States

…and something Florida doesn’t

Florida space advocates have been hoping to turn concern about the economic impact of the retirement of the shuttle and the planned cancellation of Constellation into support for some initiatives to support the state’s space industry. Those initiatives, with a cost of $32.6 million, have the support of the state’s governor (and US Senate candidate), Charlie Crist, who mentioned them again in his State of the State address earlier this week. And on Wednesday space supporters swarmed the halls of the state capitol for Space Day, talking with legislators to win support for those efforts.

However, there’s no guarantee that despite the dire predictions of economic catastrophe on the Space Coast, state help will be forthcoming. As the Orlando Sentinel reported Thursday, state legislators said it would be difficult, at best, to get those incentives approved given the poor state of the overall economy and a $3-billion state budget deficit to close. “[T]he probability of getting $32 million is not probable,” said state Sen. Mike Fasano, who chairs a committee that will take up the proposed incentives.

Meanwhile, Florida Today reported that Gov. Crist had a “tense” meeting with KSC director Robert Cabana, who was promoting the proposed budget that would transition human transportation to low Earth orbit to the private sector. “We can cry about what we’ve lost, or we can make the most of our opportunities,” Cabana said. Crist, though, tried to argue that the shuttle retirement should be postponed until “after the recession”.

61 comments to …and something Florida doesn’t

  • What’s wrong with your politicians? They all seem to think that the shuttle retirement being planned for 2010 since way back in 2003 is somehow renegotiable now. It’s taken a decade to arrange the retirement of the shuttle, why is everyone acting so surprised?

  • No one is “surprised” but the cancellation was to make way for Constellation. As you know not only the shuttle budget stream (and more) but also many NASA facilities would be required for Constellation. With the cancellation of Cx it is appropriate to reevalute the shuttle decision. While it is true that schedule slips in Cx created a major LEO gap by the time of the admistration decision, we are felt with an even more uncertain situation relying on COTS to fill the space transpotation gap.

    Extending the shuttle is a way to fill the gap and to preserve some capabilities that none of the COTS systems under development can fill. It also is ecoomically compatible with a $6 billion comercial seed program ove the next five years. Also, the extension of shuttle enables development of a derivative HLV along the Direct/Jupiter pattern. It also is supportive of the administrations objectives (assuming they are truthful) and would be better at accomplishing them than their so-called plan.

  • Robert G. Oler

    this is not a surprise…support for human spaceflight is strong just as long as someone else is paying for it…

    Robert G. Oler

  • Hugo

    After the Columbia disaster and with the fact that the shuttles are not getting any younger, it was understood that a third shuttle disaster was almost inevitable sometime in the future. This was a key point in deciding to speed up completion of the ISS and get the shuttles retired. Now that we have reached the retirement date, we want to reconsider the decision because Constellation is cancelled? The fact that Constellation is cancelled does not make the shuttles any safer or reliable, and in any case even if we move on with Constellation, we all know it’s so late in its schedule that it won’t be able to bridge the gap anyway. Just throwing money at Constellation so that some economic activity can be maintained may sound a good idea for the people directly impacted by the end of Constellation, but it isn’t a wise way to spend the hard-earned taxpayers money (although it would not be the first time government would spend money on futile endeavours just for the sake of it).

  • OpsGuy

    The 2003 CAIB report threw out an arbitrary 2010 deadline. “Certifcation” or “re-certification” was raised as an issue with no definition of what that meant; despite the fact that it and every other space flight (as opposed to commercial air travel for example), is “certified” every flight. This industry has no equivalent of the FAA’s airworthiness standards for certifying flight equipment, or for certifying operators, for that matter. Given that immature state of the this industry, and the no-kidding success record for things flying today, the Shutle has flown more successful human space flight ascents, and more successful human space flight entries, than Soyuz; and certainly far more than Falcon 9 or Orion! Even with 128 out of 130 round trip successes, that success record over that amount of flights is unbeatable in the world that will exist for the next five years or so. And that with the world’s only in-flight assembly workbench (the paylaod bay), and a substantial space flight hardware return capacity. If the astronaut office is that scared of flying the most reliable system in existence through this recession, then that sounds like a nation in retreat, and not worthy of permission to pursue bold exploration of Mars.

  • Robert G. Oler

    Rumor is that Crist meeting consisted of him saying over and over the line from the song “save my life I am going down for the last time”.

    BTW the Texas Gov has been changed from “Leaning R” to tossup by Charlie Cook.

    like that Mark? Robert G. Oler

  • Bill White

    BTW the Texas Gov has been changed from “Leaning R” to tossup by Charlie Cook.

    Bill White is smiling.

  • Robert G. Oler

    http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1003/05china/index.html

    wow the Chinese could be on the Moon any day now…stealing the resources, living in caves (the mine shaft gap) and destroying our purity of essence.

    Robert G. Oler

  • ehok

    I wish the chinese would steal the moon faster. Nothing is as likely to get Americans interested in space.

  • Doug Lassiter

    I love that, where since we don’t have a reason for going back to the Moon, we’re hopeful that competition with the Chinese will spur us to do so without having a reason to do so.

    I don’t want to claim that we can’t find compelling reasons to go back to the Moon, but just want to point out that wishful thinking about being spurred on by competition doesn’t relieve us of the responsibility for finding those reasons.

