/sci/ - Science & Math

0/10
gb2 /new/

HAVE YOU DONE ANYTHING FOR SCIENCE?

obama cancelled it because NASA was using old research and technology. he wants them to get newer stuff before we go up again.

Actually, he has done a fair amount of shit.

Not to mention that he continues to promote scientific literacy in the american population

>he canceled Constellation.
>Has Obama done anything for science at all

Yes, he cancelled Constellation

>>1605857
Constellation is better than nothing. He wasted all the money that has already been spent on it. He could have at least let Orion and the Atlas rockets be developed.

Constellation was the worst fucking space project ever. It was proposed by Bush, what did you expect?

>>1605880

Sunk cost is never used in any decent decision making process.

>>1605880
do you cock smuglers knnow what the term 'sunk costs' means? no, of course not.
Constalation WAS worse than nothing,

>>1605896
So if 99% of a project is done it is better to drop the entire project if one decides it would have been better not to start at all? Obviously you are wrong.

Isn't he just cancelling it in favor of waiting for higher-tech, cheaper expeditions? Oh and he wants NASA funding to be more focused on things like studying global climate. you know, things that might come in handy right now.

>>1605825
>obama cancelled it because NASA was using old research and technology. he wants them to get newer stuff before we go up again.
No he doesn't. He says that NASA's mission now is to make friends with Islamic countries.

>>1605840
>Actually, he has done a fair amount of shit.
No he hasn't

>Not to mention that he continues to promote scientific literacy in the american population
No he doesn't

>>1605888
Take the liberal butthurt to /new/.

>>1605905

The constellation project wasn't 99% done. It was 30% done at most, and NASA kept delaying things. Their progress was like 3 years overdue, and only getting more delayed.

>>1605904
>Constalation WAS worse than nothing,
Bullshit. Constellation was exactly where we needed to be going.

Honestly, I was kind of bummed when Constellation got cancelled, but then I thought about it and realized its alright, when you realize that about five or six years from now, it's the private companies that are going to be the major players. The next space race isn't going to be between the US and Russia, it's going to be SpaceX vs Bigelowe. Competition is good for companies, because it makes them both better in the long run. Two theme parks battle to build the best ride, yet it's the people who go to the parks who win, because they get to have bigger and better stuff every year. The people of earth in general win when space companies compete, because we'll get to go to Mars and Jupiter. Maybe with all this competition, in twenty years or so, maybe we'll all get to fly in space.

>>1605888
no, Reagan's Star Wars laser to defend against a collapsing USSR was the worst space project ever

>>1605918
and now for 10% the cost Boeing and SpaceX will have better systems in 3 years(5 years sooner than the last constalation timeline)

>>1605926
Sauce or gtfo. >:(

>>1605923
yeah but don't let that lead you to believe that EVERYTHING is better when left to private business. keep in mind that if we leave all space exploration up to private business, they're only going to be doing whatever profits them; not necessarily anything that will profit society

But will the private companies openly share every scientific discovery with all of humanity? I highly doubt it. At least when Nasa was paying their bills, they kept their mouths shut while Nasa shared all of their accomplishments with the world.

>>1605922
did you ever actually read anything about it that was wasn't complete fan wank? It was never going to fly! the shaking problem alone would have been unsolvable with out removing the critical pork!

>Give all money to military and corporations.
>No money for science.
>Obama zombies still defend me.
>Obama.jpeg

>>1605939
>implying obama isn't funding SCIENCE! and education more than any recent president

>>1605923
I think that's nonsense. Space exploration will never be profitable. At least not in the next 500 years. Obama's basically decided that no progress will be made on this hemisphere. Any hope for advancement now rests with the Chinese.

>>1605939
>I love to watch Fox News.

>>1605939
>would rather pay attention to vague and distorted/uninformed mainstream media on general politics rather than specific things you'd actually care to look into

>>1605944
>implying Obama isn't funding EVERYTHING more than any other president

>>1605944
[citation needed]

>>1605946
SPOILER: China and the United States are in the same hemisphere.

>>1605946
>Any hope for advancement now rests with the Chinese.

>>1605946
>At least not in the next 500 years.
A lot of nonrenewable resources will run out well before 2500, resources that can be found in space. Once they run out on Earth demand will make space mining profitable.

>>1605929
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Dragon
> manned variant of Dragon were proceeding and had a 2-3 year time line to completion.

The whole test launch of the falcon 9 (that included a pressurized test dragon capsule) cost spacex less than a hundred million.
Aries 1 was expected to cost a minimum of 600 mill a pop.

>>1605947
>Straw man all my opponents. That way I win.

>>1605946
Space exploration could very well be profitable depending on what's done. For example, once laser energy-transferring technology can good enough to go from space to the ground effectively (or any other means of transporting the energy over planetary distances), it would just take one solar farm on the moon to completely power the earth. Other planets in the solar system might also be rich in valuable resources. But these kind of things (at least the solar farms) should be left to government rather than private business

>>1605946
>next 500 years
Hahaha, oh wow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfbOyw3CT6A

If you really think it will take that long for cheap technology to make it extremely profitable, then you're just delusional.

>>1605961
>implying that an education of politics derived solely from the mainstream media isn't wankery

>>1605956
Nothing will run out before 2500. Even when something runs out, that doesn't make mining it in space necessarily profitable.

>>1605946
Everything that has a demand can be profitable, space exploration is no exception.

>Any hope for advancement now rests with the Chinese.

Or Zimbabwe ... heck maybe Indonesia in the next millennium.

>>1605959
also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CCDev_capsule
Boeings market entree to compete with spacex.

>>1605971
>Nothing will run out before 2500.

>>1605969
>someone who believes in the technology singularity calls me delusional.
>mfw
<span class="math">\overset{\overline{\bigodot \bigodot} }{\overbrace{\varpi }}[/spoiler]

>>1605974
>everything that has a demand can be profitable

Air has a demand, can that be profitable?

>>1605982
>doesn't know how supply and demand works

>>1605974
>implying some guy is going to put up $1Trillion for you to set up a science base on the moon, because there's "demand".

>>1605984
Doesn't know that supply/demand can be thrown out when retarded people are around

>bottled water

>>1605971
pic doubly relevant for warranting a facepalm and disgracing a hero of scientific culture

screw you emo fags i'm going into space!

>>1605981
Yeah, nobody believes in that dumb shit... except morons like Bill Gates, Ray Kurzweil, Vernor Vinge, and a whoooooooole lot of dudes smarter than you.

Obama gave a speech at Kennedy Space Center outlining a new plan in which he committed to increasing funding to NASA over the next five years. He cancelled Constellation because it was complete bunk at this point.

>>1605993
>implying bill gates is actually smart

>>1605971
Who is this retard and what is he doing here?

>>1605982
as it turns out; yes, air is somewhat profitable.

>>1605991
>>1605980
>Samefag idiot who watches too much tabloid news

>>1605990
oh fun and completely unrelated fact! major bottled water companies have been found to have thousands of times more bacteria in their water than the typical municipal water supply.

i've tried talking to my parents about just getting one of those sink plug-on filters but they're those conservatives that are convinced that anything from the private sector is superior =|

mmmmyeaa

>>1605998
>implying that an air freshener (or whatever the fuck that is..) is air

>>1605996
>implying you aren't a weebo with an IQ of 101 who will never accomplish anything greater than fixing your familys' computer problems by flipping a surge protector switch

>>1605997
Uh, he's right. There are no mineral resources that are going to run out in 500 years.

>>1606001
not samefag. and various resources will run out at their current consumption rate, and prices will skyrocket as they become more scarce, making space exploration that much more profitable and competitive

>>1606007
>implying that my IQ is triple digit.

>>1606008
You're an idiot. Titanium is expected to run out in just 54 years.

Even Argentina will start sending rockets into space in this decade and America will continue to have to catch a ride with the Russians or the Chinese.

>>1606013
You're fucking retarded if you believe that.

>>1606013
[citation needed]

>>1606006
that is canned air sir, given that it has a high Oxygen content(about 80%) and it's flavored, but it's still air.

>>1606013
Titanium is the 4th most common metal (after Aluminum, Iron, and Magnesium) in the earth's crust.

oh my! Saturn class!

