—–

Direct has the same fundamental problems, nobody at NASA knows how to build a booster. Perhaps this motley crew could build Shuttle-C because all the parts are there, but any other changes will just be beyond the talent pool at Huntsville and Johnson.

Well if we are going to switch horses in mid stream we better hope Space-X has it together for station support.

Direct 2.0 is the way to go if we are going to drop back and punt, (best retention and expansion of capability lift for the least investment).

Space out the last shuttle flights to close the gap in flight capability, (to see if Space-X will preform as advertised).

All this talk of scale this, man rate that, for the Delta IV or Atlas V does not take into account the payload processing issues. Major modifications would need to be made to the existing pads and support structures. Remember the processing problems with Apollo 7?

As for members of the review team to add:

John Young – Real American Hero!
Burt Rutan – For out of the box thinking
Homer Hickman Jr. – Veteran of the clone wars
A Anson-Stoner Representative – To teach NASA how to sell the product to main street!

Have a great day!

The administration is taking the political pulse measuring the grassroots support for aggressive and bold initiative. Their assessment is likely to be that the public will react enthusiastically to a bold initiative for American leadership. [fwiw — watch the box office data for Star Trek]

Worden and Garver will not be leading dueling potentially contradictory reports. They are both on ascent for potential role as NASA Admin. Augustine is a safer play as leader of the “study”, and he is not shy about costs.

Watch for a Kennedy-esque historically significant speech and appointment to follow right on the heels of this report, as the American public contemplates the Apollo legacy.

Ah. %^)
Yep, well just goes to say about our space community, doesn’ t it?

But who can blame them/us? Haven’t we (our US society) borrowed as far as the eyes can see? And I am not talking stimulus, just in case…

Reality check on order and it’s going to hurt.

On a scale from 1 to 10 where do you put human space flight to the Moon or Mars in our current mess? If you guessed “-1″ you’re probably right.

Actually, there is a critical prior step, which is to acknowledge reality.

The fact that somebody seriously posed a question about “which budget?”, suggests a serious disconnect with reality. The budget is not disputable. It is not a matter of interpretation. It is hard numbers on paper.

We can’t have a productive conversation where one person is talking about a “wish for budget” or “the budget we could have had if only ____” or “the budget we were promised in 2004″, and the other person is focused on the hard facts of the *PRESENT* actual budget.

FWIW,

– TANSTAAFL

While I 100% support Major Tom’s devastating points — 3X cost overruns SWAMP any impact of 1X budget cuts — the fact is that the budget cuts are not news. Much of the $12B in Bush43 cuts to outyear exploration funding were made in 2005-6, not 7-8. In other words,
They were made EARLY ENOUGH for Griffin to correct the fundamental inaffordability and unsustainabilty of his architecture. He chose not to do that.

You ask “which budget”. There’s only one budget: the real one, including the vaguaries of continuing resolutions, etc…

The real budget doesn’t support Ares 1. It arguably never did. That reality has caught up to NASA. It’s not pretty, and it definitely doesn’t make me happy, but if you want to get out of a deep hole… the first step is to STOP DIGGING.

– Jim

That would be great, as long as it’s not Constellation or Orion. It’s a feature, not a bug. I am considerably more optimistic. I believe Mr. Obama and company will realize just how optimistic and realistic LEO transportation becomes with the cancellation of Constellation, Ares, Orion and the moon.

The planets can wait, they’re not going anywhere. But commercial and advanced reusable EELV and COTS derived launch vehicles certainly are.

Throw a dozen SSMEs into the mix, and it’s fantastic, in my humble opinion. This could well sort itself out in remarkably non-intuitive ways, and he’d leave the next administration well prepared for whatever follows in 2016.

My prediction is that there will indeed be no moon base option. However, I also think that ultimately there will be no NEO mission, or Mars mission. The new commission will probably end up justifying a continued scaleback of the objectives of Constellation. What will be left is just LEO capability, just as we have had since the Shuttle started flying. Cynically, I believe the dangling of “skip the moon, go straight to Mars talk” is a way for the budget masters to push buy time to slowly reduce the budget and capabilities of Ares, unmanned alternatives, and anything else those of use who would like to see something happen beyond LEO.