NASA Willing To Team With China; Rumors of a Budget Cut 200
eldavojohn writes "2009 has been an interesting year for NASA — from a new strategy to even closer ties with an old enemy. So it's perhaps no surprise that NASA has publicly stated that they are ready to team up with China. NASA Chief Charles Bolden said, 'I am perfectly willing, if that's the direction that comes to me, to engage the Chinese in trying to make them a partner in any space endeavor. I think they're a very capable nation. They have demonstrated their capability to do something that only two other nations that have done — that is, to put humans in space. And I think that is an achievement you cannot ignore. They are a nation that is trying to really lead. If we could cooperate we would probably be better off than if we would not.' While the budget of the China National Space Administration is a fraction of NASA's, partnering with them has been considered since 2008. In possibly related news, rumors are circulating of the Obama administration cutting NASA's budget by ten percent for fiscal year 2011 despite the success of Monday's Atlantis launch. Considering the Augustine panel's recommendations, such a cut could halt US human space flight for a decade."
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:4, Informative)
Just a slight clarification, in todays dollars the Apollo program cost $300 Billion. It also caused the microchip to be invented along with hundreds of other game changing inventions.
Re:Just 10%? (Score:2, Informative)
Hogwash. A good remote-bot sample-return program could cover more areas than humans for roughly 1/4 the cost.
Thank you. That's right. Unmanned exploration gives you the biggest bang for the buck.
The GP talks about white collar aerospace welfare program, which is exactly what I think whenever I see an ISS story. Exactly what has that given us with regards to science or engineering?
How about a mission to an extrasolar planet? Or even the outer reaches of our solar system?
Folks talk about sending people out there, usually over some fantasy based on Star Trek, but the thing is, if we start just sending folks out without really knowing what is out there, we'll be not only putting folks at needless risk, but we'll also be putting money and other resources at risk. When I say risk, I mean needless risk. Risk is inherit with any human activity, but we shouldn't be sending folks out there willy nilly and without a stated goal other than putting them out there for the sake of having manned space flight.
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:2, Informative)
The microchip was invented before Apollo. Apollo did inject funds into the industry when few other manufacturers seemed interested, I will agree.
Re:By all means (Score:4, Informative)
Follow up.
OK, According to NASA, there were 18 Shuttle/Mir missions [nasa.gov]. However, none of them occurred prior to 1991. Therefore ASTP was the only Soviet-US joint mission.
US Manned Space Missions from 1961-1991:
* Mercury - 6
* Gemini - 10
* Apollo - 11
* Skylab - 3
* ASTP - 1
* Shuttle - 44 (per Wikipedia)
Soviet Space Missions from 1961-1991 (per Wikipiedia, includes ASTP): 66
That gives 141 missions. So out of 141 manned missions before the fall of the Soviet Union (your timeframe: "during cold war"), exactly 1 (or 2, depending how many times you count ASTP) were joint.
Would you care to explain how 1 out of 141 is the norm?
We won't just sell the rope,but the rope machinery (Score:3, Informative)