Barack Obama: Advancing the Frontiers of Space Exploration

[Larry]

Larry, why do you say that private industry is "incapable" of completing the mission? I dont see what the basis of your opinion is in this?

I said that Spaceship One is incapable of fulfilling the Shuttle's mission. Because it is.

Spaceship One has a payload of one person. The Shuttle's payload (going from memory) is seven people and 30 tons of cargo.

Spaceship One isn't capable of even achieving orbit.

[Larry]

apples and oranges, aircraft carriers are part of the military budget and needed for national defense. If you are advancing a theory that NASA should be funded as a military budget, I'll surely listen, as that makes sense. But fact is, is just another bloated program that doesnt yiled a significant return for what has been sent for the past 20 years.

Again, why should it be funded via taxation, in a time of economic strife, if it's something that can be handled by the private sector.

Branson of Virgin claims that his future space flights (using the spaceshipone technology) would only cost an average of a few hundred thousand per launch. Why does it take multiple billions to fly some astrobaughts and equipment to the ISS just one time?

Apples and Apples.

Your (completely idiotic) point is to assume that because the government paid a contractor to do something, therefore, if the government didn't pay for it, the private company would have.

Guess what? By your "logic", the government didn't build the USS Nimitz, private industry did. Therefore, if the government didn't pay for it, private industry would have done it, anyway.

[SnyderShrugged]

Spaceship One isn't even remotely close to being capable of orbital insertion.

"spaceshiptwo" will be able to and it's scheduled to be complete next year, it would have been done this year except for an accident in testing. And no taxpayer dollars are used at all, not even for museums and school supplies.

[Larry]

I'm going to have to get out of this thread.

I didn't think it was possible for there to be enough idiocy, in a thread on this subject, to make me unable to control my temper. But apparently there is.

Enjoy it, folks.

[SnyderShrugged]

Apples and Apples.

Your (completely idiotic) point is to assume that because the government paid a contractor to do something, therefore, if the government didn't pay for it, the private company would have.

Guess what? By your "logic", the government didn't build the USS Nimitz, private industry did. Therefore, if the government didn't pay for it, private industry would have done it, anyway.

Come on Larry, you are above throwing out frivolous insults while in a debate. Was calling me an idiot really making the debate a better one? I havnt stooped, yet you have insulted my intelligence twice in this thread. Please go back to being more level headed, it doesnt become you to be that way and its out of character.

Back to the discussion, What makes you claim that private industry couldnt have or wouldnt have invented those items without the space program? It's really an unprovable and backward logic.

There wasnt a government funded program needed to invent most of the luxuries that we have today.

[SnyderShrugged]

I'm going to have to get out of this thread.

I didn't think it was possible for there to be enough idiocy, in a thread on this subject, to make me unable to control my temper. But apparently there is.

Enjoy it, folks.

wow, you need a nap Mr. Cranky. I cant believe that you are the same Larry who has always discussed things with a calm head. You are really that upset because you disagree with my opinion? I honestly thought we were simply debating. There certainly wasnt any negative feelings on my end when I disagreed with your thoughts.

[Riggo-toni]

another senseless waste of tax dollars with very little return on investment.

Yup.

[Zen-like Todd]

"spaceshiptwo" will be able to and it's scheduled to be complete next year, it would have been done this year except for an accident in testing. And no taxpayer dollars are used at all, not even for museums and school supplies.

You are entirely incorrect. SpaceshipTwo will simply be somewhat larger.

It's not even remotely close to achieving orbit.

[SnyderShrugged]

You are entirely incorrect. SpaceshipTwo will simply be somewhat larger.

It's not even remotely close to achieving orbit.

I'll have to look, but I really thought I read that somewhere in the past few months.

[Prosperity]

Space exploration is a very risky business, gains are going to be in the distant future if at all... they may never come but as human beings, and as Americans who are descendants (in more than familial lineage) of some of the worlds greatest explorers, we have to take it upon ourselves to explore the unknown. It is an essential part of our nature.

