Is NASA dead? Is there any point to what they do? Do people

Why not go to their website and find out?

>>8986314
I want the general consensus on what the people think of them, not what they think of themselves.

Researching cool rockets and spacecrafts seems rad tho

They're not led by le wacky man of science and Mars Mr. Musk and therefore uncool to post about on Twitter and iflscience.

they need more gibs

I'm interpreting your question as "would it be exciting to work for NASA" and not "do people think NASA is cool". That being the case I am a Mech/Aero engineer and I'd like to work for NASA, they are doing some really awesome kick ass things. However at this time I'd prefer to work for SpaceX or Blue Origin (private space travel companies) bc they are innovating faster and more ambitious (risky) with their ventures. But NASA layed the groundwork for everything they are doing. NASA is nowhere near dead. They are exploring the cosmos. They are working on putting people on Mars.

>>8986310
No, you're just ignorant. Do a fucking google search man

It's not dead, but Obama killing off the shuttle program was certainly a crippling blow.

>>8986682
Common misconception. Obama did not kill Shuttle, Bush did. By the time Obama came into office it was too late to reverse course (which would have been a stupid idea anyway). The true issue is that there was no plan in place to replace shuttle in order to prevent the period between it's end and the SpaceX/Boeing manned flights that will happen eventually

What the hell are all the people who maintained the Shuttle program doing now?

Water is level. Space is fake.

>>8986310

Do you even keep up with like anything that goes on in space? NASA is always up to, and doing all kinds of shit.

>>8987129
this

NEWSFLASH

THERE WAS NO OSCAR FOR BEST SPECIAL EFFECTS THE YEAR AFTER 2OO1 A SPACE ODYSSEY WON THE AWARD IN 1968

THRE GUESSES WHY

>>8987186
>and doing all kinds of shit
If "all kinds of shit" is clickbait about ayy lmaos and doing repetitive retarded shit in low orbit, yeah.

>>8987248
you sound like someone who browses facebook all day and doesn't know shit

File: sexsphere.jpg (1MB, 2048x2048px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x2048px

NASA in a nutshell
(in 2 mins) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvmED6XH-3Y
(thoroughly, in 50 mins) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzyPN8-AbJQ

>>8986310
They could've done so much more if they hadn't gone the space shuttle route.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Applications_Program

Just to give you an idea, imagine having rockets that could put 150+ tons into LEO or 50+ tons into lunar orbit.
That could've been done with small changes to the Saturn V

>>8988438
neat ideas, ideas guy
The blueprints for the Saturn V are freely available
why not make these small changes and make some money with the idea if it works

File: 1489628917240.jpg (12KB, 194x260px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 194x260px

they always were .
they are misdirection agents.
propaganda.
this is a prison planet.

>>8986310
NASA is a political checkbox, it always has been and always will be.

[x] Have national space program
[x] Create/keep American jobs

NASA is great at what it does, being a complete graft machine and a way to funnel taxpayer dollars into defense contractors, and to give lazy boomers jobs so they don't all kill themselves. All that scientific crap doesn't matter, just do some barebones shit.

In reality if you wanted to develop space capabilities you would find economical ways to do so. Think better propulsion systems (nuclear), think bigger and badder telescopes (like JWST). Think 3D printing style replication. Shit like that, which is actually brand new tech.

Shit like ARES and the SLS are just fucking garbage. It's 60-70 year old tech, not designed to improve our scientific and engineering capability. Designed to keep money flowing. Fuck that nonsense.

>>8987122

Doing SLS, at apparently as slow a pace as they can manage.

For fuck's sake they damaged a tank and it's going to set them back years on the schedule, which they were already behind on. How does it take years to build a tank, especially when it's essentially the same tank that they'd already built for Shuttle more than 100 times?

>>8989168
>economical
>JWST

more like JUST

>>8989168
When you're tired of BAAAAAing, >>8987911

>>8989265
This is why Trump can't rely on NASA to do anything
They will drag shit out for a maximum amount of time, hoping to just wait 8 years until he's gone

>>8986310
>To me, it feels
NASA is not about your feels, fgt pls

>>8986310
NASA experienced a huge setback because their Schiapparelli failed.

>>8986328
>what they think of themselves
he was referring to looking at what the fuck they're doing you dumbcunt, you asked "are they still doing cool shit".

>>8986310
>Do people still dream of working for NASA?
Of course.
Even if 99% of the people become disenchanted, that still leaves millions of Americans that think highly of them.
There will always be more astronaut candidates than NASA needs to fill their missions.

>>8988438
>They could've done so much more if they hadn't gone the space shuttle route.
The point of the shuttle is that each succeeding president inherited the space-truck and didn't have to justify manned missions to their voting base.
Sure, it was more expensive then conventional rocket systems, but at least NASA didn't need a new JFK-style mandate every 4-8 years.
If we still had a shuttle fleet we wouldn't be hitching rides with the Russians.
And the American government debating the NASA budget is like Bill Gates deciding how much to tip the newspaper delivery guy at Christmas.

>>8986310

They couldn't put feet on the moon within a couple of years.

Yes, they're literally useless.

>>8986310
I don't see them doing any important shit unless Trump threathens to kill them completely with his new budget.