Comments on: House space supporters respond to Pelosi

By: Space Politics » Griffith changes parties

Space Politics » Griffith changes parties — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:56:53 +0000

[…] at the White House for not yet making a decision on space exploration policy. He also expressed his disagreement with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi about her comments that she’s not a “bi… and that any additional funding for it would have to be weighed against alternative programs for […]

By: Ferris Valyn

Ferris Valyn — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:50:35 +0000

vulture4 – I don’t know that his re-election is assured. He is going to be facing opponants from his right, vis-a-vie tea******s. there are 2 already openly declared.

By: vulture4

vulture4 — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:38:00 +0000

With Griffith becoming a Republican, his re-election is assured but his influence on the administration will be reduced. Perhaps he suspects Constellation will lose support, and feels he has a better chance of being re-elected if he can blame Obama for its failure rather than accept any responsibility himself.

If we give up ISS we will have nowhere to go in LEO, and if we give up Shuttle we may well have no way to get there. Those who feel “trapped in LEO” should be careful what they wish for; we may soon be trapped on the ground.

Finally, America is in debt and losing what remains of its industrial base, and NASA needs to start producing practical benefits if it wants to get funded.

By: Rand Simberg

Rand Simberg — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:32:00 +0000

Considering that his district includes the Marshall Space Flight Center, I wonder what effect if any his switch will have on congress and NASA

I can’t imagine any at all.

By: spaceguy

spaceguy — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:31:21 +0000

Freshman Democrat Parker Griffith has announced today that he will become a Republican. Considering that his district includes the Marshall Space Flight Center, I wonder what effect if any his switch will have on congress and NASA

By: Robert G. Oler

Robert G. Oler — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 17:36:22 +0000

Marcel F. Williams wrote @ December 20th, 2009 at 5:08 am

Construction jobs vs space flight R&D that could eventually help us expand into the rest of the solar system in order to avoid the extinction for our species while also giving us access to hundreds of quadrillions of dollars of natural resources amongst the asteroids and planets in our solar system. Thatâ€™s a no brainer for me! ..

but thankfully that is not our choices.

Robert G. Oler

By: Robert G. Oler

Robert G. Oler — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:14:00 +0000

Marcel F. Williams

no.

Skylab would cost about the same to resupply (people and parts are people and parts) and ISS is on orbit, ready to go, and only needs the correct system to operate in to see what can be done with microgravity and spacecraft construction.

“And if any of our international partners or private industry wants one, we could place one into orbit for them ”

nope. ISS needs to turn into national infrastructure. stand by, if policies are done correctly you are about to see the start of the first real space age.

Robert G. Oler

By: Marcel F. Williams

Marcel F. Williams — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:10:19 +0000

The US needs to end any significant contributions to the mission to nowhere (ISS) in order to replace it with a real space station program. I’d rather spend the $2 billion a year that we spend on the ISS on launching Skylab-like space stations into orbits that are not inordinately delta v expensive for our vessels to get to and space stations that can produce artificial gravity.

There was no logical reason for a single titanically large microgravity space station in the first place. Smaller Skylab-like space stations are much cheaper. Plus a heavy lift vehicle could place a Skylab-like space station into orbit with one single launch.

And if any of our international partners or private industry wants one, we could place one into orbit for them too if they’re willing to pay for the space station and the launch cost!

By: Doug Lassiter

Doug Lassiter — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 00:16:05 +0000

“No brainers” aside, I will suggest that real thinking by Pelosi, whether instinctive or not, has some merit, though it is quite true that she evidently hasn’t been supplied with any convincing arguments about why human spaceflight has value to the nation.

I want to echo the sentiment expressed about EVA and orbital assembly. If humans are going to do ANYTHING useful in space, those two skills, developed so well with ISS and Shuttle, need preservation. The baseline Constellation plan does no such thing. In this respect, and especially given funding caps, continuation of ISS may well be a more functionally appropriate path to future human space exploration than near term efforts on the lunar surface.

By: Marcel F. Williams

Marcel F. Williams — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 10:08:17 +0000

But there are many conservative nations out there not foolish enough to waste public funds on scientific research and development. They’re usually called third world nations!