NASA announced early this morning that it will be holding a teleconference this afternoon to discuss the “the next steps in implementing the agency’s new exploration initiatives outlined in the new fiscal year 2011 budget.” The only other details about this event, called on rather short notice, is that it will feature much of the agency’s top leadership: administrator Charles Bolden, deputy administrator Lori Garver, the heads of the aeronautics, exploration, science, and space operations mission directorates, and new chief technologist Bobby Braun. The telecon will be at 2 pm EDT and will be streamed on the NASA web site. (I’m currently en route to Phoenix for the Space Access ’10 conference, but hopefully will be on the ground in time to tune in.)
We won’t have to wait for the President to talk next week at KSC. It will come out today!
We were first notified of the 1pm with Bolden and Garver.
Then another notice about a 10:30 all hands tomorrow with KSC director Cabana.
Then a thid notice about a 3:30 Cabana meeting today following Bolden/Garver.
It’s all coming out today, there is too much activity for it not to be.
I agree that whatever is said “today” is setting the tone for the “summit”…typical ground breaking stuff Robert G. Oler
When they rolled this out in February, they made it clear the details would be forthcoming in the weeks and months ahead.
I think the main problem was the budget cycle calendar. Like it or not, they had to submit a proposed budget to Congress by date x, which just wasn’t enough time to flesh out everything.
The other option was to go another year with the status quo, wasting more money on a moribund Constellation program.
Dipping a big toe into the water to see the temp?
Not a “plan B” but tweaking the budget towards eliminating objections before they can come up when the President makes his case in florida?
Sell the sizzle not the steak and key to that is eliminating the objections in your presentation before they get the opportunity to be voiced.
just 8 days left to the Florida Space Summit and counting… if you’ve something useful to say post your proposals now http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=356261201268
probably, today’s press conference, has the purpose to reveal some points of the “Plan A+” to have a feedback from contractors, experts, politics, public opinion, etc. and use that feedback to “refine” the “final” plan to be presented the next April 15 avoiding to change it again and again and again…
The Bolden/Garver telecon is about the roles of each center’s workforce in executing the FY 2011 budget plan. See:
NASA Work Assignments Topic of Media Telecon on Thursday, April 8
spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30557
At least four center directors will be holding follow-on telecons today, too:
NASA Johnson Space Center Director Michael Coats Avaialable Thursday to Discuss Center’s Roles in 2011
spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30559
NASA Kennedy Center Director Holds Media Briefing on April 8
spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30558
NASA to Hold New Exploration Strategy Briefing; Marshall Center Director Robert Lightfoot to Speak with Media
spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30555
Media Invited to Dial In for NASA Langley Assignment News
spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30556
FWIW…
Basically, this is no change from the Feb 2 announcement. All of this is contingent upon Congressional support, which does not currently exist.
This is a “don’t worry, be happy” announcement, devoid of any contact with reality.
Some of you really need to get a napkin and wipe the egg off of your faces.
If you believe this, the money will be flowing freely. We are RICH!! We must have solved the Federal deficit already.
@CharlesHouston wrote @ April 8th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
“If you believe this, the money will be flowing freely. We are RICH!! We must have solved the Federal deficit already.”
If you believe what? NASA official documents (http://www.nasa.gov/news/budget/index.html)? Right, why would we believe this? Better believe that Constellation or Shuttle will go on forever!
“Believing” is big thing to you and others isn’t it?
Oh well…
“Basically, this is no change from the Feb 2 announcement. All of this is contingent upon Congressional support, which does not currently exist.
If “Congressional support” for NASA’s FY 2011 budget request “does not currently existâ€, then why do both draft authorization bills provide every dollar in every NASA account requested by the Administration and adopt all the major program elements contained in the Administration’s request?
If “Congressional support” for NASA’s FY 2011 budget request “does not currently existâ€, then why was the statement of the chair at NASA’s House appropriations hearing supportive of the request?
Don’t make stuff up.
Two links with more information
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/2010/04/plans-for-kennedy-space-center-under-obama-2011-budget.html
and this . . .
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/441798main_KSC_Roll_Out_Final.pdf
KSC to do fuel depot R&D:
Initiated in FY2011 or flown in FY2011?
“This is a ‘don’t worry, be happy’ announcement, devoid of any contact with reality.”
