Now would be a time for great exploratory progress, if only NASA and other space agencies world-wide were not having budgets cut to boost national defense and offense.
Fact: In 1973 interest payments 6% of the federal budget and today they are 10%. At that rate of % growth interest would become the largest expenditure category in 175 years.
I am not disagreeing with you. I just think its good to keep these things in perspective with facts, not worries.
NASA has been incredibly wasteful for a long time. You give it more money then suddenly the timelines become longer. Private companies like SpaceX will save us
Well, all the previous private companies that built spacecraft for decades didn't manage to save us. (Space Shuttle = Rockwell, Apollo capsule = North American, Saturn V = Boeing, Mercury Capsule = McDonnell Douglas.) The fact that a device was designed/built/operated by a company with shareholders doesn't make it magically more efficient. What matters is how the entire operation is managed, something more tied to the identity of the customer than that of the contractor.
operational management is influenced by the pressure it takes to survive. Nasa doesnt need to make money to survive. SpaceX does. but agreed theres more too it than that
SpaceX?!?! The company promising to take us to the moon this year in a rocket that has yet to experience space let alone refuel in orbit? The company that has claimed this same rocket would be doing human test flights in 2020 and carrying cargo to Mars in 2022?
There's a lot to be impressed by from SpaceX, but accurate forecasting is about the last thing on my list...
Not sure, are you comparing the costs of technology 50 years ago with the costs of today's technology? That's not a very valid comparison, to say the least. Not only technology as a whole evolved a lot to give you waaay more bang for the buck, but also everything done today is built on the shoulders of the giant investments made at the start of the space age. So please, let's not bring unfounded arguments for the sake of ideology.
Not 50 years ago. See SLS for example. NASA is paying $146m PER engine (and the rocket has four, and fuel tanks, avionics , an upper stage, fairings, two solid rocket boosters ... ). An entire Falcon Heavy launch is <$100 million.
Sort of, except not always. Compare to medical insurance in the US. Medical care in the US is both one of the most expensive and most privatised in the world.
“When I cite a schedule, it’s actually a schedule I think is true,” Musk said in a response to a question at Code Conference. “It’s not some fake schedule I don’t think is true. I may be delusional. That is entirely possible, and maybe it’s happened from time to time, but it’s never some knowingly fake deadline ever."
Which sounds convincing until you realize the cargo missions are already supposed to be delivered.
And it's fun to make fun of how poorly the space industry holds on to their timelines but really I would much rather have the launch go well and deliver the most output possible, private or public. Mars transfer windows come about every 2 years, it's not a tragedy to miss one or two of it means we get to maximize the payload and make sure we have triple checked everything that needs to be checked.
I would have thought geothermal (martiothermal?) power would be the biggest long-term potential result of this. No mention of that in the article, though.
Maybe, though I suspect there's little if any potential.
There was, however, a recent paper published suggesting that there is still liquid magma beneath the Mars surface based on seismic activity:
"Magma on Mars likely", by Marianne Lucien, 27.10.2022
Since 2018, when the NASA InSight Mission deployed the SEIS seismometer on the surface of Mars, seismologists and geophysicists at ETH Zurich have been listening to the seismic pings of more than 1,300 marsquakes. Again and again, the researchers registered smaller and larger Mars quakes. A detailed analysis of the quakes’ location and spectral character brought a surprise. With epicentres originating in the vicinity of the Cerberus Fossae - a region consisting of a series of rifts or graben - these quakes tell a new story. A story that suggests vulcanism still plays an active role in shaping the Martian surface.
(I found the article above after initially assuming Mars was completely geologically dead, which had been the consensus until recently. Had to re-write my response ;-)
Why is that? They're similar conceptually but very different environments, so the distinction seems reasonable. If there were companies building geothermal equipment for Mars, it would likely have quite different requirements versus earth, right?
Now would be a time for great exploratory progress, if only NASA and other space agencies world-wide were not having budgets cut to boost national defense and offense.