After 30 years and 135 flights, NASA is officially closing down its space shuttle program.
In its place, NASA recently signed a deal with Russia for $753 million to provide it with 12 round trips to the International Space Station aboard the Soyuz spacecraft. So from now on, the U.S. will essentially be paying for rides from the Russians.
As a backup plan, NASA has also hired private commercial spacecraft companies like SpaceX to build a space shuttle replacement, so NASA can "focus on more ambitious missions".
We've discussed in class the budgetary crisis facing the nation; and, yes, the cost of the space shuttle program is the main reason for its cancellation.
Last night during the Republican presidential debate, the consensus among the candidates was that NASA should continue to exist and design missions, but that the process would be much more efficient and cost-effective if many space-related tasks were outsourced to the private sector. Their argument is that free market competition will lead to more innovation and cost-efficiency, as compared to government bureaucracies. Indeed, there are literally dozens of other private space companies that are already trying to develop launch vehicles for both unmanned and manned flight.
All of the candidates, to some degree, positioned themselves in these terms: "The era of manned spaceflight is not ending; instead it's taking a new course".
What are your thoughts on the closing of the space shuttle program in the context of our budgetary crisis? To what extent is privatization desirable?
I may be biased to this whole issue because I love astronomy, but I believe that NASA shouldnt close their space shuttle program because of the budgetary crisis. I feel it is important for NASA to continue their missions because there is much more to learn about and because global warming is an important current issue their missions into space can help us learn if there are other possible ways to reverse it.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure how I feel about private sectors because information they find may not be as accessible to the public like NASA.
I think that instead of completely shutting down the shuttle program, NASA should monitor and prioritize their spending so that the government isnt spending so much on space missions. I think it would be ideal if they make fewer missions into space to reduce the cost. What I dont understand is why is the government offering to pay for rides made by Russia when NASA can do it here?
- Danielle D.
While I am truly regretful about the decision of NASA to close the Space Shuttle program, I personally agree with the decision. NASA is ending the Shuttle program for more reasons than just costs: the Shuttles have reached their life service. The Suttles were designed to last for 30 years, and paying to upgrade them for a few more years could put lives at risk, in addition to costing more.
ReplyDeleteI have mixed feelings about the decision to pay the Russian Space agency for American missions to the ISS. While it is probably the safest alternative at the moment, it may have a negative effect on the morale of Americans, given the U.S.'s history with Russia's predecessor (the U.S.S.R.). I would personally prefer the sponsoring of American private companies, but ONLY after EXTENSIVE safety checks, precautions, and of course, regulation by the government.
Richard C.
While I understand NASA closing its Space Shuttle program to narrow the budget gaps in the National debt, I hope they don't dismantle the agency completely in order to make way for the private corporations to make an monopoly out of space travel.
ReplyDeleteWhile NASA don't have to return to the Space program, I think they can invest in making efficient and effective spacecrafts. They have a ton of data from their previous space flights and can be share with the international community. I would preferred that an “International Space Agency” was created to avoid any loopholes in regulations that governments have for private Space flights.
Michael C.
It is very unfortunate that United States Spacecraft (NASA) is ending shutting down. NASA was considerably a symbol of the advance technological power for the United States.
ReplyDeleteone can argue that the action taken by NASA is for the interest of the United States. even though it account for less than 1% of the federal budget, outsourcing to Russia, will exclude it from the federal budget. According to the article, Russia's Spacecraft Soyuz, has perform "some 1300 successful launches more than the US's approximately <1200". the proposed deal will increase '8%' cost for each astronauts flying to space, however it provide better safety and better technology for the Spacecraft.
Also Outsourcing to private sectors can in turn be good for the well being of the economy of the country. one can argue that if a private sector has the authority to send tourist to space, it not only generate income for themselves, it also attract tourist to come in the United States. this can also help improve the creation of more jobs through the Private sector and help improve the well being of the economy.
Alimou D.
NASA closes its space shuttle program is a wrong decision, because it is a sign that America will lost the goal of explore more about our universe. For example, in ancient China, to decide a good emperor is through its performance in foreign affairs such as wars and land acquisition. This is because it keeps citizens a goal to do better and better. But in case of closing NASA due to the budget deficit, politicians make a huge mistake because in exploring the space, we will develop more advanced technology. For example, computer has been developed better and better after the Moon landing in 1976. And as a result, we have better living style and have created more jobs.
