Astronaut Group Endorses Commercial Spaceflight
FleaPlus writes "Buzz Aldrin and twelve other astronauts have published a joint endorsement of commercial human spaceflight, stating that 'while it's completely appropriate for NASA to continue developing systems and the new technologies necessary to take crews farther out into our solar system, [the astronauts] believe that the commercial sector is fully capable of safely handling the critical task of low-Earth-orbit human transportation.' They are confident that commercial systems (which NASA already relies on for launching multibillion-dollar science payloads) can provide a level of safety equal to the Russian Soyuz and higher than the Space Shuttle, while strengthening US economic competitiveness. They also support the expected endorsement of the White House's Augustine Commission regarding NASA's use of commercial spaceflight — the Commission's final report will be released today." And here's the Augustine report itself (PDF).
Is the link to the Augustine report expected to be a joke ? It appears to be a link to Windows 7 from here.
"the commercial sector is fully capable of safely handling the critical task of low-Earth-orbit human transportation"
Well it's not rocket science, is it?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This will not go over well in Huntsville. In fact, it already hasn't.
"Republican Senator Richard Shelby launched a preemptive strike on President Barack Obama's blue ribbon space panel ther day before its due to release its final report, calling the committee's findings "worthless." Shelby, a staunch defender of NASA's Marshal Space Flight Center In Huntsville, Alabama, said in a Senate floor speech that the committee failed to consider safety when it ranked various rocket options for the White House to consider. "Without an honest and thorough examination of the safety and reliability aspects of the various designs and options for manned space flight, the findings of this report are worthless," said Shelby."
Senator Shelby, obviously a noted rocket expert, contradicts former Shuttle astronauts Sally Ride and Leroy Chiao. Undoubtedly he astronaut safety at every step of the process with little regard to politics while they as former astronauts were completely unconcerned with it.
Speaking of unconcerned, apparently President Obama is exactly that in regards to NASA. New NASA Administrator Charles Bolden hopes to meet with Obama before end of year on agency future.
On top of all of that, it seems that Altair, the lunar lander from the Constellation project has been defunded.
In polls, a huge percent of the American people support the space program. It costs each of us around 7 cents a day. I think most people would be willing to pay that, to have a human space flight program.
Way off...bear with me here U.S. population appx 300,000,000 x Percentage of population who pay taxes 55 /day.
gives us 165,000,000 taxpayers
the NASA budget is $17,600,000,000 / yr, divided between those taxpayers yeilds roughly %106/yr, or roughly 30 cents
Did I miss something?
0 = 1 + e^(Alt something)
They don't want their rockets to go *BOOM* any more than NASA does. Perhaps even less so, since they may be financially liable.
Man, Buzz Aldrin will punch you in the face.
For some reason the link for the Augustine Report seems to be going to a download for Windows 7 (Huh?!?), so here's the actual link (mirror).
Here's the main report findings from the PDF:
Summary of Principal Findings
The Committee summarizes its principal findings below. Additional findings are included in the body of the report.
The right mission and the right size: NASA's budget should match its mission and goals. Further, NASA should be given the ability to shape its organization and infrastructure accordingly, while maintaining facilities deemed to be of national importance.
International partnerships: The U.S. can lead a bold new international effort in the human exploration of space. If international partners are actively engaged, including on the "critical path" to success, there could be substantial benefits to foreign relations and more overall resources could become available to the human spaceflight program.
Short-term Space Shuttle planning: The remaining Shuttle manifest should be flown in a safe and prudent manner without undue schedule pressure. This manifest will likely extend operation into the second quarter of FY 2011. It is important to budget for this likelihood.
The human-spaceflight gap: Under current conditions, the gap in U.S. ability to launch astronauts into space will stretch to at least seven years. The Committee did not identify any credible approach employing new capabilities that could shorten the gap to less than six years. The only way to significantly close the gap is to extend the life of the Shuttle Program.
Extending the International Space Station: The return on investment to both the United States and our international partners would be significantly enhanced by an extension of the life of the ISS. A decision not to extend its operation would significantly impair U.S. ability to develop and lead future international spaceflight partnerships.
