|
Author
|
Topic: Review of US Human Space Flight (Augustine)
|
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 08:57 PM
   
quote:
Originally posted by Mercury7:
Yes, if you told me you support it to get my vote Robert. Big difference.
So in other words, if I ever run for office, I have to remember that if I am elected I am not allowed to change my mind ever otherwise I am automatically a liar. I must ignore what expert advisers tell me, ignore advancements, ignore setbacks, ignore the rest of the world and remain steadfast to the ideas I put forth during my campaign. Really? |
Mercury7
Member Posts: 360
From: Greenville, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 09:06 PM
I think you are going too far, but surely you have to understand that during the election there were many people like me that were paying very close attention what the candidates were saying about whether or not they were going to support us going back to the moon. The President's policy actually flip flopped if you remember. But he finally changed his position and put it out in writing that he would support returning to the moon by 2020. If he had not done that then he probably would not have gotten my vote.But the short answer to your question is yes, if you were to run for office I would expect you to stick by the promises you made to get elected. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 09:10 PM
Then I'm sorry, but I find your whole position to be unreasonable. By your definition, even if whatever is announced on Monday returns to humans to Moon or puts crews around Phobos or accomplishes any number of other positive achievements in space, you still will hold President Obama to changing his mind (in your words, "lying") about Constellation. By your definition, all those who voted for President Kennedy were lied to because he never pledged to send Americans to the Moon during his campaign. |
Lunatiki
Member Posts: 237
From: Amarillo, TX, USA
Registered: Dec 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 09:13 PM
Obama lied, Constellation died.  |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 09:17 PM
Kennedy lied, Apollo flied.  |
Lunatiki
Member Posts: 237
From: Amarillo, TX, USA
Registered: Dec 2006
|
posted 01-28-2010 09:25 PM
I'm as right-wing as they come, and people keep asking me "would you want your taxes raised to get back to the Moon and then on to Mars?" I say YES without hesitation. I know how important it is. I was looking forward to, as a father, watching man venture further into space. That dream has been postponed. Just doesn't sit well with me. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 10:22 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Lunatiki:
I know how important it is.
I think, or at least I hope, that everyone who is a collectSPACE member agrees with your sentiment: space exploration is important. We may disagree about what aspects of space exploration are important, or how to accomplish them, but I think we are unified in our belief that we need to be pushing outwards into space. That much unites us. Space exploration is more important than partisan politics. It is more important than our personal feelings about the President. It deserves to be discussed absent of accusation and generalization. On Monday, when the new policy is announced, this topic will be closed and a new one will begin. I hope we can all agree to use that fresh start to discuss the plan on its own merits (or lack thereof) and leave any extraneous, unimportant distractions behind. |
issman1
Member Posts: 1106
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 01-29-2010 01:40 AM
I think some should get a grip.The fact is Constellation was reliant upon two developments, Ares I and Ares V, which were underfunded? Not forgetting that Orion was being pared down as a consequence. Besides, I don't hear or read about too many tears being shed from the vast majority of Americans on the demise of Constellation. What does that say? |
moorouge
Member Posts: 2486
From: U.K.
Registered: Jul 2009
|
posted 01-29-2010 03:21 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
By your definition, all those who voted for President Kennedy were lied to because he never pledged to send Americans to the Moon during his campaign.
As I keep saying, Kennedy was not a space enthusiast. Apollo was a result of a need to redevelop and stimulate American industry particularly in the southern states. That Apollo was chosen as a means of doing this is down to Lyndon Johnson.Today, America has this industrial base legacy. Constellation would only be using these foundations. As such, in the real world, politicians have to look at the broader picture and priorities have changed, especially in the eyes of public opinion. Remember, public opinion carried Apollo until the '11' flight. |
issman1
Member Posts: 1106
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 01-29-2010 05:41 AM
With regard to Ares, it's a case of redesigning the wheel. NASA administrator Griffin is to blame for selecting this inferior rocket.I notice the Space Frontier Foundation hailed the new plan. So there's at least one lobby or public space advocacy group behind the commercial approach. And isn't all the headline-grabbing opposition coming from Florida and Texas politicans, who, in the words of the Foundation, want to "throw good money after bad"? |
328KF
Member Posts: 1388
From:
Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 01-29-2010 07:55 AM
I saw that release yesterday, and obviously it does not legitimimize the cancellation of Contellation or provide any good justification for it. This group is pushing to advance "NewSpace" which is great, but not at the expense of the real exploration hardware which NASA was well underway in building.These outsourced space transportation providers have a long way to go before NASA pays them to put their astronauts (sounds surreal, doesn't it?) on their rockets. Jumping up and down at the death of Ares is purely self-serving and prematurely speculative on their part. |
328KF
Member Posts: 1388
From:
Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 01-29-2010 08:02 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
On Monday, when the new policy is announced, this topic will be closed and a new one will begin. I hope we can all agree to use that fresh start to discuss the plan on its own merits (or lack thereof) and leave any extraneous, unimportant distractions behind.