ReplyDeleteU.S. government is experiencing huge budget deficit currently. NASA can still survive by sharing the technology with private sector only and have total control of NASA. We explore space is to better citizen’s life and we can do it through private sector’s hand, just sharing the technology with them (Not military weapons or technology related program). Government can play a monopolistic role in my suggestion of sharing technology with private sector.
I believe that the more people do one job, and that people will get handy on that job because of massive practices. People will gain more experience if they practice a lot. And second problem is the land. Our planet may go explosion some day in future. We have to lead our next generation to a better world, just like our forefathers of the United States.
In the context of budgetary problems, the first items to be cut off the spending list should be those with no apparent short term or long term benefits. I think that no one at NASA or any other space-related firm or industry fully knows what they are looking for in outer space. As a result, NASA's space shuttle program being shut down when there are other, more cost-effective measures should be viewed for what it is: a sound economical, managerial and financial decision.
ReplyDeleteEven if those involved in the space program did know their goal, whatever it may be they are trying to achieve is so far off into the future that it will take decades for man's technical knowledge and expertise to catch up to his dreams. NASA shutting down its space shuttle program is not going to have any discernible effect to its progression. The private sector taking up the mantle will only be to the benefit of space travel as a whole.
The one problem I can envision is with the plan to buy space rides from the Russians. This can alienate the American people, who have a heightened patriotic fervor. NASA itself was built upon a race to the stars between the Russians and Americans; Americans may see this as a defeat at the hands of one of their arch-rivals.
Cheers,
Amir A.
It honestly sadens me to see NASA shutting down, however, I agree with the idea to shut them down because of the budgetary crisis. I believe the government has some big issues on their hands and they need to focus their attention to those bigger issues.
ReplyDeleteWe as people need the government right now, we need the money back into our social security and into our health care for the future. A lot of young people do not necessarily think of these things because they believe it is not currently a factor in their lives, however they need to remember one day it will be us who need the social security and the medicare.
Ennovy Sanchez
The decision of NASA of closing down its space shuttle program is clearly seen as unfortunate in the eyes of many Americans who think that perhaps this decision will lead to the end of scientific research. However, many other people, including scientists and educators are positive about the future of NASA and its space shuttle program.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, Bernard Harris, who in 1995 became the first black astronaut, mentioned that he is very optimistic about the changes through which NASA is going because it means that there will still be space shuttle programs that will operate to continue with scientific research, understanding about the earth, and education about science and the importance of humans in space. However, Harris argues that “in order for space research and projects to take off, they are going to require an investment from the private sector”. As we all know, the government can no longer pay for the cost of any of these scientific research projects, and privatization is viewed as a potential option if the goal is to reduce the national deficit.
I understand the concern of people with the idea of privatization of NASA, however, it seems that for us, the future of scientific exploration in space is a difficult transition and it will require a different mind set if we want to promote opportunity for creativity and innovation.
Girlane Tarph
I think it is reasonable to shut down the Space Shuttle Program because a new analysis shows that it cost $1.5 billion per flight. As a result,
ReplyDeleteNASA have to find the more effective and economical way which put the
men to an outer space and come back safely. Closing down its space shuttle
program doesn't mean NASA stopping its scientific research and studying.
Recently, NASA has other new space program which I think it is same meaning with the Space Shuttle program, but this time the new spacecraft will be built by Lockheed Martin. here the link more about the Multi-Purpose Crew
Vehicle(MPCV).http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/05/24/nasa.new.spacecraft/index.html?hpt=T2 I think this new spacecraft willl be more economical so that NASA could keeping dicovering the outer space.
Yiquan Chen
I do not know much about NASA, but based on the article and other people's comments i would have to agree with those who are for NASA. I believe that closing NASA is not going to help build up the economy because money is going to be spent else where. I do not really understand why closing NASA would help the bugetary crisis. Can someone please explain to me why it would help the bugetary crisis?
ReplyDeleteNASA has provided so much information to society within the spand of 30 years, and i think they will be able to discover more if they would not have shut down. Shutting down one of the best resources we have to outter space adventure and research is not the best decision that has made.
