×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Japan Scrapping Moon Mission

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 7 years ago | from the overbudget-and-overdue dept.

Space 70

jonerik writes to mention the AP is reporting that Japan may be scrapping their upcoming moon mission. The original plan was for the "Lunar-A" probe to implant two seismic sensors on the moon, however, the project took so long that the delivery probe has fallen victim to neglect and would take too much money to repair. From the article: "The mission would have been Japan's first to the surface of the moon, and was originally scheduled for lift off in 1995. [...] JAXA's space development committee recommended canceling the Lunar-A project on Monday, and a final decision will be made later in the month, [Satoko] Kanazawa said."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

70 comments

Requisite GODZILLA Post (3, Funny)

Artie_Effim (700781) | more than 7 years ago | (#17615226)

They realized that the on-going battle between the Japanese Security Services and Godzilla was diminishing their funds too quickly to afford the moon mission. There are plans for a Mothra powered earth orbit rentery rocket, but the spacesuit for a 400' wingspan moth is also too costly. Ultraman is unable to go more than 14.7km up, due to his 70's early technology.

Silly Japanese... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17615258)

Son't they know it's easier to just fake a moon mission?

Re:Silly Japanese... (3, Informative)

UbuntuDupe (970646) | more than 7 years ago | (#17615312)

The NASA moon landings weren't faked.

*please mod informative, please mod informative*

Re:Silly Japanese... (3, Funny)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 7 years ago | (#17616204)

>>> "The NASA moon landings weren't faked."

You should take a gander at this: http://www.xkcd.com/c202.html [xkcd.com]

Re:Silly Japanese... (1)

annakin (994045) | more than 7 years ago | (#17616970)

That's funny. If you notice, all the people in that cartoon know the footage is fake, but they don't know why.

Even funnier are the Occam's Razor people, who say things like, "It would be easier to do something for real than to fake it." As if that isn't a complete contradiction.

Re:Silly Japanese... (1)

PeolesDru (535625) | more than 7 years ago | (#17624606)

I don't know. Just off the top of my head, it would be easier for me to simply drink a glass of water than to go to the trouble of faking it. It would be easier for me to drive to work tomorrow than to somehow fake it. There are plenty of examples where faking it would be harder than just doing it.

Re:Silly Japanese... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17618664)

Obviously the moderator didn't read the cartoon....

Re:Silly Japanese... (1)

profindis (1051836) | more than 7 years ago | (#17626134)

Ohh yeah .... we all know that they weren't but do you also believe in Santa coming and putting gifts below ur pillow at Christmas? GROW UP for Pete's sakes!

Re:Silly Japanese... (1)

MidVicious (1045984) | more than 7 years ago | (#17617258)

Welcome to the information age... aka... the Age of Revealing.

Scientific proof thrown in your face. Big Government cranking those propaganda gears on full. Religion rearing its questionable head(s).

Don't you just love it?

Protection? Check. Practicality? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17615316)

Its a suit of armor designed for soliders, good.

Can they move in it? Can they climb into and out of vehicles in it? Can they take cover in it? Can they strap on a rucksack, shoulder a weapon, and engage targets with it ? Do they still have periphial vision?

Good idea, I just hope it has some actual, practical use.

The EU did not land on Moon (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17615334)

> Currently, only the United States, Russia and the European Union have landed probes on the moon.
Nor did ESA. SMART-1 crashed into the Moon, that's not called landing.

Re:The EU did not land on Moon (1)

maroberts (15852) | more than 7 years ago | (#17615460)

Sure its a landing! It may be a crash landing, but it is still a landing.

Re:The EU did not land on Moon (2, Funny)

WhyDoYouWantToKnow (1039964) | more than 7 years ago | (#17615772)

Hey, any landing you can walk away from is a good... What's that, unmanned probe. Completely destroyed you say. Never mind.

Re:The EU did not land on Moon (2, Funny)

VAXcat (674775) | more than 7 years ago | (#17617608)

Landings are an important subject in learning to fly. My instructor told me they are so important, they include at least one in every flying lesson.

