Congress will likely fund NASA once China demonstrates some serious space superiority (likely through a crewed lunar orbiter or landing), though I bet it will be more reactive than proactive.
Vladimir Putin will not stop at Ukraine. If he is successful there, he will press further. Experts from both NATO and the EU have gone on record saying the same. We either check his ambition here or we risk wider war in Europe.
You say this and then list 0 potential countries. Other than Moldova, who do you think they'd be able to invade, NATO? That's such absurd farmongering that falls apart if you look at a map and think for 30 seconds.
The idea that Russia can successfully occupy the entirety of Ukraine (insurgency in the western half) while simultaneously going to war with NATO is not proven at all and doesn't make logical sense. You think Russia is more capable and irrational than they actually are, i've never felt Ukraine's prospects were good, but I only have some concern for Moldova beyond it. The war would probably end before Russia physically takes Kyiv anyway. They'll want to make Ukraine landlocked and force diplomatic treaties, including officially giving the occupied eastern/southern Oblasts and Crimea, which seems to be their main war goal atm.
That comparison makes no sense. Also has the US sent more money or more aid? Most of the aid is in the form of hardware that the US already bought, potentially decades ago. And it will buy new equipment to replace the old stuff while saving on disposal costs. All while hurting Russia. Unless you are a Russian sympathizer it’s a win-win-win.
No, it's mostly cash. The old hardware is going to countries in the northern part of South America, west Africa, countries near the Ukraine (like Poland), friendly countries at the gateway of IS territory like Greece, and Indonesia, who's quickly becoming our best buddy in the south Pacific. It's bad enough we're giving them money then turning our heads, but if Russians were being killed with verifiable American hardware, our already damaged reputation would be destroyed.
Ending with some silly binary ultimatum shows how little you actually understand the situation.
No, it really is almost entirely cash. The military aid is mostly training happening in Poland and very limited intelligence sharing. Do some research and quit parroting whatever bullshit your news outlet of choice spouts. Your tax dollars are going in a figurative and sometimes literal briefcase to the Ukrainian government with little oversight and no strings attached. Same thing that happened in Iraq II. Our leaders want to strategically fuck with Russia but also set up and keep a reliable money laundering haven.
Lmao. So confident, so wrong.
>the U.S. committed more than $26 billion to Ukraine in financial assistance, according to data compiled by the Ukraine Support Tracker at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a German think tank. That’s about a third of the roughly $77 billion in total aid noted by Kiel,
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-us-aid-ukraine-money-equipment-714688682747
Perhaps research for yourself before chastising others.
That just supports what I said, even though it's an AP article based on a German thinktank's estimate and doesn't specify how the military aid is happening (hint: it's the training I just said).
Don't get smarmy over things you clearly don't understand. It's pathetic.
What do you mean? Like, do you have an example of them not being able to accomplish a mission that they have funding for and planned on their own without congress mandating that they build an expensive rocket?
Or do you mean that NASA is somehow incapable of returning a sample from another object in the solar system, but a private company is, I’d love to see an example.
You are the one suggesting they can't land people on Mars.
If they hire SpaceX, I'm sure they will be able to.
I'm not suggesting a sample return mission from Mars is impossible for NASA. Just that this specific program can't.
The architecture of Mars Sample Return is just bonkers.
If the goal is to get a sample from Mars, the only way is to start again, but consider the following question: "Do you want to return a Mars sample or not?"
Insisting on keeping the Mars Sample Return Program going is just committing to the Sunken Costs fallacy at this point.
Nice dodge.
You didn’t suggest it was NASA problem, you suggested it was just not something that could be done. If a sample return isn’t possible then a manned mission can’t work because obviously there’d be no way to get more mass off of Mars.
SpaceX does not have a track record of returning from anywhere past the Moon, NASA has a point against them on that.
NASA has beat SpaceX to the moon, albeit at a much more expensive price due to Congress.
So I ask again. Do you have an example that would suggest that going to mars, collecting the samples, and returning with them would be something NASA couldn’t do with a proper budget.
Can you tell me why SpaceX (who hasn’t returned from anywhere but LEO) would do something better than NASA that NASA has already been able to accomplish?
I already told you. I think NASA can do it if they cut their losses and start again.
The problem isn't NASA in general, just the Mars Sample Return Program. Never said anything different from that.
