NASA: "We're going back to the moon!"

M.A.R.S.!

Eyes full of sorrow, never wet
Hands full of money, all in debt
Sun coming out in the middle of June
Everyone's gone to the moon

You see a long time ago life had begun
Everyone went to the sun

Parks full of motors, painted green
Mouths full of chocolate-covered cream
Arms that can only lift a spoon

You see everyone's gone
Everybody's gone
Everyone's gone to the moon
Everyone's gone to the moon
What will happen now
Everyone's gone to the moon
There's nobody left
Everyone's gone to the moon

Take heart - maybe Bush will hire Edward Bass (of the Biosphere 2 debacle) to head the effort.

back to capsules for a while before we get better propulsion -> shuttlecraft.

we'll get off this planet, but it's gunna be the chinese who do it first.

but who cares; as long as we can get sustainable colonies elsewhere so when we finally nuke ourselves, we don't end our species.

As Discovery Magazine pointed out a coupla years ago, we can get to Mars _now_. It's just that the astronauts would probably go insane along the way.

And as long as Bush is dusting off old nuclear programs, he could resurrect the Orion project for this moon redux.

Huh? Does this mean Apollo will start growing more feminine man-tits???

-- Paunchy Stratego (fluxion2...), September 19th, 2005.

robble

"this is the moon blowing up, and this is me smiling...."

NASA is an acronym--na-sa

but I kind of agree

I don't know man. Chinatown NYC has trouble locating a building with a 4th wall...

We're whalers on the moon, we carry a harpoon...

NASA has scheduled a media teleconference to announce the discovery of an object in our Galaxy astronomers have been hunting for more than 50 years.

http://www.nasa.gov/news/media/newsaudio/index.html

Huh.

Wonder what that could be.

loch ness monster>??

golf ball

predator ship

wait wait wait, that's in the future, and also is the intellectual property of 20th century fox, so i think you've go that wrong buddy

something that they sent out to space 50 years ago, and lost?

http://blogs.usyd.edu.au/theoryandpractice/monolith.jpg

http://www.marveldirectory.com/pictures/individuals/g_1d/galactus.gif

Laika!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c9/Laika.jpg

Hitler?

the uss eldridge !?

Major Tom? That's only about 40 years...

i'm guessing this will the most boring discovery, like "ooh a type-s-z system never seen before it has 0.0000000000000000000000001% less hydrogen than other systems blah blah"

black hole? or did we already stop believing in those?

^^^OTM

will be awhile before non-NASA commercial enterprise gets to the Moon though, much less Mars

I'm counting on Andy Griffith to get us there.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_0aGGYTJxkYs/TRwAkbvIvYI/AAAAAAAAAjQ/nRjYUzMIh3E/s1600/salvage_1.jpg

This is a neat sorta-NASA-related thing:

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/aroundthemall/2011/06/q-a-nichelle-nichols-aka-lt-uhura-and-nasa/

...I’ve decided to form the Nichelle Nichols Youth Foundation for Space Sciences—technology, engineering, math and attending performing arts. I want to further careers and interest in young people and bring back the majesty that the United States once held in education. So, for me, that is what I want to give. That is what I want to be known for. That is what I hope is my legacy.

ok here's the proper aas response

http://lists.aas.org/pipermail/aasmembers/2011-July/000216.html

Apart from needing to be split into smaller paragraphs, that's a huge improvement over the talking points email you posted yesterday.

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lolvo9PPX01qz4vjro1_400.pnghttp://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lolvo9PPX01qz4vjro2_400.pnghttp://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lolvo9PPX01qz4vjro3_400.png

want these prints

http://designarchives.aiga.org/#/entries/%2Bid%3A21333/_/detail/relevance/asc/0/7/21333/going-to-work-in-space/1

After reading this, I'm convinced that the US no longer deserves a space program. Certainly NASA (outside of JPL) doesn't.

A new schedule, created by NASA, has provided a “preliminary, budget restricted” manifest which places the first flight of the fully evolved Space Launch System (SLS) in the year 2032. The information includes details on the chosen configuration and hardware, but provides a depressing schedule, with a flight rate of just one mission per year, after a staggered opening which results in SLS-2 waiting until 2021 to launch.