    Somewhat OT, but in some ways that’s what’s going on in Florida, where the reason for a space program is avoidance of economic catastrophe.

  • common sense

    I think the Chinese would then really be smart to say they want to land humans and establish colonies on Venus. Then we would have an open competition with them. We could take 5% GDP to go nowhere and then claim we were there first!!! I think that’d be cool, I mean the competition, not Venus.

  • ehok

    Politics and nationalism are factors in the real world (see Apollo) . At no point did I lay this out as the underlying justification for HSF or moon missions. I’m just pointing out that rather than fearing a strong Chinese entry into space, we should be hoping for it.

    We might have done more in space by now if the Russians had funded a more ambitious space program.

  • common sense

    “I’m just pointing out that rather than fearing a strong Chinese entry into space, we should be hoping for it.”

    And what I am saying is thaat no one cares what the Chinese do or do not do in Space. Even better if there is any expension in the Solar System, a true expension that is, it will be done WITH the Chinese. They need teh prestige and we need to share the cost. As simple as that. Of course if this is a NASA/USG endeavor, otherwise we don’t even need the Chinese but that is a different story.

    “We might have done more in space by now if the Russians had funded a more ambitious space program.”

    The Russians did not and still don’t neeed a stronger space program. And they don’t have the cash. They are trying to hang for dear life in the world and they cannot care less about Space.

  • ehok

    “”The Russians did not and still don’t neeed a stronger space program. And they don’t have the cash. They are trying to hang for dear life in the world and they cannot care less about Space.””

    But the current ruble/dollars exchange rate stands at 0.033584. Just thought I’d add a comment that had as much to do with your comments as yours were to mine.

    As for the rest, we obviously disagree. Chalk another one up for the internet.

  • common sense

    “As for the rest, we obviously disagree. ”

    I am not surprised. But Holdren suggested so in the past and it is the direction the world is taking. Not the US alone. Not any more but you are free to believe it.

  • “wow the Chinese could be on the Moon any day now…stealing the resources, living in caves (the mine shaft gap) and destroying our purity of essence.”

    Don’t make me dig up my American vs Chinese development schedule comparison. In the time it took between project 921 start and their first manned mission we had completed Mercury, mostly completed Gemini, and were gearing up for Apollo. By that point we had launched 16 separate seats (not astronauts as some flew on multiple missions) and done rendezvous. If their development process continues at the same rate in comparison with Mercury/Gemini/Apollo, they’ll put boots on the moon sometime around 2025. And let’s not forget this is their third numbered manned program, 4th when you consider their first program was restarted and recancelled. Break neck pace my butt.

    Keep in mind too, that merely one week ago the Tiangong program was slated to fly this year, but was postponed due to technical issues. They’re still not 100% sure they can do rendezvous and docking, successfully, either.

    If we kept Constellation exactly as it was and made no adjustments at all, China would still beat us there. But even solving some of Cx’s problems could put us there earlier. If we can get the new HLV online before 2020, we’ll almost certainly beat them there.

  • ehok

    No, we don’t disagree on cooperation.

    Cooperation would be great but I think the psychology of the US is such that we would not be content to be a junior partner. If the Chinese invested more in the program, we would be compelled to match or exceed their contribution. Cooperation or not, the US public has a “we’re #1″ expectation of US HSF. A robust chinese program, in my opinion, is helpful on our side regardless.

    Unfortunately, I don’t expect them have a robust program.

  • common sense

    “Cooperation or not, the US public has a “we’re #1″ expectation of US HSF. ”

    Another point of disagreement. The US public does not really care about the NASA HSF program. Not as it stands and has stood for the past 40 years. The new generation of Americans do not know, do not understand, do not care about this kind of pissing contest. Most of the youth today is connected with their counterparts all other the world. They will not embrace such a competition. Only those of us old enough to be adults during the Cold War have these kinds of expectations.

  • Robert G. Oler

    aremisasling wrote @ March 5th, 2010 at 2:08 pm

    I wont make you dig it up as long as you promise that you understand my post was as satirical as possible.

    I dont believe that the Chinese are in a race to the Moon, I dont believe that they even give a darn about sending humans to the Moon.

    Robert G. Oler

  • ehok

    People are led to issues by the pols and pundits who make them issues of the day. To think that pols wouldnt use a future loss of HSF leadership to another nation as a club to win votes is like betting that the sun won’t rise.

    And if you are betting on the wisdom of the people to see through fear ,jingoism and invocatons of national pride, well, good luck with that. The Iraq war had over 70% approval in the first few months and might cost us $1 trillion dollars. An issue that most Americans did not care about the year before. Despite all that cooperation between young people to pirate music and porn on the internet.

    And you honestly believe that if the Chinese set up dry cleaning shops or built a railroad on the moon that nobody in the US says a peep or lifts a finger? That NASA wouldnt benefit at all? I disagree.

    But China isnt dong that soon so it’s all moot.

  • Robert G. Oler

    common sense wrote @ March 5th, 2010 at 2:29 pm

    concur.

    my impression from so many sources…is that the era of “gunboat programs” (at least for awhile) ended with Mr. Bush’s efforts in Iraq.

