Congress, NASA

Congressmen to call for 30-day spaceflight study

On Thursday six members of the House, all Republicans, wil hold a press conference at the Capitol to ask NASA administrator Charles Bolden to conduct a study in advance of next month’s presidential space conference. Here’s how the event is described in a release late today from one of the six participating members, John Culberson of Texas:

Tomorrow Congressmen Frank Wolf (R-VA), John Culberson (R-TX), Pete Olson (R-TX), Rob Bishop (R-UT), Michael McCaul (R-TX) and Bill Posey (R-FL) will host a press conference calling on Administrator Bolden to explain how he plans to save the manned space program.

In light of the many questions surrounding the president’s budget request for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Exploration Program, Congressman Frank Wolf, Ranking Member on the Commerce, Justice and Science Subcommittee on Appropriations and Congressmen John Culberson, Pete Olson, Rob Bishop, Michael McCaul and Bill Posey will call on NASA Administrator Charles Bolden to appoint a team of NASA experts to review how exploration spacecraft and launch vehicle development and testing may be maintained within the proposed budget request to ensure uninterrupted, independent U.S. human space flight access to the International Space Station and beyond. The team should report back within 30 days in order to provide the administration and Congress with this necessary information – before the President’s space summit in Florida on April 15.

It’s difficult to see NASA responding to this request in a positive manner (particularly with rhetoric like “save the manned space program”). Hopefully the members will explain their logic in more detail at the press conference, scheduled for noon Thursday at the Capitol Visitor Center. (I won’t be able to attend, as I’ll be at the Goddard Memorial Symposium in Greenbelt.)

52 comments to Congressmen to call for 30-day spaceflight study

  • Robert G. Oler

    it wont get much coverage at all…the cable people are still spinning over Massa and health care is the soup dejure.

    another dumb move

    Robert G. Oler

  • Set it straight

    “It’s difficult to see NASA responding to this request in a positive manner ”

    NASA doesn’t have a choice if congress directs them to

  • ISS vet

    These Congressmen remind me of the proverbial airplane passenger who pays little attention to the flight until an emergency, then tries to grab the controls from the pilot. On the other hand, they should be cautious about what they ask for – they may get it.

  • Ferris Valyn

    I do hope someone will ask them, during their press conference, why they didn’t make an issue of it, when Bush & Griffin were screwing it up, particularly since he was in their party, and obviously had better access?

  • Mark R. Whittington

    So sad that we have this thing called democracy in which elected representatives of the people actually get to help determine government policy. This may annoy a lot of the defenders of the Obama train wreck space plan, but they will just have to deal with it.

  • Did I miss something or is this what the Augustine Commission just did?? They analyzed the options available for spaceflight, analyzed the budgetary constraints, and then produced a set of options for the program based on those findings. What makes this group of Republicans think that a new group with less time to work and the SAME initial data will find something radically new?

  • Robert G. Oler

    Mark R. Whittington wrote @ March 10th, 2010 at 11:53 pm

    So sad that we have this thing called democracy in which elected representatives of the people actually get to help determine government policy…

    as I use to say when the “invade iraq” people called Al Gore nasty names for pointing out flaws which sadly have come true…everyone should get their say.

    It is just that in the case of the conference by the “Space Pork 6″ (sorry channeling Liz Cheney) no one will listen. Bad timing.

    Robert G. Oler

  • Mark R. Whittington

    One would wish Robert Oler would stop introducing non sequiturs based on his continued obsession with the War in Iraq. The fact of the matter is that the administration blundered epically in both the policy and its roll out. Now the Congress is getting ready to push back. Bolden had better be responsive,

  • Robert G. Oler

    Mark R. Whittington wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 12:52 am

    Now the Congress is getting ready to push back.
    ..

    there is no evidence of that. There is only the evidence that the members of Congress from districts that have pork funding are “pushing back”.

    ” Bolden had better be responsive,” or what?

    Charlie serves at the pleasure not of Congress but of The President of The United States. Bolden can just, as Lord Nelson would say “turn a blind eye to the glass” and I dont see the consequences of it. Maybe Jay B will come on and make some more really stupid statements.

