Comments on: Will COMSTAC take a stand on commercial crew?

By: DCSCA

DCSCA — Sat, 22 May 2010 10:18:35 +0000

@RobertGOler- re Ares. It’s a lousy rocket upon which to ‘launch’ the Constellation program. If memory serves, Von Braun worked with both and prefered liquids over solid LVs. (Of course, stockholders in Thiokol may disagree. )

By: DCSCA

DCSCA — Sat, 22 May 2010 10:11:42 +0000

@EricSteiner-“â€¦ Challenger forced a reexamnitation of the whole idea of USG vehicles launching commercial payloads, which folks recognized was a bad idea after 1986. Not surprisingly, the â€œfree marketersâ€ in the administration allied with the â€œletâ€™s not risk people for fun and profitâ€ folks in NASA and the â€œnot all our eggs in one basketâ€ crowd at DOD and got the USG out of a business it had no business being in.”

To a degree, but Challenger forced a revision of using USG manned spacecraft to release commercial payloads — but mostly was a painful lesson to the ‘free marketer’ crowd that they could not make a R&D run by engineers into a commercially viable enterprise whose mission was to turn a profit, not basic fundamental space research. Folks ‘recognized’ this was a ‘bad idea’ from Day One of shuttle. Revisit the original concepts– it was a compromise vehicle from the get-go. And the DoD was never in love with having to depend on shuttle over expendible LVs. Even the construction of the never used shuttle launch complex at Vandenberg AFB was sloppy.

@AlFansome- Yes, I know. But the final design was dictated by DoD payload requirements/specifications. Shuttle is a fine machine for what it can do. How it was managed from Reagan on is a separate issue.

By: Trent Waddington

Trent Waddington — Fri, 21 May 2010 09:01:16 +0000

Bennett, I care, and I’d prefer he made a specific accusation. All this dancing around is very debonair but it doesn’t seem to be going anywhere. As for The Space Review, I wish some more people would be banned from there, particularly the guy who calls himself “Spacer” and posts about flying saucers on every article.

By: Al Fansome

Al Fansome — Thu, 20 May 2010 20:57:31 +0000

@DCSCA

… The decision to put commercial satellites (as well as USAF satellites and all NASA satellites) on the Shuttle was made well before the Reagan administration. It was made by the Nixon administration when the Shuttle decision was first made.

FWIW,

– Al

By: Eric Sterner

Eric Sterner — Thu, 20 May 2010 19:06:20 +0000

@DCSCA

… Challenger forced a reexamnitation of the whole idea of USG vehicles launching commercial payloads, which folks recognized was a bad idea after 1986. Not surprisingly, the “free marketers” in the administration allied with the “let’s not risk people for fun and profit” folks in NASA and the “not all our eggs in one basket” crowd at DOD and got the USG out of a business it had no business being in.

By: Bennett

Bennett — Thu, 20 May 2010 02:05:01 +0000

Gary Church wrote @ May 19th, 2010 at 6:17 pm

:-]

By: Bennett

Bennett — Thu, 20 May 2010 02:03:39 +0000

Mark3 wrote @ May 19th, 2010 at 9:11 pm

Whatever point you’re trying to make, this isn’t the place for it, and I doubt anyone cares anyway. I sure don’t. If you have something to contribute to the conversation, please do!

By: Robert G. Oler

Robert G. Oler — Thu, 20 May 2010 01:18:00 +0000

DCSCA wrote @ May 19th, 2010 at 9:00 pm

solely no, but the arrangement that works in aviation will work in space.

Robert G. Oler

By: Mark3

Mark3 — Thu, 20 May 2010 01:11:41 +0000

Jeff I don’t understand why you do not admit that you do a lot of your reporting while being paid by Futron. I would think that Futron would be pleased to inform people that they support this rather useful service that you provide. What is a little odd is how NASA let’s you participate as a reporter. I doubt that they would allow a Boeing employee to participate in that way.

By: DCSCA

DCSCA — Thu, 20 May 2010 01:00:06 +0000

“1. NASA does not have the technical expertise to regulate private industry.
2. NASA does not have the management expertise to regulate private industry.
3. NASA does not have the market expertise to regulate private industry.”

The push by the Reagan Administration in the 80’s to make shuttle operations @ NASA, a R&D organization, into a profit center demostrated these points all too well with Challenger.

That’s why the future of the manned space program should not be left solely in the hands of private industry.