So on Monday, when Ares, Orion, Altair, and maybe even Constellation no longer exist, will cS close this entire section or rename it? Sounds like everything we discuss might come under the "Commercial and Military Spaceflight" subject.For what it's worth, I don't think anything discussed here has been either extraneous or unimportant. |
GACspaceguy
Member Posts: 2954
From: Guyton, GA
Registered: Jan 2006
|
posted 01-29-2010 08:39 AM
quote:
Originally posted by issman1:
Besides, I don't hear or read about too many tears being shed from the vast majority of Americans on the demise of Constellation.
It has been my experience that the typical American Tax Payer has the expectation that the United States has and will always have a strong manned program, it is a given. I believe if the program would go away that there would be an, after the fact, outcry. It falls under the title "... you don't know what you have 'til it's gone...". |
Aztecdoug
Member Posts: 1405
From: Huntington Beach
Registered: Feb 2000
|
posted 01-29-2010 08:53 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Lunatiki:
I'm as right-wing as they come, and people keep asking me "would you want your taxes raised to get back to the Moon and then on to Mars?" I say YES without hesitation. I know how important it is.
The problem with this track is what we see in California. They take money away from schools, police, fire etc, and move the money to something silly, then push a new tax that is now required to backfill the money lost from schools, police, fire etc. It is a shell game. So raising taxes to fund a good thing usually means that somebody in a back room will come along and take it away for something silly. In the end the taxpayer pays more for less. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-29-2010 09:00 AM
quote:
Originally posted by 328KF:
So on Monday, when Ares, Orion, Altair, and maybe even Constellation no longer exist, will cS close this entire section or rename it?
Neither, at least not until NASA decides to change the name of its exploration program from Constellation to something else. |
issman1
Member Posts: 1106
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 01-29-2010 09:20 AM
Was there any Constellation flight hardware built, other than an assembly room and launch tower at KSC? Ares I-X was just a mish-mash of surplus SRBs with a dummy Orion capsule bolted on top. Some reports suggest over $3 billion was already spent. |
jimsz
Member Posts: 644
From:
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-29-2010 10:01 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
By your definition, all those who voted for President Kennedy were lied to because he never pledged to send Americans to the Moon during his campaign.
That's a ridiculous analogy unless Kennedy actually stated he would "never" send men to the moon. Obama said what he did to get the votes he was looking for. Did he lie? Probably. Is it anything different than any other politician? No. What's different is the social spending platform of this President and the reality that the money has to come from somewhere. Anyone who thinks you can spend as he is wanting to and be able to expand spending elsewhere is simply being naive. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-29-2010 10:13 AM
According to Keith Cowing at NASA Watch: Charlie Bolden and a small team have already (quietly) put the basic architecture in place. Think LEO, cis-lunar, near-Earth, and inner solar system utilization and exploration of space - all with a significant, paradigm-shifting emphasis on the use and participation of the private sector and (eventually) partnerships with other nations...After half a decade, NASA's human space flight program may have unfortunately "lost the Moon" -- but it may be about to gain the solar system - that is, if Congress wants it to happen. |
jimsz
Member Posts: 644
From:
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-29-2010 11:11 AM
Fox News has info on Monday's announcement. Obama has scrapped the moon project. When the president releases his budget on Monday, a White House official confirmed on Thursday, there will be a big hole where funding for NASA's Constellation program used to be. Constellation is the umbrella program that includes the Ares rocket -- the replacement for the aging space shuttles.NASA will receive an additional $5.9 billion over five years, some of which will be used to extend the life of the International Space Station to 2020. The official said it also will be used to entice companies to build private spacecraft to ferry astronauts to the space station after the space shuttle retires. Editor's note: Off-topic comment removed. |
Mercury7
Member Posts: 360
From: Greenville, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-29-2010 01:13 PM
I for one will never let anyone forget this day, Obama lost us the moon, I do not see many people here just moving on and embracing the new plan no matter what it is. |
bobzz
Member Posts: 100
From: Batavia, Illinois
