![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Apparently no budget bump for NASA for work on Ares-1, and more money
shifted to commercial spaceflight options: http://www.spacenews.com/policy/1001...s-unclear.html ....as well as environmental satellites, education programs, and research and technology development. Pat |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 23:09:45 -0800, Pat Flannery
wrote: Apparently no budget bump for NASA for work on Ares-1, and more money shifted to commercial spaceflight options: http://www.spacenews.com/policy/1001...s-unclear.html ...as well as environmental satellites, education programs, and research and technology development. Well, we can't say we didn't see this coming. Then Senator Obama announced in 2007 that he would defer Constellation for five years to pay for his Education Initiative. And here is it. Okay, he's not officially deferring Constellation, but he's not requesting funds for it either, which amounts to the same thing. Ares I is dead (thankfully) but there will be little progress on Ares V-Lite without a significant budget increase, especially with the new priorities President Obama wants for NASA: more environmental satellites to report disturbing climate information that no one in Washington will do anything about. Yippee. Brian |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
So, the stick is dead, long rest the stick.
So does NASA push ahead with Orion/CEV, or put it on the shelf w/o something that can lanuch it? Why wouldn't NASA start engineering studies now to see if SpaceX Dragon can be adapted to their ISS servicing needs? Can the Dragon be mated to other EELVs, (Delta-V heavy, Atlas-V, DIRECTX/Jupiter) or will SpaceX insist on Falcon 9 exclusivity? Comments? Dave |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
David Spain wrote:
So does NASA push ahead with Orion/CEV, or put it on the shelf w/o something that can lanuch it? If they have any brains they kill it immediately so as to minimize the amount of money they've wasted on it. Why wouldn't NASA start engineering studies now to see if SpaceX Dragon can be adapted to their ISS servicing needs? Can the Dragon be mated to other EELVs, (Delta-V heavy, Atlas-V, DIRECTX/Jupiter) or will SpaceX insist on Falcon 9 exclusivity? Comments? After the Ares/Orion debacle, the last thing we need is to have them muddling around with the Dragon and screwing it up also. Just give SpaceX the specs on what it needs to do in a manned form and let them build it without interfering. If they want it on different booster, SpaceX can work that out themselves directly with ULA. Pat |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:22:28 -0800, Pat Flannery
wrote: David Spain wrote: So does NASA push ahead with Orion/CEV, or put it on the shelf w/o something that can lanuch it? If they have any brains they kill it immediately so as to minimize the amount of money they've wasted on it. Why? What's wrong with Orion? What was controversial about that design? It could still be mated to a "private rocket," or one of the contractors to decide to continue the work as a "private capsule." And the problem is .... what? I don't get it. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Michael Gallagher wrote:
Why? What's wrong with Orion? What was controversial about that design? It's unnecessarily large and heavy for a simple orbital passenger ferry mission, due to its design being optimized originally for the Moon mission. Pat |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:55:53 -0800, Pat Flannery
wrote: It's unnecessarily large and heavy for a simple orbital passenger ferry mission, due to its design being optimized originally for the Moon mission. So? Apollo was also used for Moon missions and orbital missions. There were plans to use Gemini on lunar missions, too. Again, what's wrong with it? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:17:06 -0500, David Spain
wrote: So, the stick is dead, long rest the stick. Five years later and God Only Knows how many billions wasted. Does anyone seriously doubt Delta IV-Heavy could have been manrated by now with that much time and money? So does NASA push ahead with Orion/CEV, or put it on the shelf w/o something that can lanuch it? EELV-Heavy could launch it. Why wouldn't NASA start engineering studies now to see if SpaceX Dragon can be adapted to their ISS servicing needs? Huh? Dragon is already designed to meet ISS servicing needs as part of CRS. You mean for manned flight? SpaceX doesn't need NASA's help (much) just some funding. The problem is, if we cancel Orion (which I think is likely, just not this year... Pres. Obama is hiding the cancellation of Constellation by killing it one piece at a time) and we decide to fund commercial options, Congress isn't just going to write a check to SpaceX. They'll demand a competition, which will be good for a year or two of delay, so we really won't get indigenous manned space again any sooner under Dragon than if we just go forward with Orion and launch it on EELV. Can the Dragon be mated to other EELVs, (Delta-V heavy, Atlas-V, DIRECTX/Jupiter) or will SpaceX insist on Falcon 9 exclusivity? Comments? Evidently Mr. Musk has entertained that idea, so it isn't inconceivable. Probably cheaper to buy it as a package with Falcon, though. Brian |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Brian Thorn wrote:
So, the stick is dead, long rest the stick. Five years later and God Only Knows how many billions wasted. Does anyone seriously doubt Delta IV-Heavy could have been manrated by now with that much time and money? That's the one I would use, and it certainly could have been man-rated by now. We man-rated the Saturn V after only two launches, only one of which worked right. And if NASA is going to start saying that there is safety to consider, remember they were the guys who came up with the concept of manned all-up testing with the first launch of the Shuttle. Pat |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Pat Flannery wrote:
Brian Thorn wrote: So, the stick is dead, long rest the stick. Five years later and God Only Knows how many billions wasted. Does anyone seriously doubt Delta IV-Heavy could have been manrated by now with that much time and money? That's the one I would use, and it certainly could have been man-rated by now. We man-rated the Saturn V after only two launches, only one of which worked right. And if NASA tried that today, or if s.s.* had been around then - we'd see a zillion posts/threads castigating NASA for doing so. And if NASA is going to start saying that there is safety to consider, remember they were the guys who came up with the concept of manned all-up testing with the first launch of the Shuttle. Thereby proving the point made above. D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/ -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Budget cut for NASA? | Pat Flannery | Policy | 32 | December 3rd 09 01:00 AM |
Budget cut for NASA? | Damien Valentine | History | 1 | November 21st 09 05:45 AM |
in my opinion (both) Ares-I and Ares-V could NEVER fly once! ...could NASA rockets win vs. privates on launch date and prices? | gaetanomarano | Policy | 0 | May 10th 07 11:11 PM |
New NASA budget | Dholmes | Policy | 12 | February 6th 04 07:46 PM |