Everything old is new again?

ISS is a partnership endeavor.

The Russians are fully capable of taking responsibility for the taxi service for a while.

Alan,

the Russians proved decades ago that you don't need a Space Shuttle to build a Space Station.

So are you saying Russia will once again drive itself, economically, into the ground to prove a point?

And how is ditching dated technology a failure?

magnum

The Soyuz is a very risky vehicle, for many reasons.

How about we look at this from a pratical economical stand point. Each job produced through the stimulus program cost $278,000. To send two shuttles up a year would cost about 3 billion. Divide 3 billion by 278,000 and you would get over 10,000 jobs. Cutting the shuttle program is eliminating 8,000 jobs. Not just any kind of job, but good paying jobs with high skills that have given back to this country a wide variety of technological advancements. Wouldn't one say that this is "shovel ready" and maybe we should just simply move some of the stimulus money over to the shuttle program.........

oops I'm sorry I'm using common sense.

"Soon Russia will grow tired of NASA and up the cost to 350 million then 750 million then 1 billion per flight. NASA is over, finished."

Sorry Magnum, Russia has learned Capitalism, and the concept of 'pricing yourself out of the market.' They won't push so hard as to make us stop buying, or 'seek alternatives.' (Translation: Spend more money on Commercial Crew Development...which is not about the suborbital operators, or have you not paid attention to the stories about SpaceX, Boeing, SpaceDev and Blue Origin?)

As far as that article goes, it was Jim Oberg who said that the Soyuz "may" be less safe, and not NASA. Mr. Oberg is NOT a spokesperson for NASA!! As for Jim's creditability, well....... I've known him for a number of years........he's a pretty bright guy....and he "may" be right, but he wasn't speaking for NASA.

Doug

As far as I can tell, it is the same impression that NASA itself has, however they sure won't say that publicly. It would be bad PR to say that about your only ride to the space station.

The fact is that the Soyuz capsule is safe, for 1965 level of standards, and while NASA has moved forward, the Russians haven't.

There have been a few close calls on reentry where the astronauts nearly died, so it isn't undocumented that there are issues.

Casper- I see your logic 10k vs 8k..not much diff..but when 2 shuttles blow up,...something is not going right.

A few months before the last shuttle disaster...my girlfriend and her 12yr old went to phx to see the space shuttle memorial...we were explaining to him the time when were his age and the first space shuttle accident happened. He was interested in how it affected us..and then boom we were all there in the living room for the next one...you could just see it in his eyes...sorta a shock, sorta a sad dissapointment that we could "allow" it to happen again.

Casper, actually it has eliminated a lot more than 8000 jobs, but those other jobs were lost when the supply chain was shut down.

guru:

Space is a risky business. That only 2 shuttles have been destroyed is actually nothing less than a miracle considering the complexity of the vehicles.

Yea,$48 million today. Wait til they add parking, baggage, and snacks. Then you'll see what can fit in an carry-on.

By 2035 NASA will be totally forgotten, thanks to NASA junking the Space Shuttle program and not having a clue as to what to do next except spin in circles somewhere out beyond the moon.

Wow Magnum! You can see that far ahead in the future?!? GOSH. Great to hear of your prediction. *sarcasm*

ISS is a partnership endeavor.The Russians are fully capable of taking responsibility for the taxi service for a while.

Exactly GendoIkari. Let them prove to us they are reliable since some idiots on this board think Russia makes "suborbital toys". I never doubted them in the first place but it's time for the stupid to eat crow.

Speaking of crow......This Ogberg dude really needs to check himself before saying such comment. No where in that statement did I see any crowing. Like I said, they are now the only way to get to the ISS. They are happy to show they can be just as reliable as the Shuttles. Deflate the American ego people.

Stopping the shuttle program before there was a replacement ready, or at least imminent, was a monumental mistake. To put the US in the position of having to rely on Russia to get our astronauts into space puts us at a huge disadvantage. A disagreement between the US and Russia could easily lead to the US losing all access to the space station. The US has been at the forefront of space exploration since Kennedy threw down the gauntlet that led to the US putting men on the moon. For us to take a back seat to the Russians when it comes to access to the space station and orbital space is a big mistake. We should be keeping at least one shuttle operational to ensure the US has continued access to space. Of course, I wonder if the rumors are true that the military has their own shuttle that could be used if a situation arose that warranted it. That could explain why the government was willing to kill the shuttle program before a replacement was available. Of course using this shuttle for a civilian mission would mean revealing the existence of a military shuttle, which would surely ruffle some feathers. I certainly hope the rumors are true, otherwise the decision to kill the shuttle program seems very ill advised.

