NASA Topic

[Timoric]

-

[Montrose1100]

There was an article yesterday about NASA's ailing manned-space program.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/nrc-human-spaceflight-report-says-nasa-strategy-cant-get-humans-to-mars/2014/06/04/e6e6060c-ebd6-11e3-9f5c-9075d5508f0a_story.html

My thoughts are:

1. Something is wrong with Procurements of large systems government-wide. My proof: NASA cannot get a manned space craft. The Department of Defense can't build cost-effective weapon systems.

2. NASA seems to be turning inward to study natural forces on the Earth more than looking above and beyond to study the Universe. My proof - NASA satellite data that tracks climate - can't other places do that instead?

3. NASA has always been a pride point for Houston. If privatization is the future, are we as a city doing enough to cultivate that interest at say Ellington or will Dallas beat us with the aircraft stuff up there and California beat us with the National Laboratories, etc.

4. As it stands now it seems like NASA in Houston is an aging historical monument not a cutting edge place where the next generation of technical innovation and discovery is happening.

It's a sore subject for me because it seems the page has turned already for NASA. I've mourned it's loss a few years ago to help coop with the reality that it will probably fade away like sand slipping through fingers. Not only as a Houston pride ideal, but of national pride.

 

NASA represents our future, bleak, privatized, gloomy. Science is so greatly important not only for the understanding of our world and universe, but for technology, health, research, our future as a civilization.

 

If society doesn't crumble like ancient Rome, and we make it the 4 or so billion years we have left until the Sun starts to dry up our planet before eventually swallowing it, what next? I know that's a lot of time but an asteroid could smash into us anytime in between now and then, and are we prepared? No. Do we have any way of saving our species?

 

Sorry for the rant. It just gets me angry that our government/people doesn't see the benefit of pouring money into science and NASA.

[Luminare]

There was an article yesterday about NASA's ailing manned-space program.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/nrc-human-spaceflight-report-says-nasa-strategy-cant-get-humans-to-mars/2014/06/04/e6e6060c-ebd6-11e3-9f5c-9075d5508f0a_story.html

My thoughts are:

1. Something is wrong with Procurements of large systems government-wide. My proof: NASA cannot get a manned space craft. The Department of Defense can't build cost-effective weapon systems.

2. NASA seems to be turning inward to study natural forces on the Earth more than looking above and beyond to study the Universe. My proof - NASA satellite data that tracks climate - can't other places do that instead?

3. NASA has always been a pride point for Houston. If privatization is the future, are we as a city doing enough to cultivate that interest at say Ellington or will Dallas beat us with the aircraft stuff up there and California beat us with the National Laboratories, etc.

4. As it stands now it seems like NASA in Houston is an aging historical monument not a cutting edge place where the next generation of technical innovation and discovery is happening.

 

Actually NASA just got a boost in their budget, they have several rovers on Mars, and probably one of the most amazing events yet in our space history just happened yesterday; we just landed a probe on a comet! Ok so they aren't the NASA of the Kennedy, or even the LBJ years, but then again that was during a time when only the government had the resources, political power, and reason to go into space in the first place. Lets also not forget that this wasn't just a government program created just for the fun of going to space, but was very political and was supercharged by the immense Cold War paranoia of the 1950's and 1960's.

 

Today there are several space companies with the biggest one being SpaceX which is probably one of the most amazing companies today with a CEO, Elon Musk, who is such a Maverick and intense entrepreneur that the momentum he is building with SpaceX will make NASA look like a high school physics experiment.

 

We are making advancements in Space technology everyday and while it isn't a national attention grabber like it used to be, lets remember that there are reasons for this. Primarily when you are just getting out of a very sluggish economy, spending money on two wars (still! yes a dem. and rep. problem -.- ), and recent world events are also going to affect cooperation in this field. The current and past president have also not be very stern fast in providing funding to help in its endeavors. 

 

NASA will still play an important role in the future. As more and more people want to visit space via privatization (which was going to be the next logical step in space travel anyway), it means that NASA's resources and training programs will be essential in training the future astronauts of tomorrow. In fact, many people at NASA are praising the privatization of the industry because instead of putting millions of dollars into rockets and rocket fuel, it instead allows them to spend money upgraded dated facilities, continue important studies on the ISS, focus more on the study of space as a whole, and sending non-manned missions to places man can't go just yet.

 

I have no idea where you might be getting your facts about Houston not being the ones on the "cutting edge" of space technology when they ARE the leading organization worldwide in space technology. It's of course not in the news because the media quiet frankly could give a crap.

