Category Archives: Space

More Whittington Nonsense

Where does he come up with this stuff?

Rohrabacher suggests that “several hundred million dollars” could be transferred from the SLS program to commercial crew. There are several problems with his proposal.

First, commercial crew space craft such as the SpaceX Dragon are not due to start carrying human passengers until 2015 at the earliest.

What does this mean? Where does he come up with that date, and why would they not be “due” to do it sooner? I am aware of no reason that Dragon couldn’t be flying people in a couple years, given sufficient investment. It could fly even sooner if one were willing to forgo an abort system.

The cargo version, depending on some test flights being flow successfully, would start flying next year. There is little evidence that a transfer of “several hundred million dollars” would advance the start dates of either version by as much as a day.

This is ridiculous. The request for Commercial Crew for 2012 (which starts in about a month) was $850M. The House reduced it to about $300M. Does Mark really imagine that this reduction will not impact the schedule? And that increasing it won’t accelerate it? On what basis?

On the other hand, siphoning off money from the underfunded SLS would pretty much cripple that project and add to the arguments of those who want it scrapped entirely. That may be the entire point of Rohrabacher’s proposal. However the proposal is so transparent that it is not likely to be met favorably by other members of Congress. Rohrabacher is in the strange position of being a man who has advocated free market capitalism demanding more government subsidies for a space craft whose sole purpose, at least thus far, is to service the government.

Other members of Congress don’t really give a damn, except the ones whose states and districts are affected. He continues to not understand the meaning of the word “subsidy,” and continues to turn a blind eye to the real subsidy — multi-billion cost-plus contracts for vehicles that will likely never fly.

[Update a few minutes later]

Michael Belfiore discusses the implications:

If all goes according to plan, another unmanned Dragon, also riding a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, will dock with the International Space Station this December. A strong commitment from SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and independent funding from the company’s satellite launch business puts Dragon on the fast track to manned flight within three years.

“Within three years” means 2014 by my math. And as I said, the long pole in the tent is the abort system, not life support. If there were an emergency, they could fly without the abort system much sooner (Ken Bowersox has said that someone could have flown last December with a beanbag chair and scuba tank). Of course, that would only happen if space were important.

[Friday evening update]

OK, I know I shouldn’t link his stupid blog (just as an aside, it’s hilarious that after all these years, the permalinks on his blog still have double tags), but as usual he doubles down on the stupidity and reading incomprehension:

Rand Simberg reacts. He doesn’t offer any evidence to refute the position that adding just a few hundred million is not going to advance the schedule of the commercial space vehicles becoming operation, besides throwing out words like “nonsense.”

Really? I’ll repeat again (it’s right up above), though he’ll ignore it again, rather than responding to it, because he has no response:

The request for Commercial Crew for 2012 (which starts in about a month) was $850M. The House reduced it to about $300M. Does Mark really imagine that this reduction will not impact the schedule? And that increasing it won’t accelerate it? On what basis?

He goes on:

Of course, one might concede the point that if one were to pour billions of dollars into the commercial crew program, which I think Rand is implying, one might get something flying in “a couple of years.”

Note that I wrote nothing about “pouring billions of dollars into the commercial crew program.” He may be inferring it, but as almost always, what he insanely infers is not what others imply.

Also, I think Rand has also admitted, though he will likely deny it, that funding projects like the Space Launch System more than currently contemplated would advance the advent of that launch system as well.

Again, I “admitted” nothing of the kind, though I would in fact concede that if we actually do “pour billions” (that is, tens of billions) into the SLS, it’s possible that its schedule might be moved up a year or so, perhaps only two or three years past the current date after which there is no guarantee that the ISS will even be flying. How he thinks this helps his case Jehovah only knows.

He’s A Cruel Man, But Fair

Jon Goff tweets: “Hubble scientists think they’ve discovered a fact sufficiently distant that KBH won’t use it as a justification for starting SLS *right now*.”

Earlier ones: “Seen on spacepolitics.com: KBH says that USGS data about the east-coast earthquake proves that we need to build SLS right now,” and “In related news, KBH says that events unfolding in Tripoli prove that NASA needs to get going on SLS right now…”

[Update a few minutes later]

For a little background, read this post at Space Politics.

Our Space Policy Chickens

…have come home to roost. I’ve started blogging at Open Market.

[Evening update]

Can I call them, or what?

