The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

[Handyman]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Lets expand your analogy...sure paying $2 million for the $1 million Ferrari is nice because you have it to show off...but is it worth it if you can get a similar car cheaper and still be able to brag about it? Lets say you can get a Lamborghini for $1.5 million does it still make sense to pay $2 million for the Ferrari? What if you have no need for a Ferrari or a Lamborghini because you aren't a balding middle-aged man that can't get it up you just need something that will do the basics and get the job done. Does it still make sense to spend $2 million on the $1 million car?

So lets review...$18 million for NASA = wasted...$65 million for F-22 wasted but ok because it sure is perrty!

 

[bronconick]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Worthless? In what sense?

I think it was a good decision to end the F-22 program, and that the decision was long overdue. The only reason it lasted this long is that the production was spread over 42 states and hundreds of Congressional districts. But just because you paid $2M for a $1M Ferrari doesn't mean that the car is "worthless" - you still have a $1M car sitting in your driveway.

The high cost of the aircraft, a lack of a clear air to air combat mission because of the lengthy delays in the Russian and Chinese fifth generation fighter programs, a US ban on export of the Raptor to other countries, and the development of the cheaper and more versatile F-35 resulted in calls to end F-22 production.

Yes. Worthless. This one program out of our entire budget over the past 15 years has cost as much as the Russians and Chinese spend on their entire defense budgets in a year. We give the military unlimited money to play with all sorts of technology to fight a war that will never happen, or if it comes, will be followed by us all digging out of the rubble and trying to rediscover fire. Is there really a realistic scenario where our technological best is going to face the Russian or Chinese best where we actually walk away without our planet glowing in space? We could cut the defense budget in half and still outspend the Russians and Chinese combined 3-1. I don't even think that includes the day-to-day operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Not to mention with what little I have read, the Joint British/American F-35 basically is built on the existing F-22 tech and will be cheaper to build...meaning the F-22 was just a really expensive prototype!

Not to mention that the F-14 was just decommissioned in 2006 (still in use by Iran), the F-16 is still in use as is the F-18. Of course those planes are way cheaper meaning the DOD and the companies they contract with (McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed Martin...this means you!) can't inflate their numbers and all.

The Congressional Research Service says that the Iraq War costs $12 Billion per month...assuming that the Afghan War costs $6 Billion how about we just take a month off from fighting so NASA gets her budget...how scary is it that 6 months of War could probably fund NASA for the next decade...who needs science and exploration and all the positives that brings...we can get soldiers killed and throw money into a pit for funzies!

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Certainly. But the argument that was put forth almost immediately by Red Cloud, Kepler, and Blockski was that space exploration was worth it no matter the cost and they stopped just thiiiiis short of saying that continuing to explore was the morally right thing to do.

I didn't say either of those things. Nothing justifies "no matter what the cost," and exploration isn't the right thing, it's the bright thing to do.

I did say that until humanity gets its eggs out of one basket, we're uninsurable.

 

[joecct]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

I didn't say either of those things. Nothing justifies "no matter what the cost," and exploration isn't the right thing, it's the bright thing to do.

I did say that until humanity gets its eggs out of one basket, we're uninsurable.

Local humor...
We can be thankful that these guys are not building the Intercounty Connector:

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Lets expand your analogy...sure paying $2 million for the $1 million Ferrari is nice because you have it to show off...but is it worth it if you can get a similar car cheaper and still be able to brag about it? Lets say you can get a Lamborghini for $1.5 million does it still make sense to pay $2 million for the Ferrari? What if you have no need for a Ferrari or a Lamborghini because you aren't a balding middle-aged man that can't get it up you just need something that will do the basics and get the job done. Does it still make sense to spend $2 million on the $1 million car?

So lets review...$18 million for NASA = wasted...$65 million for F-22 wasted but ok because it sure is perrty!

Sheesh. Reading comprehension much you guys?

I regret that we spent so much on the F-22. I wish we hadn't. Many, many bad decisions were made all along the way. It did not make sense at the time, and it would not make sense to do it again. They are not worth the price we paid, nor am I suggesting that we should go out and do it again. Clear so far?

However, saying that they were not worth the price we paid is not the same as saying they are worthless. They are ridiculously capable aircraft that will dominate the battlefield for decades to come. From the same Wiki article that bronconick quoted:

During Exercise Northern Edge in Alaska in June 2006, 12 F-22s of the 94th FS downed 108 adversaries with no losses in simulated combat exercises. In two weeks of exercises, the Raptor-led Blue Force amassed 241 kills against two losses in air-to-air combat, and neither Blue Force loss was an F-22.

