posted 02-03-2009 05:15 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
According to the Washington Tribune, the president then asked the children if they wanted to be astronauts.

---

posted 02-03-2009 11:48 PM               

There is still nothing new on WhiteHouse.gov as far as space interests, and NASA continues on with no permanent Administrator at a time when one is critically needed.

I look forward to hearing from Obama what he intends to do with our space infrastruture, but I guess right now he's kind of tied up with, what, his third cabinet nominee who didn't get properly vetted? Not to mention one more who probably should have bowed out.

I certainly hope that he doesn't put much stock in that garbage the Baker Institute put out (thank you George Abbey).

We all keep hoping that one day we'll wake up and see Obama make some Kennedy-like speech fully supporting the return to the moon, inspiring our youth to pursue science and engineering studies, and invigorating the high-tech workforce of THIS country. But I think we've heard all of that we're going to hear during the campaign.

He used his "Apollo 8" story repeatedly on the stump, said what he needed to say to Florida voters who had the most to lose, and evoked JFK's moon speech to stir up a teary eye or two. But since then? He's read a book to a room full of kids for a photo op.

posted 02-04-2009 05:27 AM               

The guy's been in office,what...3 weeks? Even Kennedy had 4 months to say what we were going to do and I don't believe Kennedy had the economic mess that our current leaders are facing right now.

posted 02-04-2009 02:27 PM               

I try to be optimistic and hope that when he announces his choice, it's a well known, experienced person who will carry through on the current Constellation program and return us to the moon. But that will take a real acknowledgement from the Administration that it is the right thing to do for the nation, our economy, and for our future.

posted 02-04-2009 03:24 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by 328KF:
The way in which he was shown the door was shameful.

---

Griffin tendered his resignation. And it was accepted. How is that shameful?

There really is nothing surprising about this. Any position that is appointed by the president is more-than-likely to change hands when a new administration starts...especially when a new party takes office. To expect anything differently is unrealistic, based on history. Griffin knew that as well as anyone else did.

posted 02-04-2009 06:21 PM               

Every other Administrator stayed on for various lengths of time either in a permanent role or to assist in the transition to new leadership.

Clearly, Griffin believed in the direction NASA was going and wanted to stay on and see things through. Clearly, President Obama saw some reason to part ways with him. It was shameful in the way it was handled in public, with Griffin's supporters calling on the President-elect to keep him on, and Obama turning a deaf ear.

posted 02-04-2009 11:15 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by 328KF:
It was shameful in the way it was handled in public, with Griffin's supporters calling on the President-elect to keep him on, and Obama turning a deaf ear.

---

Just because Obama didn't ask Griffin to stay on doesn't mean he turned a deaf ear. You're making one assumption based on another.

posted 02-04-2009 11:34 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by 328KF:
Griffin tendered his resignation only because he was required to. If the President recognized the importance of the crossroads we are at right now in space, he would have kept him at his post (as he did Gates).

---

What makes you think Obama doesn't recognize the "importance of the crossroads"? Maybe he doesn't want to send astronauts to the Moon again...

Chris.

posted 02-05-2009 11:32 PM               

I'm just proposing a dissenting view from the "if we don't go back to the Moon, we're doomed" scenario, that's all.

And if you've read Aviation Week for 25 years, you should be aware that fancy space plans never got much further than the drawing board or eventually some test hardware...

I know that Obama tends to be viewed as some sort of Messiah but let's keep our feet on the ground. It's not negative, it's just being realistic -borderline pessimistic, I'll give you that.

posted 02-11-2009 05:57 PM               

Suzanne Kosmas took advantage of a rare opportunity - face time with President Barack Obama aboard Air Force One - on Tuesday to invite the nation's highest-ranking space enthusiast to a Kennedy Space Center launch.

Kosmas, the freshman Democratic congresswoman from New Smyrna Beach, caught up with the president flying back to Washington from Obama's economic recovery speech in Fort Myers.

