Seti aff •seti neg •Asteroids Aff
Article: Constellation Design Was Flawed
Download 2.75 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- NASA Tradeoff Disadvantage
Article: Constellation Design Was FlawedHarry Spencer: NASA moon plan was an illusion, wrapped in denial. February 11th, 2010. NASA's Constellation programme, which was going to fly manned capsules to the International Space Station in (maybe) 2015, to the moon in (maybe) 2020, and to Mars someday, is dead. Some people are mourning it. I'm not. Is manned space exploration important? Yes – not least because it simply works much better than sending robots. When you look past the rhetoric and superstitions and compare the results, today's robots (and tomorrow's too) are pitifully limited, painfully slow, and not really all that cheap. (Case in point – NASA recently gave up trying to free the Mars rover Spirit from a sand pit it had been stuck in for nine months. But when the Apollo 15 crew's lunar rover got bogged down in loose soil, the astronauts got off, picked it up, moved it, got back on, and drove away – all in maybe two minutes. Robots do fine when everything goes as planned, but that's rarely true on complex, poorly-known planetary surfaces.) Exploring with robots looks cheaper only because we set our expectations so much lower. Bolder goals need humans on the scene. Nevertheless, I'm not shedding tears for Constellation. Why not? Because it wasn't going to get us there. First, it probably wasn't going to work. Even so early in its life, the programme was already deep into a death spiral of "solving" every problem by reducing expectations of what the system would do. Actually reaching the moon would probably have required a major redesign, which wasn't going to be funded. Second, even if all went as planned, there was a money problem. As the Augustine Committee noted, Constellation was already underfunded, and couldn't ever get beyond Earth orbit without a big budget increase. Which didn't seem too likely. Finally, and most important, even if Constellation was funded and worked ... so what? The programme was far too tightly focused on repeating Apollo, which was pointless: we already did Apollo! Early ideas of quickly establishing a permanent lunar base had already been forgotten. Constellation was going to deliver exactly what Apollo did: expensive, brief, infrequent visits to the moon. That was all it was good for. Sure, there were hopes that Constellation's systems could later be adapted to support more ambitious goals. But Apollo had those hopes too. It didn't work in 1970, and it wasn't going to work in 2020. The demise of Constellation is not the death of a dream. It's just the end of an illusion. The proposed replacements are a mixed bag, with reason for optimism but some reason for concern. More R&D is good. Space flight technology has stagnated badly in recent decades; for example, we badly need a robust, fully-reusable, low-maintenance heat shield system for atmospheric re-entry, and promising concepts from 50 years ago are still awaiting flight tests. My one concern is that when money gets tight, it's easy to cut R&D funding that isn't tied to a specific project – look at what's happened to NASA's aviation research. Switching to commercial space transportation, for both cargo and crews, is long overdue. For over 20 years, NASA has been legally required to use commercial space transportation whenever possible – and has used every possible excuse not to. It's high time to end this. Opponents' main argument is that NASA will have trouble assuring astronaut safety if it uses commercial launch services. Hogwash. To be blunt, NASA has no financial incentive to build safe spaceships – the shuttle, on average, has killed its entire crew about every 50 to 60 flights, and yet it has kept going. (Indeed, after the Challenger disaster, NASA's shuttle budget increased; compare that to what happened after Boeing's first two launches of its Delta III rocket failed – no one bought more launches and the rocket programme folded.) Spaceship builders who have a direct financial interest in safety should do better, not worse. At the very least, safety assessments should be done by an independent authority, with no vested interest in the answer. When NASA was considering launching its Orion capsule on Atlas or Delta rockets five years ago, its safety standards were very strict indeed – and the commercial rockets ended up losing out. But when NASA started applying those standards to its own rocket when development of the Ares rocket and Orion crew capsule got well underway a few years later, suddenly the standards were in need of revision, and the revised ones were much less demanding. It's time to give commercial space flight a fair trial. The one aspect of the announcement that is worrisome is the vagueness of the long-term plans. "We'll do neat stuff someday" is a recipe for going back into the holding pattern NASA has been stuck in for many years, driving endlessly around the parking lot without ever getting out onto the road. Even if the transportation is going to come from commercial providers and the details will depend on them, they need some rough idea of what NASA wants to do and when. A clearer explanation of NASA's new exploration goals is urgently needed.
