How Should The U.S. Respond to Chinese Space Success?
Space, the Missing Frontier, opinion, NY Times
“During the transition period after he defeated John McCain, Obama contemplated combining the best of the space programs at the Pentagon and NASA to compete with the rapidly accelerating Chinese space program. For whatever reasons, he declined to follow through on that plan when he became president. The president should dust off those plans. Given the fact that during the height of the war in Iraq, our government was spending nearly a billion dollars a day, I suspect the American people would support spending a month’s worth of that budget every year to ensure that our assets in space and our future on earth are more secure. But to support it, they first need to be convinced of its importance. So do our leaders.”
China’s space challenge to America, Opinion, Washington Times
“Beijing has used its space program, including its manned space efforts, to highlight its technological prowess and to build diplomatic bridges. But the program also serves to signal the PRC’s growing military capabilities, and to raise its stature as a great power. Compared to China, the United States enjoys a far wider array of space capabilities, but Washington seems to employ them less effectively. Here are some things the U.S. can do to get the most out of its space programs.”
– China’s Success, earlier post
– NASA Astronaut Andy Thomas is Still Bashing China On The Job, earlier post
– NASA Exploration Ideas – With Added China Bashing, earlier post
– Other China postings
The only meaningful response would be to set some sustainable, realistic, mission that could be used to inspire the next generation of engineers, scientists, and mathematicians: a permanent presence on the Moon. This would be a first step toward an outward push to the solar system, Mars the next step.
I continue to not understand why anyone would think that trying to set up a base on the Moon would be a good idea. From where do you plan to get your resources? endless expensive supply ships from Earth? How long do you suppose the Europeans would have lasted in North American if they had landed in Death Valley rather than in the lush forests of the east coast? A sustainable destination needs local resources that can be exploited. The Moon is barren, for all practical purposes. The cost of extracting what few water molecules there might be at the poles would be prohibitive. Only Mars makes sense.
I continue to not understand why anyone would think that Mars “makes sense”. Mars is a final destination, it is the end of a program, it will never be a “step”.
Look at the plans of Moon advocates. They see the Moon as a source of resources for other missions, not just supplying itself. They may be wrong, you may disagree wildly with them, but they are thinking in terms of increasing available resources in space, both for existing operations (in LEO/GEO) and to aid missions further BEO.
Hell, even the science goals from Moon advocates are outward looking. Farside or polar astronomy, not just geology about the Moon.
With Mars, you can’t even pretend you are supporting other missions. Mars is a giant bucket you pour resources into until somehow, one day, we hope, those resources achieve some kind of self-sufficiency. But even then, no matter how self-sufficient, they’ll never flow outward, they’ll never be used for anything else.
That means Mars is what you do with spare capacity, after you’ve increased the available in-space resources elsewhere, when you no longer need a mission to “make sense”. It is not, and must never trick us into thinking it is, a “next step”.
I’ll bite on that, Paul.
The Moon is barren. It has no atmosphere. It has only token quantities of water (if that). Attempting extract resources there will mean bringing absolutely everything with you, from the digging and processing equipment to basic life support inputs.
But that’s beside the point. Going to Mars is not about extracting resources. It’s about building a self-sustaining society. If you want resources, go get an asteroid. With no gravity well, it makes the most sense.
If you want a place to live, the Moon is a dead end. It’s proximity to Earth provides benefit only insofar as you have a government (or corporation) that is willing to expend an endless stream from resources to keep the thing going. Why in the world would I expend massive resources just to dig out more resources to build a ship to take me to Mars, one that I can more easily and cheaply build right on Earth? That doesn’t make economic sense.
As a place to live, Mars is far from the end of anything. It is merely the first easiest place available on which you can actually build a self-sustaining human settlement. It will by no means be the last.
I think the fundamental difference between ‘Moon first’ and ‘Mars first’ is the purpose of the trip. If you are looking to extract resources for quick re-sale or shipment, then the Moon might make sense (if you can find something there you can’t get more easily from an asteroid). If you are looking to build an actual human settlement that can sustain itself from locally-available resources, then Mars makes far more sense.
Europeans came to the Americas originally to extract resources to take back to Europe. They made one-off forays, brought a bit back, often lost many ships and crew. When Europeans came and established settlements, they ended of with far more.
Count me in the ‘settle first, extract second’ camp.
