4 ms·

NASA gets so few opportunities. It always weighs on me when they run into issues, because I fear their charter and funding will be further reduced as a result o

NASA gets so few opportunities. It always weighs on me when they run into issues, because I fear their charter and funding will be further reduced as a result of a big failure. Hoping for the best for the mission!

verdverm 4y ago
It's better if NASA focuses on space science rather than rocket engineering at this point. Private companies can build & fly them cheaper (discluding certain legacy contractors)
- m2fkxy 4y ago
  you would be afraid to see the list of SLS subcontractors, i.e. who actually builds it. "private companies" indeed. unless, of course, "private companies" is your shortcut for "SpaceX". which other launcher of the same class are being designed, build and launched at the moment by the way?
  - dylan604 4y ago
    Yes, but the list of NASA contractors are behemoth companies that are not focused on any one purpose. SpaceX is only focused on launching things into orbit, even if the majority is their own constellation. I’m guessing the money received by NASA contractors is pennies compared to other contracts they receive. Apples and oranges you’re comparing here.
  - verdverm 4y ago
    I thought "(discluding certain legacy contractors)" would be clear in my first comment Relativity and Rocket Lab are working with NASA https://www.relativityspace.com/press-release/2022/jan27/nasavclsrelativity https://www.relativityspace.com/press-release/2022/jan27/nas... https://www.rocketlabusa.com/updates/rocket-lab-moon-mission-for-nasa-a-success/ https://www.rocketlabusa.com/updates/rocket-lab-moon-mission...
  - 1958325146 4y ago
    I'm not sure if this is the point you're trying to make or if you're implying private companies aren't up to it, but... the other launcher of the same class, which will probably be launching within a year and is much more capable, is Starship. https://everydayastronaut.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Super-Heavy-Lift-Launcher-Capabilities-1536x864.jpg https://everydayastronaut.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Sup...
- cantaloupe 4y ago
  I agree, and NASA is increasingly using private launch providers. But it’s worth noting that many of the high level engineers and management in the private space industry come from NASA. Same goes for testing standards and valuable space hardware knowledge, which NASA releases as research to the public domain. The same can’t be said of private space companies, which keep their internal research to themselves.
- case0x00 4y ago
  Yeah I absolutely agree. The recent [CLPS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Lunar_Payload_Services https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Lunar_Payload_Servi...) program seems solid. NASA really should just hand out contracts and let companies compete and run their missions with NASA supporting and operating science stuff, rather than them spearheading bloated messes such as SLS (and honestly shuttle)
  - nine_k 4y ago
    The Shuttle was rather reasonable initially, then the military and other designers-by-committee ruined it.
- yellow_postit 4y ago
  Science doesn’t generate enough jobs. I can’t remember the attribution but the quote that the best military jet is one that has a part made in every congressional district surely applies to NASA as well. The problem is that is counter to the mission they should ideally be pursuing (imo).
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > better if NASA focuses on space science rather than rocket engineering at this point Or focus on novel rocket science. There is so much opportunity in novel propulsion systems, from nuclear propulsion to ion drives. Most of this is only useful in deep space, a region the private sector has no interest in.
jonhohle 4y ago
If you look at their budget, NASA’s funding has rarely been reduced and is currently it’s highest ever. Their political spin is that their rate of budget growth may be lowered or their percentage of the federal budget (around 0.5%) may be affected. My perception (unfortunately) is that NASA’s budget is its highest, but their public contribution and visibility are near its lowest. From the casual observer, NASA looks like two decades of mismanagement and a lot of whining about funding without doing anything to justify what they are getting.
- brycewray 4y ago
  > If you look at their budget, NASA’s funding has rarely been reduced Apollo 18, Apollo 19, Apollo 20, and the orbit repair of Skylab have entered the chat.
- Steltek 4y ago
  Too pessimistic. They launched JWST and put a helicopter on Mars this year. Last year, we touched the Sun. They're doing insanely great science work. Rocket tech lags because it competes with the private market, which the people with money don't like.
  - CrazyStat 4y ago
    > Rocket tech lags because it competes with the private market, which the people with money don't like. This is exactly backwards. Rocket tech lags because NASA, via congress, has been captured by the private market to ensure that existing big players continue to get contracts. SLS is a boondoggle in large part because Congress required that it use half-century-old rocket tech. Not because of concerns about competing with the private market, but to ensure that the major players that got contracted to build the shuttle rockets half a century ago continue to get contracts. This lagging rocket tech created by Congressional capture (and a similar situation in Europe) created the private rocket market, not the other way around as you suggest.
- DSMan195276 4y ago
  > If you look at their budget, NASA’s funding has rarely been reduced and is currently it’s highest ever. I assume you're not adjusting for inflation? That seems more than a bit misleading.
fnordpiglet 4y ago
In this situation exploding the rocket is the failure. Not exploding is the victory.

