Author
|
Topic: Member poll: NASA's new vision - Hooray or Boo?
|
Matt T Member Posts: 1372 From: Chester, Cheshire, UK Registered: May 2001
|
posted 04-16-2010 07:26 AM
So the plan's finalized; with congressional backing this is what NASA will be doing next. I'd be curious to see (very unscientifically) what the feeling across cS is. So how about it? One word answer, keep the debate in the other threads. |
Matt T Member Posts: 1372 From: Chester, Cheshire, UK Registered: May 2001
|
posted 04-16-2010 07:26 AM
Boo! |
ejectr Member Posts: 1961 From: Killingly, CT Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 04-16-2010 07:26 AM
Hooray! |
SpaceAholic Member Posts: 5246 From: Sierra Vista, Arizona Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-16-2010 07:26 AM
Sustained Boo... |
jimsz Member Posts: 644 From: Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 04-16-2010 07:27 AM
I would not state as you have that the plans are finalized.If this President is discarded in 2+ years, the plans will change yet again. If he is reelected and replaced in 6 years, the plans will change again in 7 years. As for this plan - Boo. |
Lunar rock nut Member Posts: 916 From: Oklahoma city, Oklahoma U.S.A. Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-16-2010 07:27 AM
Boo-humbug! |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 50516 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-16-2010 07:35 AM
Seeing as this poll is unscientific, I assume it will be acceptable if I share the votes of those members who have e-mailed since yesterday who wrote to say that they have no desire to participate publicly but have a strong opinion about the new plan for NASA. If so, then add seven members' Hoorays. (As for myself, I have yet to share my personal thoughts on this plan [though I am sure many think I am fully behind it] so I will continue to abstain.) |
Fra Mauro Member Posts: 1739 From: Bethpage, N.Y. Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 04-16-2010 08:38 AM
Long, loud sustained boo from me.Robert, you should feel free to voice your opinion. Just as we shouldn't feel restrained from making comments, neither should you. |
Matt T Member Posts: 1372 From: Chester, Cheshire, UK Registered: May 2001
|
posted 04-16-2010 08:39 AM
Yes sounds eminently fair but - can any future silent voters who wish to participate please address this specific question i.e. Hooray! or Boo!? Otherwise we're effectively just going back to the previous thread where people were counting posts for and against for a sense of the mood.Let your voice be heard! (Anonymously if you wish). Hooray! or Boo!? |
Tykeanaut Member Posts: 2235 From: Worcestershire, England, UK. Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 04-16-2010 08:42 AM
BOO!! |
garymilgrom Member Posts: 2125 From: Atlanta, GA Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-16-2010 09:01 AM
Hooray from me. There is not one process or product that is the same today as it was 50 years ago - why should we access space in the same manner? Although I will always love NASA's glory days I have to believe there is a more efficient way to space. We can always go back to the old ways if these new ideas (private sector) don't work as well as we hope. |
BNorton Member Posts: 150 From: Registered: Oct 2005
|
posted 04-16-2010 09:22 AM
BOO |
Delta7 Member Posts: 1733 From: Bluffton IN USA Registered: Oct 2007
|
posted 04-16-2010 09:24 AM
Neither. I've adopted a wait-and-see attitude. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 50516 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-16-2010 09:29 AM
Add another anonymous member's ("cautiously optimistic") Hooray. |
jimsz Member Posts: 644 From: Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 04-16-2010 10:00 AM
Casting a vote via the Admin is a bit bizarre. |
cjh5801 Member Posts: 189 From: Lacey Registered: Jun 2009
|
posted 04-16-2010 10:22 AM
I don't see the point in a nonscientific poll. It tells me more about the political views of the collectors of space memorabilia than about the future of the space program. I'm cautiously optimistic about the new direction, but would still like to see considerably more funding for the space program. Your poll doesn't capture that. |
rasorenson Member Posts: 116 From: Santa Clara, CA, USA Registered: Nov 2009
|
posted 04-16-2010 11:07 AM
YEA! with thumbs up. I think we will look back and see that NASA is investing in a 21st century infrastructure with far greater capability than simply launching Ares on outdated equipment. It's time private interests were brought to the plate which I think will ultimately make orbital access easier, cheaper and user friendly. We can get to ISS on the cheap. Going to the moon (while I'd love to) had no real goal (mining for H3?) and frankly, the Ares/Orion combo just isn't Mars bound. It was new money on old ideas. Let's get going! |
Greggy_D Member Posts: 1007 From: Michigan Registered: Jul 2006
|
posted 04-16-2010 11:36 AM
quote: Originally posted by cjh5801: It tells me more about the political views of the collectors of space memorabilia than about the future of the space program.