Crashing is NOT crash landing (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17615880)

Crash landing implies some degree of survival is intended and feasible. The ESA probe SMART-1 intentionally bought it at 4,500 miles per hour. I reckon the probe would sustain more than a few bruises.

Probe survival was not the intention of the ESA's deliberate action of crashing the probe into the moon (so they can examine the plume for stuff etc.), therefore I can't call it a crash landing .. I have to call it a crashing or better yet a slamming.

Hmm I hate arguing over semantics, cause it's silly. Hopefully this is my only one for this year.

Re:Crashing is NOT crash landing (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 7 years ago | (#17623090)

Eh, I will strive to right this vile slander against the ESA. They deliberately slammed the probe into the Moon? Sounds like a crash landing to me. Everything they wanted to survive, survived.

It is nice to know (2, Funny)

maroberts (15852) | more than 7 years ago | (#17615368)

...that even the Japanese can fail to make delivery deadlines and have productivity problems.

Re:It is nice to know (2, Insightful)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 7 years ago | (#17615590)

Actually if you look at JAXA, almost everything they have done is a failure. It's interesting because Japan isn't a poor country(in terms of GDP it's #2 in the world), is famous for its science and technology education(whether or not that reputation is deserved is another issue), and has relatively healthy funding. And yet, almost nothing but failure has come out of JAXA. To be sure NASA has had failures as well, but NASA has had resounding successes to match. JAXA really hasn't. Why is that? Is it just poor management? Botched politics? What?

Re:It is nice to know (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17615766)

It is because of the lack of technology exports and because the Japanese government is not the same as Japanese industry. Japan is a great place for perfecting technologies, but they suck at inventing things (if you don't believe me compare the total number of Japanese Nobel Prizes to what the US got in just physics or chemistry from 1990-2006). And their government is generally inept (but in a good way since it doesn't restrict industry). If they wanted to see a Japanese space program take off they would start by modifying a couple of US designs and contracting it all out to Japanese industry (instead of using their oppressive government bureaucracy).

Re:It is nice to know (1)

Alinabi (464689) | more than 7 years ago | (#17616656)

What about the Nobel Prize laureates who were educated in Japan but worked in the US? Which column do I count them in?

Re:It is nice to know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17619006)

Well lets see, since we are talking about something made in Japan and not something made by people educated in japan who later left... I'm going with US. Good education doesn't count if you don't hold onto the people who use it...

Re:It is nice to know (3, Informative)

0rionx (915503) | more than 7 years ago | (#17616014)

Although there are probably a number of factors at play here, primarily JAXA is simply just chronically underfunded. Similar to the system used for many software developers, they were given a certain amount of funding based on achieving certain checkpoints. However, for the most part they were weighted heavily toward the end of the missions. This is only speculation, but it's likely JAXA was forced to skimp on some things in order to reach their budget checkpoints. Furthermore, if one project became bogged down and was unable to recoup its expenses, it would place further financial strain on the organization as a whole.

Re:It is nice to know (1)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 7 years ago | (#17616324)

>>>> "Actually if you look at JAXA, almost everything they have done is a failure."

I'd be interested if you have any information on their failures. One of the companies I've been dealing with has been doing work for them, and although I gave this company a pretty crappy quality write-up, my upper management decided they'd stay as they must be doing 'something right' if they're doing work for JAXA....

Oh dear.

Re:It is nice to know (1)

annakin (994045) | more than 7 years ago | (#17617070)

Here's one: Their Hayabusa asteroid mission failed to collect a sample and is returning to earth with an empty container.

Re:It is nice to know (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17621142)

Hayabusa was not a complete failure. It came pretty close and made detailed measurements and surveys of the asteroid.

Their Nozomi Mars mission also failed after experiencing a series of problems

They've had much better luck with launching observatories into earth orbit, but nothing spectacular as far as I know.

They also contributed a yet-to-be launched laboratory module for the ISS. However, lately they've been talking about pushing forward with manned exploration on their own. There's some good reasons for doing so, but they're hardly in a position to do so at the moment. JAXA has been talking big, but they haven't got the necessary support from their nation.

