

Moonset: Something is Afoot Down at NASA - rfreytag
http://www.cringely.com/2010/01/moonset/

======
briansmith
The death rate for manned space missions is absurdly high. At the same time,
robotics, AI, and remote control technology have all made incredible progress.
Unmanned missions are much cheaper. So, an unmanned program is a greater bang
for the buck, and a greater bang per death. See
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_accidents_and_incidents>.

Let's say China sent people to Mars tomorrow. What could they learn about Mars
that we couldn't learn by sending our robots there, similarly equipped? Manned
space missions are now almost purely about bragging rights; the first person
to do X in space was from nation Y. Who cares? It's just propaganda.

~~~
radu_floricica
Unmanned missions are not only safer, but a lot cheaper. It's sending human
habitats to the moon and back compared to sending a package one-way.

I'd be very exited to see the moon as a testbed for robotic technologies. With
little effort we could make a moon base before anybody even goes there. Or
useful stuff, like a telescope.

You have cheap energy, lots of space, some building materials and time. Could
be a lot worse.

------
gamble
Good? NASA has spent decades pouring money into scientifically-useless
programs like the shuttle and space station, while starving out the robotic
missions that actually produce results. Spirit and Opportunity were such a
slam dunk, it's hard to believe we're still having this discussion.

The Constellation program has been a particularly sad example of NASA's
refusal to face reality. It was conceived as a cynical political stunt by the
Bush administration, and essentially abandoned the day after it was announced.
NASA should have faced the fact years ago that Constellation never had and
never would have the budget or popular and political support required to get
back to the moon.

------
bediger
Really. What do we expect after gutting the aerospace industry in 1970, and
approximately every 8 years after that. Sure, it keeps profits high for (more-
or-less hourly) engineering work, as you have beginners doing it, at
beginner's rates. But between the Iron Hand of the FAA, the oddities of the
Black Space Program and politics, nobody can have a career in aerospace, so it
doesn't attract decent people, much less imaginative innovators.

~~~
yardie
As a former aerospace major I have to agree. When I entered the program,
Boeing was scaling back their programs and lots of engineers were heading back
to school. The consensus I got from former engineers and some professors was
it would have been wiser to go into mechanical. Then, if the aerospace jobs
fall out you can coast by designing pumps or something.

I remember some joke about aerospace engineers and working in fastfood.

~~~
waterlesscloud
I remember graduating with my CS degree and having multiple job offers, and my
electrical and mechanical engineering friends having the same. And the lone
aerospace guy in our circle with no job prospects at all. And he'd probably
worked the hardest of all of us. Sad.

------
stcredzero
Prediction: China will go to the moon or perform some other feat of manned
space exploration as a way of claiming the mantle of leadership for the 21st
century.

~~~
RyanMcGreal
They will secretly build their ship in full view in orbit, surprising everyone
when they attach boosters at the last minute and rocket out toward Jupiter.
They will name their ship after Chinese rocket scientist Qian Xuesen, and it
will run into trouble in the vicinity of Europa.

~~~
stcredzero
If they accept a 10% or so cancer risk per crewmember, they can launch a
chemical rocket mission as 4 pieces using a variation on Mars Direct. But to
do this, they would need in-situ fuel production in place a year earlier.

------
another
Much of the gloomy commentary on this announcement, Cringely's included, is
uninformed. (And statements like "NASA has had zero success in relying on
outsourced systems" are just bizarre.) Canceling the Constellation program is
a _positive_ step, and an essential one---it makes possible the very dream,
bold human spaceflight, that Cringely seems to be mourning. At the very least,
read the Augustine Commission's summary report; it's only 12 pages. Note their
statement of the goal of space exploration: "human expansion into the solar
system". That's cause for excitement, not mourning.

------
karzeem
It makes sense; there's no real reason for the government to own and operate a
spaceflight company. The exciting stuff in aerospace is happening in private
companies, and especially in smaller ones.

Manned spaceflight doesn't have many good arguments in its favor, and in any
case, if the government wants to get involved, why not buy the tech from a
contractor? That's how pretty much all military technology works, and as
wasteful and inefficient as it is, it's probably a step up from direct
government ownership.

~~~
nradov
NASA has always purchased most of the technology for manned spaceflight
systems from contractors.

~~~
karzeem
Ah, I didn't know that.

------
jsz0
The moon is incredibly boring when Europa & Titan are within the reach of our
unmanned probes. I know it's not quite as exciting to the average person but
it's just a more realistic approach to space exploration at this point.

------
TrevorJ
Are there any history buffs out there who can shed some light on this for me?
Is there any link between a civilizations' predilection for exploration and
its' longevity?

~~~
thaumaturgy
Yes and no. (As it happens, my current book du jour is "The Collected What
If".)

The Greek, Roman, Islamic, and Frankish empires all became huge due to the
need for exploration and conquest, usually from a relatively small number of
people. Their massive growth led to greater wealth and cultural exchanges,
which enriched the empires, sometimes at the cost of conquered territories and
peoples. That, in turn, usually led to stability.

The great exception to this is of course the Mongol Empire. They were the
largest empire in history, led by just a few people, and they were incredibly
destructive. They had a certain distaste for cities and everything that they
represented (education, culture, liberalism), so they became an unstoppable
destructive force. The "What If" book claims that some regions of the world
are still feeling of the effects of this. But, the empire only lasted for
around a hundred years.

I'd say that a civilization's thirst for exploration and adventure is one of
the traits which would tend to lead to longevity, but others include a respect
for education, intellectualism, and liberalism.

------
DanielBMarkham
What's worse than having a mission you can't accomplish? No mission at all.
What's worse than no mission at all? A changing mission every 4 or 8 years as
a new administration takes office.

I'm finding it really hard not to say something political -- pretty angry
right now. I'll simply note that for whatever reasons manned spaceflight at
NASA has lost its luster with large hunks of the American public. And like
every other political spending program, if there is not a large group of
people pushing for it, it's going to get cut.

~~~
TetOn
People tend to think it's a lot more of the federal budget than it is: "For
example, in 1997 the average estimate of NASA's share of the federal budget by
those polled was 20 percent." From <http://bit.ly/aAg7I3> Er, try 0.58%. But
this misconception is a real problem: if people think there's just _tons_ of
money in there, cuts don't seem like a big deal; in fact, they seem entirely
reasonable.

Add to that the unwillingness of our political class (both parties) to do
_anything_ about spending and cost growth on defense, medicare, and medicaid
and you've severely limited "what you can cut" to NASA and a handful of other
programs, even though cuts to those are a fractional percent of the budget and
barely enough to even register over a 10-year window.

Leadership takes hard decisions. Our "leaders" have shown no interest in same.

~~~
yardie
Not to mention that out of the 50 states only 3 really benefit from the NASA
budget. Aerospace tends to be highly concentrated around Alabama, California,
Florida, and DC (obviously). Without the support of the 47 other states NASA
becomes an obviously easy target.

