http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4334800.html#

It appears we have no direction, no funding, no man-rated vehicle, and no solutions.  In this era of huge budget deficits, solving these problems will be no easy feat.

bogenj:

It appears we have no direction, no funding, no man-rated vehicle, and no solutions.  In this era of huge budget deficits, solving these problems will be no easy feat.

I agree with you bogenj. They have done fairly well up till now with the Shuttle Program, but with that ending due to age, there seems to be no clear goal and certainly no support to accomplish one. I do believe there has to be a way to include the private sector a lot more and break down the many barriers that NASA has put into place.

Throwing a lot more money may not be the solution. The need to have the proper structure in place to use those dollars wisely. I have read where there have been many ideas on how to replace the shuttle program that weren't even considered. Makes a person wonder if NASA has built up a kingdom where they feel they are the only smart ones in space-flight.

It doesn't matter. Humans are going into space, they will go from other countries and maybe for other reasons but for good or ill they will go.

America has blown it leadership in the quest of manned spaceflight.  Instead we have squandered our fortunes in idiotic ways that are not subject to discussion here. 

Perhaps we are closer, in a historical sense, to the Vikings than the Spanish after all.

L

With 13 digit deficits facing us for the foreseeable future, I don't see much hope for the future of space exploration in this country.  The public is more interested in the next tweet from their favorite celebrity, and the government is hamstrung by bureaucracy and special interests.  It will public opinion, though, that eventually destroys the program.  Too few people care.

zachsdad:

I don't see much hope for the future of space exploration in this country

Terry,

There is some hope for space exploration, just not the kind you are currently thinking about.

At some point in the near future we will be exploring a segment of space that is empty and void of "celestial" bodies, where "dark matter" abounds and intermingles with tendrils of opaqueness thought to be the possible "beginning of the end". A vastness never before seen or measured, where the formula's of time, gravity and energy have no meaning.

Right smack between our politicians ears. 

If I were king, with 20/20 hindsight...

Ten years ago I would have developed a "cheap dumb disposable rocket" for getting astronauts or large payloads to and from Earth orbit.  This should have been done along with the Space Shuttle Program.  Yes, it would have cost more money then.  But we will pay the price of inaction in a few years - other countries will have to transport our astronauts to and from space.

But I'm not king and this is now.  What do we do?

I would finish the ISS, and focus on operations and doing good space research.  It cost a fortune to build.  Let's milk it for all it's worth, and not deorbit it until it has reached it's operational lifetime.

I personally do not support the use of resources to get man back to the Moon or go to Mars AT THIS TIME.  I have been a live-long supporter of astronomy, space science, and humans in space.  I would save these journeys for the next generation.  Those heavenly bodies will be there for us when we're ready.

I would fund R&D into next-generation rocket propulsion technology (e.g. magnetoplasma rocket - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_specific_impulse_magnetoplasma_rocket).  Until cost per pound of payload is reduced by several orders of magnitude, viable long-duration missions outside of low Earth orbit are very expensive.

Continue efforts to privatize the space industry.  The govt will always be needed to fund basic science missions, but can get out of commercial applications.  Spend big bucks on robotic missions to the Moon, asteroids, and planets.  Also, find the NEO's, and fund R&D into asteroid/comet impact mitigation strategies.

Man-rate ASAP the Delta IV Heavy or SpaceX's Falcon 9 or Orbital Sciences Corporations' Taurus or Minotaur rockets, or combination thereof.  Does Atlas V have a role?  What ever happened to the Shuttle-C (same tank and SRB's, orbiter replaced with a big cargo pod and disposable main engines) discussed years ago?  Richard Branson (yeah, that's a stretch)?  Europe (they've talked about manned vehicles since before Ariane was built - e.g. Hermes)? As for Ares, well, we can't fund everything else I mention if we fund Ares I and Ares V.  Again, manned missions should focus on the ISS for at least the next ten years.

Can we invite the Chinese to participate in ISS missions?  Contracts with member partners limit things, but maybe the U.S. could sell one of it's slots.  Besides being a political cooperation gesture, why not let them learn from the best?

The above are just a few of my ideas.  I'm no industry expert, just a citizen.  As per forum rules, I've tried to keep politics out of the discussion.  I support allocation of public money for space, but to also make the environment favorable for private companies.  This forum is not the place to discuss allocation of funds to non-astronomical Earth-bound activities.  I think it is appropriate to discuss how to allocate a set amount of funds.

Our program will only fail if we let it. We may be a minority, but so were the African Americans in the 60s. That didn't stop them from being loud as all hell and getting what they deserved, in that case, their freedom and respect. Remember Andy Dufrain (sp?) in the Shawshank Redemption? He wanted that library, so we wrote the state week after week until they caved. That what we need to be doing. Sending letters to every elected representative from the lowest of the low to the president himself...every.week, until we get some action. Do it by email, do it by snailmail, do it by telephone, do it by twitter, facebook, myspace, forums, blogs, news reports, newspapers, yell it in the streets! But, if we fail to show our support and let it die, it lies on us. No one else. So, who's ready to make themselves heard on this issue?

Nice launch of Ares I-X today.  Eerie since it was the first time we've seen a single SRB of that size flying since Challenger,  It would seem that the directional and torsional (deactivated one second out of every ten for data purposes) control systems worked! 

 

Yes I think that rocket has great potential.

http://www.space.com/news/nasa-budget-billion-boost-sn-100125.html

While Obama's budget funds the ISS to 2020, and attempts to privatize man-rated space vehicles, I am concerned about what will happen to the skilled aerospace workforce.  Congress has yet to act on this budget, and they tend to restore funding to preserve high-tech jobs in local districts.  It is unclear exactly what "privatize" means.  Which launch vehicle will be funded for man-rating?  I do hope cooler, wiser heads prevail.

We can still achieve a lot with robotic missions.

I do not know if funding will be preserved for traditionally underfunded hypersonic research, which potentially can lead to cheaper cost to launch payloads to orbit.

I urge responders to my post to keep their comments apolitical, respectful, and professional.

None of this is unexpected.  We had a grand dream of manned spaceflight setting off for the Moon and Mars but as usual did not lay down a solid financial footing for it nor set up a management system that would procure top class talent and spur them on with a sense of purpose and urgency.

All those wasted billions could, and should have, been spent on developing a permanent and very exciting scientific presence on every major body in our solar system via robotic probes.  How can we have the technology to keep a permanent space craft presence in the Jupiter system and not do so, or have probes not going to Neptune and Uranus like the one headed to Pluto?  Not to mention replacing all the aging Solar observatories.

I am sure that Ares I will be a fine launch vehicle if it survives.  So do we really need to jettison it in the hopes that private companies will produce man-rated vehicles more efficiently and cheaply?   On their own initiative?  All one has to do to put the needle into the balloon of this idea is review the Boeing 787 program.  Man rated vehicles, space faring or not, are hugely expensive to produce and expensive to operate.  Commercialism of space and the dismemberment of NASA is not a cure-all.  If there is no profit to made, and there is no profit in space exploration beyond building hardware like communication satellites and placing them in orbit, there is no investment money.  I for one would never invest my hard earned money into airline stock let alone someone trying to design and build their own rocket.  There is nothing wrong with putting a bid out to manufacturers to design or adapt an existing rocket to produce a man-rated rocket but don't expect it to be a whole lot cheaper either. 

 Whatever we decide we need to stop mucking about without a sustainable direction and/or vision of what we are doing and why.

L