    Robert G. Oler

  • Ferris Valyn

    Maybe Jay B will come on and make some more really stupid statements.

    No, I don’t think thats a maybe – I think thats a foregone conclusion

  • rich kolker

    Tip O’Neill once famously said “all politics is local”. Today, that statement might be revised and extended to “all politics is local pork.” This is nothing new, and it used to be Congress’ dirty little secret. At election time, they’d act like they were doing the nation’s business, while they’d make sure their campaign contributors got (more than) their fair share. To be non-partisan about this, having lived in West Virginia, I have to say Sen. Byrd brought all of this out in the open. There, politicians of both parties don’t try to hide what they do. They run full page newspaper ads saying “this is the pork I brought home!” Only maybe they don’t use the word “pork”…and they never mention that they didn’t do it for the voters, they did it for the campaign contributors.

    That space is often about pork is nothing new. That space is about pork in places like Texas and Florida is even less of a surprise. What has happened, is that nobody is even trying to hide it anymore, and a few dozens of years ago, NASA discovered the value of “spreading the wealth” as a survival tool.

    But Florida and Texas voters (and I’ve been both), don’t kid yourself. This isn’t about your jobs and it CERTAINLY isn’t about space, it’s about campaign contributions and meeting requirement #1 for people in Congress…staying in Congress. And that’s about money, not votes.

  • Ferris Valyn

    Bill – I disagree – he is still spreading the wealth, but he isn’t going to try and control how the wealth gets spread.

  • Al Fansome

    MEMBERS: “maintained within the proposed budget request to ensure uninterrupted, independent U.S. human space flight access to the International Space Station and beyond.”

    Please note that the only option that meets this requirement is extending the Shuttle, with perhaps a transition to Sidemount.

    Bolden might send these Members the relevant sections of the Augustine report that answers their question. No need for another study.

    I somehow doubt that the Members understand what they are doing. It sounds like pure posturing … excepting one issue.

    Does anybody here understand what Frank Wolf is doing?

    Virginia is a significant economic beneficiary of the new plan. The Virginia political establishment is supporting this change. See report here:

    http://spaceports.blogspot.com/2010/03/virginia-says-yes-to-nasa-commercial.html

    “Virginia Says ‘YES’ to NASA Commercial Plan

    The Virginia General Assembly, bucking recent political trends in the more traditional space states, has passed resolutions in the House of Delegates and the Senate affirming support for the NASA FY 11 budget submitted by the White House and backed by NASA Administrator Charles Bolden.”

    What is Frank Wolf doing?

    He is the anomaly here.

    FWIW,

    – Al

  • Major Tom

    This letter is six years too late. It’s impossible at this point to “ensure uninterrupted, independent U.S. human space flight access to the International Space Station and beyond”. Even the Space Shuttle will have a 2-3 year gap after its last manifested mission, per the Shuttle program manager and a deputy associate administrator for Space Operations. Even the simplest capsule on an existing, single-stick EELV will take a few years of development. Are these congressmen and their staff really this ignorant of the situation? Or are they just trying to score political points against a White House occupied by the opposing party?

    Olson and McCaul were more recently elected, but where were Frank Wolf, John Culberson, Bill Posey, and Rob Bishop back in 2004 when the Bush II Administration rolled out the VSE with a built-in, four-year gap between Shuttle retirement in 2010 and CEV operations in 2014? If they truly care about the civil human space flight gap, did it really take these congressmen six years to wake up to this issue? Or are they just trying to score political points against a White House occupied by the opposing party?

    FWIW…

  • MrEarl

    It’s too late to practically and economically to extend the shuttle. But as I have said many times before in other posts there is enough parts, (ET’s SRBS and such) for four more flights after the scheduled manifest is flown. There are also payloads that were originally scheduled for the ISS but were cut to fit the 2010 deadline. What congress should really do is have NASA report back in 30 days on a manifest for 4 additional flights that would best support and enhance ISS operations.
    A couple of things I can think of off hand is to bring a VASIMER demonstration to the ISS and fly the Russian power tower, if both could be ready in time.

  • Major Tom

    “But as I have said many times before in other posts there is enough parts, (ET’s SRBS and such) for four more flights after the scheduled manifest is flown.”

    Do you have a reference for this? So far, all (I think) we’ve heard from the program experts (Shannon, Radzanowski) is that production lines for some things would have to be restarted and that’s a 2-3 year process.

    FWIW…

  • Major Tom

    “So sad that we have this thing called democracy in which elected representatives of the people actually get to help determine government policy.”

    In the prior thread you complained about “all of those aerospace engineers in the Congress [who] will feel empowered to do what they like… Let the sausage making begin.”

    Which is it? Is it good for Congress to weigh in? Or are they a bunch of laymen who won’t be able to produce a sensible plan?

    “Now the Congress is getting ready to push back. Bolden had better be responsive,”

    To what? A letter sent to the White House, not Bolden? A letter asking for a study about a goal that can’t be achieved?

    Or a draft Senate authorization bill and a draft House authorization bill that both incorporate all the major elements of the President’s FY 2011 budget request for NASA?

    FWIW…

  • Robert G. Oler

    John wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 1:26 am
    I wrote:
    Do you really think that is a real option?

    You replied:
    Possibly if we can create a sense of crisis about it.

    I am not in any sense for “creating” a sense of crisis or creating a crisis.

    Most importantly to create a “crisis” where none exist to achieve a policy goal is wrong. That is why I have argued endlessly here that the “Chinese are going to the Moon” meme of Spudis, that nutty politician in Al (not Shelby the other nut) and yes Mark Whittington is wrong…and in no small measure counterproductive.

    Besides it being wrong (see the Iraq war, the TARP etc)…the American people are “phony crisised out” they have been told the sky is falling in so many times if we dont “hurry up and do things” that later reach out and bite them…that they are hosed with that.

    The other problem is that there is no way to create a crisis but just to simply lie about one. I agree if you can do it it would work…Karl Rove has all but admitted that is what they did with Iraq…but we are way past that.

    “Obama doesn’t really care about fiscal discipline.” I dont like his spending and think most of it is not well spent…but thats a pretty broad statement particularly after Bush the idiot.

    “Any way it is worth a try from my side of things” when it is all you have. The “save our jobs” people are trying that…it is clumsy and is not working.

    ” Florida is a swing state and once an election was decided by 513 votes.” and that wont be how it works the next time.

    Robert G. Oler

  • MrEarl

    My information comes from NASASpaceflight.com, an admitted shuttle hugger I know but his technical information is usually very accurate.
    Here are two pieces that most apply, there is more info:

    “An extension that adds two to three flights in 2011/early 2012 is deemed the most viable scenario, avoding the unknown quanity of recertification, age-life hardware issues, and would utilize External Tank ET-122 for STS-135 – as opposed to its current role as STS-335 (Launch On Need) for STS-133, currently the final flight of the manifest.

    STS-136 and STS-137 would require two part built tanks to be completed (now classed as ET-139 and ET-140), both of which – sources say – would be ready within nine months of the decision being made. LON for STS-137 could potentially be carried out via a Soyuz ferry plan.”

    “Ironically, the availability of SD HLV assets are mainly thanks to efforts made to protect for the possibility of a shuttle extension – especially at MAF, who have since confirmed they have enough materials and part-built tanks to construct no less than three new ET’s with materials to spare, with all of the shuttle ET tooling either still in-situ or protected in storage on site.”
    That would be in addition to the ET for STS335 LON.

    Thats how I get 4.

    http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2010/02/ssp-balance-between-shuttle-legacy-hlv-advancement/

    http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2009/12/extension-no-closer-one-heck-of-a-year-for-shuttle/

    Starting Now the new tanks can be completed at the end of the year.

  • Major Tom

    “Thats how I get 4.”

    Fair enough for the ETs. But are there enough fueled cases laying around to support eight SRBs? Enough of the right sizes of TPS tiles to support four orbiter reentries? Etc.