No, it was a telecon letting reporters and the public know which NASA field centers will lead which activities in the FY 2011 budget plan. If you had bothered to listen, you could have generated a factual list of assignments, like the one below from a poster on nasaspaceflight.com, instead of making things up.
JSC
Technology demonstration office
Extra commercial cargo money
Higher human research program funds
Extended ISS to 2020
KSC
Commercial Crew Development Program
Upgraded Launch complex
Deputy manager for technology demonstration
Extra fiscal quarter of shuttle funding
MSFC
Heavy Lift and Propulsion Research Office
Exploration Precursor robotics program
Space technology demonstrators program (1.4 billion over 5 years for new tech test launches)
Centennial challenges program (50 million over 5 years, more or less X-prizes)
SSC
Propulsion Testing (already have)
Commercial Crew Development support (mostly propulsion)
ARC
Exploration Scouts robotics program
Small satellites subsystems program (autonomous swarms of satellites, miniaturized sensors and components)
Edison small satellite demonstration program (life and physical sciences)
Increased funding for aeronautics (green aviation, next-gen air traffic control)
GRC
Exploration Technology Development (high power electric propulsion, autonomous landing, resource management, nuclear power systems)
Space technology research grants
increased funding for aeronautics
LaRC
Game Changing Development Program (1.5 billion over 5 years, milestone based funding)
Earth science missions (atmospheric measurements, climate monitoring)
Increased aeronautics funding
DFRC
Flight operations program office (flight opportunities for research)
Increased aeronautics funding
GSFC
Joint polar satellite system
Decadal survey tier 1 missions (I-Sat 2, Clario)
JPL
Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (Zombie sat!)
Decadal survey tier 1 missions
Augmented Climate Continuity Missions
Stop making things up.
Ugh…
“Initiated in FY2011 or flown in FY2011?”
Initiated. If you read the budget documents, the first demonstrator must fly before 2014.
FWIW…
Just finished listening to the telecon. It was, to say the least, a surreal experience. NASA is being totally unresponsive to Congressional and public concerns about the lack of direction of Obamaspace. NASA is in, effect, playing let’s pretend that all is well. Amazing.
Initiated. If you read the budget documents, the first demonstrator must fly before 2014.
’tis a pity, then.
Far enough away to be cut from future budgets.
NelsonBridwell wrote:
“Basically, this is no change from the Feb 2 announcement. All of this is contingent upon Congressional support, which does not currently exist.”
Could you copy and paste those sections in the Feb 2 budget announcement where all the centers were shown who would be doing what and when?
It was a divvying up of the pork press conference. The truest statement was when Bolden said that they had to figure out what the new budget actually funded (strange–most budgets actually start with that as a baseline). And, of course, Ms. Garver made extravagant plans for the commercial human spaceflight initiative without ever addressing the complete lack of a market for those services (see the recent statements from ULA on that score).
We ALL hoped to hear a plan B today, because plan A is not going to get off the gound. And it is not that plan A is really so bad. It’s just that marginally useful academic research isn’t very exciting compared to actual space exploraton.
So it looks like Congress is going to have to write it’s own Plan B.
MT, if you are at all correct, you know more about Congress than the rest of us. At the Congressional hearings every single person spoke out against this plan except republican Dana Rohrabacher representing the SpaceX district in California. Strong opposition included democrats from Ohio, which would be a financial winner in this proposed budget, and even Oregon, which has absolutely no NASA centers or financial stake in Constellation.
Plan A appears DOA. My guess is that the Obama strategy is to ask an sky-high price to try to negotiate a sales price that will be as favorable as possible. Or perhaps they are praying for a miracle. In either case, they are riskinig a total reversal in 2 years because they do not have support from either side of the aisle, let alone bipartisan support.
Rocketman wrote:
“Ms. Garver made extravagant plans for the commercial human spaceflight initiative without ever addressing the complete lack of a market for those services (see the recent statements from ULA on that score). ”
I think it would be better to look to Bigelow Aerospace. With the soveign client system he is planning on. Once Bigelow has a facility up, a country like India, Brazil, South Korea etc can afford to have a human space program. They can launch an astonaut commercially and give them “hang time” as Robert Bigelow calls it, in LEO. That will be a prestige builder for any of the 2nd and 3rd tier nations to have their own astronaut programs. Currently a lot of countries are basically locked out of space because they can not aford to develop the hardware themselves. With America dominating the industrialization of LEO we can grab all of those customers ourselves.