This was followed with the Raptor's first participation in a Red Flag exercise. Fourteen F-22s of the 94th FS supported attacking Blue Force strike packages as well as engaging in close air support sorties themselves in Red Flag 07-1 between 3 February and 16 February 2007. Against designed superior numbers of Red Force Aggressor F-15s and F-16s, it established air dominance using eight aircraft during day missions and six at night, reportedly defeating the Aggressors quickly and efficiently, even though the exercise rules of engagement allowed for four to five Red Force regenerations of losses but none to Blue Force. Further, no sorties were missed because of maintenance or other failures, and only one Raptor was adjudged lost against the virtual annihilation of the defending force. When their ordnance was expended, the F-22s remained in the exercise area providing electronic surveillance to the Blue Forces.

So not only are they by far the most effective (i.e. LEAST worthless) aircraft in our inventory, they make all the other aircraft they fly with much more capable as well.

We overspent to get that capability, but the fact is that we now do have it. We got something for our money, not NOTHING, which would be the case if they were actually worthless.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Oh lighten up I read what you said I was making a joke using your analogy.

And sorry, but it is worthless because it isn't needed. (that is my definition, and well I am the one who called it worthless ) I am guessing the F-16s and the F-18s are good enough to destroy whoever it is we are fighting, assuming the next war doesn't go nuclear. (as stated Iran is using the Tomcat still and I just have this feeling that China and North Korea aren't exactly up on the latest and greatest in Jet Plane Tech ) The F-22 was America having a Midlife Crisis...we got sick of having the right amount of plane so we needed to trade it and get THE UBER PLANE!!!!111! to make sure no one questioned our sperm count!

I wouldn't care, but since we keep hearing how things need to be deficit neutral and how NASA is wasteful with its $18 billion funding needs I figured we should look at some of the other things that cost way more money and have absolutely no value moneywise. Considering the cost of the jet was over 3 times that of NASA I think it points to the real problem. NASA is a red herring...no one would be whining if there was launchpads in every state, just like no one whined because about the F-22 because it had its tendrils in upwards of 40 states. My stuff good, your stuff bad!

We have already listed the War and the DOD as ridiculously inefficient and wasteful...what else can we find that burns through money with no results! This is fun!

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Budgetary discussions are by definition about the future - what we should do in the next 1-10 years. No point in flagellating ourselves for our past wastefulness.

By all means - cut defense, please. Bring the boys (and girls, and...closeted queers) home and stop wasting money trying to herd cats in the desert. I have no sacred cows in the budget fight. In fact, that's exactly my main point: there shouldn't be *any* sacred cows, period. NASA, Defense, Entitlements - everything needs to be thoroughly audited and pared down to the bare minimum that we can stand. Since the thread started with NASA as the focus point, that's where the discussion centered, but it would have been a completely different discussion if the thread title had been "2011 Budget: No Cuts for Defense."

Manned space flight is an OBVIOUS sacred cow that deserves to be cut. Using your definition, how is it not worthless? In what way is it "needed?" And talk about a midlife crisis - people on this very thread have been advocating keeping it just so that WE can do it and so that WE are the leaders in space. After all, we do have that Big Johnson Space Center.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Man I hope you never say WE when talking about a sports team because if you do then YOU are a hypocrit

I never said NASA wasn't worthless by the same definition...but if you are asking me if I would rather spend $18 million on NASA research or $65 million on a flying Jet Viagra Plane I will take NASA.

I think manned space flight is important, it isnt the ONLY important thing but I think it should always be a goal. Lets be honest even if we set towards a manned mission to Mars my guess is we are talking a decade at earliest and that is if we can solve the inevitable fuel problems and the fact that such a flight would take months under the best of conditions which most likely would drive people CRAZY! In the interceding years NASA is going to do hundreds of missions that most likely will not involve humans (set up satellites and orbiters to help with communications issues, mapping, plot courses, test speeds...etc) so you will get what you want anyways. It is going to be ten times as decompressed as Apollo was with a heckuva lot more risk.

I dont know if it will work, but whats the worst that happens it falls through? Oh darn that puts it in line with 3/4 of the budget as is

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Manned space flight is an OBVIOUS sacred cow that deserves to be cut. Using your definition, how is it not worthless? In what way is it "needed?" And talk about a midlife crisis - people on this very thread have been advocating keeping it just so that WE can do it and so that WE are the leaders in space. After all, we do have that Big Johnson Space Center.

It's not a good reason -- it's a really dumb one, in fact -- but if pure science wins championships, nationalism still sells tickets. Good luck selling the next generation of supercolliders unless you can convince enough of the great unwashed that their daughters will be speaking Chinese without it. At the end of the day, it's still a thin crust of rational people atop an enormous cake of animals. If emotion can swing things your way for once, use it, because you know everyone competing for those dollars will.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

It's not a good reason -- it's a really dumb one, in fact -- but if pure science wins championships, nationalism still sells tickets. Good luck selling the next generation of supercolliders unless you can convince enough of the great unwashed that their daughters will be speaking Chinese without it. At the end of the day, it's still a thin crust of rational people atop an enormous cake of animals. If emotion can swing things your way for once, use it, because you know everyone competing for those dollars will.

Mmmm....Krusty cakes.... Oops. Wrong thread!