verdverm 4y ago

It's better if NASA focuses on space science rather than rocket engineering at this point. Private companies can build & fly them cheaper (discluding certain legacy contractors)

m2fkxy 4y ago
you would be afraid to see the list of SLS subcontractors, i.e. who actually builds it. "private companies" indeed. unless, of course, "private companies" is your shortcut for "SpaceX". which other launcher of the same class are being designed, build and launched at the moment by the way?
- dylan604 4y ago
  Yes, but the list of NASA contractors are behemoth companies that are not focused on any one purpose. SpaceX is only focused on launching things into orbit, even if the majority is their own constellation. I’m guessing the money received by NASA contractors is pennies compared to other contracts they receive. Apples and oranges you’re comparing here.
- verdverm 4y ago
  I thought "(discluding certain legacy contractors)" would be clear in my first comment Relativity and Rocket Lab are working with NASA https://www.relativityspace.com/press-release/2022/jan27/nasavclsrelativity https://www.relativityspace.com/press-release/2022/jan27/nas... https://www.rocketlabusa.com/updates/rocket-lab-moon-mission-for-nasa-a-success/ https://www.rocketlabusa.com/updates/rocket-lab-moon-mission...
- 1958325146 4y ago
  I'm not sure if this is the point you're trying to make or if you're implying private companies aren't up to it, but... the other launcher of the same class, which will probably be launching within a year and is much more capable, is Starship. https://everydayastronaut.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Super-Heavy-Lift-Launcher-Capabilities-1536x864.jpg https://everydayastronaut.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Sup...
cantaloupe 4y ago
I agree, and NASA is increasingly using private launch providers. But it’s worth noting that many of the high level engineers and management in the private space industry come from NASA. Same goes for testing standards and valuable space hardware knowledge, which NASA releases as research to the public domain. The same can’t be said of private space companies, which keep their internal research to themselves.
case0x00 4y ago
Yeah I absolutely agree. The recent [CLPS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Lunar_Payload_Services https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Lunar_Payload_Servi...) program seems solid. NASA really should just hand out contracts and let companies compete and run their missions with NASA supporting and operating science stuff, rather than them spearheading bloated messes such as SLS (and honestly shuttle)
- nine_k 4y ago
  The Shuttle was rather reasonable initially, then the military and other designers-by-committee ruined it.
yellow_postit 4y ago
Science doesn’t generate enough jobs. I can’t remember the attribution but the quote that the best military jet is one that has a part made in every congressional district surely applies to NASA as well. The problem is that is counter to the mission they should ideally be pursuing (imo).
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> better if NASA focuses on space science rather than rocket engineering at this point Or focus on novel rocket science. There is so much opportunity in novel propulsion systems, from nuclear propulsion to ion drives. Most of this is only useful in deep space, a region the private sector has no interest in.

jonhohle 4y ago

If you look at their budget, NASA’s funding has rarely been reduced and is currently it’s highest ever. Their political spin is that their rate of budget growth may be lowered or their percentage of the federal budget (around 0.5%) may be affected. My perception (unfortunately) is that NASA’s budget is its highest, but their public contribution and visibility are near its lowest. From the casual observer, NASA looks like two decades of mismanagement and a lot of whining about funding without doing anything to justify what they are getting.

brycewray 4y ago
> If you look at their budget, NASA’s funding has rarely been reduced Apollo 18, Apollo 19, Apollo 20, and the orbit repair of Skylab have entered the chat.
Steltek 4y ago
Too pessimistic. They launched JWST and put a helicopter on Mars this year. Last year, we touched the Sun. They're doing insanely great science work. Rocket tech lags because it competes with the private market, which the people with money don't like.
- CrazyStat 4y ago
  > Rocket tech lags because it competes with the private market, which the people with money don't like. This is exactly backwards. Rocket tech lags because NASA, via congress, has been captured by the private market to ensure that existing big players continue to get contracts. SLS is a boondoggle in large part because Congress required that it use half-century-old rocket tech. Not because of concerns about competing with the private market, but to ensure that the major players that got contracted to build the shuttle rockets half a century ago continue to get contracts. This lagging rocket tech created by Congressional capture (and a similar situation in Europe) created the private rocket market, not the other way around as you suggest.
DSMan195276 4y ago
> If you look at their budget, NASA’s funding has rarely been reduced and is currently it’s highest ever. I assume you're not adjusting for inflation? That seems more than a bit misleading.

fnordpiglet 4y ago

In this situation exploding the rocket is the failure. Not exploding is the victory.