Donald Trump Said Some Words About Space Today
Donald Trump, at a campaign stop in Daytona Beach, Fla., this afternoon, criticizes the “space program”: pic.twitter.com/nZ5Xwo8jvL
— Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) August 3, 2016
Hey @jeff_foust Trump's comments about space look as if he delivered them as a pre-formatted word cloud pic.twitter.com/ENfZ6JkAz4
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) August 3, 2016
I don’t get it. What is he saying?
“Trump Talk’
True, give me the clear visionary comments of Hillary any day. If asked, she will tell you what you want to hear, like any normal politician would.
It’s all BS and no matter who wins, we’re likely screwed.
Bartender, a round for my house…
If we as space enthusiasts can come to a consensus and make an effective case for it, we can influence the course of events. To do so I believe we have to find common ground on the issue and at the same time avoid being so emotionally committed to one party or the other on ideological grounds.
Simple: he says “look what’s happened to your space industry”, allowing the listener to fill in the blanks. It’s classic, really.
Trump has a talent for drawing attention to visuals. To the broader public, since the retirement of the Shuttle, America’s space program has been totally reliant on Russia (the fallacy that HSF = the space program). He’s basically blaming President Obama for this.
That is the way Donald Trump talks about just about anything. It has to be intentional, for whatever reason. It is like a muscular action, practiced over and over for years. He is so good at saying things that make no grammatical sense at all.
I heard him live. He said “and our space program, it is a shame what Obama and this Administration did to the space program, its a shame, it was once a great symbol of our country, there is nothing left now” or words to that effect.
Nothing left? Pasadena, for instance? Or Maryland? Or MIchoud? or Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Pluto?
Sheesh.
There are relatively few planetary probes in the que now. I am quite sure what you’ve seen over the last ten years were ALL put in place prior to the last 10 years. To many people manned space is the space program, even though budget wise its only about half. Yes, NASA has no shortage of smarts and capability but if it is not being led and not being used, or if the funds and the time fly by with little to show for it, then what is the value?
Because the elephant in the room has been sucking up 3 billion a year in funding since 2005…
We don’t talk about the … elephant.
Upcoming NASA planetary science / space exploration missions (roughly in order): Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), Osiris-Rex, Mars InSight, Solar Probe Plus, James Webb Space Telescope, Mars 2020 rover, Europa flyby / lander mission.
New FrontiersDiscovery mission to be decided. Along with a dozen or so Earth-observing satellites. And a smattering of smaller projects.Nevermind all the airplane flight testing they do, you know, the first A in NASA.
Yep. There’s a big hole – nothing past Mars – but thanks for the list.
Other than the Europa mission(s), you mean :p
The most recent decadal survey put a high priority on a mission to either Uranus or Neptune (personally I’d prefer Neptune). That would definitely be a Flagship-class mission, but I would put good money on a Titan explorer being picked in the next couple of rounds at the New Frontiers level.
Two of the Discovery missions currently under consideration would also go beyond Mars. Psyche, to orbit the asteroid of that name, and Lucy, to survey Jovian Trojan asteroids.
Some of these also predate the current Administration.
So what?
Technically, the approved Europa mission is a multiple flyby only. The lander is under study, but not approved.
Also, it’s a Discovery mission with a pending selection (a down-select from five phase A studies to one for flight, with selection scheduled for this September.) The next New Frontiers AO isn’t out, and personally, I don’t expect it before early 2018.
The Europa mission is not part of the Discovery program.
Those were two, separate comments. One about Europa and one about the Discovery/NF schedule.
Oh. Sorry, I thought “it’s” referred to the Europa mission.
Do you mean missions which were selected in the last ten years, and are either complete, or still operating? MAVEN was selected in 2008, and it’s in extended mission orbiting Mars. The Discovery mission, GRAIL, was selected in 2007 and its mission ended successfully in 2012.
The time from selection to launch is about five years for a Discovery mission, and NASA is trying to select two or three every decade. It’s a few years longer from selection to launch for New Frontiers (based on sample size of three) and an intention of selecting one or two per decade.
Congress would disagree based on the billions being spent on SLS, Orion, ISS, and etc.
While it is true that many of us argue about SLS and Journey to Mars, let us never ever forget that anyone who actually disparages the whole of NASA is simply misinformed.
The agency is, as Ms. Garver pointed out recently in a Planetary Society interview “a jewel”. She’s right. The interplanetary portfolio is second to none.
It’s probably true that there is a PR problem with the lack of visible _manned_ NASA spaceflight, which is what Trump is haranguing on. I wish NASA were a little more pro-active boostering the commercial operations ramping up. In my way of thinking, it’s way better for national pride to just say “We’ve moved past the 60’s era and have commercial companies planning manned spaceflight. Show me another place where that is happening.” I just saw an article yesterday highlighting DreamChaser as “NASA’s spaceplane”, whatever that meant.
I think that the article you refer to basically exposes a lack of research before publishing more than anything else.
DC has been out of the race for a year or so; the last I heard was that Sierra Nevada were talking to ESA it was very possible that it’s going to end up ESA‘s space plane, launched on a modified Ariane 5. However, I don’t know if those plans are still active.
I think that your statement basically exposes a lack of research before publishing more than anything else. DreamChaser was not selected for Commercial Crew but has been selected for Commercial Cargo and is getting NASA support and financing.
Why would NASA want to hype up commercial programs? “Hi, we spent oodles of time and money developing a reasonably reliable and cheap, for space, reusable space machine but now there’s a market we’re banned from using it and it’s all been given over to a bunch of morons with money who are still blowing their ‘replacements’ up. Yay!”.
That’s the problem with innovation and invention in America, too many greedy bastards. Throwing profit before progress ruined America before, no reason to think it would never happen to NASA but it’s still a damn shame.
Please explain further what you mean here…
“there’s a market we’re banned from using it and it’s all been given over to a bunch of morons with money who are still blowing their ‘replacements’ up. Yay!”.
What market? Who is banning it? Which morons?
I need it explained like I’m 6 years old. Thanks.
I’m intrigued as well. What are we banned from using, and who made / is enforcing this ban?
What are you talking about?
Indian rockets?