Augustine Commission Summary Report Available

Both summary report and transmittal letter are available he

http://www.nasa.gov/offices/hsf/rela...ry_report.html

Haven't read through either yet, but wanted to get this out there.

Dave

Spaceref.com has it as well. I got the impression that they're giving POTUS
either a Moon first option or a flexible exploration option, reccommending
keeping ISS and leaving crew rotation/resupply to commercial providers, and
either going to an Ares V lite or a shuttle-derived lifter. I personally
prefer moon first, then going deeper (i.e. NEOs, Mars orbit/moon rondezvous,
the L-points,) before going for the big one: Mars itself. The committee did
say that neither a Moon first or a Flexible option is mutually exclusive,
and that if the latter is chosen, and requirements for a Mars mission
require lunar landings to use the Moon as a proving ground for Mars, then a
Human lunar return would be in the mid to late 2020s; a few years later than
originally planned, but it'd still happen. If you are going to Mars, lunar
missions to test spacesuits, crewed rovers, exploration gear, habitats,
would be necessary.
"David Spain" wrote in message
...

Both summary report and transmittal letter are available he

http://www.nasa.gov/offices/hsf/rela...ry_report.html

Haven't read through either yet, but wanted to get this out there.

Dave

Matt Wiser wrote:

Spaceref.com has it as well. I got the impression that they're giving POTUS
either a Moon first option or a flexible exploration option, reccommending
keeping ISS and leaving crew rotation/resupply to commercial providers, and
either going to an Ares V lite or a shuttle-derived lifter. I personally
prefer moon first, then going deeper (i.e. NEOs, Mars orbit/moon rondezvous,
the L-points,) before going for the big one: Mars itself. The committee did
say that neither a Moon first or a Flexible option is mutually exclusive,
and that if the latter is chosen, and requirements for a Mars mission
require lunar landings to use the Moon as a proving ground for Mars, then a
Human lunar return would be in the mid to late 2020s; a few years later than
originally planned, but it'd still happen. If you are going to Mars, lunar
missions to test spacesuits, crewed rovers, exploration gear, habitats,
would be necessary.

You are going to be sorely disappointed when in another five years you
are still bickering about these things that have no chance of happening.

"David Spain" wrote in message
...
Both summary report and transmittal letter are available he

http://www.nasa.gov/offices/hsf/rela...ry_report.html

Haven't read through either yet, but wanted to get this out there.

Dave

--
as already predicted a week ago in my latest article --
http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/052strangestory.html -- the Augustine
Commission Report has given ONLY "options" (EIGHT) but NO CLEAR
ANSWERS
--
so, there are ZERO CHANCES for the (much less expert about Space)
politics to decide the right things for NASA and the future of human
space exploration
--
the "core" of the Report substantially is that "with more money NASA
can do more" while "with less money NASA can do less"
--
it seems not to read a Report written by TEN "space experts" but only
something that is so OBVIOUS to be Lapalissade -- http://ow.ly/oA6K
--
paraphrasing the (287-212 B.C.) Archimedes of Syracuse's statement
"Give me a place to stand on, and I will move the Earth." -- http://ow.ly/oA6W
-- the Augustine Commission (after THREE MONTHS of "hard work"...) is
only able to say "Give enough money to NASA, and NASA will move beyond
Earth."
--
however, the "Ares-5 Lite" isn't new as "better strategy" since I've
suggested to adopt it (in place of the Ares-1 and Ares-5) 3.5 YEARS
ago (in May, 12 2006) and FOUR months BEFORE the RESIZED-Ares-5-called-
Direct, in this article: http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/005_SLVnow.html
(that, in the same days, I've posted on several space forum and blogs)
--

just think of what could of been done with the $ WASTED on taking out
saddam and the iraq war

i dont believe manned space will get the bucks to do
anything..........

but go round and round

bob haller wrote:
just think of what could of been done with the $ WASTED on taking out
saddam and the iraq war

i dont believe manned space will get the bucks to do
anything..........

but go round and round

You mean like the moon goes around the Earth, the Earth goes around the
sun, and the sun goes around the galaxy? Good luck with going straight.

gaetanomarano wrote:

-- snip

Yes, Geronimo, you were first.

