Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
Bush To Announce Manned Mars Mission!
Rogue Trader
Somebody stop him...
in Zocalo v2.0
[url]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107807,00.html[/url]
FUCKIN AWESOME!!!!!!!
FUCKIN AWESOME!!!!!!!
Comments
I must set foot on that planet!
We should try this on the MOON first, at least then we'll have some practice with off planet colinization where we can reach out and help them if there is something wrong.
[quote]
PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. — President Bush will announce plans next week to send Americans to Mars and [b]establish a permanent human presence on the moon[/b], senior administration officials said Thursday night.[/quote]
[remainder of the post deleted]
The rest of my post was just a rant that had no relevance to the topic and, as a result, does not belong in this thread.
I LOVE MY AARDVARK, MY AARDVARK LOVES ME! I LOVE MY AARDVARK, BY THE COTTEN WOOD TREE! MY LITTLE AARDVARK GOES DOR DE DOR DE DOR DE DE DOR DE DE DOR DE DE DOY!
Here's a summary for the lazy :)
------
1. President will ask Congress for a 800 million downpayment for fiscal year 2005 for the development and creation of new space robotic vehicles.
2. Increase NASA budget by 5% each year for at least 5 years. Increase will go ENTIRELY to manned space exploration.
3. Retire aging shuttle fleet once the International Space Station is built. Develop and create the orbital space plane along with a crew exploration vehicle (CEV).
4. Moon landings and colonization to begin around 2013.
5.The first test flights of unmanned prototypes of the CEV could occur as soon as 2007. An orbital version would replace the shuttle to transport astronauts to and from the space station.
6. The various models of the CEV would be 21st century versions of the 1960s Apollo spacecraft. When they become operational, they would be able to conduct various missions in Earth orbit, travel to and land on the moon, send astronauts to rendezvous with nearby asteroids, and eventually serve as part of a series of manned missions to Mars.
7. First lunar landings will essentially start off where the Apollo program ended. Small groups of humans staying on the moon for a few days at a time until sufficient equipment has been relocated to the moon.
8. New budget for NASA will be made public next week when Bush presents the fiscal year 2005 budget to Congress.
===============
Looks like Bush is SERIOUS about this. About freaking time! :) Better late than never.
That could mean the launch windows around 2030.
ESA is currently seriously planning manned Mars mission that could be in that launch window if everything goes right.
[B]Let's at least keep this thread 99% politics-free and just be happy that the U.S. will announce mankind's return to manned space travel. [/B][/QUOTE]
Yeah no shit...
Why does every damn thread on this forum get turned into a fricken political BS session... I don't agree with your opinion about Bush, and I really don't care to have it infiltrate the topic at hand.
I think it's way overdue that someone pumped some life back into the space program and set a few respectable goals.
[B]Yeah no shit...
Why does every damn thread on this forum get turned into a fricken political BS session... I don't agree with your opinion about Bush, and I really don't care to have it infiltrate the topic at hand.
I think it's way overdue that someone pumped some life back into the space program and set a few respectable goals. [/B][/QUOTE]
This is ONE thread I'm determined to keep politics free. =)
Anyhow, what does everyone think on the above plan?
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by E.T [/i]
[B][i]Bush won't propose sending Americans to Mars (search) anytime soon; rather, he envisions preparing for the mission more than a decade from now, one official said.[/i]
That could mean the launch windows around 2030.
ESA is currently seriously planning manned Mars mission that could be in that launch window if everything goes right. [/B][/QUOTE]
Read what I posted above. It gives a lot more info on the overall plan.
[B]i really think your lookin way into it. of course its slightly political, every politician does everything for political gain. but i dont think hes doing it for these so-called oil friends. [/B][/QUOTE]
I'm very much inclined to agree with Arik. It's all because of political focus. I see it as this:
1) Bush wants a name for himself. "The man who revived the space program" sounds a lot better than "The man who began the costly war on terror and took our freedoms away in the process"
2) It's money. The one to find the next oil and can be the first to exploit it gets the profits and reap the rewards.
Political status is key, but if something great comes out of what is most likely greed, then damn bush and those with him. It's worth it.