To all who gave their time and talents to the shuttle program over the years I say Thank You - Bravo Zulu!!!

Jonathan says: "The Soyuz is a very risky vehicle, for many reasons."

Okay, so we are waiting Jonathan.

What are these reasons?

Or should we just bow down before your godlike wisdom and immediately believe your pronouncement?

I bet Obama reads this with pride! He canned Aries so we have no way to get into space, except by begging and paying the ruskies. Admittedly, he can't take all the credit for it. It took a whole lot of politicians and years of neglect to get here too. If we had had today's politicians after WWI, we would never have won WWII as they would have told the military we don't need to have airplanes, they're a waste of money.

Witchrunner says, "If we had had today's politicians after WWI, we would never have won WWII as they would have told the military we don't need to have airplanes, they're a waste of money."

Oh nonsense! They would have outsourced the airplane production to Japan and Germany and everything would have been fine.

I was there at the beginning, working w/Apollo and Saturn S-IV projects. Trust me, this is horrible for the USA, and we can blame Nixon for screwing it all up and add the military into the mix of blame for good measure. We'd be past Mars by now, if it weren't for the GOP and military wanting to stomp on Kennedy's (and thus, America's) dream.

There wouldn't have been any real motivation for the government to spend billions on the space program if it wasn't actually mostly used to test military equipment and technologies.

"Feel free to chime in with your comments below."

Just one more example of America's 'decline'. There was a theory on the decline and fall of the Roman Empire that speculated that their decline was largely a result of the debasing of their currency (diluting gold and silver coins with relatively worthless metals). Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Here's an interest 'read';

http://www.roman-empire-america-now.com/US-Dollar.html

PS - There was talk about the 'decline of America' under Jimmy Carter as well, but then Ronald Reagan was elected and all of that changed - until now.

The current administration is the cause of this country's failure to keep the lead in space travel. Kind of disgusting really when it didn't need to happen.

even though NASA has paid most of the estimated $100 billion cost of construction.

So now the Russians will be living there. What's that saying from 'Field of Dreams'.....If you build it, they will come.

The current administration is the cause of this country's failure to keep the lead in space travel. Kind of disgusting really when it didn't need to happen.

Of course. Because spending billions yearly on space is so much more important right now than getting the economy running.

Jasmine,

It's very obvious that many of these American posters have a huge confidence problem.

Russia IS our primary partner in the ISS endeavor, and they have been from day one of the project. Get over it.

You people probably make the Russians second guess why they ever gave up with continuing their own extremely successful Space Station Mir to join our arrogant asses in building ISS.

Space Station Mir was the pride of Russia in the very same way Space Shuttle has been the pride of the USA. They gave up Space Station Mir for us. Don't ever forget that.

Space Shuttle has served it's purpose. International Space Station is complete. It's time to move on to the next phase of America's space program. In the meantime, Russia can continue demonstrating the strength of their space program.

I am for sending up a 'system-failed signal to the US portion of the ISS as soon as those Ruskies shows their pale white assets to 'US.

I don't even like NO DAMN RUSSIANS. PERIOD.

Yes sometimes NASA has had money go to dead-ends. Yes sometimes accidents happen. This is virgin territory people, and sometimes wrong turns are taken. That's how it goes for pioneers. We didn't fire Louis and Clark and abandon westward movement just because they took a few wrong turns and had to eat up a few dollars more of rations as a result.

@!$%#ing Americans. /rollseyes

Witchrunner says, "If we had had today's politicians after WWI, we would never have won WWII as they would have told the military we don't need to have airplanes, they're a waste of money."

Oh nonsense! They would have outsourced the airplane production to Japan and Germany and everything would have been fine.

uh... you do realize that we were at WAR with Japan and Germany then??

Do you realize that was meant as sarcasm?

So again we get caught with our pants down, to busy standing on the top of that mountain pounding our chest it just proves one thing lack of common sense which does not amaze me, while we were flying our shuttles why were we not building the replacements, and we wonder why our country is failing, could it be that we have to many morons running our government.

Better to point funds in a better direction besides outer space. We have enough probs here. I'm sure Russia has enough old toasters to keep their space program going.

",,,,,What goes around" ,, as some would say.

So NASA spent the last few decades dumping money into the useless orbiting pile of connected tin cans (read "space station") for no good reason, INSTEAD of developing an up-dated space delivery system.