    Most of the Ares huggers forget that support for Apollo was waning in the American people even before the first Apollo flew. The networks were getting calls about coverage of Gemini interrupting “network” programming…the Apollo TV coverage was good for 11…but declined rapidly after that (see the Apollo 13 movie) except for tragedy. By the time 17 flew…no one cared.

    That is in my view even worse today. The national challenges after Iraq are viewed mostly as posturing by politicians. The “older fox news” group still longs for those glory days of “confrontation toe to toe with some enemy” but although they are loud they are a declining subset of Americans.

    I do not think that the Chinese are going to the moon in a crewed way period…but even if they were most Americans would look at that and say “good luck let us know when you do something useful”. After endless comments of Saddam going to kill us with WMD, blowing up two bit thugs into a “war” most Americans are just tired of the incessant chest thumping that the “fear fear groups” are pushing.

    Absent some serious evidence of danger…most Americans are growing more callous to those calls (which begs the question why Obama just doesnt shove the finger at the Fox News group…I would)

    Robert G. Oler

  • Robert G. Oler

    ehok wrote @ March 5th, 2010 at 3:28 pm

    this is the deception (lies) of the last administration.

    Without WMD as Karl Rove has admitted the Congress (and the American people) would not have cared a hoot about regime change in Iraq.

    What Bush and his thunderheads did is oversale the need for the war and undersale the cost. It was “going to pay for itself” and be over in under 6 months…and we were going to stop the “storm clouds that were gathering near our shores” or the “smoking gun which could be a smoking mushroom”.

    Had Condi, Dickie, and all the other exaggerators not run around spouting those slogans “It is a fact that Saddam has (links to AQ, or WMD or is on the verge of nuclear weapons)” Bush and company never could have gotten the go ahead to invade Iraq.

    If the Chinese set up dry cleaning shops on the Moon…I am curious whose business would they have!

    Robert G. Oler

  • ehok

    The Indians, obviously.

  • common sense

    Just to add to Robert. The war mongering fear driving ideologues of the previous administration did just that: They capitalized on the events of 9/11 and on the lack of education/sophistication of the public at large about Iraq/Iran/etc. They made sure there was a fear of WMD and made up all the necessary evidence: I still cannot believe what a guy like Colin Powell did going to the UN and delivering all this bs. The saddest day of his political if not whole life. This being said the pundits and the public will not care of a Moon race with China UNLESS there is some associated, immediate threat that could have the shape of a mushroom cloud if you see what I mean. Only the likes of Palin who can see Russia from her window are likely to go this route. It is a sad possibility and not that far from reality and should not be ignored. But I would hope that the US public learned their lesson this time around. Otherwise the Moon race will be the least of our problems. BTW what cash would we use to go there? Some loan from China?

    This President either has a plan, long term, to bring the Fox News networks of the world to oblivion or he’s too much of a nice guy. We’ll know starting in 2010.

  • Robert G. Oler

    ehok wrote @ March 5th, 2010 at 3:48 pm

    The Indians, obviously…

    of course…how silly of me Robert G. Oler

  • This President either has a plan, long term, to bring the Fox News networks of the world to oblivion or he’s too much of a nice guy.

    You didn’t notice last year when he went to war with Fox News? It turned into a bloody quagmire, and the White House had to withdraw. It was hilarious.

  • Robert G. Oler

    common sense wrote @ March 5th, 2010 at 4:27 pm

    three points on your excellent post.

    There are so many tragedies about Iraq…the first is the obvious; that the administration lied/exaggerated etc and got us into the mess. But then the reality is that the thunderheads of the last administration listened to the people who least knew how to do the “thing” and that screwed it up until the “revolt of the generals” and change in strategery started in country (in Anbar) . Had Bush/Cheney etc listened to the people who knew what they were talking about…the irony for them is that the Iraq of today would have been possible in 2006 or so (or even earlier) and Bush would have left (in my view) as a conquering hero not as some dolt.

    There is nothing that will make Iraq worthwhile to this America (debt lives ruined world view etc) but places like Bataan seemed useless in 1910 to my Great Grandfather’s generation and by 41 they were valuable. We have no real idea of what might happen in the future but the present…the whole thing was a lie.

    As for Colin…Larry (Col. LArry Wilkerson) more or less in my view speaks for General Powell and his feelings toward that UN speech. Colin Powell resigning and saying why he was resigning was the one person who could have shut the thing down (if that was possible). The GOP was embarked on this sort of nutty crusade so it might not have been…but Powell was the one who could. He failed his own post Vietnam test.

    Second. AS for the GOP …in my view it is imploding (so is Obama’s Presidency but another story). A Key test is going to be Texas and what happens with White/Perry…this is the campaign of the “GOP Bully past” (the Sarah Palin “we can say anything even if it is a lie as long as we think you want to hear it”) vrs moderation in politics.

    Absent some real threat (and Iran is not it) we can live and live quite well with an Iranian bomb and some of the other problems which are going to work their way out. (that includes a failed Afland…I dont see how we win that one)…These are all residues of the Bush era…and while we wish they were not there (the Iranian bomb) I have no fear that we can “deter” them. Contrary to Ms. Palin…they are not suicidal. (BTW Sarah Palin has as much chance of being President as you do.)

    Third. In my view Charlie B is going to get (more or less) his space effort and we will see what he does with it. When the final dollars pass, the real push starts. He has to completly reorg the agency to turn it into an R&D group instead of a badly run operations agency.

