Now that they've lost their jobs, program engineers find themselves scrambling for new, often menial jobs if they find work at all.
NASA is supposed to send two of its space shuttles this month, but not to space but to rest in museums across the US. The first of which will be the space shuttle Discovery which will be transferred to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum in Washington. The shuttle will be transported on a Boeing 747 aircraft that has been adapted for this purpose on April 17.
The special plane will operate again a week later on April 23 and will carry with it the test shuttle that did not take off into space - Atnerprise. Initially, it will stay at Kennedy Airport, and later it will be transferred to the INRAPID Museum - the museum for aviation and space issues.
As soon as the dust storm subsided with the landing of the last space shuttle in July, it was clear that things, as they were known to many who dedicated their lives to the Kennedy Space Center, would never be the same.
This was due to President Obama's decision to end the space shuttle program and start with a more modest program. But it didn't happen. Because immediately after the end of the shuttle program, Congress also put an end to the funding of the alternative program, which not only caused many Americans to lose their jobs, but also usurped America's leading position in the field of space aviation - a record held by the Americans for the past five decades.
Now, having lost their jobs, the program engineers find themselves scrambling for new jobs. Sami Rivera, an engineer on the program, reports that in the past eleven months he has had three job interviews when he expected it to be no more than three months. In an interview with CBS, Rivera states: "I offered myself for an engineer position, a technician position, basically any position"
Chris Miller and his wife are also experiencing problems even though they run two side businesses after the layoffs from the Kennedy Center. "They were all fired. It has the silent wave effect" he tells the interviewer about the family business and claims that all the businesses are closing now and although they accept the reality as it is, it is not the thing that bothers them the most, but their 12-year-old son who was used to a certain standard of living that is difficult for them to maintain by the hour and for example even They don't go to McDonald's anymore.
In addition to those mentioned, a growing number of people are angry and hurt by the fact that America has lost its number one status. Now those who want to fly into space will have to buy a seat on a Russian rocket?
17 תגובות
It's a shame, it's a shame that the government in the United States is stopping the allowance for NASA (or rather significantly cutting the budgets). I think humanity needs studies on the subject of biological processes in conditions of zero gravity. Besides, the administration takes the lead in space exploration from the Americans and the lion's share in this matter.
It is a very serious mistake on the part of the US to give up the ability to carry out manned space missions on its own, and if all due respect to the private programs is really not a substitute for investment and a country's long-term commitment to invest in research, can anyone imagine the US without the Apollo program? Get lost and the US will need its own manned missions at some point - only to find out that recreating the capability will cost them a lot more money than trying to maintain a minimal capability.
It's really unfortunate that this discussion is being conducted on the basis of a position paper without evidence, without data and without basic information: what did they close? what are you not? How many of the fired went on to other NASA programs? Does the closure prevent or stop the agency's adaptation, which caused less and less daring projects to cost more and more and fail more and more (or is it just slander).
Let me know when you write something serious - and it will be possible to refer to the substance of the matter
outsider
The American economy thrives thanks to engineering (and other advanced technologies). The American workforce is more expensive than the workforce of the Far East, therefore without technology the state of the American economy would be more difficult today.
The only question is which direction in engineering should the American economy go. Manned space travel is not a profitable direction today (it will be profitable in the future, let's say another 30 years). On the other hand, today, the direction of developing satellites is very profitable.
nPay American taxes
Young people should not be encouraged to study engineering
with money he doesn't have.
It could be said that other things had to be cut first
And the answer to that is
Both the space program and the other things should be cut
Then taxes can be lowered
And as a result the economy will recover and grow again.
Right here, Obama made the right decision.
Sorry,
Who wrote this news ***originally***?
And where do the data and names come from?
Thanks in advance
Father, I do not agree with you, in my opinion these are very exciting fields, I am personally very enthusiastic about them and I am sure that so are many teenagers who seek science and technology. Think how challenging it is to try to build autonomous robots with artificial intelligence that will fly hundreds of thousands of kilometers from here, land on other planets, explore them, analyze findings, know how to deal with a wide variety of situations, some of which are unexpected, return samples to Earth... In my opinion it is an amazing and exciting thing that definitely has a lot of inspiration and challenge in it.
Soon a publication about the privatization of space flights and colonization in space, some of the readers responded to the matter without having seen the article. The article justifies some of the writers - but I would like to add my insight to the matter. Launching robots into space is much cheaper and saves lives in a hostile environment for humans: in space, in launches, on celestial bodies that lack a life-supporting atmosphere or other harsh conditions. There robots are highly efficient. The landing of man on the moon for example did not prove anything other than the fact that it is possible to land a man on the moon. All the other things that were done there such as the space vehicle, the arms operated by the astronauts, etc. could have been done by robots and not necessarily humanoid robots but robo-surveyors, robo-gathering robo-arms in short such transformers that would do most of the work. The experiments on the shuttles could also be done in part by robots and thus save many human lives that were lost in the shuttle program, what a shame.
to whistle
The reason the article appears here is precisely so that there will be comments like yours, which will give additional insight.
The knowledge site, apart from reporting on innovations, also deals with the peripheral aspects of the field, and as you yourself wrote, they relate to several topics that the site deals with, for example pharmaceutical companies, or innovations in computer technologies. Patents are, like it or not, part of the fabric that surrounds technology.
properly
Robotics without any person having a chance to reach space, really does not inspire the younger generation to study engineering and exact sciences.
Very well, in my opinion it was a waste of money that would be better without it, especially today, I think it is much better to invest in robotics, remote controlled robots and autonomous robots that will go into space and carry out missions and experiments, land on distant stars and even return samples to Earth.
Not only will this be much cheaper than sending humans into space with all the expensive life support systems that go with them, this will also give a tremendous impetus to the robotics, computer and artificial intelligence industries which in turn will integrate and contribute in many other areas such as help in hospitals and nursing care for the elderly (a field that is developing rapidly according to What I read mainly in China and Japan where the elderly population is expected to make up a very significant percentage of the population within a few decades, and there probably won't be enough young people to support them).
Want to go back to work, find a budget. If you want a budget, heal the economy first. You want to heal the economy, lay off workers.
A day will come and they will return to work at NASA and its affiliates. A day will come and the USA will return to leading the field.
"Narrow-minded?" And "political gain"? Do you know how much the US national debt is? It's not the government's role to mess with spacecraft, so they'd do well to stop spending public money on such things (what's more, it's not at all clear what the benefit of manned missions is).
The space industry is being privatized (Project X, Virgin Galactic and a few other small ones) and in the long run this will only accelerate the progress of the field and provide an industry for many space engineers and others.
The breakthrough will be as soon as regular tourist flights to space begin. Once that happens then the burden of financing will shift from a few brave investors to the super-affluent first customers and once that happens then the sky won't be the limit either.
Really good, another good reason for Obama's failure and more Pontial voters who were disappointed.
And just a few days ago, it was announced that unemployment is failing to wake up.
Americans remember who decided to land a spacecraft on the moon
Now they will remember who stopped the space programs at all!!!
Really sad !@#$
disgrace!
An honorable and long-standing tradition is rudely interrupted because of a narrow-minded view and wretched political considerations!