Comments on: With Bennett out, what does his successor think about NASA? http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: vulture4 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/#comment-303299 Sat, 15 May 2010 02:37:16 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3459#comment-303299 >>The USAF has no way to do business other then the way it does business until someone tells it to do business otherwise. (and as an aside I guess proves that the alternate way of doing business will work).<<

Elon Musk apparently thought there was a way to persuade the USAF and its contractors to use some modicum of common sense, and it turned out there wasn't. The whole range safety system is obsolete. There's been talk of modernizing the range for at least the past 23 years, and commanders always talk of how great it will be next year, but nothing significant ever happens. The few people that really pushed for change were fought to a standstill by the range contractors, who apparently don't want real change because it may cost jobs. I could be wrong about this, but I've been here a long time and that's the way it looks to me.

]]> By: Chris Castro http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/#comment-302414 Wed, 12 May 2010 07:05:29 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3459#comment-302414 @ Trent Waddington…. All this petty talk about having no-place to go, if there isn’t a Skylab or an ISS some 200 miles up, sounds truly tiny-minded! When Apollo flew to the Moon, and broke the bonds of Earthian gravity, there was NO darned LEO space station!! What the blazes is going on here?! Now we GOTTA have a dull, gigantic aluminum can emplaced in LEO, or our astronauts go nowhere?! The Moon & other sizeable spherical bodies are totally disqualified as places to go to?? Just look at the Russians: LEO stations are all they’ve ever done, since the 1970’s. I predict, that the sooner we outgrow Low Earth Orbital stations, and see just what a dead-weight waste of time they truly are, the sooner we will actually remake grandiose strides into deep space, once more!

]]> By: Rand Simberg http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/#comment-302237 Tue, 11 May 2010 14:46:07 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3459#comment-302237 Robert wrote in confusion:

nope I didnt imply anything I stated that “In the end both parties have for a couple of reasons become addicted to almost unlimited federal spending. ”

You may have stated that, but it has nothing to do with anything I wrote.

My response was to this:

Two books that nailed the GOP on the head for me…were “Dead Right” by David “axis of evil” Frum and The Future and its Enemies by Virigina Postell.

As I said, she wasn’t just talking about Republicans. Why can’t you even follow a discussion?

Chris Castro irrelevantly wrote:

Republicans seem to be far more keener about doing things that keep the nation in a state of greatness.

Whether that’s true or not, Constellation was doing nothing to “keep the nation in a state of greatness.”

]]> By: Trent Waddington http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/#comment-302199 Tue, 11 May 2010 10:30:17 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3459#comment-302199 Chris, and Constellation would be no further along than it is now. Ares I won’t fly until 2014 at best, 2017 more likely, and Ares V simply cannot start at all until Ares I is operational. With the ISS splashed in 2014, as was the plan, there would simply be no-where to go and nothing to do with the Ares I. People are bemoaning the gap now, imagine the gap under that plan!

]]> By: Chris Castro http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/#comment-302167 Tue, 11 May 2010 07:24:17 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3459#comment-302167 @ Robert G. Oler…..I have every bit of confidence that in some alternate world, where the Republicans won the 2008 Election, that Constellation would have carried on. (Just like the damned ISS carries on, while keeping us trapped in LEO for another 15 to 20 years!) Republicans seem to be far more keener about doing things that keep the nation in a state of greatness. Just check out Mitt Romney’s new book: “The Case For American Greatness”. Under a hypothetical McCain Presidency, I see a man who would NOT have sold out to the petty “Let’s-take-care-of-the-Earth’s-problems-first” people. A truly GREAT nation or empire is basically obligated to do astounding things, and engage in exploration & re-exploration of other lands, continents, and frontiers. It is undeniable that the Democrats tend to shy away from doing grand space projects. (Aside from dull & boring business-as-usual in LEO.) I for one, will be rooting for the Republicans, for the most part, in this year’s Election and the next.

]]> By: amightywind http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/#comment-302083 Tue, 11 May 2010 01:10:48 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3459#comment-302083 “No, it would require only the development of the RS-68A engine.”

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/Study061509.xml&headline=Study%20Finds%20Human-rated%20Delta%20IV%20Cheaper

…and a J2-X, and 2.5 more years. pwnd.

]]> By: Michael Kent http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/#comment-302078 Tue, 11 May 2010 00:30:20 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3459#comment-302078 amightywind wrote:

The Atlas V is not large enough for an Orion class spacecraft.

True, but that’s because Orion is massively overweight for the task at hand, not because the Atlas V is underpowered. Consider that the Orion is tasked with carrying four astronauts to LEO at a launch cost (of the Ares I) of over $1 billion / flight. Now consider that the manned Dragon, the DreamChaser, and the Boeing / Bigelow capsule are all being designed to carry seven astronauts to LEO at a launch cost of $150 million (Atlas V and Delta IV medium) or $50 million (Falcon 9). Seven astronauts at $50 – $150 million* / flight vs. four astronauts at $1 billion / flight. It’s not a difficult choice.

The Delta IV would need a massive upgrade, including a new upper stage

No, it would require only the development of the RS-68A engine. Funny thing. The RS-68A is already under development by PWR for the NRO. The development costs to NASA is zero. It is scheduled for first flight next year.

Aren’t you embarrassed yet?

Considering your ignorance of the Atlas V, the Delta IV, the CCDev contracts, the Ares I-X, and the development and operational costs of major pieces of America’s space program, I’d suggest refraining from slinging questions like that around.

* launch cost. Does not include the cost of the crew vehicle or LAS.

Mike

]]> By: amightywind http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/#comment-302077 Tue, 11 May 2010 00:25:52 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3459#comment-302077 Oler

Thanks for theHLV posting. Fantasy or not it is good to see the debate becoming a technical and architectural one. You can expect a lot of folks to come out of the woodwork with the NASA leadership on the defensive. If you want an HLV, there are only so many ways to do it: shuttle derived, hybrid shuttle derived (Ares), EELV derived, Obama’s unicorns. It is hoped we can progress beyond ‘we will develop an HLV plan by 2015′. It makes much more sense to cut metal with the abundant components we have. I’m getting go fever just thinking about it.

]]> By: Trent Waddington http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/#comment-302076 Tue, 11 May 2010 00:17:38 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3459#comment-302076 Mike, as I keep saying, STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS. What’s wrong with you people? If someone says something stupid, just shake your head and MOVE ON TO PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSION.. don’t dwell on the idiots.

]]> By: Michael Kent http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/05/09/with-bennett-out-what-does-his-successor-think-about-nasa/#comment-302075 Tue, 11 May 2010 00:12:08 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3459#comment-302075 amightywind wrote:

I am not aware of any advanced plans for manned launch on an Atlas or Delta. Post some links.

First, the Atlas V has already flown 21 times. It already exists, and, unlike Ares I, requires no development costs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V

Second, the Delta IV has already flown 12 times. It already exists, and, unlike Ares I, requires no development costs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_IV

Man-rating these two vehicles requires only the development of an Emergency Detection System. Preliminary design of said system was initiated under the Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program.

http://www.satnews.com/cgi-bin/story.cgi?number=1677335289

ULA estimates that the total development cost for man-rating the Atlas V is $300 million and the Delta IV is $400 million. Compare this to the $35 billion development cost of the Ares I.

All of this is fairly well known in the aerospace industry. I’m surprised you missed it.

Mike

]]>