Neil Armstrong's Warning

[Jay Honeck]

On this, a day when we remember our hero Neil Armstrong, and his well-lived life, let's not forget his eloquent lament:

"I fully expected that, by the end of the century, we would have achieved substantially more than we actually did."

"Apollo was looked upon at the time to be a starting point. It was proved that Man could achieve what many considered impossible, and we set our sights on greatness. Everyone fully expected that we would soon be off to Mars. The colonization was a near certainty, probably by the end of the century."

We have failed to fulfill Mr. Armstrong's vision, utterly. And this WILL come back to haunt all of mankind, some day.

 

[genetk44]

 

[fgcason]

To quote Gomer Pyle: Shame Shame Shame

 

[Henning]

What did you expect? The required budgets would have to come from somewhere, where? We're still paying for the moonshots in our current deficit. Even worse, we're paying for a bunch of nuclear energy we're not using either.

 

[fgcason]

Still paying for Apollo? How much was that? $20 billion? During that time period, HUD was using NASA's annual budget in 3 weeks.
How much has been thrown away feeding the DHS/TSA circus gustappo act over roughly the same length of time? A quick google says $635 billion.

That's over half a trillion dollar difference? NASA could have gone to Venus and Mars on what the DHS has spent so far with money to spare for the next project...Those radio controlled cars on Mars today should be driven by permanent resident humans wearing space suits. Instead we can no longer even limp into low Earth orbit.

There's more to life than money however the beancounters rule this planet and are keeping everyone prisoner here because nobody can see past the damned dollar signs.

Yea, Henning, I understand what you're saying. That doesn't change the fact that it's a frigging crockup.

 

[DouglasBader]

We're going to be paying for not having landed on Mars?

We'll eventually be paying when we do so. We can go a very, very long time without ever going to Mars.

We've only explored a small part of what constitutes much of our globe, in the oceans.

Imagine what Rutan (et al) could have accomplished with NASA's budget.

 

[Henning]

Still paying for Apollo? How much was that? $20 billion? During that time period, HUD was using NASA's annual budget in 3 weeks.
How much has been thrown away feeding the DHS/TSA circus gustappo act over roughly the same length of time? A quick google says $635 billion.

That's over half a trillion dollar difference? NASA could have gone to Venus and Mars on what the DHS has spent so far with money to spare for the next project...Those radio controlled cars on Mars today should be driven by permanent resident humans wearing space suits. Instead we can no longer even limp into low Earth orbit.

There's more to life than money however the beancounters rule this planet and are keeping everyone prisoner here because nobody can see past the damned dollar signs.

Yea, Henning, I understand what you're saying. That doesn't change the fact that it's a frigging crockup.

We could have done lots of things except that we chose to do different things. Comparing budget $$$ from 40 years ago to budget $$$ from today is kinda a non starter in arguments, but your overall point is valid. That we did not follow through on our investment in space is sad, but it stemmed from the reality that there is little to be gained from continuing manned space flight, especially deep space flight until we figure out how to control gravity to bend space time around and make trans universal flights travelling outside the confines of space time from point to point instantly. What is a friggin crockup Is not following through on the energy investment we made in the 30s and 40s which gave us a great nuclear energy industry that we are completely wasting, and those investments as well we are still paying on.

 

[EppyGA]

Overall from 1958 the NASA budgets totaled around $493B, ow much was Obama's stimulus again?

 

[Henning]

Overall from 1958 the NASA budgets totaled around $493B, ow much was Obama's stimulus again?

What was the GDP during those years? Do you consider TARP an Obama stimulus?

 

[EppyGA]

What was the GDP during those years? Do you consider TARP an Obama stimulus?

Part of the TARP money was spent my Obama. It was a request he made to the Bush administration that they release the balance of the TARP money so the Obama administration could spend. Don't remember the exact amount, somewhere around $200B I think plus the Obama stimulus package at $867B.

 

[Jeff Oslick]

How much was that? $20 billion?

$20B would be over $140B today. Are you willing to increase NASA's budget that much? NASA's budget is currently at its lowest level it's ever been at since shortly after its creation, as a % of the federal budget:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA

And, yes, we are still paying for Apollo, strictly speaking, since we've (generally) had budget deficits every year since well into the 60s.

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

Imagine what Rutan (et al) could have accomplished with NASA's budget.