Space historians of the future will see that clearly documented here.

Matt Wiser wrote:If you are going to Mars, lunar
missions to test spacesuits, crewed rovers, exploration gear, habitats,
would be necessary.

Not necessarily, not only did we develop the Apollo suits and rovers
here on Earth, but conditions on Mars, which has a thin atmosphere and
higher surface gravity than the Moon, may make lunar tests
nonrepresentational.

Pat

On Sep 8, 10:53*pm, kT wrote:
Matt Wiser wrote:
Spaceref.com has it as well. I got the impression that they're giving POTUS
either a Moon first option or a flexible exploration option, reccommending
keeping ISS and leaving crew rotation/resupply to commercial providers, and
either going to an Ares V lite or a shuttle-derived lifter. I personally
prefer moon first, then going deeper (i.e. NEOs, Mars orbit/moon rondezvous,
the L-points,) before going for the big one: Mars itself. The committee did
say that neither a Moon first or a Flexible option is mutually exclusive,
and that if the latter is chosen, and requirements for a Mars mission
require lunar landings to use the Moon as a proving ground for Mars, then a
Human lunar return would be in the mid to late 2020s; a few years later than
originally planned, but it'd still happen. If you are going to Mars, lunar
missions to test spacesuits, crewed rovers, exploration gear, habitats,
would be necessary.

You are going to be sorely disappointed when in another five years you
are still bickering about these things that have no chance of happening.

"David Spain" wrote in message
...
Both summary report and transmittal letter are available he

http://www.nasa.gov/offices/hsf/rela...ry_report.html

Haven't read through either yet, but wanted to get this out there.

Dave

Folks that are public funded are never sorry about anything, as long
as their jobs, benefits and retirement stays untouched and having
those COL applied each year or whenever necessary.

~ BG

On Sep 9, 5:01*am, gaetanomarano wrote:
--
as already predicted a week ago in my latest article --http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/052strangestory.html-- the Augustine
Commission Report has given ONLY "options" (EIGHT) but NO CLEAR
ANSWERS
--
so, there are ZERO CHANCES for the (much less expert about Space)
politics to decide the right things for NASA and the future of human
space exploration
--
the "core" of the Report substantially is that "with more money NASA
can do more" while "with less money NASA can do less"
--
it seems not to read a Report written by TEN "space experts" but only
something that is so OBVIOUS to be Lapalissade --http://ow.ly/oA6K
--
paraphrasing the (287-212 B.C.) Archimedes of Syracuse's statement
"Give me a place to stand on, and I will move the Earth." --http://ow.ly/oA6W
-- the Augustine Commission (after THREE MONTHS of "hard work"...) is
only able to say "Give enough money to NASA, and NASA will move beyond
Earth."
--
however, the "Ares-5 Lite" isn't new as "better strategy" since I've
suggested to adopt it (in place of the Ares-1 and Ares-5) 3.5 YEARS
ago (in May, 12 2006) and FOUR months BEFORE the RESIZED-Ares-5-called-
Direct, in this article:http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/005_SLVnow.html
(that, in the same days, I've posted on several space forum and blogs)
--

Obviously your expertise and even that of William Mook plus dozens of
others are not required when the only viable plan of action by our
public funded DARPA and NASA has little to nothing to do with honest
space explorations or even commercial LEO utilization, not to mention
their inability to accomplish anything productive with our own
physically dark moon. They can't even get Selene L1 (Earth-moon L1)
properly utilized, or for that matter the deployment of our spendy OCO
mission seems beyond their capability.

For what has been wasted on manned LEO missions and efforts could have
instead accomplished dozens of robotic landings plus a good number of
extremely impressive space observatories that would make even the
recently improved Hubble look like a Kodak Instamatic throw-away.
Having the sorts robotics as fully interactive missions that could
each be ongoing for a decade or more is apparently asking too much,
and their past decade of ignoring what the planet Venus has to offer
has been nothing short of home grown treason.

Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”