[Kosh]

No surprises here

Things don't look good for NASA when the opening sentence of a report outlining its future begins: "The US human spaceflight program appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory."

'[NASA] is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources. Space operations are among the most complex and unforgiving pursuits ever undertaken by humans. It really is rocket science. Space operations become all the more difficult when means do not match aspirations," the report continued.

That was just the beginning of the Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee summary report which was handed to the White House today after months of expert review and testimony.  A bleak report was expected by many observers but ultimately how its results are interpreted will determine the future of any manned space flights. Keep in mind too that NASA has spent almost $8 billion of a planned $40 billion to develop systems for a lunar return.

I must say I'm not surprised, basically NASA is being pushed to do a lot but without the resources to do it (combined with NASA's beareucratic inefficiencies it makes the situation that much worse). Some people say "oh it costs too much", "oh we're spending too much", or someother such nonsense. In reality, NASA's annual budget is less than 0.6% of the total Federal budget. We are perfectly happy spending hundreds of times that bombing other countries or maintaining our mighty war machine (effectively a form of Military Kaynesianism). We're also perfectly happy with spending hundreds of millions of dollars for bridges to nowhere in Alaska. Maybe we should just admit it: we as a nation, by and large, don't give a **** about space. Our program has been stagnant for 30 years, and its very rare to hear ordinary people care. In fact, a great many americans think we're spending   1/4 of our total annual budget on it. This might change temporarily when China or some other country catches up to us, but it is sad that we would have to let that happen to get our attention.

[IronBeer]

Space exploration could be argued to be one of the longest-term investments any nation (or our species, even), could undertake. We won't see returns, as it were, for a long time (barring, say massive deposits of gold on Mars, but that is not the case, so it's irrelevant). Strictly speaking, the future of US manned spaceflight isn't in peril, it's really NASA-run manned spaceflight that could be in danger.

[BloodEagle]

I'd be sorely tempted to revoke my citizenship and immigrate to the first nation to come up with a viable form of widespread space travel. 

Of course, that won't be in my lifetime, so the point is moot. 

[Kosh]

(barring, say massive deposits of gold on Mars, but that is not the case, so it's irrelevant)

IIRC there's massive deposits of precious metals (platinum, gold, silver) in the Asteroid Belt.

Of course, that won't be in my lifetime, so the point is moot.

If they end up getting Maglev Launch Assist technology to work as advertised within the next 20 years, it will happen well within your lifetime.


I saw a Computer Chronicles episode about a tech expo in Japan, in that expo there were working prototypes for maglev trains. When was this episode? 1985.

Spoiler:

[rant] WE'VE ****ING KNOWN ABOUT THIS STUFF FOR ****ING 25+ ****ING YEARS AND WE NEVER EVEN ****ING BOTHERED TO ****ING LOOK INTO THIS UNTIL A FEW ****ING YEARS AGO, IF WE COULD HAVE GOTTEN OFF OUR ASSES AND INVESTED IN THIS IN THE ****ING 80'S WE WOULD HAVE ****ING HAD IT BY NOW. If/when the US looses its edge in space we will have deserved for it to happen.[/rant]

Added spoiler tags because of lanauge.

[Flipside]

I remember reading about the concepts of using magnetic acceleration for space-flight when I was about 7-8 years old, so around 1979-1980. Admittedly, the idea then was to mine the moon, and use a magnetic coil to accelerate the goods back to close-Earth orbit, or even to the surface (though that thought scares me, it's kind of like firing a rail-gun at our own planet) thus removing half the transport requirements, but it's certainly been known as a possibility for around 3 decades.

[Black Wolf]

(barring, say massive deposits of gold on Mars, but that is not the case, so it's irrelevant)

IIRC there's massive deposits of precious metals (platinum, gold, silver) in the Asteroid Belt.

Of course, that won't be in my lifetime, so the point is moot.

If they end up getting Maglev Launch Assist technology to work as advertised within the next 20 years, it will happen well within your lifetime.


I saw a Computer Chronicles episode about a tech expo in Japan, in that expo there were working prototypes for maglev trains. When was this episode? 1985.

Spoiler:

[rant] WE'VE ****ING KNOWN ABOUT THIS STUFF FOR ****ING 25+ ****ING YEARS AND WE NEVER EVEN ****ING BOTHERED TO ****ING LOOK INTO THIS UNTIL A FEW ****ING YEARS AGO, IF WE COULD HAVE GOTTEN OFF OUR ASSES AND INVESTED IN THIS IN THE ****ING 80'S WE WOULD HAVE ****ING HAD IT BY NOW. If/when the US looses its edge in space we will have deserved for it to happen.[/rant]

Added spoiler tags because of lanauge.

I know how you feel. I've always like the Skyramp idea, but whenever you bring it up in conversation people are always "Space Elevator! Space Elevator!" as if some Sci-Fi construct we probably won't have the technology to build for decades or longer is a viable alternative plan to something we could start working on tomorrow.

[Akalabeth Angel]

Sky Hook

[High Max]

If they end up getting Maglev Launch Assist technology to work as advertised within the next 20 years, it will happen well within your lifetime.

Not to mention if they find a viable way to make humans live much longer like the esay they might in 20 years. Funny that people always assume things won't happen in their life times when the more people there are and the further into the future we go, the faster technology improves.

And about the space elevator. It need not have a building structure. Just a cable made out of very special and strong light metal that goes from the ground and is tethered to a space station and a propulsion system based on light energy from a device on the ground. I hear NASA has one in the works. Watch the science channel and the show called "2057".

Here we go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=li_8JhIxay4

I like Dr. Michio Kaku.

[Black Wolf]

We can't make the cable. It's not within our technological capabilities, plus a space elevator is inherently more dangerous and more expensive. Sure, the potential benefits are greater, but the potential benefits of tonnes of technology we don't have are huge. Imagine the potential benefit of fusion reactors or artifical gravity.

A skyramp could literally be started tomorrow if the money and political will was available. No new technology, just train tracks and rocket boosters (or even jet engines) and you get a SSTO reusable launch vehicle. Beautiful.

[Kosh]

It would still take some R&D to adapt what we have, but yeah, it will be in use long before any space elevators are. Even though I love the idea of an orbital ring, it wont happen until at least the second half of this century, maybe even next century. I don't want to wait that long to get off this rock.

And about the space elevator. It need not have a building structure. Just a cable made out of very special and strong light metal that goes from the ground and is tethered to a space station and a propulsion system based on light energy from a device on the ground.

The materials to make the cable don't exist, and likely wont be available for a long time.

I remember reading about the concepts of using magnetic acceleration for space-flight when I was about 7-8 years old, so around 1979-1980. Admittedly, the idea then was to mine the moon, and use a magnetic coil to accelerate the goods back to close-Earth orbit, or even to the surface (though that thought scares me, it's kind of like firing a rail-gun at our own planet) thus removing half the transport requirements, but it's certainly been known as a possibility for around 3 decades.

Which really makes this whole thing an even bigger Epic Fail than it already is. 3 decades and no one bothered to look into it. I did read in 2001 that NASA is supposed to be working on something like this, but to be honest I am a bit skeptical. As I understand it this system is geared more towards being used by re-usable spacecraft, something which NASA has totally abandoned. Combining that with the budgetary squeeze, I'm not sure if it will make it.

[Akalabeth Angel]

We can't make the cable. It's not within our technological capabilities, plus a space elevator is inherently more dangerous and more expensive. Sure, the potential benefits are greater, but the potential benefits of tonnes of technology we don't have are huge. Imagine the potential benefit of fusion reactors or artifical gravity.

A skyramp could literally be started tomorrow if the money and political will was available. No new technology, just train tracks and rocket boosters (or even jet engines) and you get a SSTO reusable launch vehicle. Beautiful.

Well the navy has Railguns doesn't it. Can't they just make some rail-gun assisted launch platform. Mass Driver if you will (ala Gundam Seed).

