Of course there is. Just not in your neighborhood in Texas– or in the halls of American government. You shoul have learned by now that U.S. space efforts are always reactive, nto proactive. Butt’s a big planet with lots of aspiring nations. The Russians have never lost their interest in human exploration in space– and the PRC has whetted an appetite for same.

So what’s your point. America’s space program is in ‘free drift”; free marketers denied capital investment in the private secotr by wary investors want to pick the carcass and tap the Treasury of dwinding resources needed for existing government space programs, civil & DoD, faking their ‘free enterprising’ street cred by socializing the risk on the many to benefit a few– using tax monies, and 43 cents of every dollar is borrowed.

TA01: Launch Propulsion Systems
TA02: In-Space Propulsion Systems
TA03: Space Power and Energy Storage Systems

The top three get my vote.

What was their top priority for extending and sustaining human activities beyond LEO?

“A1 – Improved Access to Space: Dramatically reduce the total cost and increase reliability and safety of access to space”

Not “increase the amount of mass we can launch to space on one rocket”.

Will the politicians pushing the SLS ever ask NASA what is really needed? Not likely.

I don’t think I’ve ever read so much blind hate and pathetic nonsense as I have on this comment section. Robert G. Oler is clearly the main clown in this uninformed and poorly educated collection of comments,>>

yes compared to the well reasoned non personal attack post that you have the courage to sign your name to…. doubtless I have a lot to learn

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmW-ScmGRMA&feature=youtube_gdata_player

RGO

Instead of bashing her, why not write a thoughtful but respectful letter explaining why you folks want her to change her priorities?

Why not write her a respectful letter?

Because she has no reason to listen.

First, she’s a lame duck. She’s announced her retirement at session’s end.

Second, I don’t live in Texas. I don’t represent her constituency.

Third … Quite frankly, she’s shown she doesn’t listen to reason. For reasons known only to her, she’s obsessed with SLS. Unlike her, who chose to all but call Mr. Bolden a liar, I won’t go for the personal attack. But I will presume that her motivation is pork for Texas.

As big $$$ campaign money has an increasingly larger role in politics, our humble single letters matter less and less.

I live in Brevard County, Florida, in Sandy Adams’ district. I’ve written her several times, and received one form letter that really didn’t address my concerns. I’ve written Senators Nelson and Rubio several times. Nelson’s staffed replied with one form letter. I got nothing from Rubio.

My opinion is that we need to divorce space exploration from the government as quickly as possible. I think these Congresscritters are slowly waking up to the reality that commercial crew means an end to their pork gravy train, which is why they’re fighting it. Several of them yesterday insisted that NASA force the CCDev participants into contracts. Why? Because then these Congresscritters can do what they always do — lobby behind the scenes for the contractors pouring money into their campaign coffers. CCDev doesn’t work that way, so they can’t figure out how to get campaign money out of the participants.

I hope that SpaceX, Boeing, Bigelow and the rest are willing to put up enough money to make up what Congress won’t, divorce space from Congress, and let’s move forward into the future. Because it sure won’t happen with SLS.

“….the subtitles of politics frequently escapes some.”

Indeed, and you’re clearly one of the some. A vote for Ricky is a vote for Ricky. You might as well vote for Newt or Mitt – or not vote for any of them– if your intent is to re-elect President Obama. Any support for Santorum only reinforced his ‘faith’ in himself as the ordained and inevitable conservative savior of the Western World. Good grief.

Robert,

I agree that SLS is wrongheaded. But if I let people attack Hutchison then I can’t complain when they attack other space leaders I happen to like.

Forgive my intellectual consistency… I know it’s out of fashion.

– Jim>>

Jim…I hope that you were not taking my comments as criticism of you. You are a true believer (in all that phrase entails) and buckets smart in terms of politics…

Calling KBH “corrupt” and other phrases which demean or slander her with no proof (and substantial proof should be offered) is one of the things that is wrong with her politics.

I was trying to make a policy point, which I htink you got…anyway…I have the highest respect for you and appreciation for your endeavors …and intellectual consistency. (gin)…the later is what I admire most.

Robert

I have no insight on whether Hutchison is corrupt or not. (I, for one, did not state such above.)

But her positions on the ISS National Lab and on commercial cargo/crew are incongruent and highly inconsistent. The former relies heavily on the latter.

That means that she’s either blatantly hypocritical or shocking stupid on this issue. Neither qualifies her for membership on any committee overseeing NASA.

“and her professional staffer Jeff Bingham has forgotten more about space policy than most of us will ever know.

As I said in my SpaceNews oped this week, Senator Hutchison tried to do the right thing in mandating MPCV/SLS, but there just isn’t the money in NASA’s top line to do what she wants.”

The fact that civil space spending is not a federal budget priority is _the_ central and primary lesson of U.S. civil space policy ever since the Apollo peak. Since it’s been 45 years and Bingham has still not learned this fundamental lesson, it appears that he retains little knowledge or wisdom with respect to space policy. He may know the Senate and he may be a great Shuttle mascot, but he’s also arguably the staffer last year who is most responsible for shackling the agency to very costly Shuttle systems, infrastructure, and workforce for years to come in the absence of a budget to afford them. Despite yet another blue-ribbon expert committee strongly advising the nation’s leadership not to do so.

It’s not just Bingham, but the NASA committees in the Senate and House are in dire need of better staff and guidance.

“Instead of bashing her, why not write a thoughtful but respectful letter explaining why you folks want her to change her priorities?”

I don’t want to dissuade anyone from exercising their constitutional rights. But given that the FY13 budget almost certainly won’t be decided until after the election and Hutchison’s retirement from Congress, it’s probably a waste of time to contact her instead of other members.

I’d also argue that congressmen and staff that have spent years and decades on NASA but remain so ignorant that they repeat the Velcro myth in committee meetings are probably not going to change their minds no matter how much information and logic is thrown at them.

http://nasawatch.com/archives/2012/03/velcro-and-nasa.html