Kosmas said she invited the president, who described himself as a "space guy," to join her for a space shuttle launch.

posted 02-12-2009 10:06 PM               

Only a union could serve the hopes of every citizen -- to knock down the barriers to opportunity and give each and every person the chance to pursue the American dream. Lincoln understood what Washington understood when he led farmers, craftsmen, and shopkeepers to rise up against an empire. What Roosevelt understood when he lifted us from Depression, built an arsenal of democracy, and created the largest middle-class in history with the GI Bill. It's what Kennedy understood when he sent us to the moon.

posted 02-13-2009 02:17 PM               

A much more realistic view of Obama's lack of priority on the subject was posted by Rob Coppinger with Flight Global/Hyperbola.

Talking to a USAF space policy professor this week their opinion was that Obama will be unlikely to get round to focusing on space for another year. That has all sorts of implications for Shuttle and Constellation and reinforces Hyperbola's view that thanks to the economic crisis and the Obama administration's internal candidate difficulties, drift is now NASA's biggest threat

posted 02-13-2009 02:30 PM               

From my perspective, a President who was planning to derail a burgeoning moon program would probably avoid such references as to lessen the political fallout. After all, how easy would it be for the press to later cite his numerous Kennedy and the Moon remarks as a contradiction to any such space policy?

posted 02-13-2009 03:45 PM               

And while I certainly cannot point to an interview that addresses Obama's speech inspirations, neither can I point to an article which clearly spells out his vision for manned spaceflight.

Robert, I don't hate the guy...he's done many things right and has my respect for rising to the highest office in the world. Your point on the political fallout is well taken. I am just frustrated with the fact that, in the absence of any real poilcy, we continue to grasp at these rhetorical comments as a sign of his support.

The manned space program is at a most critical point in it's history. This is no time for "drifting" or lack of leadership. To think that NASA can continue developing Orion/Ares/Altair "under the radar" until someone tells them to stop is unrealistic.

This decison can easily go either way. I want to see Americans return to the moon, and I'm not getting any younger. If we don't do it now, when will we?

posted 02-13-2009 03:58 PM               

Nor would I advise reading too much into the occasional mention of space and the moon by the President, but then again, I don't think such references should be ignored either. They could mean nothing but they could also be foreshadowing his thoughts, only time will tell.

posted 02-13-2009 10:44 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
And the longer the program marches forward, the harder it becomes to halt.

---

It's never too late for a program to stop, be cancelled, or be re-directed. Many government programs, and several space programs, have come to a screeching halt when all of the dedicated people involved thought it could never happen. MOL, ISS, the SR-71, even Apollo.

I don't use sports analogies, but in football (American football, not to be confused with soccer) momentum is everything. Those who have it typically go on to win, yet several times this season I saw a team that had it lose. Why?
Because at halftime the head coach of the losing team demonstrated incredible leadership which inspired his players to go back out and turn it around.

We have that momentum now with Constellation, and I feel like we're at halftime in the locker room. There is no guarantee that it will move forward, and what we need is clear, positive leadership and direction from a new Administrator and the President, to keep that "other coach" from turning the tables on us.

posted 02-23-2009 10:43 PM               

Some 30 leaders from across the U.S. military, intelligence, civil and commercial space arenas have come together to urge U.S. President Barack Obama to address the systemic problems they say are now plaguing the entire U.S. space enterprise.

The nonpartisan, independent Committee for U.S. Space Leadership, composed of current space industry professionals and former top military and civil space officials, has concluded the U.S. space industrial work force problems, looming gaps in important space-based capabilities and widespread program overreach can only be remedied by increased White House involvement.

Failure to act, the group said in a memo to the president, could result in further erosion of U.S. leadership in space. The memo, a copy of which was provided to Space News, is being circulated on Capitol Hill and among White House officials.

posted 02-25-2009 05:58 PM            

Aviation Week: Obama Will Stick with Bush Moon Plan

The fiscal 2010 NASA budget outline to be released by the Obama Administration Feb. 26 adds almost $700 million to the out-year figure proposed in the fiscal 2009 budget request submitted by former President Bush, and sticks with the goal of returning humans to the moon by 2020.