    FWIW…

  • MrEarl

    The SRB cases are available and from what I understand from a person that works for ATK, but not the shuttle boosters project, lead time is only 6 months.
    TPS tiles are made to order at a site at KSC. Various and sundry parts are still be being made to support the remaining flights and by retiring one of the orbiters you can use it for parts and get further cost savings by “retiring” it’s support crew.

    If flying the Russian Power Tower, we might be able negotiate a better deal on future seats till commercial HFS is ready.

    Let’s stop thinking monolithicly and decide how best to utilize the resources we have to move forward.

  • Robert G. Oler

    MrEarl wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 10:43 am ..

    not you but the entire discussion of “save the shuttle” is focused around just flying the vehicle…and not “what we would get by it”…

    which is simply a “save our jobs”.

    the bottom line here is that we would be better off ending the shuttle paying unemployment we dont loose all that much

    Robert G. Oler

  • Robert G. Oler

    http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2010/03/orion-removed-nasa-control-mod-positioning-commercial/

    this is a fascinating article…it continues to confirm the “every group for themselves” mentallity now setting in…

    the quote that stood out

    ““With the things that filter down to the center, and based on some things I’ve either heard you say or that have been attributed to you, I felt compelled to send this to you to ensure you have a good idea of where MOD is today. Consider this the elevator speech I’ll not likely have an opportunity to give you,” Mr Hill wrote in the letter, which was sent to numerous high level managers and acquired by L2.”

    this paragraph if accurate…says so much…

    Robert G. Oler

  • MrEarl

    The decision to retire the shuttle in 2010 was partially made to fit the funding curve of Constellation. Constellation is no more. Four more flight could be very useful in a number of ways.
    Bringing better functionality to the ISS.
    Bring R&D projects to ISS like VASIMR.
    Shorten gap between shuttle and commercial HSF.
    Reduce reliance on Russian crew and cargo transport.

    Just saying…

  • Major Tom

    “The SRB cases are available”

    Of course the cases are available. But have enough cases been cast with propellant to support eight SRBs? According to another poster in the top thread at this site, the casting pits have been shut down and the associated workforce laid off. (They also dispute ET availability.)

    “TPS tiles are made to order at a site at KSC.”

    But is there enough material left to support four flights?

    “If flying the Russian Power Tower, we might be able negotiate a better deal on future seats till commercial HFS is ready.”

    A nice idea, but have the carriers to bring the power tower up in the Shuttle bay ever been built? If not, what’s the lead time on that?

    Not trying to be a jerk — just pointing out that there are a lot of potentially showstopping details (more than could be covered in this forum). Additional Shuttle flights are not the sort of thing we can handwave into reality based on the existence of a few ETs.

    FWIW…

  • MrEarl

    Tom:
    “Not trying to be a jerk”
    But you do a fine job of it.

    “Of course the cases are available. But have enough cases been cast with propellant to support eight SRBs? According to another poster in the top thread at this site, the casting pits have been shut down and the associated workforce laid off. (They also dispute ET availability.)”

    I’d like to hear their sources. I gave you mine. People can post what they want. I have a hard time believing that knowing those casting pitas and that workforce were needed to fabricate the SRB’s for Constellation. Why would ATK fight so hard to keep the program if they had already shut everything down?

    “But is there enough material left to support four flights?”
    It’s silica Tom, material acquisition is not a problem.

    You’re picking nits that don’t exist.

    Just Saying

  • Robert G. Oler

    MrEarl wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 11:31 am

    flight could be very useful in a number of ways.
    Bringing better functionality to the ISS.
    Bring R&D projects to ISS like VASIMR.
    Shorten gap between shuttle and commercial HSF.
    Reduce reliance on Russian crew and cargo transport. ..

    a) the first one seems a little broad to me. b) will VASIMR be ready to fly? what are the cost of flying VASIMR on the shuttle as oppossed to something else…almost anything that flies on the shuttle has a cost increase based on that fact.

    the last two are to me the most interesting.

    First I am not sure why shortening the gap between shuttle and commercial HSF would be important.

    Second…it doesnt reduce reliance on the Russians. If the Progress and Soyuz cannot fly the station cannot be continued…even if the shuttle is flying once a month.