As admitted by NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden, the decision on the configuration of the Space Launch System (SLS) was made on June 15, a decision based on the winning Design Reference Vehicle (DRM) out of the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) hosted RAC (Requirements Analysis Cycle) study effort.

Memos on the decision, based around the utilization of a Shuttle Derived (SD) Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (HLV) – as requested in the Authorization Act – soon circulated at the main NASA centers, with references to an official announcement to be made on July 8, the launch date for STS-135.

In a sign of how widespread the information was, Atlantis’ commander Chris Ferguson told the media to expect the announcement on the next vehicle to be made on launch day, following his arrival at the Shuttle Landing Facility (SLF) from Houston. His statement wasn’t retracted, nor was it corrected, by NASA Public Affairs.

July 8 came and went, as Atlantis launched on the final NASA shuttle mission – and most likely the last domestic manned mission for several years.

General Bolden was then called in front of a “Full Committee Hearing – A Review of NASA’s Space Launch System“, where lawmakers were given the chance to ask questions about the delay in pressing on with the SLS.

After a tough opening question, the General gave arguably his most impressive public performance to date, holding firm on why he was not able to reveal specifics on the vehicle’s configuration. His defence was related to industry restrictions and an ongoing independent cost analysis effort by Booz Allen.

That costing effort – which began on July 5 – is likely to be completed by mid-August, while an announcement on the configuration of the vehicle, is expected “soon”.

An attempt to request NASA push on with making a public statement on the SLS configuration to the media – to coincide with Atlantis’ landing at the Kennedy Space Center – was turned down by NASA’s leadership.

The continued delays to the announcement are now causing numerous managers and workers – at least those remaining after the massive jobs losses shortly after Atlantis’ return – to question if the delay is based on politically-aligned tactics to kill the SLS.

Of course much of this is worst-case scenario FUD from NASA's part, but I'm sick of NASA's institutional nihilism.

By way of comparison, this is almost the same amount of time between Explorer 1 and Apollo 11.

Booz Allen Booz Allen Booz Allen Booz Allen Booz Allen Booz Allen Booz Allen Booz Allen

here's some more inside baseball on the us astronomy community's response to the jwst defunding

http://lists.aas.org/pipermail/aasmembers/2011-August/000222.html

this editorial contains the sunk costs fallacy, but is otherwise pretty good: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-bullock-hubble-telescope-20110906,0,4761128.story. ET, it's by the guy i was visiting when you and ned took me out in costa mesa.

Thanks for the heads up on that... worth reading.

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2011/sep/07/lets-bring-astronauts-home/

uh oh http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/09/planetary_scientists_webb_tele.html

uh oh http://lists.aas.org/pipermail/aasmembers/2011-September/000226.html

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1947/1

Is OMB wiping out planetary exploration?

As part of US-European cooperation in Mars exploration, NASA had planned to launch a European orbiter, the ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter (above), on an Atlas rocket. Those plans are on hold, and may be scrapped. (credit: ESA)

by Lou Friedman
Monday, October 10, 2011

Comments (52)

In 1980, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the NASA Administrator made the decision to shut down planetary exploration in NASA in order to free up funds for the development of the Space Shuttle. This decision triggered Carl Sagan, Bruce Murray, and me to start the Planetary Society. The administration leaders told us, face-to-face, that the planets could wait because soon the cost of access to space would be so cheap that we could fly any missions about which we could dream.

We fought back, and they didn’t shut down planetary exploration. However, they did cut it deeply, resulting in a dark decade with no launches to and no data coming back from from other worlds.

We’re in a similar situation today. Behind closed doors, the administration is deciding on NASA budget cuts that may not be in the best interest of either the agency or the American people. Having caved in to Congressional special interests on the Space Launch System (SLS), the administration is now prepared to sacrifice science and exploration programs in order to prematurely start its development, with requirements that will neither be met nor needed for more than a decade.

Imagine a NASA that for ten years (say, 2015 to 2025) ceases to explore the solar system and stops looking deep into the universe. Already, the administration has said that flagship missions to explore the outer planets will cease. Voyager, Galileo, and Cassini will be followed by nothing. Already, the administration has deeply cut the Mars program, reducing American plans to support a 2016 European mission and taking away funds that were to be used for a 2018 follow-on to Mars Science Laboratory, leading to Mars sample return.