Then it has no right acting embarrassed while begging for Russian Taxi Service.

I have never believed that we landed on the moon. If we had the moon would be the space the station. We had to do anything to beat the Russians at any cost even if we lied. We had problems with our space shuttles with leaving the earth and returning. The only thing that we did was send two mobile computer toys to mars. Which they will never return to earth. This is more believable. I do believe that the human race needs to explore outer space. To save the humans and other living things here on planet earth from destroying it self. If we can do this with team help. I'm all for it. Thanks to the Russians you and I can go into space. (Yes it will cost).

Then comes Russia's Ultimatum, but look on the bright side. Russia is an easy language to learn.

And Putin can sernade actress Sharon Stone with "Blueberry Hill" all night long.......

@ Jerry who says:

Witchrunner says, "If we had had today's politicians after WWI, we would never have won WWII as they would have told the military we don't need to have airplanes, they're a waste of money."

Oh nonsense! They would have outsourced the airplane production to Japan and Germany and everything would have been fine.

uh... you do realize that we were at WAR with Japan and Germany then??

My response: Uh... you do realise that the US was not at war with Japan and Germany AFTER World War I and BEFORE World War II? The US entered the war on December 8, 1941 with the declaration of war against Japan.

Uh... I guess you didn't pick up on the fact that my statement was a sarcastic joke?

Duh!

I'll have to go back to putting "sarcasm" after every sarcastic statement I make. I guess I'm a bit to subtle for some posters.

Hah! space X is the future! they are making a killing right now at getting 1lb into orbit for a $1000.00 and making it cheaper.... Not even the Russians can do that..... We are getting hyped up for no reason right now...

GimDan

And how many launches has SpaceX had so far?

I get the biggest kick out of people who say we didn't land on the moon.

Better re-tune those tin foil hats!

GimDan - getting one pound into orbit for $1000 does not mean you can get 25 tons into orbit for $50 million. The cost growth and complexity of orbital delivery is not linear.

@RaisedbyWolves - You can't blame the GOP. Have you forgotten Ronald Reagan who envisioned expanding NASA, granted for SDI, but he had wanted to expand our presence in space. You must have also forgotten that the GOP has NEVER signed a piece of legislation that would put NASA out of the Space Business.

But surely one can look at the current White House, and a certain "vacation" that Democrat took to Florida where he announced the end of the Shuttle Era, and the outsourcing of space jobs. Apparently, I should add, it would certainly seem for a person who is supposedly got an ivy league degree, HISTORY wasn't a subject he took. Otherwise, that education would have revealed most of our rocket technology came from German Scientists, who were politically outsourced...

That leaves one to wonder, where will our, now supra-educated and jobless rocket scientists look for work? Seems to me, that money is money regardless if it is Korean, Iranian, or even Syrian. Don't doubt, that these once loyal, once patriotic scientists don't have a burr under their saddle, having been now been labeled "outsourced" wouldn't ply their trade with someone willing to embrace the work they do, and engage them with the appreciation they rightly deserve.

In a time where we need domestic stability, this White House Administration, spends more time apologizing for our country, than he does in taking pride in the ingenuity of the American people. I am surprised he hasn't yet contacted the UK and apologized for our success in the American Revolution, the War of 1812, and for our continued succession from the British Empire. Hell I am willing to bet, if Hitler was still alive, he would have probably given him a jingle and apologized for the liberation of France, the dismantling of the Berlin Wall, and the advent of the HAMBURGer. THIS administration, has done more to harm the credibility of our Country, then it has done to embrace the things that make this country great.

I wonder if his cutting the budget with the basic dissolving of NASA will also include his trips to Andrews to play golf, his 12 vacations a year to destinations Not American, and the trashing of our borders to enable more illegal immigrants to gain the American Dream, which by the way, is no longer a dream - but a nightmare... Homeless Patriot Veterans living under bridges, eating out of garbage cans; hard working middle class families loosing their homes to greed driven, BAILED OUT banks; and to top it off - his "promise of a transparent presidency", which we already are aware was yet another lie from a guy who isn't fit enough to even organize a fart in a bean factory, much less lead this country.

I have never believed that we landed on the moon. If we had the moon would be the space the station. We had to do anything to beat the Russians at any cost even if we lied.

<Groans> Please don't be daft. Even the Discovery channel's Mythbusters put that myth to bed. We have been on the surface of the moon. There are still experiments that we left on the surface that scientists continue to work with even today (the one the Mythbusters used was a reflective tool that bounces laser beams back to determine the exact distance between us).

