Comments on: Feeney and Weldon send out an SOS http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: Space Politics » Florida state incentives and spaceports http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43876 Mon, 07 Apr 2008 16:02:55 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43876 […] but in not nearly as sensitive a location.) Of course, that editorial was published before the news that thousands of KSC jobs would be lost when the shuttle is retired; one wonders if that assessment changed a few minds about the proposed KSC launch […]

]]> By: Library: A Round Up of Reading « Res Communis http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43875 Mon, 07 Apr 2008 16:01:53 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43875 […] Feeney and Weldon send out an SOS – Space […]

]]> By: Donald F. Robertson http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43407 Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:15:07 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43407 Robert Horning: If anything, the end of the Iraq war would mean that there could be a significant increase in spending toward NASA and other more “civilian” research projects.

Unfortunately, I think this is wishful thinking. With the impending increases in costs associated with aging Americans — costs that no elected government is going to significantly truncate if it wants to get re-elected — the very best NASA could hope for is to retain it’s current budget, and even that would probably take a minor miracle. I hope I’m wrong. . . .

— Donald

]]> By: me http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43386 Thu, 03 Apr 2008 12:22:13 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43386 “This is impacting NASA as well, which is one reason why you see a major postponement of major new projects and why this layoff is happening.”

The war is not a reason this. This was going to happen with or without the war

]]> By: Space Politics » Preparing for life after the shuttle in Florida http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43374 Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:40:09 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43374 […] predicting thousands of job losses at the Kennedy Space Center when the shuttle is retired as another reason to extend the shuttle’s life, a couple of major newspapers in the region have called for a different type of legislative relief. […]

]]> By: Robert Horning http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43364 Thu, 03 Apr 2008 07:29:46 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43364 There is a huge difference between the period following the end of the Vietnam War vs. the war in Iraq in terms of its impact upon defense spending and that spending going to space-related missions.

Where the big ramp-up of military spending has been, in terms of high technology in relation to the Iraq war, has been with the development and implementation of UAV’s and ground robots that are developed for anti-mine/bomb activity. The end of the Iraq war would mean some serious cutbacks in this area of research.

If anything, the end of the Iraq war would mean that there could be a significant increase in spending toward NASA and other more “civilian” research projects. If you ask most ordinary Americans, particularly those who remember the Apollo program and lived in the 1960’s, they would think that NASA still represents 5%-15% of the federal budget…. as it did in the mid-1960’s. If you hear people complaining about how wasteful NASA is, it is a throwback to this era when perhaps it was wasteful of taxpayer money.

Mind you, I’m not a huge fan of Ares/Orion (quite the opposite), but compared to perceptions the American public is getting pennies on the dollar for what they think is being spent on public space projects. A president that is serious about spaceflight (especially human spaceflight) could significantly change this around and make a huge difference.

Other areas of basic research have also suffered during the Iraq War, most notably the fusion reactor (the Polywell system) that Robert Bussard was putting together right before he died. Dr. Bussard explicitly mentioned that the growth of spending toward daily operational costs in Iraq was largely responsible for canceling his project under Navy research authority. This is impacting NASA as well, which is one reason why you see a major postponement of major new projects and why this layoff is happening.

]]> By: mike shupp http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43332 Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:48:01 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43332 It’s reasonable to assume the war in Iraq will come to an end, one way or another, in the 2009-2011 period, leading to a tapering off of defense spending. Which is to say another period of aerospace retrenchment, a la the 1970s and 1990s, is ahead of us. NASA’s job losses are probably going to look like the few drops that presaged a deluge a decade hence.

-ms

]]> By: Rand Simberg http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43327 Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:22:56 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43327 most people here when they talk about how slow China is moving appear to be referring to the launch rate. The argument is that you can’t learn enough, and keep skills in tact, if you only launch one a year or once every other year. SpaceX’s demonstrated launch rate is in this ballpark.

SpaceX’s *demonstrated* launch rate is irrelevant. They plan to launch at a high rate once they get through development. China, on the other hand, shows no such plans or tendency. Or ability to afford a high rate with their planned systems.

]]> By: Donald F. Robertson http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43299 Wed, 02 Apr 2008 22:03:24 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43299 Al, I don’t dispute your logic, but most people here when they talk about how slow China is moving appear to be referring to the launch rate. The argument is that you can’t learn enough, and keep skills in tact, if you only launch one a year or once every other year. SpaceX’s demonstrated launch rate is in this ballpark. I wonder if they would be better off if they bit the bullet, tolerated more failures, and attempted to launch more often.

However, if launch rate is the measure, China’s human flights and SpaceX’s Falcon flights are comparable, yet appear to be judged by different standards.

— Donald

]]> By: Anon http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43294 Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:40:01 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/04/02/feeney-and-weldon-send-out-an-sos/#comment-43294 From a standing start, SpaceX is planning on launching the Falcon IX in the next year or so — if they say a year it will probably take them 2-3 years, and they probably will have 1-2 failures. So make it 2011/2012 for the initial success on the optimistic side.

Al – If that is what happens then they will miss their COTS deadlinesm making the program a failure, unless OSC comes through with the Taurus II. That will not be good for the image of New Space.

]]>