Kill the SLS and use the money to pay down the debt, but don’t let the meager development funding for commercial HSF be thrown out with the bathwater. It’s the first time there has been a serious challenge to the do-nothing series of cash-cow programs doled out to the good old boy military industrial complex.

You are free to disagree.

In other words, the Apollo Moon Program, the Space Shuttle program, the International Space Station and Constellation were so successful and delivered such immense value for the citizens of the United States of America, that we should just keep repeating that paradigm over and over again, no matter what the results and costs. Many hundreds of billions of dollars thus far as I see it. Close to a trillion dollars I’m guessing so far if you add it all up.

And now you complain when some people question your line of reasoning, and criticize those who would diverge from the mob based on the historical evidence.

Old paradigms fall hard, and human space exploration will be no exception.

Where are the terrestrial planet finders Mr. Bennett?

Where are the lunar rovers?

There’s no upside to engaging. Other than pointing out the inconsistent logic or facts employed, but even then…

GuessWho wrote @ December 18th, 2011 at 10:16 am

I’m not a Statist, rather a realist. This broken congress isn’t capable of undoing the mess that selling out has brought about. All three branches of Government have sold out, and as long as the fix is in, I’d at least like to see MY pet interests get funded.

At least MY pet interests are based on looking forward and upward for the long term future of our (unlikely and potentially rare) semi-intelligent life form.

YMMV

Well with all due respect to the folks who were involved in this effort (the one to “save our shuttles” or “build another one but more advanced”) the entire notion sounds far to good to be true and as we say in the engineering business…”incredible claims require solid proof”..

So far all we have is a lot of “wow”…”wow we looked at the business case and all these wonderful things could happen but alas the entire transformation had gone to far so it wont work”…

Along the way I find the notion of a “second gen” shuttle more fiction. The nomenclature is even strange …what is a second generation shuttle?

is it just a machine that is reusable or is it another orbiter that rides on the rest of the STS stack or ?????

NASA and people associated with it are full of “if we only waive our hands” then pigs can fly, the shuttle will be safe, and the station deploy on time…and we all get ponies.

All this is in my view with no proof is more Fantasy Island stuff. RGO

More accurately, it is undead…a zombie that eats the living.

Certainly not human exploration of ‘space’ funded by federal dollars.

There is no space exploration ‘act’ to get together, and if there was it certainly wouldn’t involve humans. Human space exploration at taxpayer expense is a paradigm so obsolete – people are laughing behind your back.

Human space ‘flight’ is another story, but certainly that doesn’t justify the enormous expenditures with such little actual value returned to US citizens.

“I don’t seem to recall that part of Constellation’s accomplishments.”

Don’t be daft, or too literal. I was speaking of it’s plans.

“And FWIW I’m not opposed to programs that don’t go anywhere and do anything…”

Nor I depending on what the goal is. Knowledge. Capability and infrastructure for future use. All good things to spend money on if they provide the right future value.

“Constellation did not do that.”

I have been quite vocal about how I thought that Constellation was an uninspiring program, and an inefficient use of public money. I supported it’s cancellation, as well as the cancellation of the SLS. I also think the MPCV is of marginal use, and that it will be superseded by better systems once we get our exploration act together.

Just so you know what I do support, I support those things that lower the cost to access space. I see that as the key enabler for us to venture beyond Earth in a sustainable and affordable way.

What do you believe or support?

I don’t seem to recall that part of Constellation’s accomplishments. Can you point out to me where it actually went and what it actually did, besides surviving a new administration? And FWIW I’m not opposed to programs that don’t go anywhere and do anything, as long as they have intrinsic value to their stakeholder’s, and deliver that value expeditiously, which in this case happens to be value for the citizens of the United States of America if I recall. Constellation did not do that.

“Guess who missed that Cx is not dead.”

The Constellation program (Cx) was a program with a plan – return humans to the Moon. Even though it was just a slightly expanded Apollo program (Griffin’s “Apollo on steroids” comment), nevertheless it went somewhere and did something.

The SLS and MPCV are just echos of that program, but not part of any planned effort to go anywhere or do anything – just a bunch of hardware looking for a need.

So yes, Cx is dead, but not everyone wants to let it (i.e. the money) go.

NO we are not discussing that..we are discussing the spending of money for things which have little or no value…and money is money.

In these Bush/Obama depressionary times one does not say “well I can waste XXX dollars on this or that while not making the XXX car payment” my original post stated at the top

“The US is not spending to much; it is spending to much on things which have zero value for the cost; at least to this generation and most likely to the generations that will be stuck paying the actual tab.”

there is a case (although I think a declining one) to be made that in the last 40 years the “boats” contributed to the peace and to our victories in the “wars” (to kind a term for them) that we fought.

The shuttle spent 200 billion plus and we end it with ease; because there is no real thing we are losing in proportion to the dollars spent.

Since you dont have the courage to tell us who you are I dont know your politics or your beliefs other then what is posted in this thread (and then who knows if you are the same person)…but the contention you had was that the US spends to much…no it spends to much on things which do not have value for the cost and hence return no reward.

Human spaceflight the last 40 years is the poster child for that RGO