Nothing really surprising here except maybe KSC getting commercial crew.
It would have been nice to see more information on the three FTDP projects to be initiated in FY’11.
My reading of this announcement is that any “compromise” that may be tossed out next week will be small and nothing more than a “bone” to a few constituencies.
The above statements do not mean that i support the FY’11 NASA budget or even think it’s too late to change it. But it dose look like the administration feels it is riding high after the health care win.
Nelson, unless Obama decides to pivot next week, which it looks like now he won’t, it looks like something will come out of the Congressional sausage factory. In choosing the just bull ahead with a plan that will not and cannot be approved, the White House as abrogated all leadership in space and has thrown things into chaos.
NelsonBridwell wrote
“We ALL hoped to hear a plan B today”
The problem with using a fallacy in logic to support an arguement is ….. it’s a FALLACY.
“fal·la·cy   /ˈfælÉ™si/ Show Spelled[fal-uh-see] Show IPA
–noun,plural-cies.
1.a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc.: That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy.
2.a misleading or unsound argument.
3.deceptive, misleading, or false nature; erroneousness.
4.Logic. any of various types of erroneous reasoning that render arguments logically unsound. ”
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fallacy
When you use the word “ALL” it means you have talked to ALL the people and know their opinions as fact. If only ONE person disagrees, your arguement is gone. That is why you never want to use fallacys of logic in an arguement.
I personally was NOT waiting to hear a plan B .. so much for your arguement. You shot yourself in the foot.
Gen. Bolden said the President will make a major space policy announcement next week. I don’t know why anyone who follows space politics with more than just a passing interest would expect either he or Garver to say anything today that would have preempted that.
As I see it, today’s announcements were to help put what the President says next week into the context of the programs that will follow. It’s up to the President himself to convey the vision driving them. Unless someone leaks the text, we aren’t going to know what that is until then.
Vladislaw, you’re always touting Bigelow. I wish them luck and really hope that they succeed but it’s been 6 years since they have launched anything and realistically would be at least another ten years before they have a service to offer.
Right now, and for the foreseeable future, the only destination for a commercial crew and cargo is the ISS.
Not a very big market.
Mark:
We are in agreement.
My guess is that Bollden, Garver, and some of their cheer leaders (Miles Obrien, Bobby Block) are smart enought to realize that they have no hope whatsoever, so they are currently going through the denial phase…
MrEarl wrote
“Vladislaw, you’re always touting Bigelow. I wish them luck and really hope that they succeed but it’s been 6 years since they have launched anything and realistically would be at least another ten years before they have a service to offer.”
Actually, if you read the Bigelow Aerospace website you will find:
“Genesis II was successfully launched from the Kosmotras Space and Missile Complex near the town of Yasny on June 28, 2007. Like its predecessor, Genesis II is testing and validating the technologies necessary to construct and deploy a full-scale, crewed, commercial orbital space complex.” http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/genesis_II/
That means it has been TWO years and 10 months since they launched anything. Why launch a human module before humans can go there?
Vladislaw:
To not comprehend is your free choice, just as it is your choice to shoot yourself in the foot or any other part of YOUR body. I do not, however, recomend it to anyone. Not even you.
What part of “we all hoped for a plan B” didn’t I comprehend? You chose not to define “we” which automatically included me in that group.. If you would have predicated the we to constellation supporters it would have made sense.
We, constellation supporters, all hoped for a plan B.
That wasn’t any mistake on my part.
The NASA junta is anxious to hype their vacuous plan. One wonders if they have a hidden stake in SpaceX. If they were wise they would have spent the last month negotiating with congress, and they would have made a joint presentation. They apparently did not. Instead they put lipstick on the pig. The April 15 Space Summit is beginning to feel eerily like the Bipartisan Healthcare Summit. Expect similarly disastrous results for America.
Justin Kugler wrote @ April 8th, 2010 at 3:29 pm
Gen. Bolden said the President will make a major space policy announcement next week. I don’t know why anyone who follows space politics with more than just a passing interest would expect either he or Garver to say anything today that would have preempted that…
in fact what they did, is set the foundation for it.
