SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Trump Presidency

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Mannie who wrote (343949)8/9/2025 12:15:02 PM
From: i-node1 Recommendation

Recommended By
longz

  Read Replies (2) of 361341
 
And we wouldn't want any evidence to the contrary to be produced by the anti-science administration.
Information has a cost and a value. If someone can justify the satellites' existence, perhaps they will be deorbited.

A 2023 NASA review recommended continuing the missions for at least three more years, suggesting no prior decommissioning plans existed before the recent directive. Congress has funded the missions through September 2025, but their future beyond that is uncertain due to the proposed budget cuts.

IF NASA wants to pay for them out of its budget I'm sure they can be saved. But it seems like someone could illustrate precisely what the importance of the data is. Who precisely is using this data and what for?

I see eight studies referencing this data since 2020. The question is whether they provide value. Almost all of the data being generated is readily available from many other satellites.

So, are a few studies over a 5-6 year period, where there are adequate alternatives, truly worth $15 million a year to keep on orbit? If they are precious, then someone at NASA should come up with $15M/year to save them. This is how budgets work.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext