Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed




Скачать 141.1 Kb.
НазваниеFunding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed
страница1/5
Дата конвертации16.02.2013
Размер141.1 Kb.
ТипДокументы
  1   2   3   4   5

136534.doc DDW 2011

Shuttle 1AC


Shuttle 1AC 1

Shuttles 1AC [1/17] 2

Shuttles 1AC [2/17] 3

Shuttles 1AC [3/17] 4

Shuttles 1AC [4/17] 5

Shuttles 1AC [5/17] 6

Shuttles 1AC [6/17] 7

Shuttles 1AC [7/17] 8

Shuttles 1AC [8/17] 9

Shuttles 1AC [9/17] 10

Shuttles 1AC [10/17] 11

Shuttles 1AC [11/17] 12

Shuttles 1AC [12/17] 13

Shuttles 1AC [13/17] 14

Shuttles 1AC [14/17] 15

Shuttles 1AC [15/17] 16

Shuttles 1AC [16/17] 17

Shuttles 1AC [17/17] 18

Shuttles 1AC [1/17]

Contention 1 is Inherency


Funding for a NASA low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the SLS program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed


Col. Walter Cunningham and Pete Olson 7/22/11 (*served as the NASA lunar module pilot for Apollo 7. **the former ranking member for the House Science Committee, Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee. He represents the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. POLITICO OPED section, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59647.html)


However, last year President Barack Obama shifted NASA policy away from human spaceflight. His budget cancelled the next-generation Constellation human flight system rather than modifying any deficiencies — wasting a $9 billiontaxpayer investment. Instead, NASA was directed to pursue a riskier course, diverting billions of dollars to a group of companies – most devoid of experience in manned space vehicles – to take over operations to low-earth orbit and the transport of astronauts to the International Space Station. The goal was to generate a private marketplace to support the cost of these manned missions. Meanwhile, NASA’s plan for deep space exploration, requiring development of new heavy lift rockets and crew vehicles, leaves them without a specific destination and timetable. Really, without a mission. We don’t believe that a private market capable of supporting a low-earth orbit system, independent of government, exists in the near-term. If it did, it wouldn’t need government support. Space exploration is likely to continue to be a government-sponsored mission for the foreseeable future — if the U.S. is to retain its preeminence in space. This investment is vital to national security and our ability to remain competitive in science, engineering and technology. China, Russia, India and Japan continue to pursue their human space programs at breakneck speeds, and are likely to surpass us if we stop. ASA has been subjected to the whims of changing budget and policy priorities for several decades, fostering bureaucratic inefficiency in an organization that had prided itself on original thinking and team-driven, can-do attitude. With last year’s NASA Authorization law, Congress placed a roadblock in front of much of the administration’s plan. But even if we had a clear direction, we will be reliant on the Russians for transportation to space for a number of years – at a cost of more than $60 million per seat. We are at the crossroads. The direction we choose will affect not only foreign perceptions of the U.S., but our economy and national security.


More budget cuts are coming which extend the completion date indefinitely


Lee Roop 7/12/11 (Writer for the Huntsville times, newspaper, http://blog.al.com/space-news/2011/07/bolden_tells_congress_looming.html)


WASHINGTON, D.C. - A powerful House committee could advance budget cuts today that would increase the gap between the space shuttle and what comes next an "untold" number of years, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden Jr. testified in Congress today. The House Appropriations Committee is to consider the 2012 appropriation for NASA today, and a $1.6 billion cut has been recommended. If the Appropriations Committee approves the proposed cuts, they must still be approved by the full House and reconciled with appropriations approved by the Senate. The Senate has not acted yet. "It goes without saying that my efforts to keep the gap between the end of the shuttle era and an American capability to take humans to orbit ... would increase and it's untold how much it would increase," Bolden said told a House NASA oversight committee today. Bolden was being questioned by U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Huntsville. Bolden said he would not sacrifice NASA's science missions to keep human spaceflight moving forward. See the video of the Bolden-Brooks exchange below.


Shuttles 1AC [2/17]


Plan: The United States federal government should substantially increase funding for a Low-Earth Orbit Shuttle Program.