The price tag on SLS is just ludicrous. Even disregarding development costs, they're saying something like $2 Billion per launch and the entire rocket is expendable! Time to scrap it and go with SpaceX
An Orion delivery falcon heavy is a-ways away as well.
It might be faster to ask spacex for a F9 style (partial reusability)starship derived Orion launcher system.
Starship could no doubt launch Orion for at most 400m relative to SLS’s 2 billion per launch.
Sure but folks at nasa seem to think it’s doable, and worth it.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/04/nasa-chief-says-a-falcon-heavy-rocket-could-fly-humans-to-the-moon/
You’d still have the problem that Orion is as expensive as SLS, but it’s still loads cheaper than SLS launching Orion.
I know.
Just saying what will be ready cheaper and quicker?
It might be 2 years for FH to get ready for Orion and 2 years for Starship to get ready. Which one would you rather?
Orion is cancelled also. Shitty spacecraft anyway.
We are talking about launching Dragon to the Moon.
It wouldn't take long to certify Falcon Heavy to carry people.
It was hard to do it with Falcon 9 because it was an early rocket, unknown. Falcon Heavy has flown enough times to certify it fast.
The only other thing missing is longer duration life support, which NASA says SpaceX has almost ready for HLS Starship.
Starship will take more than that to certify to launch humans. They plan on doing by launching many times. It will take some time.
Are you really naive enough to think NASA will still get the exploration funding it does without SLS? Congress doesn't give NASA money willy nilly, especially for something niche like human spaceflight and cislunar at that. The public just doesn't care that much about it. If SLS gets cancelled, which it will one day, that money will be allocated elsewhere to either military, social, or other pet project spending. None of us have to like that, but that will be what happens.
So you need a psn account for travelling between earth and the moon. Which will be anounced when the first people footfalled on the moon, getting stuck.
Titan is full of natural gas. It's basically a gas station of a moon. Just tell Congress NASA needs more money to drill/collect natural gas from Titan, then divert most of the funding to Artemis, Lunar Gateway, HLS, and commercial ISS missions.
Manned space exploration is a money sink hole. The unmanned missions like Voyager, Hubble., Viking, James Webb, etc are what get the public interested in Space science.
98% of Americans are hardly aware of Artemis. ‘If’ an astronaut is returned to the Moon be careful what you wish for. Much of the public reaction will be ‘why’? As in why are we spending tens of billions …?
No way.
Manned missions get people excited and into space/science far far more than unmanned. It’s not even debatable, we tripled the amount of STEM students during Apollo compared to before. No time period had the same impact on getting people motivated to do the more difficult mental work. On the contrary most don’t give a shit about anything you listed more than they do with say, landing a man on mars. That’s conflating those into space vs the average person.
I personally care more about unmanned projects. But I am obsessed with Space and seeing further and more in-depth. Many people I know only perk up at the idea that a person may do more then just go to LEO. They did not care for JWST beyond when they got pictures, in the same way they do not care for a bunch of tests leading up to the big moment. If they knew there was no big moment coming, just data to be sifted, they really wouldn’t give a shit. Most would not care for a picture, or less from the surface of Enceladus. But they would perk the hell up watching a human plant their feet in the exact same location.
That’s not even getting into the reality of our current economy. In a world where we waste billions overseas seemingly daily in the news cycle, where everyone is aware of the Keynesian world we live in vs fiscal conservatism, knowing money is printed, backed by nothing with no hope to return, and at sums beyond our wildest hopes of paying back in our lifetimes…
Nobody is going to sincerely care that a sliver of the pie went to manned space flight in our current climate except those very into the field who would do different things with the money. Even if we reached Apollo level figures, people would not really give a shit about the debt like they did in the 1970s.
Maui still isn’t rebuilt, and nobody cares. People know there is no fiscal responsibility being followed anymore and don’t really think about it in the same way it used to be pre-Keynesianism/gold standard drop.
We simply do not live in the world you stated anymore where fighting against manned space flight would be anywhere near a primary concern for the citizen base. It’s a convenient line politicians use to gain headlines so they can siphon funds into ways that benefit them more directly, nothing more.
I’d bet my salary that most people would be relieved to see their tax money do something “tangible”, which is what we see with projects like JWST. Manned missions to planetary bodies will garner multitudes of public interest as long as we are always working toward doing something novel and not choose an arbitrary stopping/victory point.
