Senate Hearing on Commercial Space
Senate Hearing: Risks, Opportunities, and Oversight of Commercial Space
“The U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Science and Space will hold a hearing on the “Risks, Opportunities, and Oversight of Commercial Space.” This hearing will examine the commercial space industry, its role in the nation’s space program, and its contribution to U.S. global competitiveness.”
Prepared Statements
– William Gerstenmaier, NASA
– Pamela Melroy, FAA
– Gerald Dillingham, GAO
– Michael Gold. Bigelow Aerospace, LLC
– Michael Lopez-Alegria, CSF
I found it extremely surprising that Senator Hutchison seemed to say that ISS won’t be used at the end of 2020, and NASA will only have SLS/Orion. Particularly since she fought for it so much, and both Boozeman and Nelson seemed to imply they see a future for ISS beyond 2020.
I also find it remarkable that there is this emerging view that EFT-1 is the first flight of SLS.
After the lame duck session of this Congress Hutchinson is moot – she (thankfully) isn’t running for re-election.
When U.S. currency ceases to be the world currency standard, printing more money doesn’t work anymore, and the world monetary system becomes hybridized, the U.S. discretionary budget will go to hell in a handbasket. NASA mission end dates for ISS in 2020, 2016, or 2028 and the end points of other programs will all be moot.
I agree Aaron, KBH’s comment was catching. I think she may see writing on the wall that others don’t.
I watched this. I just can’t abide by Kay Hutchison’s left handed bashing. “Can we ensure that this president looks to the future, as opposed to…”
She opened and closed her questioning with those phrases.
Senator Nelson dutifully thanked her.
And what are the Orbital Sciences’ “Launch pad troubles/delays” that Nelson was referring to?
Christopher:
Orbital hired a sub-contractor to build their launch pad instead of building it themselves like Spacex does. Spacex uses the ‘vertical integration’ philosophy, where they try to have complete control over the entire process, design, manufacture, integration, support (launch pads) and (mission) control. Orbital tends to sub-contract hardware and only do the integration and control parts. They got bit in the butt by a bottleneck they couldn’t control.
tinker
Tinker, Noone- Good info, thanks as always.
Construction of Wallops Island pad has endured numerous delays. Engine tests have had setbacks. Current issues involve pad/services certification. Realize though that SpaceX has multiple year lead over Orbital. Orbital is executing faster and more deterministically, which is to be expected given a) they’re integrating outsource provided components from Russia, Ukraine, and Italy.
The benefit for flying from Wallops is like SpaceX from Texas – less competition for range, and the state pays for your pad facilities. The penalty is indeterminacy because asking for the state to do things isn’t the most certain way …
I feel sure that this coming right on the heals of announcing the NASA / FAA talks on commercial space is no coincidence. The Senate can’t have these upstarts getting out from under the Senate thumb!
Steve
Michael Gold’s testimony was by far the best, funniest, and most realistic.