In order for a base or colony to be economically self sustaining, it has to be to able to produce products or provide services that justify the expense of setting up the base or the colony in the first place. Obviously, reducing unnecessary imports from the Earth’s enormous gravity is essential towards reducing cost.
Sustainability on the lunar surface for NASA, however, simply requires NASA to conduct its manned activities on the lunar surface within its normal manned space flight budget. President Obama inherited an $8.4 billion a year manned spaceflight budget from George Bush.
The moon has plentiful oxygen resources and substantial hydrogen resources in the form of ice at the lunar poles. Significant carbon and nitrogen resources might also be available at the lunar poles. So sustaining human life on the lunar surface might not be too difficult– if it turns out that the Moon’s 1/6 gravity is not inherently deleterious to human health.
The Moon’s economic value is in its proximity to Earth and in its low gravity well. If commercial space tourism does blossom then the Moon could be a primary destination for the super wealthy and space lotto winners. The export of lunar water to LEO could also contribute to the space tourism industry supplying water, air, and maybe even food for tourist visiting space hotels in low Earth orbit.
Supplying fuel from the Moon for reusable space tugs for transporting satellites from LEO to GEO or for transporting zombie satellites from GEO to Langrange point repair stations could also be an economically viable industry.
In the long run, if a lunar colony can utilize lunar resources to manufacture satellites then the Moon would completely dominate the multi-hundred billion dollar a year satellite industry. And if space solar power satellites ever become practical then lunar colonies could be part of a multi trillion dollar a year energy production industry.
Marcel F. Williams
I replied at length to this early yesterday, looks like it got eaten for some reason.
Basically, my point was that I’m not saying “Moon first, Mars second”, nor “Asteroid first, Mars second”, I’m saying, “everywhere in the entire solar system first, Mars last… and even then only if we have a lot of resources to throw away, and we’re feeling especially generous”.
I’m saying the cloud-tops of Venus before Mars. The terminator of Mercury before Mars. Pluto before Mars.
To adapt your analogy: If the solar system is America, Mars is the bottom of Lake Erie. I can see why someone would go there for research, hell I can see why someone would go for bragging rights, but it has nothing to do with colonising the rest of America, and it’s only something you do after you have enough spare resources elsewhere to “waste”.
Mars is most definitely not like an east coast colony. They could trade with each other and with Europe, they were useful in exploring and colonising further inland.
NASA could easily spend its entire budget for the next hundred years on a dedicated Mars settlement effort, and at the end of the century still have little more to show for it than an Antarctic-style research station. And not a single tool, not a single resource, except possible the in-space ships, could be used for settlement elsewhere.
Like Apollo, Manned Mars is a monument, not a stepping stone. Do it well and it makes you feel good, do it badly and it is a money sucking white elephant. But no matter how well you do it, no matter how successful, it’s still just a monument.
Oh, no! Please, no! We don’t want another NPOESS-style disaster now, do we? That will most assuredly happen if they combine DoD space programs with NASA….
Your comment is funny Colin. If they patterned the U.S. approach along the lines of the NPOESS debacle that would mean DoD / NASA would jointly pursue space, spend tens of billions, constantly reduce the number of system outputs and then after a nauseating number of Nunn McCurdy breaches they’d simply cancel the entire thing. Perhaps cancelling DoD and NASA along with it.
Cheng got it right but did not go far enough.
“Rely on American strengths”
America can do more than compete and could lead the world into making space a part of the economy by doing everything necessary to get private and commercial interests to invest in space. Whether it is tourism, or space utilization in low earth orbit, or resource utilization of the moon, asteroids and planets, those are reasons for getting capital invested in the future in a big way.
America did it with the transcontinental railroad, with automobile assembly lines, with the airlines and with computers and high-tech. Greed is good and we need to get private and commercial interests to invest.
The US government has several roles:
education-get kids, students, industry, and investors thinking about prospects for growth of an industry and reasons for their involvement;
R&D-invest in technology development in areas where industry will not because the ROI is not steep enough-simplified manufacturing methods, advanced propulsion, closed loop life support, etc;
commerce-do what it takes to encourage the growth of a new industry, including tax breaks, offering potential land and resource exclusive ‘deals’, and serving as a customer until the industry can survive on its own.
You saved me all that typing and said it better than I ever could. lol thanks!
Go New provider space lol
I would add I liked the authors race analogy. And if you are running a marathon with some one. You don’t sprint in the middle of the race, for you will surely lose. Instead you tuck in behind him, draft his back. Because even though you are foes by working together to fight the wind. You both run better times.
Go spaceX go!!
Your government is about to partner with you to make space flight cheaper.
Maybe a little help on flyback boosters maybe??
Wasn’t that Warren Von Braun’s bright idea?
Lol
Porky Pie Institute
China and Russia have arsenal system based space programs.
Think about what that means.
An arsenal system refines weapons systems components. The more chances to apply them, the more effective they are as weapons systems components. But only if they can be used as weapons.
What kind of weapon works well with non-storable propellants? Or heavy launch vehicles? Answer: none that are practical.
How often have the US and Russia used militarily heavy launch? Seldom. Significant failures (Russia) and successes (US, Russia).
Now – to bring any efficiencies of scale, you have to move volume of those components / launchers / etc. And when we mean volume, that means something like hundreds of launches (like with Soyuz R-7 ICBM derivatives).
It is really, really hard to do this. There’s a few than in ten years might succeed in doing this, already. But for the Chinese to follow this model, means to risk significantly when they are compelled to adopt a larger military posture.
What do you get for risking it? A different economic basis for access to space, and … a more effective arsenal system. Because all of the arsenal systems componentry – becomes outmoded due to reinvention.
That is why Cheng is right.
add:
The best thing for the US right now is outdoing Soyuz LV with a Falcon (or EELV) LV in reliability and rate, because cost/reuse will attend to itself.
How do you want your pork ???? Broiled? Boiled? Ribs on the barbie? How about stir fried in a wok???
How should we engage our friend/foe Steve??
Let me check my porky pie notes lol
Porky Pie Institute
Reply by constructing a hi-tech mining camp on the Moon.
This will show to the world that the USA is recovering its technological lead and is not afraid to do difficult things. This will also raise the morale within the United States. Jobs manufacturing the new mining and processing machines will be created in several states throughout the USA. Hopefully the companies will use the new technology in Earth based products. (Space rated equipment is normally too expensive for general use.)
Unfortunately this topic is more political than not. NASA necessarily does not have to be a part of this as the current administration has arrived at.
I get in daily arguments with NASA civil servants who resist simple, yet sustainable solutions, simply because that is not being done now. A lot of it stems from the constrained technical and financial specifications that is SLS.
You would think after decades of cancelled projects some NASA managers might have learned that, congress eventually decided it knew better. NASA needs an economic sustainable model to compete and withstand political bumps.
We may compete, but it will be likely with SpaceX, DoD with minimal support from NASA in this generation
I know that my understanding would greatly benefit from examples. I’d like more insight into exactly what happens at NASA (being a completely non-NASA, non-scientist but interested citizen-observer…)
China is simply doing what is logical in order for them to progress their manned and unmanned space program towards eventual technological superiority– without awakening the Sleeping Giant (America).
China perceives America as a nation that is in a gradual economic and social decline– due to the politically paralyzing cultural civil war between the political left and the right in addition to the insatiable greed of the US corporations which China has taken full advantage of since they discovered that American businesses really have no loyalty to the American people.
The ruling oligarchy in China is probably rather astonished at how truly prophetic Vladimir Ilyich Lenin really was when he said:
“The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them!”
China’s only fear is that America might finally wake up and start to heavily invest in itself again and in its people– with America, once again, putting all of its political and economic efforts towards technological and economic superiority in both the heavens and the Earth!
Marcel F. Williams
Folks:
Think. Why did folks ‘head West’ in the first place anyway? Could it possibly be that they were trying to get away from all the nattering debate, posturing and philosophizing just so they could get things done?
Now, like then, government is a liability to opening up a new frontier. The railways came later, once their were profitable destinations carved out by that first impatient wave. Also, don’t expect government help to assist folks who are clearly planning to take themselves out of said government’s jurisdiction.
China is planning on making ‘many’ Shenzhou capsules at a new plant they are building. I’m also pretty sure they will not allow a ‘gap’ between their present launcher and the new kerolox boosters they are designing. They are planning something. Who knows, maybe China will increase their crewed missions to the launch rate of the Gemini Program, when launches were only weeks, or even days, apart.
Whatever China does, it won’t have much to do with freedom IMHO. It will be a government program and therefore unimaginative.
As for America, those railroads got build because the country was still a republic back then. Not so much now.
