Mar06
Brian Williams’ Disappointment
on March 6, 2013 at 7:52 amWhat did he mean by this?
I love this country. I love the American idea. I have profound disappointments in my country. I feel we ought to be in space … because it meant so much to us … technologically. It moved us along.”
We are “in space.” We have a space station, we have at least two, maybe three manned spacecraft in development, to fly in two or three years (not even counting NASA’s wasteful efforts that won’t fly with humans until the end of the decade at best), we just got an announcement of a serious plan to send two people to Mars within five years. What more does he want?
[Update a few minutes later]
Well, Brian Williams has 160,000 followers, but he’s never issued a single tweet.
IIRC, he also said our space program was dismantled. Been hearing this a lot lately and as William’s comment shows, it isn’t a left/right thing. What media do these people consume that would lead to this conclusion?
That’s not surprising. He came into adulthood during the Shuttle era. To him, the Shuttle was the space program — he has never known any other.
A lot of Americans are in the same boat. The loss of the Shuttle has created a void in their hearts of the American people, and they aren’t inspired by going back to space capsules.
Unfortunately, “new space” leaders like Jim Muncy and SFF are too tone-deaf to understand that. They just keep trying to tweak Apollo and make it work, while giving lip service to commercial space.
This might have just been written/read weirdly, but it sounds like you’re saying Muncy et al. are trying to recycle Apollo?I don’t think that is correct.
SFF has been trying to resurrect Apollo for decades. In the 90′s, they ran the “Return to the Moon” conference where keynote speakers like John Young showed pictures of Saturn V-class heavy lifters with Apollo-style capsules.
In 2004, the Bush Vision of Space Exploration was announced, and SFF jumped on the bandwagon. Those of us who questioned “the President’s Vision” were accused of being anti-GOP, anti-American, and maybe even pro-France. (Which is pretty ironic, considering the SFF leadership leans heavily toward the “D” column.)
Later, they turned against Mike Griffin and Ares I, which they said was unaffordable, saying NASA should immediately start work on Ares V instead. (NASA can’t afford Ares I, but it can afford on even bigger, more expensive rocket???)
2009 was the fifth anniversary of SpaceShip One, but SFF refused to even put out a press release on it. They were too busy planning their big party to celebrate the 40th Anniversary of Apollo 11. Apollo was “new space.” SpaceShip One wasn’t.
Last year at Space Access, Muncy presented the SFF’s latest scheme, called “Mind the Gap” (without ever explaining why the “gap” matters). He said NASA should not only support COTS and CCDEV but also build the Orion capsule and launch it on an EELV. (No explanation of why NASA couldn’t simply launch a Dragon or CST-100 capsule on EELV, assuming that is useful.) He also said NASA should cancel SLS but develop the “cheapest medium heavy lift vehicle” for exploration missions beyond Low Earth Orbit.
He did not explain what the “cheapest” vehicle looked like; he just said NASA should build it and we should support it. Another pig in a new space poke. (Remember, a few years ago, Ares I was supposed to be the “cheapest” option.)
The details of the vehicle have been tweaked over the years, but the goal and policy remains the same. NASA must return to the Moon (for reasons that are never quite clear).
At the same time, they blocked every attempt to get the SFF to come out in support of prizes, suborbital launch purchases, property rights, tax incentives for commercial space, regulatory reform, etc. Any time an Advocate brought the subject up, the leadership would jump down our throats and say it wasn’t politically correct to support any commercial space policy except COTS/CCDev.
Edward,
Yes, SFF allowed little variation from their “great vision” which is why I quit as an advocate. They weren’t interested in input, just money from the advocates to support their narrow vision.
Nor interested in working with anyone else. I remember asking Rick for assistance in promoting space commerce in Texas which was looking at funding three different spaceports and possibly a Texas Space Academy at the time (this was before Gov. Perry killed off the Texas Aerospace Commission) and Rick T. said it wasn’t worth their time, the SFF needed to focus on NASA…
SFF is a large part of why I don’t waste my time with space advocate groups anymore.
“The loss of the Shuttle has created a void in their hearts of the American people,”
I agree with that and it has created a void in my heart as well. The gap is a national embarrassment.
” and they aren’t inspired by going back to space capsules. ”
I agree with that too but it isn’t likely that most people even know that there is a CST-100 or a Dragon. Hopefully, interest and coverage will increase with Antares launches and Dreamchaser tests.
The phrase “space program” is the problem with his line of thinking. A space program is a government activity.
The private sector space projects don’t constitute a program but they offer much more potential. Statists deplore that because they want the government to get all the glory.
McGehee,
I agree. Its a space economy, or space industry, not a space program…
“The phrase “space program” is the problem with his line of thinking.”
That’s a very good point
Plus, how many of us have spouses that would say “Oh, he’s in the den watching one of his space programs, but I think it’s the old one with Spock so I’ll go get him.”
Wodun,
No, as long as NASA exists we have a space program and that is the problem.
Spain didn’t have a New World program, they had settlements in the New World started by adventurers seeking wealth. Since the King got a share they were looked at as a source of revenue, not an expense or a playground for scientists, although the knowledge learned as a side effect did drive the Scientific Revolution.
England didn’t have a New World program for Jamestown or New England, they had corporations with private charters to settle the land and generate profits for the investors, including the King.
Real progress on the road to the settlement of space will only be made when NASA is disassembled and we no longer have a space program.
We are “in space.”
Only if you’re using the royal “we” (as Williams apparently is).
I also wonder about this:
As a great man once said, I yield to no one.
My Google search shows it is an old Latin motto, Cedo nulli, but does not ascribe it to any specific individual.
I just hope that motto is not on his license plate.
Yes, I’m using it in the same sense that he is.
Solution: Send Brian Williams and Kim Kardashian to Mars…
Oh God.
And it would -be- the nightly news.
If we’re making a ‘reality show’ out of it, pick cuter people. And I can think of “weight savings” that would make for absolutely riveting television.
From what I read in the tabloids, maybe Mr. West could go for that . . .
Some people confuse the space program with manned space. They’re not the same thing. Manned space is but one rather expensive part of the nation’s space program. Actually, you can make the argument that we have more than one space program.
The US military operates several constellations of satellites providing many essential services:
- Position, Navigation & Timing (PNT) by GPS
- UHF communications by UFO and the successor, MUOS.
- Wideband communications by DSCS-III and the successor WGS.
- Resilient communications by Milstar and the successor AEHF.
- Weather info by DMSP.
- Missile warning info by DSP and the successor SBIRS.
- Add in a collection of intelligence satellites operated by the NRO.
On the civilian side, we have many scientific satellites ranging from the Hubble Space Telescope down to collections of Earth observation systems. There are also weather satellites, both in sun synchronous orbits and GEO.
These are all systems owned and operated by the US government. They make up the lion’s share of our space program but people seldom give them much thought until something they’ve come to depend on isn’t available any more.
Manned space is but one rather expensive part of the nation’s space program.
No, they are merely an overlapping sets. And if Nelson, Shelby, Milkulski, Wolf, etc. continue to get their way, they may become disjoint sets in a few years.
“What more does he want?”
He wants his old NASA back, the BIG government NASA, the one that is supposed to be for Muslim Outreach.