How is this correlation made? Because members do not like the plan they are anti-Obama or anti-Democrat? I fail to see the link. |
Aztecdoug Member Posts: 1405 From: Huntington Beach Registered: Feb 2000
|
posted 04-16-2010 11:40 AM
This speech was political in nature and really has to be weighed in that light. If you want to read some awesome dodging the point verbiage read what he says about returning to the Moon.Now, I understand that some believe that we should attempt a return to the surface of the Moon first, as previously planned. But I just have to say pretty bluntly here: We've been there before. Buzz has been there. There's a lot more of space to explore, and a lot more to learn when we do. So I believe it's more important to ramp up our capabilities to reach -- and operate at -- a series of increasingly demanding targets, while advancing our technological capabilities with each step forward. He does not say explicitly that we will not return to the Moon. There are no firm sound bites on that topic that you can walk away with. So you really are left interpreting what he says instead of reading it literally. This is quite a brilliant job in delivering bad news without leaving a quote for anybody to hang a hat on. He is a top flight orator and to be honest John McCain and George Bush were not so silver tongued. Ronald Reagan was another example of a great orator in our times. The trick is whether the deeds will match the words here. So in this case you need to go back on his record and see if he lives up to what his promises have been in the past. Based on him living up to his words during the campaign of hope and change etc., and how he has conducted his administration, in conjunction with his Congress, I would say that I am left hoping that his words do come true, but sadly skeptical that they will not. Boo |
cjh5801 Member Posts: 189 From: Lacey Registered: Jun 2009
|
posted 04-16-2010 11:48 AM
quote: Originally posted by Greggy_D: How is this correlation made? Because members do not like the plan they are anti-Obama or anti-Democrat? I fail to see the link.
Have you read the other thread? The Obama bashing is rampant throughout the postings of those who have voiced opposition to the new plan. Positions don't strictly split along political lines, but the discussion has been so heavily colored by politics that it's difficult not to make the correlation. I'd like to see rational consideration of the plan free from political bias on either side. I've yet to see it here. |
Rick Boos Member Posts: 851 From: Celina, Ohio Registered: Feb 2000
|
posted 04-16-2010 11:59 AM
BOO!!!! |
alanh_7 Member Posts: 1267 From: Ajax, Ontario, Canada Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 04-16-2010 12:08 PM
As a outside observer, who lived in the United States for ten years, I like some of the things Obama has done and is trying to do. But I have to say I think he dropped the ball on this one.Boo. |
Michael Davis Member Posts: 559 From: Houston, Texas Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 04-16-2010 12:10 PM
quote: Originally posted by cjh5801: Have you read the other thread? The Obama bashing is rampant throughout the postings of those who have voiced opposition to the new plan.
Agreed. The there seems to be a small group of posters crying "See! I told you not to vote for that socialist! Now look at what he's done to my space program!" It is a "the sky is falling" cry that has little to do with whether the stated goals are actually worthwhile. Odd given that there was little outcry about a completely underfunded and mostly imaginary lunar initiative that would never actually take place when it came from a conservative administration. I guess the animations and flag backdrops where better at the Bush press events. Hooray and now on to Mars please. |
MrSpace86 Member Posts: 1618 From: Gardner, KS Registered: Feb 2003
|
posted 04-16-2010 12:18 PM
Boo. |
DChudwin Member Posts: 1121 From: Lincolnshire IL USA Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 04-16-2010 01:05 PM
Cautious YAY!Constellation was poorly designed and managed and wasn't getting anywhere. Def not sustainable. Getting commercial companies involved in orbiting cargo and crew is essential if we are truly going to develop a spacefaring civilization-- this is good. We cannot just depend on government. Main problem is that future NASA goals are fuzzy and too far in the future, long after Obama will be out of office. It should not take 5 years to design a heavy lift rocket, nor should it take 15 years to get astronauts to an asteroid or 25 years to orbit Mars. It only took a little over 8 years from JFK setting the goal of landing on the Moon to the acheievement of that goal, at a time when the infrastructure we have now was not available. The good news is that we do have some explicit goals consistent with the "flexible path" outlined by the Augustine Commission. The bad news is that many of us may not be alive if they actually happen (I would be 85 in 2035 for the first Mars expedition, assuming its not delayed more in the interim). |
robsouth Member Posts: 769 From: West Midlands, UK Registered: Jun 2005
|
posted 04-16-2010 01:18 PM
not good |
SpaceAholic Member Posts: 5246 From: Sierra Vista, Arizona Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-16-2010 01:18 PM
quote: Originally posted by DChudwin: Main problem is that future NASA goals are fuzzy and too far in the future, long after Obama will be out of office...The good news is that we do have some explicit goals consistent with the "flexible path" outlined by the Augustine Commission.
