US should tread lightly. Putin controls US human space flight

All these politicians running thier mouths should bear in mind that Putin could end US involvement on ISS. We dont have a way to send men into space without Putin's approval and wont for a goid long time.

Originally posted by Xeven
All these politicians running thier mouths should bear in mind that Putin could end US involvement on ISS.

That would be silly. Without U.S. involvement in the ISS, Russian launches and/or the ISS itself could easily suffer a major "accident".

Originally posted by Xeven
We dont have a way to send men into space without Putin's approval and wont for a goid long time.

You don't really believe that... do you? Rest assured, if the U.S. had to get a man into space they could do it in less than a few hours. Just because the "public" program (NASA) let go of its manned launch capabilities doesn't mean the DOD was sitting on their hands letting black projects cease. Not to mention all the private companies like Lockheed, Bigelow Aerospace, Virgin Galactic, etc tossing their hats into the mix.

reply to post by Xeven


Yes... few things remind America better of how far we've fallen and how fast we've made the trip than the fact we have to ask the Russian's politely to get a ride to a Space Station we largely built and took to orbit.



There is much truth there, I think. Oh... How far it's all fallen, too.

Originally posted by Xeven
All these politicians running thier mouths should bear in mind that Putin could end US involvement on ISS. We dont have a way to send men into space without Putin's approval and wont for a goid long time.

Please show me any documentation that shows Putin as having control of other countries space programs? The International Space Station is not owned by one country, The International Space Station programme represents a combination of three national space station projects: the Russian/Soviet Mir-2, NASA's Freedom including the Japanese Kibō laboratory, and the European Columbus space stations. Canadian robotics supplement these projects.
Here is a link to wikipedia. Read all about What the space program is all about. And You should think about Putting more input Into your thread. Maybe some links to what you are trying to say. Thanks and hope to hear from you soon.

en.wikipedia.org...

I'm assuming you've heard of SpaceX .. they've been awarded a very nice contract from NASA .. they've already flown re-supply missions to the ISS and the craft is designed to be able to seat 7 astronauts .. They expect to have their first manned missions in 2015 .. Yes, in the mean time we've been hitching rides but that won't be for much longer.. you said we wouldn't have our own way for a good long time, that's just not true

Here ya go. Just one publicly acknowledged option that's available, and already under contract with NASA, is the Falcon 9 that carries/launches the Dragon which "is capable of both manned and robotic operation".

Again, this is public domain stuff. We haven't even scratched the surface of "black project" capabilities.

OK. you think that the US has nothing in the air as a substitute for rockets, right? the Russkies have the whole space travel business sewed up with the Chinese and half a dozen other countries hot on their heels with their own rocket-powered space programs, right? After a 40-year head start in manned craft, we simply quite the game and gave up trying keep lofting those death-trap shuttles, right? Is that the way you see it?

Do you ever read about mysterious devices that move in the skies, especially over the US and the UK that are very unconventional is motion, lack of noise and configuration? Do you know the term "black triangle?" If not, I need to tell you that is where our money has gone for a couple of decades. Since the mid-1970s or so the US has been building these craft that have made the rocket--all rockets--obsolete. The Space Defense Initiative (SDI), better know among the unwashed as the Star Wars" program, was the system put into place at that time. (End of short history lesson.)

Originally posted by russ1969

Originally posted by Xeven
All these politicians running thier mouths should bear in mind that Putin could end US involvement on ISS. We dont have a way to send men into space without Putin's approval and wont for a goid long time.

Please show me any documentation that shows Putin as having control of other countries space programs? The International Space Station is not owned by one country, The International Space Station programme represents a combination of three national space station projects: the Russian/Soviet Mir-2, NASA's Freedom including the Japanese Kibō laboratory, and the European Columbus space stations. Canadian robotics supplement these projects.
Here is a link to wikipedia. Read all about What the space program is all about. And You should think about Putting more input Into your thread. Maybe some links to what you are trying to say. Thanks and hope to hear from you soon.

en.wikipedia.org...