    Put it another way. The station is in serious trouble if say on reentry a Soyuz doesnt have the chutes open and the crew perishes. For however long that recovery takes…we are all tap dancing on the radio.

    Robert G. Oler

  • MrEarl

    Just a thought:

    “Put it another way. The station is in serious trouble if say on reentry a Soyuz doesnt have the chutes open and the crew perishes. For however long that recovery takes…we are all tap dancing on the radio.”

    If that happens while the shuttle is still operational a shuttle can be sent to recover all crew members and reboost the station till Soyuz flights can resume.

    If the shuttle is not in operation than the solid waist recycling unit will be getting quite a workout.

    :-)

    Just Saying

  • brobof

    MrEarl wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 11:06 am
    “If flying the Russian Power Tower…”
    FYI Alas No! the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Power_Platform is an ex parrot, it has ceased to be…
    So has most of the other heavy hardware. Eg the CAM in a car park: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifuge_Accommodations_Module
    This hardware was abandoned in 2005 with the announcement of the VSE:

    “At a January 2005 Heads of Agency meeting, the partners endorsed a final configuration of ISS, but NASA subsequently announced changes to it. The agency now plans to conduct only 16 (instead of 28) shuttle launches to the ISS, all before the end of FY2010 (September 30, 2010),
    and has dropped plans to launch the centrifuge and its accommodation module, and Russia’s Science Power Platform. The agency plans to meet with the other ISS partners to discuss these changes.”
    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/space/RL33568.pdf refers.

    And I think you will find that other figures both political and commercial have ‘other uses’ for those part built ETs…

  • Robert G. Oler

    MrEarl wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 12:02 pm

    If the shuttle is not in operation than the solid waist recycling unit will be getting quite a workout…yeaper.

    Reboost of the station is no problem as long as the service module is functional (and has fuel)…

    as for uncrewing it…I bet that is not much of an option.

    Granola bars? MRE’s are not bad.

    Robert G. Oler

  • MrEarl

    BROBOF:
    That last report you reference is interesting. It’s written by a “Specialist in Energy Policy”, the information is years old but has a date of March 18th, 2009 and seems to just recap what happened to the ISS after the Colombia accident.

    The other two references are wikipedia and while it’s a good jumping off point, (and that pic of a module sitting in a parking lot is interesting) I would not consider that an authoritative source.

    That’s why a 30 day review of what’s available to launch and shuttle resources to launch them would be a reasonable course at this time.

  • Major Tom

    “I’d like to hear their sources. I gave you mine.”

    You gave me a source on ET availability, but not SRB availability. I’d also note that there’s now a second poster in that thread who claims there’s only two, not four, ETs.

    “Why would ATK fight so hard to keep the program”

    ATK is not fighting Shuttle retirement.

    “if they had already shut everything down?”

    The other poster didn’t claim that ATK had “shut everything down”.

    “It’s silica Tom, material acquisition is not a problem.”

    Of course. But it takes time to turn silica into tile material. Is there enough existing tile material to support four orbiter flights? If not, what’s the lead time to restart production?

    Same goes for other components that are damaged during flights due to ET debris, micrometeriods, and reentry. Are there enough thermal blanket spares? Enough window spares? Etc. If not, what’s the lead time to restart production on each?

    Same goes for components that typically wear out. Are there enough actuator spares? Wiring harness spares? Etc. If not, what’s the lead time to restart prodcution on each?

    Same goes for mission-specific equipment. Are there enough of the right kinds of carriers to put the right payloads in each orbiter bay for those four missions? If not, what’s the lead time to restart production on each?

    Same goes for the payloads themselves. What are the payloads and do they exist? If not, what’s the lead time for each? As another poster has pointed out in this thread, one of your proposed payloads, the SPP, has been turned into the Rassvet Mini-Research Module and is already scheduled to fly on STS-132.

    “You’re picking nits that don’t exist.”