WMG,

The only thing accurate about the moon hoax is that we haven't spent any money on the moon. Every penny of it was spent here on earth.

And how many launches has SpaceX had so far?

Two. Both a success. There are two more later this year, one of which will attempt robotic docking with ISS. If those two mission are a success, SpaceX will be very well positioned to make even greater advancements over the next two years.

What you guys tend to forget is that many of the folks at this company are experienced aerospace engineers that used to work at other rocket manufacturing companies or at NASA.

Call them amateurs if you want, but you're flat out wrong.

The only thing accurate about the moon hoax is that we haven't spent any money on the moon. Every penny of it was spent here on earth.

I guess Neil and Buzz could have taken a wad of cash up there and tossed it out onto the Lunar surface. Would that have counted?

This could very well be the 'Century of Russia'. They kind of remind me of the USA in the 19th Century.

They have tremendous natural resources (oil, coal, gold, etc. - in fact, they are second only to the United States in having the most recoverable fossil fuel energy reserves - more than twice what Saudi Arabia has). They also have a well educated work force, and they actually have over half a $Trillion in capital RESERVES (unlike the $14+ Trillion in debt for the USA). They also have the largest land mass of any country on Earth, which is largely unexploited, and with 'global warming', more and more of it will become 'arable', with plenty of water reserves. They will also be relatively unhampered by ridiculous environmental and 'endangered species' restrictions.

Yes, look for the ascendancy of Russia in this century. For an interesting 'read', look up 'Russia' on wikipedia.

GendoIkari:

Yes, but you said they were making a killing. That is a very different adjective than they have been successful getting out of the gate, which is a much more accurate description.

Either way, the ONLY customer that they have so far is NASA.

"oops I'm sorry I'm using common sense"

Casper, maximizing employment was never the original purpose of the Shuttle program (though it may have turned into that, and SLS would do the same). If it were possible to do it with five people, it should be.

Don't ask again why the program cost so much, or never met its original costs per flight. You answered it.

"You can't blame the GOP. Have you forgotten Ronald Reagan who envisioned expanding NASA, granted for SDI, but he had wanted to expand our presence in space."

Will, SDI wasn't part of NASA, and was newer meant to be. The DC-X project started in that agency, because it was clear that existing launchers would have cost too much to place and operate space-based defenses. DC-X got transferred to NASA, but absolutely did not start there.

For better or worse though, we can thank Reagan for ISS.

"I have never believed that we landed on the moon. If we had the moon would be the space the station."

??? Do you have any idea of how nonsensical that is?

If the shuttle was about maximizing employment, then NASA did a horrible job. NASA went from 60,000 employee's in the cape area alone to manage just a few launches in a year to 6,000 employee's to manage up to I believe 11 flights in a year. That is actually a pretty big increase in efficiency.

Jonathan-2055273- they have had 7 successful flights so far..

Here is what is booked so far for the future...

NASA COTS – Demo 2

2011

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

NASA COTS – Demo 3

2011

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

ORBCOMM - Multiple Flights

2011-2014

Multiple

Cape Canaveral

MDA Corp. (Canada)

2011

Falcon 9

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 1

2011

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 2

2012

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 3

2012

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 4

2012

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

Falcon Heavy Demo Flight

2012

Falcon Heavy

Vandenberg

SES (Europe)

2013

Falcon 9

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 5

2013

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 6

2013

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

Thaicom (Thailand)

2013

Falcon 9

Cape Canaveral

DragonLab Mission 1

2013

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 7

2013

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

NSPO (Taiwan)

2013

Falcon 9

Vandenberg

Spacecom (Israel)

2014

Falcon 9

Cape Canaveral**

Space Systems/Loral

2014

Falcon 9

Cape Canaveral**

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 8

2014

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 9

2014

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 10

2014

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

Astrium (Europe)

2014

Falcon 1e

Kwajalein

Bigelow Aerospace

2014

Falcon 9

Cape Canaveral

CONAE (Argentina)

2014

Falcon 9

Vandenberg**

DragonLab Mission 2

2014

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

SES (Europe)

2015

Falcon 9

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 11

2015

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

NASA Resupply to ISS – Flight 12

2015

F9/Dragon

Cape Canaveral

CONAE (Argentina)

2015

Falcon 9

Vandenberg**

Iridium

2015-2017

Falcon 9

Vandenberg

With that said, yes they are proven and are doing it far cheaper then the russians.