[B]I'm very much inclined to agree with Arik. It's all because of political focus. I see it as this:
1) Bush wants a name for himself. "The man who revived the space program" sounds a lot better than "The man who began the costly war on terror and took our freedoms away in the process"
2) It's money. The one to find the next oil and can be the first to exploit it gets the profits and reap the rewards.
Political status is key, but if something great comes out of what is most likely greed, then damn bush and those with him. It's worth it. [/B][/QUOTE]
*smacks Sanfam with a large frying pan*
No politics! Go start another thread! =) This one is about the U.S. and the return of manned space exploration.
[B]too bad. Fits here :D [/B][/QUOTE]
Does not! :alien:
Anyhow, no more politics. Create another thread for that.
Also, something else to consider...
if we establish a moon base, those chinese folks won't be able to do it first, eh? Same for Mars! If we do it before they do, it's safe!
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Striker [/i]
[B]1. President will ask Congress for a 800 million downpayment for fiscal year 2005 for the development and creation of new space robotic vehicles.[/b][/quote]
What sort of robotic vehicles? Are we talking more probes or something like robotic base-builders?
[quote][b]2. Increase NASA budget by 5% each year for at least 5 years. Increase will go ENTIRELY to manned space exploration.[/b][/quote]
Cool, but 5% still ain't a hell of a lot compared with some other budgets. Still, better than nothing.
[quote][b]3. Retire aging shuttle fleet once the International Space Station is built. Develop and create the orbital space plane along with a crew exploration vehicle (CEV).[/b][/quote]
About time. While the shuttle is a good ship and a sturdy workhorse (it's a lot tougher than recent events and media descriptions have made it out to be), it is made out of fairly out of date tech.
[quote][b]4. Moon landings and colonization to begin around 2013.[/b][/quote]
Ah, if only that were 9 years earlier... Still, we get lots of cool tests leading up to that. That should keep me entertained. :)
[quote][b]5.The first test flights of unmanned prototypes of the CEV could occur as soon as 2007. An orbital version would replace the shuttle to transport astronauts to and from the space station.[/b][/quote]
See above. :)
[quote][b]6. The various models of the CEV would be 21st century versions of the 1960s Apollo spacecraft. When they become operational, they would be able to conduct various missions in Earth orbit, travel to and land on the moon, send astronauts to rendezvous with nearby asteroids, and eventually serve as part of a series of manned missions to Mars.[/b][/quote]
Good to see they don't want to create an all-in-one vehicle. A craft designed for moving in and out of an atmosphere and deep inside a gravity well is really not suited to moving long distances through space. Just think how much more difficult the Apollo craft would have been to design in the 1960s if they had tried to do things like make them capable of atmospheric flight (I think one of the options was, actually).
[quote][b]7. First lunar landings will essentially start off where the Apollo program ended. Small groups of humans staying on the moon for a few days at a time until sufficient equipment has been relocated to the moon.[/b][/quote]
A good way to go, but we should start sending equipment up there as soon as possible. Ever read [i]Red Mars[/i]? They basically swamped Mars with equipment - oxygen generators, bull dozers, diggers, portable cranes, kilns, water extractors, robotic transport rovers, food, everything they would need. Just keep sending it up and let it sit there, nicely sealed away in its landing container, until the people arrive to use it. The sooner we start, the more stuff we can get up there, the quicker we get a base off the ground. Naturally, we need to develop the tech for the stuff we send first. Better get on to that quickly.
Regards,
Morden
Sanfam brings up an interesting point about the Chinese (since they are indeed developing their own space program). So are the europeans.
I wonder if it would be worth it to make the moon/mars missions into an international collaborative project. The obvious benefits would be shared cost and potentially faster progress. Given the ISS delays due to communication problems and lack of commitment by some of the partners who shall remain nameless, the draw backs to international participation are also clear.
The other question would be finding the potential time window for a manned mission to Mars. I remember there was a Popular Science magazine about 5-6 years ago which featured a story about space exploration and potential missions to Mars. IIRC, they mentioned that there were a few ideal 'launch windows' for such a mission, occurring either around 2017 or 2024 or something like that. Does anyone have more information on that 'ideal launch window'?