    If he doesnt do a reorg, it will be a worse R&D agency then it is an operations group and it is a horrible ops group. I find the nashing of teeth of the ares huggers…entertaining.

    All in all I am very bullish on the future. We are going through a rough patch that is in my view going to get rougher…but we can get through and be a better country for it.

    Robert G. Oler

  • Robert G. Oler

    Rand Simberg wrote @ March 5th, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    A President should never engage the media…it didnt work for Nixon…the 1st amendment is very strong.

    What a President should do, is point out the lying and exaggerations of the “other side”. For instance when the perils and evils of “reconciliation” are pointed out by folks like oh say Judd Gregg…Obama or someone should show over and over the videos of him defending it on the Senate floor.

    That is what hits and hits hard.

    Robert G. Oler

  • common sense

    “You didn’t notice last year when he went to war with Fox News? It turned into a bloody quagmire, and the White House had to withdraw. It was hilarious.”

    I’d say pathetic not hilarious. He should never have done it head on. I’d grant you that: If the Democrats had half the spine (to stay polite) and discipline of the Republicans they might, just might, be able to govern and stop the Fox News of the world. But suffice to watch the Health care “debate”, not between the Dems and the Reps mind you!, but within the Dems! And also closer to business here Sen. Nelson’s jig to appease his good friend in Alabama he’d be ready to damage the President’s plan. It does not mean that the President is wrong though.

    Oh well…

  • common sense

    “BTW Sarah Palin has as much chance of being President as you do.”

    You just meant to ruin my weekend didn’t you? I knew I could not trust Republicans!

  • “I’d grant you that: If the Democrats had half the spine (to stay polite) and discipline of the Republicans they might, just might, be able to govern and stop the Fox News of the world”

    In the words of Will Rogers:

    “I’m not a member of any organized political party, I’m a Democrat!”

  • It was pathetically hilarious. Or hilariously pathetic. But then, I was rooting for Fox News. Especially against the buffoon Robert Gibbs…

  • After the Columbia disaster and with the fact that the shuttles are not getting any younger, it was understood that a third shuttle disaster was almost inevitable sometime in the future.

    The is now real reason to think that it would happen due to life-limits in say the next 50 or sixty flights if they were occur. The fix for the SRBs has worked since then and the inpections seem to be doing the trick for now on the Columbia problem.

    And what I am saying is thaat no one cares what the Chinese do or do not do in Space.

    That is until they do it of course! Then it’s different. The U.S. public expects us to be first in space but it doesn’t really occur to them that the situation might change. They don’t like hearing about the cost just like they don’t like hear what the CEO of some company makes. It sounds like a lot of money. Then they don’t like what a whole lot of other government programs cost either. Well…unless they are benefiting from them.

    R.G.O.:

    Perry is going to be re-elected. Also, Sarah Palin is smater than you!

  • Robert G. Oler

    John wrote @ March 5th, 2010 at 5:54 pm

    Perry is going to be re-elected. Also, Sarah Palin is smater than you!..

    to the latter. “Smart” is like “beauty” it is in the eye of the beholder…and is more a scaler then a vector..so if you want to think Palin is smarter then “me” go right ahead.

    to the former. To paraphrase Charlie Cook, who I think knows a lot more about politics and political trends then either you or I…”anyone who this far out will predict an elect or reelect is either a (and these are the words) “a prophet, partisan, a fool, or an idiot”.

    Hmm…that you are willing to predict this far out an election to me is a valid metric on how smart you are…and as for the four choices Charlie Cook offered. I am in a kind mood now…I’ll go with number 2.

    The farm equivalent of that of course is “dont count the ducks before they hatch”.

    Long Live The Republic

    Robert G. Oler

  • Robert G. Oler

    John wrote @ March 5th, 2010 at 5:54 pm

    And what I am saying is thaat no one cares what the Chinese do or do not do in Space.

    That is until they do it of course! Then it’s differen..

    there is nothing but speculation to support that analysis. I doubt most Americans even know the Reds have flown people in space. But you go ahead and have your fears…

    Robert G. Oler

  • But then, I was rooting for Fox News. Especially against the buffoon Robert Gibbs…

    This is tragic. Hitler learns that the war against Fox News has been lost.

  • common sense

    “That is until they do it of course! ”

    Until they do what exactly? What is it that the Chinese might do that will stirr up the public so much they will be in arms in front of the WH and Congress and demand reparation? They would do what? We have a DoD to take care of national security so what is it that NASA would do to counter what the Chinese would do? If they were to do anything. Like be number 2 on the Moon? Wow, big deal. That they may fund it with the interest on the loans they provided us for 2 wars might be kinda more interesting but the public does not even know that… Poor Chinese who may have a little more important things to do like lifting their people out of poverty, trying to transition to a market economy without losing face, find the resources to do all that… I am sure all they think all day long is what they will be able to do to us in Space.

  • So far Chinese space efforts have been relatively minor beside the things we are still doing. People take it for granted that we are number one in space. But, what happens when we can put anyone up and China goes to the moon? Then they will notice.

  • Grenville Wilson

    First, as a member of the generation everyone keeps discussion, let me remind you that nationalism is still alive and kicking. Sure, I may talk to Chinese citizens on the Net and play with them through games, but I like my country a hell of a lot more than I like theirs.