Plus they give you the price of what it cost for each rocket system based on payload right on the site.

http://www.spacex.com/

Also, they are almost complete with their Dragon personnel transport vehicle set to make the Russian shuttle look like an over priced relic.... And the best part about spaceX, they keep getting cheaper.....

They have had 7 flights, the first 3 of those flights of the Falcon 1 were not successes.

witchrunner: "we would never have won WWII as they would have told the military we don't need to have airplanes, they're a waste of money"

Actually, the military said they didn't need heavy tanks, So Shermans (tin cans w/ popguns) went head to head with Tigers. Morale of the story? Even the smart guy make mistakes :P

Rob, and for every tiger tank, there was about 100 shermans to go up against. This was a situation where sheer numbers really did make a difference.

The difference was that the US had the auto industry manufacture tanks, in Germany, it was heavy industry that built the tanks. Heavy industry was never set up to deal with manufacturing in quantity.

So on a 1 to 1 basis, the sherman was way outclassed, but on a 100 to 1 basis, it ended up being a turkey shoot.

Actually in one of the more ironic moments of WW2, both the Americans and Soviets possed a superior heavy tank to the German Panther and Tiger(even King Tiger) tanks. The Pershing and IS-2 respectively. Both nations made a well thought out choice to continue producing overwhelming numbers of medium tanks for both the reasons Johnathan listed and because the Sherman and the T-35 both outclassed German medium tanks, of which the bulk of German's arsenal continued to be made up of.

the pershing and IS2 were really not available until the end of the war though, and the IS2 had some really nasty shortcomings (the turret couldn't be reloaded until the gun was brought to a specific level, which means it had to be re-aimed after every firing.

The Pershing ended up being the main battle tank for many years after WWII and is still used in some countries (egypt for example has loads of the, and I believe Isreal still has some in reserve). (Israel doesn't really use them anymore as front line tanks though, they have their own nasty as frack main battle tank now)

The IS-2 was a bit before my time, but if I remember correctly the Pershing was designed and put into production well before Sicily if I remember. The General Staff didn't see a need for it though.

And either the russians can't actually get a soyuz launched from Korou or they can't get any customers to launch it from Korou, it doesn't matter because until there is a launch, it is just spent money. There haven't actually been any private customers for Soyuz anyways. They certainly aren't actively selling that.

I don't see skylon as being viable, too many sharp surfaces that would create thermal problems on reentry.

oh, and you have to be aware that russian is a harsh language, so a literal translation may come across as saying one thing, but in reality, they are saying something with a far different tone.

Re Heating I'll let an REL engineer answer that one:

blahforum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=24621.msg778279#msg778279

And your translation would be?

"All your base are belong to us" perhaps

doesn't come up with anything. so oh well.

"NASA was founded on finding alternative habitable planets for humans"

No, it wasn't. It's wonderful that NASA is making some small effort in that work (Kepler mission, for instance), but exoplanets - habitable or not - is a very small part of what NASA does. (Too bad.)

"In the mean time, Russia is making a manned mission to Mars in 2013."

Do you mean UN-manned? The Roscosmos Phobos-Grunt mission is slated to take off late this year; otherwise I am not aware of any other concrete Russian plans for Mars; lots of talk - but no rubles means no plans.

"The last shuttle trip .... releasing ANOTHER secret satellite for DoD."

To my knowledge it has been 24 years since the Shuttle has had anything to do with DoD satellites; since Challenger the DoD has decided that the Shuttle was not a reliable platform choice for its missions. Atlantis did NOT release a satellite on this just completed trip.

NASA was founded to unify a variety of agencies that dealt with aeronautics and astronautics. NOTHING in the NASA charter or mandate has ever been to finding an alternative habitable planet for humans. Where in the deluded world did you ever get that idea?

And a manned mission to mars in 2013? their hardware can't even last for a year in space, let alone for a return trip to mars. What the Russians ARE doing is locking people up for a time to SIMULATE a trip to mars.

Michael

There were a couple of satellites launched by the shuttle post challenger but they were more leftovers that couldn't be retasked to other rockets because they were too large. Unfortunately the Titan IV ended up costing as much if not more than the shuttle did.

Jonathan - good to know, thanks. I had no idea that the Titan IV was so bloody expensive.

Ed, I think Russia said that Mars mission is for 2040 or 2050, they want to spend money on building Colonies on the Moon first.

Just remember this the next time your complaining on some blog about what a giant waste of money the shuttle program was......NASA's yearly budget was usually a little over 1/2 a percent of the nations federal budget.

