Exploration: March 2017 Archives

Trump, with NASA, has a new rocket and spaceship. Where's he going to go?, Washington Post

"There are practical issues, too: Musk has a reputation for overpromising on timelines. SpaceX has never launched anyone into space. The Falcon Heavy has never flown. Moreover, NASA officials would be unlikely to embrace a SpaceX moon flyby unless it clearly fit into the agency's long-term plans for deep-space exploration. What does Elon want to do with this - is it just a one-off tourist flight?" said NASA's top official for human spaceflight, William Gerstenmaier, in an interview with The Washington Post. "I don't see it as advancing human presence in the solar system."

Keith's note: NASA has never launched SLS and has never put people into space in Orion. SpaceX has launched (and recovered) multiple Falcon 9 rockets (the components of a Falcon Heavy) and has sent multiple Dragon spacecraft to/from the ISS on those same Falcon 9 rockets. SpaceX may have delays but they always deliver what they promise. NASA doesn't have as good of a record in that regard. With regard to lower cost, reusable spacecraft flying around the Moon - without NASA funding - such as SpaceX is planning to - if Bill Gerstenmaier doesn't "see it as advancing human presence in the solar system" then he really should relinquish his position at NASA to someone who understands what is going on these days. Indeed, Gerstenmaier is going to have a very hard time fitting in with what the Trump folks want to do if he continues with the antiquated mindset he is so fond of promoting.

Trump's call for human space exploration is hugely wasteful and pointless, opinion (or something), LA Times

"Among the dangers of cavalier calls for publicly-funded human space exploration is that monumental Big Science programs like the space race tend to suck resources away from any science left on the outside looking in. A multitrillion-dollar program to put an American on Mars, endorsed by a president, will get first call on the federal budget, leaving programs aimed at disease cures, chemistry, and physics far behind."

Keith's note: Here we go again. "Today few can summon up the names of shuttle astronauts ..." Where's the poll where someone actually measured public knowledge on this and published the results? The author just proclaims this as it it were a commonly accepted fact. "Multi-trillion dollar"? (sigh) No one has ever published an actual cost estimate for anything NASA has done or might do that uses the word "trillion" - other than references that lazy journalists make to references that other lazy journalists make to references to other lazy journalists make etc.

It is quite obvious that the author spent absolutely no time whatsoever researching the facts behind the topic he has written about. He set out to write an anti-humans in space article and found tired old quotes that people have been dredging up for years and uses them out of context, and then adds in unsubstantiated alternative facts to make his point - or so he thought. I am surprised he did not mention Tang or Teflon as NASA spinoffs. If you are going to try and debunk the notion of humans in space don't just dial it in - do some actual research - and don't just repeat the tired old unsubstantiated rants that others have been writing for years.

I am, by no means, a paragon of any manner or form of virtue when it comes to online behavior, but ...



Monthly Archives

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries in the Exploration category from March 2017.

Exploration: February 2017 is the previous archive.

Exploration: April 2017 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.