So we'd need to first test out equipment on the moon, then strap it on to a bunch of rockets and send it to Mars, with humans to follow once the equipment is safely delivered and auto-deployed.
its not a lot true but it is a start.
[B]they mentioned that there were a few ideal 'launch windows' for such a mission, occurring either around 2017 or 2024 or something like that. Does anyone have more information on that 'ideal launch window'?[/B][/QUOTE]
I can check those from "Tähdet ja Avaruus" (Ursa Astronomical Associations member magazine), when I (and IF :D) find out where I put that number.
Magazine 4/2003 had article about ESA's mars program and it contained schedule with launch windows to around year 2030.
[url]http://koti.mbnet.fi/tuunaes/Images/PICT2556.JPG[/url]
That red line portrays sun activity.
Which is important because it affects to radiation levels which astronauts would be exposed. (especially flares are dangerous)
Sure looks like an international effort to me.
[quote]Bush also plans to ask Congress to boost NASA's budget by 5 percent annually over at least the next five years, with all of the increase supporting space exploration. With the exception of the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, no other agency is expected to receive a budget increase above inflation in FY 2005.[/quote]
Five percent increase every year for five years amounts to a total increase of about 27.6%, not accounting for inflation; that's a pretty large amount. I like it.
[quote]NASA would end substantial involvement in the space station project about the same time the moon landings would begin -- beginning in 2013, according to an administration timetable shown to UPI.[/quote]
2013 is long after Bush will leave office, whether he gets re-elected or not. Zero chance of Arik's mining contract theory, though the timing of this announcement certainly supports the idea that he's doing this to help him get reelected, which is perfectly reasonable.
[quote]As part of its new space package, sources said, the administration will convene an unusual presidential commission to review NASA's plans as they unfold. The group would consider such factors as the design of the spacecraft; the procedure for assembly, either in Earth orbit or lunar orbit; the individual elements the new craft should contain, such as capsules, supply modules, landing vehicles and propellant stages, and the duration and number of missions and size of crews.[/quote]
Hrmm.. not sure what I think about this. Some kind of review would probably be good for NASA, but this commission had better be comprised of scientists who actually know what they're looking at.
On the other hand:
[quote]Sources said Bush will direct NASA to scale back or scrap all existing programs that do not support the new effort.[/quote]
...I do like the new focus.
[B]...I do like the new focus. [/B][/QUOTE]
Did you mean to say "don't"? While the plans to go to the moon and beyond are exciting, it'd be a shame to kill off all other areas of research. Sort of like putting all eggs in one bucket. I mean, what if we get to the moon and find out it has been terraformed by the Goa'uld 15 years ago and is now made of cheese (low fat, of course). Then we'd have to start all over again.
To anyone who disagreed with my original post -- no arguments there. As I said in the post, it was mostly a Bush rant, and rants are based on a need to vent rather than anything resembling factual information. I will take this opportunity and say that I'm sorry, that post did not contribute to the discussion and, as some of you said, had little to do with the topic at hand. I apologize if I upset anyone by my comments.
Now, moving on...
Overall, it is definitely a much more reasonable proposal (gradual budget increases) and may succeed where Bush Sr.'s plan failed due to incredibly high costs. I hope it gets approved by congress...
The other three questions that come to mind are...
1) My knowledge of this area is very outdated (by over 5 years) but IIRC, there is at least one privately-funded group that had its own plans for developing space missions (satellites, moon and mars rover-type exploration vehicles). Would such groups also be tapped in order to find the best ideas and technologies?
2) Are there any ways to contribute to the NASA research budget, directly or indirectly? I know it's allocated by the government, but just wonder if there's a way to make donations that would increase that budget somehow. If there are no donations, there's always the possibility of creating a 'space exploration' tax. That'd be interesting.
3) I want to go to the Moon and try jumping to see how much higher I can jump in moon's lower gravity environment as compared to Earth. I know it's easy enough to calculate using gravity differences, but I want to test it for myself, in person. My question: when can I go and how much is a round trip ticket?
I also agree with Bekenn that any kind of review panel should be made of scientists and engineers who will look at it from the right point of view, not politicians who [i]might[/i] put their own little PR spin onto it.