Shuttles 1AC [3/17]


Contention 2 is Space Leadership


Subpoint A is Commitment to Space


The Private sector will fail at development AND the lack of a coherent government plan signals an abandonment of commitment to space – both eviscerate leadership


Armstrong et al. ’11 (frmr astronauts, Neil Armstrong, Jim Lovell and Gene Cernan, 5/24/11, USA Today Editorial, http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2011-05-24-Obama-grounding-JFK-space-legacy_n.htm)


Congress, realizing the devastating effects to the plans, program and morale of those trying to keep America in the forefront of exploring the universe and expanding the human frontier, worked diligently to steer NASA's program back toward Kennedy's goals. Congress passed an authorization bill directing NASA to begin development of a large rocket capable of carrying humans toward the moon and beyond and to continue development of a multipurpose spacecraft based on the configuration that was being developed in the Constellation program. However, the president's 2012 budget reduced funding significantly below the authorized amount for both the big rocket and the multipurpose crew vehicle. On the other hand, the president's budget had significantly increased funding over the congressional direction in the area of space technology research programs and the development of rockets and spacecraft by the commercial entrepreneurs. Congress stated that rather than depending on NASA subsidies, the development of commercial sources to supply cargo and crew to the International Space Station should be a partnership between government and industry. Entrepreneurs in the space transportation business assert that they can offer such service at a very attractive price — conveniently not factoring in the NASA-funded development costs. These expenditures, including funds to insure safety and reliability, can be expected to be substantially larger and more time consuming than the entrepreneurs predict. The response to Kennedy's bold challenge a half-century ago has led to America's unchallenged leadership in space. We take enormous pride in all that has been accomplished in the past 50 years. And we have the people, the skills and the wherewithal to continue to excel and reach challenging goals in space exploration. But today, America's leadership in space is slipping. NASA's human spaceflight program is in substantial disarray with no clear-cut mission in the offing. We will have no rockets to carry humans to low-Earth orbit and beyond for an indeterminate number of years. Congress has mandated the development of rocket launchers and spacecraft to explore the near-solar system beyond Earth orbit. But NASA has not yet announced a convincing strategy for their use. After a half-century of remarkable progress, a coherent plan for maintaining America's leadership in space exploration is no longer apparent. "We have a long way to go in this space race. But this is the new ocean, and I believe that the United States must sail on it and be in a position second to none." — President Kennedy Kennedy launched America on that new ocean. For 50 years we explored the waters to become the leader in space exploration. Today, under the announced objectives, the voyage is over. John F. Kennedy would have been sorely disappointed.


Inability to access the ISS independently signals we are a passenger, not a leader. This cedes space to other countries


Space Travel 2/10/11 (Space News Website reporting on discussions of the Competitive Space Task Force, a space think tank group, http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Renewed_Call_For_Competitive_US_Spaceflight_Marketplace_999.html)


Retired Congressman and former Chairman of the House Science Committee Robert S. Walker remarked, "The Space Economy is emerging as the next great frontier for economic expansion and U.S. leadership. If we really want to 'win the future,' we cannot abandon our commitment to space exploration and human spaceflight. The fastest path to space is not through Moscow, but through the American entrepreneur." In recent years, between the long-planned retirement of the Space Shuttle and the cancellation of Constellation and NASA's troubled Ares rocket program, the U.S. has grown increasingly reliant on the Russian Soyuz for transportation to and from the International Space Station costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars over just the next few years. Rather than funding the Russian space program, the U.S. could be creating jobs at home by relying instead on America's private space industry. America's dependence on the Russian program is complicated by our foreign policy as we seek to discourage the Russians from aiding U.S. adversaries in the

Shuttles 1AC [4/17]

[CONTINUED]

development of nuclear weaponry and missile technology. Said Rand Simberg, Chairman of the Competitive Space Task Force, "America cannot simply sit in the passenger seat and expect to lead. We need to pilot the ship. We need to lead the way."


Russia and China are getting ahead now


AP ’11 (Associated Press, 7/11/11, “China Aiming High in Space as U.S. Shuttle Program Winds Down”, http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/07/11/china-aiming-high-in-space-as-us-shuttle-program-winds-down/)