Those who are expecting Obama to say anything different then what was laid out today are just terminally dumb. And because of that anyone who expects Congress to go against Obama’s space policy is like Captain Tracy in Omega Glory…looking for a serum that does not exist.
What I find pretty pathetic are the folks who somehow think that human spaceflight is that much different from the rest of American politics…as common sense noted they are caught up to much in the space groupie syndrome.
Robert G. Oler
NelsonBridwell wrote @ April 8th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Mark:
We are in agreement.
My guess is that Bollden, Garver, and some of their cheer leaders (Miles Obrien, Bobby Block) are smart enought to realize that they have no hope whatsoever, so they are currently going through the denial phase…..
lol the only folks who are taking a bath in that river are ones like you and Whittington who just cannot figure out that the ship is changing course.
A good friend (who Mark has met) who is a pretty heavy player in DC once told me his theory on elections one is going to lose “drink heavily”.
I would suggest you all go shopping for the booze. Start with the good stuff then the cheaper stuff still taste good at the end.
There is no Plan B.
Robert G. Oler
–
after the latest news release from NASA I don’t see any change in the “plan” nor even any further detail of the plan’s points… the most relevant aspect of this plan is that it has plenty of (unknown) basic researches but just a few real projects and, great part, relying on the (unknown) real capabilities of the “commercial space”
–
@amightywind
Anyone who does not have enough money to get proper health insurance knows how the current health care is having disastrous results for America. Obama has set an important step in the right direction with his new health care plan.
The current NASA situation with Constellation is just as disastrous. Once again Obama is taking steps to improve the situation with the new budget proposal.
Most of the money for these projects comes in the out years, FY’12, 13 and so on. Future budgets can continue to “fund” these various projects but without the expansion called for, a device used by the last administration, none of these projects will get off the ground literally or figuratively.
Jack wrote @ April 8th, 2010 at 4:04 pm
Excellent. I was wondering how to phrase exactly that point.
I am perfectly happy to see our robotic and HSF programs suffer similar “disastrous” evolutions.
amightywind wrote @ April 8th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
The NASA junta is anxious to hype their vacuous plan. One wonders if they have a hidden stake in SpaceX. If they were wise they would have spent the last month negotiating with congress, and they would have made a joint presentation..
A few points.
First “negotiating with Congress”…ok who do they negotiate with? There are three very small forces walking around in the Congress…all from “save our pork” congressman. There is no negative feedback from any of the Congressional leaders (like the Speaker or The Senate Majority leader). If Pelosi were to come to Obama and say “I cant get your bill through” that is when the negotiating starts and it goes through the leaderships office.
If the “anti change” forces had any smarts what they would have done is come up with some unified alternate plan that at least on paper looked like it fit the budget. Here is the problem…no such plan exist or really can be formed.
Of course since neither the Speaker or The ML or even KBH or Nelson is saying “I cant make this happen” then why should Obama negotiate?
Every day the anti change people look more absurd to the rest of The Republic. That is why companies like Boeing and PW are starting to bail out on the lobby effort
Finally “hyping” the plan. Commercial lift to space is not SpaceX and SpaceX alone. Yeah if the Falcon 9 works I think that SpaceX can write their own ticket but we are not there (yet) and it is also clear to me that Boeing/Lockmart have some irons left to throw.
What you and Whittington and all the other “save our program” folks are left in the position of arguing for is the same thing that happened with the MRAP and the Lockheed CTV. Marines were dying in Anbar and the POR was so important that as a nation we were quite happy to let them continue to die waiting for an appropriate urban combat fighting vehicle. If the MRAP had not been forced on the Pentagon…an appropriate vehicle would still today not exist.
Substitute Orion for the CTV and you get the picture.
Robert G. Oler
Oler, the problem is that Obamaspace is not even going to make it out of committee in its current form. Pelosi is not going to take any notice of it, having for her more important things to consider, like packing up her things in the Speaker’s office to make way for John Boehner.
By the way, we won in Iraq. You lost.
Robert wrote:
“Finally “hyping†the plan. Commercial lift to space is not SpaceX and SpaceX alone. Yeah if the Falcon 9 works I think that SpaceX can write their own ticket but we are not there (yet) and it is also clear to me that Boeing/Lockmart have some irons left to throw.”