Re:It is nice to know (1)

digitalgoddess (1051762) | more than 7 years ago | (#17624136)

Let's see...Japan is an extremely wealthy series of islands...I'd say they're doing pretty good in world standing regardless. And since when is there ever enough support for research? We have yet to get another shuttle up.

Re:It is nice to know (1)

Drooling Iguana (61479) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620304)

It's a cultural thing. The Japanese don't consider a vessel to be spaceworthy until it can transform into a giant robot.

Re:it is nice to know (1)

dididothat (1043756) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621622)

what with battling godzilla and all those other monster fellers, i can see why Japan put space exploration on the back burner....(i am glad this is a typed reply so that my mouth and sound don't appear out of sync.) i suggest they deploy an orbital device with ground penetration radar to pre-empt the monster intrusions........and to promote good will, pay layed off united auto workers to man ground control (after they complete a payed retraining program funded by the U.S. Dept. of labor..)

Someday (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17615422)

... someone WILL go to the moon. If not a government entity, maybe a private entity, like virgin galactic.
I wonder how the US is gonna explain there's gonna be no footsteps, no flag and the hills at the orignal landing site will look somehow different.

On the other hand, the flag could be there, waving in the wind...

Well, it says in my rocket manual ... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17615464)

if you are laying this rocket up to be unused for more than six months:

1) Park in a well aired garage
2) Jack up the body and put chocks under the suspension points
3) Fill all cylinders with a good quality mineral oil
4) Unplug and remove the battery
5) Be prepared to replace perished rubber components such as tyres or suspension bushes if unused for more that one year

What bit do you think the Japanese left out?

 

Re:Well, it says in my rocket manual ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17617482)

They probably forgot to drain the used oil from the crankcase and refill it fresh.

Ima K'Hoe (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17615606)

K'Hoe

You know what you are - you're a karma hoe - suckees and suckers all around, spitting out the same crap day in and day out .

Lesson learned (3, Funny)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 7 years ago | (#17615664)

Next time they won't keep the probe in the U-Pack-It long term storage garages in Kobe.

Or at least put a tarp over it or something.

(Frist psot.. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17615762)

d)istribution. As they learn from our Not anymore. It's Nigger Association

Sony can do it. (1, Funny)

Quasimodoca (828730) | more than 7 years ago | (#17615870)

After the super successful launch of the PS3 why doesn't the Japanese space agency just contract the job out to Sony!

Re:Sony can do it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17624486)

I bet they used those damn laptop batteries

Send them to Mars! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17616126)

It sure would be nice to take those seismos and plant them on Mars. We know so little of the Martian interior, yet we know that there is a degree of activity, and have recently become very interested in the cratering rate, current vulcanism, and springs.

If the mass budget were to allow one to hitch a ride with Phoenix, and the other with MSL, or if the Japanese could be persuaded to revamp it for Mars and a heavier booster. . ..

Penetrator Probes (3, Funny)

tehSpork (1000190) | more than 7 years ago | (#17616130)

Japan will now scrap the mission but finish development of the penetrator probes and offer the technology to other space programs, including Russia's, Kanazawa said.

Only in Japan...

Re:Penetrator Probes (2, Funny)

GuyMannDude (574364) | more than 7 years ago | (#17617612)

apan will now scrap the mission but finish development of the penetrator probes and offer the technology to other space programs, including Russia's, Kanazawa said.

Ten bucks says they're tentacle-like in appearance.

GMD

Why *nobody* is returning to the moon!? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17616506)

Does anyone else find it strange that with all the public support moon missions received in the past, that nobody has gone to the moon in so long? The guy who wrote the book that Oliver Stone's JFK was largely based on had some ideas [amazon.com] about this... Only book I've ever read like this that used appropriate qualifiers and didn't just present evidence that argued for UFO's (i.e. he presented information which made it clear that many witnesses were lying or unreliable. That still left a whole lot of reliable ones though!)