>>1606008
OMG, damnit, there was a really interesting and graphical picture of various materials expected time of depletion on earth. Very few passed the 200 yr mark, some (im certain it was 2 or 3, albeit those 2 or 3 were minerals) expected to last over 1,000 years. I swear im saving that next time i see that, I thought it was common knowledge that resources are decreasing rapidly... apparently not. This isn't scare tactics, very legitmite peopel checked this, the next couple of hundred years are gonna suck unless people find solutions.

aaaand now you all rather slap cocks than talk rockets. oh well.

I'm like half of the post talking about resources. I love misinformation. You guys are too easy.

>>1606034
People make those extreme charts when they have an agenda. It's easy to cook up numbers assuming no new mines, and then its ZOMG WE GONNA RUN OUT!!!!111

>>1606026
Why does that even exist? How does it work?

>80 percent oxygen
That seems unhealthy

>>1605969
LMAO, here's quote from the video you just linked me, you fucking technology singularity retard:

"By 2010 computers will disappear; they'll be so small the'll be embeded in our clothing and in our environment. Images will be written directly to our retina; providing full imersion virtual reality; augmented real reality. We'll be interacting with virtual personalities."

That dumbfuck said that in 2007.

>>1606068

Feb 2005. It was right at the beginning of the video.

Constellation was hilariously bungled.

After 4 years of development on Constellation, they were behind schedule by 4 years.

That's right. They basically went fucking nowhere over the course of 4 years.

Constellation exemplifies everything that is wrong with NASA.

>>1606068
He meant 2020 if you look up his writings on the subject. It was even pointed out in a comment. Human error, yo.

>>1606068
He misspoke, but...
>Images will be written directly to our retina; providing full imersion virtual reality; augmented real realit
That's actually possible right now.

It's even possible to interact with virtual personalities and put computers into our habitat and clothing. But by 2020, it will be so cheap that it will all be everywhere.

>>1606080
get a copy of a book called 'this new ocean' by William E. Burrows, Constellation is the crowing failure of an institution that has been rotting since 1970.

I have more or less written enough to fill a book to date about this. So I will simply tl; dr it to this:


If obama really wanted to be an agent of change, he would keep constellation going.
Why? Every president before him (Since Nixon) has done the following:
OMG AWESOME PROGRAM!!!!!
Next guy:
Disregard I sux cox.

There, I'm not gonna bother elaborating more. Call your fucking representatives and vote to keep constellation going....

I did.

Also, Nice Atlas V launch on Saturday. I enjoyed watching it from building 1645 (Launch control roof) at canaveral AFB myself.

>>1606105
Why start changing that trend with the absolute shittiest program to date, though?

>>1605998
Reminds me of spaceballs.

>>1606105
functionally illiterate mental defective.

>>1606109
Because there was nothing WRONG with constellation from the get go. In fact, when you look at the cost of development testing and finally missions for Apollo, Constellation didn't even get the chance to scratch at the 254 Billion Apollo programs' nuts yet.

Yes, constellation to date cost 9 billion. However, when you consider the command module is nearly complete (Thanks Boeing) and that the design of the ARES 1 was proven as successful (Using next gen 1st of it's kind avionics) I'd say that the 9 bill was well spent so far.

>>1606113
>When people don't agree with you, insult them.

Nice logic. How about refuting the central point?

>>1606117
My dick is bigger than your's

>>1606120
lol. Probably, who knows? Only gay guys compare dick sizes so I'm gonna take your word for that.

>>1606127
My cat is smarter than you. But in your defense, he is a fucking smart cat.

>>1606115
facepalm.jpg
>ARES 1 was proven as successful
no, it wasn't you thundering sub human shit stain. Aries X was a half billion dollar mock up that brought no data relevant to Aries 1, Aries 1 remains fatally flawed from a severe shaking problem, and on top of that, Aries 1 is slated to cost a fucking 600 hundred million a pop. And if you had put any effort into looking into it, you would know about this. Die in a fucking fire.

>>1606034
Is this the chart? I googled for it ("mineral reserves") because I remember seeing it and it sparked my interest.

>>1606131
And then you failed the game.
I guess that's what happens when one lacks enough of a logical basis for their opnion. Either that or you are just a complete failure at life anyways.

