The White House Plans to Privatize the International Space Station

Discussion in '[H]ard|OCP Front Page News' started by Megalith, Feb 11, 2018.

  1. Megalith

    Megalith 24-bit/48kHz Staff Member

    Messages:
    12,018
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    According to NASA documents, the government intends to turn the International Space Station over to the private sector as a means of keeping it afloat without direct federal support, which is expected to end in 2025. Skeptics say that this is troubling, as the ISS was built for science, not business.

    In its budget request, to be released Monday, the administration would request $150 million in fiscal year 2019, with more in additional years β€œto enable the development and maturation of commercial entities and capabilities which will ensure that commercial successors to the ISS β€” potentially including elements of the ISS β€” are operational when they are needed.”
     
  2. Chebsy

    Chebsy Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    373
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Ive got an idea, private company (SpaceX et al) strap some big booster rockets on it and use it to get men to Mars !!
     
    Red Falcon likes this.
  3. Gorankar

    Gorankar [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    14,247
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    Science is business. I consider privatization a better alternative to a controlled atmospheric burn up, or an intentional crash landing in the ocean. That is where the station is headed otherwise. It is past it's original EOL already, and they are not going to just keep extending it like they did this time.
     
    Makaveli@BETA, mullet, mrp and 4 others like this.
  4. TorxT3D

    TorxT3D Gawd

    Messages:
    586
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Long gone are the days of federal funded missions and hardware.

    Privatization is needed, and should have been a decade ago.
    If americans dont wanna spend the extra tax money for space exploration, then hand it over..
    But when private companies start hand picking certain people for the jobs, i dont wanna hear shit. Americans should have jumped on the space exploration tax a long time ago, maybe we'd be on mars by now.

    Too much red tape, politics, bs, and waiting for funds with a federal funded space group.
    Time to grow up, time to move onto greater lands.
     
  5. odditory

    odditory [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,669
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Stopped reading here. They have bigger problems than space anything when the house is on fire.
     
    tikiman2012 and Chunder like this.
  6. Nukester

    Nukester [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,171
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2016
    Things look pretty good to me. Then again I don't drink out of the Democrat or Republican flask either.
     
    F.E.A.R., Dillirium, Roberty and 5 others like this.
  7. wyqtor

    wyqtor Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    280
    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Sell it to Elon, he'll make good use of it!
     
  8. atarumoroboshi18

    atarumoroboshi18 n00bie

    Messages:
    29
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2013
    [​IMG]
     
  9. gigaxtreme1

    gigaxtreme1 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,169
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2002
    Scew that money pit. Get the railgun set up on the moon.
     
    KarsusTG and Nukester like this.
  10. James Robinson

    James Robinson Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    231
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2016
    At which point will board rooms have that conversation where they justify shutting the program down, abandoning anyone on the station, and paying off the widows rather then pay to bring everybody down alive.......
     
  11. sfsuphysics

    sfsuphysics I don't get it

    Messages:
    12,794
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2007
    So "The White House" is deciding to turn over the INTERNATIONAL space station to corporate interest to turn into a fancy hotel?
     
    Chunder likes this.
  12. James Robinson

    James Robinson Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    231
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2016
    All they need to stop doing is funding trillion dollar shitfest "super advanced cutting edge ships and aircraft" that spend the entirety of their existence in storage because they don't work... problem solved and programs funded.. WEEEEEE!

    I remember getting the order to expend ALL of our stored ordinance one summer at the MAU... seems Manufactures needed a new build and supply contract, which wasn't going to be approved with our available stock. Didn't matter if none of it was scheduled for dump and destroy (due to age) for another half decade.. we had to have a shortage NOW
     
    tikiman2012 and Chunder like this.
  13. Dullard

    Dullard [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    2,040
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Space exploration is too big for the government, the private sector should do it.

    Then on the other hand, health care is too big for the private sector, the government should do it.

    It's all clear to me now.
     
    BHenry likes this.
  14. Krenum

    Krenum [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,956
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
  15. thebufenator

    thebufenator Gawd

    Messages:
    845
    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Different political parties mang.

    I think SpaceX has been setting an example that others should follow.
     
  16. DeathFromBelow

    DeathFromBelow [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,716
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2005
    I don't care who handles the logistics it as long as it continues to function as a national laboratory.
     
  17. Nukester

    Nukester [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,171
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2016
    Got it. Floating prison for worlds most dangerous. If and when it burns up in the atmosphere, who cares.
     
