Worrying times at NASA
Discussion
In the same week that Trump announced the formation of a Space Force, NASA is looking a a major revamp of the way several of its research centres operate :
"
Rogue NASA
20 hrs ·
THIS IS WHY THIS PAGE EXISTS. Listen up, folks.
NASA employees were told today that Headquarters would be conducting a study into turning its research centers into "Federally Funded Research & Development Centers". This would effectively create vast cuts to the Civil Servant workforce and potentially turn NASA Ames (Mountain View, CA), NASA Glenn (Cleveland, OH), and NASA Goddard (Greenbelt, MD) into private research campuses, eliminating much of the pure research and moving to a "for-profit" model only. This is an AWFUL move and one rife with long-term pitfalls to our innovativeness and competitiveness as a nation in fields like materials, combustion, propulsion, aviation, electronics, communications, etc.
These cuts to NASA's workforce in lieu of contractors is being sold in the guise of becoming more "agile and flexible", but really represent a shrinking of the government workforce, sacrificing NASA's ability to innovate in order to put more money in the hands of large corporations.
It seems the administration is trying to shrink its books in order to make up for the devastating tax cuts already imposed this year, even though NASA's Civil Servant workforce has been decreasing by 2-3% for a decade already. Bleeding the agency dry of talent and the ability to do their jobs is unacceptable - this will not happen without a fight! #AdAstra"
"
Rogue NASA
20 hrs ·
THIS IS WHY THIS PAGE EXISTS. Listen up, folks.
NASA employees were told today that Headquarters would be conducting a study into turning its research centers into "Federally Funded Research & Development Centers". This would effectively create vast cuts to the Civil Servant workforce and potentially turn NASA Ames (Mountain View, CA), NASA Glenn (Cleveland, OH), and NASA Goddard (Greenbelt, MD) into private research campuses, eliminating much of the pure research and moving to a "for-profit" model only. This is an AWFUL move and one rife with long-term pitfalls to our innovativeness and competitiveness as a nation in fields like materials, combustion, propulsion, aviation, electronics, communications, etc.
These cuts to NASA's workforce in lieu of contractors is being sold in the guise of becoming more "agile and flexible", but really represent a shrinking of the government workforce, sacrificing NASA's ability to innovate in order to put more money in the hands of large corporations.
It seems the administration is trying to shrink its books in order to make up for the devastating tax cuts already imposed this year, even though NASA's Civil Servant workforce has been decreasing by 2-3% for a decade already. Bleeding the agency dry of talent and the ability to do their jobs is unacceptable - this will not happen without a fight! #AdAstra"
I ask this as a genuine question, as I don’t know the answer, but what sort of thing does NASA do nowadays, and should it still be being done by a government agency?
A naive view would be that Musk seems to be doing some of the same things far cheaper. Is that fair, or a long way from the truth?
A naive view would be that Musk seems to be doing some of the same things far cheaper. Is that fair, or a long way from the truth?
James_B said:
I ask this as a genuine question, as I don’t know the answer, but what sort of thing does NASA do nowadays, and should it still be being done by a government agency?
A naive view would be that Musk seems to be doing some of the same things far cheaper. Is that fair, or a long way from the truth?
Building rockets is only a very small part of what NASA doesA naive view would be that Musk seems to be doing some of the same things far cheaper. Is that fair, or a long way from the truth?
People often forget about the "air" part of the NASA acronym. They do and have done thousands of research projects over 100 years (when you take the original NACA into account) that has been invaluable to US and world aviation. The manufacturers certainly appreciate the work NASA does for them.
James_B said:
I ask this as a genuine question, as I don’t know the answer, but what sort of thing does NASA do nowadays, and should it still be being done by a government agency?
A naive view would be that Musk seems to be doing some of the same things far cheaper. Is that fair, or a long way from the truth?
Much as I am a fan of Musk, my view is very much that pure research that is decoupled from economic return is vitally important for our development as a society. Government research and publically-funded universities are an absolutely critical source of innovation and whilst Google et al are doing great work in many areas, we shouldn't be relying on commercial organisations to have the far-sightedness and freedom to explore unknowns that is the source of so many fundamental breakthroughs in science and technology.A naive view would be that Musk seems to be doing some of the same things far cheaper. Is that fair, or a long way from the truth?
Sadly this is the way of the world at the moment. America likes defence rather than science still. Even Obama cut down Nasa.
The funny thing the US defence spending lots means lots of veterans that need to be looked after later. That add nothing much to the current generations needs. $75b on vets affairs was it at the last counting? What was NASA's request?
Worlds most technologically advanced nation being worlds least. Again.
Long gone where the days of Kennedy.....
The funny thing the US defence spending lots means lots of veterans that need to be looked after later. That add nothing much to the current generations needs. $75b on vets affairs was it at the last counting? What was NASA's request?
Worlds most technologically advanced nation being worlds least. Again.
Long gone where the days of Kennedy.....
Einion Yrth said:
Don't kid yourself, "we choose to go to the moon" was act of economic warfare. Science had bugger all to do with it.
Indeed. They were almost 2 years into the planning of Apollo before scientists asked "Do you plan to do any actual science on these missions?".It wasn't quite an afterthought but the scientists had to fight to get some genuine science into the programme. In the end, they actually did quite a lot.
98elise said:
SLS?
Toaster is right. NASA does not technically build rockets - and it never really has. What it has traditionally done is instigate programmes and private industry bids to provide the hardware to carry out those programmes.The Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft was built by Boeing, Douglas, North American and Grumman, with many other companies involved in engine building and other features of the Apollo system.
The Space Shuttle Orbiter was built by Rockwell (formerly North American Rockwell) the External Tank by Martin and the Solid Rocket Boosters by Morton Thiokol.
The Mercury and Gemini spacecraft were built by McDonnell. The Redstone rocket was built by Chrysler. The Atlas rocket was built by Convair and the Titan by Martin.
Eric Mc said:
Einion Yrth said:
Don't kid yourself, "we choose to go to the moon" was act of economic warfare. Science had bugger all to do with it.
Indeed. They were almost 2 years into the planning of Apollo before scientists asked "Do you plan to do any actual science on these missions?".It wasn't quite an afterthought but the scientists had to fight to get some genuine science into the programme. In the end, they actually did quite a lot.
To be fair, at the time Apollo was originally envisaged (1959/60), TV cameras were rather big and heavy and chiefly black and white only although the first colour TV cameras were beginning to be used in the US. There is no way they would have fitted in a spacecraft like the Command Module.
However, it was the decision to carry a TV camera that led to developments in miniaturising TV cameras to make them lighter and smaller. The TV cameras carried by Apollo was the smallest in the world at the time.
This is a typical late 1950s TV camera -
These are the two TV cameras used by Apollo, one being black and white and the other colour -
However, it was the decision to carry a TV camera that led to developments in miniaturising TV cameras to make them lighter and smaller. The TV cameras carried by Apollo was the smallest in the world at the time.
This is a typical late 1950s TV camera -
These are the two TV cameras used by Apollo, one being black and white and the other colour -
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff