PDA

View Full Version : Time to Privatize NASA




Flash
09-16-2010, 01:59 PM
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5960



A history of flight

Put the progress in spaceflight in historical perspective. The Wright brothers' first flight was in 1903, and Charles Lindbergh flew across the Atlantic Ocean in 1927. By the late 1930s, the first commercially viable aircraft, the DC-3, was flying. But 35 years after Mr. Glenn's first flight, travel into space is still an expensive luxury.

Should we have expected better? If the National Aeronautics and Space Administration had backed out of the civilian space business after the moon landing, yes.

Consider the progress in other areas. The inflation-adjusted cost of commercial air travel has dropped by about 30 percent since the late 1970s, when airline deregulation began. And the cost of shipping oil has dropped by as much as 80 percent in a little over two decades. But the government's reusable shuttle has actually made spaceflight more expensive.



No thanks, private sector

The government has had many opportunities to turn over civilian space activities to the private sector. In the 1970s, American Rocket Co. was one of the private enterprises that wanted to sell launch services to NASA and private businesses. But NASA was moving from science to freight hauling, and planned to monopolize government payloads on the shuttle and subsidize launches of private cargo as well. The agency thus turned down American Rocket.

In the late 1980s, Space Industries of Houston offered, for no more than $750 million, to launch a ministation that could carry government and other payloads at least a decade before NASA's station went into operation. (NASA's station currently comes with a price tag of nearly $100 billion for development, construction and operations.) NASA, not wishing to create its own competition, declined Space Industries' offer.

In 1987 and 1988, a Commerce Department-led interagency working group considered the feasibility of offering a one-time prize and a promise of rent to any firm or consortium that could deliver a permanent manned moon base. When asked whether such a base were realistic, private-sector representatives answered yes -- but only if NASA wasn't involved. That plan was quickly scuttled.

Each shuttle carries a 17-story external fuel tank 98 percent of the distance into orbit before dropping it into the ocean; NASA could easily -- and with little additional cost -- have promoted private space enterprise by putting those fuel tanks into orbit. With nearly 90 shuttle flights to date, platforms -- with a total of 27 acres of interior space -- could be in orbit today.

These could be homesteaded by the private sector for hospitals to study a weightless Mr. Glenn or for any other use one could dream of. But then a $100 billion government station would be unnecessary.

As long as NASA dominates civilian space efforts, little progress will be made toward inexpensive manned space travel. The lesson of Mr. Glenn's second flight is that space enthusiasts ignore economics at their peril.

Elwar
09-16-2010, 02:10 PM
http://www.xprize.org/

lucius
09-16-2010, 08:54 PM
Hell Yes... :D


http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5960

Knightskye
09-16-2010, 08:55 PM
Is it palatable to the general public to go from zero to liberty in 3.9 seconds?

lucius
09-16-2010, 09:17 PM
Is it palatable to the general public to go from zero to liberty in 3.9 seconds?

Who cares? They're all watchen' Jersey Housewives...clueless, won't even see a thing...

Stary Hickory
09-16-2010, 09:44 PM
Not against privatizing NASA no one should be forced to fund it. Just like all government programs.

messana
09-16-2010, 09:57 PM
I agree constitutionally we shouldn't fund it but I wonder how NASA would be funded if it was privatized? They don't produce anything therefore can't make revenue and space exploration probably costs millions of dollars yearly.

I doubt that they would never get where they are today if they weren't funded by the government.

Sentient Void
09-16-2010, 09:58 PM
Wrong.

Time to privatize *EVERYTHING*!!!!!!!

RAAAWWWWRRRRRR!!!!

lucius
09-16-2010, 10:57 PM
Not against privatizing NASA no one should be forced to fund it. Just like all government programs.

Got to start somewhere...eliminate this modern-day pyramid building endeavor: all done with my tax dollar--f*ck them... :(

freshjiva
09-16-2010, 11:03 PM
Meh. NASA should be far down the list of things to privatize.

lucius
09-16-2010, 11:09 PM
Meh. NASA should be far down the list of things to privatize.

$400 hammer?

Dude, they are putting it way in and breaking-it-off inside us...that's not cool, huh?

Elwar
09-17-2010, 05:14 AM
Even Ron Paul voted for NASA funding.

Referring to it's Defense Department uses.

lucius
09-17-2010, 06:27 PM
Even Ron Paul voted for NASA funding.

Referring to it's Defense Department uses.

You're a contractor...right? :rolleyes:

Flash
10-13-2010, 11:39 PM
Meh. NASA should be far down the list of things to privatize.

I would normally agree-- but this article makes the case that NASA is actually hurting space exploration.