I don't know if I'm the only one here that feels the need to restructuralize NASA. I feel that even though the rovers have done well beyond there expected duties I find it hard to believe that billions of dollars was pour into this project and all they conger up are few months to a year out of these machine. I believe that private companies can do way better jobs than NASA with even lesser funding. I feel we should start to privatize the space industry. maybe we can get more than a few miles out of these machines per day rather than a few feets.
Spirit landed on Jan. 3 and is slated to scour the Gusev crater, near Mars' equator, for three months. Its twin, Opportunity, is due to land Saturday. The combined mission cost is $820 million.January 2004 to now is 34 months. Almost 3 years. So... I'm not sure what "few months" long multi-billion dollar project you are talking about.
Well they've come a long way from some of the earlier probes that just landed there and only lasted for a couple of hours at best.
Remember Mars is only a little rockier, dustier, and generally more harsh than your backyard. And it's only a couple thousand or so miles farther away.
Sure NASA Could use some restructuring, but I think the accomplishments of these 2 things have been pretty amazing. I say we mount a rescue mission. Leave no man, er...robot behind.
What are you talking about?! This is actually one of the biggest NASA success stories. Both of these rovers were originally intended to function for about 90 days, they've been driving around on Mars for almost 4 years now! It's only expected that they're going to start having problems at this point.
I think the point Total is trying to make is that why design something that cost 800 million dollars to last only 90 days. Yeah, it has exceeded that expected lifespan by a lot, but it would make more sense to design a long term robot that could be expected to last for years. Thats what I think at least.
Sorry for being an idiot because i spelled one word wrong.
As for the topic, Ya i feel that this current mission is a great success story, but out of how many failure? Think of it this way if Microsoft was the only OS on the market you think they are going to consistently try to work better by producing better products and conserve spending as they go? I feel NASA in essence is almost the same thing. Of course you have Russia and China, but they are somewhat behind. I just feel that privatizing most the space industry is lead to better productivity for mankind.
Also as for the rover ya they lasted very long but in that time what have they accumulated? a few samples of data? Of course we can argue about the measurements of achievement, but my main more is open the gates for "privatization."
Also I feel this will lead to more job opportunities, by having more people in the industry we can covert all that raw data that have been accumulated into something productive for mankind. And not for the benefit of one government or country.
If I'd seen an example of this private-company efficiency of which you speak I'd be a little more interested, but as far as I can tell, private companies as large as would be necessary to run these kind of operations (and stick around to gather the information) are all as bloated as the government.
What's more, private companies would all want to keep the rewards for their efforts (i.e., information) in the hopes that it would bring them future riches, so we'd add intellectual property issues to the mix of problems.
While I definitely see a role for private companies in space travel/exploration, I feel pretty strongly that the infrastructure is best put in place by NASA.
@muddyh2o If you think the government can anything other than national security better than private companies, you need to put down the KoolAid, buddy.
total, brad. I think you got it right here. this is a case of nasa taking a page from the corporate playbook 'underpromise and overdeliver' vs. the standard nasa overpromise, underdeliver, and overbudget...
Still quite an achievement (and a good investment as well). I bet that $820 million price tag could have been a lil' lower.
You, sir, obviously do not know the first thing about designing spacecraft. Do you honestly think it is easy to design, build, and operate a robot that travels to another PLANET to achieve "years" of reliability? There is a reason it's called rocket science.
As for the cost.. that is the TOTAL cost. Current operations is a small *fraction* of that figure. The expensive part is paid for, it would be dumb not to run these rovers into the ground.
Folks, this country spends more in one MONTH on the War than it has on the whole Mars Rover mission. That tells you something about where our priorities are ... [sigh]
As an example. As much as i do not like apple, even though i own an iphone, and also Google to name a few(neutral stands on them). I have to say these companies have revolutionized many of things we now see in the computer industry. You can't possibly thing the government can do a better job then the what the free market can do? Seriously when did it become so prevalent that government can do a better than the people? We have a great system(not the best)for check and balance on private companies. but we have nothing but the government to keep NASA in check and NASA is the government. I'm sorry to say this but the people in congress cannot possibly truly understand the technology involved and be allowed to approve and deny funding.
Like the saying "just pick the lesser of the two evils." Both have there flaws but in my opinion government should not get involved but only to monitor and help guide the way.
Let's stop the ignorance, shall we? It's not like the US government is holding back the private sector from developing space flight - far from it, in fact. The reason why NASA spends so much on space exploration is because if they didn't, no one else would. Before private enterprise gets involved, you need to show they why it would be worth the investments that so far, only governments have been able to afford.
A private organization doesn't get involved in spaceflight to make Americans feel better about themselves. They are in it to make money.
And I tell you this: If you can prove that there are thousands of tons of gold deposits or diamonds on an asteroid somewhere, the private sector would start designing spaceships faster than you can say Buck Rogers! But until that day, don't be upset that our government pumps so much money into the space program. Because if we didn't, we wouldn't have a space program at all.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Totalfixation @ Nov 16th 2007 3:01PM
I don't know if I'm the only one here that feels the need to restructuralize NASA. I feel that even though the rovers have done well beyond there expected duties I find it hard to believe that billions of dollars was pour into this project and all they conger up are few months to a year out of these machine. I believe that private companies can do way better jobs than NASA with even lesser funding. I feel we should start to privatize the space industry. maybe we can get more than a few miles out of these machines per day rather than a few feets.
CraigJ @ Nov 16th 2007 3:12PM
Spirit landed on Jan. 3 and is slated to scour the Gusev crater, near Mars' equator, for three months. Its twin, Opportunity, is due to land Saturday. The combined mission cost is $820 million.January 2004 to now is 34 months. Almost 3 years. So... I'm not sure what "few months" long multi-billion dollar project you are talking about.