    Second, I think China seriously gearing up their space program would cause quite a bit of alarm. However, as it appears the Chinese are not going to do that anytime soon I doubt we can rely on them to help NASA out.

    And why should we? Do we really want another Apollo, another few trips to the Moon or Mars that end in massive cuts to the space program as the next administration tones down spending? We’ve already been there and done that, and it sucked. The 1960s were the 1960s, it’s the 21st century now. Get with the times.

  • Uhhh.. yeah, the 2010 cancellation of the shuttle was selected because that was predicted to be the minimum time when the ISS could be completed. This was a compromise between the people who wanted to retire shuttle back in 2003 because, you might remember, one of the orbiters had just killed 7 people, and those who wanted to ignore the safety problems and continue to fly the shuttle until 2015. Remember that STS-114 (aka, “return to flight”) launched in 2005.. so the compromise was solomon-esq: 5 years for the station, 5 years for safety.

    So continuing to operate the shuttle until 2015 is sending a very clear message to the Astronaut Office: your safety is not important.

    Extending the shuttle to 2020 sends an even stronger message.

  • Robert G. Oler

    John wrote @ March 5th, 2010 at 8:42 pm

    So far Chinese space efforts have been relatively minor beside the things we are still doing. People take it for granted that we are number one in space. But, what happens when we can put anyone up and China goes to the moon? Then they will notice…

    that is not a very sophisticated argument. It assumes a few things which are 1) not self evident and 2) are not even modestly realistic.

    There are several glaring weakness in your statement but I will just concentrate on one of them.

    It assumes that the American people would find a PRC return to the Moon as evidence that they are number 1 in space and the US is not…(ignoring another weakness that they take it for granted the US is number 1 or care).

    If and When (and it is a big if and when) the PRC gets a person to the Moon it is not at all obvious that this would be a statement of being a “number 1 space power”. Doubtless the PRC would play that up and there would be some thunderheaded right wing politician who would try and link the PRC going to the Moon with his/her own personal diatribes much like bush the idiot did after 9/11 linking it to Iraq…

    but you assume it would work..

    And it strikes me that Bush has more or less killed “the rhetorical links”…people would have to see some real peril for The Republic in the action and there really is none.

    Worse for your statement…if there is a thriving commercial space market where it is obvious that human spaceflight in The Republic is a thriving industry…and things are being done by it that change the face of the nation…the American people and the rest of the world might just go “Yawn”.

    So in my view your statement rates a C minus or D Plus on the grading scale.

    In my view it is not possible to ascertain what PLA doctrine is with the human spaceflight component. one can make some guesses but several guesses have multiple weights in terms of the evidence. I have been surprised by the two dimensional aspect of their military buildup…it is impressive but nothing that is scary…and nothing that is very innovative. There are so far no game changers (and please dont repeat the droll about their ASAT test…gee that was so primitive).

    Robert G. Oler

  • Texas, California, Maryland, and Florida are the four biggest receivers of dollars for NASA. Why should we care about the economic health of these states? These states only represent about 30% of our economy. The nation will do just fine without them:-)

  • Rhyolite

    I would be more worried about Chinese astronauts if there was something useful for astronauts to do in space.

    In the mean time, their launch capabilities, communications satellite manufacturing, navigation satellite, reconnaissance satellite capabilities and, yes, even their ASAT capability are more interesting.

    Not that what they are doing in unmanned space is particularly advanced but it is still more relevant to their national interest and ours than Chinese HSF.

  • ISS vet

    Hmm, of the four largest receivers of NASA dollars, two clearly benefit from the new program. An interesting starting point.

  • Rhyolite, stop speaking logic. The REDS are under the BEDS!!!

    And now for your amusement, let’s all point and laugh at the old person, Dr. Harrison Schmitt:

    Speaking at the Institute of Human and Machine Cognition in Florida, Schmitt stated, “I think it is extremely important, for geopolitical reasons, that the US be the leader in manned space exploration. If it is a commercial effort only to visit the space station, then it is the beginning of the end of human space exploration. Ultimately, you abandon the Moon to China, you abandon the space station to Russia, and you abandon liberty to the ages. If China and Russia are the dominant space powers, then liberty is at risk because they don’t believe in it.”

    What that? You hadn’t heard the bit about Russia? Yeah, that’s the joy of selective reporting eh?

  • Robert G. Oler

    Trent Waddington wrote @ March 6th, 2010 at 5:18 am

    Rhyolite, stop speaking logic. The REDS are under the BEDS!!!..

    as long as the reds are under the BED then they can just enjoy the show!

    stay cool Trent…off for a day with the pregnant woman

    Long Live The Republic

    Robert G. Oler

  • you abandon the space station to Russia

    This would be an interesting outcome. If the U.S. can’t go to the space station the Russians might inherit it.

    I don’t think there is a lot of direct military threat in HSF. The U.S. reacted strongly to the Russian space firsts: Sputnik and Gagarin. But, even if we hadn’t done any done Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, and the Space Shuttle it would have had essentially no impact on our physical national security. We could have still done Minuteman, Polaris, and Poseidon plus all of those satellites without any HSF. We would have done just fine on the physical aspects of security. This is true even if the N-1 hadn’t exploded and the Russian had pulled of a moon landing.

