There is no proof or logic to this assertion.

The DOD is moving away from manned systems (UAV, UCAV, etc)
The DOD found that manned space missions were unnecessary.
The DOD would rather fund other projects.

DCSCA, you are just blowing smoke and stating the same ole inane BS.

You are showing the signs of insanity, posting the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.

The Boeing Co. is donating $5 million to an Air Force museum in Ohio that a senator hopes will help it acquire one of NASA’s retired shuttle orbiters.

Boeing’s contribution, with three installments, had been planned before the release of President Barack Obama’s fiscal 2012 budget.

I have to wonder if this is the Obama administration’s pandering to Rep. Boehner (Porker-OH) in exchange for certain things the President wants. Boeing certainly knows where to invest their bribes.

“Who says, you? What makes you think it isn’t already in work, unbeknownst to you?”

That’s like proving a negative. An infinity of things MIGHT be going on somewhere that any of us aren’t privy to. (Area 51, anyone?) We can speculate, or we can apply the ‘Missouri Standard.’

” Certainly the MOL project indicated a desire by DoD to press for HSF capabilities even as Apollo was surging forward– and, of course, Vandenberg AFB had a shuttle launch facility near completion by the mid-80s. So its never been an area void of interest in the DoD.”

Okay, so…where is it? None of what you just mentioned ever went on to operational status. Looks to me as if the DoD didn’t want it *enough.*

Given lower-cost human access to LEO, maybe a better argument for military manned space can be made. If it’s possible for NASA to develop that low-cost access, well…where is it? Where’s it been, up till now?

They’ve had plenty of time to do it as a separate agency, why would it now somehow happen if the agency was within DoD?

And what exactly would prevent a similarly fiscally-minded DefSec from cancelling HSF again if it were moved to DoD?

You seem to have this illusion that military programs never get cut. They do. Admittedly, rarely, but they do. Particularly ones where there is very little justification for direct military application (like HSF).

Dude, MOL was cancelled because unmanned NRO spysats made it obsolete, and furthermore, the lackluster record of Almaz proved that was a good idea. Unmanned ELVS have launched every single major DoD sat since 1992. There has not been a military shuttle crew since then.

Face it, there is no need for military HSF. It’s cheaper and more effective to use unmanned platforms. The U.S. Air Force is not going to suddenly decide they need manned capability, no matter how hard you wish.

You are talking history. None of that is applicable today.

@spacermase wrote @ February 16th, 2011 at 8:49 pm
“and there isn’t really a military need for human spaceflight currently.”

Who says, you? What makes you think it isn’t already in work, unbeknownst to you? Certainly the MOL project indicated a desire by DoD to press for HSF capabilities even as Apollo was surging forward– and, of course, Vandenberg AFB had a shuttle launch facility near completion by the mid-80s. So its never been an area void of interest in the DoD. Under DoD guidence (and disciplines) NASA would ‘do’ as it’s told and most likely flourish– particularly after overlapping or parellel research is transfered to university consortiums, appropriate agencies such as FAA, NOAA, etc. And how is ‘mission’ is labeled is pretty much a matter of semantics. Of course, if you know the history of missile and space project development in the U.S., it was pretty much couched within the DoD services (Army, Navy, NRL and AF for high altitude research flight test) until the politics of the moment forced Eisenhower into the creation of NASA to begin with- as a civilian alternative to military space projects at that point in the Cold War. But its mission ended when the Cold War came to a close 20 years ago and really, since Apollo, it’s been floundering around for a new ‘mission’ ever since. ‘Mision to Planet Earth’ being the most pathetic. Since shuttle was designed as a DoD carrier to begin with, all the ‘missions’ could be labeled DoD missions– certainly they were crewed by military personnel. The Soviets saw shuttle as a military asset from the get go through SDI research flights as well. ‘National security’ casts a wide umbrella– often with accompanying shadow as well. Nation-building wasn’t a function of the DoD either- that was a function of State at one time- even when DoD once was just the ‘War Department’ at one time either. Nor is ‘peace-keeping.’ LOL The objective is to maintain some kind of steady funding for NASA through the Age of Austerity for mid and long term projects. Chances are if it was under the DoD umbrella now, Weiner couldn’t rob it to fund polics programs more properly funded throguh city and state revenue sources in NY. As it sets now, NASA is doomed by every vote to get robbed of funding for other discretionary programs. It’s propped up as a Cold War relic, ripe for the picking.

@ James T wrote @ February 16th, 2011 at 9:07 pm
Seriously, wake up and smell the java. Weiner is just the first of many to understand and realize this agency as it stands today is ripe for raiding to save domestic programs under attack.