 

Finally as for the future of the Aerospace in Houston. The Ellington field spaceport is going to happen. The fact we have NASA, closer to a body of water, refineries for fuel, and a super flat topology means Houston is the best candidate for this over anywhere else in Texas or the rest of the USA. SpaceX just announced that they are going to build facilities in Brownsville, TX and have intentions on moving to Houston as well.

 

Also, apologies if it seems like I'm jumping on you because that's not my intention. I'm simply here to say that while not the topic of the day, there are always awesome things happening in this field (which will still involve houston and NASA).

[arche_757]

I've long wondered just how long this agency will remain here as well.  I suppose there will always be a government presence, but I don't know how many people will be employed or the importance of the local employees.

 

I thought that NASA ought to sell off some of that land and develop it with UHCL, TTU, UofH, TAMU, UT (etc) as a state center for aeronautics/space reasearch.  Why not?  Take some of the money being generated by the current business boom and issue a % of that towards a new multi-agency research center off some of the land at NASA.  Surely the Feds would allow 75+ acres to be sold off (or ground leased for 99 years).  Think of the development potential of this and the boost it would give Texas' aeronautics community?  Instead the Texas Enterprise fund will continue to pour money towards nonsense like Siracha and paying a company like Chevron to move people here.  I'd rather see our state government spend that money towards higher education.  I would think the Feds might be receptive to an idea like that?  Surely NASA wouldn't mind if the groundwork was laid out with clear enough text.

[Timoric]

.

[Subdude]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the outlook for NASA overall is different than that for NASA in Houston.  NASA Houston is the headquarters for manned flight projects, not the space program overall.  Certainly NASA continues to do a lot, but the manned spaceflight program, at least by NASA, has fallen off considerably in favor of unmanned efforts.  Private space companies like SpaceX aren't headquartered here, and I don't see where Houston has any particular advantage in aeronautics, launch technology or satellite development.  I just see Houston's role in the space program continuing to diminish over time as manned efforts are either automated, taken over by private ventures, or spearheaded by the Chinese or Russians.  The whole "Space City" thing was nice back in the day, but perhaps its time to move on.

 

 

[arche_757]

I respectfully disagree with some of Luminare's post.

 

1) NASA has 4 major research/campuses.  Cape Canaveral (FL), JPL and Ames Resarch Park (CA), and JSC (Houston).  Now... of those four, which one is the most redundant at this point in time?  Yep.  Houston's very own JSC.

 

2) Private Space ventures - such as Elon Musk's SpaceX - are merely getting people into the very fringes of the atmosphere (for A LOT OF MONEY TOO) and are not - repeat NOT sustainable space ventures taking away the government money (allocated by NASA) that is being funneled their direction.  How many times does a billionare need to go into the upper levels of the atmosphere/stratosphere what have you?  Will that interest be enough to make this system worthwhile?  Doubtful.  Satalites exist at much higher elevations than what is possible at this time.  Will SpaceX allow "us" on this forum to afford a chance to fly almost to space?  If so, then some day these ventures might be somewhat less of an unneeded novelty than they are today.  I mean, lets face it, SpaceX and Virgin Galactic could implode and little would happen outside of those singular companies.

 

3) What becomes of the International Space Station?  It was the most expensive single project in US Taxpayer history.  Costing $100 Billion Dollars for JUST the ISS.  Our contribution.  Only.  Right now we can get to it because of the Russian's.  Take that out of the equation and we don't have any need to send astronauts into space.  Making JSC redundant, since its the manned space flight hq.

 

Unless the Government decides that pursuing the Moon is a tangible and worthwhile goal for Manned Space Exploration (which it is) then we need to imagine a future where government spending cuts either A) greatly reduce JSC, or B ) shut it down.  Hopefully even if it is shut down, we can figure out how to make a local aerospace research institute a reality...?

[Luminare]

Wow.... So many debbie downers here  ==____==

 

I guess I'm the only one looking at the big picture in all of this. I'll respond at greater length to all points later after work.

 

I will say though that if you haven't read about Elon Musk's intentions with SpaceX then you should really read up on it. The goal's of SpaceX isn't simply to be some Billionaire Shuttle to the fringe of our atmosphere, it's goal is to get to Mars. In fact the main goal is to keep improving until they have an iteration that can complete that mission. Musk has even stated in interviews that he wants to send people to colonize Mars. While I would of course be suspect to anyone with such lofty ambitions, this guy actually has his own space company doing the things that people said would never be possible (especially one that isn't a government entity)!

