…from Stephen Fleming. Goodby space program, hello space industry.
[Tuesday morning update]
Michael Belfiore, at Popular Mechanics:
I would argue that the new direction is not just the best option for NASA, but the only one. NASA already has no choice but to rely on the Russians for rides to the International Space Station after the shuttle retires this year. It’s an embarrassment. Obama’s budget will open the door to homegrown solutions for crew and cargo delivery to the space station, while providing much needed research funding for the development of next-gen technologies such as heavy-lift rockets and on-orbit refueling depots.
It’s a step that’s long overdue, though not one without peril. The private sector will have some very big shoes to fill, without the track record to prove that it’s up to the job. And can it succeed without succumbing to the kind of bloat that has eaten our defense budget alive? Working with the government tends to increase the amount of paperwork and oversight, along with the bureaucracy required to handle that extra workload, so it’s a legitimate concern. But, after all, the goal is to reduce the cost of reaching space. It has become clear to the right people, including many engineers and managers at NASA, that the traditional way of doing things hasn’t been working. NASA and the White House have every incentive to keep out of the way of the private contracts as much as possible.
We’ll see if that’s enough.
As of yesterday, ISS became a single point of failure for the entire US space program. An accidental fire, significant orbital debris hit, whatever, and NASA’s new direction is utterly kaput.
What if we have a fight with our ISS partners? Putin rebuffs us on Iran, for example. Then we cannot withdraw from ISS without scrapping all these new commercial ventures.
Unless we launch additional orbital destinations. Soon.
But that raises another question. What carrier rockets will we use to deploy additional orbital destinations?
PS — I am a huge supporter of getting additional orbital destinations up there, soon.
For the sake of the new Garver/Whitesides PoR, that needs to be in the budget, soon.
The (current, maybe any) White House does not really care as there is no political imperative
Congress will try to cover its jobs program
The regulators will demand to keep us safe at all costs
NASA…
The unmanned guys will continue to do good work within whatever budget they are allowed
The manned guys will continue churn out power point studies by the car load and pursue their perchant for making any real world activities into a hobby
Private space will continue in its need to make a long term profit. Making a profit does not include government contracts. Until they figure out how to do this they will go no where, but I will not sell them short.
All in all the future remains dicey but hopeful.
And, alas, the future probably will not come as fast as some us would like.
As of yesterday, ISS became a single point of failure for the entire US space program. An accidental fire, significant orbital debris hit, whatever, and NASA’s new direction is utterly kaput.
Oy, vey!
Bill, did you pay any attention to what was said yesterday? General Bolden talked about enabling thousands of people to live in Low Earth Orbit.
He did *not* say ISS was going to be the entire US space program. I think it’s obvious that he does not envision those thousands of people all living aboard ISS.
Edward, tell me what happens if in the next five years ISS encounters a problem we cannot fix. Orbital debris takes out a solar array for example.
Or if Putin decides to be profoundly uncooperative.
Where will all those new CCDev vehicles go?
Notice my suggested solution. NASA buys a free flyer Bigelow hab (or 2) and launches them sooner rather than later. Get that in the budget now.