A rational space program, or, you help the mankind to conquer the space.

[carmelo]

I propose a little game.
Start from 1959, you are the commander in chief of the American space program (leave aside the soviets for another game).
You are in this field more that President of United States and Congress,you decide programs with a budget equal to 2,30% of federal budget (NASA budget for 1963 or 1969).
The goal is build a solid space program,step by step,to ensure a firm human permanence in space.
Forget stunts or political propaganda missions; you objective is a rational and solid space program.
You can use all build or unbuild space projects and adapt they.

For exemple:

 

[blackstar]

You are in this field more that President of United States and Congress,you decide programs with a budget equal to 2,30% of federal budget (NASA budget for 1963 or 1969).

How is anybody here going to be able to do that?

There's no way to know what various things cost at that time in order to fit them into your imaginary budget.

 

[OM]

...Well, if *that* isn't a thread killer, I dunno what is. Thanks, D.


[/dripping_sarcasm]

 

[antiquark]

I've always thought the main obstacle to any space program has been that people think it's a waste of money. The Apollo program was canned because there were big social problems on the ground, and what good was putting men on the moon when you have problems on Earth?

So an interesting thought experiment would be: how do we make a space program that people in general like and support?

No, I have no suggestions!

 

[RGClark]

Might be better placed in the "Theoretical and Speculative Projects" or "Alternative History and Future Speculation" subforums.
I like the premise though. The choices in the U.S. space program were not always in the most rational fashion, politics playing the biggest role.
One decision that still rankles was the decision not to continue the research into a heavy-thrust hydrocarbon engine a few years ago. NASA was partnering with the Air Force to produce such an engine. With the two splitting the cost, the yearly cost to NASA was only in the few hundred million dollars range. But with the decision to go with the Ares I and Ares V it was cancelled by NASA.
Now NASA wants to re-start the F-1 to use on more advanced boosters for the SLS. And Russia is also threatening to cut off use of the RD-180. If that heavy-thrust engine had not been cancelled we would already have such a booster engine and would not be beholden to Russia for the RD-180 and moreover our engine would be man-rated and reusable!
That decision was incredibly short sighted and misguided, based on the idea that "since we're going to have the Ares V and Ares I, we won't need a heavy thrust engine."


Bob Clark

 

[blackstar]

1-I like the premise though. The choices in the U.S. space program were not always in the most rational fashion, politics playing the biggest role.

2-Now NASA wants to re-start the F-1 to use on more advanced boosters for the SLS.

1-It is wrong to assume that on the one side there is "rational" and on the other side there is "politics." Politics drives the system. And politics operates according to its own rules. It is rational once you understand those rules.

2-Read my article in last month's Spaceflight magazine about that.

 

[carmelo]

This is only a game.
Take your favourite build or unbuild space projects and build that the you think a better space program.

 

[bigvlada]

Had a lot of fun with this one. Waiting for the successor.

 

[OM]

Had a lot of fun with this one. Waiting for the successor.

...BARIS is something that Kerbal should have been, especially if they dropped the pathetic little "Kerbals" and allowed for a skinnable Astronaut mesh. They could run a competitive mode through their servers where programs are based on actual historical events/articles/plans and their "What If?" variants, which would allow for those variants to compete directly, i.e. Charlie Wilson dies a horrible death before being picked as Ike's SecDev, and WvB's "Jupiter-C" launches Explorer 1 before either Sputniks and/or Vanguard, while over in the Evil Soviet Empire someone at the Politburo makes a decision ordering SPK to wait for "Object D" to be completed instead of going with the "Simple Satellite", thus delaying a Soviet satellite launch by at least a year.


Kerbal could be this, if only it weren't for their neo-smurf approach to "attention-getting".

:OM:

 

[bigvlada]

Astronautix as database for the game, ability to play as US or USSR from 1946, UK and France from mid fifties, China and Japan from sixties, or even as an independent using available technology such as Otrag rockets and in later stages of the game option to purchase rejected or retired government technologies such as Spacehab, TKS or inflatable station modules. The goal would be to settle Mars. Paradox, I am looking at you

 

[Grey Havoc]

You may find this of interest: http://www.pcgamer.com/kerbal-space-program-2/

 

[merriman]

I've always thought the main obstacle to any space program has been that people think it's a waste of money. The Apollo program was canned because there were big social problems on the ground, and what good was putting men on the moon when you have problems on Earth?

So an interesting thought experiment would be: how do we make a space program that people in general like and support?

No, I have no suggestions!

Make NASA every-day life a 'reality' show. A Producer might arrange for the camera:

Test-stand fist-fights between engineers; turn the Langley tunnels into gladiator style 'challenges' (remove the fan-guards for added excitement); politicized Federal 'science advisors' at NASA planning meetings suggesting more Moslem involvement; grown, hairy-chested men crying like little girls, with real tears streaking down their cheeks while viewing mission Powerpoint presentations; screaming contests between Contractors.

That kinda stuff the American audience would eat up and support. Big advertising rates! NASA could raise enough capital to beat Musk to the red planet.

David

 

[The Artist]

I would go forward with Dynasoar to get early winged spaceflight experience while the public is still excited with the space age. I'd also push the 'Tin Can' space stations to provide a destination. Now, here's the part to keep the public interested. I'd let it be known that one of the agency's goals is to establish public access to space. We (NASA) prove the way, then let Pan Am and Howard Johnson and others conduct civilian operations in space. When we have the hardware and experience in place to go to the Moon, we would go with the public supporting the effort because they are looking forward to eventually going there themselves. The nagging question of why should we go into space would settled, or downplayed, once the innovative spirit takes hold and people find ways and reasons to do things in space. We would, over time, be pushing deeper into the solar system because the public would be calling for us to reach for that next goal.

 

[bigvlada]

I've always thought the main obstacle to any space program has been that people think it's a waste of money. The Apollo program was canned because there were big social problems on the ground, and what good was putting men on the moon when you have problems on Earth?

So an interesting thought experiment would be: how do we make a space program that people in general like and support?

No, I have no suggestions!

Make NASA every-day life a 'reality' show. A Producer might arrange for the camera:

Test-stand fist-fights between engineers; turn the Langley tunnels into gladiator style 'challenges' (remove the fan-guards for added excitement); politicized Federal 'science advisors' at NASA planning meetings suggesting more Moslem involvement; grown, hairy-chested men crying like little girls, with real tears streaking down their cheeks while viewing mission Powerpoint presentations; screaming contests between Contractors.

That kinda stuff the American audience would eat up and support. Big advertising rates! NASA could raise enough capital to beat Musk to the red planet.

David

That idea was already implemented.