Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Sunday May 30 2021, @02:16AM   Printer-friendly

NASA requests $24.8 billion in 2022, proposes to cancel SOFIA again

NASA released its fiscal year 2022 budget request May 28, asking for $24.8 billion to support a number of new and existing science and exploration programs but also proposing once again to cancel an airborne astronomical observatory.

[...] The $7.93 billion for NASA's science programs is the largest ever, Nelson said, eclipsing the $7.3 billion the agency received in 2021. "The Biden administration is proving that science is back," he said. "The record funding in the science area will help NASA address the climate crisis and advance robotic missions that will pave the way for astronauts to explore the moon and Mars."

[...] NASA's planetary science program, though, would see a larger increase of $500 million to $3.2 billion in 2022. That additional funding would primarily go to a new Mars Sample Return program, with $653.2 million requested for it in the budget. It would also ramp up funding for the development of the Near Earth Object Surveyor mission, a small space telescope to search for potentially hazardous asteroids.

Unlike budget requests during the Trump administration, the fiscal year 2022 budget proposal includes funding for several science missions frequently targeted for cancellation, such as the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope and the PACE and CLARREO Pathfinder Earth science missions.

However, as with the 2021 budget request, NASA is proposing to cancel the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA), a modified Boeing 747 that carries a 2.5-meter telescope to perform observations above much of infrared-absorbing water vapor in the lower atmosphere.

See also: NASA budget goes all-in on science, stays the course on Moon lander


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday May 30 2021, @06:28AM (2 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 30 2021, @06:28AM (#1140200) Journal

    Almost anywhere in space. High earth orbit, geosynchronous orbit, even low earth orbit. Stick it in a lagrange point. Park it on the dark side of the moon. Throw it out into the asteroid belt. Put one in Mars orbit.

    Or you could put that giant waste of resources on a plane for a small fraction of the cost. One of the problems with trying things in space is that they are often much cheaper to do on Earth.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 30 2021, @05:25PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 30 2021, @05:25PM (#1140286)

    Except putting a man on Mars. That can only be done on Mars, which is why we need to put a man on Mars.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday May 30 2021, @10:12PM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 30 2021, @10:12PM (#1140340) Journal
      Circular logic though it may be, it is indeed correct. To develop to the point where many people are living on other worlds, will require other people living on other worlds.