 

Not to mention lets just look at what is funding his program in the first place and that is the most widely used system of transactions on the internet and that is Paypal. Musk isn't even doing this SpaceX venture to make an immediate profit or he would have gotten out by now. He understands that it's a long term investment not just for him to make more money, but because space is important and the future of mankind.

 

Sure it's going to be pretty much available to only the super wealthy in the beginning, but then again what mode of transportation or anything new in general hasn't been? I wonder if we were living back at the turn of the 20th century and we are all discussing about the future of the automobile and wondering if that Henry Ford guy really is going to be able to get everyone an affordable car. I'm sure at that time nobody thought that would be possible.

 

I could literally go on a rant forever here, but I see some design documents calling my name and must be getting back

[skwatra]

Costing $100 Billion Dollars for JUST the ISS.  Our contribution.  Only.  Right now we can get to it because of the Russian's.  Take that out of the equation and we don't have any need to send astronauts into space.  Making JSC redundant, since its the manned space flight hq.

 

JUST the ISS? Are you kidding me? Do you know how enormous that project is? To design, develop, assemble and maintain?

The cost of the war in Iraq since 2003 is in the trillions.

 

I'm on a team that recently upgraded the high rate communications systems to 25 Mbps up and 300 Mbps down. We're investigating further upgrades to 600 Mbps in the near term and 1.2 Gbps as our stretch goal. All this to get payload/science data to the ground for all the experiments in place now and being developed for the future (universities, private, international partners). The ISS is only recently being utilized the way it was intended, as a science testbed.

 

We were just extended through 2024.

 

SpaceX and Orbital both dock with the ISS, they do plenty of work in Houston. They will have manned flights soon. Its unfortunate that we were shortsighted in retiring the shuttle, but it was too old and too expensive. And that we have to rely on the Russians. Believe me that is a pain, lots of bartering always, and now it is even worse given the political climate.

 

[arche_757]

JUST the ISS? Are you kidding me? Do you know how enormous that project is? To design, develop, assemble and maintain?

The cost of the war in Iraq since 2003 is in the trillions.

 

Not kidding.  The Iraq War.. was that a single budget item, or hundreds and thousands of budget items?  The International Space Station was just the International Space Station.  The ISS is estimated to have cost upwards of $150 billion.  Single construction piece+flight to-fro+man-hours+continuing upkeep.  That's a lot of money for a space-lab!  Apollo was estimated to have cost something like $60 billion from 1960-1975.

 

You guys can put all your chips in Elon Musk's basket if you want, but the best bet for long term human exploration of space is government funded projects by the people who know what they're doing - NASA.  Musk probably wants to invent a time machine as well, who doesn't?  If I was an eccentric billionaire I'd spout off all kinds of grandiose notions as well.

 

But - SpaceX and Virgin Galactic are not based in Houston.  No connection to the JSC.  That's the question.  Not whether Elon Musk will be able to eventually send certain people up into space.  No doubt that's eventually possible, but that will not make Houston's role in the future of space exploration any brighter.  Why would it?  Has Musk mused at the idea of moving operations to Houston?

[skwatra]

I wasn't trying to compare a product, I was pointing out government spending and the total cost of the ISS compared to Defense.

 

NASA is intentionally getting out of manned spaceflight and focusing on ISS, research, and future exploration. We laid out the ground work, now let the commercial world make it better and cheaper. We are guiding private companies, that is our current direction as far as manned spaceflight.

 

And Elon Musk has a pretty amazing track record, he hasn't "spouted out all kinds of grandiose notions" he has actually done it. I'm not sure how you can question what SpaceX and Tesla have already done.

 

Orion (starting as CEV in 2004) is still working on launching. SpaceX was awarded a contract in 2006 i believe and docked with ISS in 2012.

[arche_757]

You should say - I work for NASA - that would clarify things a bit.

 

Billionaires are grandiose.  What else could you call someone who is worth that much money?  The guy started his own space company!  That's crazy.  His ideas are grandiose.  Will he see them become reality, who knows?

 

What are your thoughts on the longevity of JSC?

[skwatra]

I didn't come out right and state it, but I wasn't hiding it and did imply it in referencing the projects I am working on for the ISS. I try to stay technical and away from the politics, but the culture has bounced back post shuttle demise. People are looking forward and are positive. Its hard to say what will happen, we unfortunately change direction to some extent every 4 years, but I think Houston will play a strong role wherever we end up. We have an amazing knowledge base here and have hired a lot of young people, that will adapt whether the focus is manned spaceflight or other endeavors. The US has committed to ISS through 2024, and though nothing is set in stone things are looking good near term (10 years).

