Back in late August a group of former astronauts published an op-ed in the Houston Chronicle in support of human space exploration in general and Constellation in particular. (The link to the original op-ed is now broken, as the Chronicle has apparently moved it to its archives, never to be read again.) The piece was somewhat supportive of commercial options for human space transportation to low Earth orbit, saying such ventures could “possibly” transport cargo and crew if they’re able to meet NASA crew safety requirements.
The Wall Street Journal published online late Thursday another op-ed by another group of former astronauts, led by Buzz Aldrin, that takes a stronger stance in favor of commercial crew transportation. “While it’s completely appropriate for NASA to continue developing systems and the new technologies necessary to take crews farther out into our solar system, we believe that the commercial sector is fully capable of safely handling the critical task of low-Earth-orbit human transportation,” the op-ed states. Not surprisingly, they support the emphasis on commercial options in the Augustine committee summary report. “NASA should put its unique resources into pushing back the final frontier and not in repaving the earth-to-orbit road it cleared a half century ago. Commercial human spaceflight is not competitive with NASA. It is complementary.”
Several people, each far smarter than I, asked about the process by which the original Houston Chronicle op ed came about. Did the astronauts just happen to meet in a bar and decide to write the editorial? Did one start it and send out an email on the “Astronaut’s Only” email dist list? Or probably did a company VP actually start it and shop around for names to sign it?
Similarly here – did they all just run into each other at the checkout line in the grocery store? As a big fan of commercial options for launching people (disclaimer here) I am glad to see this op ed, but I do wonder if maybe Richard Branson is behind it.
The impact of something like this is probably small though I am glad to see people (who know what they are talking about) forcefully support this option.
Five of these astronauts work for companies that expressed interested in NASA’s Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program:
Bowersox – SpaceX
Gibson – Sierra Nevada (formerly SpaceDev)
Lounge – Boeing
Voss – Sierra Nevada (formerly SpaceDev)
Walker – Boeing
The rest work for companies that have not expressed interest in CCDev (Rocketplane, Zero Gravity), are in academia (UVa), or are retired (ex-politician, ex-Raytheon, etc.).
That’s better than the other op-ed, where nearly all of the astronauts worked for Constellation contractors or ESMD grantees. But it’s still troubling that the newpapers publishing these articles don’t advise their readers about these obvious conflicts of interest.
FWIW…
I would like to see commercial companies take over the US access to LEO. There are about a hundred reasons why that would benefit US space flight, and all have been examined on this blog by people more knowledgeable than me. Before that can happen those companies have to PROVE they are up to the job.
One of the most anticipated companies, SpaceX, has had only one fully successful flight of their Falcon1booster and the booster that would actually be used to launch humans, Falcon9, has yet to fly. The same can be said of the Dragon capsule.
NASA should do what ever they can to help the process along like share information and funding a COTS D competition but I don’t think we can base our plans on commercial human space flight just yet.
I think this was actually important.
It ends the debate that astronauts — per se — do not support transferring responsibility for NASA’s human spaceflight to LEO to private industry. Policy makers would take notice if all the astronauts were saying this.
I can imagine a defender of Ares 1 saying “Trust the astronauts, who put their lives on the line. They are saying “Don’t do this.” ” That argument has now been defused.
This also partially addresses the Scott (I am mind melded with Griffin) Pace argument that “Ares 1 is the public option.”
When you consider that both Sally Ride and Leroy Ciao will be signing their names to the Augustine report saying it is time to transfer responsibility for human transportation to LEO to private industry, this is a good sign that the Griffin/Pace’s of the world are out of touch with the reality of where the nation is.
FWIW,
– Al
Major Tom,
I believe Charlie Walker retired from Boeing in 2006.
FWIW,
– Al
“I believe Charlie Walker retired from Boeing in 2006.”
You’re right. Thanks for the correction. That brings the number of astronauts who authored the article and work for companies that expressed interest in CCDev to four.
Thanks again…
I believe Charlie Walker retired from Boeing in 2006.
I’ll bet he’s still available for consulting.
Astronauts want to go to space and preferrably to distant worlds. If NASA is unable to provide transportation astronauts will do whatever they can to find transportation. Today they only have two choices: NASA and commercial. Therefore you’ll essentially get two groups of astronauts and maybe a third group of undecided ones. In addition astronauts want to fly often. What is the prospect with Constellation’s Ares/Orion in terms of flight rate? What is that of commercial?
So who is right?
Considering the trend with Augustine’s panel, Lori Garver Deputy Admin., Georges Whitesides Chieff of Staff… Hmmm… I wonder…
Rand…everyone is available for consulting…
well most everyone
Robert G. Oler
Anybody here have any idea why the Delta IV was left out as a possiblity for crew delivery to LEO in this article?
everyone is available for consulting…
But some people have the inside track with some people.