This is a little different post from usual. The American Association for the Advancement of Science asked me to join with Dr. John Grunsfeldt and Pat Duggins to discuss the future of NASA and the achievements of the space shuttle. The web based program aired live last Tuesday, but the AAAS has released a link and you can watch the hour long show at your leisure. Here is the link – enjoy!
Independence
This blog represents the personal opinions of Wayne Hale only. It does not represent the opinions of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or Special Aerospace Services, or their clients.Follow me on Twitter
- Glad to be back in the cool Colorado Rockies. Huntsville AL was a tad warm by comparison. Glad to see all my old MSFC friends! 1 day ago
- Really glad to have a successful rocket launch today to supply the ISS. Good news is especially welcome. Congratulations to the team! 5 days ago
- RT @expatminister: Do you accept the freedom & power God gives you to resist evil, injustice, & oppression in whatever forms they present t… 6 days ago
- John Adams quote above the White House Fireplace: "May none but honest and wise Men ever rule under this roof." 2 weeks ago
- I guess I've been with the scouts a long time because I really do believe that character matters. 2 weeks ago
Licensing
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.Top Posts
Meta
If anybody figures out how to watch this without Silverlight, please post!
Wayne
Can Soyuz be launched and dock/undock with ISS unmanned? If Yes then why not launch next Soyuz unmanned, stuffed with supplies instead of crew, take 3 crew off ISS and keep 3 crew on ISS until problem with the 3rd stage is fixed (which might only mean a few extra months for that crew of 3 to stay extra on ISS).
That is one of the options under discussion
There is some discussion with some tangible examples of how much more efficient a human explorer would be, compared to robotic efforts. That was news to me, but it makes perfect sense.
In the years leading up to Columbus’ journey to North America, they designed his ships. They did not know where they were going or what they would find. Maybe that is where we are today, with respect to Mars.
Columbus, to his dying day, professed the belief that he had sailed to India or the Orient. Never once did he say that he had discovered a new world. We should be able to do better than that.
Just managed the time to watch this. Excellent. A very good choice of voices.
Musings from watching this webcast. Back when the space station program was transformed from Alpha to ISS with the addition of the former Soviets, it seemed the primary reason was to create an International Welfare to keep Soviet technology from ‘leaking’ out of the former USSR. In hindsight, it seems provincial and wrong. Was the original inclusion based on fear or was there people that understood what Russia could add?
Is it wrong that we aren’t allowing China to participate? From a tech stand point, not political. Or both if you choose.
Also, about the budget. I have skimmed the Augustine report. My interpretation from news reports and now actually reading some of it, we cannot fund exploration without expanding NASA’s budget. That’s even if commercial space can deliver lower cost access to space. Is that a clear understanding of the report?
The tribute at the end brought tears to my eyes.
The ISS was very successful in keeping Russian space experts from helping other nations develop their military rockets, in my opinion. Inclusion of China in the ISS depends on the geopolitical goals of the US and the other ISS partners, not their technical ability. My opinion is they have not demonstrated that they can be trustworthy partners.
Norm Augustine stated in more than one open meeting that to have a space program the nation could be proud of, NASA needed about $3 billion more per year than it was getting. That did not occur and in fact significant cuts are being proposed.
That brings a tear to my eyes.
“That did not occur and in fact significant cuts are being proposed.
That brings a tear to my eyes.”
Me as well. And some amount og anger.
Wayne,
On the future of NASA – I’m sure you’ll have something to say soon about the newly announced “Space Launch System.” Two questions:
1) Will the thing actually fit out the doors of the current VAB? It always reminded me how big the Saturn V was when the STS stack looked relatively tiny when it rolled out of the building.
2) What is the batting average on announced NASA spacecraft actually making it into space? Reading your blogs, it seems like any new spacecraft is more likely to end up in the scrap yard than into space? Is the Space Launch System the next project destined to be killed by the next administration?
In all studies of new rockets, the one limitation has been the size of the VAB doors. At just over 400 feet tall, the rocket will fit . . . barely.
In my opinion, the SLS needs a clearly established mission, backed by the executive branch, to be successful. Does it have that?
Your comments that we should have taken an evolutionary approach to reusable launch systems were, in my opinion, right on target. Jay Penn’s recent study for Aerospace Corp. shows that human spaceflight with big ELVs is not sustainable, even for the government. DOD is going aggressively into RLV development, as is SpaceX. So why is NASA abandoning reusable launch, right at the moment when we have learned so much that could make a new generation of RLVs practical and safe?
NASA isn’t. Politicians are.