Deep space exploration so expensive and risky that the only entities with enough resources and staying power to see the projects through are global powers... and not just any global powers, but the ones that will be stable enough to eventually see the rewards... thus the role of the US in space exploration. The US may be as close to an immortal global power as the world will ever see, so it will be worth it as long as we think of the long haul, and not just within our short lifetimes.

[TrumanB]

Space exploration is a very risky business, gains are going to be in the distant future if at all... they may never come but as human beings, and as Americans who are descendants (in more than familial lineage) of some of the worlds greatest explorers, we have to take it upon ourselves to explore the unknown. It is an essential part of our nature.

Deep space exploration so expensive and risky that the only entities with enough resources and staying power to see the projects through are global powers... and not just any global powers, but the ones that will be stable enough to eventually see the rewards... thus the role of the US in space exploration. The US may be as close to an immortal global power as the world will ever see, so it will be worth it as long as we think of the long haul, and not just within our short lifetimes.

Wow, I totally agree with you on this.

[SnyderShrugged]

You are entirely incorrect. SpaceshipTwo will simply be somewhat larger.

It's not even remotely close to achieving orbit.

I checked and you are right Todd, SS2 is still a suborbital craft, it just will get higher into sub orbit than SS1 I stand corrected.

SS3 and SS4 are the LEO versions with SS4 being a satelight launcher and SS3 a ISS linkup and passenger craft. I couldnt find the projected dates for SS3, but SS4 is slated for 2014 so I assume sometime in the years prior to that will a privately built space craft reach the same orbit as the space shuttle and ISS.

Either way, It really doesnt disprove my overall point that private industry can get us into space cheaper, it just may take a few extra years.

[Prosperity]

Snydershrugged maybe you should think of it in another way...

WalMarts and Starbucks don't just appear in the middle of nowhere... roads are built, utilities are connected, and people move in then they start setting up shop.

Maybe it is the governments role to lay the foundations, and then let the free market take off. I don't think anyone is saying the free market can't capitalize on space eventually, but I think we have to lay the foundations so it won't be so risky.

Wow, I totally agree with you on this.

holy ****, who'da thunk it

[mjah]

I'll have to look, but I really thought I read that somewhere in the past few months.

No, you were definitely way off on that. And SpaceShipTwo will, in fact, reach almost exactly the same altitude as SpaceShipOne: roughly 70 miles.

The ISS orbits at about 3 time that altitude.

And while you might think that "merely" makes the problem 3 times as hard as the one that took one of the greatest aviation geniuses of our time the better part of a decade to realize, it actually makes the problem MUCH MUCH harder.

Because the problem is no longer just a matter of getting enough oomph to go 200+ miles straight up. It's a problem of getting enough oomph to go 200+ miles up and still have lots and lots of oomph left. LOTS. Enough oomph to orbit at about 17,000 mph. Otherwise, you aren't staying up there.

SpaceShipTwo will only reach 2,600 mph as a top speed.

So that's SpaceShipTwo with 1/3 of the altitude and less than 1/6 of the speed required to reach the ISS. To make that up, you're talking about a completely different design and leaps and bounds in technology. Totally new, massively more powerful and more finely engineered system.

Not to mention all the "shortcuts" SpaceShipTwo can use due to the fact that it's suborbital and therefore reenters "slowly," like feathering itself instead of requiring a heat shield and having an extremely wide, almost unlimited range of safe reentry angles. The damned thing could reented backwards and upside down and stand an extremely good chance of not burning up. Try that with an orbital spacecraft, and you'll be lucky if they find enough of you to bury in an Altoids tin.

There's talk of an orbital SpaceShipThree, assuming SpaceShipTwo is a success. There's no real timeline, no real design, and no budgetary information of any kind for that project.

Edit: SpaceDev claims that to reach Mach 25 and therefore ISS orbit, they will have to scale up the power of their biggest motor by 4x. They say it's not much of a problem, but they've been saying that since at least 2005. Back then they were saying unlimited funding would give them a chance at reaching orbit in 2010. Looks like there's zero chance of that happening now...