Now, news reports and reliable sources are saying that the administration (in the form of OMB) may refuse to allow NASA to proceed with any joint Mars exploration plan with Europe. This decision would destroy the whole NASA/ESA Mars collaboration that has been built in the past several years. The collaborative plan was to have the US provide an Atlas launch of a European Trace Gas Orbiter mission (with several US instruments) in 2016, and then NASA and ESA would jointly develop a sophisticated astrobiology and sample cache rover mission in 2018. OMB seems to be cutting out the American role in the 2016 mission and refusing to let NASA commit to the 2018 collaboration. (ESA has sent a letter to NASA saying that ESA has committed about $1 billion to the joint NASA-ESA mission, but that financial commitment depends on the US formally committing to its role in the mission. We hear that OMB has refused, thus far, to let NASA respond positively).

The administration has also punted the James Webb Space Telescope. The current plan states that they will support JWST, but they do not specify either a budget or where the money will come from. Are they going to leave that to Congressional special interests too?

We are very much in danger of another dark decade with NASA funding going to new launchers that will have nothing much to launch and no results to show the American people. Sure, tough choices must be made given the financial state of the country, but, as I see it, if the choice is between continuing space exploration with the space telescope and with the search for life and habitability on Mars, or building a rocket to nowhere, it’s not a hard decision.

To be clear: I am very much for both human space exploration and development of a deep space rocket (heavy lift or otherwise) to enable it. I am for it—but not at the expense of cutting out science and exploration. The rocket development, by NASA’s own (surely optimistic) schedule, will not lead to a mission until 2021. Can’t we postpone the rocket new start and then build it with a shorter development schedule (and hence lower cost)? It’s not as if we don’t have rockets or access to space: we have Atlas, Delta, Falcon, and, of course, Soyuz. We have even more rockets around the world for cargo and payloads. Our astronauts and cargo can get to the International Space Station for the rest of its life without the Space Launch System.

This is not some humans-vs.-robots argument. I am among the staunchest supporters for human explorers to go beyond the Moon and on to Mars as soon as possible. But for that to happen, NASA needs to do more than build a rocket over the next decade. Stopping robotic space exploration decreases the chances for human space exploration. If NASA’s Mars program is really devastated, as it now is on paper in OMB’s offices, then public support and interest in NASA doing space exploration in general will wither. It truly will become another federal jobs program.

Desperate times bring desperate reactions, and the ill-advised in-fighting going on among some—fortunately a small number—in the science community over Webb vs. Mars vs. astrophysics vs. solar physics vs. Earth science proves we are in desperate times. Rep. Frank Wolf, the chair of House Appropriations Committee subcommittee whose jurisdiction includes NASA, stoked the in-fighting fires by sending a letter to OMB Director Jacob Lew last month, asking the administration to tell the Congress how they recommend cutting the budget to pay for the increased costs of the James Webb Space Telescope. In tough budget times, such questions are not unfair; however, in this case, the behind-the-scenes maneuvering is being kept secret. The administration should respond directly to Rep. Wolf’s question by recommending delays in the Space Launch System (as President Obama originally proposed) until the fiscal conditions permitted a sustainable and cost-effective program. The money from the delay would pay for JWST, restore the Mars exploration program, including allowing the American role in 2016/2018 to proceed, and pay for a host of other science and technology initiatives.

If the administration will not make that recommendation, then Congress should, as I said last month, vote no on the Space Launch System

Just watched low-budget sf/horror film 'Apollo 18': really lovely recreation of Apollo technology, etc--porn for space race nerds

You might like Stephen Baxter's alt.history novel Voyage about the first manned Mars landing in 1986 using Apollo-era technology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage_(Stephen_Baxter_novel)

I DID like that!

The Huell Howser of the astronaut corps is very cheerful when he takes you on a tour of the ISS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_832bo27jo

I'm actually blown away by just how big this thing is now. When the tour ends inside the shuttle, I actually kinda miss it...

Dear Vanity Fair, please hire me to write about science and NASAy subjects because if this is publishable I 100% guarantee that I can write something better: Emo NASA Is Taking Its Feelings Out on the Moon

ISS appears to be full of bales of cocaine.

Noises and sounds of the ISS space station

I just listened to space toilets IN SPACE!