Capricorn One... (0, Troll)

javabandit (464204) | more than 7 years ago | (#17616894)

Read the book or rent the movie. Talks alot about this. Many people, including many scientists and historians, don't believe the US ever went to the moon. It really was a piece of propaganda during a very communist-paranoid time in our history.

Re:Capricorn One... (1)

javabandit (464204) | more than 7 years ago | (#17616928)

Also, for this conspiracy theory, it certainly doesn't bode well that NASA just lost all of the high-quality moonwalk footage. Seems sort of strange given its relative historical and scientific value.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/one-giant-blun der-for-mankind-how-nasa-lost-moon-pictures/2006/0 8/04/1154198328978.html [smh.com.au]

Re:Capricorn One... (3, Insightful)

maggard (5579) | more than 7 years ago | (#17622248)

NASA did not "just lose" the footage, indeed there was no "footage" (as in film) to lose. Rather the original downlink recordings were misplaced decades ago. It was only recently discovered that those recordings were of significantly higher quality then what was retransmitted and seen by the rest of the world. Therefore there is now a search on for those original source recordings. This search has been fairly high profile including significant stories in Wired Magazine, AP newswire stories, etc.

If you're going to imply conspiracies at least have the well known facts right.

Re:Capricorn One... (1)

javabandit (464204) | more than 7 years ago | (#17624028)

I certainly don't think it is a conspiracy. I was merely saying that the misplacing of the footage adds fuel to the fire of the conspiracy theorists. Whether it was misplaced decades ago or not is immaterial.

In the eyes of the conspiracy theorist, the fact that recordings of the most significant event of the last millenium was lost is proof enough that it simply didn't happen.

Non-Technical proof we went to the moon. (2, Insightful)

arthurpaliden (939626) | more than 7 years ago | (#17617056)

Non-Technical Proof Of The Moon Landings by Arthur Paliden © 2006 In 1969 the Americans first landed men on the moon. Now some people have made names for themselves by saying that this and subsequent landings never happened. Their position is that NASA faked them in order to save face and fool the public. To prove their point they rely on explanations of the reported events using dubious science and lay explanations that any first year science major would and does, laugh at. However, they always miss or purposely avoid the the one piece of irrefutable proof that it did in fact happen. That is that the Soviet government never refuted the American claims and they were in a unique position to do so. For even after the Americans landed on the moon the Soviets still continued to send orbiters, landers and rovers to the moon. http://www.russianspaceweb.com/spacecraft_planetar y_lunar.html [russianspaceweb.com] Now if they wanted to get the goods on the Americans all they had to do was to land, photograph or explore with a rover the American landing sights. Just imagine the embarrassment not to mention the the damage to American credibility, at the height of the cold war no less, that such information would generate. Records even show that they never landed or even explored the areas that that American landings happened. So they did not even go and look to make sure because they knew it really happened. The next question then is even if they did know they were faked why did they never use the information. They did not use it to pressure the Americans to stop bombing North Vietnam and Cambodia where Soviet military advisers were being killed as a result. They did not use it to pressure the United States to stop sending military advisers to and providing Stinger missiles to the Afghan fighters during the Soviet occupation. They did not use it to stop the Star Wars program of the Regan administration. In fact they did not even use it to turn the West's attention away from the Soviet Union during the Soviet Coup of 1991 when members of the Soviet government briefly deposed Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev and attempted to take control of the country. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_coup_attempt_o f_1991 [wikipedia.org] Which every body knew was the last death throws of the Soviet empire. If they did not use the information then to turn the attention of the American, and world public, inward to their own governments lies and thus corruption and force it to ignore the events in the Soviet Union in order to deal with a damaging domestic and international issue. Then the proof of faked moon landings does not and never did, exist. One final thought. After the fall of the Soviet Union the Russian economy tanked. People were selling all kinds of stuff owed by the crumbling state, ships, weapons, artworks and knowledge but nobody ever approached any Western news agency or tabloid to sell them this information. And to say that one would buy it but not publish is foolish. The seller could just keep peddling it until some on did and then it would be old news and worthless until then it would still be worth something.

Re:Non-Technical proof we went to the moon. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17618696)

Wall of Text crits you for *9999*!
You die.