We US dont have a spacecraft that we can fly humans to ISS on. Right now our only ride to the ISS Iis Russian spacecraft. All this speculation if secret spacecraft means nothing. Without Putin our astonaughts dont fly in space right now. Its shameful and humiliating to the US.

reply to post by Xeven


Agreed on the meaningless speculation about what secret things the US does or doesn't have. We could have the U.S.S. Enterprise in orbit and it makes absolutely no difference if a few hundred or less men on Earth are aware of it. As you say, we still gave up the lead and almost a position in the competition for space accomplishments as a nation. Where once we led? Now we thumb rides and hope the driver doesn't ask too much in return.

Pathetic.. Indeed. Very very pathetic. Some small minded little men couldn't see the value of space flight (while every other nation which can, is still working to get there or further) so ours got canned while we watch others achieve ...not by our lack of our own ability but literal choice to stay home.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Don't blame small minded men, blame ourselves. It's our own fault that the US lost a manned space flight capability. Some of the last shuttle missions weren't even broadcast on tv because they had become so routine people weren't tuning in to watch them. I remember when almost the entire countdown was on the air, and towards the end of the program, you got the last three minutes or so.

It's the same reason that Apollo was cancelled. From at least Apollo 13 NASA wasn't even broadcasting astronaut videos, because they couldn't get network time. It became too routine, and people started asking "Why don't we worry about earth first?" The same questions asked today.

reply to post by Zaphod58


I think that's a bit weak for reasoning. We require leaders with vision beyond re-election and party politics. The budget allotment for NASA and all science related expenses is so pitifully small in the overall scope of things, you'd wonder if we really care about anything but parking orbits for GPS and Communications? Out of that pittance of a working budget, one of their early-on added missions was to push outreach in other cultures. Huh? NASA? Yeah.... The lines of departments and missions have blurred to where everyone basically does everything else but what they're supposed to.

In NASA's case? They had little to work with, to start and follow-up manned replacement programs that were to at least be in progress, showing promise, but were among those cut after our current President came, saw and said 'What for??'.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


They were given money to spend on going back to the moon, and they were so far over budget and behind schedule on it in less than a year that it wasn't even funny. By the time it was cancelled it would have cost at least twice as much and taken three times as long to build as it was originally planned to.

But NASA is ruled as much by public opinion as they are by Washington. People no longer have any interest in space, as there is still a "we were there first, it didn't do anything, big deal" mentality around the US when you talk to people about space flight. Over 90% of people probably couldn't name any of the first astronauts if you held a gun to their head, let alone any of the shuttle names.

reply to post by Zaphod58


I take your point and the public doesn't much care. If that is the only reason to do it, then it should die off. If we're truly a marble in a sea of nothing for light years in all directions? Then we shouldn't waste money on it.

Then again, Antarctica is just a big glacier sitting on a landmass. Why fund science there? I imagine everyone can find it on a map but only because it's obviously as far south as Earth gets. What is there, must be Antarctica. lol....

Same with deep oceans. How sexy is that? Why have study of Ocean currents and what lives or happens in the deeps and abyss areas? That costs money and what good is it? People don't much care and Cameron barely got notice for his ultra-deep Mariana Trench dive.

So, if NASA is just a P.R. effort, you're right. It's failed and public opinion should determine it's collapse. If, however, there IS real science there and real importance to human development and/or our survival at some future point? The public opinion shouldn't mean squat to a budget running under 20 billion for ALL of it. From outreach to Houston Mission facilities to the Voyager mission team. Everything...start to finish...on less than that. Priorities show clearly and here? Russia, China, India and ...dare I say it? Even IRAN for goodness sakes...are more ambitious than we are to devote effort toward it.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


If your budget is $20B a year (or less), and the manned rocket you are developing (as of 2009) was going to cost you $97B through 2020 (keeping in mind that it was supposed to be operational in 2009, so you're now looking at 6 years behind schedule minimum), would you seriously keep funding it? That's close to half your budget for the next 11 years.

reply to post by Zaphod58


No... I might increase the budget, if the science and benefit to the nation is worthy of the effort.

