No incentive Darli. Sad but true, these huge corporations led by these egomaniacs aren’t interested in helping anyone unless there is a buck attached to it.
Whilst I agree that we should be fixing this world before screwing up another, you only have to look at NASA and how little they have achieved (in an public expected view) since the space race was won by the yanks.
You want things fixed here, start another space race. Whether it’s to the moon or mars or an asteroid, if there is trillions to be made, innovation and technology will thrive. And hopefully, even by accident, we may discover something that will heal this rock we’re stuck on.
I am not going to go out on a limb on this, you could be absolutely correct. The only thing I will say is that Nasa is a very conservative organization, and the safety of the Astronauts is their primary concern. That being said the Astronauts are way over the time they were going to be there. It was my view that the reason the return was delayed was to ensure they would have the safest return possible. I am certain about one thing is that if they were at extreme risk they would have been bought back, that not being the case then NASA have decided to ensure the safest return possible.
Also people forget that NASA also deal with Aeronautical. That check list every pilot does before takoff and landing? NASA developed. Those wing tips? NASA.
They are a very conservative organization and it has and is changing rapidly. Hopefully the new NASA administrator will continue down this path.
Apollo 1, Challenger and Columbia do not support that astronaut safety is always their primary concern.
Maybe a bit harsh with Apollo 1 as it was the at start of NASA, but it should have been avoided. Engineers stated they were not ready for that test.
Challenger was the ultimate case of not putting safety first. 1985 had the highest rate of shuttle launches. All but 1 showed O-ring burn through. It was the one flown at the highest ambient temperature. The contractors engineers said they should not launch as the dual O-ring system would definitely fail at temperatures below 3 degrees Celsius. They launched at minus 2. They were overridden by management and NASA. The thinking is that Raegan wanted to claim putting the first teacher in space during his a state of the Union address later that night.
Columbia was almost as bad. They could have re-assigned a military satellite to check and see what damage was caused during the foam strike on the wing during takeoff. They didn’t due to cost. As an aside, there was a 1% chance they could of saved those astronauts. They would have had to launch a second shuttle that they didn’t even have ready. The astronauts would have had to use a tether connecting the 2 shuttles to get to the rescue shuttle.
The shuttle was too complex and had too many known issues to be used as anything more than prototype.
The initial plan was that the initial shuttle version would be a prototype to discover design / safety improvements and to test out full reusability. They changed tack as costs were rising and too high. As a result 14 astronauts are dead.
NASA’s mission should only be scientific discovery. Hubble, JWST, all the probes for discovery, thescience of living in space and places like the moon and Mars.
They have always done this but should exclude spacecraft development. Pay contracts to commercial space if required to deliver the vehicles. They deliver at a much lover cost.
Here’s the tip: stop farking over the planet we have, and we won’t need to go to Mars. It’s a bullshit waste of money and resources when this planet is the only one that we know of that can sustain life.
Dude, thats why I said “in a public expected view”. I know they have achieved a hell of a lot.
But unless society looks like the Jetsons, you’re gonna get a bunch of the public thinking that NASA gets a ■■■■ ton of money and does nothing with it.
Very narrow view of what is achieved via Spaceflight and associated discovery.
A virus can wipe out all human life on earth.
An asteroid can do to us what happened to the dinosaurs. Maybe spacecraft development and investment can prevent that. NASA’s DART hypervelocity impact with Dimorphos successfully altered Dimorphos’ orbit around Didymos. Could save earth and billions of lives in the future. Modified starship could save us in the is instance.
There are many companies (includes Musk’s Tesla) and governments spending more money on solving earths problems than what is being spent by the public purse on going to Mars. It will cost less government money to get to mars than what it cost to get to the moon.
Why do people put effort into making music or writing novels or making art instead of doing things to help save the planet? Sounds pretty stupid. Same as saying there is no reason to explore and learn and benefit in and from space exploration because it doesn’t solve every one of earths problems.
More than 1 thing can be achieved at the 1 time. It’s not either / or.
Discovery and exploration is one of the most human things there is. It’s been a constant throughout our history. Not everyone participated in it at the time, but many have benefited from it.
ADD
During the Apollo program development, there were 350,000+ people that earned a living directly from the program. ~25% of yearly US GDP was spent at the time. Civilization continued and prospered.
At present the systems are failing all the time and air traffic control is having to rely on manual procedures is my understanding.
So yeah fixing the reliability of it would be pretty important.
And to have the engineering talent to keep a site like X or any one of the large social media or other sites out of Silicon Valley would take some talent.
The guys that work for Elon Musk are better than your average IT guy with a tafe certificate.
Or it’s not restoring blitz when a match day thread melts.
