backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 92 comment(s) - last by MisterModder.. on Jun 24 at 11:27 AM


The moon is an important goal for NASA  (Source: NASA)
NASA will receive an additional $2.9 billion for research purposes

Members of the House of Representatives recently disobeyed the White House and gave NASA an additional $2.9 billion for its yearly budget.  The House approved $20.2 billion for the U.S. space agency for the fiscal year starting in October.

Two-thirds majority was needed, but the spending bill received an overwhelming 409-15 vote that helped send a "strong message" to the next president of the United States.  The voting breakdown was as follows:  228 Democrats and 181 Republicans voted yes, while 15 Republicans voted no.

White House officials have not responded to the news.

The additional money will allow NASA to launch one more manned shuttle mission before the space shuttle program is shut down in 2010.  Up to $1 billion in the NASA money also will be designated to help accelerate the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle and Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle, both of which will replace the aging shuttle by 2015.

Until Orion is completed, NASA will pay an estimated $2.8 billion to the Russian space agency for its assistance in getting NASA astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station (ISS).

NASA still aims to launch a manned mission to the moon by 2020.  As more nations continue to receive funding required to launch ambitious space missions -- including Russia, China and Japan -- U.S. space officials previously were concerned that other nations will prosper while NASA falls behind.  

India and other nations also have developing space programs that are beginning to blossom due to accelerating technology fields and increased government support.

Late last year, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin admitted China will likely beat NASA and other nations back to the moon.

"Without additional funding for Orion, America risks abdicating its position as the world leader in science and technology to Russia, China and Japan," Rep. Nick Lampson (D, TX) said during the House meeting.   

A committee hearing is now scheduled for the Senate early next week, where the budget increase will be discussed.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

well...
By jay401 on 6/20/2008 10:09:32 AM , Rating: 5
"Late last year, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin admitted China will likely beat NASA and other nations back to the moon."

Well, you could put it that way, but it's a cheap manipulation for him to use the word "beat' when there's not actually a true race. The reality is it's taken the Chinese 40+ years to match what the US and USSR did back in the 60s. So they aren't technically "beating" either of us at anything, they're at best catching up.

An accomplishment for them when they do it, for sure, but note the difference: We've done it already. It's not like there's the same level of urgency on our part or the Soviets' part to go back to the moon because we've both already been there.

China has the urgency to get there simply to prove itself on the world scene as a scientific and space power. Good for them, but the use of the word "beat" is a cute play to try to stoke support for something of relatively little value for our space program in comparison to the many other initiatives (from Mars, to Hubble, to any of the plethora of other programs).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_landing




RE: well...
By jay401 on 6/20/2008 10:14:58 AM , Rating: 5
...just realized it wasn't a quote by Griffin, but just the blogwriter's wording. i retract the use of "cute ploy" since I used that wording when i thought it was Griffin's words.


RE: well...
By Amiga500 on 6/20/2008 10:17:45 AM , Rating: 3
1. The Soviets did not go to the moon.

2. Now, the goal is to harvest He3 from the moon for use in future fusion reactors.

3. An additional goal is to use the moon as a staging post for missions into deeper space. A proper moon-base in other words.


RE: well...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/20/2008 10:27:49 AM , Rating: 3
> "1. The Soviets did not go to the moon"

Actually they sent over a dozen missions to the moon, and actually conducted a soft landing there before we did. They just never sent people there.


RE: well...
By omnicronx on 6/20/2008 11:15:26 AM , Rating: 2
Its true, the Soviet Luna probe conducted the first controlled landing, and sent back the first pictures from surface level.


RE: well...
By lexluthermiester on 6/20/2008 12:12:58 PM , Rating: 1
The United States is the only nation on Earth to send actual people to the moon, so no, the Soviets did not go to the moon. Satellites and probes may have gotten there, but that in no way means that the nation sending them actually visited. The Soviets did get a man into space first, credit were credit is due, but we were the only ones to get to the moon, an entirely more challenging and intricate endeavor. The Soviets were not up to the task then. Russia is now if they wanted to focus on it, but we'll see if they will.