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 01-29-2010 01:24 PM
As the Constellation dips below the horizon, the new focus will be earth observation in support of the "climate change" agenda. Politics is spaceflight's biggest catalyst and wet blanket all at the same time. The discussion of it's impact on spaceflight is as essential as the science which makes it possible. |
cjh5801
Member Posts: 189
From: Lacey
Registered: Jun 2009
|
posted 01-29-2010 01:33 PM
I think it's a mistake to say that we've "lost the moon." What we've lost is an empty promise to return to the moon that was never properly funded by the former president or the Congress in the first place.I'm not trying to change anyone's mind about Obama, but personally I won't hold a grudge against him if he does change NASA's direction for the foreseeable future. He didn't have the information he needed to set a firm direction for NASA during his campaign, and gave his thoughts about what he'd do based on the information he had at the time. Now that he's president, and has been fully briefed as to the sad situation NASA finds itself in, he's trying to set a future for the agency that he feels will be the most useful given the economic realities of today. I'm not fond of the "flexible path" recommended by the Augustine commission, but it does hold the promise for some sort of a future in space for the United States. And I'm enough of an internationalist that if the next person to set foot on the moon is Chinese, I'll be just as happy about it as if it were an American. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-29-2010 01:49 PM
It has been suggested I clarify my position regarding partisan (off-topic) comments. If you want to be critical of the President's plan for NASA, that's fine, be critical, but there is no need for quips or barbs aimed at the President himself or either party. Critique the plan, not the person or (any) party. (Rather than take this thread further off-topic, if you have questions regarding this policy, e-mail me.) |
mjanovec
Member Posts: 3811
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted 01-29-2010 02:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by cjh5801:
I think it's a mistake to say that we've "lost the moon." What we've lost is an empty promise to return to the moon that was never properly funded by the former president or the Congress in the first place.
I agree completely. A lofty goal without the necessary financial support is doomed to failure. Constellation wasn't really given a fighting chance from Day 1, with the limited budget it was given. quote:
Originally posted by cjh5801:
And I'm enough of an internationalist that if the next person to set foot on the moon is Chinese, I'll be just as happy about it as if it were an American.
I also think Chinese footprints on the moon would be great. As long as they continue to explore "for all mankind," it's an effort I can get behind. If nothing else, I think it will re-energize the US space program to see China on the moon. |
bobzz
Member Posts: 100
From: Batavia, Illinois
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 01-29-2010 03:47 PM
Gene Cernan was interviewed by telephone on FOX News. WOW!!! He was VERY unhappy about the turn of events. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-29-2010 04:07 PM
NASA release NASA Announces Innovation Initiatives With FY 2011 BudgetNASA Administrator Charles Bolden will brief reporters about the agency's fiscal year 2011 budget at 3 p.m. EST on Monday, Feb. 1. NASA Chief Financial Officer Beth Robinson will join Bolden. The news conference will be broadcast live on NASA Television and the agency's website. NASA budget and supporting information will be available at 12:30 p.m., Feb. 1, at this nasa.gov/budget. |
SpaceAholic
Member Posts: 5246
From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-29-2010 04:11 PM
Its pretty apparent none of the generations succeeding those that worked on America's first lunar program were worthy enough to inherit Apollo's legacy (else the Nation would have pressed on to colonization in the following decades). As noted by Stephen Hawkings, such colonization is obligatory if we are to survive as a species.One thing's for certain - the indefinite stagnation of manned space flight in LEO should compel all collectors to redouble their efforts to become committed custodians of US Space Heritage and in particular remnant material from M/G/A (programs which have assumed almost a "mythological status" for those born with no direct memories of the history). Treat each of our individual collections as annexes (to the national collection) and preserve these artifacts in the hopes that when the time is right again, they can be exploited to re-inspire a renaissance in a meaningful HSF program which builds on the gift of Apollo. |
328KF
Member Posts: 1388
From:
Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 01-29-2010 04:18 PM
quote:
Originally posted by bobzz:
Gene Cernan was interviewed by telephone on FOX News.