Deuces faggot.

>>1606115
>Because there was nothing WRONG with constellation from the get go.

Ummm... You clearly know NOTHING AT ALL about the constellation program.

I don't even know where to begin.

They're back to using shitty solid rocket fuel instead of liquid, despite liquid being safer and more controllable. They've got major oscillation problems in the body of the rocket and they couldn't add dampeners to it because they'd be going even more overweight than they already were. The Orion vehicle went overweight, and because the Ares was designed from the start with a hairline margin to work within, they were basically fucked. The safety abort system is overly complicated and requires deploying something like three or four series of parachutes, with one failure dooming the astronauts to death.

They thought with all their fancy computers and technology, that they could design a perfect rocket on the first try and everything would go smoothly, so they didn't leave any room for errors. The tolerances are all tight, there's no way to add more weight onto the thing, they didn't even take it into consideration.

The whole bloody thing is a goddamn fucking mess of engineering. I don't think *anyone* wants to have their name associated with the shitpile that is Constellation.

It's not just a political mess, it's a science and engineering mess. If Constellation gets the go-ahead again, NASA is pretty much just going to be scrapping what they've got and starting over again. In which case, why even fucking bother with Constellation? Give a few hundred billion to the private companies that are not just designing and building rockets on time, but also within budget and at dramatically lower costs. THEY are the ones pushing the frontier of launch vehicles. NASA should get down to developing interplanetary engines and such for the future.

>>1606140
>too dumb to spot an obvious troll

>>1606134
Yeah it was thanks

>>1606133
Wrong again. The point of ARES 1-X was to test structural loads, avionics systems relevent to the enhanced SRB/ fairing system as well as the ability for the computer to make a pinpoint shutdown using only the barometric pressure indicator as a backup to activate and fire the separation system. Had you bothered to read anything on 1-X you would have realized that.

Furthermore, a very interesting anomaly was noted in regards to the G force buildup (Which I am certain you did not bother to read) And how the oscillations from the rough burn from star to cylinder can be corrected.

Also, the new hydraulic system for nozzle gimballing passed the flight test.

Oh wow, would you look at that? pulling directly from L2 and the presentations on 1-X I have demonstrated that it wasn't a waste of money as you assert....

>>1606147
See the reports concerning the oscillations.
Furthermore, the only part of ARES which was SRB was and continues to be the 1st stage (And only part of the cluster in ARES V which is no major deviation from say the ATLAS V or even the DELTA or ARIANE)

Continuing. You name for me one vehicle that was designed and not considered overweight from the get go. Bringing up weight issues is asinine and you know it.

The Abort system was not tested and is still under development so calling it overly complicated is calling the LAS test a few months ago which has yielded a number of design changes (And I cite Ken Wallace as my source on that one)

Continuing, Trial and error is furthermore the point of designing and building a brand new space system.

I doubt I need to point out to you the point in using an SRB first stage since you know the entire point was to draw on the re-usability that made the SRBS exceptional (post 1986) and versatile enough to be used over and over again.


Nevermind the fact that only 2 people in NASA actually thought Constellation wasn't going to work:
Buzz Aldrin (Who wanted commercial anyways)
And Charles Boldin.
After Obamas little announcement, a series of memos were sent out which voiced many views but all of them seemed to say the same thing :

"Why are we doing this again then?"
And
"I guess we haven't learned from columbia then..."
Lurk moar.

>>1606147
Here's my favorite memo too...

USA:

Subject: CEO Message on President's Budget Request


Dear Colleagues,


Today, the Obama Administration unveiled their budget request for FY2011 and subsequent years. The requested budget for NASA demonstrates the administration’s intent with regard to a number of key programs and initiatives. Specifically, in addition to funding the five remaining Shuttle flights and extending the ISS, the plan proposes to cancel the Constellation program and shift funds to commercial providers to develop crew and cargo delivery systems for the ISS.


It is disappointing that the Administration would propose to cancel Constellation after so much progress has been made. The team has performed in outstanding fashion, and their efforts will be invaluable regardless of what is ultimately decided.