The shuttle program through research and development up untill the last mission cost approx. 186 billion dollars. That was spread out over 40 years. It gave tens of thousands of people jobs in this country. Jobs that people took pride in and loved. Tens of thousands of jobs that are no more.

To put that cost of the shuttle program into perspective.....we gave AIG 182 billion dollars!

NASA and manned space flight is the only thing left on this planet that isn't about profit or greed. It's about sience and exploration and just plane ol' seeing what incredible things human beings can accomplish!

NASA did have plans for a replacement vehicle after the shuttle retired. Hell, they even built a rocket and spent a ton of money doing so.....but Obama (probably the guy you voted for!) said Nah...we don't need that, we'll pay the Russians tons of money to do stuff for us!

If you thing that's a waste, not worth .8 percent of the national budget well I guess that's your (foolish)opinion.

michael,

what is shocking about the Titan IV is that it was that costly and it was an unmanned vehicle. The shuttle cost that and it was a manned vehicle.

"Russia is making a manned mission to Mars in 2013."

Reference, please? It's just possible that the Russians, who have never gone beyond LEO, might by that time (more likely somewhat later) make a flight around the Moon...carrying a passenger for money.

Go to the Space Adventures site for more on that.

But even if that happens, that's a long way from 'a manned mission to Mars.'

Jonathan-2055273 "their hardware can't even last for a year in space,"

Er Zarya and Zvezda? Indeed their, or rather, your FGB is way past its 70,000th Orbit!

Source CollectSpacedotcom February 03, 2011

And critically the Soyuz lasts on orbit for up to 6 months. With plans to extend to one year. Whilst the Shuttle... 20 day max I believe. (Mind you there were plans...)

After ISS RKA intend to recover their bits and utilise in OPSEK. Or rather that was the plan when Bush and Griffin were going to splash the ISS around 2015. Thus pissing off ESA & JAXA!

Everything aft of Zarya can be reused. But Zvezda will probably be splashed as by 2028 it will be a bit past it.

Base Block in MIR lasted 15 years and could have been good for longer IMHO but that's ancient history.

The shuttle was never designed to operate for anything longer than 2 weeks with an extension of that removing from the payload capacity. All but Atlantis was also modified to connect up to ISS supply lines. Atlantis never got that last upgrade.

And the comment about the duration was because of the description of a russian space program. Russia has problems making a probe that can make it to mars, let alone a manned mission. They know that. They have done well keeping things working in orbit, but that is next to the supply line, not on its own. Russia has also been saying that they will extend the docked duration for about a decade now. They just don't have the money to actually do it.

ANd MIR did NOT last 15 years without extensive modification and upkeep. The difference between an orbiting space station and a mission to mars is exactly that. Russia doesn't have the money to do it in their space budget. Every one of their 'announcements' isn't actually an announcement, it is a quest to get money.

I suppose Patton was right.

The problem is that we now have some of the medium players, globally, wanting to go into space. Wait until Iran pushes more money into their space program.

We are all in a freight train racing down hill towards a solid rock wall. Just call it a countdown to something that most of us will witness in our lifetime. The great war to end all wars. The war for control of the heavens. The most ancient desire of humanity, the desire to go to the stars, and we wont do it as one people, we will do it as a group of greedy ignorant children.

Case in point. America loses face again because of our broken political system and most of the people on this vine blame either Bush or Obama. Why would the government susidize all of the sub orbital and space vehicle start-ups, and fund NASA? Especially in our wonderful capitalism? You dont think Boeing was blameless in all of this?

Call your senator and demand some real change. End the control corporations have over our government. Short term limits for politicians. A new criteria that includes a persons IQ and not television presence rating. Wipe out all subsidies for business. Tax the crud out of imports to create that even playing field. Are we afraid that China will attack us if we tax imports???? If we dont do something soon they wont have to take us over... THEY WILL OWN US.

ViVa La Idiocracy!~

Where have all you nay sayers been for the last several years? This has been in the works for a long time, I remember reading about it years ago. Cooperation between our government and Russia has long been a hope, that idiots keep stomping on from both sides.

The good thing that is and will come from this is that private industry is getting funds from the government to take over the space exploration. Any corporation can do a better job of running anything than the government can because they don't have ignorant politicians sticking their noses in things to try to find a way to up their chances of getting re-elected. Term limits NOW.

The government will probably not restart NASA. Once they get some extra funds left in the coffers, they immediately find a get more votes program to spend it on. Too bad we can't privatize a lot of other things the government has no business being involved in.