Noriella Santos
I have mix feelings about NASA. While in some ways I am happy that the shuttle program is shutting down mainly because it had in some ways limited our space exploration in lower Space and not really outer space. I really hope that the reasons why it shutting down is not only pure economics. My fear is that NASA or other National Scientific Research center such as DARPA will become a bigger lynch pin as way for politicians to "close" the budget without actually making a real dent in the deficit. A big question I have about bringing in private companies is that will it in turn increase the amount of money the Federal Government will inject into the Space Program. The current system in place gives NASA a monopoly on launching satellites into space. This gives NASA the ability to charge an inflated rate for launching Satellites. I hope that the powers to be would not shy away from its continued funding of NASA for its future endeavors.
ReplyDeleteIvan L
It is always been said, who owns the technology, will always maintain present and future power and supremacy, as we are living in a world that witnessing some ambitions new States such as China, Brazil, India, and Russia, which all would like to drag the global lead from United States of America, which seems NASA by its decision to end and close its space shuttle program in the context of budgetary crisis will help those countries to achieve their goal.
ReplyDeleteWhy not The USA government partner with the Europeans in order to be able to fund NASA operations and let them to share the benefits of NASA research and technology, the Europeans will fund some of NASA operations, as Europeans are friends of the Americans because both are believing and living with democracy and value human rights.
The privatization of NASA operations to commercial sector will not be an easy task as some think, as there are so many questions an unanswered yet, as what are going to be the regulatory standards? What are going to be the qualification standards? How are they going to work with NASA to ensure they meet the safety standards? all of that will take a lot of time.
It is always been said, who owns the technology, will always maintain present and future power and supremacy, as we are living in a world that witnessing some ambitions new States such as China, Brazil, India, and Russia, which all would like to drag the global lead from United States of America, which seems NASA by its decision to end and close its space shuttle program in the context of budgetary crisis will help those countries to achieve their goal.
ReplyDeleteWhy not The USA government partner with the Europeans in order to be able to fund NASA operations and let them to share the benefits of NASA research and technology, the Europeans will fund some of NASA operations, as Europeans are friends of the Americans because both are believing and living with democracy and value human rights.
The privatization of NASA operations to commercial sector will not be an easy task as some think, as there are so many questions an unanswered yet, as what are going to be the regulatory standards? What are going to be the qualification standards? How are they going to work with NASA to ensure they meet the safety standards? all of that will take a lot of time.
Maged B
I am very surprised that NASA is shut down. Due to the finacial issues I feel that it is a good thing that it was shut down, but at the same time for the long run it was not a good idea. it is like we are working for the Russians becasue they bought us out. people also will lose their jobs becasue the russians will want to have most of their researchs work for them.
ReplyDeleteI feel that other companies should be able to go to the moon and make trips. the more people that do make discovers the better is is for everyone in ther world. The government should enforce some regulations and global policies if people want to go out of space. i think we will be spending more moeny then we do now because American that want to go in outer space will recieve money for research and other expenses. i think it would have been a good idea for the US to partner with russian rather then just to completely let russia take over.
I'm curious as to what "more ambitious missions" entails. Regardless, I agree with the decision to move space discovery and all that the study of astronomy entails to the private sector. It does allow for competition, innovation and cost efficiency. Men such as Richard Branson have an immense amount of capital to invest in the final frontier, and this privatization allows for a speedier process towards discovery and exploration of space. Most of these private companies I am assuming are European or American based and will reap some benefit from their success. If they didnt, I doubt the government would have closed the program, leaving it for the Russians to take over. Furthermore, by privatizing space discovery, the US government can focus more on its bureaucratic role. It can establish guidelines and regulations ( necessary precautions) with regards to space discovery, and while they are playing a more passive role in this field, they still play a ( important) role none the less. I'm excited for what the future holds for privatized space discovery. It was a smart move on the governments behalf.
ReplyDeleteK.B.
Although it is unfortunate for NASA to be shutting down,it may be a way to free up some space for growth in the economy. There is a crisis here at home,on earth, so priorities should come into play when it comes to making decisions of this nature. Privatization may be a good idea for the economy. Privatization may be a way to stimulate growth in the economy by having smaller groups spend money.