Mars Colonization Affirmative 2 Explanation 3 Glossary 4 1AC [1/6] 5 1AC [2/6] 6 1AC [3/6] 7 1AC [4/6] 8 1AC [5/6] 9 1AC [6/6] 10 Overview Effect Advantage 11 Inherency Extensions 12 Extinction Inevitable – Human Weapons 13 Extinction Inevitable – Asteroids 14 Extinction Inevitable – Overpopulation 16 Answers To: War in Space 17 Overview Effect Extensions 18 Overview Effect Extensions 19 Solvency Extensions 20 Answers To: Can’t Establish a Colony Fast Enough 21 Answer To: Health Risks in Space 22 Answers To: Colonization Technologically Impossible 23 Answers To: Colonization Technologically Impossible 24 Answers To: Privatization DA / CP 25 Article: Why Spaceflight Has Ended 26 Article: Why We Must Return to Space 28 Article: Why a Mars Colony Would Be Possible 31 Mars Colonization Negative 38 Glossary 39 Answers To: Inherency 40 Answers To: Colonization Advantage 41 Answers To: Colonization Advantage 42 Answers To: Colonization Advantage 43 Answers To: Colonization Advantage 44 Answers To: Humans Will Cause Extinction 45 Answers To: Overpopulation Will Cause Extinction 46 Answers To: Asteroids Will Cause Extinction 47 Answers To: Overview Effect Advantage 48 Answers To: Overview Effect Advantage 49 Answers To: Solvency 50 Answers To: Solvency 51 Answers To: Solvency 52 Answers To: Solvency 53 Article: Why We Should Not Seek to Colonize Mars 54 Article: Space Travel Has Many Health Risks 57 SETI Affirmative 59 Explanation 60 Glossary 61 1AC [1/6] 62 1AC [2/6] 63 1AC [3/6] 64 1AC [4/6] 65 1AC [5/6] 66 1AC [6/6] 67 Extraterrestrial Perspective Advantage 68 Extraterrestrial Perspective Advantage 69 Space Debris Advantage 70 Space Debris Advantage 71 Space Debris Advantage 72 Inherency Extensions 73 Alien Contact Extensions – Aliens Exist 74 Alien Contact Extensions – Alien Contact Good 75 Extraterrestrial Perspective Extensions 76 Space Debris Extensions – ATA Helps Tracking 77 Space Debris Extensions – Plan Mitigates Debris 78 Space Debris Extensions – Debris Impacts 79 Solvency Extensions – ATA Leads to Contact 80 Solvency Extensions – Radio Searching Best 81 Solvency Extensions – Can Identify Alien Signals 82 Answers To: Privatization DA / CP 83 Article: The Allen Telescope Array 84 Article: Overview of SETI’s History 86 SETI Negative 91 Glossary 92 Answers to: Inherency 93 Answers to: Inherency 94 Answers to: Alien Contact Advantage 95 Answers To: Alien Contact Advantage 96 Answers To: Alien Contact Advantage 97 Answers To: Alien Contact Advantage 98 Answers To: Extraterrestrial Perspective Advantage 99 Answers To: Extraterrestrial Perspective Advantage 100 Answers To: Space Debris Advantage 101 Answers To: Space Debris Advantage 102 Answers To: Space Debris Advantage 103 Answers To: Solvency 104 Answers To: Solvency 105 Answers To: Solvency 106 Answers To: Solvency 107 Article: Aliens Don’t Exist 108 Article: Problems With Alein Communication 110 Asteroids Affirmative 113 Explanation 114 Glossary 115 1AC [1/7] 116 1AC [2/7] 117 1AC [3/7] 118 1AC [4/7] 119 1AC [5/7] 120 1AC [6/7] 121 1AC [7/7] 122 Small Asteroid Advantage 123 Mining Advantage 124 Mining Advantage 125 Inherency Extensions 126 Inherency Extensions 127 Impact Extensions – Prefer High Magnitude Impacts 128 Impact Extensions – Asteroid Killed the Dinosaurs 129 AT: Focus on Earth’s Problems 130 AT: Focus on Earth’s Problems 131 AT: No Risk of Small Asteroid Sparking War 132 AT: Small Impacts Irrelevant 133 Mining Advantage Extenions 134 AT: Not Technologically Feasible 135 AT: Not Technologically Feasible 136 AT: Asteroid Mining Not Profitable 137 AT: Asteroid Mining Not Profitable 138 Solvency – Deflection Successful 139 Solvency – Deflection Successful 140 Solvency – Space Telescopes Best 141 AT: Deflection Fails – International Cooperation 142 AT: Deflection Fails – International Cooperation 143 AT: Nuclear Deflection 144 AT: Nuclear Deflection 145 AT: Privatization DA / CP 146 Answers To: NASA Tradeoff Disadvantage 147 Article: NASA Tasked With Cataloguing Asteroids 148 Article: Risks From Smaller Asteroids 150 Asteroids Negative 153 Glossary 154 Answers To: Inherency 155 Answers To: Inherency 156 Answers To: Asteroid Impact Advantage 157 Answers To: Asteroid Impact Advantage 158 Answers To: Asteroid Impact Advantage 159 Answers To: Asteroid Impact Advantage 160 Answers To: Asteroid Impact Advantage 162 Extension: Prefer High Probability Impacts 163 AT: Small Asteroid Advantage 164 Answers To: Asteroid Mining Advantage 165 Answers To: Asteroid Mining Advantage 166 Answers To: Asteroid Mining Advantage 168 Answers To: Asteroid Mining Advantage 169 Answers To: Solvency 170 Answers To: Solvency 171 Answers To: Solvency 172 Answers To: Solvency 173 Article: Asteroids Not A Threat 174 Article: What Caused The Extinction of The Dinosaurs? 176 Constellation Affirmative 179 Explanation 180 Glossary 181 1AC [1/7] 183 1AC [2/7] 184 1AC [3/7] 185 1AC [4/7] 186 1AC [5/7] 187 1AC [6/7] 188 1AC [7/7] 189 Space Leadership Advantage 190 Space Leadership Advantage 191 Space Leadership Advantage 192 Space Leadership Advantage 193 Space Leadership Advantage 194 Inherency Extensions 195 Industrial Base – Plan Reinvigorates Industrial Base 196 Industrial Base – Plan Reinvigorates Industrial Base 197 Impact – Air Power 198 AT: Obama Plan Creates Jobs 199 AT: Brain drain 200 AT: Space won’t inspire 201 AT: Alternate Causalities 202 AT: Alternate Causalities 203 Constellation Key to Space Exploration 204 Space Exploration Impacts 205 Space Leadership on the Brink 206 Space Leadership on the Brink 207 Constellation Key to Space Leadership 208 Space Leadership Key to Hegemony 209 Space Leadership Key to Hegemony 210 AT: Constellation Design Was Flawed 211 AT: Constellation Design Was Flawed 212 Constellation Effective / AT: Smaller Rockets Solve 213 Constellation Effective / AT: Smaller Rockets Solve 214 AT: Constellation Trade off With Deep Space 215 Answers To: Privatization DA / CP 216 Article: Constellation and the Space Program’s Legacy 217 Article: America’s Need for Space Leadership 220 Constellation Negative 223 Glossary 224 Answers To: Inherency 225 Answers To: Space Leadership Advantage 226 Answers To: Space Leadership Advantage 227 Answers To: Space Leadership Advantage 228 Answers To: Space Leadership Advantage 229 Answers To: Space Leadership Advantage 230 Answers To: Space Leadership Advantage 231 Answers To: Industrial Base Advantage 232 Answers To: Industrial Base Advantage 233 Answers To: Industrial Base Advantage 234 Answers To: Industrial Base Advantage 236 Answers To: Industrial Base