It's online now... |
Apollo Redux
Member Posts: 346
From: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Registered: Sep 2006
|
posted 01-29-2010 04:55 PM
Funny how history repeats itself.My father worked on the Avro Arrow - exceedingly cutting edge at the time. When the Prime Minister Diefenbaker canceled the program, there was already a line-up outside the gates with American aerospace representatives. They had contracts in hand for displaced engineers and technicians. Canada never recovered from that loss of expertise, and the U.S acquired within hours the brains that would help propel their aerospace (and NASA in particular) dominance for the next 50 years. I would not be surprised at all if America looses a good portion of it's aerospace brain-trust to China and India. Certainly America would be in no legal position to deprive these people of earning a living in their chosen field, if these two up and coming spacefaring nations were so inclined to make offers. |
bobzz
Member Posts: 100
From: Batavia, Illinois
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 01-29-2010 06:49 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Apollo Redux:
My father worked on the Avro Arrow - exceedingly cutting edge at the time.
What a great looking airplane!! Here's a video... |
Mercury7
Member Posts: 360
From: Greenville, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-29-2010 07:05 PM
quote:
Originally posted by bobzz:
Gene Cernan was interviewed by telephone on FOX News.
I was happy to see Gene Cernan do what we all should be doing..... |
413 is in
Member Posts: 690
From: Alexandria, VA USA
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 01-29-2010 10:38 PM
quote:
Originally posted by SpaceAholic:
...re-inspire a renaissance in a meaningful HSF program which builds on the gift of Apollo.
Well said SpaceAholic. Well said. |
cspg
Member Posts: 6347
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 01-30-2010 12:37 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Apollo Redux:
Canada never recovered from that loss of expertise, and the U.S acquired within hours the brains that would help propel their aerospace (and NASA in particular) dominance for the next 50 years.
That was my point in an earlier post.  quote:
I would not be surprised at all if America looses a good portion of it's aerospace brain-trust to China and India. Certainly America would be in no legal position to deprive these people of earning a living in their chosen field, if these two up and coming spacefaring nations were so inclined to make offers.
The Suhkoi T-50 5th generation fighter made its first flight (yeah, I know it looks like the F-22) but even though we're talking aeronautics here, Russia has some hardware flying. Let's see if astronautics will follow... in view of repeated announcements by the Russian Space Agency. |
cspg
Member Posts: 6347
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 01-30-2010 12:38 AM
quote:
Originally posted by bobzz:
What a great looking airplane!! Here's a video...
You know the plane is old, not necessarily because of its design but rather by the accompanying soundtrack! |
issman1
Member Posts: 1106
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 01-30-2010 06:35 AM
I fail to see why Constellation should be renamed. The Ares/Orion elements may no longer exist, but a heavy-lift vehicle is still a distinct possibility.I see no difference in the timelines at all regarding the gap. Whose to say another president won't direct NASA to use the new launcher as a baseline for human missions beyond LEO? Let's see how the assets of Space X and Orbital perform. Give them time. |
Delta7
Member Posts: 1733
From: Bluffton IN USA
Registered: Oct 2007
|
posted 01-30-2010 09:26 AM
If they do rename it, PHOENIX might be appropriate! |
SpaceAholic
Member Posts: 5246
From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-30-2010 09:39 AM
Project Consternation seems more appropriate. |
Mercury7
Member Posts: 360
From: Greenville, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2006
|
posted 01-30-2010 09:47 AM
Project Lost Moon seems appropriate to me. |
MrSpace86
Member Posts: 1618
From: Gardner, KS
Registered: Feb 2003
|
posted 01-30-2010 10:43 AM
OK, so apparently all this will get canceled. So what will happen with the Space Shuttle? Will it still be retired this year? Will it continue to fly until something comes along? What will come along?Sure, the private sector sounds exciting, but they don't the experience NASA or any government has. What will happen to the ISS? (Sorry, I have not read the whole report, I am just going off of what I have read from this topic). |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-30-2010 10:51 AM
The space shuttle is being retired after the STS-133 mission, currently scheduled to launch in September of this year. Under the new plan, U.S. participation in the International Space Station will be extended to at least 2020, as confirmed by the White House. NASA has already contracted with Roscomos to provide Soyuz and Progress support for U.S. astronauts to fly to the International Space Station. Under the new plan, it is also expected that the current Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program being developed for cargo delivery will be extended to also provide ISS crew taxi service. |
Topic Closed
advertisement