Comments on: Shuttle vs. Soyuz? Obama says yes

By: g-c

g-c — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 22:16:15 +0000

I wish someone would just say how much a flight for the space shuttle actually costs! One can get information on the Soyuz but not the space shuttle.

By: Vladislaw

Vladislaw — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:00:08 +0000

I said when Mike G. first announced Ares I was he trying to kill NASA manned flight.

I now believe that was the plan from the start. Bush wanted commercial flight. The Next president, with the current budget, will not fund it and with the shuttle canceled they will have to do a safe, simple, soon, capsule on a rocket. Ares I busted the budget the day it was announced and every new add on only added time and money to the gap. While Russia is sending tourists to space on their rockets america has to ask for a ride. That changes the arguement and it will be private enterprise launching capsules not nasa. I now truely believe that was the plan from the start.

By: Al Fansome

Al Fansome — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:21:11 +0000

CHARLES: Of the three, hopefully Safe will make the cut. So of Fast and Inexpensive – which do we want????

Charles,

Is this a trick question?

Right now we are getting both “slow” and “expensive”.

Right now I would be quite happy with acquiring either “fast” or “inexpensive”, in addition to safe.

– Al

By: anonymous.space

anonymous.space — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 03:18:03 +0000

“‘As it is only Dragon is close’ No indication of this either. No known status on an actual working orbital prototype.”

Very wrong. Dragon has passed CDR (Critical Design Review). Orion, by comparison, is still a year away from PDR (Preliminary Design Review).

Dragon’s PICA heat shield, structural test articles, aerodynamic mockups, landing model, and ergonomic mockups all finished their builds and/or testing last year. Orion, with the exception of its ergonomic mockup, still has crucial decisions to make in each of these areas, nevertheless built the test articles and models and completed the testing.

This information is widely available on Wikipedia, the Space-X website, etc. Please, let’s do at least a little homework before making totally false statements.

FWIW…

By: Space Politics » Senator Obama endorses INKSNA waiver extension

Space Politics » Senator Obama endorses INKSNA waiver extension — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:05:40 +0000

[…] the Obama campaign issued a statement Monday generally supporting a wide variety of options for dealing with the Shuttl…, Senator Obama is being a little more specific. In a letter from Obama’s Senate office to […]

By: joe

joe — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:46:15 +0000

Spacer: “As it is only Dragon is close” No indication of this either. No known status on an actual working orbital prototype. Until it ascends, approaches ISS, gets berthed, stays at ISS, reenters and lands [while not killing anyone inside in the crewed version] at least once, it’s not an alternative either.

By: Charles In Houston

Charles In Houston — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 23:50:04 +0000

“Fast. safe. and inexpensive” sounds like “Better, Cheaper, Faster” to me, and as many wiser people pointed out – you can have any two that you want, but can’t have all three.

Of the three, hopefully Safe will make the cut. So of Fast and Inexpensive – which do we want????

By: Master of the Obvious

Master of the Obvious — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 23:07:18 +0000

Sounds like Lori Garver wrote this to me.

By: Spacer

Spacer — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 23:07:01 +0000

Maybe if “minor” sapce firms actually had some capusles flying NASA would have a basis to trust them. As it is only Dragon is close, and the repeated failures of the Falcon 1 does not bode well for having confidence in it.

When minor space firms start producing results instead of excuses NASA will trust it. but until then New Space will need to earn its stripes by showing what it is able to do. Hopefully the Falon 1 launch this week will be the turning point for New Space firms in terms of creditability.

By: Charles Lurio

Charles Lurio — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 22:39:24 +0000

To me it sounds more like, instead of extending COTS to COTS D, this could devolve into the govn’t just going out and tasking a major aerospace company to build a capsule pronto – the usual excess cost. We can’t trust capsules that the private sector might consider adequate for its own use for commercial purposes, such as transport to and from Bigelow’s stations, etc., now can we?