Comments on: In the search for a “definitive” national space policy, no definitive answers

By: NeilShipley

NeilShipley — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 06:20:09 +0000

Ares1-X. What was that? Oh yes, that’s right, a dummy sub-orbital Ares1 with nohing bearing any resemblance to the final design or flight hardware. ‘Spinning out of control’. LOL

By: vulture4

vulture4 — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 04:52:42 +0000

I think the panel was a little short on answers but correct in pointing out that the taxpayers are not going to pay for colonizing space at current costs. To me the answer is clear. The first step is to figure out why it is so expensive and substantially reduce costs. And let me be clear; increasing demand does not lower costs.

By: DCSCA

DCSCA — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:46:53 +0000

Nonsense. In reality, Pappy Bush’s initiative had no budget to push and the CIC did ntohing to fight for one- so it foundered and sank. Albrecht is to space policy what Bolton is to foreign policy; essentially irrelevant these days, and in search of a relevant gig.
…

By: Gary Warburton

Gary Warburton — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:10:29 +0000

That is using a small reusable craft to get outside the Van Allen magnetic belts and exchanging various materials stored on the space station from time to time.

By: Gary Warburton

Gary Warburton — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:58:22 +0000

There is a special reason why this refueling was important best explained by Spaceflight Now http://spaceflightnow.com/ Granted there was test before but this test set standards for industry so that satellite developers could design there satillites for refueling and repair.
Ridiculing someone`s name does not constitute an arguement against ion engines. Everyone knows they`ve been around for a while but these ion engines are more powerful and have variable thrust. Mr. Diaz still works toward making them more powerful and efficient.
About the centifuge if scientist are able to install them on the space station and future spaceships they would be a means of mitigating bone loss it would it could result one more step to develope the ability to take long trip to Mars and foster the ability to stay at the station for long periods.
It is precisely because they are in a weightless environment that they are able to do these Salmonella experiments and achieve the results they do. No, they couldn`t achieve the same results on earth.
Tests to develop various materials for protection from radiation can be carried out much more cheaply in orbit at the station where astronauts can swap various materials in the station to see how well they work. Who says the won`t play a role?

By: Guest

Guest — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:10:05 +0000

“commenters here hit on the lack of much attention in the panel to budget outlooks and realities”

I thought they covered it.

On the one hand one or two said NASA should be ashamed of itself not being able to do more and move faster with the money they’ve been getting.

There was also a discussion about if NASA or supporters provided just a little bit of rationale and got some Congressional support behind them, they could easily increase the budget considerably. It was also pointed out thqt at the beginning of Albrect’s term at the time of the start of the SEI under the first Bush, he asked for and got an extra $billion.

I fault NASA. They’ve not put together a meaningful plan and rationale. and they’ve been showing they do not move too quickly or get too much accomplished with the money they receive. I think the first point especially was the case made late last year by the two independent reports and by last week’s panel discussion. NASA needs a plan and strategy. They ma need to find the Presidential and Congressional support, but if they are waiting on the President to define the plan, then its a lost cause.

By: Paul

Paul — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 17:49:04 +0000

I think he’s trying to use astronaut corpses as a substitute for an actual argument.

By: DCSCA

DCSCA — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 08:21:47 +0000

“Dr. Albrecht struck me as someone who had a partisan agenda and therefore wasnâ€™t inclined to be truthful.”

Good observations and well said in your posting, Stephen. Things are going on at KSC. You just have to look. Spent some time there in ’78 as they were transitioning between Apollo and shuttle. On the surface, it may appear to be ‘crumbling’- but renovations and construction were going on then just as they are now. All you had to do was look for it. Albrecht is to space policy what Bolton is to foreign policy; essentially irrelevant these days, and in search of a relevant gig.

By: Brian M

Brian M — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 04:55:25 +0000

Is anyone else noticing that the current real space policy, as witnessed in the field, is every fiefdom (big, as in center-sized or small, as in local experts) for itself?

I think this is the normal situation. JSC is focused on ops and trying to do some development (Orion, Morpheus). KSC is supporting launch facilities and trying to convert some of those facilities to manufacturing. MSFC does rockets like SLS…..

What is the big plan?

An asteroid, I think.

By: Marcel F. Williams

Marcel F. Williams — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 02:21:28 +0000

Nixon really didn’t understand the purpose of a manned space program just like he didn’t understand what all the fuss was about when the Soviets Launched Sputnik. He foolishly decided to completely throw away our heavy lift capability, after all of the money spent developing the largest and most powerful rocket on Earth. America could have had complete economic dominance over cis-lunar space by this time if we had built our first lunar outpost back in the 1970s or 80s. Now we have to build a heavy lift rocket all over again.

Pulling back from the New Frontier didn’t help the US economy, it hurt it. And America’s economic growth has really never been the same since. Investing in science and technology and in vast new frontiers grows the economy, it doesn’t hurt it! You don’t grow an economy by not investing in our technological future.

America’s economy– is not in trouble– because we invested too much money in domestic infrastructure and in science and technology. Its in trouble because we spent titanic amounts of money on unnecessary wars (Vietnam, Iraq) while continuing to run one of the most– astoundingly inefficient– welfare states on Earth in our Medicare, Medicaid, and Unemployment Insurance systems along with our terrible K through 12 public school system.

Marcel F. Williams