How are these two statements consistent? What explicit goals (when/where/how) have been offered by Obama? |
Playalinda Member Posts: 152 From: Peoria, AZ, USA Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted 04-16-2010 01:23 PM
If NASA was an automobile I would not like to be a passenger as it is rather slow, aimless and nearly out of control.Sorry to say this but I don't see any adult driving (running) it at this time. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 50516 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-16-2010 01:33 PM
Seems readers are missing the point of this thread as introduced by Matt, so here it is again: quote: Originally posted by Matt T: One word answer, keep the debate in the other threads.
|
DChudwin Member Posts: 1121 From: Lincolnshire IL USA Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 04-16-2010 01:36 PM
quote: Originally posted by SpaceAholic: How are these two statements consistent? What explicit goals (when/where/how) have been offered by Obama?
I should have said that the timetables are fuzzy. The explicit goals are: - Continuing ISS past 2020
- Heavy lift rocket development and construction
- Human mission to an asteroid
- Human mission to orbit Mars
- Advanced technology development
|
Tyler Member Posts: 27 From: Auburn, Alabama, United States Registered: Aug 2009
|
posted 04-16-2010 01:37 PM
Boo.I remain thankful that President George W. Bush set a very worthy goal six years ago: returning to the Moon. It doesn't matter that we've "been there." What matters is that one would have to be crazy to say six Apollo landings resulted in a complete scientific understanding of the Moon. NASA needs to become a destination specific organization, and Bush set this country on that path. Under our current president, the agency will revert back to the old mode: waiting for a goal to present itself, and flying astronauts in circles in the meantime. |
SpaceAholic Member Posts: 5246 From: Sierra Vista, Arizona Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-16-2010 02:01 PM
quote: Originally posted by DChudwin: I should have said that the timetables are fuzzy.
Without concurrently specifying the architecture, timetable, destination and what major objectives are intended to be accomplished upon arrival the goals are non-explicit.
|
James Brown Member Posts: 1288 From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 04-16-2010 02:10 PM
BOO!!! |
Blackarrow Member Posts: 3604 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-16-2010 02:33 PM
Boo! Actually, boo-hoo. |
Spacefest Member Posts: 1168 From: Tucson, AZ Registered: Jan 2009
|
posted 04-16-2010 03:20 PM
Yea |
Saturn V Member Posts: 176 From: Golden, Colorado, USA Registered: Nov 2006
|
posted 04-16-2010 04:03 PM
Boo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!And what part of "one word answer" is not intelligable to some of you?? Now look what you have done....I typed more than one word!!! |
DC Giants Member Posts: 136 From: Kansas City, MO USA Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted 04-16-2010 05:13 PM
I totally agree with the statement that Neil Armstrong and 26 other astronauts and NASA legends issued that was critical of President Obama's plan.So....Boo! |
Space Emblem Art Member Posts: 197 From: Citrus Heights, CA - USA Registered: Jan 2006
|
posted 04-16-2010 07:15 PM
Boo, boo and boo. |
Playalinda Member Posts: 152 From: Peoria, AZ, USA Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted 04-16-2010 07:51 PM
Can so many boo's be wrong? No they can't!That's what democracy is all about everyone can express their opinion. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 50516 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-16-2010 08:03 PM
quote: Originally posted by Playalinda: Can so many boo's be wrong? No they can't!
Far more formal polls than this one conducted at the time showed that the majority didn't support going to the Moon in 1961. In fact, the majority didn't support going to the Moon for all the years leading up to the landing. Were all those "boo's" wrong? |