    This was mainly about psychology on the national interest level. Does it really matter if we win the gold in the Olymipics? Does really matter what your cities baseball, football, or any other sports team wins? Yet most people care a lot more about these things that HSF or even the “real” things that do matter.

    My point is and U.S. presidents (at least until the present) have seen the value in being first in space. The reason is psychological not economic. Regardless of what China or India is doing or going to do they have invested moneys that could have been in an economic sense better used to help their poor (and they have a lot of those). But they have and are spending money to develop HSF capabilities.

    So as I said before the public thinks we a first in space, nothing new is happening, and so they don’t care about it. If it is rubbed in their faces that the government has screwed up and we are falling behind there will be some new interest.

  • So continuing to operate the shuttle until 2015 is sending a very clear message to the Astronaut Office: your safety is not important.

    I’d put it a different way. All of this emphasis on safety of the astronauts is sending a very clear message: what you’re doing in space is not important.

  • Jack Wright

    @John,

    Constellation is not going to get us anywhere anytime soon. Even though way behind schedule the previous government did not increase the NASA budget to get things up to speed.
    I think the previous government and NASA administrator are to blame for that.
    Constellation is also very much tailored to do one thing only: getting us back to the moon. That won’t happen for at least another 20 years, the way things have turned out. NASA focussed all efforts just to keep Ares I and Orion development going. Ares V development hasn’t really started yet, neither has Altair. Their plan was to stop flying the Shuttle in 2010 and drop the ISS in 2015. Thereby creating a huge gap in HSF for the US.
    The current government has immediately started an investigation and is now taking action to get things going again.
    In fact, the current government is taking NASA back to what the original VSE by O’Keefe and Bush is all about. Read it!
    So, I think the current government and Bolden do understand the importance of US Leadership in Space.

  • common sense

    @ Grenville Wilson wrote @ March 5th, 2010 at 8:45 pm

    “First, as a member of the generation everyone keeps discussion, let me remind you that nationalism is still alive and kicking. Sure, I may talk to Chinese citizens on the Net and play with them through games, but I like my country a hell of a lot more than I like theirs.”

    Well there is a big difference between “nationalism” and “liking (loving?) your country” – Side question just to make sure: Ever been to China? – For the former read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism for the latter, well you know… No one is saying you ought to love China or anywehere else more than the US (I assume you’re in the US). Does that mean you are going to get into a Cold War mentality with China? Do you actually know what the Cold War was about? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War

    “Second, I think China seriously gearing up their space program would cause quite a bit of alarm. However, as it appears the Chinese are not going to do that anytime soon I doubt we can rely on them to help NASA out.”

    What alarm would it cause you? What is it that NASA would do to alleviate your fears? Do you think we have NASA or the DoD to take care of any threat, chinese or otherwise?

    “And why should we? Do we really want another Apollo, another few trips to the Moon or Mars that end in massive cuts to the space program as the next administration tones down spending? We’ve already been there and done that, and it sucked. The 1960s were the 1960s, it’s the 21st century now. Get with the times.”

    As to this it is a matter of opinion. I am not saying you’re right or wrong. It’d be interesting though that you provide something a little more constructive if you want to be taken more seriously let’s say. So what should NASA do? But first read this http://www.nasa.gov/offices/ogc/about/space_act1.html and then tell us. It is important you know what NASA is really supposed to do by law before starting to talk about human expension, colonization or anything really. You might argue we should change the law. Fine then what and how?

  • common sense

    “As for Colin…Larry (Col. LArry Wilkerson) more or less in my view speaks for General Powell and his feelings toward that UN speech. Colin Powell resigning and saying why he was resigning was the one person who could have shut the thing down (if that was possible). The GOP was embarked on this sort of nutty crusade so it might not have been…but Powell was the one who could. He failed his own post Vietnam test.”

    I have to say I am still struggling with this idea: Was it better for Powell to leave the WH hence losing some one with any good common sense or to have him inside and try to damage control things? Either choice was bad for us and for him. But I strongly favored he’d left the WH. The “nuts” in control did not cut him any slack anyway and they got what they wanted. He should have known better. Then of course there still is the possibility he agreed to this masquerade, and that is a very bitter pill to swallow.

    Oh well…

  • Rand,

    agreed, but the astronaut office learned to live with that long ago. Now they just want their unionized workers to go do their routine work in safety. Your point is not lost on the astronaut office.. when the Hubble servicing missions were being scrapped for safety reasons the astronaut office was shouting that they weren’t opposed to taking risk for a mission of such importance. But risk is a calculated thing that must not be taken routinely, and if anything in space is routine, it’s ISS missions.

  • Robert G. Oler

    John wrote @ March 6th, 2010 at 10:37 am

    So as I said before the public thinks we a first in space, nothing new is happening, and so they don’t care about it. If it is rubbed in their faces that the government has screwed up and we are falling behind there will be some new interest…

    I dont really agree with your post. But this interested me the most.

    This is only accurate (again) if 1) your statement is accurate…the public thinks we are first in space and 2) they care.

    I dont see any evidence that either of these are true.