  18. Chunder

    Chunder Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    496
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Don't feel like typing a long essay explaining this with evidence, but this development is extremely bad for humanity and is another step of the corporatist in Trumps administration attempting to sell America and our future. We need a global space program that engages in exploration, technology development, resource extraction, and future colonization for the benefit of humanity, not redundant CEO's and stockholders. We saw what happened last time governments let private companies take over in this area with the East India Trading Company, and it was a disaster. Companies can play a role in the space program like they did helping NASA get to the moon, but they shouldn't be taking the lead, or even having an equal part in it. They should be regulated and overseen by a fully independent space agency once again.

    Oh, and the entire budget of NASA since its formation has been funded with less than 1 penny of our taxpayer's dollar, yet is the reason we had tremendous advances for humanity and are using the technology and medicine we have today(for those unaware, just look up "What has NASA given us". Imagine what could be done if NASA/ESA/JAXA/CNSA had just 1% of America's budget, or if we had a global program and dedicated just 1% of the world's budget to it.

     
  19. Exavior

    Exavior [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,114
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    how do they sell something they don't own?
     
  20. thebufenator

    thebufenator Gawd

    Messages:
    845
    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    NDT also was the guy that said private industry won't get us to Mars. I think SpaceX is hitting milestones better than government programs......
     
  21. Gorankar

    Gorankar [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    14,247
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    The government does not need to succeed to stay in business. Corporations do have to eventually succeed, or they cease to exist. The levels of fraud, waste, and abuse in any government run endeavor tends to be fairly prevalent. The bigger the program, the more money involved, the more fraud, waste, and abuse. This does happen inside corporations as well, and even internal politics can get in the way, but as a rule not anywhere near on the scale as a US government entity. The horrifically expensive space pen, instead of just using a pencil comes to mind.
     
  22. Met-AL

    Met-AL [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,905
    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    And it begins....

     
    DrezKill and SomeoneElse like this.
  23. Chas

    Chas [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,437
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    I agree that space needs privatization.

    NASA is still living in the era where it could throw away BILLIONS on a single launch.
    Look at NASA's SLS. PURE old-school NASA.
    Lifts 130 tons into space and the entire assembly becomes billion dollar space junk.

    Now look at Falcon Heavy from SpaceX costs about 90 million to launch.
    And the entire assembly is designed to be reusable.

    As much as I think Elon Musk is a nattering prat with his hand in too many pies, SpaceX is the Real Deal for the future of space exploration.
     
    LightsOut41 likes this.
  24. TrailRunner

    TrailRunner Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    328
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    https://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp
     
    dvsman, otherweeb and Chunder like this.
  25. travisty

    travisty Gawd

    Messages:
    533
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2016
    Trump: Drain the swap by giving publicly owned assets to the rich!
     
    Elkwood and Chunder like this.
  26. Gman1979

    Gman1979 Gawd

    Messages:
    634
    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    $5 says this ends with Boeing or ULA associates as the private entity that gets the spot, depriving SpaceX of a primary launch customer since Boeing and ULA have their own launch systems. Guess they feel the need to correct the "evil" of the court decision forcing the DoD to give the same access to launch contracts ULA had a monopoly on previously..
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2018
  27. Chunder

    Chunder Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    496
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    I agree that NASA should work on reusing components, but this is something NASA needs to take the lead on and have the companies work for them like they did during the race to the moon. However, comparing the SLS to a Falcon Heavy is also like comparing an 18 wheeler to a Ford Pickup. In both cases, the SLS and 18 wheeler can carry higher volumes and far heavier equipment tremendous distances, whereas a FH and a pickup truck is good for hauling not so big and heavy things shorter distances. Going to the space station or the moon? Falcon Heavy is the best route, going to Mars or beyond for colonization? That's currently the SLS.
     
  28. Chas

    Chas [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,437
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005

    The problem is, NASA simply, constitutionally, institutionally CANNOT take the lead anymore.

    Being government backed leaves them with a fundamental disconnect from the economics. The aforementioned SLS? The thing that basically THROWS AWAY a billion-PLUS dollars a launch? What's NASA's budget for space operations? Four billion?

    Then they want to build an analogue to the ISS up in lunar orbit on the way to building a base on the moon.

    Why? Not for actual eventual movement to Mars! Because, scientifically and economically, a straight-shot to Mars is a better proposition than trying to create some sort of lunar shipyard or launch base. Why? Because it's basically just a pointless stop-over.


    They've been used to being the only gig in town for so long, and they don't have to worry about the money, the taxpayers will ALWAYS give them MORE.

    So, while "Cheaper, faster, better" has been a byword there for decades now, it never REALLY penetrated the "Just Throw Money And Lives At It" culture. THAT had already ossified into the hyper-conservative, insular mess it is LONG ago. And said insular mess has a giant case of "Not Invented Here", and is completely unable to innovate.
     
