It looks like the “two-phase” approach to the Senate Launch System, which would have resulted in a rocket that flew only four times for billions per flight, is dead. The problem is, they still have to operate within the absurd design constraints imposed by the porkers on the Hill.
Category Archives: Space
An Update On The Loren Thompson Piece
I’ll probably try to update the post itself over there, but I’ll also note here that, since the publication of my piece yesterday, I have been reliably informed that the United Launch Alliance has no budget for this sort of thing, and if it did, it would spend it more effectively than on the sort of second-rate hackery put out by Mr. Thompson.
The Legacy Space Companies
Their desperation continues.
The Continuing Constellation Underfunding Myth
Over at Space Politics in comments, in response the moonwalker editorial yesterday, “Major Tom” once again lays out the numbers:
Continue reading The Continuing Constellation Underfunding Myth
A Fraudulent Charter
Over at Tea Party in Space, there is a lengthy analysis of the fraudulent and misleading numbers from Congressional staff for yesterday’s hearing.
Space Heroes
…stuck in the past. My thoughts on Wednesday’s USA Today piece by the Apollo astronauts, over at the Washington Examiner.
[Update a couple minutes later]
I see that the White House and NASA have responded as well, over at USA Today.
Our Space Program, Made In Russia
Doug Mohney over at Satellite Spotlight has noticed how much hardware that we rely on needs Russian engines.
The COTS Hearings
Based on the Twitter feed, it looks like the committee continue to be (as Michael Mealling tweets) asshats, but at least it was an opportunity for Gwynne to explain costs to them. There are lies, damned lies, and Congressional cost estimates (note in comments at the link “Edgar”‘s analysis — I wonder if that’s Edgar Zapata?). I’ll be curious to see Jeff Foust’s report later, though we probably won’t see it until Monday, at The Space Review.
[Update a few minutes later]
More on the cooked books from Keith Cowing. I’m guessing the culprit is Ken Monroe, head staffer.
Yet More Anniversary Thoughts
Robert Zimmerman has a post, with which I mostly agree. But since I seem to be unable to comment there, I would add a couple corrections.
Gagarin’s launch vehicle had reached escape velocity and orbited the earth.
No, it reached orbital velocity. If it had reached escape velocity, it would never have come back. Escape velocity is about 1.4 (root of two, to be exact) times local circular velocity.
Another point (besides the fact that the two Bushes aren’t Junior and Senior).
In all these declarations, it was assumed that the space vehicles and rockets to get into space would be designed and operated by the federal government.
That actually was not the case for the Vision for Space Exploration. If you go back and read the Aldridge report, it recommends commercial (and international) participation, and doesn’t require or expect NASA to develop any launch systems. It only directs it to build a “Crew Exploration Vehicle” (what eventually became Orion). All of the contractors for the Concept Exploration & Refinement trade studies considered existing commercial launchers, or larger versions of them, for the lunar architecture. No one considered anything resembling what became Ares, because it was universally recognized that a Shuttle-derived system would be unaffordable (not to mention that it was always a nutty idea). It was only when Mike Griffin replaced Sean O’Keefe and fired Craig Steidle that a Marshall-developed rocket became the baseline. In fact, other than eliminating the goal of moon first, the new NASA plans (or, at least, the 2011 budget submission) resemble the original VSE much more than Mike Griffin’s Constellation did.
More Anniversary Posts
Clark Lindsey has a link collection on today’s anniversary. I’ll have a blog post up at the Washington Examiner shortly.
[Update a while later]
Tom Jones has his thoughts, over at Popular Mechanics. I continue to scratch my head over worries like this:
Until roughly 2015, when American companies hope to produce a commercial rocket and spacecraft that can carry NASA’s crews safely and economically, astronauts will be renting rides on the Russian Soyuz vehicle (at $55 million per seat and climbing). The fact that presidents and congresses have seen this gap coming and failed to close it is a significant gamble, and not just because it’s unclear whether commercial spaceflight will be ready to deliver crews by the 2015 target. NASA has no backup: If the new space startups can’t make a profit on flying astronauts and other customers to orbit, they will hang up the out-of-business sign and walk away. We’d be forced to buy Russian seats indefinitely while starting an expensive crash program to regain access to the ISS.
So let me get this straight. He’s afraid that, multiple companies, having developed systems capable of getting people to ISS, won’t be able to make a profit, regardless of how much the government pays them? And when they can’t do so, they will “walk away”? And then what? Destroy the factories and hardware? Why wouldn’t they just sell it to someone else at fire-sale prices, who presumable could then make a profit? Why would we have to develop yet another system to reach the ISS when multiple ones already existed, and could simply be operated under new management? Does this make any sense at all?
[Early afternoon update]
My Washington Examiner piece is up now.