As most of you know after years of experience in this business, there is a long process yet to be played out. It will now be up to the Congress to determine how or if to fund this approach. We will be actively engaged in that process to ensure that our nation’s interests in human space exploration are not overlooked and to continue to identify ways that we can play a contributing role in future plans.


This week, however, we must turn our focus to the job at hand…flying Endeavour and her crew safely and successfully on STS-130. Every mission matters. Let’s keep the bar set high.

Dick and Dan

>>1606157

Where is titanium on that chart?

flight correction:
The Abort system was not tested
is supposed to read:
The Abort system was not tested on Ares 1-X but had a successful test recently.

>>1606201
The chart seems to assume we don't mine any more. According to the chart we should already be out of Indium. We're not. And we're not going to be.

Anti constellation fags sure got told

Developing heavy-lift, propellant depots, commercial cargo and crew is what we need to do. Constellation was a HUGE failure. Obama will save space exploration.

>>1606480
We definitely need another Muslim outreach program.

>Has Obama done anything for science at all?
yes. he cancelled Constellation.

it was an overpriced underperforming piece of shit, the money is better spent on other projects with better scientific return.

The only reason you people agree that Constellation should have been canceled is because you're too afraid to admit that Obama may be wrong about his decision. Its not completely canceled yet, Congress can overrule him, or keep it alive till 2010, when he gets replaced by a more forward looking President.

>>1606793
i was convinced that constellation is a bad idea before Obama even came to office.
even engineers inside NASA fought against it.

>>1606832
Constellation's biggest advantage is that it used proven technology and configurations proven in the Apollo Era to maximize success

constellation is kind of pointless. more basic research and such

Neil Armstrong supports Constellation
Buzz Aldrin hates Constellation.

Who are you going to listen to, the FIRST man on the moon, or his runner up?

>obama tries to get into oval office with bogus campaign
>promises space exploration advancement
oh boy what a great president! he's not bush!

>cancels constellation once he's in office
>cuts funding for nasa horrendously in favor 9of healthcare
oh well constellation was shit anyway nasa should learn to budget balance

you guys are such fags.jpg

>>1606992
It didn't.

They tried to, but they ended up scrapping almost everything and building it over again, and the requirements to use old shuttle gear's basically just been hindering them.

>>1606461
The guy's lying through his teeth about pretty much everything regarding Constellation. He's a huge apologist for a massively over-budget, poorly managed program that's so far behind schedule it may as well have not even started yet.

He can try and whitewash all he wants. The Ares rocket is STILL overweight, overbudget, has significant oscillation problems, has a failure of an abort launch system, is using solid rocket fuel, and on and on. He's basically just been saying that it'll get fixed down the line.

Sure, at what price though? 400 million per launch? Nigga please. If that's the best NASA can do, give the money to SpaceX.

The only reason Constellation even exists is because it's a massive jobs program for a couple states and a couple entrenched corporations. Congressman don't want to lose their pork. It's the only reason the program is being kept around.

Even if the Ares rocket were magically finished TODAY, NASA's budget would force them to cancel it anyways because they don't have the fucking money to launch the piece of shit.

The Augustine commission, made up of some pretty bright minds, recommended Constellation be scrapped. Obama went with that decision. You can read that report here: http://www.nasa.gov/offices/hsf/home/index.html

We don't NEED NASA to develop another heavy lift system for billions and billions of dollars. Private corporations are showing that they are entirely capable of providing this at low cost and on time, competitively. What NASA needs to be doing is developing the hard technology, pushing the frontier. Not more of the same.

>>1607026
>>cuts funding for nasa horrendously in favor 9of healthcare

Obama didn't cut finding for NASA. Goddamn how retarded are you people? Do you get your news from Fox or something?

Obama's plan called for giving NASA another 6 billion dollars over 5 years. That is the exact OPPOSITE of cutting NASA's budget.

The bill's only been stymied by congress who can't stand seeing their pork project going away.

>>1607018
Question the relevance of their opinions.

The most optimistic estimates for Constellation put completion of the Ares I no earlier than 2017-2018... if NASA received an additional $3 billion a year in funding. The Ares V? Sometime in the late 2020s. At best we MIGHT be able to fly to the Moon sometime in the 2030s... but we wouldn't have the capability to land on it, let alone build any kind of permanent outpost.