RE: well...
By Mojo the Monkey on 6/20/2008 2:06:12 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Actually they sent over a dozen missions to the moon, and actually conducted a soft landing there before we did. They just never sent people there.


well by your standards we can say "we have been beyond the outer perimeter of the solar system" just because we sent an unmanned probe there. Your snide remark fails.


RE: well...
By PhoenixKnight on 6/20/08, Rating: -1
RE: well...
By lco45 on 6/23/2008 5:35:23 AM , Rating: 4
It was dangerous work, and the Soviets had a better union.

Luke


RE: well...
By lexluthermiester on 6/20/2008 11:53:49 AM , Rating: 2
All excellent points, to which I would add;

4. Mining of various base metals and composite materials.

5. Large observation facilities for further understanding of the universe.

6. Manufacturing of materials which can only be made in the absences of a strong gravity well, as well as medical research.


RE: well...
By PrimarchLion on 6/20/2008 5:25:45 PM , Rating: 2
Also good points, but composite materials aren't mined.

More:

7. Good test site for most Mars mission equipment.

8. Less fuel to launch payload from the moon due to lower gravity.


RE: well...
By Screwballl on 6/20/08, Rating: 0
RE: well...
By StupidMonkey on 6/20/2008 10:18:56 AM , Rating: 3
Even though that's true, its still nice to see us moving forward. We haven't exactly been progressing in space as quick as we've been progressing in technology. I would think that those things should be congruent.

Who cares if there is life in space? We should still be like little kids wanting to learn more and go to places we've never been before.


RE: well...
By omnicronx on 6/20/2008 11:13:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The reality is it's taken the Chinese 40+ years to match what the US and USSR did back in the 60s.
Whats that, send 3 astronauts out into space receiving 2x4 times the yearly radiation you would receive in a week? Lets face it, the 60's was a different time, the US definitely put those astronauts at risk compared to any mission by any space agency today, including the US. In fact Nasa has not left the lower atmosphere since the apollo missions.

I am not downplaying what NASA has done, walking on the moon is one of mans greatest accomplishments, but In this day and age, no government agency is going to allow its astronauts to fly to the moon in a tin can, and as of today it seems China is further along at safely sending man back to the moon. Whether you like it or not.


RE: well...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 6/20/2008 11:31:50 AM , Rating: 5
The Chinese are just willing to accept additional risks. In the NASA of today and the political climate, look what happened. A Space shuttle burned up and the crew was killed. It took over 2 years to get another one up in the air because of all the BS. Now look at the Apollo missions. The first test all 3 astronauts burned up instantly. Yet we threw a new one on the pad fixed the problems and attempted again only weeks later. It was a different time then. We had a goal, to get to the moon and put people there before the Soviets. Since then politicians don't have a pair of balls collectively to take that sort of risk for the sake of advancement. If someone dies in the NASA programs on your watch, its a political boondoggle and everyone wants answers under the guise of "protecting the safety of innocent lives".

Case in point, we have lost the willingness to take risks to achieve great things. China has not. Therefore they will be more likely to reach check points first.


RE: well...
By Parhel on 6/20/2008 11:58:11 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
The Chinese are just willing to accept additional risks.


The Chinese put lead paint on children's toys too. The Chinese (government, not people) just don't place the same value as we in the West do on human life and safety. I'm all for increasing funding on space exploration, but not at the expense of people's lives.


RE: well...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/20/2008 12:01:47 PM , Rating: 5
> "I'm all for increasing funding on space exploration, but not at the expense of people's lives. "

Why not? The people who are actually risking their lives -- the astronaut corp themselves -- have long said they're willing to accept much higher risks, in exchange for a more aggressive exploration program.

There's just no way we're going to explore and eventually colonize space without killing a few people in the process. If we're not willing to take risk, we should just shut down the entire manned program now.


RE: well...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 6/20/2008 12:09:06 PM , Rating: 5
Indeed, the people at risk are not complaining at all. It's the politicians that don't want to have to handle or explain that people die in the service of their country/planet to advance us into the future. It's just not something they want to do politically.


RE: well...
By JimmyC on 6/23/2008 12:52:08 AM , Rating: 2
Space monkeys...