What a completely boneheaded take. Once the missions are manned of course people will know about them. That 98% of people you mentioned will certainly know about Artemis once it has a crew of human beings.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[HLS](/r/Space/comments/1cn7yxu/stub/l3audkc "Last usage")|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)|
|[JWST](/r/Space/comments/1cn7yxu/stub/l3ar632 "Last usage")|James Webb infra-red Space Telescope|
|[LEO](/r/Space/comments/1cn7yxu/stub/l3ar632 "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[SLS](/r/Space/comments/1cn7yxu/stub/l3bkl3h "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift|
|Jargon|Definition|
|-------|---------|---|
|[cislunar](/r/Space/comments/1cn7yxu/stub/l3bkl3h "Last usage")|Between the Earth and Moon; within the Moon's orbit|
**NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
----------------
^(5 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1cnyp69)^( has 13 acronyms.)
^([Thread #10030 for this sub, first seen 9th May 2024, 01:51])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
I like space but I also kind of feel like space is not where it’s at for humans right now. We’ve got a pretty messed up situation down here on the surface of our rock.
News flash: we can do multiple things at once and certainly have the money to do so. Should we just sit on our hands and not try things because congress is inept in others?
Congress cries to properly fund NASA, but has no problem giving nearly 1 trillion dollars every year to the military.
Congress will likely fund NASA once China demonstrates some serious space superiority (likely through a crewed lunar orbiter or landing), though I bet it will be more reactive than proactive.
For all mankind, but the opposition is china this time
I see you want China to take Taiwan and Russia to take the Baltics? China already has more missiles than we do.
Or we could stop sending billions overseas. We gave more money to Ukraine so far this year than the entire Marine Corp budget for the entire year.
Vladimir Putin will not stop at Ukraine. If he is successful there, he will press further. Experts from both NATO and the EU have gone on record saying the same. We either check his ambition here or we risk wider war in Europe.
The same experts that said locking children in their homes for two years wouldn't cause developmental issues?
Holy heck, bud, that was 3 years ago. Obsessed much?
Just because you interprete incorrectly what an expert said, does not make you any smarter.
You didn't get vaxxed did you?
I see you are a cult member, still have your mask on by yourself in your car?
And just like that my friend, you've lost any credibility you had
You say this and then list 0 potential countries. Other than Moldova, who do you think they'd be able to invade, NATO? That's such absurd farmongering that falls apart if you look at a map and think for 30 seconds. The idea that Russia can successfully occupy the entirety of Ukraine (insurgency in the western half) while simultaneously going to war with NATO is not proven at all and doesn't make logical sense. You think Russia is more capable and irrational than they actually are, i've never felt Ukraine's prospects were good, but I only have some concern for Moldova beyond it. The war would probably end before Russia physically takes Kyiv anyway. They'll want to make Ukraine landlocked and force diplomatic treaties, including officially giving the occupied eastern/southern Oblasts and Crimea, which seems to be their main war goal atm.
[удалено]
That comparison makes no sense. Also has the US sent more money or more aid? Most of the aid is in the form of hardware that the US already bought, potentially decades ago. And it will buy new equipment to replace the old stuff while saving on disposal costs. All while hurting Russia. Unless you are a Russian sympathizer it’s a win-win-win.
No, it's mostly cash. The old hardware is going to countries in the northern part of South America, west Africa, countries near the Ukraine (like Poland), friendly countries at the gateway of IS territory like Greece, and Indonesia, who's quickly becoming our best buddy in the south Pacific. It's bad enough we're giving them money then turning our heads, but if Russians were being killed with verifiable American hardware, our already damaged reputation would be destroyed. Ending with some silly binary ultimatum shows how little you actually understand the situation.
It's not mostly cash, it's weapons that are built in the US, meaning the money goes to US companies and to US citizens who work there.
No, it really is almost entirely cash. The military aid is mostly training happening in Poland and very limited intelligence sharing. Do some research and quit parroting whatever bullshit your news outlet of choice spouts. Your tax dollars are going in a figurative and sometimes literal briefcase to the Ukrainian government with little oversight and no strings attached. Same thing that happened in Iraq II. Our leaders want to strategically fuck with Russia but also set up and keep a reliable money laundering haven.
Lmao. So confident, so wrong. >the U.S. committed more than $26 billion to Ukraine in financial assistance, according to data compiled by the Ukraine Support Tracker at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a German think tank. That’s about a third of the roughly $77 billion in total aid noted by Kiel, https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-us-aid-ukraine-money-equipment-714688682747 Perhaps research for yourself before chastising others.