If he really wanted to make that case, he should have used Orbital instead of SpaceX. Orbital got 1.9 billion for 8 flights and SpaceX recieved 1.6 billion for 12 flights.
Mark R. Whittington wrote @ April 8th, 2010 at 4:20 pm
WE won in Iraq, starting in Anbar because we stopped listening to the people who you make one excuse after another for.
Obama’s space policy will make it out of the Congress with little or no changes. He has figured out how to make the trains run on time in The Congress after handing the GOP the greatest defeat in politics on par with Lee and his failed execution of the last day at Gettysburg.
Robert G. Oler
I got to agree with those believing Obama’s Nasa plan is going nowhere.
Congress in an election year won’t kill 10’s of thousands of jobs in 2010 when they look like idiots for the way they did much of their jobs since 2009. Nasa looks like a fine candidate for a continuing resolution with no new program starts and existing programs funded.
When the new Congress is seated in 2011, Obama will have to carefully pick his fights. I don’t think he’ll fight about Nasa if Congress wants to go in another direction. Congress will be closely divided in both chambers and the surviving Dems will probably be pretty angry with Obama for leading them on a death march to November. If the GOP controls the show, they will want significant spending cuts, probably across the board.
Nasa will get a hair cut in that case. Obama’s plan, if its recycled won’t get anywhere near the funding he proposes, especially for his climate change fetishes, again DOA.
Could Constellation survive a 2011 Congress? Could some other design like the mooted SDHLV be revived? That I don’t know but I’ll bet we spend the next 2 years waiting for an answer.
Bob:
“Obama’s space policy will make it out of the Congress with little or no changes.”
That may be your prediction, and we will hold you to it. However, as much as you choose to wish otherwise, for the past 2 months Congress has been saying NO.
At what point would you be willing to openly admit that you have been wrong? When funding of commercial crew is dropped from the 2011 budget? When Ares I development and testing is continued into 2011? When Constellation lands a man on the Moon?
At what point does your opinion really matter when reality selects an entirely different couse???
Yes, Congress could change course 180 degrees and support Plan A. It is not totally impossible. Just hightly improbable.
Nelson
“Just finished listening to the telecon. It was, to say the least, a surreal experience. NASA is being totally unresponsive to Congressional and public concerns about the lack of direction of Obamaspace.”
The purpose of the telecon was to make field center assignments available to the press and public. If the agency wanted to respond to congressional concerns, they’d do so with congressmen and/or their staff present, likely behind closed doors — not with reporters on a public telecon.
Duh…
“NASA is in, effect, playing let’s pretend that all is well.”
No, NASA HQ is making workforce assignments, part of the job in executing any plan.
If you had bothered to read the press notices and/or actually try to comprehend the content of the telecon, you’d know this.
“Amazing.”
Not compared to the lack of basic reading comprehension and forethought in your posts.
Jeez…
“When Constellation lands a man on the Moon?”
I don’t think waiting until 2030 to decide this debate is realistic.
NelsonBridwell wrote @ April 8th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
Bob:
“Obama’s space policy will make it out of the Congress with little or no changes.â€
That may be your prediction, and we will hold you to it. …….. When Constellation lands a man on the Moon?
………………….
Even if it were to continue Constellation wont land a person (“man” shows really backwards thinking.. women in my family fly combat jets) until oh 2030 or later.
It is my prediction that Obama will get most if not all of his space policy. There will be some tampering around the edges that people like Nelson and KBH can go back and claim victory with, but thats it. The essence of it; Constellation gone, Shuttle in museums, no shuttle derived heavy lift and commercial crew access with heavy R&D will sail into the future.
Congress doesnt have to turn 180 to support them, the support is lining up on vector pretty good now.
The problem with you, Whittington and the crowd at Save our Space (and other places) is that like the Fox News crowd, you have listened to much to the rhetoric of people who have a pecuniary interest in making you and others think that they are supporting your position and to keep the believers tagged up…and that has convinced folks like you that they are winning.
Being loud might work for the extremes at Townhall meetings but it doesnt do policy.
Obama is winning, because of a large number of factors (including winning the health care bill and that his opposition is disjointed) but more importantly (grin) because all the major players are lining up behind him, because he has been careful to formulate a policy which does that. there is a reason Boeing and PW (and actually Lockmart) Have tossed in the lobbing towel.