[High Max]

We can't make the cable. It's not within our technological capabilities, plus a space elevator is inherently more dangerous and more expensive. Sure, the potential benefits are greater, but the potential benefits of tonnes of technology we don't have are huge. Imagine the potential benefit of fusion reactors or artifical gravity.

Are you saying these physicists and futurists are wrong and saying you know more than them on that subject? I am more likely to believe them than others. Also, it said in 50 years. It is still being worked on and tested. Did you watch that video carefully?

I know they could be wrong since know one knows for sure, but they are the most likely to be right than any other people.

[The E]

Riiiiiight. Like the AIs and fusion reactors that have been 20 years away for the last 40...

Point is, while we do have a good idea of what the end result looks like, we don't know all the intermediate stages required to get there, or how long it's going to take for us to get to the next stage.

For your education, read John Scalzi's Old Man's War. Orbital elevators are extremely complicated and not even entirely practical means of transportation. Not to mention dangerous when sabotaged.

[Black Wolf]

We can't make the cable. It's not within our technological capabilities, plus a space elevator is inherently more dangerous and more expensive. Sure, the potential benefits are greater, but the potential benefits of tonnes of technology we don't have are huge. Imagine the potential benefit of fusion reactors or artifical gravity.

Are you calling these physicists and futurists wrong and saying you know more than them on that subject? I am more likely to believe them than others. Also, it said in 50 years. It is still being worked on and tested. Did you watch that video carefully?

I know they could be wrong since know one knows for sure, but they are the most likely to be right than any other people.

I didn't watch the video at all, because I know all about the proposals for the space elevator. Well, not all about, of course, but I know how it works, what it needs, the arguments for and against  etc. etc.

My position is simply that we shouldn't be waiting for some potential future technology to develop a SSTO RLV 50 years from now when we have existing technology that can do it right now. I'm not saying don't develop the materials for a space elevator, just why should we wait for them? Surely a cheap, practical way of getting into space will only promote the industry that one day might make use of such an elevator?

[Thaeris]

Railguns might be useful for satellites. If you can manufacture electrical, mechanical, and computer systems which can withstand IMMENSE acceleration forces, a gun would be a good payload delivery mechanism. It's actually been done before.

NASA is in between a rock-and-a-hard-place. They have good plans and intentions, but the crappiest budget you can think of. Because they don't have the money to develop the technology, the technology doesn't get developed when it's needed. Because they can't meet deadlines, the budget gets cut even more. So, who was I voting for again?  

That's govenrment spending for you. If you want results, you might be better off focusing on private industry. It won't be as safe for a long time, but it's the only way you might count on "getting somewhere."

[Dark Knight]

Well the navy has Railguns doesn't it. Can't they just make some rail-gun assisted launch platform. Mass Driver if you will (ala Gundam Seed).

A quick side note. What they called a mass driver in gundam seed was actually a Skyramp. I don't know weather its a translation error or a script/production design mix up but what we saw on screen was clearly a skyramp.

You know why they'll never go for the skyramp idea? its too retro sci-fi. Hell they had one in When Worlds Collide and that film is from the 50s!

[Thaeris]

Retro has nothing to do with it. A good engineer considers all posibilities. Convincing mush-headed politicians otherwise is the problem.

Why do you think the Challenger incident happened? Paper-pushers! The problem with NASA is the government policies dictating their actions.

[Dark Knight]

To clarify I didn't mean the engineers. I meant the paper pushers and frankly they want Star Trek not Space Patrol.

[SpardaSon21]

Well, I'm not holding much hope out for NASA developing viable spaceflight.  Chances are true affordable spaceflight will come about through a greedy corporation wanting to exploit the asteroid belt.

[Thaeris]

I'm just waiting for the day you can buy "kit spaceships." Heck, look as Scaled Composite's SS1. The thing is basically skinned like a lightweight aircraft. Reentry is possible due to the ingenious "feather" system. And it's got a rocket that burns... I think it's a rubber-based fuel!