Nasa updates 2013

[Guest Lady Luck]

In 2013, NASA will push ahead with an ambitious exploration program, continuing crew flights and commercial resupply missions to the International Space Station, and advancing the systems needed to send humans deeper into space. We'll also be launching a new mission to the Red Planet, learning about our own planet, understanding our place in the universe, and developing technologies that benefit us right here on Earth.

 

We'll be watching the skies with you when meteor showers, asteroid encounters and eclipses capture your attention, and we'll surely make scientific discoveries and technological advances we haven't even planned for yet. Meanwhile, we already have a busy launch schedule planned, with destinations from the International Space Station to Mars.

2013 Launches

For current dates, visit

› NASA's Consolidated Launch Schedule

 

The Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRS) will update NASA's space communications network.

The Landsat Data Continuity Mission (LDCM) will gather valuable data and imagery of Earth to be used in agriculture, education, business, science, and government.

Several International Space Station Expeditions head to the orbital outpost, beginning with Expedition 35 in March.

The Orbital Sciences Corporation plans tests flight with the goal of sending its Cygnus capsule to the International Space Station.

Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) plans the second and third contracted commercial resupply flights to the International Space Station.

The Interface Region Imaging Spectrograph (IRIS) looks to increase our understanding of energy transport into the Sun's corona and solar wind, and provide an archetype for all stellar atmospheres.

TheLunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) will gather detailed information about conditions near the lunar surface and environmental influences on lunar dust.

The Mars Atmosphere and Volatile EvolutioN (MAVEN) mission to Mars is the first devoted to understanding the Martian upper atmosphere, with a goal of understanding how Mars changed through time.

[Strelky]

Good luck and godspeed NASA. May you get us somewhere else before the world truly does end.

[Kashiwaba Tomoe]

Um.... pretty sure this isn't a political thread.....

[Ark of Truth]

pretty sure this has got nothing to do with politics.

 

This thread is a good read either way, even if it is in the wrong section.

[Guest Lady Luck]

ark obviously he didn't know about minor politics that supports ideology going through space and time lol.

[Ark of Truth]

Seems that way.

[ChancellorKremlin]

Moving this to the off-topic section seeing as it has more to do with "news" than politics.

 

If anyone wants to then start a discussion about Nasa's policies or your ideological views on why nasa rocks/is a waste of time, feel free to use the politics section.

[Guest Lady Luck]

true that , i just want to make thread that usefull instead rumbling about weapons people die each day , if people dont care about nasa we dont know what space politics means , u know i realized people are selfish in their own way well this thread interested on intellectual people that likes this kinda of stuff.

[ChancellorKremlin]

Don't get me wrong Domgar, I'm a massive fan of NASA and what it stands for. But your OP had nothing inherently political about it (maybe we should have a science section?) so I moved it here on that purpose only.

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

NASA is pointless, because we're never going to other planets.

 

They're all populated by demons.

[Guest Lady Luck]

Don't get me wrong Domgar' date=' I'm a massive fan of NASA and what it stands for. But your OP had nothing inherently political about it (maybe we should have a science section?) so I moved it here on that purpose only.

[/quote']

 

 

eh it don't matter what kind of opinion [obviously some certain opinion will go against the debate which is pretty pointless to argue about the topics] , im a massive fan of nasa too i always see their updates to see the progress yeah i agree with you we should have science politics on the forum its mixture of political opinion it doesn't matter which wrong or right, even with the updates they politicize the issue, its the edict that matters at the end.

 

 

 

BaconMinion

NASA is pointless, because we're never going to other planets.

 

They're all populated by demons.

 

Nasa is pointless? , let me see how about your comments are pointless, If you say this topic has nothing to do with the current event please do elaborate us with your thoughts at least make a point on that argument you make.

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

NASA, like the Internet, is serious business.

 

That's why we haven't had any manned missions to the Moon in decades.

[Guest Lady Luck]

NASA' date=' like the Internet, is serious business.

 

That's why we haven't had any manned missions to the Moon in decades.

[/quote']

 

dude that doesn't even make any sense , do u realize what you say here is ignorant political view , let's see here do u even watched nasa tv they do literally hundreds of missions trust me , they discovered water source on mars, shit even new lifeform on that planet and that isn't " manned mission" seriously before u trolled nasa is pointless do a background check first before you make a total schmuck out of yourself.

 

here's a perfect example

 

Nasa Mission To mars GOV source

 

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/ <-- Clear Source of Mission details

 

here's another thing what you didn't know claiming nasa didn't do any mission.

 

http://www.nasa.gov/missions/index.html < -- nasa glossary of mission from point A -z Entire mission base

 

 

if you think nasa didn't do shit to the moon u can visit the second link there's hidden mission that nasa so inclined to share.

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

So serious business that people can't see a joke and jump to moronic conclusions. I make a joke about demons, and suddenly I said NASA doesn't do missions? Are you this touchy about everything, or is NASA somehow the most special thing in the universe to you?

 

What I said about no manned missions to the Moon is still true; haven't gone there in decades. I guess once we beat the Russians, everybody stopped caring about setting foot on another body in space. Except not, since other countries are trying to get to the Moon now with humans. But not NASA.

