NASA planetary science budget whacked

[DocM]

here comes the fallout from the massive James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) cost overruns; cancellation of joint missions with ESA etc. Maybe it'll spur Congress to add to NASA's budget, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

NBC....

WASHINGTON ? Scientists say NASA is about to propose major cuts in its exploration of other planets, especially Mars. But even before the cuts are unveiled, lawmakers are vowing to fight "tooth and nail" to preserve missions to the Red Planet.

With limited money for science and an over-budget new space telescope, the space agency essentially had to make a choice in where it wanted to explore: the neighboring planet or the far-off cosmos.

Based on the advance word about NASA's budget for the coming year, Mars lost out.

Two scientists who were briefed on the 2013 NASA budget, due to be released on Monday, said the space agency is eliminating two proposed joint missions with Europeans to explore Mars in 2016 and 2018. NASA had agreed to pay $1.4 billion for those missions. Some Mars missions will continue, but the fate of future flights is unclear, including a much-sought project to bring rocks from the Red Planet back to Earth.

The two scientists spoke with The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the budget.

They said the cuts to the Mars missions would be part of a proposed reduction of about $300 million in NASA's $1.5 billion planetary science budget. The other big part of NASA science spending ? the $1.8 billion Earth science budget ? is not being cut, the two scientists said.

[Astra.Xtreme]

It's pretty sick that they keep chopping more and more of NASA and putting some of the smartest people in the country out of jobs.

The government has their priorities severely messed up.

[articuno1au]

Yeah.. Feeding your people is definitely a secondary priority..

That said, I think the military ought get a lot more of the chop before NASA.

[Astra.Xtreme]

Yeah.. Feeding your people is definitely a secondary priority..

We are talking about the USA, not Zimbabwe...

[Melfster]

Honestly James Webb Space Telescope Is way may more important then Mars missions though it has big cost overruns.

[shockz]

We are talking about the USA, not Zimbabwe...

Oh that's right, there's nobody living in poverty in the US.

[Vice]

Honestly James Webb Space Telescope Is way may more important then Mars missions though it has big cost overruns.

I agree.

When you look at all the things we've learned about the universe from Hubble compared to all the things we've learned from sending probes to Mars it clearly indicates that the telescope is more important and will give us much more value and over a longer period of time. If we were to send people to Mars we would have under a decades worth of scientific discovery. Possible 3-4 years at most. But by funding the telescope we could still be using it in 20-30 years from now or longer.

Now I'm not saying we should abandon a manned mission to Mars I still think we should go there but if it was a toss up between the telescope and a manned mission to Mars I'd choose the telescope, we have forever to make a trip to Mars and the longer we wait the better our technology progresses. We will get to Mars eventually, there's no rush.

Oh that's right, there's nobody living in poverty in the US.

Poverty in the USA is like being a king in Zimbabwe though. Some people in these poverty stricken countries are eating dirt to stop hunger pains, that is true poverty. How many Americans are you aware of that eat dirt just to keep their stomachs full? -- For the first time in history the fattest people are the poorest.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

gotta love this country - hundreds of billions goes to the war machine but NASA cant get a decent budget.

[Astra.Xtreme]

Oh that's right, there's nobody living in poverty in the US.

Way to completely miss the point... What he said was completely stupid because it's already a top priority in this country to hold the hand of everybody in poverty.

The budget for helping the poor puts NASA's budget to shame. I'd rather have my money go towards the super brains expanding our scientific abilities rather than somebody sitting on a couch all day.

Excuse my generalizations, but you get the point.

[stevember]

We are talking about the USA, not Zimbabwe...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_9695000/9695217.stm

[Astra.Xtreme]

http://news.bbc.co.u...000/9695217.stm

And? Do you really think that out of 300+ million people, that there aren't going to be a few sad unlucky souls? The taxpayers are still footing the bills to keep them alive.

The people in Africa that are eating dirt and each other would die to have the same treatment as the very poorest in this country.

[DocM]

Sorry, but if that report is true then its the parents fault as there are innumerable federal and state programs specifically for feeding the poor and especially kids. All too often the adults just won't sign up for them or take the "food stamp" debit card & sell it on the black market so they can buy drugs.

I know this because of working with food programs that attempt to serve the poor.

Also; being technically "poor" in the US is far different than elsewhere. Here large percentages of those in that group have air conditioning, a car, cable/satellite TV, a computer, a game system, live in a larger space and have many other amenities you wouldn't necessarily find in many other countries.

[Hum]

Maybe Bill Gates can chip in a billion.

[+Raze Subscriber²]

Off topic: Good lord...is this thread about NASA and their budget or the comparison of America's poor to the rest of the world? It's one thing to discuss the situation, but hell some of you just can't resist the urge to argue it into the ground to show off your incredible intellectual skills/egos. And it seems like it's always the same people...

On topic: NASA's budget will be cut by only $59 million, the cuts are aimed at the unmanned planetary/solar bodies and Mars missions, they still have $1.2 billion in funding. Other programs saw an increase in funding, commercial spaceflight and human exploration and space technology. The James Webb program has been terribly managed, though it does involve some of the most advanced technology that the USA is capable of and really pushes the envelope, which is not a bad thing. NASA is still one of our best investments, the returns have been priceless.

[Nerd Rage]

Obama is destroying space exploration. He must be scared of martians!

[DocM]

The US Senate is the fly in the ointment - they are the ones who chopped Obama's funding request and insisted on SLS - a $38B+ franken-rocket that could be developed for far less if done in a competative program similar to Commercial Crew.

[Hum]

Space budget axing is not surprising, considering the USA is going bankrupt.

[Xero]

Obama is destroying space exploration. He must be scared of martians!

Pretty sure he already met some. :shiftyninja:

[Alladaskill17]

We are talking about the USA, not Zimbabwe...

Oh the ignorance.

[Astra.Xtreme]

Oh the ignorance.

Welcome to the conversation and thanks for adding nothing to it. Have a nice day...

[neoadorable]

Thank you Raze for some common sense. The cuts are not that massive, I think mostly meant to show that NASA is trying to be more responsible and efficient. Plus many of you seem to have missed on the fact that these are cuts proposed by NASA themselves, not congress. I wouldn't worry too much, the space program is still here and Mars exploration will pick up over the next decade. Having said that, NASA living on fifteen billion a year while wall street gets trillions is really beyond words.

[Kelxin]

Honestly James Webb Space Telescope Is way may more important then Mars missions though it has big cost overruns.

Until something such as a small planet starts heading towards earth, then everyone will have wished we had somewhere already colonized to get off the planet.

[DocM]

A more immediate need is a pro-active, manned & unmanned asteroid interdiction program, including a network of widefield space telescopes dedicated to detection and accurate orbit prediction.

[neoadorable]

Its interesting you bring up asteroids. I was recently somewhat convinced that NASA's desire for an asteroid.mission over a Mars mission was justified due to interdiction concerns and the more pertinent reality that asteroids are quite feasible sources or precious metals and minerals for human industries. I was always under the impression Mars was a ball of resources flying through space, but it seems current data indicates that aside from iron.which we don't lack, old Mars doesn't have too much to offer in terms of mining?

Anyway I think the current NASA budget is still ok, they are still committed to the same basic goals.