• server room
• coffee machine
• underneath an aircon vent
• office kitchen cupboard
• more server room
• office ping pong table
• someone finally gets around to washing those coffee mugs
• need to call IT and get them to fix the fan on my computer
• restroom ambience
• in the stationary cupboard
• fire escape door won't open properly because people keep going through outside to smoke
• office cleaners' hoover
• roadworks outside the street block out the sound of hitting the stapler to make it work

that guy's blog is amazing

I put this on the Cassini thread, maybe it's better here.

Not sure where else to put this, but here's a 25-minute tour of the international space station hosted by astronaut Sunita Williams.

http://kottke.org/13/01/a-tour-of-the-international-space-station

NASA: "We're not going back to the moon!"

Here's where I rep for Kerbal Space Program, a neat little game/physics sandbox where you construct various rocketry and spaceplanes in an attempt to make orbit, translunar, or intrasolar travel, before failing spectacularly and having your little green astronaut dudes bail out right before everything blows up.

http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/

"NASA human spaceflight is the Terry Schiavo of the US government, its been dead a long time, they just need to pull the plug..."

i didn't know about this! http://www.airspacemag.com/space-exploration/FEATURE-FirstPhoto.html

https://cdn1.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2912016/Kepler-186f_20x30.0.jpg

https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2912018/HD_40307g_20x30.0.jpg

https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2912020/Kepler_16b_20x_30.0.jpg

Beautiful.

(Those JPEGs are hueg, BTW)

Voyager 1 has already departed the solar system. For the past five years it’s been sailing between our star and another, and every day it still calls home. One day it will stop calling. For years the team has been slowly turning off instruments on both Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 in order to preserve the most important feature — the communication link. Suzy Dodd thinks the spacecraft have several years left. There’s no way to know for sure what Voyager’s final call will be. “You don’t exactly know when you get to say goodbye.” she tells me. “So every day you should say goodbye.”

https://longreads.com/2018/03/15/welcome-to-the-center-of-the-universe

Was recently reading a biography of Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci and there was this surprising to me part of her life in the mid-'60s when she was in the US hanging out with astronauts from the Gemini program in order to write profiles of them. She was fascinated by space travel and apparently intrigued by the astronauts, and became especially close with Pete Conrad. This work led to a book published in English as If the Sun Dies (1966). Wondered if anyone here has read it.

After the first moon landing she wrote another book about that, apparently published only in Italian in 1970.

I have an Italian copy of If the Sun Dies and enjoyed what I was able to read of it

Wow, that's cool - I gotta look for this

Think you can still get an ebook like I did

It mentions The First Law of Robotics on the first page so there’s that

So I found a copy of If the Sun Dies and this thing is amazing. I've never read such revealing character studies of the astronauts. Plus a ton of fascinating speculation, both practical and philosophical, about the implications of space travel and technological progress. And on top of that, the endlessly interesting perceptions of mid-'60s America through the eyes of a youngish Italian woman. Am only halfway through the 400-page hardcover and can wholeheartedly recommend.

I so want that book

Coincidentally, I've been reading former NASA deputy admin Lori Garver's book Escaping Gravity for the past couple of days and it's not that I *want* Artemis to fail, but it should never have gotten this far. SLS = Senate Launch System.

Scrubbed. I find the entire idea of manned space missions absurd but SLS is a special kind of terrible.

e.g., the annual budget for R01s is $2.2 billion. The cost _per launch_ of the SLS is $2.2 billion.

NASA finally admits what everyone already knows: SLS is unaffordable
https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/09/nasa-finally-admits-what-everyone-already-knows-sls-is-unaffordable/

One of the commenters:

As a very junior software engineer for a potential second-tier subcontractor, I was in the back of the room at the first preproposal meeting for the Shuttle. The NASA executive giving the briefing stated that all bids should be on a "Design for Success" basis, that is, your cost estimate should assume that every component you interface to will operate according to spec. Grumbles of discontent from the hardened aerospace systems engineers in the room was met by "Do you want the business or not?" from the NASA guy. It was all shenanigans from their forward.

Well, I guess I now know why I didn't get a second interview (everything was frozen). sigh - back to the coding saltmines.

Yeah saw that news the other day. Fucking ridiculous.