Category Archives: Space

Philosophy, Political Commentary, Space, Technology and Society

“Space Cadet” Politics

8 Comments

Nader Elhefnawy has a sort-of interesting, but ultimately confused and confusing piece about the political inclinations of space activists over at The Space Review today.

I’ll have more to say about this later (it really needs a longer essay than Elhefnawy’s itself), but I’m too busy with a deadline to respond immediately. It’s confusing because he uses the terms “liberal” and “conservative” as though there is some common consensus on what these words mean, despite the fact that he shows examples where they are the opposite of conventional thinking (e.g., post-modernists as pre-modern “conservatives” and “nineteenth-century” (which I would call classical) liberals). Also, as I note in comments over there, there can hardly be more of an oxymoron (excluding the obvious ones like jumbo shrimp and congressional intelligence) than “left-libertarian.”

Also, I wonder if he is aware that it was H. G. Wells himself who coined the phrase “liberal fascism”?

There is also some (perhaps inadvertent, and again, confused) slander of the community as well. But go read for yourself, and I’ll try to tackle it later.

[Update in the afternoon]

At least with regard to the straw men and blatant misrepresentation of the views of the alternate space community, Clark Lindsey has responded:

The broad consensus certainly does not predict anything as ridiculous as “Earth-to-low orbit costs being slashed to $100 a pound by 2012”. The expectation is in fact that low transport costs will be achieved over time via incremental development of reusable systems of increasing robustness and reliability. The incremental approach keeps development costs down while robustness provides for low operations costs. The time scale for this process will depend on the parallel growth of markets like space tourism to pay for the hardware development and to drive flight rates higher.

Elhefnawy implies that all the “experts” hold to his views on these matters. However, I can easily point to people with decades of experience and solid records of accomplishment in the space industry who are now participating in NewSpace companies and who believe that large cuts in the cost of space access are achievable. There are, in fact, a number of examples of projects already, such as the Bigelow habitats, the Surrey Satellite GIOVE-A, the SS1, etc., that were accomplished for costs dramatically below what they would have been if carried out by a government agency or a conventional aerospace industry firm.

Apparently Professor Elhefnawy has a pretty restricted circle of “experts.” Perhaps he should attend Space Access in a couple weeks and broaden both his technical and political horizons.

Business, Economics, Political Commentary, Space

The Country Is In The Very Best Of Hands

3 Comments

Congressman on the space committee, meet the real space program:

At one point he raised a few eyebrows when he said America’s position in space depended “particularly on funding from the US Congress. Only governments can really afford space.” That was a rather odd comment given the number of people in the room who do business in, and make money from, space, without relying on the Congress for funding. Asked about that comment in the Q&A session that followed his speech, he amended his comments somewhat. “Fundamental research has to come out of the government and then our private sector will partner with us as a government to improve it and make it more ubiquitous, so to speak.”

Later in the Q&A came the topic that is almost inevitable in any discussion of commercial space policy in the US these days: export control, or ITAR. “Can you comment about your thought on ITAR and the ability for US companies to sell products overseas?” someone asked. Griffith had a blank look on his face. The questioner, and others in the audience, repeated and elaborated on the question: you know, ITAR, export control restrictions, that sort of thing? “Is that a ‘Buy America’?” he asked. “I’m not quite sure.”

Sigh…

Well, at least, given that he’s completely innocent of the issue, he might be amenable to being persuaded into a sensible position on it. I’d rather have someone who is educable than someone who is damned sure of the wrong answer.

Political Commentary, Space

The NASA Administrator Hold Up

5 Comments

Is Bill Nelson the problem? It wouldn’t surprise me. I was actually looking forward to Isakowitz, if the rumors were real. I hope that the White House tells Nelson to pound Playalinda Beach sand.

[Update early evening]

You know, reading the (typically NASA fanboy comments) there, it makes me wish even more for an administrator Steve.

I don’t even know if he wants the thankless job, but I wonder if there’s some way to get an on-line movement for Steve Isakowitz going?

Ideas are welcome in comments.

[Saturday morning update]

Jeff Foust has more over at Space Politics. So does Bobby Block over at the Orlando Sentinel.

Space

A Strange Conference

2 Comments

Over at Arocket, Randall Clague (of XCOR) notes how weird you have to be to stand out at Space Access:

A colleague went to pick up Ed Wright’s hat off the table, Ed intoned, “Objects at rest shall remain at rest.” XCOR got its first investment check after firing a rocket engine inside a crowded ballroom – at Space Access – with the written permission of the Scottsdale Fire Marshal. “Laser physicist and arm-waver extraordinaire” Jordin Kare has been known to sing of a sadistic designer and the machinists he tortures with his impossible designs. (One design was a hollow sphere, to be machined. One person wondered, “Would you need a six-dimensional lathe for that, or could you do it it in four?” Someone else answered, “You could do it in four. You only need one additional degree of freedom.”) ERPS used to give demonstrations of hydrogen peroxide decomposition – during their Space Access presentation – until they got an ashtray too hot and scorched the tablecloth.

It’s the best conference in the industry.

It’s coming up in only three weeks.

Economics, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Space, Space Education, Technology and Society

Making Space Relevant To The American People

13 Comments

In a discussion at NASA Watch about the president’s…interesting…statements on space policy, Andrew Tubbiolo has some ideas:

Launch Vehicle Extreme Makeover:
A team of crack yet touchy feely Engineers arrive on a bus, send the NASA team to Disney World, tear everything apart, and employ John Carmak and XCOR Aerospace to rebuild everything…..It’ll all look nice, but doesn’t really need to work. Employ the typical attendees of the Space Access Conference as the mindless mob cheering the action on.