I wrote:

It will be interesting to see how those in Congress who have been demanding that NASA build a heavy-lift vehicle for which there is no mission with insufficient funding, while starving Commercial Crew, will respond. Judging by history, it will be with non sequiturs, and bashing of American enterprise by supposed conservatives and Republicans, such as Senator Shelby of Alabama (the senator from NASA Marshall Space Flight Center), Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas (the senator from Johnson Space Center), and Orrin Hatch of Utah (the senator from ATK, manufacturer of the giant Shuttle solid boosters that the Congress insists be used in the new launcher), or Science Committee Chairman (from Johnson Space Center) Ralph Hall.

Emphases mine. And Senator Hutchison responds on cue:

This failure underscores the importance of successful development of our own National capabilities and at the same time demonstrates the risks with having limited options for ISS supply and crew rotation. As we have already seen with the multi-year delay with commercial providers of cargo to the space station, the country would greatly benefit from the timely implementation of the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 and development of the Space Launch System (SLS) as a back-up system.”

She also dispatches this from Planet Hutchison:

“Last Friday NASA received the independent cost assessment for the SLS that was requested by OMB. OMB is expected to be briefed on the results of this assessment tomorrow. This additional independent cost assessment confirms what NASA officials have known for months: The NASA approach to human space flight is sound, achievable, and can be initiated within our currently constrained fiscal limitations.

Let me translate: “The independent cost assessment confirms that NASA’s own estimates are overoptimistic, and there is no way in this fiscal universe that Congress is going to provide enough funds to sustain this over the long haul, regardless of its merit (which is feebly little), but I’ll be out of here next year, so what do I care?”

That Was Fast

Congressman Dana Rohranbacher’s office has issued a press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 24, 2011

Contact: Tara Setmayer
202-225-2415

Rohrabacher Statement on Implications of Russian Soyuz Launch Failure

Calls for Emergency Funding of U.S. Commercial Crew Systems to End Dependency on Russian Launch Vehicles

Washington, DC- Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) issued the following statement in reaction to today’s failure of the Russian Progress Soyuz cargo rocket:

“Today, Russia’s Soyuz launch vehicle failed to boost the Progress M-12M cargo ship into orbit to deliver needed supplies to the International Space Station. This failure should be a cause of grave concern, and a moment of reexamination of America’s space strategy,” said Rohrabacher.

“Today’s Russian rocket failure will interrupt ISS cargo deliveries, and could threaten crew transportation as well. NASA needs to conduct an investigation before another Soyuz spacecraft with new ISS crew members can be launched, and it is unknown how long such an investigation will take.”

“I hope this is a minor problem with a quick and simple fix,” said Rohrabacher. “But this episode underscores America’s need for reliable launch systems of its own to carry cargo and crew into space. The only way to achieve this goal is to place more emphasis on commercial cargo and crew systems currently being developed by American companies.

“We need to get on with the task of building affordable launch systems to meet our nation’s needs for access to low Earth orbit, instead of promoting grandiose concepts which keep us vulnerable in the short and medium terms. The most responsible course of action for the United States is to dramatically accelerate the commercial crew systems already under development.

“I am calling on General Bolden, the NASA Administrator, to propose an emergency transfer of funding from unobligated balances in other programs, including the Space Launch System, to NASA’s commercial crew initiative. Funding should be used to speed up the efforts of the four current industry partners to develop their systems and potentially expand the recent awards to include the best applicants for launch vehicle development.

“NASA could potentially transfer several hundred million dollars from this long term development concept, since the SLS project has not even started, to the more urgently needed systems that can launch astronauts to ISS, reliably and affordably. This transfer will boost the development of American controlled technology and greatly reduce our dependence on the Russians.”

Rep. Rohrabacher is a senior member of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

Tara Olivia Setmayer | Communications Director
Office of Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (CA-46)
2300 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
( 202.225.2415 (main)
tara.setmayer@mail.house.gov

Emphases in original. It hasn’t been put up on the office web site yet.

Expect the usual idiots to chime in and say that this is because SpaceX is in Rohrabacher’s district. Even though it’s in Maxine Waters’ district, and Rohrabacher’s district is mostly in another county.

It will be interesting to see the porkers’ response, particularly Chairman Hall’s.

[Update a while later]

Jeff Foust has a post up at Space Politics on this as well.

[Late evening update]

The press release is now at the congressional web site.