    The Sputnik/red moon thing was in my view a unique situation of American history. The generation(s) that were involved had (mostly) come out of a world war…and to quote JFK were now in the midst of a “hard peace”…and looking at another war and a war with “rockets”…

    The Moon goal fitted in quite well with a LOT Of political things…

    the trick to recognize is that very quickly the political set of circumstances which the lunar goal was designed to address changed and all the public steam started going out of the support to go to the Moon as a national goal.

    I am quite certain that some President could try and rev up a chinese moon landing as some sort of “red under the bed”.

    somehow after bush I dont think it works so well

    Robert G. Oler

  • Robert G. Oler

    common sense wrote @ March 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm

    I have to say I am still struggling with this idea: Was it better for Powell to leave the WH hence losing some one with any good common sense or to have him inside and try to damage control things? Either choice was bad for us and for him. ..

    Colin Powell answered that question himself in one of the seminal post Vietnam speeches on the role of flag rank seniors to the civilian chain of command when the Civilian chain of command insisted on a course of action which “the flag” thought was ‘wrong”…it was resignation.

    in the end the devil that Powell has to wrestle with is that he allowed him and his “good name” to be attached to the actions of a bunch of thugs who were unwilling to play straight with the American people on the dangers before us.

    Robert G. Oler

  • Robert G. Oler

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/space/os-obama-nasa-space-summit,0,2635621.story

    and BHO goes down to Florida and puts the head shot on the opposition to his programs…end of the ride for the Ares huggers

    Robert G. Oler

  • danwithaplan

    Mr. Oler, I am sure I have no right to ask you to…, but what the heck I’ll do it anyway – can you stop posting for a while…? There are other blogs, forums, etc…

    Be kind.

  • red

    John: “you abandon the space station to Russia

    This would be an interesting outcome. If the U.S. can’t go to the space station the Russians might inherit it.”

    The Program of Record has us getting astronauts to the space station in 2017-2019 – most likely 2019 or so. The new plan has us getting there by 2016 at the latest. That’s according to the Augustine Committee’s estimates, which were skeptical on the schedules on both the government and commercial sides.

    So … the new plan reduces our reliance on Russia.

    The new plan also funds up to 4 U.S. commercial crew services, giving us a lot more chances at successes than the “all eggs in 1 basket” Ares I. Again the new plan reduces our reliance on Russia.

    The new plan includes new funding to encourage U.S. commercial cargo services to add risk reduction steps and additional capabilities. Again the new plan reduces our reliance on Russia for the ISS.

    The new plan includes Shuttle contingency funding that, if needed, will extend the Shuttle into 2011. That reduces the Ares gap.

    We have always relied on the Russian Soyuz for the ISS since crews stayed there for long durations. The Shuttle can’t provide crew rescue services except for the short time it’s at the Station. We certainly relied on Soyuz during the post-Columbia gap. Given those points, there is nothing new about the gap we’re getting into, except that Ares has made it much longer than it should have been. Even if commercial crew were expected to be slower than Ares in reaching the ISS, which it’s not, reliance on Soyuz is nothing new, so why the sudden interest in it after the 2011 budget? The 2011 budget shrinks the gap.

    Also note that the Russians can’t inherit the space station. How could they control the U.S. or other nations’ ISS components technically? How could they control those components legally? How could they afford to maintain them? How could they get the needed cargo there?

    Looking into dependence on Russia in other areas, the new budget includes U.S. engine work that perhaps could replace the Russian RD-180 in U.S. rockets. The new budget includes U.S. production of Plutonium-238, which we now buy from Russia. Again and again the new budget reduces or reliance on Russia.

    None of these steps to reduce reliance on Russia would be affordable if we’d kept Constellation.

  • red

    John: “The U.S. public expects us to be first in space but it doesn’t really occur to them that the situation might change.”

    It could change, and Constellation was on a path to take us out of that first place spot. Raiding NASA science, aeronautics, and technology development, forcing the ISS to be dumped in 2015 or so, getting an Ares I/Orion ready to service ISS in 2018 or so, getting an HLV in 2028 or so, realizing that Ares I/Orion/Ares V are way too expensive to operate, and finally perhaps, if it hasn’t been cancelled before then, repeating Apollo in 2035 or so, is as good a way as I can think of to take the U.S. out of first place spot in space.

    The 2011 NASA budget gives us every opportunity to remain first in space:

    ISS: The new budget makes sure the Shuttle finishes building the space station, adds capabilities to the space station, gets faster and more U.S. cargo support for the station, gets faster and more robust crew support for the station, actually uses the station, sets us up to operate the station to 2020+, and gives the station a new use in operating some parts of a new series of technology demonstrations.

    robotic missions: The new budget boosts small and large robotic missions in Earth sciences. It decreases our dependence on Russia for Plutonium-238 for deep space missions. It starts a new series of large and small robotic HSF precursors. It starts a new line of general space technology innovation efforts. Many of those efforts will benefit U.S. robotic missions.

    commercial space: The new budget strengthens the U.S. ISS commercial cargo services. It starts a new program for U.S. commercial crew services. All of these can be applied to commercial markets (eg: space launch, etc). The new general space technology, exploration demonstration, and propulsion budget lines give many opportunities for commercial interests to cooperate with NASA to develop new technologies that can be used in the commercial market.

