Comments on: Augustine panel session at MIT December 11 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/12/03/augustine-panel-session-at-mit-december-11/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=augustine-panel-session-at-mit-december-11 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 » On his desk http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/12/03/augustine-panel-session-at-mit-december-11/#comment-277483 Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:57:03 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=2827#comment-277483 […] person attending this morning’s Augustine committee panel session at MIT passed along, via Twitter, this comment from committee chairman Norm Augustine: “I’m […]

]]> By: Anon2 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/12/03/augustine-panel-session-at-mit-december-11/#comment-277043 Mon, 07 Dec 2009 13:26:21 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=2827#comment-277043 According to the writers of the MIT report there are only three primary reasons that justify human presence in space, Exploration, National pride and International prestige and leadership. The then go into a long discussion on what exploration is. They then finally “define exploration as an expansion of the realm of human
experience, bringing people into new places, situations, and environments, expanding and redefining what it means to be human.” In short HSF basically Flags and Footsteps and bragging rights. (roll eyes…)

They did group all the other arguments (economic development, Inspiration, etc.) as secondary reasons that fail to justify the cost.

Gee, they as bad as Queen Isabella’s wisemen.

Well, if those are the MIT findings for justifying HSF then CATS makes little sense, same with encouraging commercial alternatives… Really if all HSF is seen by experts as a modern version of the great polar race its easy to understand why so many bad space policy decision are being made. Maybe it is time to shut NASA down and just use its budget as a tax credit for New Space companies.

]]> By: one http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/12/03/augustine-panel-session-at-mit-december-11/#comment-276727 Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:36:54 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=2827#comment-276727 –
the Ares 1-X has FAILED its goals, so, the Ares-1 can’t fly
—
http://technologyreview.com/blog/deltav/24479/?a=f#comment-215330
—
http://ow.ly/IDow
–

]]> By: Neil H. http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/12/03/augustine-panel-session-at-mit-december-11/#comment-276592 Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:03:53 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=2827#comment-276592 John Logsdon? Eek. Also, it’s a pity they don’t have Jeff Greason to counter Logsdon.

]]> By: Doug Lassiter http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/12/03/augustine-panel-session-at-mit-december-11/#comment-276585 Thu, 03 Dec 2009 23:43:53 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=2827#comment-276585 With 90 minutes for 5 people, one probably won’t get overfilled by this. Too bad it’s so brief. Norm gets fifteen minutes to talk about several months of intensive work, I guess. The MIT white paper on the future of human spaceflight is a good one, though — http://web.mit.edu/mitsps/index.html, and it would be interesting to see how that report meshes with the implementation options the Augustine committee came up with.

]]>