BEIJING – This year, a rocket will carry a train car-sized module into orbit, the first building block for a Chinese space station. Around 2013, China plans to launch a lunar probe that will set a rover loose on the moon. It wants to put a man on the moon, sometime after 2020. While the United States is still working out its next move as the space shuttle program winds down, China is forging ahead. Some experts worry the U.S. could slip behind China in human spaceflight -- the realm of space science with the most prestige. "Space leadership is highly symbolic of national capabilities and international influence, and a decline in space leadership will be seen as symbolic of a relative decline in U.S. power and influence," said Scott Pace, an associate NASA administrator in the George W. Bush administration. He was a supporter of Bush's plan -- shelved by President Obama -- to return Americans to the moon. China is still far behind the U.S. in space technology and experience, but what it doesn't lack is a plan or financial resources. While U.S. programs can fall victim to budgetary worries or a change of government, rapidly growing China appears to have no such constraints. "One of the biggest advantages of their system is that they have five-year plans so they can develop well ahead," said Peter Bond, consultant editor for Jane's Space Systems and Industry. "They are taking a step-by-step approach, taking their time and gradually improving their capabilities. They are putting all the pieces together for a very capable, advanced space industry." In 2003, China became the third country to send an astronaut into space on its own, four decades after the United States and Russia. In 2006, it sent its first probe to the moon. In 2008, China carried out its first spacewalk. China's space station is slated to open around 2020, the same year the International Space Station is scheduled to close. If the U.S. and its partners don't come up with a replacement, China could have the only permanent human presence in the sky. Its space laboratory module, due to be launched later this year, will test docking techniques for the space station. China's version will be smaller than the International Space Station, which is the size of a football field and jointly operated by the U.S., Russia, Canada, Japan and 11 European countries. "China has lagged 20 to 40 years behind the U.S. in developing space programs and China has no intention of challenging U.S. dominance in space," said He Qisong, a professor at Shanghai University of Political Science and Law. "But it is a sign of the national spirit for China to develop a space program and therefore it is of great significance for China." Some elements of China's program, notably the firing of a ground-based missile into one of its dead satellites four years ago, have alarmed American officials and others who say such moves could set off a race to militarize space. That the program is run by the military has made the U.S. reluctant to cooperate with China in space, even though the latter insists its program is purely for peaceful ends. "Space technology can be applied for both civilian and military use, but China doesn't stress the military purpose," said Li Longchen, retired editor-in-chief of Chinese magazine "Space Probe." "It has been always hard for humankind to march into space and China must learn the lessons from the U.S." China is not the only country aiming high in space. Russia has talked about building a base on the moon and a possible mission to Mars but hasn't set a time frame. India, which has already achieved an unmanned orbit of the moon, is planning its first manned space flight in 2016. The U.S. has no plans to return to the moon. "We've been there before," Obama said last year. "There's a lot more of space to explore." He prefers sending astronauts to land on an asteroid by 2025 and ultimately to Mars. But those plans are far from set. Instead, NASA is closing out its 30-year space shuttle era this month, leaving the U.S. dependent on hitching rides to the space station aboard Russian Soyuz capsules at a cost of $56 million per passenger, rising to $63 million from 2014. The U.S. also hopes private companies will develop spacecraft to ferry cargo and crew to the space station. China, having orbited the moon and starting collecting data on it, is moving toward sending a man there -- and beyond. It hopes to launch the rover-releasing moon probe in about two years. Chinese experts believe a moon landing will happen in 2025 at the earliest. "The lunar probe is the starting point for deep space exploration," said Wu Weiren, chief designer of China's moon-exploring program, in a 2010 interview posted on the national space agency's website. "We first need to do a good job of exploring the moon and work out the rocket, transportation and detection technology that can then be used for a future exploration of Mars or Venus." In testimony in May to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, which reports to the U.S. Congress, former NASA official Pace said what China learns in its space program can be applied elsewhere: improving the accuracy of ballistic missiles and quality controls for industry. China also offers space technology to developing countries to secure access to

Shuttles 1AC [5/17]


raw materials, said Pace, now director of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. There may also be economic reasons to explore the moon: It contains minerals and helium-3, a potential rich source of energy through nuclear fusion. "But that's way ahead," said Bond, the Jane's editor. "A lot of it would be prestige, the fact that every time we went out and looked at the moon in the night sky we would say the Chinese flag is on there."

  1   2   3   4   5

Добавить в свой блог или на сайт

Похожие:

Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed iconTotal Grants issued by the dme research & Development Fund (before program funding was cut in 2010)

Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed iconExecutive Summary kiss funding will be used to leverage investments from multiple agencies including nist, nasa, and the California Air Resources Board Part 1: Program Description and Rationale

Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed iconAnd—All human spaceflight has been cancelled except maintenance of the International Space Station—nasa is a rudderless ship with no clear project and inadequate funding

Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed iconIcebreakers Negative Funding Spec You’ve got a lot of budget questions to answer about your plan

Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed iconFunding for this program was provided by "friends," the iowa public television foundation; by aarp iowa, dedicated to enhancing quality of life for all as we

Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed iconInterplanetary Transfer Vehicle Concepts for Near-Term Human Exploration Missions beyond Low Earth Orbit

Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed iconInterpretation: Development refers to programs funded by the nasa or dod development budgets

Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed iconNo nasa space launches now- partisan fighting and controversies prevent all funding

Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed iconPlan text – the usfg should establish a system of Space Based Solar Power in geostationary earth orbit

Funding for a nasa low-earth orbit shuttle program was redirected to a private development plan and the sls program – Both programs non-unique the negative’s disads, but neither has clear funding or design necessary to succeed iconДайджест ресурсов здравоохранения Январь 2003 г., №1 Учебные ресурсы в области доказательной медицины и здравоохранения
«Разработка плана действий на основе принятой программы или стратегии» (Developing An Action Plan From the Program or Policy); «Разработка...


Разместите кнопку на своём сайте:
lib.convdocs.org


База данных защищена авторским правом ©lib.convdocs.org 2012
обратиться к администрации
lib.convdocs.org
Главная страница