NASA selling off manned space program assets

[King Arthur]

http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/08/launch-pads-runways-facilities-nasas-grand-shuttle-sell-off-continues/

NASA is allegedly selling off its Mobile Launch Platforms (used to carry the Saturn V, and later on the Space Shuttle from the VAB to the launch pad) and Launch Complex Pad 39A, both symbolic landmarks of NASA's manned space program and which were deeply involved in both the Apollo and Space Shuttle programs. They are also selling off the Shuttle Landing Facility and runway at KSC.

As someone who still cares about how relevant NASA (and the USA) is/will be to space exploration in the world, this piece of news only strengthens to me the impression that the US manned space program is in fact dead for good (if it wasn't dead already). Needless to say, I am extremely saddened.

[astropapi1]

D:

Let's hope they don't have to cancel the SLS.

[cesarcurado]

Look at the bright side, maybe the money collected from the sales will be used on future missions and research.

Also, manned space programs aren't so needed IMO.

[Motokid600]

Look at the bright side, maybe the money collected from the sales will be used on future missions and research.

Also, manned space programs aren't so needed IMO.

I would draw a line at the Moon. Theres no need to send people farther then that. ( not yet anyway. Not until theres money to play with and some form of stasis module is developed. ) The moon has great potential to be a HUGE money maker when it comes to natural resources.

[King Arthur]

Look at the bright side, maybe the money collected from the sales will be used on future missions and research.

Also, manned space programs aren't so needed IMO.

Except future missions and research may require some or all of the advanced hardware that is being sold off, and which will cost magnitudes more than the money gained from selling them to reacquire or reproduce. Besides the fact that the money gained from the sales will be pitiful compared to what the hardware is capable of and what it cost to get that hardware in the first place.

You realize that even the Ares I prototype, from the now-cancelled Constellation program, used the MLP and LC-39B (right next and almost identical to LC-39A that is being sold) to conduct its test flight? "Future missions and research" like that simply won't be possible if NASA keeps on selling its assets like this (which actually makes me wonder if SLS is a serious project, not that I ever had faith in it).

[NovaSilisko]

Also, manned space programs aren't so needed IMO.

I am having a difficult time remembering why I keep coming back to this forum.

[Mercy]

I am having a difficult time remembering why I keep coming back to this forum.

What a productive and insightful post, Nova!

[ROFLCopter64bit]

I am having a difficult time remembering why I keep coming back to this forum.

Do you keep coming back because of me?

[Canopus]

What a productive and insightful post, Nova!

Well isn't he right? How can one say manned missions are unneeded?

[Mercy]

Well isn't he right? How can one say manned missions are unneeded?

What do we have to gain from going to other planets right now?

Besides, the guy said it was his opinion. Not fact.

[m4v]

I would draw a line at the Moon. Theres no need to send people farther then that. ( not yet anyway. Not until theres money to play with and some form of stasis module is developed. ) The moon has great potential to be a HUGE money maker when it comes to natural resources.

prrrf, all the stuff in the moon you can get it here more easily, safer and cheaper.

[King Arthur]

My view on manned space exploration is thus:

As it stands today, manned space exploration is highly impractical due to excessive costs in lifting payloads into space, producing and maintaining life support systems, inability to produce/keep/maintain food and supplies for long periods in space, inadequate technology against dangers in space like radiation and space debris, inadequate propulsion technology making manned missions anywhere past LEO unreasonably long, and the current lack of any justification whatsoever to merit human presence in space thereof.

Ultimately though, I for one believe that human presence in space will be an inevitable neccessity. When we get past the stage that is "space exploration" and finally move on to "space exploitation", there will come a time when human presence is absolutely required for the finer tasks and duties that robots alone just cannot adequately perform.

What does this mean? Personally, I believe this means that we need to move forward in manned space exploration in a way that is economically and financially reasonable and sustainable. This does mean of course that programs like the ISS and SLS are a huge waste of money (Going to Mars? An asteroid? Jeez, we haven't even managed to economically and reasonably maintain human presence in LEO yet!) and should be cancelled/terminated, but I am all for moving forward in projects such as next-generation propulsion technologies, next-generation life support systems, new forms of agriculture that is possible and sustainable in space, creation of new materials/techniques that can better shield against radiation and debris damage, biomedical advances to better maintain human health in space, and so forth.

[deadshot462]

So is a company like SpaceX buying this? I'd like to see how this platform can be used for non-space related business.

[NGTOne]

Anyone want to chip in and help me buy a crawler-transporter?

I wonder if they ship to Canada.

[rpayne88]

NASA isn't dead, but it might as well have a terminal illness. Lets hope for a miracle (i.e. more funding) and an actual reason for space flight and put a stop to this decay. Even if your not an American, you can not deny what NASA has done. NASA is the only organization to have put humans beyond LKO. Not only that, but bring them back alive. The Apollo program was mankind's crowning achievement as of now. I personally think we should have kept going, following all the projects drawn up by AAP. Instead it seems we allowed ourselves to stagnate in LKO and lose funding. NASA may be shutting its doors soon, bought out by the private sector. That day, if it comes, will be a very depressing day for humanity.

[Tiberion]

What is with all the naysaying? Did you not even read the article?

The mobile platform is one of THREE they own. They no longer need three, they probably never actually needed the third one since the shuttle was supposed to fly even more often than it did during its heyday.

Owning and maintaining assets is expensive, and that cost is wasteful if its something you don't need. Its GOOD they're getting rid of one of the mobile pads, and someone like SpaceX will make great use of it. They'll still have one to use with the SLS - do you really ever see a point where the SLS program would need 3 crawlers at once, even if we're in an active exploration phase? I seriously doubt it.

