Comments on: FY06 budget out

By: Kevin Parkin

Kevin Parkin — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 00:53:13 +0000

I’m encouraged by the new space station language Jeff points out.

The reality of the low shuttle flight rate and near-term retirement had to dawn at some point, and this is evidence that they’re not in total denial.

They should close a field center – NASA’s been spread too thin for years. I know where I’d pick: the place where it’s hardest to attract, accumulate and retain the best and brightest.

By: John Malkin

John Malkin — Mon, 07 Feb 2005 22:18:46 +0000

90% chance the Hubble Shuttle servicing mission will be restored but hopefully not at the expense of the current budget. One capability NASA will need to develop for a Hubble mission is shuttle to shuttle crew rescue. The shuttle mission would happen after “core complete” of ISS but before mid-2007. I would really doubt they would launch a Hubble service mission next year and there are only 6 more flights before core complete. JIMO was a good call; most of the technologies aren’t even close to being develop much less proven to be ‘mature’. I do hope we get a JIMO and another Titan mission at some point in the future.

By: Donald F. Robertson

Donald F. Robertson — Mon, 07 Feb 2005 21:14:41 +0000

Unfortunately, the game is not over. I expect Congress will buy in to the JIMO cancellation, but not Hubble, and the fight will continue. The longer this fight goes on, the greater the polical cost to the VSE.

In my opinion, the political compromise should be to fly a Shuttle repair mission using an all volunteer crew. Such a mission should use the oldest orbiter and be pushed as late as possible to ameliorate the technical (as opposed to political) cost of another lost orbiter. The incremental cost to the Shuttle program for such a mission should be (relatively) low, and the political gain could be quite high. I could envision a trade — Democratic support for near-term elements of the VSE in exchange for the Shuttle repair mission.

— Donald

By: Dogsbd

Dogsbd — Mon, 07 Feb 2005 21:00:05 +0000

I agree Donald, good news. As for trying to make nice with the Hubble-huggers (my words, not yours ), I doubt there is any way to do that short of giving them exactly what they want, IE keeping Hubble alive indefinitely. And that, I believe, is too high a price to pay.

I also lament the loss or postponement of JIMO, but it was the right call. The VSE is rightfully the centerpiece of NASA’s existence, hard calls will be required and Hubble/JIMO are just the first.

By: Frank Johnson

Frank Johnson — Mon, 07 Feb 2005 19:20:33 +0000

Looks like Exploration systems is being moved from Exploration Capabilities into Science, Aero and Exploration systems.

Centennial challeges got $34 million. Hope they get to spend it.

Also, what’s left of Biological and Physical Sciences is being moved into Exploration systems as Human Systems Research and Technology. I guess microgravity science won’t fare too well as it was never even mentioned.

By: Donald F. Robertson

Donald F. Robertson — Mon, 07 Feb 2005 18:14:42 +0000

While I lament the loss of both JIMO and Hubble (in that order), this looks overall like good news for us. It tells me that the Administration really is willing to make difficult choices to support its “vision.”

I just wish they would learn some political finesse. Good politics would involve coopting the Hubble and JIMO supporters, rather than making enemies of them. Undoubtedly, that would be hard to do, but who said good politics is easy?

JIMO was actually a good example of how to do it. Get some of the planetary scientists on the side of nuclear propulsion applicable to human missions. Now, they’ve pulled the rug from under these scientists, and guaranteed yet another enemy camp.

That said, though, I still think that, that on balance, this is good news.

— Donald