Advantage 237 Answers To: Industrial Base Advantage 238 Answers To: Space Exploration Advantage 239 Answers To: Space Exploration Advantage 240 Answers To: Solvency 241 Answers To: Solvency 242 Answers To: Solvency 244 Answers To: Solvency 245 Article: Is the Apollo Approach Best? 246 Article: Constellation Design Was Flawed 249 NASA Tradeoff Disadvantage 252 Explanation 253 Glossary 254 Budget Tradeoff 1NC [1/2] 255 Budget Tradeoff 1NC [2/2] 256 Overview 258 Uniqueness – NASA Focusing on Earth Science 259 Uniqueness – NASA Focusing on Earth Science 260 Link - Space Exploration Trades off With Earth Science 261 Link - Space Exploration Trades off With Earth Science 262 Specific Link – Colonization Affirmative 263 Specific Link – Constellation Affirmative 265 Specific Link – SETI Affirmative 266 Specific Link – Asteroids Affirmative 267 Impact – Earth Science Solves Global Warming 268 Impacts – Earth Science Solves Global Warming 269 Impact – Warming Causes Extinction 270 Impact – Warming is Man Made 271 Impact – Warming Not Inevitable 272 Article: The State of NASA’s Budget 273 Article: Space Science, Earth Science and Politics 275 NASA Tradeoff DA Affirmative 277 Glossary 278 Uniqueness – NASA overbudget now 279 Uniqueness – Earth Science Not Funded Now 281 Uniqueness – Earth Science Not Funded Now 283 No Link – Tradeoff Happens Between Agencies 284 No Link – Budget Flexibility now 285 Link Turn – Spending Increases the Budget 286 No Impact – NASA Program Unnecessary 287 No Impact – Warming Not Caused by Humans 289 No Impact – Warming Inevitable 291 Privatization Disadvantage 294 Explanation 295 Glossary 296 Privatization DA 1NC [1/2] 297 Privatization DA 1NC [2/2] 298 Overview 299 Uniqueness – Privatization Occuring Now 300 Uniqueness – Privatization Occuring Now 302 Links – NASA Crowds Out Private Sector 304 Links – NASA Crowds Out Private Sector 305 Links – NASA Crowds Out Private Sector 306 Impact – Economic Growth 307 Impact – Leadership 308 Impact – Turns Case 310 Impact – Turns Case 311 Article: NASA and the Privatization of Space 312 Privatization DA Affirmative 316 Glossary 317 Uniqueness – Private Sector Doesn’t Exist 318 Uniqueness – Private Sector Doesn’t Exist 319 Link Turn – Government Action Spurs the Private Sector 320 Link Turn – Government Action Spurs the Private Sector 321 No Impact – Privatization Won’t Achieve Goals 322 No Impact – Privatization Won’t Work 323 Impact Turn – Leadership 324 Impact Turn – Leadership 325 Impact Turn – Space Debris 326 Space Weaponization DA 329 Explanation 330 Glossary 331 Space Weaponization 1NC Shell [1/3] 332 Space Weaponization 1NC Shell [2/3] 333 Space Weaponization 1NC Shell [3/3] 334 Overview 335 Uniqueness – No Space Weaponization Now 336 Uniqueness – No Space Weaponization Now 337 AT: Space Weaponization Inevitable 338 Link – Exploration Causes Weaponization 339 Link – Exploration Causes Weaponization 340 Link – Exploration Causes Weaponization 342 Specific Link – Colonization 343 Specific Link – Constellation 344 Impact – Plan Causes Weaponization 345 Impact – Weaponization Causes War 346 Impact – Weaponziation Causes War 347 Impact – Weaponization Kills Relations 348 Impact – Turns the Case 349 Article: Obama’s Objectives in Space 350 Space Weaponization DA Affirmative 354 Glossary 355 Uniqueness – Weaponization Now 356 Uniqueness – Weaponization Now 357 Uniqueness – Weaponization Inevitable 358 Link Turn – Plan Trades off with Weaponization 359 Impact Turn – Space Weaponization Solves Conflict 361 Impact Turn – Space Weaponization Solves Conflict 362 Impact Turn – Weaponziation Solves India-Pakistan War 363 AT: Space Weapons Cause Miscalculation 364 AT: Weaponization Causes Space Arms Race 365 AT: Weaponization is Infeasible 366 Privatization Counterplan 368 Explanation 369 Glossary 370 Privatization Counterplan 1NC [1/1] 371 Solvency – General 373 Solvency - General 374 Solvency – Colonization Affirmative 375 Solvency – Colonization Affiramtive 377 Solvency – Constellation Affirmative 378 Solvency – Constellation Affirmative 379 Solvency – Asteroids Affirmative 380 Solvency – Asteroids Affirmative 381 Solvency – SETI Affirmative 383 Solvency – SETI Affirmative 384 AT: Counterplan Links to Spending 385 AT: Counterplan Links to Spending 386 AT: Counterplan Links to Spending 387 AT: Permutation 388 AT: Permutation 389 AT: Permutation 390 Article: NASA Should Step Back 391 Privatization Counterplan Affirmative 397 Glossary 398 398
Permutation 399 Privatization Fails – No demand 401 Privatization Fails – International Law 402 Privatization Fails – Too Long For Profit 403 Privatization Fails – Safety 404 Privatization Fails – Tax Incentives Fail 405 Privatization Fails – High Start Up Cost 406 Frontier Critique 409 Explanation 410 Glossary 411 Frontier Critique 1NC [1/3] 412 Frontier Critique 1NC [2/3] 413 Frontier Critique 1NC [3/3] 414 Link – Generic 415 Link – Asteroid Affirmative 416 Link – Constellation Affirmative 417 Link – Constellation Affirmative 418 Link – SETI Affirmative 419 Link – Mars Colonization Affirmative 420 Link – Mars Colonization Affirmative 421 Impact – Conflict 422 Impact – Turns Case 423 Alternative – Reconsider Space 424 AT: Permutation 425 Article: Space and Manifest Destiny 426 Frontier Critique Affirmative 431 Glossary 432 No Link – Space Isn’t Guided By the Frontier Metaphor 433 Link Turn – Frontier Metaphor Good 434 Link Turn – Frontier Metaphor Good 436 Alternative is Harmful 437 Alternative Fails 438 Permutation 439 Permutation 440 Topicality 442 Exploration Means Traveling to Space 1NC [1/1] 443 Space Exploration is Human Exploration 1NC [1/1] 444 Space Exploration is not Planets 1NC [1/1] 445 United States federal government 446 Substantially 447 Space Exploration 448 Space Exploration 449 Space Exploration 450 Development 451 Development 452 Beyond 453 Earth 454 Mesosphere 455 Directory: wp-content -> uploads -> 2011 2011 -> Voices of the Old Sea Norman Lewis 2011 -> Malevil Robert Merle 2011 -> The Elephant Keeper’s Children Peter Hoeg 2011 -> Jv packet •Mars Colonization Affirmative •Mars Colonization Negative 2011 -> Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) omb no. 1024-0018 2011 -> All America Looks Up to Virginia;” Virginia and the Declaration of Independence 2011 -> Rao bulletin 2011 -> Christopher Columbus was born between 25 August and 31 October 1451 in 2011 -> The Battle of Frenchtown (1855), Washington Territory: the Political and Demographic Context rev 9/4/11 2011 -> The harmony society Download 2.75 Mb. Share with your friends:
|