    These are not nits. Even if four ETs exist (a fact under dispute by other posters), there are dozens of other critical components needed to pull off four additional Shuttle flights. Both the Shuttle program manager and one of the deputy associate administrators for Space Operations have stated or are directly quoted on this forum that it will take 2-3 years to restart the production for at least some of those components. If you know of references that contradict those program experts, please share. But if not, this is handwaving based on one article about four ETs that may or may not exist.

    “But you do a fine job of it.”

    Raising legitimate questions about the viability of the plan you’re proposing is not being a “jerk”. Don’t blame me if you don’t have the answers.

    FWIW…

  • MrEarl

    Nice work on the strawmen you set up Tom:
    There was only one other poster who disputed the claims and all his sources were “buddies” who work there. I think his tageline was NoExtension so we know where his bias lies.

    I’ve never advocated restarting the ET production lines.
    Stop making stuff up! :-)

    So really it still comes down to my original proposal:
    “What congress should really do is have NASA report back in 30 days on a manifest for 4 additional flights that would best support and enhance ISS operations.” And out of deference to my good friend Major Tom ascertain how may flights are feasible given current supplies.

    Just Saying.

  • MrEarl

    Oooops, forgot the other guy posting information from Wikipedia and a strange report from an energy policy expert commenting on NASA space policies. ???

    My source for ATK is the son of a woman I’m dating who works for ATK and is interested in spaceflight so he trys to keep up with what’s going on with the SRBs.

    As for the other things you mention like wiring harnesses and actuators can be pulled from the retired shuttle if new parts are not available.

    Fo you I’ll check how long it takes to make a tile , I guess you will Wikipedia information authoritative?

    Just Sayin’

    I like it without the g better.

  • MrEarl

    Ok Tom Go this from the Air&Space Smithsonian web site.

    “The silica fibers are mixed with water and chemicals, and the mixture is poured into molds, which are zapped in microwave ovens at 2,350 degrees to fuse the silica fibers.”

    It’s just my interpretation but “zapped” sounds like a quick process. :-)

    At least short enough to support a 6 month turnaround.

  • brobof

    So for the record you are authoritatively stating that the Russians have squirrelled away the NEP? Just so that the Space Shuttle cannot be extended. Why those dastardly ex-Commies! Then perhaps you should be authoritatively telling Anatoly: “As of 2001, the NEP platform was expected to be launched along with the Enterprise module on the same Shuttle mission (9A1) at the end of 2004. As of 2004, the delivery of the NEP to the ISS was deferred to 2009 and later cancelled.”
    http://www.russianspaceweb.com/iss_nep.html

    Ah but that is just a non authoratative fan site, just like that wikipedia and TOTALLY unlike the site that you seem to use. Speaking of which:
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=8364.0

    Quote from: simon-th on 08/14/2009 08:34 AM
    ” I know it sounds unrealistic,”
    It is. The Centrifuge was never built. ” [Reply from] Jim
    Authoritative enough for you? There is also some more nice pictures of a non CAM.

    AFAIK There is nothing currently on the ground that NEEDS another shuttle launch:
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=19743.0
    refers. Now if we had a couple of Blanket Boxes. Or a space ready TMNT like Michelangelo, or a Transhab, or a CRV, or a HAB module, or a …
    But you don’t!
    “Alea iacta est” as the Alenia Aerospazio’s engineers like to say.

  • common sense

    ““Alea iacta est” as the Alenia Aerospazio’s engineers like to say.”

    Only because they long the good old imperial times… ;)

  • MrEarl

    “So for the record you are authoritatively stating that the Russians have squirrelled away the NEP? Just so that the Space Shuttle cannot be extended. Why those dastardly ex-Commies!”

    No I didn’t….
    Stop making stuff up. oye-vay
    But looking at the last section of the ruski site you listed mentions that the NEP was to be flown at the end of 2004 after being developed for the Mir-2 project. I would think that it would have been in an advanced state of production before finally being canceled. It may be around some place.

    An MPLM is already being refitted as a permanent module on the ISS there are still two others available for other uses.

    While I consider NASASpaceflight.com as authoritative, you refer to forums that is only opinion, just like the posts here.

    JustSayin”

  • MrEarl

    ““Alea iacta est”

    Just got that, “The die is cast”

    But they’re still rolling baby!

