Comments on: The last, best hope for export control reform?

By: E.P, Grondine

E.P, Grondine — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:19:46 +0000

My thinking is that this is similar to the earlier stiruation with regard to space imagery.

One can only hope that our legislators move in a wise manner that reduces the regulatory burden on our industry while maintaning our nation’s secrutiy.

By: Jason Poblete

Jason Poblete — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 12:11:23 +0000

Great post. The export control reform process should have been broken down into manageable chunks that took into account the role of the Congressional Committees. Space-related controls should be done independent of that process next year. There will not be enough time in the Fall to complete and answer all the questions, some very legitimate, that Congress has raised. A lot will also depend on who wins the elections.

By: Heinrich Monroe

Heinrich Monroe — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 18:04:35 +0000

Seems to me the US space program is bigger, more expensive, and does less as a result of its international â€˜partnershipsâ€™.

Bigger, more expensive, and does less … than what? Than some figment of your imagination? If we weren’t doing ISS, pretending we were doing “exploration” there, we wouldn’t have humans in space, nor would anyone else. It’s as simple as that.

By: Chuck Divine

Chuck Divine — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:52:21 +0000

I mentioned this story briefly at last Wednesday's COMSTAC meeting. Ever hear of the Cartmill affair in 1944? Cartmill, a SF author of middling ability, wrote a story that had Manhattan Project "secrets" in it. Robert Silverberg wrote an interesting two part article in Asimov's SF some years ago. Part one is here. Part two is here. Keeping science secret is basically impossible. Campbell, the editor of Astounding at the time of the Cartmill affair, was once known to have said "Mother Nature is a blabbermouth. You ask her the right questions and she will tell you everything." OK -- that quote is from memory.

By: Robert G. Oler

Robert G. Oler — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:42:56 +0000

wind wrote

“Seems to me the US space program is bigger, more expensive, and does less as a result of its international â€˜partnershipsâ€™. It also bolsters dictatorship in Russia.”

as with most of your claims it is a conclusion with no facts behind it RGO

By: amightywind

amightywind — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 12:18:56 +0000

Like everything else, export control reform should wait for a new President and congress, ones more serious about national security. The fiscal cliff, tax reform and spending will dominate the legislative agenda until next summer.

To the extent that international partnerships are becoming more critical to all space accomplishment

Seems to me the US space program is bigger, more expensive, and does less as a result of its international ‘partnerships’. It also bolsters dictatorship in Russia.

By: Heinrich Monroe

Heinrich Monroe — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 02:03:43 +0000

Jeff, to what extent is this issue a partisan one? To the extent it is, the partisan disfunctionality of Congress doesn’t make it sound like an agreement can be achieved.

To the extent that international partnerships are becoming more critical to all space accomplishment, international interoperability is of high value, and to the extent that at least in the academic aerospace engineering environment, ITAR is becoming hugely limiting, this is an issue that desperately needs resolution. While there is certainly space technology that deserves protection with arms control legislation, the present system really micromanages the whole situation, and U.S. industry is handicapped by protection of technologies that are already commonly available on the world market.