It may only represent a smidgen of the multi-trillion dollar annual federal budget, but funding for NASA never fails to stir up debate, and that looks like it'll be the case more than ever with the Obama administration's just-announced 2011 budget. While NASA's budget will actually increase slightly to $19 billion, the big news is that
Constellation moon program started by the Bush administration in 2006 (with the goal of returning by 2020) is being shelved amid what amounts to a fairly big change in priorities for NASA. That includes the first phase of more than $9 billion in spending on robotic exploration and heavy-lift rockets and, perhaps most notably, $6 billion in spending to promote the development of commercial rockets and spacecraft -- which NASA hopes will eventually be able to transport astronauts into orbit. Turning around a space agency isn't exactly easy though, and it'll apparently cost $3 billion over two years simply to end what's already been started on the Constellation program.
Feeling a little wistful? Then head on past the break for a brief history of NASA's recent lunar ambitions.
posted February 1st 2010 4:34PM
Weight has nothing to do with it
Awful...scrapping lunar (and potentially Martian) exploration in favor of global warming observation. Ehh...how's that hope and change working out?
@Whistletutor
I don't know about hope, but change is evidently working out
@JeremyBenthem Ha! True, that's a good point.
@JeremyBenthem
Funny! I would like to get some of my change back from the banks!
@droberts
Yes, because going to the moon is important, been there done that, why spend billions on something that have little rewards and has already been done.
@Ryujin
... and you're basing your incredibly brilliant comment on what? It's really sad that the general populace is so uneducated about the benefits that came out of the 60's space program. That was simply a 9 year span too.
Nasa is one of the few remaining sources for innovation in this country. Explain to me how replacing high tech jobs with railroad construction is going to advance our country and rebound an already pitiful economy?
How are we supposed to achieve any meaningful long term goals if every damn administration keeps coming into office every 4-8 years and completely changes direction of the agency? That's ignoring the billions we apparently waste by this so called change...
This is as bad as Bush's stem cell research nonsense, but where is the uproar now?
@Whistletutor
With this ecenomical climate its no wonder moon mission is on low burner. If they get the budget off the red and back to black as it was with clinton, maybe then we will see a moon mission.
Banking crises combined with Bush fiscal incompetence and afghan/iraq wars don't give much wiggle room for prestige spacemissions. And moon mission is about prestige.
If it were about science there would be a lot more probe missions to moon. The last probe to land to moon was in 1976. Land more probes for science before landing men there.
@Whistletutor Yes, so while we thought US is going on a bankruptcy, here we are, investing on this space expeditions and lo, the last time I check each escapade like this cost more or less than 1-2 Billion, isn't this great or what? Maybe next time, we'll see apophis in action now: http://bit.ly/apophis-asteroid-fact-fiction
@moneymark, it looks like the USofA have been Balkanized - no project that spans over 4 years is to be allowed and funded as the current government might not be there to rip the rewards from it. Or what's worse, their fierce competition might get credited for it...
$1.6T budget and they couldn't eek out the extra $$ it would take to keep Constellation alive...
@Critic2029 3.833 trillion actaully
That's one shitty ride. :)
@One Love Reminds me of Snuffleupagus.
to be fair, at least he increased the overall budget for nasa. it is rather sad tho that we were able to get to the moon in the 60s and now 50 years later we're unable to because of budget problems...
@spasewalkr It's better to spend trillions on wars to secure limited resources and you know it. Those trillions weren't even in the budget, so don't worry about it.
@BigD145 I have a better idea - take the trillions, outfit every home in America with solar power (thus negating the need to get into expensive false-premise energy wars), and then build a colony on the moon with the leftovers to farm isotopes and provide energy for more distance space travel.
@spasewalkr Our safety requirements are part of the problem. NASA has the idea that as a nation, we won't tolerate any lives being lost in exploration.
During the apollo program, there were like 8-10 launches, 7 orbited the moon and 6 landed... The shuttle has flown 129 times with 2 failures. It is pretty well accepted that had Apollo flown out its missions or continued much further, there would've been dead americans on the moon or somewhere in between. Continued presence on orbit means that there WILL eventually be a disaster with a failure on orbit. It is only a matter of time.