Obama's proposal and the Senate draft of the NASA Authorization Bill (which was passed by UNANIMOUS consent almost two weeks ago) are going to vastly improve American spaceflight capability. First and most importantly, by embracing the development of commercial spaceflight that will substantially lower the cost of space exploration. Second, by abandoning work on the Constellation architecture in favor of a new HLV which can be completed sooner.

obama is a dickbag

The NASA Authorization Bill has already passed in the Senate, when the House returns from recess in September, they'll have to vote on whether to support the Senate bill, or support their own version of the bill.

The Senate bill supports the development of and cooperation with a commercial space industry, supports completing a new HLV by 2015 and beginning development of a deep space vehicle by 2016. It provides drastically more funding for NASA's scientific research and bold new technology programs.

The House version cuts virtually all commercial funding, cuts science, cuts technology development, in favor of sinking a quarter of NASA's entire budget over the next decade into continuing development of Constellation as planned.

NASA deserves better! Write, call, or email your Representative and tell them - NO on H.R. 5781, YES on S. 3729!

>>1607107
I wrote my rep last week (Loebsack, D-IA), I got a letter from him yesterday saying he'll be voting against the House bill in favor of the Senate version.

As insane and completely impossible as it might sound, writing letters or making phone calls to your elected officials actually works!

>>1607149
Does email work?

>>1607149
what exactly did you write to him?

>>1607161
Might, I know a lot of representatives and senators have email contact on their pages.

While it'll definitely be read by staff first (to weed out the crap and copy-paste form letters) they seem to be pretty good about passing the good letters and emails up the ladder. I took my letter into my congressman's local office rather than mail it to DC. The woman I spoke with was very nice, and a space enthusiast herself. She told me she'd pass it on to the congressman with her support. Apparently she kept her word.

This is a reelection season, almost every member of the House is campaigning - they want every edge they can get. Every constituent they piss off is one less vote, one less donator, one less volunteer. The loss of one supporter can cost dozens of votes, sometimes even hundreds. If a representative thinks they can score a few more supporters by changing his vote on an issue 99% of his constituents won't care about one way or the other, they'll do it.

Fuck, even if it doesn't work with every congressman, it's at least worth trying, right?

dont' treat this as some kind of scifi wish fulfillment bullcrap

>>1607199
Women, they get shit done. With a blow job and sex for dessert.

Your fellow congressman

>>1607165
I don't think I kept a copy but I'll check. The gist of it was outlining the situation and the two versions of the bill, and then arguing a simple case for the senate version of the bill. It was only a page long, but I kept it very respectful and to-the-point.

It worked, so I obviously did something right.

>>1607238
I just don't want to fuck up when I write one to my local representative

>>1607258

Open with a little information about yourself. Ex if you're a student, tell them where. If you're a voter, tell them how you've always been a big supporter (even if you haven't been). You don't need to tell them your life's story, a couple sentences will do it.
Continue with some background information about the issue, Obama introducing his plan back in Feb, the debate, the passing of the senate version this last month.
Outline what each version does and make a case for why the senate version is better (shouldn't be hard). Make sure to reference the bills by name and/or number at least once. Respectfully ask that they oppose the house version in favor of the senate version.

Just be respectful and straightforward. Keep it short but informative. A page or two should do it. Make sure to include your info at the end of the letter (name, address, and all that)

Hope that helps. Also, if you don't know who your congressman is you can check the House's website and find all their contact info.

>people say that Obama has funded science
>they can't name any specifics
>my face when

ITT: Fox News-watching rednecks in the outback who can't understand Obama saved NASA by scrapping the money black hole that was the delayed, past-schedule Constellation.

Also

SpaceX Falcon-9 >>>>>>>>>>> Ares or any taxpayer-funded shitty rocket.

>>1607149
THIS SHIT!

>going to the moon again
>"space exploration"

Cancelling constellation was a good thing and those who think otherwise lack perspective

>>1605880
1) constellation was just a whore for money, it would have continued to be over budget and resource hungry, and would still run over schedule
2) if you get a mortgage with 15% interest, pay off half, then find another mortgage with no interest, you don't call the 15% already paid a waste.