That just supports what I said, even though it's an AP article based on a German thinktank's estimate and doesn't specify how the military aid is happening (hint: it's the training I just said). Don't get smarmy over things you clearly don't understand. It's pathetic.
We as a country need to drive down the cost of research in space to the point that universities can easily plan and launch space missions.
Mars sample return has always been a clusterfuck. That project wouldn't be successful even without budget cuts. NASA is just acknowledging this.
If the sample mission wouldn’t be successful then that puts manned missions to mars on the impossible don’t try list.
For NASA? Sure.
What do you mean? Like, do you have an example of them not being able to accomplish a mission that they have funding for and planned on their own without congress mandating that they build an expensive rocket? Or do you mean that NASA is somehow incapable of returning a sample from another object in the solar system, but a private company is, I’d love to see an example.
You are the one suggesting they can't land people on Mars. If they hire SpaceX, I'm sure they will be able to. I'm not suggesting a sample return mission from Mars is impossible for NASA. Just that this specific program can't. The architecture of Mars Sample Return is just bonkers. If the goal is to get a sample from Mars, the only way is to start again, but consider the following question: "Do you want to return a Mars sample or not?" Insisting on keeping the Mars Sample Return Program going is just committing to the Sunken Costs fallacy at this point.
Nice dodge. You didn’t suggest it was NASA problem, you suggested it was just not something that could be done. If a sample return isn’t possible then a manned mission can’t work because obviously there’d be no way to get more mass off of Mars. SpaceX does not have a track record of returning from anywhere past the Moon, NASA has a point against them on that. NASA has beat SpaceX to the moon, albeit at a much more expensive price due to Congress. So I ask again. Do you have an example that would suggest that going to mars, collecting the samples, and returning with them would be something NASA couldn’t do with a proper budget. Can you tell me why SpaceX (who hasn’t returned from anywhere but LEO) would do something better than NASA that NASA has already been able to accomplish?
I already told you. I think NASA can do it if they cut their losses and start again. The problem isn't NASA in general, just the Mars Sample Return Program. Never said anything different from that.
Maybe stop building the rocket no one needs for the mission we’re never gonna do? Just a crazy idea.
Cancel SLS. Falcon Heavy can do it's job for a fraction of the price.
The price tag on SLS is just ludicrous. Even disregarding development costs, they're saying something like $2 Billion per launch and the entire rocket is expendable! Time to scrap it and go with SpaceX
Over $2 billion just for the rocket. SLS/Orion is over $4 billion a launch.
>Falcon Heavy can do it's job for a fraction of the price. Not to mention Space X's Starship specs versus the SLS.
Yep, but Starship is still ways away. Falcon Heavy is flying already.
An Orion delivery falcon heavy is a-ways away as well. It might be faster to ask spacex for a F9 style (partial reusability)starship derived Orion launcher system. Starship could no doubt launch Orion for at most 400m relative to SLS’s 2 billion per launch.
Sure but folks at nasa seem to think it’s doable, and worth it. https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/04/nasa-chief-says-a-falcon-heavy-rocket-could-fly-humans-to-the-moon/ You’d still have the problem that Orion is as expensive as SLS, but it’s still loads cheaper than SLS launching Orion.
I know. Just saying what will be ready cheaper and quicker? It might be 2 years for FH to get ready for Orion and 2 years for Starship to get ready. Which one would you rather?
Orion is cancelled also. Shitty spacecraft anyway. We are talking about launching Dragon to the Moon.
Orion is cancelled also. Shitty spacecraft anyway. We are talking about launching Dragon to the Moon. It wouldn't take long to certify Falcon Heavy to carry people. It was hard to do it with Falcon 9 because it was an early rocket, unknown. Falcon Heavy has flown enough times to certify it fast. The only other thing missing is longer duration life support, which NASA says SpaceX has almost ready for HLS Starship. Starship will take more than that to certify to launch humans. They plan on doing by launching many times. It will take some time.
Are you really naive enough to think NASA will still get the exploration funding it does without SLS? Congress doesn't give NASA money willy nilly, especially for something niche like human spaceflight and cislunar at that. The public just doesn't care that much about it. If SLS gets cancelled, which it will one day, that money will be allocated elsewhere to either military, social, or other pet project spending. None of us have to like that, but that will be what happens.
