Although the International Space Station won't be completed until the end of 2010, NASA is already planning to plunge the station into the Pacific in 2016. A Washington Post article is reporting that NASA plans to close shop on the International Space Station (ISS) in 2015, and dump the entire station into the Pacific Ocean in 2016. Even more, the space station is only now nearing completion, costing taxpayers and "government partners" a whopping $100 billion to construct thus far. Orbiting just 220 miles above the earth, the space station has serves as a symbol of humanity's desire to reach beyond the atmosphere, to eventually explore and conquer its rugged neighbors. Now NASA wants to bring that icon down in a huge fiery ball. According to Michael T. Suffrendini, the NASA space station program manager, NASA is steadfast in its plans to de-orbit the space station, throwing away years of progress and taxpayer money. "In the first quarter of 2016, we'll prep and de-orbit the spacecraft," said Suffredini. So why bring it down? Apparently, there's a lack of funds to keep the station alive. After all, the metallic beast has already cost $100 billion. NASA also plans to retire the decrepit Space Shuttle fleet by the end of 2010, forcing each astronaut to hitch a $51 million ride skyward with the Russian Soyuz spacecraft; the American-made replacement won't be available for flight until 2014. However, many disagree with NASA's plans for the ISS, especially when considering the investment. "If we've spent a hundred billion dollars, I don't think we want to shut it down in 2015," said Senator Bill Nelson in a statement to the Washington Post. "My opinion is it would be a travesty to de-orbit this thing. If we get rid of this darned thing in 2015, we're going to cede our leadership in human exploration." Although NASA is not officially lobbying to extend the ISS' mission, it is trying to determine what resources will be needed to extend its lifespan well into the 2020s. But for now, there's no long term funding for the space station beyond 2015. The last components are expected to be installed by the end of next year. Source
Seriously. Six years in space is nothing. I wouldn't be surprised if they later retracted this statement. It's not only a waste of time, but a HUGE waste of money. They may say that they'd shut it down for financial reasons, but what they're basically going to do is throw billions of dollars into the ocean.
The space programs in the world today are a joke, anyways. We don't need some tiny space station with like 5 crew, we need some kind of orbiting shipyard to build longer-range vehicles (possibly nuclear-powered) to get us to the other planets in the solar system. I mean, what's the point of putting us into space if we're not gonna be profiting from it? If there's no money coming in, it's just a waste. Mining would be the most plausible application - we can mine the Moon for good fusion materials (or so I hear - I don't remember where), we can mine the asteroids for various metals, maybe even the gas giants might have something for us, etc, etc.
And it's both ironic and amusing that these NASholes are throwing all that money away because of their financial troubles, yet we have a war that costs us hundreds of billions (possibly trillions) of dollars annually. I love the priority the USA keeps.
The moon might be okay, although I'm not sure if I like the idea of destroying it for some materials, we're already hurting OUR environment... But the gas giants are way too inaccessible right now to be practical sources of anything. Correct me if I'm wrong, but last I heard it'll take years to get to one and years back, and we don't know if we'll be able to find anything useful at all or if we'll need special equipment to bring it back. @Darkwatch - Business as usual I guess. "Hey, let's put up a multibillion dollar space station up and throw it into the ocean six years later, but let's NOT fix this war that's costing us more money every day and causing thousands of casualties!"
If they intend to retire it in 7 years, why are they still prepping millions and millions of dollars into updating it only to watch as it comes crashing down?
you have to remember, the NASA doesn't have the only say in this. it's the International Space Station. Sure it's not the Death Star that Russia probably wanted but it's good enough. this is taking one step backward in space exploration. and WHY are they shutting down the Space Shuttle so soon. it would be less expensive than a rocket. that's the whole reason for a Space Shuttle. at least wait for the next-gen one
This is a major blow for space exploration. What happened to the massive drive and passion for space during the cold war years? It seems that all of that political will has just drained away. I want to live on Mars dammit! D:
As long as people on Earth still hate and kill and incarcerate each other, I seriously doubt life on Mars is going to be easy, much less possible.
You'd be surprised what a bunch of scientists can achieve. True scientists couldn't give a rat's ass about politics. They just want to do their science in peace. I mean, the astronauts on the ISS mutinied against their controllers on earth because they thought they were being pricks. All it takes is sending the right people, then the political ******s on earth won't have any say (at least not in the 20 minute delay there is between sending a radio signal from Mars and it being received on Earth ;o)
The drive only existed because we Americans felt that beating the Russians to the moon would be another "victory" in the Cold War. It was never intended, then, that we would actually have colonies there, or anywhere else. At least, not by the politicians who controlled the funding.