Re:Capricorn One... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17637380)

You forgot the quotes. Instead of including many scientists and historians, I think you meant including many "scientists" and "historians."

Re:Why *nobody* is returning to the moon!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17616940)

Ingo Swann, a quite famous remote viewer, has also written some interesting material about this in his book 'Penetration'. In this book he describes how he sees activity on the moon using remote viewing when working for an unknown government group. This group is asking him to try and investigate various coordinations they're interested in. Ingo describes at one point that he said something about how he realizes that we have been told not to return to the moon or something alone this line. Although I'm not the first to start believing such stories.. lately I have been stumbling more and more upon material discussing exactly what you are talking about: why haven't we returned yet?!?

Re:Why *nobody* is returning to the moon!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17627664)

"Does anyone else find it strange that with all the public support moon missions received in the past, that nobody has gone to the moon in so long?"

I think that lack of public support is why no one has been back. The first landing was absolutely momentous, everyone cared. The subsequent landings, not so much - it was old news already, back in the seventies. I recently found out that my father, who was a kid at the time and very interested in astronomy, wasn't even aware that there were any post-Armstrong moon missions.

The same thing applies today. A moon landing would certainly be newsworthy, but unless it was timed to a slow news day it wouldn't be the lead item. Is it worth spending billions for a limited scientific gain and a page 2 story?

In Other News.,, (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17616744)

In Other News, The Canadian Government has announced its plans for a similar mission to take place, which is going to be called "Lunar-eh"

Film at 11.

failed Japan Mars and asteroid probes (2, Informative)

peter303 (12292) | more than 7 years ago | (#17616844)

A Japanese Mars probe, originally timed to arrive with that of the NSA rovers and ESA Beagle limps [bbc.co.uk] through space. It ran out of fuel.

The Hayabusa asteroid probe probably landed on one and got a sample, failed [newscientist.com] on its return earth, schedued this summer. Bad computer programs and running out fuel is blamed.

Academic research in Japan is mostly on a shoestring budget, and I guess this is a result. I hope they keep on trying.

Fixed that for ya (1)

Drakin020 (980931) | more than 7 years ago | (#17617218)

The mission would have been the first to the surface of the moon.

/I keed I keed....Or do I...

priorities! (1)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 7 years ago | (#17617946)

"The original plan was for the "Lunar-A" probe to implant two seismic sensors on the moon"
who cares about moonquakes when they are super affected by earthquakes and the giant waves they cause. I say put the moon sensors in the ocean floor instead. Maybe that's what they'll do

First to be Second (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17618180)

What, repeating vintage 1969 American technology is beyond the reach of 2007 Japan, even though what it has to do to land a person on the Moon is now proven, and the equipment has 30 years of further development?

Or are they just feigning incompetence to get America to do the (literal) heavy lifting, and put Japanese space exploitation teams and gear up there?

I know I would, if I could.

Re:First to be Second (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 7 years ago | (#17618400)

What, repeating vintage 1969 American technology is beyond the reach of 2007 Japan, even though what it has to do to land a person on the Moon is now proven, and the equipment has 30 years of further development?

Well, first of all, it's not like everyone has access to that stunning 1969 technology and merely needs to build the next iteration of it. You will notice, that even the Americans lack the ability to reproduce that particular feat, and there's not a bunch of other people running around on the surface of the moon. Not getting to the moon doesn't exactly put Japan at the biggest list of losers or something.

Don't forget, the will (and level of funding) required to put people in the moon was immense. The amount of money spent by the US was really significant.

Japan seems to be scrapping a mission which due to years of chronic underfunding is pretty much doomed anyway. They're just finally pulling the plug.

Cheers

Apollo-style mission too risky (1)

AHumbleOpinion (546848) | more than 7 years ago | (#17622526)

What, repeating vintage 1969 American technology is beyond the reach of 2007 Japan, even though what it has to do to land a person on the Moon is now proven, and the equipment has 30 years of further development?