>>1607351
your smileys are good, it's like you're a namefag only I don't dislike you.

Do know whether non-US citizens have any importance? I'm british, intending to write from the perspective of someone who sees this as internationally relevant, but I don't want to waste an hour writing something that isn't going to be listened to.

THIS is what i'd replace constellation with. swallow your national pride and buy the superior, already tested solution form russia.
just replace the polyus with a cargo capsule.
and send astronauts up on a separate rocket, possibly falcon 9/dragon, with a soyuz TMA ready as a backup.

>>1607524
Didn't the UK just start it's own space agency?

>>1607545
>british government
>organised science

Lol, I hope not, this is what ESA is for. It would be nice if we finally got our act together though

>>1607545
Considering the budgetary problems in the UK, I seriously, seriously doubt they're going to be launching or developing anything.

Maybe consultation work with other space agencies, but actual work? I just don't see it happening.

>>1607553
>>1607550
>>1607545
here we go, http://www.ukspaceagency.bis.gov.uk/
Basically their missions involve the russian space program and imagining how good it would be if they owned hubble

>>1607536
fuck, I can feel my dick grow ten inches longer and chest hair sprouting just looking at that pic

>>1607563
and this is why they're rubbish
http://www.ukspaceagency.bis.gov.uk/Learning%20Zone/Space%20Explorers/Numeracy%20Activities/8329.asp
x
they spent all their money on flash games and forgot to check they even fitted on their web pages

http://www.ukspaceagency.bis.gov.uk/Discovering-Space/8494.aspx

I AM WRITING A JAVA SCRIPT TO CLAIM EVERY PLANET KNOWN TO EXIST

Short answer: No, if you're not a US citizen (preferably a voter) than there's not much you can do outside of contacting American friends and encouraging them to write to their congressmen.

I'm working on a draft of my letter now.

-send supplies to Mars ahead of time
-use the SpaceX leo and heavy lift rockets to build ship in orbit
-attach JPL's VASIMR engines to it
-send men to Mars
-profit!

>>1607598
d'aww. I could pretend to be American, but I don't know enough about your legal system to try that

>>1607598

bumped in the hope of more people actually DOING something to help the space program instead of sitting on their asses talking about how great the space program "if only ______"

If anything kills the space program, it won't be the government, it won't be cost, it won't be technical obstacles... it'll be public apathy.

>>1607579
Yeah, you can sell a completely bogus certificate for land on the moon or something, bank the money people give you and then take the interest on it.

Pretty clever scam, imo.

>>1605810

>Has Obama done anything for science at all?

Canceled Constellation, increased R&D funding. By its very definition, giving more money for NASA to research science is doing something for science.

Why are you bumping this crap, /sci/? Obama shut down Constellation, and he is increasing NASA's funding. That's a good thing! Constellation was never going to be completed!

> Constellation was the worst fucking space project ever.
Constellation wasn't any kind of space project. It was pure, unadulterated pork.

>>1608461
What increase? He completely shut down their funding and told them their primary role was now increasing relations with Islamic countries.

>>1608480

hello fox news

>>1605810

>obama cancelled it because NASA was using old research and technology. he wants them to get newer stuff before we go up again.

Saturn V: old research and technology, takes payload and shoots it up into the upper atmosphere in multiple stages

Ares V: new research and technology, takes payload and shoots it up into the upper atmosphere in multiple stages

The point of spending billions on that new tech is.....

>>1608578
>The point of spending billions on that new tech is.....
blame the idiots who thought space shuttle would be a good idea. now that it is well known that's not the case, we need to build a multi-stage rocket from scratch, because you can't do an evolution of saturn V design after a 40 year hiatus.

>>1608578
>Ares V: new research and technology
what's new? avonics are from a military rocket, engines from the space shuttle.

what we need is a SSTO design, and combined cycle engines.

>>1605857
>>1605888

Holy fuck, you guys are fucking awesome. I'm going to start lurking /sci/ more.

Sage for useless post.

>>1608626
Daydreaming about SSTOs accomplishes nothing. Doing what we can to convince congress to pass a decent fucking NAB - now that's something.

bamp