 

I guess what I was getting at on your comments about Musk is that yes, of course its grandiose but it is already a reality.

[Slick Vik]

Nasa is a tricky investment. You never know what you'll discoveries you'll get, if any, but you could get some life altering ones. The issue is there's only so much money to go around and nasa has to fight for it like anyone else.

[skwatra]

Yes, we will continue to fight for our 0.5% of our budget.

[arche_757]

My posts where not meant to be troublesome - though I believe that they came across as a bit harsh?  I'm quite defensive of NASA.  You will be amazed at how many people in Houston think its a waste to have a space program and spend as much as we do on it.  Maybe not the expenditures at the JSC, but overall, the agency as a whole.  Quite sad.

 

So when I see what people like Elon Musk and Richard Branson are doing with private - for profit space ventures - I can get a little defensive.  I see SpaceX and Vigrin Galactic (as two examples) that will spend their money and work in unision with NASA but not contribute towards the greater prosperity of the JSC here in Houston.  Quite the oposite, I think people like Branson or Musk would be hesitant to attach to anything in Houston given a choice.

 

NASA's JSC is an important part of the Houston economy, and adds to the areas economic diversity (even a little).  Losing it, or having any more large scale cuts would be harmful, that is sure.

 

I'm curious skwatra... what would you - or others at JSC - think about working with Texas/Regional public universities on a regional aerospace/aeronautics research center, attached, but not part of JSC?  I'm wondering if something like that has been proposed at some point?

[Timoric]

-

[arche_757]

So NASA needs something big to happen to thrive again.  I think going to MARS has to be that next big thing and I think going to the Moon is a necessary interim step to testing all the systems needed on MARS.

The Cold War was an interesting era in our history.

 

Coencidentally WW2 - and Nazi rocket scientists from Peenemünde were exploited post-war by both the USA and USSR for the purposes of gaining a strategic foothold on the race to put men in space, and then on to the Moon.

 

Any way... I think the Moon is a more tangible and logical goal for the interim (next 40 years) with the goal that Mars should be sought after post 2050.  Mars is a three year trip.  The Moon offers great potential that Mars will not be able to offer us for who knows how long?  Until at least a point in time where travel to-fro is quicker/less dangerous.  Besides I really think we need to return to the Moon.  Its been since the early 70s and we simply MUST return.

 

I would think a permanent settlement of several thousand people on the Moon (say by 2035) would be grand, and a huge step for humanity towards becoming something greater than we what we are currently (but that's the inner-Trekkie speaking).  Granted this would take years, but then something like Ellington Space Port WOULD be a huge asset to have if such settlement existed.

[skwatra]

I'm curious skwatra... what would you - or others at JSC - think about working with Texas/Regional public universities on a regional aerospace/aeronautics research center, attached, but not part of JSC?  I'm wondering if something like that has been proposed at some point?

I know NASA JSC had a program with UTEP in the past, beyond the standard internship/co-op programs where UTEP was on contract for their students and professors to complete white papers and research for NASA (benefiting them as acting as theses).

I did a quick search and found this:

http://research.utep.edu/Default.aspx?alias=research.utep.edu/csetr

 

Though it is different from what I was referring to, I don't know much about the program, it was early on in my career (10 years back).

 

If you are talking about something local to JSC, it seems that UH-Clear Lake would be an obvious place to start a program. Marshall Spaceflight Center is where most of the research projects are worked through, I work with them regularly as my system gets the data down to the ground, but I work with the operators in Huntsville, rarely with the researchers directly.

 

JPL is another interesting example, funded by NASA but run by Caltech.

[ArchFan]

It seems strange that JSC -- at least to my eyes -- has not fostered stronger ties with local universities, such that those universities would have a more conspicuous involvement with space exploration.  Frankly, it's always struck me that, while it was great for us that JSC was put here, it hasn't really seemed a part of metro Houston.  That is despite the fact that I know a couple of people who either know some of the astronauts or who have kids dating children of astronauts.

 

Luminaire's comments cheered me up, but I'm still kinda depressed that we will lose the wonderful spark that JSC has been for our community.  Partly because I don't see that entrepreneurs like Elon or Musk have any interest in exploiting talent in the Houston area or placing it here.  Despite that, I am glad of their efforts.  I just would like us to be involved.

 

My uncle worked with von Braun and was involved in testing the Saturn V rocket.  Those were exciting years.  I wish our country could still do stuff like that.