The same applies to divesting one of the LC39 pads; Its going to be primarily used by a launch partner in the commercial crew program. If that partners owns their own facility and has to pay for the maintenance, thats something that doesn't come out of NASA's budget.

Add on the fact that LC39 is old at this point. They had to do extensive work to refit in for the SLS program, and that is expensive, perhaps moreso than making a new facility. They'll have to do that eventually, and transferring their infrastructure to partners who are going to keep using them makes a lot of sense, both financially and logistically.

And they aren't even selling the runway and landing facility, its being transferred to Space Florida, which already maintains a lot of the Cape Canaveral space facilities. Its a local/state organization. The shuttle is dead, its not coming back, and NASA has no current plans for another winged spacecraft in the works. Dreamchaser or something like SpaceshipOne might use the runway, and that won't change because Space Florida runs it instead of NASA.

Its a GOOD thing that NASA admins are able to be flexible and change with the times, cutting costs where they can and getting something out of their assets instead of letting them sit and rust or crumble.

I really can't fathom why people think NASA is dying, and it boggles my mind that anyone who has played KSP can seriously ask why we'd need a manned program. I even saw in another thread that someone thinks the ISS program hasn't been 'worth it'

Have we truly given up hope and the desire to see whats out there? Maybe we're really not so far from the fat slobs of the future we see in WALL-E after all. Except we'll be too lazy to even master space flight, so we'll just live in our own garbage piles, completely oblivious.

[Anton P. Nym]

Space.com is saying that it's the only the Apollo-Shuttle era MLPs, not the crawlers themselves, that're up for auction... and that they're for sale because they already have new MLPs designed to suit SLS on the way. Rather than spend the money to mothball and store the old and now obsolete MLPs they' re offering them for sale to anyone who can put them to use.

I hope they'll find a better use than scrap, but even that's better than NASA having to divest another program to pay for letting them gather dust in a warehouse.

-- Steve

[Psycho529]

NASA may be falling apart (ish) and all this stuff, but there is hope in àþÑÂúþÑÂüþѠbecause they were the first to do almost everything in space and seem to be making some descent progress with things like, owning 10 launch pads at ÚþÑÂüþôрþü Ñðùúþýур (strictly speaking 16 but one got destroyed in an accident and others are for rockets no longer in use like the ÿ-1, íýõрóøÑÂ-Ñурðý, æøúûþý and so-on) Not to mention the fact that the Russians own the resupply system for the ISS (crew and cargo) with their áþю÷, ÿрþóрõÑÂÑ and their Úûøÿõр. And if àþÑÂúþÑÂüþѠcollapse then the ISS is most probably going to drop dead in space (well I have a feeling it might soon because the Russians own the core which is designed to last for 15 years but the ISS is about 16 now). So all in all it seems that àþÑÂúþÑÂüþѠare making the most progress in space (in my opinion) and are more likely to end up anywhere than NASA at this rate.

[cesarcurado]

i am having a difficult time remembering why i keep coming back to this forum.

"imo"

....

Also what King Arthur (the poster lol) said.

Edited August 25, 2013 by cesarcurado

[satcharna]

NASA may be falling apart (ish) and all this stuff, but there is hope in àþÑÂúþÑÂüþѠbecause they were the first to do almost everything in space and seem to be making some descent progress with things like, owning 10 launch pads at ÚþÑÂüþôрþü Ñðùúþýур (strictly speaking 16 but one got destroyed in an accident and others are for rockets no longer in use like the ÿ-1, íýõрóøÑÂ-Ñурðý, æøúûþý and so-on) Not to mention the fact that the Russians own the resupply system for the ISS (crew and cargo) with their áþю÷, ÿрþóрõÑÂÑ and their Úûøÿõр. And if àþÑÂúþÑÂüþѠcollapse then the ISS is most probably going to drop dead in space (well I have a feeling it might soon because the Russians own the core which is designed to last for 15 years but the ISS is about 16 now). So all in all it seems that àþÑÂúþÑÂüþѠare making the most progress in space (in my opinion) and are more likely to end up anywhere than NASA at this rate.

Indeed. The future is with Roskosmos and China.

With some luck, the rest of the US will soon follow the same path NASA currently is. While it is sad that manned spaceflight keeps getting slimmed down, the technology for unmanned flights hasn't been advancing as quickly as it currently is since the Cold War. With some luck, we'll soon find a reason to send people into space again.

[Psycho529]

Well àþÑÂúþÑÂüþѠwas only capable of such things due to having unlimited funding from the government during the cold war and as a result had rockets that were marvelous and did not replacing (apart from upgraded variants). One perfect example would be the íýõрóøÑÂ-Ñурðý space shuttle that hada auto-pilot from launch right the way to landing on the runway,not to mention the space Ñурðý was capable of carrying an extra 5 tonnes more than the STS. So yeah, the future is with àþÑÂúþÑÂüþѠand China, and possibly ESA and Japan, if they can catch up with Russia and China.

[satcharna]

Their funding was far from unlimited, I'm afraid. The programme wasn't a single agency like NASA, but rather multiple design bureaus that made competing offers to the government. Price was a very big factor, not least because of the large amounts of money spent on the military. A better way of putting it would be that they spent their money a lot more sensibly, focusing more on the fulfilment of the mission than on various optional objectives.

Unfortunately, ESA most likely aren't going to do independent manned launches any time soon, nor are they likely to make any super-heavy unmanned launches. JAEA faces much the same problem, as well as relative obscurity.

[Psycho529]

Just as I thought, all the pressure of future space exploration is going to fall on àþÑÂúþÑÂüþѠand China, well at this rate it will...