Big Brother, Space Station Edition:
Pick the hottest babes from an international set of scientists, one grumpy Russian, a cut party animal fighter jock from the US Navy and lock them in an orbital space station for one month of intense competition. Make them execute complex, obscure, yet useless tasks that employ almost none of the skills they developed thus far in their lives. Every week someone is voted out the airlock.

The Gong Panel:
A panel of three PI’s from past obscure space missions completed at least a decade ago decide the fate of proposed programs as they are presented live on stage. The proposed project with the highest score wins funding. At any time during the presentation panel members are allowed to reject the proposal by banging a gong.

I think this would go a long way towards making space more relevant to the general public. Heck, it would make me pay more attention to it.

Don’t give PAO any ideas.

[Late morning update]

Here is the full story on the president’s remarks.

He said nothing about whether he wants to continue the Bush administration’s Constellation program, intended to send astronauts to the moon by 2020. The program’s Ares I rocket is behind schedule and over budget, leading to speculation that it will miss its targeted 2015 launch date and further reduce the skilled work force at KSC.

He was also silent about the fate of the $100billion international space station. Once the shuttle is retired, NASA will depend on Russian Soyuz spacecraft for access to the station.

I’ve been trying, ever since the inauguration, to figure out if the plan is to come up with a new direction for the agency, and then find an administrator to implement it, or to find a good administrator, and direct him (or her) to come up with the plan. Or, given a lot of the other Charlie Foxtrot that’s been going on in general, if there is no plan.

Political Commentary, Space

Courtney

5 Comments

I don’t think I’ve posted on this subject, but I was shocked to hear that Courtney Stadd was indicted recently for allegedly steering funds to a client while at NASA. Shocked because it seems entirely out of character, based on knowing him for almost three decades. In any event, there has been some discussion of it over at NASA Watch, where he has broken his (no doubt lawyer-encouraged) silence in comments:

There are no words to express my gratitude to (a) Keith Cowing for reminding his readers of the presumption of innocence (believe me, I will NEVER again second guess someone who declares from the courthouse steps his or her innocence!) and to (b) the many who have taken the time (the most precious gift we have to give one another) to express their heartfelt support for me and my family.

I guess the greatest compliment I have received since the indictment came out on Friday is that my server had a near nervous breakdown from the outpouring of support from extended family and friends. The other side has the unlimited resources of the US Government (I guess I should be grateful that the NASA Inspector General has yet to be supplied with Apache gun ships) but I want you all to know that I have felt empowered and fortified by your collective good wishes and prayers. Faith is a very powerful weapon. Empires have been known to crumple at its feet.

I would not wish this situation on my worst enemy. But I am bearing it with the strength, courage and honor that I was brought up to believe in. When I recently read about a 75-year old woman in Saudi Arabia who was sentenced to 40 lashes, and four months in prison, for mingling with two young men who reportedly brought her bread, I am reminded of the fortune of living in this great nation. To date, the prosecution has held all the cards – including how to shape and time the indictment, including the press release to drive the news cycle. (And, of course, a grand jury hears but one side of a case. Thus the cliche: a prosecutor can get a ham sandwich indicted for not having cheese.) As the wheels of US jurisprudence turn, the defense, thankfully, gets its turn at bat. Although I sleep with an absolutely clear conscience, I would not be human, of course, if anger did not try to interrupt my slumber from time to time. But I find great solace from these superb lines from A Man for All Seasons:

Sir Thomas More: “You threaten like a dockside bully.”
Oliver Cromwell: “How should I threaten?”
Sir More: “Like a Minister of State. With justice.
Cromwell: “Oh, justice is what you’re threatened with.”
More: “Then I am not threatened.”

My family and I feel grateful and most blessed by your support in the weeks and months to come.

Let us hope that justice is served. As Jim Muncy also notes in comments, it sounds like he’s being accused of recommending to the agency that a powerful appropriator’s earmark be honored, which isn’t corruption — it’s just common sense in the very ugly world of Congressional prerogatives and federal procurement.

Administrative, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Space, Technology and Society

Are We Serious About Space Policy?

2 Comments

Jeff Foust reports on a forum where that is the topic of discussion. The (unsurprising, or at least it should be to readers of this weblog) answer is, “no.”

Space, at least civil space, is not important, and has not been since the early 1960s. What is more dismaying, though, is that military space is not treated seriously, either, and that really should be considered important.

The panel also doesn’t think much of reviving the Space Council. I agree that the focal point should not be at OSTP, and that space does need a more serious advocate on the National Security Council.

I wonder why Jeff doesn’t quote anyone by name? Was he reporting under restrictions?

[Update in the afternoon]

Apparently, he was. He writes over at Space Politics:

Because of the ground rules of the discussion, none of the comments are attributed to any of the attendees.

I’d be curious to know at least who the attendees were, even if we can’t correlate specific statements with specific attendees. Is that a secret, too?

Also at The Space Review today, a good tutorial on how to tell a launch system from a ballistic missile.

I should note that one point not made here is that it’s actually easier to build a launch vehicle than an effective ballistic missile, if one defines “effective” as being able to hit a precise target, because the latter requires an entry vehicle. Getting into orbit, per se, does not require a precise injection, or heat shields, as long as the resulting trajectory doesn’t intercept the atmosphere.

Finally, Dwayne Day clears up (or at least attempts to clear up) media misconceptions about the Chinese space program.

[Mid-afternoon update]

Jeff provides the list of speakers, though it’s still not clear whether the quotes are from speakers or attendees.