With all due respect to Burt, he don't know jack about spaceflight, and his space vehicles are nothing more than toys for rich people. The correct thing to say is imagine what Musk (SpaceX) can do with the budget of NASA in the 60's.

 

[Threefingeredjack]

It's all about priorities. NASA's FY 2011 budget of $18.4 billion represents about 0.5% of the $3.4 trillion United States federal budget. In that same period Americans spent $39 billion on pizza according to Goodhousekeeping .com.

 

[fgcason]

$20B would be over $140B today. Are you willing to increase NASA's budget that much?

Yea. Sure. Why not? It would be interesting. Worst case scenario it would still be more interesting and entertaining than blue glove strip search rectal exams in public at 5 times that price.

 

[Henning]

It's all about priorities. NASA's FY 2011 budget of $18.4 billion represents about 0.5% of the $3.4 trillion United States federal budget. In that same period Americans spent $39 billion on pizza according to Goodhousekeeping .com.

Excellent point. Now, for twice NASA's budget we served about 6 billion meals which equates to feeding lunch or dinner to everyone in the country for 20 days. That is a calculation that the people can sink their teeth into, pun intended. Now granted, NASAs budget does the same thing in a different way since the budget is spent on manpower and products which again spend most of that money down line and it ends up in people's pockets all over the place buying those pizzas, but that's too complicated for people to understand, and if they do, it's hard for them to believe as a true result due to the way most businesses the size of NASA contractors are run with regards to historical corruption and malfeasance. They will assume that $8BB of that budget will have been siphoned of in graft, corruption and CEO/BoD compensation where sadly enough, they will be proven mostly correct.

 

[Palmpilot]

We can go a very, very long time without ever going to Mars.

We hope so, but we really don't know when the next killer comet or asteroid will hit. Astronomers tell us it's a matter of when, not if, and the amount of time we have is not predictable. Maybe we could calculate the probability per unit of time, but I think that's about best we can do.

 

[MSPAviator]

And this WILL come back to haunt all of mankind, some day.

Don't worry, China is currently completing construction of a massive spaceport on Hainan Island, which is closer to the equator than any of China's current launch facilities.

The Moon has already been mapped by two consecutive Chang-e Lunar orbiter missions and a robotic lander/rober is scheduled to be launched to the Moon next year. A rocket larger than the Saturn V is on the drawing boards.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2011-03/03/c_13759948.htm

 

[DouglasBader]

In that same period Americans spent $39 billion on pizza according to Goodhousekeeping .com.

It was money well spent, too.

 

[Henning]

We hope so, but we really don't know when the next killer comet or asteroid will hit. Astronomers tell us it's a matter of when, not if, and the amount of time we have is not predictable. Maybe we could calculate the probability per unit of time, but I think that's about best we can do.

There is no technology we have, not even on the visible horizon, that could save the human race by the use of Mars. That's the thing, getting to Mars is not enough, and we already know how to do that, no worries. The problem is that there is **** all nothing there in the way of supporting life.

 

[fgcason]

It was money well spent, too.

Thirty Nine Billion Dollars on greasy cardboard and that's money well spent?

They went to the moon. We ate greasy cardboard. No matter how you look at it, that is frigging pathetic in the extreme.

 

[Henning]

Thirty Nine Billion Dollars on greasy cardboard and that's money well spent?

They went to the moon. We ate greasy cardboard. No matter how you look at it, that is frigging pathetic in the extreme.

What is pathetic is that you haven't found a better pizza... BTW, I bet those guys on the Moon would have loved to have a greasy pizza...

 

[Velocity173]

I'd give up pizza for a year if it would allow us to land a man on Mars. I think all of us would. :wink2:

 

[Henning]

I'd give up pizza for a year if it would allow us to land a man on Mars. I think all of us would. :wink2:

Not me, I have no desire to waste that money at this point, it would be hugely expensive and completely non productive. There is no exploit of mankind that could be achieved on Mars at this point that cannot be done at a small fraction of the price of landing a man there, much less returning them. This would be a multi trillion dollar undertaking that would produce no future gain at this point. It's as stupid as it comes with one potential proviso; that the method for landing a man on Mars is through bending around space time to bring Mars within reach of instant wormhole travel. If we are going to invent new space transportation technology that will allow us to cross the universe in a moment, then I'm all for it. Any type of rocket or sub-luminal travel, no freakin way, a complete waste of money.