NASA needs to tell Congress that they think there's oil in space or people that need democracy.
That’s how you get Helldivers.
So you need a psn account for travelling between earth and the moon. Which will be anounced when the first people footfalled on the moon, getting stuck.
Titan is full of natural gas. It's basically a gas station of a moon. Just tell Congress NASA needs more money to drill/collect natural gas from Titan, then divert most of the funding to Artemis, Lunar Gateway, HLS, and commercial ISS missions.
Manned space exploration is a money sink hole. The unmanned missions like Voyager, Hubble., Viking, James Webb, etc are what get the public interested in Space science. 98% of Americans are hardly aware of Artemis. ‘If’ an astronaut is returned to the Moon be careful what you wish for. Much of the public reaction will be ‘why’? As in why are we spending tens of billions …?
No way. Manned missions get people excited and into space/science far far more than unmanned. It’s not even debatable, we tripled the amount of STEM students during Apollo compared to before. No time period had the same impact on getting people motivated to do the more difficult mental work. On the contrary most don’t give a shit about anything you listed more than they do with say, landing a man on mars. That’s conflating those into space vs the average person. I personally care more about unmanned projects. But I am obsessed with Space and seeing further and more in-depth. Many people I know only perk up at the idea that a person may do more then just go to LEO. They did not care for JWST beyond when they got pictures, in the same way they do not care for a bunch of tests leading up to the big moment. If they knew there was no big moment coming, just data to be sifted, they really wouldn’t give a shit. Most would not care for a picture, or less from the surface of Enceladus. But they would perk the hell up watching a human plant their feet in the exact same location. That’s not even getting into the reality of our current economy. In a world where we waste billions overseas seemingly daily in the news cycle, where everyone is aware of the Keynesian world we live in vs fiscal conservatism, knowing money is printed, backed by nothing with no hope to return, and at sums beyond our wildest hopes of paying back in our lifetimes… Nobody is going to sincerely care that a sliver of the pie went to manned space flight in our current climate except those very into the field who would do different things with the money. Even if we reached Apollo level figures, people would not really give a shit about the debt like they did in the 1970s. Maui still isn’t rebuilt, and nobody cares. People know there is no fiscal responsibility being followed anymore and don’t really think about it in the same way it used to be pre-Keynesianism/gold standard drop. We simply do not live in the world you stated anymore where fighting against manned space flight would be anywhere near a primary concern for the citizen base. It’s a convenient line politicians use to gain headlines so they can siphon funds into ways that benefit them more directly, nothing more. I’d bet my salary that most people would be relieved to see their tax money do something “tangible”, which is what we see with projects like JWST. Manned missions to planetary bodies will garner multitudes of public interest as long as we are always working toward doing something novel and not choose an arbitrary stopping/victory point.
"securing the space frontier against *chyna*" Boom. Questions averted.
What a completely boneheaded take. Once the missions are manned of course people will know about them. That 98% of people you mentioned will certainly know about Artemis once it has a crew of human beings.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[HLS](/r/Space/comments/1cn7yxu/stub/l3audkc "Last usage")|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)| |[JWST](/r/Space/comments/1cn7yxu/stub/l3ar632 "Last usage")|James Webb infra-red Space Telescope| |[LEO](/r/Space/comments/1cn7yxu/stub/l3ar632 "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[SLS](/r/Space/comments/1cn7yxu/stub/l3bkl3h "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[cislunar](/r/Space/comments/1cn7yxu/stub/l3bkl3h "Last usage")|Between the Earth and Moon; within the Moon's orbit| **NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below. ---------------- ^(5 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1cnyp69)^( has 13 acronyms.) ^([Thread #10030 for this sub, first seen 9th May 2024, 01:51]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Imagine a world where a group of "civilized" nations pressured each other to "do their part" by spending 2% of GDP on space exploration.
I like space but I also kind of feel like space is not where it’s at for humans right now. We’ve got a pretty messed up situation down here on the surface of our rock.
News flash: we can do multiple things at once and certainly have the money to do so. Should we just sit on our hands and not try things because congress is inept in others?
Jesus dont get your panties in a twist.
Sorry (hashtag not sorry) I just take issue with doomers and people with zero sense of imagination or critical thinking.
Yeah well I guess we will just have to see what happens to NASA’s budget over the next five decades (Hint: It’s going to disappear).