    :-)

  • common sense

    “But they’re still rolling baby!”

    For a “little” while, just like the Roman Empire did…

  • Robert G. Oler

    MrEarl wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 12:29 pm

    That’s why a 30 day review of what’s available to launch and shuttle resources to launch them would be a reasonable course at this time…

    for who?

    I dont know that Administrator Bodlen nor anyone who is reporting to work at NASA HQ needs such a review. (they probably have all this information at their fingertips).

    aside from that.

    The purpose of this “review” by the Space Pork 6 is simply to go over plans which have already been made and to give people who dont have a plan (the save our jobs folks) something maybe to hang their hat on.

    If this review was going to be useful then it should have occurred oh maybe five years ago…or at least four years ago when Constellation started having trouble.

    As it stands now it strikes me as the Japanese high command having a review if Pearl Harbor was a good idea…oh sometime in 44.

    Robert G. Oler

  • Major Tom

    “I’ve never advocated restarting the ET production lines.”

    I (at least) never said that you did.

    “There was only one other poster who disputed the claims and all his sources were ‘buddies’ who work there.”

    “My source for ATK is the son of a woman I’m dating who works for ATK and is interested in spaceflight so he trys to keep up with what’s going on with the SRBs.”

    These sources are both hearsay. One isn’t better than the other.

    “Nice work on the strawmen you set up Tom… As for the other things you mention like wiring harnesses and actuators can be pulled from the retired shuttle if new parts are not available.”

    Used/damaged RCC panels, thermal blankets, and windows can’t be reused.

    A retired orbiter won’t provide mission-specific hardware.

    A retired orbiter won’t provide payloads.

    This is not a strawman. If we want to play Shuttle extension manager, these are the issues we have to deal with. We can’t handwave them away.

    “So really it still comes down to my original proposal”

    Why do we need a 30-day study for something that Shannon’s team has been studying for months now?

    What about Shannon’s statements on the 2-3 gap don’t you think are true?

    “I would think that it would have been in an advanced state of production before finally being canceled. It may be around some place.”

    The pressurized static test hull for the SPP is being used on Rassvet Mini-Research Module (or MRM-1), which is already scheduled to fly on STS-132.

    FWIW…

  • brobof

    “It may be around some place.”
    [ MrEarl wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 3:05 pm ]
    Oh I see that
    Major Tom wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
    and earlier at
    Major Tom wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 1:41 pm
    has answered and pre-answered(!) for me. Thank you Major.

    “An MPLM is already being refitted as a permanent module on the ISS there are still two others available for other uses.”
    Yes and if you read NASASpaceflight you will understand why Rafaello and Leonardo won’t be flying. The TMNTs: Donatello and Michaelangelo are of course a different matter :)

    Robert G. Oler: “Space Pork 6″ KUDOS Sir! Still makes me laugh. That meme needs to be promulgated.

    And whilst in Rome: “In a state where corruption abounds, laws must be very numerous.” Publius Cornelius Tacitus

  • common sense

    “In a state where corruption abounds, laws must be very numerous.”

    So long that you don’t have any more lawyers than there are laws maybe. Or they may just make their own laws just by the mere number of them all.

  • danwithaplan

    We never even needed the Augustine ‘study’ to begin with. What a waste of money. It was obvious the Constellation/Constipation/Cancellation was doomed due to budget overruns, bad performance, poor technology selection.

  • Ferris Valyn

    danwithaplan – I’d like to see you convince people like Senator Shelby, or Ralph Hall about it being a bad plan. Or Giffords

  • googaw

    Ferris: they will all be convinced as soon as the Constellation porkfest disperses and stops being a source of their fundraising.

  • Abbysum1

    FWIW – the ATK casting pits are not shut down – they are still in use for Ares test motor fabrication

  • […] Congressmen to call for 30-day spaceflight study – Space Politics […]

  • […] when asked by Wolf about the request he and other members made for a 30-day study of alternatives, Bolden said there was no examination of alternative concepts underway. “There is no […]

Leave a Reply to Ferris Valyn 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>