 

[fgcason]

I'd give up pizza for a year if it would allow us to land a man on Mars. I think all of us would. :wink2:

Actually most people would rather shut down spaceflight entirely, let that money vanish into the greed system with no indication that it ever does anything meaningful and be perfectly content to punch up speed dial on their cellphones to order pizza and no be inspired by anything other than quarterly corporate profit margins.

it would be hugely expensive and completely non productive

So what it really comes down to is maximized fiscal profitability margins and to hell with everything else.

 

[Henning]

Actually most people would rather shut down spaceflight entirely, let that money vanish into the greed system with no indication that it ever does anything meaningful and be perfectly content to punch up speed dial on their cellphones to order pizza and no be inspired by anything other than quarterly corporate profit margins.

Why would I be inspired by sending a manned rocket to Mars? It's all old hat stuff, we already know how to survive in space and we have already performed decades of research and experiments there without having to spend those resources. If we spent the resources it would have taken to send men instead of unmanned probes, would that have come out of our budgets for high energy research like our contribution to CERN? Our science research budgets are laughably low as it is, we don't have any to waste, and sending a man to Mars to do a robots job would be a waste so large at this point I'd consider it criminal when there are actual things we can learn that will make the entire rocketry process obsolete.

Quit being so stuck in the past technologies, we already know their limits and those limits are far too great to produce a useful result such as colonizing other worlds to get this bloody population down. We just do not have the resources at this point to do it all so we have to go where the greatest likelihood of results are, and that is quantum physics at this point, not rocket engineering.

 

[Red Air Rambo]

Why would I be inspired by sending a manned rocket to Mars? It's all old hat stuff, we already know how to survive in space and we have already performed decades of research and experiments there without having to spend those resources. If we spent the resources it would have taken to send men instead of unmanned probes, would that have come out of our budgets for high energy research like our contribution to CERN? Our science research budgets are laughably low as it is, we don't have any to waste, and sending a man to Mars to do a robots job would be a waste so large at this point I'd consider it criminal when there are actual things we can learn that will make the entire rocketry process obsolete.

Quit being so stuck in the past technologies, we already know their limits and those limits are far too great to produce a useful result such as colonizing other worlds to get this bloody population down. We just do not have the resources at this point to do it all so we have to go where the greatest likelihood of results are, and that is quantum physics at this point, not rocket engineering.

+1...robots can pick up rocks more cheaply than humans...no one wants to live on a dead planet.

 

[Jay Honeck]

+1...robots can pick up rocks more cheaply than humans...no one wants to live on a dead planet.

You folks need to dream bigger. It's our only hope.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Mars

 

[Palmpilot]

There is no technology we have, not even on the visible horizon, that could save the human race by the use of Mars. That's the thing, getting to Mars is not enough, and we already know how to do that, no worries. The problem is that there is **** all nothing there in the way of supporting life.

True. Hopefully, the probability of a mass extinction event before we could develop the necessary technology is low.

 

[Henning]

True. Hopefully, the probability of a mass extinction event before we could develop the necessary technology is low.

Lets see, we are spending increasing amounts of money on war and decreasing amounts on science. So far the 'Hope Meter' needle is bouncing off triple zero trying to break the peg.

 

[gcd89]

On this, a day when we remember our hero Neil Armstrong, and his well-lived life, let's not forget his eloquent lament:

"I fully expected that, by the end of the century, we would have achieved substantially more than we actually did."

"Apollo was looked upon at the time to be a starting point. It was proved that Man could achieve what many considered impossible, and we set our sights on greatness. Everyone fully expected that we would soon be off to Mars. The colonization was a near certainty, probably by the end of the century."

We have failed to fulfill Mr. Armstrong's vision, utterly. And this WILL come back to haunt all of mankind, some day.

Well, we may have had the ability, but was it financially possible?

 

[Armageddon Aviator]

Even if half of this article is right, it is a very sad situation for America...

http://sultanknish.blogspot.co.il/2012/08/a-small-step-for-one-man.html

Sic Transit Gloria Mundi ?

 

[fgcason]

You folks need to dream bigger. It's our only hope.

Why dream and have an imagination and think of doing great things when you can sit at your cookie cutter office computer desk stare at your cookie cutter wallet and drool about how infinitely wonderful the cookie cutter money is.

 

[Bob Noel]

+1...robots can pick up rocks more cheaply than humans...no one wants to live on a dead planet.

I'd love to explore the moon or mars or ...