 

I've been waiting most of my life to see humans on Mars, and the way it's going, I'll be dead before that happens.

[ChancellorKremlin]

I haven't quite left this thread yet, so lets watch our language in here.

 

While they may not have set foot on the moon, they have done a hell of a lot of other stuff. And we need to ask ourselves, what's so big about setting foot on the moon anyway? Its probably the costliest return on investment ever, when probes can do the same if not more, for a lot cheaper.

 

Personally, I'd like to see men on mars in my lifetime. But that is looking like it will either be an international collaboration, and not simply a NASA one, which also suits me just fine.

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

By the same logic, what's so big about man landing on Mars? Or man going anywhere else in space? We can just send machines to do everything and stay on Earth. If they had machines to do it back in the late 15th century, do you think they should have sent a probe across the ocean to look for a passage to India instead of Columbus?

 

I think it's the same drive to explore first hand that has always spurred humanity to expand. When I was a kid, I wanted to be a part of NASA and go to the Moon. Or Mars. I held out hope that one day, I would hear about men landing on the red planet.

 

But as I grew older, it seemed like they had either no interest, or simply pushed back, the whole landing on other bodies in the solar system. Now it really is just use probes for everything while sitting behind a computer. The process has become... almost lazy, in a way. And if they keep doing this, I fear man will never again leave the orbit of Earth, much less Earth proper.

[ChancellorKremlin]

By the same logic' date=' what's so big about man landing on Mars? Or man going anywhere else in space? We can just send machines to do everything and stay on Earth. If they had machines to do it back in the late 15th century, do you think they should have sent a probe across the ocean to look for a passage to India instead of Columbus?

 

I think it's the same drive to explore first hand that has always spurred humanity to expand. When I was a kid, I wanted to be a part of NASA and go to the Moon. Or Mars. I held out hope that one day, I would hear about men landing on the red planet.

 

But as I grew older, it seemed like they had either no interest, or simply pushed back, the whole landing on other bodies in the solar system. Now it really is just use probes for everything while sitting behind a computer. The process has become... almost lazy, in a way. And if they keep doing this, I fear man will never again leave the orbit of Earth, much less Earth proper.

[/quote']

 

The difference is, we've already been to the moon. Not a lot there to be honest. It is symbolic, but setting foot on a totally different planet (and not just a satellite) would be a huge leap in Human history. That alone is worth the effort.

 

Having said that, Mars also has a whole load of other stuff to justify both the investment and the risk of sending humans. It has water, it may well have life, it is a lot more suitable for human habitation than the moon, etc.

 

So for those reasons, I see a manned mission there a lot more interesting than yet another to the moon.

 

I'm having trouble though; if you were such an idealist as a child, and still believe men should expand and go to Mars (and the moon) then why are you bashing Nasa? Surely you realise they can only do so much on a federal budget, which is facing cuts left right and centre?

 

I'm surprised they still keep doing stuff, like at all, and I hope they never stop. One day, the money (and the interest and will) will return.

[gregathit]

All things go in fits and starts. Right now there just isn't the need to go into space. The moon landing was driven in large part by the cold war and fear of the Russians. The benefits of the "space race" were immense and far reaching. A massive amount of inventions, technology and improvements came from this so the ROI was well worth the cost.

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

The Moon also has water, and it would be a good launching point for future missions, what with the lower gravity. A long term stay on the Moon, being closer to Earth, would be an excellent proofing ground for any manned missions, much less extended stays, on Mars.

 

Man on the Moon is more than a symbol; it's the stepping stone to further, deeper exploration.

 

Also, I don't recall "bashing" NASA beyond calling the use of probes sort of lazy. Unless you're referring to my joke post ABOUT DEMONS.

[ChancellorKremlin]

Sorry, I've re-read your previous posts and see that I misread your sarcasm/jokes. So much negativity around the forums these days I just take it for granted.

 

There's been plenty of discussion as to why going straight to Mars rather than using the moon would be less costly and time consuming to achieve. I don't really care *how* they do it to be honest, I just hope they do.

[CanShield]

Nasa manned mars landing planned 2019

 

Nasas Man on Mars by 2019

 

Spacex.com also has plans to land on mars. Who ever gets there first has physical rights to claim land, and resources a significant financial windfall.

 

[video=youtube]

[Guest Lady Luck]

uh wow this thread is still going >.>

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

There's been plenty of discussion as to why going straight to Mars rather than using the moon would be less costly and time consuming to achieve. I don't really care *how* they do it to be honest' date=' I just hope they do.

[/quote']

 

Granted, if you're JUST planning to make a short manned mission to Mars, then building up the infrastructure needed on the Moon is way more costly. But if you're planning to STAY on Mars, and explore the rest of the solar system, then in the long run, the cost to build up on the Moon will be far less than constantly launching from Earth.

[Nonsense667]

[video=youtube]

 

Like it if you like it, don't if you don't, I'm not a debater.

 

And here is a bonus:

 

[video=youtube]

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

When we want to murder one another, the sky is the limit for budget. When we want to land on another planet, it's "We can't pay for that, it costs way too much!"

 

Maybe we should use the pretense of killing one another in space?