Well, not really, but it’s close. On Thursday afternoon the space subcommittee of the Senate Commerce Committee is planning a hearing titled “Assessing Commercial Space Capabilities”. The witness list and other hearing details haven’t been published on the committee web site as of midday Monday, but this appears to be the hearing Sen. Nelson referred to in his floor speech last week “to look at the commercial rocket competitors and whether they need the $6 billion the President has recommended over the next 5 years in order for them to get humans to and from the International Space Station.â€
It’s not the only event this week with implications for commercial space and related policy issues. The local AIAA chapter is hosting a luncheon Thursday with George Nield, associate administrator for commercial space transportation at the FAA, as the speaker. Also this week is the Satellite 2010 commercial satellite industry trade show at National Harbor, just south of the District. Among other events at the conference is a session titled “ITAR 2010 and Beyond: Will Obama Make Changes?” on Wednesday afternoon, exploring the prospects for export control reform. On Tuesday the Washington Space Business Roundtable will be hosting a luncheon at the conference with NASA administrator Charles Bolden as the keynote speaker.
Charlie Precourt is giving a Speech
“Ares the commercial launch vehicle of the future
(if only we can get another 20 -30 billion in tax dollars to develop it”.
It is right after happy hour at the bar!
lol
Robert G. Oler
Sen. Nelson: “…to look at the commercial rocket competitors and whether they need the $6 billion the President has recommended over the next 5 years in order for them to get humans to and from the International Space Station.” Well, that sort of tells you where he’s going, and it doesn’t sound like he believes the number is just $6B.
I don’t think anyone that has ever worked on a space program believes these guys can get by with the paltry sum the Administration is budgeting. It’s not like the darling of alt-space, SpaceX, has a good record of on-time (4 years over) and on-budget (needed an extra $100M) performance or is without launch issues (2/5 launch attempts). Of course, once Shuttle and Constellation are gone, Boeing, Orbital, and SpaceX will be able to demand whatever they want and we’ll have to pay it.
Anyway, without this money, the “commercial” can’t get into the human space business. But…doesn’t that make them…well, “subsidized” launchers?
The real problem with Ares is just too much bureaucracy. This was a simple application of existing technology. If this was done right that is no way it would cost all those billions and take 12 or more years.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703909804575124772932031294.html?mod=WSJ_business_whatsNews
Looks like SpaceX April launch may be delayed. Seems like they are not as ready as people thought and need NASA experts to help them out.
John:
The real problem with Ares is just too much bureaucracy.
This is quite right. The problem cannot be solved by simply putting this bureaucracy on a “better” project (DIRECT, etc.). The Exploration Directorate needs a reboot.
great idea, Andy Pasztor has lost all credibility.
Bolden’s speech is available here:
spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=33707
FWIW…
“Looks like SpaceX April launch may be delayed. Seems like they are not as ready as people thought and need NASA experts to help them out.”
There’s nothing in the WSJ article summary about a delay. SpaceX is still targeting April 12, per Musk’s test-fire postgame. And the launch is pending USAF clearance, not NASA.
Don’t make things up…
http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20100315
SpaceX keeps racking up the orders…
Robert G. Oler
A real commercial order for Falcon 9 is a good sign. About the only thing that SpaceX was racking up recently until this Loral order was NASA “milestone” payments. SpaceX still has a shot at avoiding the road taking by Orbital Sciences to government contractor zombiehood, but they will have to eschew Commercial Crew and focus on real commerce like this order in order to avoid that fate. It’s not likely, given the dominating nature of NASA financial incentives, but it could be done.
Tommy,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703909804575124772932031294.html
Below is a clip from today’s WSJ (linked above), pretty much what yesterday’s article said too. I think the words push launch and delays qualifies as a “DELAY”.
Mr. Musk himself conceded in an email that most likely “some set of unexpected things will happen that push launch to May or June.” Other SpaceX officials say delays could end up lasting longer.
Don’t make things up that a delay was not mentioned Tommy…