    space access: Currently the U.S. is not in first place in the launch industry. The new budget gives us every chance to regain first place. It strengthens the SpaceX Falcon 9 and Orbital Taurus II new entries in that market with new commercial cargo funding and much more ISS cargo business potential with more and longer ISS use. It opens up many opportunities for stronger U.S. launch services with the new commercial crew line. It will use U.S. launchers for many more missions for robotic HSF precursors, Earth science, and technology demonstrations. There are new efforts that give opportunities for new U.S. entries in the launch business with NASA use of commercial suborbital RLVs, a new class of suborbital and small orbital Earth science missions, and a new program for smallsat demonstrations that requires some launcher (possibly a small one). The budget starts general propulsion R&D, and also works on new first-stage engines. It keeps the existing Shuttle going into 2011 if needed, which extends that portion of U.S. launch capabilities. It modernizes KSC and the Florida launch range, which may help the U.S. commercial launch stance.

    technology development and demonstration: Does anything really need to be said about putting the U.S. in first place in space technology with the big new budget lines in this area? There’s a big, broad new general space technology development program. There’s an ambitious series of new exploration technology demonstrations and smaller exploration research efforts. There’s a new HLV and propulsion research and development line. There are all sorts of opportunities for technology transfer to other U.S. space interests and cooperation with commercial, academic, and international partners. Additionally, commercial space is encouraged to develop new technology with the commercial space access efforts.

    Yes, this should keep us #1 in space stations, robotic missions, crew access to space, space launch, commercial space, space technology, etc.

  • Grenville Wilson

    common sense,

    Thanks for the reply, lets see if I can do it justice.

    “Well there is a big difference between “nationalism” and “liking (loving?) your country” – Side question just to make sure: Ever been to China? – For the former read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism for the latter, well you know… No one is saying you ought to love China or anywehere else more than the US (I assume you’re in the US). Does that mean you are going to get into a Cold War mentality with China? Do you actually know what the Cold War was about? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War

    You’ve got a point there, but I’d say both nationalism and patriotism are alive and kicking in my generation. Only mentioned it as I thought some folks were suggesting that my generation was disconnected from our country.

    Grew up in Hong Kong, though how Chinese that makes me depends on who you’re asking. ;) Fun city.

    Am I personally going to “get into a Cold War mentality with China?” Well, I hope not, but I can see it happening to both myself and my country. China is a major trade partner, true, but they also possess an unpleasant form of government and a rather aggressive outlook which I can easily see bringing us into a conflict.

    “What alarm would it cause you? What is it that NASA would do to alleviate your fears? Do you think we have NASA or the DoD to take care of any threat, chinese or otherwise?”

    Wouldn’t cause me much alarm at all. I’ve spent the past few years patiently explaining to people why Chinese on the moon does not mean the Reds are going to come pouring over the border soon. (I know interesting people…) More interested in space commercialization than rehashed Cold War antics, personally. However, I can *definitely* see it alarming the public and demands to “beat the Chinese back to the moon” surfacing. FOX news would have a field day, that’s for sure.

    “As to this it is a matter of opinion. I am not saying you’re right or wrong. It’d be interesting though that you provide something a little more constructive if you want to be taken more seriously let’s say. So what should NASA do? But first read this http://www.nasa.gov/offices/ogc/about/space_act1.html and then tell us. It is important you know what NASA is really supposed to do by law before starting to talk about human expension, colonization or anything really. You might argue we should change the law. Fine then what and how?”

    “The Congress declares that the general welfare of the United States requires that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (as established by title II of this Act) seek and encourage, to the maximum extent possible, the fullest commercial use of space.”

    That line seems nice enough. I’d like NASA to help the growth of private spaceflight in all of its forms and it appears that it is already empowered to do that.

    But now a question for you: Do NASA’s explicit functions as set out in the Space Act actually matter? I mean, if NASA were ordered to do something completely outside of the bounds of the Space Act…would anyone object? If the laws telling NASA what they’re supposed to do are second to Congressional and Presidential whim…well, they’re not much use, are they?

  • common sense

    “Do NASA’s explicit functions as set out in the Space Act actually matter?”

    Yes they do matter, they must matter. The previous WH has shown they can essentially go off the reservation in other policies and get away with it BUT is it a model we should follow? We have to draw a line at some point. I somehow would object and I will say this as you adequately pointed. NASA is, was, supposed to encourage the fullest commercial use of space. So far they have not and they are at fault. No one cared until very recently it looks like. And watch how many here and elsewhere actually oppose it. Progress and change never come easy. Even when they are the LAW.

    “If the laws telling NASA what they’re supposed to do are second to Congressional and Presidential whim…well, they’re not much use, are they?”

    I naively was under the impression no one was above the law. Don’t you think so? What future do you want? Ask yourself the question. Cynicism is fun and every thing but again some time some how you MUST draw a line. We, you, have the democracy we, you, deserve. Remember that.

    On a side note, I’ve been to Hong Kong a few years ago, and to China, and I think that unless it has radically changed since then China is not about to do anything stupid to the US or to Hong Kong or any where. It would go against their own interests. Then again, the US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan so you could say you never know. If you grew up in Hong Kong then I would also assume you may have some bias towards China, good or bad. From what I collected in Hong Kong it’s probably not that good. Then again… Remember that the future is for you to make, no one else.

Leave a Reply to Bill White Cancel reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>