Heavy lift: A heavy-lift launch capability to low-Earth orbit, combined with the ability to inject heavy payloads away from the Earth, is beneficial to exploration. It will also be useful to the national security space and scientific communities. The Committee reviewed: the Ares family of launchers; Shuttle-derived vehicles; and launchers derived from the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle family. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages, trading capability, life-cycle costs, maturity, operational complexity and the "way of doing business" within the program and NASA.
Commercial launch of crew to low-Earth orbit: Commercial services to deliver crew to low-Earth orbit are within reach. While this presents some risk, it could provide an earlier capability at lower initial and life-cycle costs than government could achieve. A new competition with adequate incentives to perform this service should be open to all U.S. aerospace companies. This would allow NASA to focus on more challenging roles, including human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit based on the continued development of the current or modified Orion spacecraft.
Technology development for exploration and commercial space: Investment in a well-designed and adequately funded space technology program is critical to enable progress in exploration. Exploration strategies can proceed more readily and economically if the requisite technology has been developed in advance. This investment will also benefit robotic exploration, the U.S. commercial space industry, the academic community and other U.S. government users.
Pathways to Mars: Mars is the ultimate destination for human exploration of the inner solar system; but it is not the best first destination. Visiting the "Moon First" and following the "Flexible Path" are both viable exploration strategies. The two are not necessarily mutual
...commercial spaceflight sector can provide a level of safety equal to that offered by the venerable Russian Soyuz system, which has flown safely for the last 38 years, and exceeding that of the Space Shuttle.
So the astronauts are saying that Soyuz is safer than the shuttle. Interesting.
Look at the bright side. If space debris becomes such a big problem someone is bound to start a company to try making money cleaning it. A kind of space janitor if you will.
Mada mada dane.
Oh if only I had mod points. Larson hit the nail on the head with this one. Chemical rockets really do have a law of diminishing returns when it comes to cost vs. payload size. If we don't start moving to smaller, mass production type launch capability America's space program is going to stagnate more so than it already has (40 year moon anniversary anyone?).
That being said, let's hope some of the decision makers make a point to read slashdot and comments like this one...
Also, three cheers for the commercial space programs. SpaceX, I think you should lead the industry in a group hug =)
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
My understanding is that debris in LEO isn't so much of an issue because it's orbit will decay relatively quickly and it will then burn up on reentry. It is also much easier to track.
If we get a major debris problem in GEO though then afaict that would be a huge problem.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
A kind of space janitor if you will.
This can only be a good thing. We're going to need all the space janitors we can get in case the Sariens attack.
And since space is basically a public area - that is, not owned by anyone - guess who's going to be paying that company? Monopoly rates with no requirements for results, of course.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Companies don't want their air and water polluted any more than anyone else. And yet they still pollute whenever they can get away with it. If someone can make a quick buck by externalising environmental costs (that's marketese for ignoring their responsibilities), they will. They will even pay for laws to better enable this externalisation.
Remember that many big CEOs aren't looking further than a few quarters into the future. If they can make a huge killing (pun intended) and then get the hell out with their bonuses and stock options and golden parachutes and whatever the hell else before the shit hits the fan, they will. The financial crisis is evidence of that. How many of the people responsible for that mess paid the price for their greed and incompetence? And how many of them are still getting huge salaries and bonuses, and government bailouts, and stock options, and the pick of high-paid directorships, and cushy jobs in QANGOes? They can get away with it, so they will do it, and those few of them in possession of a functioning conscience will dream up some twisted, Rayndian justification that allows them to sleep soundly at night.
How much do you think they care, or even acknowledge, that they fucked over millions of others, causing homelessness and poverty and misery and suicide?
Do you really think some big-shot new CEO couldn't waltz into the top job at Launch-U-Like and cut out all the Kessler-syndrome-costs (ignoring the objections of their engineers) and enjoy massive profits for 18 months, and then fuck off to screw up some other company in an unrelated industry, while LEO turns into a giant pinball-multiball arena? They won't care about the spacecraft falling out of the sky because they will be able to afford gold-plated, diamond-encrusted concrete umbrellas to hide beneath.
I'm all angry now. Sometimes I wish I was ignorant enough to not know or care about things I cannot change.