These astronauts know what the dangers of spaceflight are, they are willing to take the risks to possibly do something truly exceptional, but the public at large doesn't have the stomach for it.
@BigD145 Actually, funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are included in the budget this time, for the first time ever. That's why it looks like the budget has gone up when it's actually gone down if you do an apples-to-apples comparison.
@schtum
I think this is the one business that needs to be privatized. NASA designs are so fugly. I want my space ships built by Ferrari.
@TMoney2007
I have the stomach to let them risk themselves. If they know the risks, but are willing to take them, I say salute their bravery and let them carry on.
@VampireHunterZ, in space design doesn't really matter. Put an engine on a brick and it will happily fly... When it comes to technology, function is always put over style... That is if you are not running a company that have a bitten apple as their logo.
"Turning around a space agency isn't exactly easy though, and it'll apparently cost $3 billion over two years simply to end what's already been started on the Constellation program. "
What a waste!
@KGB Contractual obligations are a bitch.
What about the parade?? was it all lies??
And so it begins... the privatization of the space program.
Wonder how long it will take for China to catch up?
@PerryAJ
KIRF space shuttles dont fly very well seeing that the flight controls only operate a Hello Kitty alarm clock.
@PerryAJ Funny how conservatives are all about privatization, but now that a Democrat is privatizing space exploration they're all against it. (I don't presume to know your political leanings, just commenting on the issue of privatization in general).
Between Burt Rutan, Virgin Galactic and Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin, it seems like it might be time to privatize this stuff. What are the downsides? It's not like we were getting free rides to the moon for all taxpayers under the public system.
@PerryAJ
China has the money to buy NASA tomorrow if they were allowed to.
and there goes the last bit of respect i had for obama. They spent a trillion dollars on a 'stimulus' that didnt stimulate ANYTHING but they cant eek out a few more billion for space exploration. Such short and narrow minded fools.
@Ioncloud9
It isn't the money for space expooration.. It is that NASA is directed to spend the money on the Global Warming hoax.
Even after climategate, they are still trying to shove this BS down our throats.
@Ioncloud9
Remind me again what NOAA's job is again?
It is hard to describe my disappointment.
@Black
Me too Black...after my trip to the KSC in Florida in November to see the last shuttle launch and touring around the facilities seeing the incredibly rich history, amazing dedication and being floored by pure awe of man's achievement I can only cry a silient tear. There were already signs of the downturn in the Cocoa Beach area. For sale signs, a closed Walmart, borded up shops. I mean yes, there was a recession going on but still, the tour operators (who were incredibly smart) were none too pleased about what was going on. Tourist numbers were down then. Can you imagine when the Shuttle program stops in four more flights how little interest there will be in that area? The launches of "anything" were one of the main attractions of that area. I spent 8 hours waiting to get a piece of turf on the causeway in VIP seating just to be able to see the shuttle. Boy am I glad I got to see it. I swear, everyone needs to go down there and see a launch before its all over. It's simply a priceless experience that won't occur again for quite some time.
Well for those of you who are interested in taking an impartial look, the Constellation program was under funded and behind the time line that the Bush administration had set out in it's plan for getting back to the moon. At the current level of funding, estimates put it at 2020-2030 before we would get back into space on our own. The current administration was given a report that stated all this, and possible options for changing the direction of NASA. The current option will hopefully stop there from being a period of 10-20 years that the United States cannot get into space on it's own (for lack of a vessel to carry astronauts) and give us the ability to get to space for less than it costs right now through private options. It also extends the lifetime of the international space station(which was set to run out of US funding by around 2015). As far as I see it, getting into space in a less than ideal option and continuing to be able to amazing research is better than not getting into space for 10-20-30 years while every other country goes there. You can be upset at the administration for changing the direction of NASA or you can realize that the last administration has left NASA somewhat nonfunctional after the retirement of the current fleet of space shuttles, and this proposal is meant to correct that.
@Joe the Plumber
Impartial? Nice jab at Bush there at the end?
@Joe the Plumber
Thank you for the post of reason and logic, but others rather see the end result and not what got us to the mess that we are in now.
Once again, Obama is left cleaning up the mess of the previous administration, and he ends up looking like the bad guy.