It's not the tech, it's the human factor. Today, the Apollo landings would be considered too risky, too hazardous for the crew. Back then we would mourn the loss, but essentially say the astronauts volunteered and they knew the risks. Especially given their military and test pilot backgrounds. Today there would be too many political opportunists and lawyers trying to exploit the tragedy, and planners are thus paralyzed by fear, or at best overly cautious.

Re:Apollo-style mission too risky (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17623478)

I dunno, we did mourn and move on after Challenger's 1986 destruction, and again after the 2003 Columbia destruction. It's true that NASA has been largely paralyzed since Columbia, combined with recklessly sending new misions despite serious risks. That shows the mismanagement and opportunism of the Bush administration, which sees the shuttle as a symbol, and a way to militarize the space program. But that's an aberration, not the overall operation of the space program over the past 37 years since Apollo's first Lunar landing.

Re:Apollo-style mission too risky (1)

AHumbleOpinion (546848) | more than 7 years ago | (#17623738)

NASA was paralyzed after Challenger, not just Columbia, probably more paralyzed. Contrast these two with the Apollo 1 fire.

Regarding political opportunism, I think your post exemplifies the modern tendency to do so. *Every* administration views the space program as a status symbol, and both parties have supported the Air Force's desire to militarize space. With respect to risky missions to Mars, *all* missions to Mars are currently risky and given that they are robotic that is not too much of an issue. Their is something worth considering in a "faster cheaper" strategy, faster learning curve, risks can be somewhat managed through redundancy, ...

Re:Apollo-style mission too risky (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17628854)

No, Star Wars is a Republican programme. The Democratic Congress voted in the 1980s to kill it, and any successor programs. Though Bush Sr continued to fund it covertly or through "voodoo budgeting". The Republican Congress of the 1990s started refunding it, through Bush Jr. It's Bush Jr's military priority, which is one reason why we're losing the Afghanistan and Iraq wars through mismanagement and strategic misdirection, why we're cultivating nuke missile threats in Iran and N Korea. And why Bush just appointed a Star Wars scientist to run NASA, right after Tom Delay's last days in power increased NASA's budget higher than it requested, culminating in this year's announcement that NASA will militarize space for the Pentagon and intel orgs.

Of course both parties and every administration has viewed the space program as a "status" symbol, among other symbols. But Bush has treated it purely as a symbol, except when militarizing space (usually covertly, where symbols are bad except as misdirection). Bush doesn't want the space research that corroborates "Big Bang" theories debunking Creationism, or more importantly demonstrating manmade climate change, or even just offering info to the public, rather than corporations. In these priorities Bush is extreme, if not quite unique (other Republicans naturally shared those agendas; Democrats, not so much).

Grounding the Space Shuttle for years after Columbia, then relaunching it despite serious continuing risks, while announcing the death of the programme, makes Bush's administration the worst space admin ever. Symbol over science, transforming space into a battleground.

I'm all for cheap, fast, expendible automated missions. I'm even more enthusiastic about whatever the US can do to drag American industry to the Moon and various orbits, whatever it takes. And I want American humans landing on Mars first. The US has a lot of global prestige to recapture after the past 5 years of disgrace. The space programme is probably the most popular government operation overall, domestically and in the world. And it directly attacks our worst enemies - jihadists, anti-intellectuals, doomsayers, defeatists - both foreign and domestic. It's clearly demonstrated that until Bush is gone, NASA will be the Pentagon's bitch. In a couple of years, though, we might be able to get back on the path to an American pioneering Mars, and a Lunar solar platform.

Re:Apollo-style mission too risky (1)

Breakfast Pants (323698) | more than 7 years ago | (#17623732)

None of that happened with the shuttle.

Re:Apollo-style mission too risky (1)

AHumbleOpinion (546848) | more than 7 years ago | (#17623824)

None of that happened with the shuttle.

There are two shuttles losses, Columbia in 2003 and Challenger in 1986. In 1986 there was a little excitement among Democrats that they might be able to pin the blame for launching on Reagan. Political behavior has deteriorated since then, and it wasn't all that high in 1986 to begin with.

c0m (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17618784)

sadness And it was population as welL between each BSD That support though I have never
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...