I'm not just a personal space buff/fan but also have come to appreciate NASA's efforts on a technical level. We've only been able to see the whole sun at the same time for a short period of time now. Thanks entirely to the efforts of NASA and JPL. That MAY save our world some day by seeing a super-active region before it belches an X-50 or higher at us....and in plenty of time to 'safe' and protect what needs protecting. Just one of the things they do which has direct benefit.

Are there ruins on the Moon or Mars? If man isn't mere thousands of years old on a planet with history of life running hundreds of millions? That's where it'll likely be found to have survived the test of time like can't happen inside our destructive atmosphere. Learning that and learning from that (or even absolute proof excluding it) is a paradigm shift for the Human race. Well worth the investment.

There may even be cosmic/galactic cycles or patters we're entirely unaware of at the moment. History does show the surface has been bathed in high radiation/high energy events in the past. VERY high in some examples and some more recent than people might be comfy thinking about. Mysteries......that shouldn't be.

20 billion is a farce and a travesty if anyone believe's NASA's mission is actually worth the effort to pursue, IMO.

*referring to the title*
The US better watch out or the Dolphins will win the space race...

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


But where do you stop? If it goes to 120B total costs by 2020 do you keep funding it? How about 150? At some point you have to look at it, and realize that the problems aren't going to be overcome simply by throwing money at it and pull the plug and start again. Constellation had reached that point.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Oh come on? I don't know where your argument there even comes from. Where does it stop??? We aren't talking about leaders or a Congress so star struck that loss of control for spending at NASA will ever be one of their problems. It's been in the 20 billion dollar range for many years now and has never seen much in the way of favorable budget treatment. At least not since the glory days of Apollo or Mercury.

So I'll be HAPPY to even see a level where a complaint is warranted...let alone just not do it on the fear that "where do they stop" becomes a real concern. In a nation current spending SEVERAL trillion dollars every 12 months and 85 BILLION a month right now just buying bad debt?? This budget is a pittance.

20 billion or so for NASA says we really don't give a hoot either way what happens to the efforts they make. 20 billion in some nations is a major game changer. In the US? It's pocket change our Congress throws as political favors for contract manufacturing to things like Main Battle Tanks. It's just outright, laughably pathetic to call that funding like we mean anything by it.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


That's my point though. NASA has a tiny budget, and they have to make the most of it. Spending that much on Constellation would be ridiculous. They're spending enough on the new replacements, but to spend that much on a system with that many problems would be the definition of insanity.

But of course it's Congress' fault. People don't bitch about space, and we all want to go back up there and can't wait to be on the moon. The "We have too many problems on earth to worry about space" crowd is in a minority, including in Congress. Everyone wants to spend more money, but it's all the bureaucrats fault.

reply to post by Zaphod58


You seem awfully passionate about blaming no one in Government and everyone in the public with this issue? I'm not sure I understand where the passion comes from there?

Of course it's Congress's fault, shared with the President. The public doesn't set budget appropriation levels. They do. The public doesn't set priorities or even carry much influence over them anymore (a lot would be difference if we did...starting with an endless war).

Now personally, to settle this side of the issue really clear... I don't care if the public HATES space, hates NASA and personally throws darts at the Director of NASA every night at a bar. Public opinion, like/dislike and general apathy is 100% irrelevant in almost every other aspect of the trillions in spending ...why should it define the U.S. failure in space development?

....The thing is though, we don't set the pace or even goals anymore. The world doesn't care if we like space or not or how much our public supports it. At least 3 other nations are going balls to the wall to exceed anything we ever thought of doing in actual achievement and working to do it ASAP.

At this rate? Hell, they can disband NASA and get clear out of the Space business within 10 years. Other nations will be laughing at what we call 'high tech' at the moment ....as the moment seems where our national thinking is forever stuck, watching the world speed on past..laughing as they go.

Damn Obama and Congress for systematically taking apart everything about this nation we once could feel true pride in.