Jon explain all those russian probes to Venus that landed and returned?

To believe you have won due to the other team defaulting is foolish. Things like this happen when there is a cell terriost in the White House destroying the country from the top down.

Wow, I seemed to have stirred up a nest of crybabys! Boo hoo to you morons for not answering my questions- and thank you to those who did. Anyway, Atlantis did release a DoD satellite, it's called Pico (see here http://www.space.com/12182-final-space-shuttle-cargo-atlantis-sts135-interview.html). Sorry about my miscalculation on the manned Russian Mars mission. It is set for around 2030. However, they are sending probes to Mars and various moons that appear more advanced than the NASA probes. Thanks for the incredible insight on comparing the NASA budget to the AIG bailout. That really explains why the ISS is the hottest place to go in space . . . geez . . . I apparently found a forum of idiots. Sorry to those of you with intelligence and solid notes in response to my original question-

"Somehow the US with the wealthiest economy in the world cannot afford to go into space anymore. Yet a country with a per capita GDP of 15,900 (2010 est.) which is about 30% of our per capita GDP can afford it. What the hell is going on with this country?"

Yet the current NASA budget is .5% of the Federal budget. It isn't just about affording it, but deciding just how to spend what NASA is given. Throwing more money at bad policy is still bad policy.

Thank's for that to W. Not only did he screw our country. He did it to the best of his ability. What more could we ask for. Those Bush boys I tell ya. Making it easier then it already is. For the already wealthy. ; ]

There! I threw my juice on it

mowdy5000 2011

www.stillscrewinuh@rderandfasterthenyoucan.comm

Cheers

Agreed. China barely recreated Yuri Gagarin using primarily Russian technology and learning from their mistakes. I don't see China picking up that slack any time soon.

They will however make great strides in progress because they don't have to shoulder a lot of the same delays and expenditures that the US and Russia had to face pioneering new technology.

But China is far from inventing anything new.

However, I'm glad that China's increasing presence in space and the fact that we've ceded any substantial control to the Russians is lighting a fire under the butts of a lot of "conservatives" that were otherwise against funding NASA or having any real presence in space and the related R&D.

Whatever gets those knuckleheads mobilized works for me.

2 flights in what, now 6 years does not constitute a commitment to manned space flight. They are not a factor unless we let them become one by selling out and selling them our technology.

From 20 billion to 40 billion...

I wonder how many advanced shuttles NASA could make(at 2012 safety levels instead of 1965)we could have right now instead of mailing everyone a $300 check?

So we couldve let the automakers fail and put that money into making America the beacon of space travel, creating millions of high tech jobs?

In a nutshell, Obama couldve kept his campaign promise and brought our military home last year and we would be able to fund NASA into 2045?

Wow we really do suck dont we.

I would have been happy if Uncle Sam decided not to do the personal stimulus nonsense under Bush ($152_Billion) sending a pittance back in our tax returns (personally I think it was partially designed to get a lot of people to file tax returns that otherwise weren't...kind of like a really expensive census).

That money could have gone towards funding a whole lot of NASA programs. Including the dreaded Constellation!

$152 Billion could have gon a long way with NASA! Too bad it was all for not.

I'm alarmed by the vacuum of demand for engineering and science careers in the US ("The Great Sucking Sound"), we need to fund a government body to prop up enough demand that can offset the private sector's drive to kill the US middle class via outsourcing with something that is going to benefit the citizenry far more than simply making shiny, faster fighter jets and other fascinating new ways to kill people. Particularly since most of that Defense-tech stays classified for AT LEAST a decade while NASA-tech get's licensed for use almost immediately and primarily at cost (let's see a private contractor license its patents anywhere close to the rates that NASA charges on theirs).

Very frustrating! But at least if we can ever get out of Afghanistan and Iraq, we'll find ourselves with A LOT fewer expenditures!

people needed that case of beer man,

Agreed. I hope we do retool, and not retire from the field.

The shuttle had it's place, twenty years ago.

The next technology needs to be SSTO (single stage to orbit), and preferably NOT a chemical rocket.

Electromagnetics? Massive rail guns that can launch inert payloads?

Space was America's. My dreams of youth were all of space. How many of us wanted to be astronauts?

We have to revamp our space program, but let's take this opportunity to do it intelligently, and with clear and focused goals.

