Comments on: Fears of loss of access to the ISS fade despite ongoing crisis http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis 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: Neil Shipley http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/#comment-478123 Fri, 04 Apr 2014 01:45:19 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6978#comment-478123 Orbital and SpaceX have had to endure NASA requirements. Notice SpaceX prices for commerical satellite launches.

]]> By: Reality Bits http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/#comment-478067 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 14:24:28 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6978#comment-478067 It is a bit like Samuel Langley talking about those two brothers from Dayton, Ohio, e.g. Orville and Wilbur.

]]> By: Reality Bits http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/#comment-478062 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 14:15:58 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6978#comment-478062 In 2008 the thought was for commercial providers to close the gap to 2014

“I’m less and less inclined to think that’s the right thing to do, because the closest we could close that gap in 2014, and that doesn’t do much for station,” said Jeff Bingham, a staffer on the space subcommittee of the Senate Commerce Committee. “So COTS D becomes the next candidate on the table.”

“The COTS conundrum”, 28 JUL 2008 ( http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1179/1 )

And from the same article to close the gap to 2011 if possible:

The Senate version of the NASA authorization legislation currently under consideration, S. 3270, does contain language specifically directing NASA to move ahead with a version of COTS D. It calls on NASA to enter into Space Act Agreements with at least two teams to develop commercial crew capabilities that would be available by the end of fiscal year 2011 (“or as soon thereafter as is practicable”), and authorizes $150 million in fiscal year 2009 for starting that effort. Similar language was included in the version of the bill that the House passed in June.

So Comrade Windy, do you consider our kind host to be a liar?

]]> By: Jim Nobles http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/#comment-478061 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 14:04:59 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6978#comment-478061 Don’t let your hatred blind you. If commercial crew had been completely funded from the beginning there’s a good possibility we’d be seeing a manned Dragon launch later this summer.

I don’t know how that would help the new docking hatch situation though.

.

]]> By: Reality Bits http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/#comment-478060 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 14:00:26 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6978#comment-478060 If Jeff will indulge me a long quote from his own 28 SEP 2009 article, “A tipping point for commercial crew?” ( http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1477/1 )

In May, Sen. Richard Shelby voiced his concerns about NASA relying on commercial providers and spending money on them versus the Constellation program. “I believe that manned spaceflight is something that is still in the realm of government, because despite their best efforts, some truly private enterprises have not yet been able to deliver on plans of launching vehicles,” he said in opening testimony of a hearing of the appropriations subcommittee with oversight of NASA, singling out SpaceX in particular. “However grandiose the claims of proponents” of commercial crew transportation, he added, “they cannot substitute for the painful truth of failed performance at present.”

Setting aside the fact that ULA is a “private enterprise” … I find the quotes rather interesting looking back at them from 4.5 years in the future.

]]> By: Gregori http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/#comment-478040 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:31:26 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6978#comment-478040 The whole mercantilist economic nationalism that is applied to space is kinda embarrassing because it seems to end below 100kms in the atmosphere. They should make up their minds about what economic system they actually want since the economic powers that be are so quick to force developing nations to “open up” to trade. The access to supply the spacestation with crews and cargo shouldn’t be first American company to do it, it should be the cheapest and company to do it in the world. Neither Orbital or SpaceX have been that cheap for the mass they hauled.

If they were actually worried about Russian monopoly, China could send up crews faster than any American company because it actually has a developed product. Make them compete with Russia over launches and if Americans can eventually make it cheaper, even better.

]]> By: amightywind http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/#comment-478035 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:13:24 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6978#comment-478035 This has been a top priority of the Obama Administration’s for the past five years, and had our plan been fully funded, we would have returned American human spaceflight launches

I didn’t realize that full funding would have pulled in the launch date to 2014. It is a lie, of course, like so many others. 2017 has been the quoted date for many years. No, the wretched mess that is NASA can be laid entirely at the feet of Obama.

]]> By: Malmesbury http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/#comment-478029 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 09:20:20 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6978#comment-478029 “Its not easy being right all the time. Events are breaking faster than amightywind can keep up!”

Wonder what you’ll think when you realise what this does for –

1) Commercial Crew entrants riding Atlas V

Vs

2) Commercial Crew entrants that don’t use Atlas V

]]> By: Robert G Oler http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/#comment-478018 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 05:11:41 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6978#comment-478018 I can imagine…the right wing nuts like you and Whittington will exaggerate the issue but the rest of the US will not e at all interested RGO

]]> By: Marcel F. Williams http://www.spacepolitics.com/2014/04/01/fears-of-loss-of-access-to-the-iss-fade-despite-ongoing-crisis/#comment-478011 Thu, 03 Apr 2014 02:14:27 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6978#comment-478011 My problem with the Nautilus artificial gravity concept are the high rates of rotation in order to produce hypogravity levels of G. A rotation of 5 RPM is required for the Nautilus to produce a pseudo gravity similar to that of the lunar surface. Of course, we don’t even know if the Moon’s hypogravity environment is deleterious, or harmless, to human health. Although we could easily find out by deploying a simple outpost on the lunar surface (another way the Moon helps you to find out if humans can get to Mars). Rotations rates as high as 7 to 8 RPM would be required for the Nautilus to simulate levels of gravity found on Mars.

While there are some studies that suggest that humans can be gradually acclimated to rotations higher than 3 RPM, I still think it would be prudent to deploy rotating orbital and interplanetary habitats with rates of rotation that are around 2 RPM and that produce simulated gravities close to that found on the surface of Mars (the old Arthur C. Clarke philosophy).

That probably means deploying rotating habitats that can use cables to expand their radius to nearly 100 meters. It might take one or two SLS launches to deploy such habitats to the Earth-Moon Lagrange points (not including mass shielding).

Marcel F. Williams

]]>