The US bailed on the supercollider game long ago, which is exactly why I'm now trying to learn French. (My wife works at CERN, in case some didn't know and/or happen to care). I'd happily divert dollars from manned spaceflight to high energy physics - that has a much higher chance of being an actual game changer for human civilization some day, and building a bigger collider should play decently for those into wang measuring contests with other countries. Not nearly as sexy, I fully admit.

Your last sentence bothers me, though - it buys into the theory that we're all just special interests working the system any way we can to "get ours." That's exactly the mentality that got us into this budget mess to begin with. Until everyone starts asking...um... what we can do to help our country ... instead of what we can ... get our country to do ... for us (hmmm - that has a familiar ring to it - I'm sure I've heard that somewhere before), we're screwed. Unfortunately, that will happen on approximately the 12th of Never (thank you, Jackie P).

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

The US bailed on the science and research game long ago.

FYP

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

I think many believe that military bases in over 150 countries is waay too many.

Frankly the whole concept of international security needs to be rethought. Just as individual state govts benefited from combining with other state governments...international security needs to involve joint intel and economies of scale in international problem solving. The world is increasing looking at itself in a similar way as most have adopted business and rule by public opinion (with pockets of extremists being the exception). Most now have the same goals rather than opposing goals. A greater military service needs to much better leverage this new state of affairs...thereby reducing costs to the US on a huge magnitude.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Your last sentence bothers me, though - it buys into the theory that we're all just special interests working the system any way we can to "get ours." That's exactly the mentality that got us into this budget mess to begin with. Until everyone starts asking...um... what we can do to help our country ... instead of what we can ... get our country to do ... for us (hmmm - that has a familiar ring to it - I'm sure I've heard that somewhere before), we're screwed.

People are selfless under duress. The same guy who would throw himself in front of a train to save one grandchild will drive an F-150 and help destroy the lives of a billion grandchildren.

If you want people to do the right thing, stop using logic and start using emotion. When people are logical, they're selfish. When people are emotional, they enlist and recycle and buy war bonds and march from Selma to Montgomery and raise their own taxes to fly to the moon.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Your last sentence bothers me, though - it buys into the theory that we're all just special interests working the system any way we can to "get ours." That's exactly the mentality that got us into this budget mess to begin with. Until everyone starts asking...um... what we can do to help our country ... instead of what we can ... get our country to do ... for us (hmmm - that has a familiar ring to it - I'm sure I've heard that somewhere before), we're screwed. Unfortunately, that will happen on approximately the 12th of Never (thank you, Jackie P).

Not everyone is that way, but I would say on average most citizens ACT that way. The average citizen wants everything for himself without having to pay any taxes to get it. They buy rhetoric and BS, whine about pork until they get their own and then spend all day long whining about Congress only to elect the same people every cycle. Its mob mentality, do what everyone else does and get what you want. The politicians just sit back and reap the rewards. We elect them to think for us so we can watch Jersey Shore and tune out.

And if America would get into CERN like research that would be fantastic and I would be all for it. Hell I have said for a while NASA should evolve into more than just spaceflight but as the mecca of all scientific research, almost an umbrella that does work in everything from spaceflight to advanced particle physics. The name would need to change but you already got all the uber dorks....errr...superbrains working together why not take it to the next level?

The problem is science is seen as wasteful, unless it serves an agenda. A sentaor from West Virginia will probably tell us that spaceflight is waste seeing as it doesn't help him...but you can bet your bottom dollar he wants a piece of that $4 billion clean coal pie...that science is righteous even though it is BS. It is all a matter of perspective

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

IMO the international community should see a worldwide military freeze as a priority...just as with the environment or IBMs. Start with a cap on military spending...and move later to reductions. It only benefits everyone.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

IMO the international community should see a worldwide military freeze as a priority...just as with the environment or IBMs. Start with a cap on military spending...and move later to reductions. It only benefits everyone.

If only there were some charismatic leader who had the goodwill of the world on his side to lead that charge. Oh, and it would also be helpful if he happened to be a Nobel Peace Prize winner in charge of the world's largest military, but I'll try to stick to reality...

(I do agree with your premise, of course)

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

IMO the international community should see a worldwide military freeze as a priority

Get al-Qaeda and hundreds of armed insurgencies to go along with this, and I will too.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

If only there were some charismatic leader who had the goodwill of the world on his side to lead that charge. Oh, and it would also be helpful if he happened to be a Nobel Peace Prize winner in charge of the world's largest military, but I'll try to stick to reality...

(I do agree with your premise, of course)

Maybe we should have Superman do it...it worked in the movies

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The 2011 Budget of the United State - Alice, you're not going to the moon!

Get al-Qaeda and hundreds of armed insurgencies to go along with this, and I will too.

You say that like you think that military spending will somehow "solve" the Al Qaeda problem. Is it just that we haven't yet spent enough, then? How much do you think might be enough?

We could take out Al Qaeda with a military budget 1/10th the size it is today, if the rest of the world were actually serious about stopping terrorism.