I really hope that it brings us all closer together towards a better and common goal! Spreading out the R&D expenditures will also take a major strain off of our economies collectively, particularly if we are willing to share services

And agreed about the Middle East (sans Israel). I can't wait until our R&D in fusion really starts paying off. I'd love nothing more than to see OPEC fall apart and big oil lose its grasp on our politicians as we move away from super-polluting practices and into higher efficiencies and higher energy!

"Spreading out the R&D expenditures will also take a major strain off of our economies collectively, particularly if we are willing to share services"

See my earlier comment. NASA is not a 'major strain' on the US budget, but it can't expect special largesse either. I'll take shouldering our own burden (as long as it's chosen rationally...policy is what worries me) than having yet another layer of bureaucracy, and projects that are hostage to continuing good will with Russia and/or China.

@ Frank Glover

I agree with you to a certain degree. However, take a look at the ISS. That would have never become a reality because we cannot get our idiot politicians to adequately fund NASA enough for the agency to have done that station all by itself.

The US doesn't need to shoulder the costs of going into and operating in space all by itself. There are several decreasing marginal returns to doing so as it hedges entirely on the health of a single economy and government as opposed multiple economies and governments.

For example, if the ISS were just the USSS (United States Space Station), would it still be supported given our current economic climate? Or would we have systematically de-orbited the thing what with Bush killing the replacements to the Space Shuttle, then the Shuttle itself.

If that were the case, we would be even further back MSF-wise because there would be NO space station in orbit, AND Soyuz would still be the only way up. Or we would have had to concede all maintenance of a USSS to the Russians as well...Imagine Russia completely supporting a US space operation. At least in the current configuration, Russia has some skin in the game as they have a couple of modules of their own up there attached to the ISS and the US is just hitching a few rides for the next 3-4 years.

As odd as it sounds, thank goodness for the international effort in manned space-flight because it ensures that the idiot politicians in any single government don't have complete control over all operations.

Lastly, spaceflight is only going to get more expensive as our ambitions continue to grow while there's still no real infrastructure to support a private sector in space (yet). Until the private sector can find its own profits for getting into LEO and beyond, it's going to cost taxpayers money to get and keep people up there.

Eventually that will change, but right now, there's a greater need than ever to have international interest in getting into space.

IS, not was

Stop letting politicians gut NASA with every stroke of their pen by writing to your Senator and Congress-person about the importance of funding.

Yeah, one of our flags that have been up there for a few decades!

NASA is not ended, the shuttles are very old and the administration knew there was no hope of funding authorization to either rebuild the old or build new in the near term. To bad about your inability to spell the presidents name, study under Glenn Beck perhaps.

Marcel:

You are I think about 20 years out of date. Russia doesn't launch anywhere near the number of rockets that they used to.

Yeah cuz our space program was soooo expensive.

Try a little over 1/2 of a percent of the federal budget. It didn't even make a percent of what our gov. spends every year

Here's some old but relevant facts for you to ponder over:

• Microsoft's corporate revenues in 1998 were roughly the same as NASA's budget that year.
• NASA's budget is roughly the same size as the budgets of each of the following states: Alabama, Connecticut, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri and Tennessee.
• The federal government spends over 30 times as much money on Social Security as it does on NASA.
• Americans spent over 19 times as much at restaurants in 1997 as the federal government spent on NASA that year.
• NASA's budget represents approximately 0.2% of U.S. Gross Domestic Product.

186 billion dollars for the shuttle program over 40 years......we gave AIG 182 billion cuz their execs needed their bonuses.

@Mike-378... -- I'm with you, Mike!!! I believe it is extremely important to stay "out in front" in the technology and exploration of space! You may disagree, but I'm very sorry that America signed on to these space treaties, because, I think we should get the hell back to the moon and claim it for America! It, among other things, like resources, is the ultimate "high ground." We, meaning lay people, do not know where weaponry is and where it is going. America should "own" the moon. (And, in a sense, we already do owing to no other country has had people there to plant a flag yet.) Even though we "lost" the plans for the Saturn 5 rocket we should be able to get back there very easily with what we know today! After all, we got there with basically sliderules and pocket calculators the first time! For strategic and capitalist/economic purposes it should belong to America. I think America should be revered and compensated for sharing its accomplishments with others. And, it is something that China and the Soviet Union, now known as The Russian Confederation, would not be able to reverse engineer! I say, to hell with those treaties!!!

From Russia, with Love.

Pretty funny. "From Russia with love, I fly to you." I'll have my shuttle, Shaken not stirred.

Russian Soyuz, funded largly by whom? Three guesses, first two does'nt count, and it's not Russia. Thanks a lot Obama.