@Joe the Plumber
Right... so re-purposing NASA to do the exact same job that NOAA does is "Cleaning up the mess"
@Joe the Plumber You're certainly right about the age and condition of the shuttles, but I'm pretty sure that's what the Constellation program was designed to rectify. That aside, it's more the issue of redirecting NASA away from space exploration and pointing them to "global warm..." wow, couldn't even finish typing it without laughing.
@Hazdaz
You are such a tool and you don't even see it.
@droberts A jab, maybe, but its freaking true. Bush is the one that came in mandated shuttle retirement and the development of a new launch vehicle and then didn't fund it (although he isn't the first to do that to NASA). Without a temporary, though drastic, increase in budget, there could never be parallel development of a new launch system while the current vehicle flew out its manifest.
Presidents from Nixon on are to blame for where NASA is today. The Shuttle was never supposed to be the whole manned space flight program... it was supposed to be the LEO part with the descendants of Apollo continuing the exploration portion of the program.
@TMoney2007
The first phase of Constellation was LEO and it was suppose to be ready by 2012/2013.
If they would have held fast we were only going to be 3 years without Heavy Lift LEO capability.
@Critic2029:
"The first phase of Constellation was LEO and it was suppose to be ready by 2012/2013.
If they would have held fast we were only going to be 3 years without Heavy Lift LEO capability."
Actually, the next SUB-orbital test flight for the Ares I would've been in 2012, and the first manned orbital flight would've been in 2015 if everything had gone on schedule: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Constellation_missions
In comparison, the SpaceX Falcon 9 and unmanned Dragon capsule are slated for launch THIS year, the manned Dragon space capsule next year, and the Falcon 9 Heavy (comparable to the Ares I in lift capability) in the next two or three years. All for 1/10 the projected cost of the Ares.
SpaceX's Falcon 9 rockets may never take us back to the moon the way the Ares V might have, but for short-term heavy lift capability, they're much closer than Constellation was.
@Joe the Plumber
You'd think that they already have schematics and manuals and everything by now and all they neede is to manufacture all the mental parts.
I guess all those high-paid Solitarie players need to get off their asses and take more initiatives.
@Hazdaz
So the new plan is to rely on unproven technology, run by unproven companies in the somewhat new private space sector. Brilliant!
NASA is meant for exploration and discovery. Republicans and Democrats alike should leave it the hell alone and stop using it for political gain. All it is doing is damaging innovation in this country by significantly hindering our long term goals.
@moneymark
I'm all for private companies working at it too, but I would like public money to be spent on space exploration as well. Who knows, they could even (gasp!) learn from each other.
@Joe the Plumber
It's my understanding that the US is spending more than $700 billion on 'defense,' otherwise known as military. With the Iraq War scheduled to be completed by August, why wouldn't Obama just divert a fraction of the money that has been going to that war to the space program? He would have saved at least $3 billion in the process.
Once a nation begins to fall behind in science, it begins to fall behind in everything else. I learned that from Sid Meyer's Civilization :P
Clarification on my previous post:
Obama should recommend to Congress that some of the money that has been going towards the Iraq war be sent to NASA, WITHOUT NASA's current plans being changed.
@Joe the Plumber
Your facts are mind bogglingly wrong.
The shuttles would retire in late 2010 (possibly mid 2011). And its replacement for getting US astronauts to the ISS would only be around 3 years later. During which time we would use Russian Soyuz to get up there. While I HATE the idea of needing the Russians to get use there...it is the best option.
And we would be back on the moon by 2020-2025.
But now, thanks to the great black savior, The US will continue to spin its wheels in LEO.....Its a sad day for space enthusiasts like me.
@Abe
I hear ya. I wasn't trying to suggest there is no value in having the private sector involved, in fact most of the work is farmed out already. I'm just saying it's a bit frightening to suggest we simply rely on them to get the job done with little to no proof they are capable of the task.
I know if I started building model cars this year and GM came to me and said hey, could you maybe build our cars for us pretty please? We want to still sell them but don't want to pay all these people to do it anymore.... I'm not sure I'd feel real good about that plan. I sure love cars but I've never driven one I built around the block successfully... (ps I've never built a car)