Worse for your point of view, Obama has picked competent people (General Bolden) to execute it.
As for “holding me to it” go ahead, that is why I sign everything I write. Go search the archieves here. When Whittington, even KC were chiming up about how VSE was going to just take off and go, I predicted it would stall out just like it has. Why? I watch the big picture.
I am content to sit back, let the future unfold and then we can both compare who said what and when.
There is no plan b and there is no Congressional revolt.
enjoy
Robert G. Oler
As with most Chicago politics, the Obama regime is rewarding its friends and punishing its enemies. In this case, centers in Blue states win and those in Red states lose, with some bones thrown to the Red states to cover their tracks.
In the history of the Republic, which Presidential “regime” punished their friends and rewarded their enemies?
In the history of the Republic which Presidential “regime” didn’t reward supporters? Did Bush reward big oil? Did haliburton get no bid contracts?
You must live in fantasy land if you believe Presidents don’t reward supporters.
In my “fantasy land” once elected, POTUS is suppose to make decisions that benefit the entire country, not just his “friends”. In general past Presidents, from both parties, considered this great country as one Nation, not just states that will vote for his party and those that will not.
But this regime, and that is what it is, has divided the country between Red & Blue, between the achievers whom they will tax and the non-achievers whom they will support with welfare….
You can take the Community Organizer out of Chicago, but you can’t take Chicago out of the Community Organizer.
Regime Change in 2012!
In the interest of productive conversation, can everyone who can’t spell “Bolden” please refrain from posting on this site ever again?
The NASA administration’s job is to work out the details of the plan the President has given them. That’s what they’re doing. All talk of “plan B” and other variations is simply nonsense that is coming out the mouths of people in denial. Should Congress decide to rewrite the President’s plan that will be in law, and the NASA administration will rearrange their planning around that law, but *that hasn’t happened yet* so they are forging ahead with their planning without second guessing.
@ Major Tom,
“The purpose of the telecon was to make field center assignments available to the press and public. If the agency wanted to respond to congressional concerns, they’d do so with congressmen and/or their staff present, likely behind closed doors — not with reporters on a public telecon.”
According to NASA Watch, the Vice President has also had a teleconference with the leading Congressional voices who have publically voiced scepticism over this new direction. I’m no where near experienced (or knowledgable) enough about the world inside the Beltway to guess exactly what this might mean, especially given the imminence of the President’s visit to KSC (which is now being billed as a ‘Policy Statement’ rather than conference – indications that the final decision, whatever it is, has been made). As far as I can tell, the VP calling around people like Nelson and Shelby could mean either:
a) A final attempt to strong-arm naysayers to be silent or at least not be troublesome during the budget approval cycle;
b) A ‘any final comments’ go-around-the-table confirming that the deal is now done and ready for the President to announce on the 15th.
FWIW, an obvious possibility (and one that General Bolden has heavily hinted at) is a Common Crew Vehicle competition, aiming to produce a new NASA CV that will enter service NET 2014 (based on the current Soyuz ‘paid up to’ date) and will be launchable on any extant LV. This will be the ‘flagship’ commercial program out of KSC – a commercially designed and procured crew vehicle built to NASA specifications but under a new ‘hands off’ project oversight regime. If my theory is correct, then the first order of business for KSC and JSC’s new commercial spacecraft offices will be to develop the specifications and terms of reference so that the RFQs can go out to Boeing-MDD, Lock-Mart, etc., as soon as possible.
a commercially designed and procured crew vehicle built to NASA specifications
NASA won’t do the “design”, just the “specifications.” This is the secret sauce that is supposed to magically transform the Exploration Directorate?
@ googaw,
Apparently, yes.
As far as I can tell, the Constellation fiasco has convinced those in power that NASA is incapable of actually designing and building a crewed spacecraft and its launch vehicle. It is thus not being permitted to do so. Instead, they will say what they want and select the best bid to fill the need.
For the reason that the admin of this web page is working, no question very quickly
it will be famous, due to its feature contents.
Also visit my web page … criminal lawyer phoenix
I am not sure where you’re getting your info, but good topic.
I needs to spend some time learning much more or understanding more.
Thanks for wonderful information I was looking for this info
for my mission.
Here is my homepage – Brand Development Company Vancouver