The University of California Berkeley issued a press release this week where several of the university’s scientists argued that planned cutbacks in NASA’s science budget would be detrimental not only to their research programs, but to the nation in general. One scientist quoted in the release, Robert Lin, tried to make it clear he wasn’t trying to raise the old argument of robotic versus human spaceflight. “I’m actually a supporter of manned space,” he said. “I think it’s something the country should do. But I’m concerned about the balance between science and manned exploration… I think the problem from our point of view is not so much going with manned exploration, but trying to keep a reasonable balance between the two sides.”
Exoplanet hunter Geoff Marcy, though, is a little more pessimistic, believing the space agency “has backed away from the two most philosophically compelling questions to face modern physical science: ‘What is the history and destiny of the universe?’ and ‘Are we alone?'”
Unfortunately, the UC Berkeley press office should have subjected their release to peer review before publication. At one point, talking about the shuttle program, the release claims, “No shuttles have been launched since the Columbia disintegrated while returning to Earth in February 2003, killing all seven astronauts aboard.” Uh, STS-114? Remember that shuttle mission from last summer? Later, talking about the indefinitely-delayed Terrestrial Planet Finder mission, the release states that “The Caltech-led TPF was scheduled for launch between 2012 and 2015.” That’s highly optimistic, to say the least, even for the less-ambitious TPF-C mission, given that JWST, already well underway, is not going to launch until 2013. The more complex interferometer mission would not fly until well after 2015, even in the most optimistic budget scenarios.
I just read Space News’ coverage of last week’s House Appropriations testimony. While generally refusing to get drawn into the “China controversy” (which I believe was very wise on his part), Dr. Griffin was reported as saying that China has successfully launched two missions in the time the United States launched one! That is an excellent point, no matter what China’s plans may be.
— Donald
Get rid of the shuttle now reguardless of our obligations, and start work on CEV/CLV/HLV. If the shuttle cannot fly, we cannot meet out obligations either, and it sure looks like problems keep appearing that delay and prevent launches. I think most of our problems with manned launches will go away with cev/clv/hlv systems, although I am starting to get alittle concerned about using shuttle technology over again on the new systems. I am starting to think that using Titan or Delta launchers would be better.
I am starting to think that using Titan or Delta launchers would be better.
I have always felt that — if nothing else, to provide the economies of scale that greater use of these vehicles would provide — but that is not the decision that was made. I believe revisiting that decision would cause more political harm than any technical harm caused by NASA’s current plan. That said, I hope we can replace the SRBs early in a second generation system.
If NASA goes forward with using the Delta-IV rockets, should go some way toward ameliorating my concern with the waste involved in trying to keep to many government rockets in production.
— Donald
If we’re scared of the Chinese, then we shouldn’t be borrowing so much money from them to underwrite the Bush spending spree.
But getting back to spaceflight – if we’re scared of the Chinese, then we should fly the Shuttle now and let the CEV happen when it happens. The Shuttle is not inherently more risk-fraught now than it ever was.
Undoubtedly true, but the Shuttle is also as expensive as it ever was (or, more likely, much more so). I have always been a strong supporter of the Shuttle, but now is the time to quit. As long as the Shuttle is flying, NASA cannot afford to do anything else given any politically likely human spaceflight budget.
— Donald