Return to Article: Shift to moon-Mars focus affects 2,680 NASA jobs
-
8812
Mars does have weapons of mass destruction. I saw it on TV -- the army was fighting all of these killer machines on legs with eyebolt rays and than the Martians all died from a little bacteria. I guess we are now planning to go there to wipe them out permanently or maybe to overthrow their government and to spread democracy to all the planets of our solar system.
Somebody told me it was only a movie and the war of the worlds didn't really happen but I don't believe it. Maybe we can send the Governor of California to Mars -- He should be quite comfortable there having regained his memory from Total Recall. :-)))
-
8797
This is ridiculous, we can explore the universe without the expense of manned missions, but then again maybe Mars has WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.
-
8795
The real story is that NASA is nearly eliminating its research efforts. While the story highlights a 15% overall cut, the bulk of the cuts come from the research centers (Glenn, Langley and Ames). As a NASA employee I have always felt my primary goal was to create technology that created good jobs in the U.S. in general, and the U.S. aerospace industry in particular. That all changed with Bush's shift to exploration. The goal now is for the agency to perform space exploration. In fact, now research, if needed for exploration, is being outsourced overseas (with little regard to U.S. commercial interests). While one may or may not agree with this new direction, this monumental shift in U.S. policy should not have been made without national debate.
-
8782
Ah, I can hear it now. "Go to school, get an engineering degree, become a rocket scientist, go to work for NASA, you'll have a job for life."
-
8780
Why doesn't this surprise me at all.
"In January 2004, President Bush laid out an ambitious plan to return Americans to the moon by 2020, this time to stay, and to use the lunar base as a steppingstone to Mars. The plan marks the space shuttle for retirement in 2010, after NASA finishes building the International Space Station."
The last time we went to the Moon we did so out of National Pride in beating the Russians in the space program. Why now gut NASA's basic space and aeronautics research and laboratories, take down the Hubble telescope, and redirect the entire agency back to the Moon? Where is the race now?
While I really love looking at those wonderful rocks in the Smithsonian's Air and Space - I don't think spending billions and billions of dollars to go back for more rocks is really worth it-- and a steppingstone to Mars??? I can think of a better way to spend a few trillion dollars than to go to a lifeless planet. How about spending it here on Earth to make sure we don't end up like Mars.
-
8773
Moon? Mars? This agency cannot even send anyone into Earth orbit reliably at the present time. What a joke!!!
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.