Panel: Reduce NASA Role in Space Launches

[Kadie]

Panel: Reduce NASA Role in Space Launches

12 minutes ago


By TED BRIDIS, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - A White House commission will recommend that NASA (news - web sites) overhaul its Apollo-era relationships with private industries, giving corporations a broader role in upcoming space launches to ensure President Bush (news - web sites)'s goal of ultimately flying to Mars, according to documents obtained Monday.



The role of NASA "must be limited to only those areas where there is irrefutable demonstration that only government can perform the proposed activity," according to a summary obtained by The Associated Press that was prepared by the president's commission. Its final report is expected later this week.


The commission determined that NASA should recognize "a far larger presence of private industry in space operations with the specific goal of allowing private industry to assume the primary role of providing services to NASA, and most immediately in accessing low-earth orbit."


Experts said that conclusion clearly signals intentions to hand over nearly all space launches — except manned missions — to private corporations.

more... http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040614/ap_on_sc/moon_mars_commission_1

[DenverDem]

1. Payoffs to the corporatists to help steal the election.

Privatization of space begins.

Man, I hate publican power elitists.

[maggrwaggr]

2. this is how they will militarize space

and it's not a good thing

[Pale_Rider]

26. Sorry but space is already ...

... militarized. Granted its not a good thing but I doubt anything will roll it back.

[cap]

3. ac tually, I suport this...

there's a lot of nasa functions that are not research or high risk. Corporations can make space travel more brod based. Nasa should continue r&d on launch vehicles and use those vehicles to go to mars. NASA does need a shakeup...it has become too risk adverse and bureaucratic in many areas... JPL a notable exception.

Would like to see NASA re-energized... unlike to really happen under Bush.

[Bridget Burke]

5. "Too risk adverse"

After all, we've only lost 2 shuttles so far.

If real re-energization of NASA won't happen under Bush, what does this represent? Corporate payoffs? Less civilian control?

[THUNDER HANDS]

8. me too

But I think NASA should be dumped anyway. Once we went to the moon that was like.....it.

NASA has no purpose anymore and even to those who say that it does, the ultimate goal is trivial when compared to the human suffering and poverty that exists here on this planet.

Maybe in another time, in another place, NASA would be useful. But not now. It's just not needed anymore.

[Gore1FL]

33. how do you know space isn't the answer to suffering and poverty?

There is certainly job growth as a solution to poverty. Pherisis is a great example of lessening suffering.

NASA serves a lot of purposes and so does space -- be it immediate to earth, such as orbital satellites, or deep space probes.

The technology is far more beneficial than the price tag and minimally effects (to the good) the very issues you raise while in no way impacts those issues negatively.

[BlueEyedSon]

4. Privatize, privatize, privatize.....

is their mantra!

[XNASA]

6. The bottom line is that this is nothing new.

And if it's limited to unmanned launches, then it's not much of a factor at all.

Privatization of NASA has been going on for a long time. The United Space Alliance (USA) was founded in 1996 by Boeing and Lockheed to run day-to-day operations of the Shuttle fleet.

What we really need, is a new Shuttle. On that can bring the cost of delivering a payload down to 20% of what it is now. Until that happens, NASA will continue to stagnate.

[Massacure]

7. I don't see how privatization of space is a bad thing

Weve been stuck sending a lucky few in to low earth orbit for 30 years, it looks like it is going to continue with the ISS, and Mars isn't going to happen for another 20-30 years.

I see more hope for space with corporations than I do with the government. The government just isn't bold enough.

[XNASA]

9. I agree that privatization is not a bad thing.

But I think that the direction of the Space Program should still be controlled by the US Government.

It's true, that at this time, the government isn't bold enough. But that can change.

However, if NASA were entirely privatized, then the only bottom line would be $$$$$$. And I don't think we want to see that happen.

[Heyo]

13. I look at it this way....

....the government will do space like it does most other things.... poorly, very slowly, and way too costly....

Private citizens will do space much more effectively, cheaply and much faster...

I still think there should be a NASA, with a focus on planetary exploration..... I just think that the only people who are allowed to go to space are those chosen by a government agency..... I believe in our lifetimes we all should be able to go.

Burt Rutan is a great example of what I'm talking about.

Heyo

[rocketdem]

28. rightwing pathology embedded even here

This notion that everything that the government touches must in some we be tainted by inefficiency and ineptitude is precisely what the rightwing has been preaching for the least 25 years. It is amazing to me that even here that such an assumption is taken for granted.

The facts in this matter are that it can be shown, and has been shown very recently in the form of an international study on the subject, that significant government insight and oversight of launch operations results in a measureable increase in launch reliability.

I am all for creative innovation. Go to it. But the endeavor of space exploration, manned or unmanned, is not likely to soon be a profit generating undertaking. Corporations will not soon be seeking to do this without government involvement.

I admire Mr. Rutan, but don't be fooled by his achievement. True, it's one hell of a milestone in terms of private enterprise and reusability, but in truth it amounts to not that much more than was already accomplished over forty years ago by Alan Shepherd sitting atop a modifed Redstone rocket.

[jus_the_facts]

16. Privatization RUINS everything it touches.....

......hasn't what's happened with the military alone been proof enough of that? THis is yet another way for them to call it PRIVATE while suckin' even more TAX DOLLARS to CORPORATIONS! :grr:

:wtf:

[rocketdem]

29. That might be overstating it a bit, but ...

It is interesting to note that a primary finding of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board was that the Shuttle was endangered specifically by the push towards privitization of technical functions and the loss of technical know-how and insight on the part of the government.

