5 ms·

I mean, with all the money the US currently spends on military budgets, I can't for the life of me figure out why it is so hard to find the 50-100mil or so (est

by cubano 8y ago

I mean, with all the money the US currently spends on military budgets, I can't for the life of me figure out why it is so hard to find the 50-100mil or so (estimated) it would cost for a few orbital IR telescopes and just deal with this problem once and for all. A Pegasus XL rocket can lift 976 pounds (443 kilograms) into low-Earth orbit for about $13.5 million...put two "budget" telescopes on one launch and get to work.

viach 8y ago
It is expected to happen only about 3 times in a century (from article). In other words, building this system of telescopes won't affect the next elections in any positive way.
- dfgert 8y ago
  NASA actually receive lots of funding(might be second after military). Most of their work doesn't align with any of the politics promises, even then they receive good chunk of budget spending.
  - viach 8y ago
    In the end, it's always about politics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA#Political_opposition_to_NASA_funding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA#Political_oppos...
    - joejerryronnie 8y ago
      Isn’t everything?
  - mturmon 8y ago
    NASA 2018 budget is $20.7B. It is not in any way "second after military". NIH 2018 budget is $37B, NSF is $7.8B. DOD budget just for R&D and test/evaluation is $88B.
    - joejerryronnie 8y ago
      So, 3rd behind military and NIH then?
      - mturmon 8y ago
        No, no, no. I just picked a couple of numbers of relevant research-related agencies as a general comparative. ("This is is the kind of league NASA is in.") Other comparatives might be DOE, NOAA, USGS, NIST. The federal budget is about $4000B. Discretionary spending is about $1200B. NASA is so far down in the noise of this that it's not funny (20B/1200B ~ 1.7%). As an example, Federal highway spending (not state) is $44B.
      - jefe_ 8y ago
        Health and Human Services was $1.7 Trillion, Social Security was $1.1 Trillion, Defense was $1.1 Trillion, NASA is pretty far down the list (~19th), at $24 Billion, .35% of budget: https://www.usaspending.gov/#/explorer/agency https://www.usaspending.gov/#/explorer/agency
    - moftz 8y ago
      At least there is the benefit of DOD tech trickling down to NASA tech at some point.
- balt_s 8y ago
  Everyone else likely missed it, but I want you to know I appreciate this joke.
  - dpark 8y ago
    > Everyone else likely missed it I’m sure you’re the only one to notice the obvious joke.
  - IanSanders 8y ago
    Sure it's a joke?
garmaine 8y ago
These already exist. My old boss ran space command at NORAD at the end of the Cold War. Their problem wasn’t capturing the data but filtering it out when looking for artificial events. Unfortunately this data isn’t being collected and used by the civilian sector which is a crying shame.
- WalterGR 8y ago
  My old boss ran space command at NORAD at the end of the Cold War. That’s amazing. You should tell us everything.
moftz 8y ago
There are plenty of satellites out there that monitor for missile launches using IR cameras. These might detecting all of these meteor explosions and the military is not reporting them due to not wanting their operational capacity being known. The previous generation of missile detection missiles could see Scud launches during Desert Storm in 1991. I'm sure the military sees all kinds of weird space stuff and doesn't mention a word. Latest generation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-Based_Infrared_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-Based_Infrared_System
- daniel-cussen 8y ago
  Yep, they sent satellites to the moon in 1968 ahead of the Apollo mission. They had to noise the images they took so the world wouldn't know precisely their level of capability, but the photos taken of the entire moon had super high, crisp resolution.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >but the photos taken of the entire moon had super high, crisp resolution. At the time, wouldn't they be film based images? If so, well, obviously the resolution would be high and crisp, especially if it was medium/large format.
    - RcouF1uZ4gsC 8y ago
      These images were developed, digitized, compressed, and transmitted back to NASA from the Lunar orbiters. This article has the story of how they were recovered recently. https://boingboing.net/2018/06/16/ampex-fr-900-drives.html https://boingboing.net/2018/06/16/ampex-fr-900-drives.html
mturmon 8y ago
A study team looked at space-based and ground-based visible and IR options. Their 2017 report is: https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/doc/2017_neo_sdt_final_e-version.pdf https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/doc/2017_neo_sdt_final_e-version.... (long PDF) The cost estimate for development, launch, and operations varies a lot, but is in the $0.8-$2.0B range. See the cost roll-up on page 163 of the above document. It's ~0.5-1.0 meter telescope, and detector cooling and data rates are an issue. The scientist quoted in the above article, Amy Mainzer, is leading a more detailed study which is among a handful of proposal concepts (not all NEO-related) that NASA will select from.