Source: http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/spirit_talks_040123.html
thesawzall @ Nov 16th 2007 3:15PM
Well they've come a long way from some of the earlier probes that just landed there and only lasted for a couple of hours at best.
Remember Mars is only a little rockier, dustier, and generally more harsh than your backyard. And it's only a couple thousand or so miles farther away.
Sure NASA Could use some restructuring, but I think the accomplishments of these 2 things have been pretty amazing. I say we mount a rescue mission. Leave no man, er...robot behind.
Bizam! @ Nov 16th 2007 3:13PM
What are you talking about?! This is actually one of the biggest NASA success stories. Both of these rovers were originally intended to function for about 90 days, they've been driving around on Mars for almost 4 years now! It's only expected that they're going to start having problems at this point.
muddyh2o @ Nov 16th 2007 3:13PM
restructuralization?
you're an idiot.
science run solely by private companies? yeah, we could hire SPECTRE
CraigJ @ Nov 16th 2007 3:34PM
Sorry for bad math. more like 4 years as pointed out by Bizam. I suck at date math...
BradVT @ Nov 16th 2007 3:38PM
I think the point Total is trying to make is that why design something that cost 800 million dollars to last only 90 days. Yeah, it has exceeded that expected lifespan by a lot, but it would make more sense to design a long term robot that could be expected to last for years. Thats what I think at least.
Totalfixation @ Nov 16th 2007 3:41PM
Sorry for being an idiot because i spelled one word wrong.
As for the topic, Ya i feel that this current mission is a great success story, but out of how many failure? Think of it this way if Microsoft was the only OS on the market you think they are going to consistently try to work better by producing better products and conserve spending as they go? I feel NASA in essence is almost the same thing. Of course you have Russia and China, but they are somewhat behind. I just feel that privatizing most the space industry is lead to better productivity for mankind.
Also as for the rover ya they lasted very long but in that time what have they accumulated? a few samples of data? Of course we can argue about the measurements of achievement, but my main more is open the gates for "privatization."
Also I feel this will lead to more job opportunities, by having more people in the industry we can covert all that raw data that have been accumulated into something productive for mankind. And not for the benefit of one government or country.
Jimmy Hoffa @ Nov 16th 2007 4:05PM
If I'd seen an example of this private-company efficiency of which you speak I'd be a little more interested, but as far as I can tell, private companies as large as would be necessary to run these kind of operations (and stick around to gather the information) are all as bloated as the government.
What's more, private companies would all want to keep the rewards for their efforts (i.e., information) in the hopes that it would bring them future riches, so we'd add intellectual property issues to the mix of problems.
While I definitely see a role for private companies in space travel/exploration, I feel pretty strongly that the infrastructure is best put in place by NASA.
Totalfixation @ Nov 16th 2007 3:47PM
BTW. For crying out loud the Japanese built bumblebee, i mean come on, we should be able to build something way better than that.
:chuckle:
Mark Richardson @ Nov 16th 2007 3:58PM
@muddyh2o
If you think the government can anything other than national security better than private companies, you need to put down the KoolAid, buddy.
jderman @ Nov 16th 2007 4:49PM
total, brad. I think you got it right here. this is a case of nasa taking a page from the corporate playbook 'underpromise and overdeliver' vs. the standard nasa overpromise, underdeliver, and overbudget...
Still quite an achievement (and a good investment as well). I bet that $820 million price tag could have been a lil' lower.
rocketman @ Nov 16th 2007 4:13PM
@ BradVT
You, sir, obviously do not know the first thing about designing spacecraft. Do you honestly think it is easy to design, build, and operate a robot that travels to another PLANET to achieve "years" of reliability? There is a reason it's called rocket science.
As for the cost.. that is the TOTAL cost. Current operations is a small *fraction* of that figure. The expensive part is paid for, it would be dumb not to run these rovers into the ground.
Folks, this country spends more in one MONTH on the War than it has on the whole Mars Rover mission. That tells you something about where our priorities are ... [sigh]
Totalfixation @ Nov 16th 2007 4:26PM
@Jimmy Hoffa
As an example. As much as i do not like apple, even though i own an iphone, and also Google to name a few(neutral stands on them). I have to say these companies have revolutionized many of things we now see in the computer industry. You can't possibly thing the government can do a better job then the what the free market can do? Seriously when did it become so prevalent that government can do a better than the people? We have a great system(not the best)for check and balance on private companies. but we have nothing but the government to keep NASA in check and NASA is the government. I'm sorry to say this but the people in congress cannot possibly truly understand the technology involved and be allowed to approve and deny funding.
Like the saying "just pick the lesser of the two evils." Both have there flaws but in my opinion government should not get involved but only to monitor and help guide the way.
Dan Jensen @ Nov 17th 2007 8:57AM
Let's stop the ignorance, shall we? It's not like the US government is holding back the private sector from developing space flight - far from it, in fact. The reason why NASA spends so much on space exploration is because if they didn't, no one else would. Before private enterprise gets involved, you need to show they why it would be worth the investments that so far, only governments have been able to afford.
A private organization doesn't get involved in spaceflight to make Americans feel better about themselves. They are in it to make money.
And I tell you this: If you can prove that there are thousands of tons of gold deposits or diamonds on an asteroid somewhere, the private sector would start designing spaceships faster than you can say Buck Rogers! But until that day, don't be upset that our government pumps so much money into the space program. Because if we didn't, we wouldn't have a space program at all.