A species that doesn't want to explore might as well be dead.

 

[genetk44]

Surely the important thing is to keep striving to go farther. What we might or might not accomplish on Mars is unknown.....if we make the push to get a manned flight to Mars within 10 years we might discover the technology during that time to enable us to make practical use of Mars or something even better, maybe Hennings wormhole. Believe it or not quite a bit of technology that we take for granted now is either directly attributable to or is an indirect spin-off to the lunar missions. If we don't expand into space this planet will be a sh*thole within 100 years and our species will be either gone or back in the pre-industrial age within 200 years.

 

[Henning]

Surely the important thing is to keep striving to go farther. What we might or might not accomplish on Mars is unknown.....if we make the push to get a manned flight to Mars within 10 years we might discover the technology during that time to enable us to make practical use of Mars or something even better, maybe Hennings wormhole. Believe it or not quite a bit of technology that we take for granted now is either directly attributable to or is an indirect spin-off to the lunar missions. If we don't expand into space this planet will be a sh*thole within 100 years and our species will be either gone or back in the pre-industrial age within 200 years.

Thing is, as long as we look to rockets to take us to Mars, we are looking at what we have already done. There is no real discovering left, just engineering the details of scale. We don't even have a statis sleep system worked out and we have come across serious physiological issues for humans in prolonged '0 G'. What the Moon program and following space programs of Skylab and the ISS have taught us foremost is that rocket and sub-luminal space travel for humans is not feasible for long trips.

A program to Mars using current technical methods is far premature. We have not yet discovered the theoretical basis for the technology required to even begin on the engineering. This is why we need more pure science funding rather than spending all our money on oil for war so we can spend more money on oil.

We have traded space for palatial mansions, shiny yachts, and private A-380s; that is where our consumer economies end up when we follow the money to the end of the line.

 

[Jay Honeck]

Well, we may have had the ability, but was it financially possible?

Of course.

Our leaders instead decided that it was more important to maintain military bases all over the world, to provide cell phones to the indigent, and a bazillion other choices that have bankrupted us to the point where we can no longer service our own space station, let alone visit Mars.

As with everything bad that ever happens, its all about making bad choices.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

[gcd89]

Of course.

Our leaders instead decided that it was more important to maintain military bases all over the world, to provide cell phones to the indigent, and a bazillion other choices that have bankrupted us to the point where we can no longer service our own space station, let alone visit Mars.

As with everything bad that ever happens, its all about making bad choices.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

Personally, I think even if we put every single dollar of tax revenue into space travel, we would still not be able to afford colonization of Mars.

 

[Henning]

Personally, I think even if we put every single dollar of tax revenue into space travel, we would still not be able to afford colonization of Mars.

Yeah, I mean, we can't afford to live on Earth, much less build another Earth having to haul every last thing to another planet. You could potentially start it off by sending a few thousand tons of energy production and mineral processing equipment and supplies and a crew with the talent to put them to use refining raw materials into finished products, given that we can find a local source to generate oxygen (not yet determined, but possibly there is a way to release the oxygen from the iron oxide and recapture it in the refining process), and set up a generational program colony to develop and build out a habitable community to send following colonists to. A program like this would cost tens if not hundreds of trillions of dollars. We could spend money on nothing else and not be able to afford that.

Going to Mars now is putting the cart a mile in front of the horse. All it is is dreaming of the past and believing it to be the future.

 

[Mafoo]

Even if half of this article is right, it is a very sad situation for America...

http://sultanknish.blogspot.co.il/2012/08/a-small-step-for-one-man.html

Sic Transit Gloria Mundi ?

It is factually correct. Obama did shift NASA's resources as described. Much of the piece is opinion however, so that you can agree or disagree.

I think we could have gone three ways with respect to NASA, and this is how I would had one it (in this order)

1. Close it down, and put the money saved to paying off the debt. We are broke. Flying into space is what countries with money do, and we are not one of those anymore.
2. Keep funding it for space exploration, because that's what broke people who spend money like they have it do.
3. (worse of all) Keep the budget the same, but then use the money for something completely unrelated to space. Obama felt that if the muslim community could feel proud about there contributions to science, they would blow us up less.

Sad place we are in right now.

 

[denverpilot]

As with everything bad that ever happens, its all about making bad choices.

The cynic in me says that bad things happen to good decision-makers too, bad decisions just hasten more bad things.