ReplyDeleteThe NASA Space Program and its shuttles are obsolete. Yes, they have been a dear part of our history as Americans, however, our emotions on the subject should not cloud our judgements. We live in a globalizing world evidently led by the private sector and if they are willing and have already began to build ships that travel to space than they action should be embraced. Furthermore, paying Russia to shuttle US astronauts into space may actually be economically beneficial to the budgetary situation in the US.
ReplyDeleteConsider this analogy, Yeshiva University pays outside agencies to provide them with security, maintenance, electrical technicians, house keeping and other needs, respectively. In doing so, they save significant amount of money, money that can be used to better the facilities of the university. This is essentially what the NASA program is doing by paying an outside agency (the Russians) to shuttle astronauts out to space. Seems the logical decision when trying to cut the budget deficit.
I believe this is the right decision and action for several reasons. This decisions is an inclusive one, by this I mean that two potencies of the world are including each other in the others actions. Thus, promoting internationalism, a great step towards the homogenization of the world. Also, it is beneficial to closing the budgetary deficit of the US. Furthermore, creating jobs for those who may not have them in Russia. To conclude, I see no real reason why this decision should be debated over and it is a decision that those of the future society will reap benefits from.
The NASA and Space Shuttle program closing down is an unfortunate event in U.S. history. U.S residents take pride in NASA space missions, specifically when the first man landed on the moon. In addition to the pride the NASA brings to the country, the program also contributes to the creation of new technology. The dream of becoming an astronaut often fuels many young students to pursue science. The United States is so drastically falling behind the rest of the world, ending NASA and the research and development it provided will only increase this gap. Taking away this symbolic and educational organization will only further set back U.S. development. Although NASA is expensive to maintain, the organization should try to reduce their expenses by prioritizing missions and projects with greatest benefits. Also, NASA may reduce expenses and maybe more efficient if it becomes privatized- or certain areas privatized. This way the US government could still maintain NASA and have control over missions.
ReplyDeleteMarvin Palomeque
I believe that is is very unfortunate that NASA shuttle program closing down is unfortunate. Maybe the best solution isn't to shut it down. Maybe cutting down the finances for the NASA shuttle program would be the better solution.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that is expensive and doesn't make the national deficit any better but the NASA shuttle program does not only make space missions and come back. The research done on these trips can be beneficial to mankind. NASA contributes to a lot of the advances in technology.
I agree with Maged on the idea to partner with the Europeans. This way funding is not only done by the Americans. Shutting down the whole NASA shuttle program is not the best idea at all.
-N. Arthur
NASA is a wonderful program that has been committed to and responsible for some really amazing feats of science. Some of the best scientific minds work there. However if they close will it be the end of space exploration? Will people give up on scientific research of the universe? I doubt it. The only thing wrong with NASA is that it is a publicly funded institution. People who are not interested in atmospheric physics and rocket science are forced to pay for these services. Why not let the private sector compete in a free market and see who can develop a new form of space travel first? This would also free up the public funds to pay for things that concern the interests of the entire public like the country's infrastructure, bridges tunnels and roads for one thing.
ReplyDeleteMichael Moreno
I don't quite believe that closing the space shuttle is the solution to fixing the budget crisis, but it will provide the government with more money to repair the budget. Overtime, the prospect of humans traveling to space became less of a dream and more of a reality. It also became less of a competition and more of a common goal, so when people hear that the United States is pulling out of the space race, they should know that the discoveries of any country are the treasures of the world.
ReplyDeleteHaving private companies run the space program doesn't seem like such an issue to me either. It only means that more people will be able to do what many astronauts did since the NASA standards kept a great deal of people away. The private institutions should be looked at as a way to pump a little extra money into the economy. Either way, the space age isn't over yet.
L.D.
I have to be bias on this situation, in none end i think that NASA has never been cost efficient and is very accident prone. Also spending that amount of money every year for operations or missions that might not even go out seem like a terrible waste and a deeper hole in our deficit.
ReplyDeleteyet depending on other countries specially Russia to why whom we have had a "space" competition with does not exactly seem ok, i believe that we should not end the shuttle operation yet. Instead we should regulate and be more strict with NASA so everything could be done here in the US and no in other countries.
Claudia Chevez