I honestly cannot see how any commission looking beyond the facts of very recent history can come to the conclusion that greater privitization of launch systems will achieve greater safety or realiability. The only possibly answer is that the commission was told to make sure that their findings specifically echoed Bush's own federal management agenda.

I recommend reading this agenda that was published very early in this administration if you wish to see a unifying guide to the various activities undertaken over the last several years. It is very revealing.

[jus_the_facts]

30. Yeah it's the very reason we have a gov't....

....to enforce regulations...private corps. will NEVER do what must be done to ensure proper standards and safety. It amazes me how even democrats seem to overlook or disregard these facts. :shrug: :crazy:

[aquart]

11. You don't?

You want Enron aiming guns at you from the moon?

[TahitiNut]

14. Surveillance to highest bidder. Private intellectual property subsidized .

... by taxpayer money. Strategic intelligence under the control of private interests, not nations, places global corporatism above democratic governance. Technological advances kept 'secret' by companies, not nations ... for the wealthy interests of companies rather than the democratic interests of people.

I don't know how much more of a "bad thing" one can have regarding space.

[aquart]

10. Not good.

[oly]

12. No, not good.

We paid for the program and will continue to pay. We should not lose democratic control over the program and the money. The idea is, of course and for example, spend a trillion dollars going to Mars, pump the money through aerospace corporations (mil/indust/congress complex) and skim 25 points, or so. Its a scam. All government spending must be scam/skimmed. Sound familiar?

[ItsThePeopleStupid]

15. remember the PNAC goal

in their own words, is world domination. Domination of space is a necessary component. They wrote all about it in their PNAC document.

I think the Mars mission is just a carrot to get NASA to go along with things.

[PfcHammer]

19. Expect photos of martians being

tortured by translators from CAIC Space Division.

[ItsThePeopleStupid]

22. lol

Maybe they'll humiliate the Martians by making them wear clothes.

[newyawker99]

27. Hi ItsThePeopleStupid!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[struggle4progress]

17. Boooondoggle!

[Emboldened Chimp]

18. Can you say Holy Fucking Shit?

I wonder how this all fits into the plan to weaponize space. Does this mean we'll get zapped with lasers if we're not Good Consumers?

[tlcandie]

20. Space should be treated just like water and energy... it is for the people

by the people and NOT corporations! I'm shocked that many believe it is okay! :wow:

[Solly Mack]

21. Hooters in Space! Halliburton joins the space race!

I'm not at all thrilled by this. Well, Hooters in space is OK...

so we defund NASA, as a nation, and allow corporations to fund them...and the people expect to have any say in what NASA does afterward?

[Trajan]

23. What utter nonsense ...

Having worked with NASA, AS an employee of a contractor: I KNOW NASA is an extremely thourough overseer which demands STRICT controls over process and hardware ... Their closeouts are extraordianarily careful and well thought out ...

There is NO WAY My former employer (Rockwell International/Boeing Space) would have followed such strict guidelines on their own without prompting from an omnipresent overseer ... Companies CUT procedural corners, like they cut workers out of payrolls during GOP administrations ..

It's ALL about the BUCK with them: give them their own steering wheel? they will remove the brakes to 'save money' .... and drive STRAIGHT into the ditch ....

Even WITH a strict overseer: mistakes happen ..

Without one ? ..... Katey bar the door ...

[flaminbats]

24. 200 million years from now what species will view our bones in museums?

And here is the extinct homo sapien, they walked on two legs like the tyrannosaurus. One of this animal's ways of interacting with other homo sapiens was to run about on two legs in wild blind rages and bite each other's heads off. Often times they would do this in motorized four-wheeled vehicles, which they would drive and crash into one another at high speeds..again probably as a primitive means of social interaction.

But there is much about homo sapiens that we still do not understand. Why are many of their remains now found kneeing at walls and all pointing toward a particular geographic position? Why do we find so many beautiful buildings, all with countless symbols of perpendicular lines? Even more odd, while do some of these perpendicular lines have an image of a dying hairy male homo sapien on them? Why did homo sapiens build huge beautiful cities, and then proceed to destroy them?

Why did homo sapiens fly so many strange things to the moon, but do nothing to preserve their habitat on Earth? Why did homo sapiens decide that the Moon and Mars would be a better natural habitat than Earth? Why did homo sapiens dig huge holes in the Earth only to explode more atom bombs? Most animals become extinct because of natural disaster, homo sapiens existed only for the purpose of running off the deep end.

[Gore1FL]

34. you make some good points

but these:

Why did homo sapiens fly so many strange things to the moon, but do nothing to preserve their habitat on Earth? Why did homo sapiens decide that the Moon and Mars would be a better natural habitat than Earth?

are straw men.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mbperrin]

31. Ah yes! Privatization has worked wonders everywhere!

Those "contractors" won the war in Iraq snap, no?

Turning the Texas investment program over to the private sector lost the state $400 billion in one year! Now THAT's performance!

No private charter school in Texas has yet equalled public school scores on the end of year tests. Way to go!

Boy, it feels good just knowing that everything in the future, no matter how complex, will be built by folks scrimping on every dime to add to their bottom line and STOCK OPTIONS! Cut every corner, grub every penny! Hey, it's not like NASA is rocket science, right?

[MetaTrope]

32. O.o

:freak: :crazy: :wow: :hurts: