Comments on: All space sequestration politics is local http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: Jeff Foust http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/#comment-400506 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:38:17 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6244#comment-400506 Time to terminate this discussion, unfortunately.

]]> By: Rand Simberg http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/#comment-400505 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:32:17 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6244#comment-400505 And no, I have never claimed to have “done practically everything for a living.”

How stupid.

]]> By: Rand Simberg http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/#comment-400504 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:31:14 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6244#comment-400504 Nothing you say about EVA or Life Support Systems indicates you know anything about the subjects.

I didn’t say much about them, other than that the primary requirement for a space facility to do EVA is to have an airlock. Which remains true. And you don’t even really need that if you’re willing to blow down the facility, as they did in Apollo/Skylab. EVA and life-support systems are a separate issue.

Hilarious, again.

“Bully boy tactics”? Because I point out that I’m not ignorant?

]]> By: joe http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/#comment-400503 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:21:28 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6244#comment-400503 Rand Simberg February 26, 2013 at 4:36 pm
“I’ve done EVA planning and requirements for a living”

According to you, you have done practically everything for a living.

I have actually done EVA hardware, operations, and systems requirement work.
– ILC from 1982 – 1985 (Hardware)
– McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Division 1985 – 1993 (Operations)
– Geo-Control Systems 2007 – 2010 (Systems)

Nothing you say about EVA or Life Support Systems indicates you know anything about the subjects. So try you bully boy tactics elsewhere.

]]> By: Rand Simberg http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/#comment-400502 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:13:42 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6244#comment-400502 What did your “Booz-Allen-Hamilton” report (care to provide a link or document number – I would love to read the part where it says “the Bigelow Station stands a hell of a lot more chance of going up than SLS”) have to say about the reusable tug and orbital propellant depot?

Another ignorant question. It was a report on SLS/Orion programmatics. They weren’t paid to analyze alternate mission architectures. The fact you’re unaware of the Booz-Allen report, and need a link to it, is one more reason why we don’t take you seriously.

]]> By: joe http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/#comment-400499 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 21:37:33 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6244#comment-400499 You guys keep wanting to change the subject to the SLS to deflect from the short comings of you own plan (doesn’t work anymore – bummer isn’t it.)

What did your “Booz-Allen-Hamilton” report (care to provide a link or document number – I would love to read the part where it says “the Bigelow Station stands a hell of a lot more chance of going up than SLS”) have to say about the reusable tug and orbital propellant depot?

]]> By: Rand Simberg http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/#comment-400498 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 21:36:05 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6244#comment-400498 I’ve done EVA planning and requirements for a living.

]]> By: joe http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/#comment-400497 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 21:30:58 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6244#comment-400497 Rand Simberg February 26, 2013 at 3:09 pm • Reply
“And all an “EVA capable” Bigelow facility is is one with an airlock, which is nothing but a pressure vessel with two hatches.
But I must be the one “embarrassed” by my “lack of knowledge.””

If you really believe that all it takes to be EVA capable is “a pressure vessel with two hatches” you should be. But that would require you to know enough to at least suspect what you don’t know.

]]> By: Rand Simberg http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/#comment-400496 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 21:22:49 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6244#comment-400496 I should add that a transfer vehicle is also much more existent than an SLS is. It’s called Dragon. Pull out the recovery systems, and just let it live on orbit.

]]> By: Rick Boozer http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/02/21/all-space-sequestration-politics-is-local/#comment-400494 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 20:49:36 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6244#comment-400494 For you it’s mainly a case of ignoring the conclusions of the Booz-Allen-Hamilton report. As Rand indicated, the Bigelow Station stands a hell of a lot more chance of going up than SLS. One thing is for sure, the modules it will be made from are much closer to being actually produced than a finished SLS.

]]>