by cubano 8y ago

viach 8y ago

It is expected to happen only about 3 times in a century (from article). In other words, building this system of telescopes won't affect the next elections in any positive way.

dfgert 8y ago
NASA actually receive lots of funding(might be second after military). Most of their work doesn't align with any of the politics promises, even then they receive good chunk of budget spending.
- viach 8y ago
  In the end, it's always about politics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA#Political_opposition_to_NASA_funding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA#Political_oppos...
  - joejerryronnie 8y ago
    Isn’t everything?
- mturmon 8y ago
  NASA 2018 budget is $20.7B. It is not in any way "second after military". NIH 2018 budget is $37B, NSF is $7.8B. DOD budget just for R&D and test/evaluation is $88B.
  - joejerryronnie 8y ago
    So, 3rd behind military and NIH then?
    - mturmon 8y ago
      No, no, no. I just picked a couple of numbers of relevant research-related agencies as a general comparative. ("This is is the kind of league NASA is in.") Other comparatives might be DOE, NOAA, USGS, NIST. The federal budget is about $4000B. Discretionary spending is about $1200B. NASA is so far down in the noise of this that it's not funny (20B/1200B ~ 1.7%). As an example, Federal highway spending (not state) is $44B.
    - jefe_ 8y ago
      Health and Human Services was $1.7 Trillion, Social Security was $1.1 Trillion, Defense was $1.1 Trillion, NASA is pretty far down the list (~19th), at $24 Billion, .35% of budget: https://www.usaspending.gov/#/explorer/agency https://www.usaspending.gov/#/explorer/agency
  - moftz 8y ago
    At least there is the benefit of DOD tech trickling down to NASA tech at some point.
balt_s 8y ago
Everyone else likely missed it, but I want you to know I appreciate this joke.
- dpark 8y ago
  > Everyone else likely missed it I’m sure you’re the only one to notice the obvious joke.
- IanSanders 8y ago
  Sure it's a joke?

garmaine 8y ago

These already exist. My old boss ran space command at NORAD at the end of the Cold War. Their problem wasn’t capturing the data but filtering it out when looking for artificial events. Unfortunately this data isn’t being collected and used by the civilian sector which is a crying shame.

WalterGR 8y ago
My old boss ran space command at NORAD at the end of the Cold War. That’s amazing. You should tell us everything.

moftz 8y ago

There are plenty of satellites out there that monitor for missile launches using IR cameras. These might detecting all of these meteor explosions and the military is not reporting them due to not wanting their operational capacity being known. The previous generation of missile detection missiles could see Scud launches during Desert Storm in 1991. I'm sure the military sees all kinds of weird space stuff and doesn't mention a word. Latest generation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-Based_Infrared_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-Based_Infrared_System

daniel-cussen 8y ago
Yep, they sent satellites to the moon in 1968 ahead of the Apollo mission. They had to noise the images they took so the world wouldn't know precisely their level of capability, but the photos taken of the entire moon had super high, crisp resolution.
- coldtea 8y ago
  >but the photos taken of the entire moon had super high, crisp resolution. At the time, wouldn't they be film based images? If so, well, obviously the resolution would be high and crisp, especially if it was medium/large format.
  - RcouF1uZ4gsC 8y ago
    These images were developed, digitized, compressed, and transmitted back to NASA from the Lunar orbiters. This article has the story of how they were recovered recently. https://boingboing.net/2018/06/16/ampex-fr-900-drives.html https://boingboing.net/2018/06/16/ampex-fr-900-drives.html

mturmon 8y ago

A study team looked at space-based and ground-based visible and IR options. Their 2017 report is: https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/doc/2017_neo_sdt_final_e-version.pdf https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/doc/2017_neo_sdt_final_e-version.... (long PDF) The cost estimate for development, launch, and operations varies a lot, but is in the $0.8-$2.0B range. See the cost roll-up on page 163 of the above document. It's ~0.5-1.0 meter telescope, and detector cooling and data rates are an issue. The scientist quoted in the above article, Amy Mainzer, is leading a more detailed study which is among a handful of proposal concepts (not all NEO-related) that NASA will select from.