NASA's $100B moon program gets killed - Page 4

Tim Smith · 28-02-2010, 03:47 AM

The current plan, the so-called flexible path, is deceptively worded. The idea is that supposedly this will lead to more open ended possibilities. In fact, it means very little to none of the possible missions will be undertaken. Someone dunderheaded political type will always see NASA as an entity to be raided to fund some other thing. Asteroid mission? Nope. A quick return to the moon? no, why do a quick trip to the moon again, when in fact we need to go to stay? Flexible means no timeline or real goal, so you'll get the same old same old as always.
Sadly, in a few years I'll be able to drive to Huntsville and see these artifacts along with things like the propose 1960s Molab mockup. Phooey on the short sighted!

**CaptanApollo** · 28-02-2010, 04:23 AM

I totally agree, as a follower of the space program from a very young age This seems like such an uncertain path to follow,relying on the comercial market when it is at such an early stage of development, is a huge risk, their putting all their eggs in one basket, To cancel constelation, after so much money has been spent ,seems almost criminal .If NASA has such a long break, between manned missions, and with no solid goal to aim fore,they will lose the experience they have gained,not to mention the dedicated work force that has made ,what was once just science fiction , in my life time ,a reality.

SamTHorn · 16-04-2010, 08:05 PM

Great read! I am definitely interested. Thanks for the post.

~Sam

16-04-2010, 08:05 PM	#63
SamTHorn Exile Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 6	Great read! I am definitely interested. Thanks for the post. ~Sam Last edited by JD; 15-06-2010 at 12:12 AM. Reason: Link removed

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

28-02-2010, 03:47 AM	#61
Tim Smith Communications Officer Join Date: May 2006 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 893	The current plan, the so-called flexible path, is deceptively worded. The idea is that supposedly this will lead to more open ended possibilities. In fact, it means very little to none of the possible missions will be undertaken. Someone dunderheaded political type will always see NASA as an entity to be raided to fund some other thing. Asteroid mission? Nope. A quick return to the moon? no, why do a quick trip to the moon again, when in fact we need to go to stay? Flexible means no timeline or real goal, so you'll get the same old same old as always. Sadly, in a few years I'll be able to drive to Huntsville and see these artifacts along with things like the propose 1960s Molab mockup. Phooey on the short sighted!

28-02-2010, 04:23 AM	#62
CaptanApollo Computer Technician Join Date: May 2008 Location: Gold Coast, Australia Posts: 204	I totally agree, as a follower of the space program from a very young age This seems like such an uncertain path to follow,relying on the comercial market when it is at such an early stage of development, is a huge risk, their putting all their eggs in one basket, To cancel constelation, after so much money has been spent ,seems almost criminal .If NASA has such a long break, between manned missions, and with no solid goal to aim fore,they will lose the experience they have gained,not to mention the dedicated work force that has made ,what was once just science fiction , in my life time ,a reality.