  29. travisty

    travisty Gawd

    Messages:
    533
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2016
    ....

    Don't even know where to start other that saying, please educate yourself on how governments work and stop listening to faux and other blowhard right wing extreme talking heads.

    Seeing as NASA has little say in what it can do since Congress has final say on all projects NASA can only work on what sounds interesting and doable - since Congressmen have no desire to see a failed launch because failure is bad and a waste of taxpayer money because losing tens of millions of dollars is better per launch :rolleyes: (more direct i'm saying SpaceX had 5 or 6 failed first stage landings before they finally got it? That'd never fly today with the idiots in congress)

    What would work: Actually fund NASA instead of the atomic-width budget it's given compared to the military and allow NASA freedom equal to the Federal Reserve.

    Or just dump money into SpaceX at this point as that'll be easier and more productive.
     
  30. Exavior

    Exavior [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,114
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
  31. Chas

    Chas [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,437
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    The problem is, NASA and their contractors simply CAN'T think that way. Their funding model doesn't let them.
     
    bbartlett likes this.
  32. Chas

    Chas [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,437
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    The problem now is an entrenched culture.
    It was brought about by how NASA is funded.

    And while you're yelling about the failures for SpaceX. Yeah. 5-6 failures replicating what NASA contractors did 50 years ago in private industry TODAY.

    And the total cost there? A couple hundred million dollars.

    The cost of a SLS failure? A billion-plus dollars. And, even with a success, that billion dollars it totally written off.

    Do you see what I'm getting at?

    NASA basically can't adopt the mentality required to move forward. Again, because of their own entrenched culture, as well as the fact that their benefactor (the US government) can't allow it (again due to issues of entrenched culture and being risk averse).
     
    LightsOut41 likes this.
  33. theBrownLlama

    theBrownLlama Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    333
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2017
    the same fans that cheer when space launches are becoming the domain of commercial entities suddenly comes round and scream foul when they want to hand of the space station to a commercial entity

    same bunch are also complaining that R&D of space tech ( which has dual purpose for military purposes) are too high, and yet most of this R&D are already done by private companies.

    so, what exactly do the literate American want?

    you cannot slice off a huge chunk of the military budget because wherever America lets go, China or Russia is there to take its place. ( and that comes with the loss of resource extraction access, and supply lines )
     
  34. SomeoneElse

    SomeoneElse [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,231
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    FTFY......
     
  35. mrp

    mrp n00bie

    Messages:
    42
    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    ISS was designed for LEO, it doesn't have the radiation shielding needed for deep space.
     
  36. Dr. Righteous

    Dr. Righteous 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,820
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    The landscape of America has changed drastically since the genesis of the space program. America is so saddled with entitlement payouts it cannot afford space exploration. It has to private companies. This is the case in today's America. The best thing the government can do is get out of the way be easing regulation. To put it bluntly entitlement spending is killing us. Programs put in place in the last century to "help" Americans have been so abused it is ruining America.
     
  37. jpm100

    jpm100 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,860
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    1) modern businesses are trans-national kind of a lot like marxists. Don't worry, there'll be a kickback for everyone I'm sure.
    2) like the US didn't pay for most of it?
     
  38. Jehuty

    Jehuty Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    403
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    NASA might be better off being privatized than remaining in the government. All they do is slash funding and limiting their operations.

    The government is all about that military might, spending trillions of dollars on useless junk that will stay in storage without ever seeing the light of day. Trillions of dollars spent in that shit when our own soldiers aren't given proper funding for equipment (I've heard of many having to buy their own protective gear because what they have is wildly inadequate), and they're not properly treated once their service is over.

    Wait, what? Entitlement programs are a drop in a bucket compared to what we spend in military. ROI would far greater if we spent a quarter of what we do on entitlement programs than we do on the military. Military doesn't show shit, ever. Lots of fancy toys but some dudes with stones and AK47s and RPGs can fuck us all up for YEARS and still do so.
     
  39. lostin3d

    lostin3d Gawd

    Messages:
    1,003
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    I'm mostly for this as it is a natural evolution of things. I normally disagree about the need for government involvement but regardless of which side of the fence it doesn't seem like ours is capable of handling this anymore.

    Problem is, we already have numerous industries that have shown they can effectively control or ignore government involvement. Sooner or later space based business's will exhibit this same model. Basically once they escape the need for earth based resources or can out-source them evading any particular government's restrictions.
     
  40. daglesj

    daglesj [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,723
    Joined:
    May 7, 2005
    It's the start of the Elysium Project.