Amid Ukraine Crisis, Key Senator Urges Plan B for Space
Source: NBC
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. As relations between the United States and Russia deteriorate due to the crisis in Ukraine, Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., is calling attention to concerns about the two nations' joint venture on the International Space Station.
Nelson, who flew on the space shuttle Columbia in 1986 and now chairs the Senate's subcommittee on science and space policy, said the situation in Ukraine illustrates why it's "vital" for NASA to support the development of U.S. commercial spaceships.
"Weve got to properly fund and support commercial spaceflight so we can keep our space program alive and well, no matter happens with Russia," Nelson said in a statement late Monday.
Since America's shuttle fleet was grounded in 2011, Russia has been flying U.S. astronauts to and from the International outpost at a cost of up to $70 million per seat. If Russia should suddenly refuse to fly Americans there, the United States could be without the means to keep astronauts aboard the $100 billion-plus outpost.
Read more: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/amid-ukraine-crisis-key-senator-urges-plan-b-space-n55861
About time something wakes up congress about manned space flight.
AAO
(3,300 posts)and entering with weapons bared, taking over the space station for Muther Russia? What would we do?
Igel
(35,300 posts)And how we have more important things here at home to deal with.
AAO
(3,300 posts)I don't know. but let's not find out.
bananas
(27,509 posts)Xolodno
(6,390 posts)No....Russia would force only American's off the Space Station and then demand that China take their place....ESA will agree.
madinmaryland
(64,933 posts)our own space exploration? We basically gave up in the late 80's and early 90's just using the Space Shuttle until it's life ended.
Imagine what we could have done without the wars, the MIC, the PIC, the tax cuts, and without REAGAN.
LongTomH
(8,636 posts)kentauros
(29,414 posts)Last edited Tue Mar 18, 2014, 08:45 PM - Edit history (1)
It's rare that they say simply "the International Space Station" or "the ISS." Rather it's always prefixed with the total cost of said space platform or launch system.
Yet, I never see them report on the military the same way, such as "the $4.5 billion USS Dwight D. Eisenhower aircraft carrier" or "the $70 million V-22 Osprey." The only times costs come up is if there's a claim of massive pork going on.
And they've been reporting on NASA like that for decades. It's almost as if they want to see NASA fail, by any means.
madinmaryland
(64,933 posts)Why does NASA require accountability and the MIC does not? I would say that the MIC can use the "scare" factor whereas NASA can use only use the "intelligent" factor. We all know who will win that battle.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)that the next time he's interviewed and costs come up for him to take issue with it and really push back at the M$M for their lousy reporting style. He'd do that!
madinmaryland
(64,933 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)I know the fleet was pretty old and the chances of an accident increase, but being able to get into space independent of other countries should be a priority. It was short-sided to depend on any country to get a "lift" into space and back. IMHO we made a mistake scraping the program.
El Supremo
(20,365 posts)Like, sure. How much longer will it take Elon Musk or Richard Branson to get people up there?
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)I support commercial spaceflight. I am agreeing with you. We don't know how long it will take. Originally I thought the goal was like 2016 or 2017. It may be 2020 at this point.