The $18.7 billion that Obama will request for NASA - up from $18.026 billion for fiscal 2010 in the last Bush budget request - does not include the $1 billion NASA will receive in the $787 billion stimulus package that President Barack Obama signed Feb. 16.

Aviation Week has learned that in addition to the human-lunar return, Obama wants to continue robotic exploration with probes to Mars and other Solar System destinations, as well as a space telescope to probe deeper into the universe.

posted 02-26-2009 10:55 AM               

• Provides $18.7 billion for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Combined with the $1 billion provided to the agency in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, this represents a total increase of more than $2.4 billion over the 2008 level.

• Funds a program of space-based research that supports the Administration's commitment to deploy a global climate change research and monitoring system.

• Funds a robust program of space exploration involving humans and robots. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration will return humans to the Moon while also supporting a vigorous program of robotic exploration of the solar system and universe.

• Funds the safe flight of the Space Shuttle through the vehicle's retirement at the end of 2010. An additional flight will be conducted if it can be completed safely before the end of 2010.

• Funds the development of new space flight systems for carrying American crews and supplies to space.

• Funds continued use of the International Space Station to support the agency and other Federal, commercial, and academic research and technology testing needs.

• Funds aeronautics research to address aviation safety, air traffic control, noise and emissions reduction, and fuel efficiency.

posted 02-26-2009 11:13 AM            

I was happy also that the space shuttle will be limited to one additional flight... I believe it is time to get on with Constellation.

posted 02-26-2009 12:13 PM               

NASA Statement About Budget Overview for Fiscal Year 2010

Acting NASA Administrator Christopher J. Scolese said the following in response to the 2010 fiscal year budget overview for NASA released Feb. 26:

"The $18.7 billion budget proposal for 2010 is fiscally responsible and reflects the administration's desire for a robust and innovative agency aligned with the president's goals of advancing our nation's scientific, educational, economic and security interests.

"This budget ensures NASA maintains its global leadership in Earth and space research, and it advances global climate change studies, funds a robust program of human and robotic space exploration, allows us to realize the full potential of the International Space Station, advances development of new space transportation systems, and renews our commitment to aeronautics."

For more information about the 2010 fiscal year overview, visit NASA's website.

posted 02-26-2009 12:57 PM               

Obama will pull the space card out of his pocket when he wants to be Kennedy and set a bold future. Kennedy needed to erase his foreign political debacle, Bay of Pigs and at some point Obama will need to focus attention elsewhere.

posted 02-27-2009 09:09 AM               

Of particular note is a reply (in the comments) by transition team member and senior adviser to the yet-to-be-named NASA administrator, Alan Ladwig who responded to Space Foundation CEO Elliot Pulham's statement that suggested the budget was a "disappointingly small step in the right direction".

I must disagree with my friend Eliott’s assessment that the NASA budget represents a "disappointingly small step." With a $1 billion increase, plus another $1 billion from the stimulus package, I would say the Administration is making good on its campaign commitments for NASA and has signaled support for a balanced aeronautics and space program. Considering the budget challenges that the Administration faces and the need to allocate funds among the many worthy national priorities the space community has much reason to be encouraged. While the out-years are less certain, all the more reason for our community to focus on the job at hand and demonstrate that the budget increase represents money well spent.

posted 03-11-2009 08:06 PM               

MATTHEWS: Right now, the retirement of the space shuttle in 2010 is going to devastate the Space Coast economy down in Florida. You're looking 3,500 job losses at least at the (Kennedy Space) center which will multiply to as many as 28,000 jobs throughout that entire area. Right now, you are reaffirming President Bush's decision to retire the shuttle in 2010. I guess what I want to know is why you decided to keep that 2010 retirement date for the shuttle and what type of plans you may have to try and save the Space Coast from an economic crater?

OBAMA: First of all, we have authorized were budgeted for additional shuttle launches that had not been scheduled. So we're extending the life of the shuttle because a) I think it is doing some important work and b) we are very mindful of the economic impact of the space program in the region. I will soon be appointing a new NASA director. I think it's important for the long term vibrancy of our space program to think through what NASA's core mission is and what the next great adventures and discoveries are under the NASA banner. The space shuttle program has yielded some extraordinary scientific discoveries, but I think it's fair to say that there's been a sense of drift to our space program over the last several years. We need to restore that sense of excitement and interest that existed around the space program. Shaping a mission for NASA that is appropriate for the 21st century is going to be one of the biggest tasks of my new NASA director. Once we have that vision, then I think that it's going to be much easier to build support for expanding our space efforts. What I don't what NASA to do is just limp along. And I don't think that's good for the economy in the region either.

posted 03-12-2009 07:28 AM               

Based on what Bill Gerstenmaier siad the other day, the last flight would occur possibly as late as March 2011.

That buys the Space Coast an additional six months. But I fear that the ecomomic tsunami will begin to roll through here in the fall of 2010 when people who are not needed for shuttle processing, and have not transferred to the Constellation program start to move away in search of a new life.

I understand the reasons behind ending the shuttle program (so I am not trying to re-open that discussion) but if I could snap my fingers and make wishes come true the shuttle would fly twice a year until Orion was up and ready.

The only good news is that this area has survived this type of down-turn before. Hopefully there is enough institutional memory available among decision makers to survive this time.

Robert are you hiring stringers? I may very well be looking for work within the year.

posted 03-12-2009 09:36 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by KSCartist:
...if I could snap my fingers and make wishes come true the shuttle would fly twice a year until Orion was up and ready.

---

posted 03-12-2009 10:51 AM               

It has and will continue to be a massive money pit where little is actually accomplished. Between the ISS and the shuttle trucker missions for the last 10 years the US has squandered it's abilities for manned space exploration.

posted 03-12-2009 12:04 PM               

There is more accomplished on a daily basis on the ISS than sitting here on earth. Just the simple fact that there are humans aboard and the knowledge we gain alone from long duration space flight is an accomplishment. Something we will reap the benefits of in the future.

Just because we're not heading back to the moon tomorrow doesn't mean we're spending money wastefully on other endeavors that are answering questions we'll need the answers to later.

posted 03-12-2009 12:38 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
While you are of course entitled to your personal opinion Jim (as you've stated countless times on this forum), the facts do not support your position. That you insist on ignoring the science that has and is being conducted is regrettable.

---

The shuttle has been relegated to a semitruck in space. It does a great job doing so - but - it is not worth the time or money to continue. I was all for the Shuttle for many years and it's mission simply changed.

The ISS is far from operating as it was planned. The majority of time and energy is spent maintaining the station. The US has spent far too much money on this "joint" effort. While I am supportive of a continuous presence in space the ISS is too costly and too limited for the US.

quote:

---

What's more, it is attitudes such as yours that led to an early end to Apollo and if perpetuated, will ensure any return to the Moon or visit to Mars is equally short-lived.

---

I am a believer that the shuttle program has gone on too long, the ISS is not worth the cost, Hubble should be unplugged once it requires additional prepares.

posted 03-12-2009 12:51 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jimsz:
The majority of time and energy is spent maintaining the station.

---

quote:

---

I also firmly believe that Mr. Obama is an opportunist who is trying to force a visionary legacy but is in reality as dangerous for the space program a Walter Mondale was in his day.

---

posted 03-18-2009 07:41 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
Based on your reasoning then, it is not worth the money to return to the Moon.

---

Assembling and maintaining a moon outpost (in my belief) would yield more knowledge, opportunity, science than flying semitruck missions to the ISS so the residents can simply repair the place and be a hotel for wealthy tourists.

quote:

---

Not to repeat myself but the facts do not support your position.

---

posted 03-18-2009 09:30 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jimsz:
The shuttle has been relegated to a semitruck in space. It does a great job doing so - but - it is not worth the time or money to continue. I was all for the Shuttle for many years and it's mission simply changed.

---

quote:

---

I also firmly believe that Mr. Obama is an opportunist who is trying to force a visionary legacy but is in reality as dangerous for the space program a Walter Mondale was in his day.

---