Comments on: Space Studies Board speaks out on NASA’s space science programs

By: Kevin

Kevin — Fri, 05 May 2006 06:51:26 +0000

Incidentally, I’ve been publicly wishing that the NASA science community would realize it’s JWST overruns eating their budgets for a year now. Science overruns don’t come out of the human spaceflight budget or anywhere else, they come out of the science budget. Perhaps the penny may finally drop this time.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Fri, 05 May 2006 06:43:19 +0000

….Or trying to use one beloved solution for every new challenge, even when it fails, repeatedly.

By: Donald F. Robertson

Donald F. Robertson — Thu, 04 May 2006 20:28:18 +0000

GuessWho: Of course a change in NASA top management may significantly alter the terrain (yet again) within the next two years and ensures another round of redirection and wasted monies with little to show for it.

Unfortunately, I think this outcome is very likely, especially given the slow pace of actually implementing the VSE and the way the scientists have been mishandled politically. It’s beginning to look likely that nothing of consequence will have been accomplished by the time Mr. Bush leaves office.

My favorite archaeology professor once stated that most great empires fail, not through invasion or physical destruction, but through an inability to make decisions and act on them.

— Donald

By: GuessWho

GuessWho — Thu, 04 May 2006 19:17:39 +0000

Alex,

You are overly optimistic on a number of your assumptions. JUNO has been delayed again (2011 or later, it is still TBD) and is being repeatedly robbed to pay other cost over-runs (DAWN being the latest but not likely the last). Both the Mars Scout and Discovery efforts are questionable, NASA is NOT obligated to fund anything beyond the Phase A studies so these are easily deferred/cancelled to fund over-runs elsewhere (see JUNO). JWST is a huge source of over-runs so I wouldn’t crow about that program and any MRO/MSL follow-up is just an idea right now, especially given the cost challenges MSL is already facing. Of course a change in NASA top management may significantly alter the terrain (yet again) within the next two years and ensures another round of redirection and wasted monies with little to show for it.

By: Donald F. Robertson

Donald F. Robertson — Thu, 04 May 2006 18:55:49 +0000

Another thing that is being lost in all the noise is that this situation was inevitable. At some point, now or in the future, you need to replace the Shuttle with something. If you are not going to completely abandon human spaceflight — which, for better or worse, is not in the political cards — there will be a period when you are developing a new human spacecraft while continuing to fly the Shuttle. Given that major increases in NASA funding are politically improbable, that means that there had to be a break in the growth in other projects. Once the new human infrastructure is paid for and running on operations costs, presumably that will free up money for a more traditional “balance.”

The growth in science spending during the Shuttle’s operations period has resulted in imbalance, in that the traditional balance between human and automated spaceflight has been weighted toward the latter.

The situation could have been much worse. Since the Administration has chosen one of the cheapest possible options for developing a new human infrastructure, the disruption to other accounts is relatively less than otherwise would have been the case.

The best option for automated science is to get through this period as quickly as possible, shut down the Shuttle, and look to the future human science that the new infrastructure will make possible.

— Donald

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 04 May 2006 17:56:51 +0000

“The combined impact of these various factors will result in a solar system exploration program that for several years will appear robust to the outside observer, but is actually running on the investment of the past and will enter the next decade with nothing ready to fly…”

I don’t know about that. 2010 will see JUNO launch. 2011 will see Mars Scout 2, 2011 will see JWST, 2011/2012 will see RLEP2, 2013 will see MRO follow-up, 2016 will see MSL follow-up. And then there’s whatever Discovery missions get picked during the next couple AOs.

There are indeed *some* things we will be flying in the 2010-2015 window, and while there’s no Europa mission, Flagship, or TPF/SIM, it’s still better than the 1979-1989 gap in planetary science.