It ends, Atlantis lands tomorrow and it's done

[Second Hand Pat]

I will be getting up early to listen for the sonic booms as Atlantis enters the atmosphere. As a long term resident of the space coast it is a sad day to see the end of our space program for the near term and watch as our space shuttle fleet is retired and decommissioned to become museum displays. I can still remember my dad calling the space shuttle a "guided rock" when he worked on the shuttle systems for Harris.

I can also remember my horror when the Challenger explored after launch and again when Columbia came apart in the atmosphere. But I also am proud each time to see the shuttle fly towards the stars for the last ten years from my front porch.

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2011/jul/20/sonic-boom-thursday-sounds-end-space-shuttle-missi/

[Skip]

i now it sucks!! :( i can't believe that its over just like that!

[Darrell Ward]

It's kinda sad. As a kid, I remember space flights were a big deal. These days, coverage is regulated to page 6 of the newspaper. With all the crazies fighting over budgets in Washington, it's doubtful we will see US spaceflights again in our lifetime.

[Skip]

how could this happen?! i still don't understand.. Russia and China are still going.. but now us?! WTH!?

[Second Hand Pat]

I forget to mention that a member of my husband's family was killed in the Columbia disaster.

Rick Douglas Husband (July 12, 1957 – February 1, 2003) was a United States Air Force Colonel, an astronaut, and the space shuttle commander of STS-107 (Columbia) who was killed when the craft disintegrated after reentry into the Earth's atmosphere. Husband is a recipient of the Congressional Space Medal of Honor...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_D._Husband

[mwdw]

my teacher was in the running for the seat on the challenger and was so disappointed when he didn't make it. i'll never forget the look on his face when it exploded. i can't believe we are taking a back seat to space exploration. it somthing i sure we will learn to regret.

[calihawker]

Very sad.


how could this happen?! i still don't understand.. Russia and China are still going.. but now us?! WTH!?

It's real simple, we are outsourcing manufacturing and at the same time putting massive regulations on our ability to manufacture ie environmental, workers comp, osha, msha, unions, the list goes on and on and on and suddenly space travel becomes price prohibitive and the tax payers scream where's the benefit of spending all this money on space exploration.

Countries like China and Russia have no such inhibitions when it comes to workers and the environment.

Private industry and keeping the government out of it is our only hope.

Steve

[Second Hand Pat]

Sonic booms at 5:52 am this morning.

[terps]

how could this happen?! i still don't understand.. Russia and China are still going.. but now us?! WTH!?

Very simple. We're out of money.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

[Skip]

booo! now we have to pay russians to give a taxi into space..

[rdiscus]

OMG ... can't count that big number :)

[Skip]

Very simple. We're out of money.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

wth was that?! the matrix?!

[Second Hand Pat]

Very simple. We're out of money.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

...yet we have (or maybe not) the funds to conduct war on two fronts :(

[Skip]

...yet we have (or maybe not) the funds to conduct war on two fronts :(

thought it was 3 with libya..

[Darrell Ward]

The shuttle fleet has been scheduled for retirement for years. The youngest shuttle is over 20 years old, and no, we're not out of money. In fact, there is more money in this country right now than anytime in history. It's just that corporations are paying relativity few taxes, and using the savings to pay out ridiculous bonuses, and buy out their competition. Working stiffs never see the money, and are told, "we're broke, we're broke"! Wall street and oil companies continue to make record profits year after year, and military contractors keep the pressure on politicians to keep the war machine running, even though none have yet been paid for. There's no money to be made for them in peacetime. At the same time, we have other politicians determined to bring down the government, and the economy to it's knees for political gain. It's a real mess. It's likely to be decades, if ever, that we return to space.

[terps]

The shuttle fleet has been scheduled for retirement for years. The youngest shuttle is over 20 years old, and no, we're not out of money. In fact, there is more money in this country right now than anytime in history. It's just that corporations are paying relativity few taxes, and using the savings to pay out ridiculous bonuses, and buy out their competition. Working stiffs never see the money, and are told, "we're broke, we're broke"! Wall street and oil companies continue to make record profits year after year, and military contractors keep the pressure on politicians to keep the war machine running, even though none have yet been paid for. There's no money to be made for them in peacetime. At the same time, we have other politicians determined to bring down the government, and the economy to it's knees for political gain. It's a real mess. It's likely to be decades, if ever, that we return to space.

Did you not look at the numbers on the debt clock??? Do you not understand simple math. We are out of money. We are borrowing 43 cents on every dollar to pay our bills.

US unfunded liabilities is almost 115 Trillion and growing.

US total assests is about 76 Trillion (but assets like land and houses will continue to fall).

We cannot tax our selves out of this massive debt. We cannot grow our selves out of this massive, insane debt. We have to start massive federal spending cuts. And the cuts have to start now.

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2011/03/feed-your-family-on-10-billion-a-day.html

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2011/04/16-tons.html

[Darrell Ward]

Get real! I'm not going to argue with you. You are obviously bought and sold on the BS political notion that the FED can cut it's way out of debt. Ask any creditable economist. Cut the FED to zero, it will still fail. This will never, ever work without also raising revenue. YOU HAVE TO HAVE BOTH. Now, let's return to the space shuttle thread. Thank you. :)

[Skip]

sooooo... does that mean, we are not going to Mars!? :(

[Darrell Ward]

LOL!

[Sean Buehrle]

I dont think its the end. I think the space shuttle has been made obsolete by a new type of craft that doesnt take rockets to get it out of the atmosphere.

Ill bet something is in the works.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Discus-n00b]

booo! now we have to pay russians to give a taxi into space..

Not only pay them, but trust drunk russian cosmonauts and pilots to carry crew and payload worth millions. And I promise you, they are drunk. Russian pilots reek of vodka.

[scottthomas]

Get real! I'm not going to argue with you. You are obviously bought and sold on the BS political notion that the FED can cut it's way out of debt. Ask any creditable economist. Cut the FED to zero, it will still fail. This will never, ever work without also raising revenue. YOU HAVE TO HAVE BOTH. Now, let's return to the space shuttle thread. Thank you. :)

Its not that complicated.... spend less and you will not need to borrow -hence you will not be in debt. I agree its sad to see the shuttle program finally reach its end.

[calihawker]

sooooo... does that mean, we are not going to Mars!? :(

I've read enough of you posts Skip. You are on Mars! LOL!

Steve

[ericatdallas]

I think most people miss the point about raising taxes and cutting expenses. I think on the extreme of both, it will fail no matter what for different reasons. There's certainly a way to do it with reducing expenses and there is certainly a way out of our mess by raising taxes/revenue. The reality is there are people who think on the extremes of both sides and there are people who are strongly leaning towards on or the other.

That's the reason why we are deadlocked and not accomplishing anything. People just have to meet in the middle. As a society we all have to share the pain. We can't look at it from the side of helping one group more than the other. Politics is about distributing limited resources among the participants. People shouldn't go in it with an 'all or nothing approach."

Will reducing spending help? Absolutely. Will increasing revenue help? Absolutely. Will staying firm with ideologies help? Not if it means we never accomplish anything.

I categorize myself as a fiscal conservative. I'm not an advocate for big social programs or big government. However, I do believe what Obama is proposing is a step in the right direction. I also don't believe he is asking a lot in return.

On the side of Space Exploration, I think we don't spend enough. I would rather see the hundreds of billions of dollars we 'spend' in Iraq and Afghanistan "wasted" with NASA and the industries that support it. I do believe retiring the space shuttle is a good idea. I don't believe we should retire it before we've found a replacement. I think we're too quick to cut on science but too quick to spend on corporate bailouts. Too focused on short-term wins and too selfish for long-term planning.

$500 BILLION to go to Mars (on the high end estimate)? I can think of several government programs that cost more that have more questionable rates of return for our investment. All $500B of it will go to creating jobs, purchasing materials, and improving science. Bring back American Prestige? That's got to be worth a few billion? Stay ahead in the space race? Priceless.

[Skip]

I've read enough of you posts Skip. You are on Mars! LOL!

Steve

thats where are all the cool company is.. ...

oh wait.. thats Hell.. :)

[roundfishross]

I will be getting up early to listen for the sonic booms as Atlantis enters the atmosphere. As a long term resident of the space coast it is a sad day to see the end of our space program for the near term and watch as our space shuttle fleet is retired and decommissioned to become museum displays. I can still remember my dad calling the space shuttle a "guided rock" when he worked on the shuttle systems for Harris.

I can also remember my horror when the Challenger explored after launch and again when Columbia came apart in the atmosphere. But I also am proud each time to see the shuttle fly towards the stars for the last ten years from my front porch.

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2011/jul/20/sonic-boom-thursday-sounds-end-space-shuttle-missi/

guided rock...lol I was once told it flies like a sears and robuck crowbar

[Second Hand Pat]

Leo, I like guided rock better lol. A crowbar makes me think of a boomerang.

Guys, google the Crew Exploration Vehicle. Something like this will be our next manned vehicle if we decide to go to the moon, mars or whatever. I am not exactly sure where NASA stands with this at the moment. I'm sure Eric or Skip would love to research this :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_Exploration_Vehicle

http://www.nasa.gov/missions/solarsystem/cev_faq.html

[scottthomas]

I think most people miss the point about raising taxes and cutting expenses. I think on the extreme of both, it will fail no matter what for different reasons. There's certainly a way to do it with reducing expenses and there is certainly a way out of our mess by raising taxes/revenue. The reality is there are people who think on the extremes of both sides and there are people who are strongly leaning towards on or the other.

I see your point. However, raising taxes as a solution can only work for so long. Truth is, both sides know a reduction in spending and lower taxes is the only realistic answer to our skyrocketing debt. I have seen comments by people who feel that republicans are "holding the country hostage" over this issue but those people may not realize that all democratic senators voted against raising the debt ceiling back in 2006 for the same exacxt reasons. Same old game over and over as our economy suffers and debt increases.

How can the Republican majority in this Congress explain to their constituents that trillions of dollars in new debt is good for our economy? How can they explain that they think it’s fair to force our children, our grandchildren, our great grandchildren to finance this debt through higher taxes? That’s what it will have to be. Why is it right to increase our nation’s dependence on foreign creditors?
They should explain this. Maybe they can convince the public they’re right. I doubt it. Because most Americans know that increasing debt is the last thing we should be doing. After all, I repeat, the Baby Boomers are about to retire. Under the circumstances, any credible economist would tell you we should be reducing debt, not increasing it. Democrats won’t be making argument to supper this legalization, which will weaken our country. .”
--Harry Reid -2006 speech on the floor of Senate

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.
--Obama 2006

--What isn’t often mentioned is that in March of 2006, under President George W. Bush, when Democrats were in the senate minority, then-senator Barack Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling. So did every single one of his Democratic colleagues. The measure passed anyway., 52-48, due to near-universal Republican support.


Even the media plays the game
MSNBC's Chris Matthews and Andrea Mitchell have been telling viewers in recent days that Republicans considering blocking an increase in the debt ceiling could be creating a financial crisis.

Seven years ago after George W. Bush was re-elected and the debt ceiling had been raised in November 2004, the perilously liberal couple felt Republicans should be "embarrassed" for having done so (transcripts follow with commentary):

ANDREA MITCHELL: But what is looking over his shoulder is history. He wants a legacy. He wants to be able to do something about Social Security. He knows he's got to do something about deficit reduction. That is the big embarrassment for Republicans. They ought to be ashamed of themselves, what the Hill Republicans have done. They've been worse than Democrats.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: They just increased the debt ceiling.

MITCHELL: Exactly.

[Skip]

i just want to know, if Nasa is going to Build the DEATH STAR or NOT!

[ericatdallas]

I see your point. However, raising taxes as a solution can only work for so long. Truth is, both sides know a reduction in spending and lower taxes is the only realistic answer to our skyrocketing debt. <snip>

I don't disagree with most of what you say. In fact, I'm not sure if I disagree with any of what you say, but ... the problem again isn't what's the 'best' solution but what's a practical and workable solution. You have two sides that have different views. Both sides think their right. I might side with you, but that doesn't mean we're both right. We could easily both be wrong.

So the options are: Standby your convictions and get nothing done, or compromise and make things a little better. My main concern isn't that the US defaults. This will cause some short-term pain for some long-term national soul searching that may make us stronger. My main concern is that, if we don't start making compromises, we may never be able to pull ourselves out.

The thing is, the 'all-or-nothing' approach rarely works in history. Can we have a perfect world? No.

I think if you can get the government to stop spending the $2 trillion that Obama is proposing, that should be considered a win to any fiscal conservative and a step in the right direction.

If we default, the republicans are really going to suffer at the polls. The reason is, most americans are already sold on Obama's compromise. They should take their licks (I gamble they will) and fight another day. Otherwise, at the next election, the newly Democratic-party controlled legislature will just make their tax hikes anyway.

The only thing (IMHO) that the republicans could hope for is that we default and the American economy keeps chugging on. We default and Obama instructs the treasury to print more money or issue debt anyway (this itself has inherent risk as it could increase the power of the presidency if it goes to Supreme Court and it could prove to be a very popular move to the general population that he took charge). The fact of the matter is, I don't think you will find the Democrats promising to reduce trillions in spending without billions in new revenue.

[scottthomas]

The thing is, the 'all-or-nothing' approach rarely works in history. Can we have a perfect world? No.


I agree with you completely. - I dont claim to have a perfect solution. My point is that both sides throughout recent history always claim they are the ones that want to stop spending when they are in the minority but continue to spend money we dont have when they are in power. Nothing new. Even the media waffles the same way. I would like to see a balanced budget amendment.

[ericatdallas]

I agree with you completely. - I dont claim to have a perfect solution. My point is that both sides throughout recent history always claim they are the ones that want to stop spending when they are in the minority but continue to spend money we dont have when they are in power. Nothing new. Even the media waffles the same way. I would like to see a balanced budget amendment.

It wouldn't work. Congress would write an emergency provision (reasonable to do) and then each year, they would vote why it's important for them to spend over (War, economy, etc).

[yim11]

http://hackedirl.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/epic-win-photos-hacked-irl-end-of-an-era.jpg

[terps]

Neither side is serious about cutting spending. The Democrats are totally clueless( and fear mongers too). And the Rino Republicans are lying about "spending cuts". Jerry Pournelle has a great post about what's going on in Washington. Go to his site and read the whole post. His whole blog is a great read.

There Are No Cuts

"Everyone is talking about Draconian cuts to the budget. The President won’t sign the Boehner Plan because of the cuts. Yet there are no cuts in that plan or in any plan proposed.

There are no cuts. None. Zip, Nada, Bupkis, Zero. None.

We need to understand how “budget cuts” are measured. The base line budget projects a $9.5 Trillion Dollar increase in spending over the next ten years. Any reduction in this increase in spending is officially a “cut.” Thus the Republican Deficit Plan mandates an approximate “cut” of $1 Trillion over the next decade in exchange for a rise in the Deficit Limit of $2 Trillion. Note that the $1 T “cut” isn’t assured, since it takes place in the future, and one Congress cannot bind another. (Note that. One Congress cannot bind a future Congress. It might be well to remember this.) But even if the $1 Trillion “cut” is faithfully carried out, the effect is that there will be an $8.5 Trillion increase in spending (and thus in Debt) over the next decade.

Put it this way. If Congress were to freeze spending: we will spend next year precisely what we spent this year on each project, none of them increased and none decreased – if Congress were to do that, the result would officially be a $9.5 Trillion cut. It would be a cut in government pay, in school lunches, in Medicare and Medicaid, to the Army and Navy, to the DOE SWAT team and the Department of Agriculture Pet Bunny Inspectors, a cut to Head Start, a cut the FDA, a cut to – well, you get the idea. Not spending more money every year is a cut, and a freeze on spending is a $9.5 Trillion Cut in Federal Spending. Cuts to school lunches, Medicare, Medicaid – well, we’ve said all that. Not spending more is a cut.

It hasn’t always been this way. Back in the 1960’s a “cut” was actually a cut; if a department’s budget got cut it meant that it got less money. But since the budget acts of the 70’s Federal spending automatically increases year after year and any reduction in that increase is scored as a cut.

So: if we adopt the Boehner Plan, we get what amounts to a $10 Trillion increase in spending over the next decade. And that, we are told, is the best we can hope for, and we ought to wheedle the Democrats and the President graciously to concede to give it to us good and hard.

Let me repeat that because while most of you know it, some don’t, and those who haven’t thought of it will find it hard to believe. A freeze in spending: a mandate that no department of government spend more next year than it spent this year; will be reported as a $9.5 Trillion cut. If Boehner gets all he asks for and then some, say a $1.5 Trillion cut over the next decade, he will have locked in an $8 Trillion increase in government expenditures (and thus the Deficit) over the next ten years. And the Democrats will decry the Draconian cuts in school lunches, education spending, Medicare, etc., etc. And at the moment the “non partisan Congressional Budget Office” believes that Boehner Plan would only “cut” $0.85 Trillion over ten years, meaning $850 Billion, meaning $85 Billion/year. The United States borrows $100 Billion a month.

There are never any actual cuts in spending. No one is proposing any. There are only temporary reductions in spending increases. No Plan by either Party contemplates any actual cut in spending. We are arguing over how much more we will let the deficit rise: $8 Trillion or $10 Trillion. If it only rises by $8 Trillion that will be counted a great victory with a $2 Trillion cut. Be prepared to pay.

Salve, Sclave." - Jerry Pournelle

http://jerrypournelle.com/chaosmanor/?p=951

Also Karl Denninger's blog goes over the basic math of what needs to be done. Things will get worse with the economy when government spending is stopped. GDP will contract a lot. But if we don't stop the insane, massive government spending soon and keep on kicking the can down the road, things will really get bad. And most people are not prepared for that outcome.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=190845

[Second Hand Pat]

http://hackedirl.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/epic-win-photos-hacked-irl-end-of-an-era.jpg

:thumbsup:

[Darrell Ward]

Blah, Blah, Blah! Don't believe the political crap. Use your search engine to look up the true facts. Revenues have been declining for over 10 years, and continue to decline. This is the real problem. Revenues now cover only about half of what's needed to run the country. Cut out all pensions, starve the elderly and the poor, push the mentally retarded wheelchairs over the cliff, you still won't have enough money without borrowing, or raising revenues. If politicians are serious about this, (which they are not, only for political gain) they would shut up about the debt ceiling, pass a clean bill, close the corporate giveaways, and tax loopholes, and give the same deal to new manufacturing and low interest loans to fix the crumbling infrastructure as they gave to the wall street robber barons, then you could put this nation back to work. Corporations would race for this chance, rather than be left behind. That would raise record amounts of revenue, and solve the problem, period. REVENUE solves problems for everyone. This nation was built on manufacturing, and will never rise again without it. It won't happen though, because special interest money lining the pockets of both parties will ensure the problem is not solved, and our Supreme Court, which is the finest, most corrupt court corporate money can buy, will keep declaring that campaign donations equal to the GDP of 3rd world countries is perfectly legal. Meanwhile the country will surely continue in a downward spiral.... Now back to the space program. Today, a story was released giving the Russians authority to crash the unused space station into the Pacific Ocean around the year 2020 or so. What a waste of money!

[scottthomas]

Good post


Any reduction in this increase in spending is officially a “cut.”

Yeah people have been falling for that for years from both sides of the aisle. lol If we keep spending more and more every year at these rates how can people believe the solution is to tax ourselves out of debt and into a better economy? Even taxing those evil buisnesses (yeah I'm sure they wont pass tax increases along to consumers) we will eventually run out of revenue if we keep spending at this rate. When I'm running low on money, I stop spending-it works for me.

[terps]

Here's a video every American should watch. The Senator points out that those "cuts" are not cuts. The American people are being lied to. Spending is out of control.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/SenRe/start/14756/stop/16376

It makes you so mad at how your tax dollars are wasted. And the Democrats want more taxes??? So the government can waste more money? Simply crazy.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/07/do-we-really-have-a-revenue-problem/

[ericatdallas]

I think we need to do both until we have half the debt we do.

It represents the fourth largest budgeted disbursement category after defense, Social Security, and Medicare. A good half of it is intra-agency (to other federal agencies). I do think some debt is okay because it provides flexibility, maintains the infrastructure to increase funds in an emergency, and provides a safe investment vehicle for people to earn interest.

However, if we eliminated just the debt to foreign creditors), that would do more to decrease our budget than either the democrats or republican plans without raising taxes or reducing spending.

Last year, we spent $413,954,825,362.17 on interest payments, this is from the treasury web site (http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm)

What could we do with $413B a year? Heck, we could easily finance a mission to mars, the moon, research alternative energy, AND reduce taxes with change to spare.

Of course, this takes shared sacrifice from everyone to make it happen. So that means it won't :(

[Darrell Ward]

It's wrong to hold the nation's welfare, and the citizens of it, hostage for political grandstanding over this debt ceiling bill. It amounts to economic terrorism at the least, and treason at the worst. These politicians willing to trash the credit of the US in order to get what they want, should be sent to GITMO. Want to act like a terrorist? Then we will treat you like one!

[scottthomas]

It's wrong to hold the nation's welfare, and the citizens of it, hostage for political grandstanding over this debt ceiling bill. I agree, Obama shouldnt be threatening to veto any compromise that brings up this debate during his reelection bid. He should be sent to GITMO I guess. :)

[Darrell Ward]

:rolleyes2:

[terps]

The insane, massive spending in Washington continues. It's too bad the Tea Party failed to stop it. Expect several downgrades on our credit rating now. It should have been downgraded right after Obamacare passed. Anyway, Congress was never serious about cutting any spending. It's too easy spending other people's money.

Here are some excellent economic blogs to read:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/

http://market-ticker.org/

http://www.zerohedge.com/

Read them everyday. Be prepared.

[ericatdallas]

No comment...


Russian supply ship for space station crashes

The failed launch of a Russian supply ship may have ripple effects at the International Space Station.

A spacecraft carrying nearly 3 tons of supplies failed to reach orbit Wednesday and crashed into Siberia.

NASA's space station program manager, Mike Suffredini, says next month's planned launch of a new crew may be delayed. That's because the upper stage of the Soyuz rocket that failed is similar to the ones used to launch astronauts.

Suffredini says three of the six space station astronauts who are due to return to Earth in two weeks, might end up staying longer. NASA wants to keep the outpost fully staffed with six to keep research going.

As for supplies, the space station has plenty to last until spring.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

MOSCOW (AP) — An unmanned Russian supply ship bound for the International Space Station failed to reach its planned orbit Wednesday, and pieces of it fell in Siberia amid a thunderous explosion, officials said.

A brief statement from Roscosmos, Russia's space agency, did not specify whether the Progress supply ship that was launched from the Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan had been lost. But the state news agency RIA Novosti quoted Alexander Borisov, head of a the Choisky region in Russia's Altai province, as saying pieces of the craft fell in his area some 1,500 kilometers (900 miles) northeast of the launch site.

"The explosion was so strong that for 100 kilometers (60 miles) glass almost flew out of the windows," he was quoted as saying. Borisov said there were no immediate reports of casualties.

The ITAR-Tass news agency quoted Choisky's Interior Ministry as saying the space ship crashed in a vast Siberian forest that contains small villages. Yuri Shmyrin, the chief of Karakoksha, one of those villages, told Interfax news agency that the search operation for the wreckage is not likely to start until Thursday morning.

The Russian Emergencies Ministry could not be reached for comment. A Roscosmos media officer who refused to be identified said the agency had no immediate comment.

Roscosmos said the third stage of the rocket firing the ship into space failed a few minutes into the launch. The ship was carrying more than 2.5 tons of supplies, including oxygen, food and fuel. Since the ending of the U.S. space shuttle program this summer, Russian spaceships are a main supply link to the space station. It was the 44th Progress to launch to the International Space Station.

Roscosmos said the accident "would have no negative influence" on the International Space Station crew because its existing supplies of food, water and oxygen are sufficient.

Interfax cited a Russian space analyst, Sergei Puzanov, as saying those supplies could last two to three months and that "the situation with the loss of the Progress cannot be called critical."

In the United States, NASA said the rocket appeared to function flawlessly at liftoff, which occurred right on time, but there was a loss of contact with the vehicle just over five minutes into the flight.

On NASA TV, Russian officials said the upper stage did not separate from the supply ship and that on two subsequent orbits controllers tried to contact the supply ship — in vain. Two hours after the mishap, Russian Mission Control told the space station crew: "We'll try to figure it out."

NASA is counting on Russia as well as Japan and Europe to keep the orbiting outpost stocked, now that the space shuttles are no longer flying. The shuttle program ended in July with the Atlantis mission; a year's worth of food and other provisions were delivered.

Late this year, a commercial company in California plans to launch its own rocket and supply ship to the space station. NASA is encouraging private enterprise to make station deliveries.

There are six astronauts aboard the International Space Station, which orbits 350 kilometers (220 miles) above the Earth. They are Russians Andrei Borisenko, Alexander Samokuyayev and Sergei Volkov, Americans Michael Fossum and Ronald Garan and Satoshi Furukawa of Japan.

"The supplies aboard the space station are actually pretty fat" after the resupply mission by space shuttle Atlantis in July, NASA spokesman Kelly Humphries said from Houston. "So we don't anticipate any immediate impact to the crew."

Humphries stressed that NASA was waiting to get more details from Russian space officials on what actually happened.

In July of 2010, a Progress supply ship failed in its first automatic docking attempt due to equipment malfunction, but was connected with the orbiting laboratory two days later.

http://news.yahoo.com/russian-supply-ship-space-station-crashes-172337040.html

[ericatdallas]

http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2011/07/cartoon-round-up_22.html

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-y8APZG2CpPM/TiniOWJaCMI/AAAAAAAADXg/lLWgQEq2DM8/s1600/Cartoon+-+NASA+Cutbacks.png

[Upper Canada]

I will leave the politics alone.

However the shuttle program for me stands as a remarkable achievment. Nasa raised the bar higher again, after its accomplishments with the Saturn programe. Yes it is money that is impeding their forward momentum in space,that is all, not intellectual, design or manufacturing capability. So you should take some comfort in that.

Really, who else could do it? Who could match that record?

I had my two youngsters watch the final lift off with me, because I told them this is something they needed to remember. When Neil Armstrong touched the moon's surface I was recording it with an 8mm movie camera I still have the roll of film ) off the tv with my parents, but that's just me I guess.

Bob

[ericatdallas]

No, NASA is still doing good work. It's the good work they could do in science and the economic benefits we lose out from the development that saddens me. Also the loss of national prestige. We're so broke we're outsourcing our space program to one with a worse technical and safety track record (although, one that managed to beat us with Sputnik and first man in space).

One thing to point out is that I have work with, I do work with, and I'm taught/mentored by a lot of the people who worked on the BIG government programs of the past (i.e. space and other less well-known) projects.

Most of them are retiring. There really is no one that is there to replace them. No one that really understands how to build some of these things except in theory. When you hear the science you think, "Oh that's simple." but when they described the challenges you think, "Oh, how the heck would have expected that? Or, wow, what did you do? You did what..?!!" That is all lost :(

In theory, I'm here to replace them. My friends and co-workers are supposed to replace them. I can tell you, we are going to have a bumpy ride b/c all our knowledge is on paper. I know some pretty smart people, I can't even comprehend their "smartness" but there's little actual hands-on experience.

So hopefully, restructuring NASA and their projects is a temporary setback because it'll be a lot more costly to redevelop that intellectual capital in the future.

[ericatdallas]

That was an odd coincidence. As I was typing the previous, I was actually about to head out to a briefing (which the speaker is a current NASA director) and obviously some of the topics that came up were the issues mentioned above.

I'm sure some of it was political, some of it was polished PR, but his opinion was that NASA will be buying less, doing less, but probably doing more with what they have.

I think his main opinion was that, less money is less money, just have to deal with it. Also, to get more money, we need to be better able to figure a way to tell others that space can make money.

I think most people see space as a "nice science" but nothing to solve the world's problems.