You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #6: You bring up some good points (K&R) but NASA is responsible for its loss of focus [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-11 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
6. You bring up some good points (K&R) but NASA is responsible for its loss of focus
During the 1960s we had huge chemical rockets to shoot a capsule of Astronauts into space. NASA's current plans for manned space: to engineer less-huge chemical rockets that can shoot a capsule of Astronauts into space.

Where is NASA's spirit of innovation? They want to do things pretty much the same as it was 50 years ago! They should be looking into advanced technologies that will bring down the cost of putting a payload into space:

Google the following:
1. Magnetically levitated space launch systems, http://www.launchpnt.com/portfolio/aerospace/satellite-launch-ring/
2. Space Elevator, http://www.orbitalvector.com/Orbital%20Travel/Space%20Elevators/Space%20Elevators.htm
3. VASIMIR propulsion system, http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-amp-space/article/2009-10/plasma-rockets-could-make-pit-stops-mars-and-beyond
4. Laser powered space launcher, http://www.spacedaily.com/news/laser-97b.html

And probably a dozen more that I have never heard of.

The reality of NASA is that it is a gargantuan bloated bureaucracy built of people who want to continue their own careers. Those are the people who have systematically thwarted any change in the "rockets and capsules" paradigm. If they allowed these revolutionary technologies to take hold, where would their own lucrative careers be, who would need their expertise on rockets, capsules, etc?

In similar fashion, the "auto experts" you read in magazines, on TV, and elsewhere do not like the electric car. Why? Because their $$$ career is tied to continuing the fantastically complex and inefficient internal combustion engine. Electric vehicles are so simple to build that thousands of people have torn out their gasoline engine and all its poisons and are now driving on pure battery power. Imagine if those with careers to protect were in a position of power so as to ensure that this threat to their career never sees the light of day.

Had NASA continued its early tradition of constant improvement as technology advanced, we may be in a different world right now. Instead, private companies will be taking over the job of putting humans into space. Brilliant career move!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC