wat do americians think of nasa and its merits?

Answer 1

I think highly of NASA, but I am not so proud of some of the reasons that they have done some things.

The Moon Landing was a technological feat, and the farthest voyage that any men have every taken. After that though we have lost our way.

This back to the moon project seems as well thought out a the "Conquest" of Iraq. The Mars mission seems even worse.

Since the early days of Verner Von Brown the plan was to build a space stage and use that to stage all future Interplanetary missions. Yet the Space Station isn't finished.

NASA's Space Shuttle Program was a tour de force it changed the entire way space travel was done. A reusable spacecraft was a BIG step toward a continuing space program. We had finally stepped out of our infant shoes of simple rockets and moved on to the next phase. The Shuttle was never more than a space truck. Its primary mission was to deliver parts to the space station. Its extraordinary mission to repair and service the Hubble Space Telescope was almost unbelievable. The astronauts tackled a repair mission was never designed to be done in space. With difficult to use tools, and the thick astronaut gloves NASA wasn't sure they could physically handle the repairs. What they were able to due was amazing.

Then NASA decided to dump the Hubble Project. The project that was responsible for scientific observations that couldn’t have been made any other way. We have never looked further or seen more than with the Hubble. Yet NASA wants to abandon it. I am sure this is another of the mistakes made by the Bush Administration. Probably because he can’t understand the scientific progress that has been made. It was very expensive and difficult to get the Hubble where it is. To not continue its mission is foolish.

NASA’s new CEV program to return to the moon is just reworked Apollo era equipment used with scrap parts from the Shuttle Program. Apollo was designed to barely get to the moon and get back. To repeat 40-year-old operations is foolish. It’s like developing steam engines and iron, then going back to pure sail and wooden ships. To create one ship of the line England had to sacrifice an entire forest. One major reason for establishing the American Colonies was to fulfill their requirement for wood. The proper way to make build a new moon project would be to use the International Space Station (ISS) as an assemble point. The Shuttle would be to send parts of preassembled spacecraft to the ISS by rocker or Shuttle and then create a Moon Shuttle. The Moon Shuttle would run between the Earth and the Moon. It will carry all the parts required for a practicable moon base. The project would be done on a two or three stage process. Taking off from the moon is so much easier than taking off from the Earth, and using an Earth based rocket to carry the crew, and parts for a Moon Station would be the difference between selling milk by an eye dropper or a milk bottle. The raw parts could be brought into Earth Orbit by unmanned rockets. Each mission wouldn’t require a 3-person crew. Entire Moon Habitats could be sent into orbit and then ferried by the Moon Shuttle to the Moon. Why reinvent the wheel on each mission. What happens if there is a problem on the Moon and the astronauts have to be evacuated? Assembling an entire Apollo like mission would be hard, and it would require at least one pilot so it could only rescue 2 lunar astronauts. A moon shuttle could pick up the astronauts and bring them back to the ISS. It would be a tight fit for a while by the astronauts can be returned to Earth in a Russian Progress spacecraft, a NASA spacecraft, or a civilian spacecraft. But, only a NASA ship could make it to the moon.

The Shuttle Program had problems and the aging spacecraft is starting to show wear and tear, so it needs to be replaced. The design is a good one, and not one to be tossed onto the rubbish heap of history. Spacecraft design should be like car design a continuing evolution toward a better vehicle.

We should use something similar to the Moon Base for a Mars Mission. The Mars astronauts will have to stay on the planet for a long time and out base there should be a reusable one.

NASA’s unmanned program has done a lot better. Maybe because it is below most politicians radar so they don’t bother to interfere with it.

NASA has done some great things, but the program lacks vision and a working plan. Its bureaucracy is a maze of regulation that stifles public participation.

Answer 2

Perhaps a small dose of Churchillian wit to highlight the relative merits : Sir Winston Churchchill ,who perhaps you are aware of, was known to be quite partial to quality cognacs ,and fine cigars ,was one fine morning interrupted by his celebrated General Montgomerie (Monty ), who walked in sprightly as ever and said ," Sir ,I don't drink ,I don't smoke ,and I am a 100% fit ." With that famous bulldoggish scowl , and the ubiquitous cigar dangling from Sir Winston's lips,the repartee was ," My dear Monty ,I smoke ,I drink ,but I am 200% fit " !! So my friend it's all a matter of opinion . As far as I am concerned ,if I smoke I do not exhale ,and If I drink ,I drive so that my driver's licence expires before I do !! Just a tiny matter now on smoking . In India all cigarette packs only contain a STATUTORY WARNING of a legal nature ,unlike the USA ,where it is the Surgeon General omniously issuing a health warning . So in India ,it is only the law that warns you about the health downside. So why the heck care - smoke -the long arm of the law takes a long time coming.! If during your lifetime ,you were never able to achieve or collect anything noteworthy ,now is the time to do so by smoking and drinking- you may soon be the proud owner of a LUNG CANCER(upgraded and latest model), or a "crashed " LIVER ( which I assure you can be rated several notches higher than a 'crashed computer'!). Think of all the fame and publicity that will surround you- you will figure on the front page of every CANCER & CIRRHOSIS glossy . PHILIP MORRIS ,JOHNNIE WALKER etc will buy you out for astronomical sums . Just think about this ,and let me know IF you wake up tomorrow. CHEERS mate :)

Answer 3

Well as far at the Space Shuttle goes I think they should have retired them a long time ago and had moved on to a better design. Those things were all from the 1980's. Spaceships don't last forever. If a car doesn't last ten years than why do they think they can keep a spaceship for 20?

Answer 4

NASA has, unfortunately, become an organization without purpose and drive. During the cold war, they had a clear mandate from the government, but now, all of the DOERS have been replaced by THINKERS that seem more interested in justifying their budgets and continnued existence than scientifc study that benifits humanity in general and America in particular.

Answer 5

I can't speak for anyone else, but it used to be a good organization with a clear purpose, but it has become mired in its own internal bureaucracy, and failed to live up to its goals or its promises.