Sorry, but we’re gonna have to rely on the dreamers, the inspired and the crazies to get this job done… just like it was back when.
tinker
justatinker wrote:
“Think. Why did folks ‘head West’ in the first place anyway? Could it possibly be that they were trying to get away from all the nattering debate, posturing and philosophizing just so they could get things done?”Because of the homestead act that allowed you to grab 160 acres of land and obtain all the mineral, forest, and water rights along with it for free? Do you think that had anything to do with it?Or do you think that finding gold at Sutter’s Mill, and silver in colorado had anything to do with it? Or George Armstrong Custer announcing the discovery of gold in the Black Hills, did that have something to do with it?Actually, the transcontinal railroad was pushed from the start by a couple of merchants wanting to supply the flood of prospectors. They could not get the government to jump in almost a decade. It was lincoln, I believe, who agreed to make that jump during the civil war.Actually, government is the enabler for opening up a frontier.
Donald:
My point exactly! I don’t count giving away land and mineral rights that aren’t theirs (yet) proper government initiative. But as you point out, once there was a clear profit to be made out West (as well as extended jurisdiction), the government was all over it.
tinker
And how do you set those crazies free??? Cheaper Space flight NOT some crazy coupling with DoD
Separation from DoD
Sorry to state the obvious
🙂
Nitrogen tetroxide
Just looked up super Draco
Tinker
Could Spacex build a second stage that was completely powered by super draco’s or would that not be practical!
I keep wanting to use a second stage that you could leave in space as a thruster for space vehicles.
Your real estate idea only more like a car idea lol why not launch a space car on every flight not just a house lol
Cars for the inner solar system highway lol
Just another crazy idea lol
Or could you design your two systems to use oxygen during launch then once in space turn a few valves and use your oxygen and kero tanks for nitrogen tetroxide and hydrazine later.
That would be wasting one Merlin 🙁
Using you wet lab dry lab ideas plus designing your inter-grated second stage/service module couldn’t you launch them undermanned on missions with plans to leave them in space. Couldn’t something like this be done to make a cheap interstage to L1
DTARS:
The whole Chinese Long March rocket family is hydrazine/Nitrogen tetroxide powered. Less thrust but the fuel is handled at ‘room temperature’ so it’s ‘easier’ to work with. It does take careful handling to use that toxic stuff but without the time constraints imposed by cryogenic fuel (H2 or methane) and/or oxidizer (LOX).
Even simpler would be to fill a Dragon’s cabin with extra Draco fuel tanks and make it into a simple robotic tug. Use it to reboost the ISS as a reusable propulsion module (This would work great for Bigelow too). No fuel transfer necessary, no system integration required (operate it over radio), Replace, reenter, refurbish, relaunch.
How much delta v (Δv) could one cram into a Dragon tanker?
tinker
Hey! dragon tugs was one of my original unoriginal ideas lol
🙂
So can you make this stuff from moon water?? I doubt it right?
So what is the fuel of choice to build moon transfer cars? Hydrazine first from earth then later convert over right??
So lots of R and D work for NASA in depots right?
DTARS:
I’m loath to use precious lunar water for something as unsustainable as reaction mass (rocket fuel). Solid fuel ‘dirt’ thrusters (powdered aluminum in some medium) will do nicely for lunar launches of cargo. Lots of it around and relatively easy to work with.
They can use those until they build a magnetic mass driver.
For crew lunar landings and launches, there’s nothing wrong with using hypergolic fuels. Worked for Apollo. Once Spacex masters reusable launch vehicles, fuel (and everything else), will be a lot less expensive to orbit.
tinker
I feel a similiar way about the Mars terraforming crock. Keep that ice safely underground so you can mine it.
First step, get rid of Bolden and Graver.
“Bring back the Griffinmonster!”
We need to get this Hare running again, or that Tortoise will surely win!
I can’t agree with the previous comment enough.I congratulate China on their success.They’ve accomplished in 4 years, what it took us and the soviet to do in several but they’re relying on our strengths to do so. We should do more than what we’re doing now and that’s practically nothing.
We’re now doing the mundane by remaining in LEO and not expanding our frontiers as we should. We’re not maintaining our leadership,influence in the world. We’ve become lazy and that’s a crime in itself.
The U.S. will remain snarled-up in its own political hair net for years, confused, with a country-club attitude, no sense of direction, an old-fogie unproductive social-entitlement mindset, make-work jobs devoid of accountability and performance, with flaccid conviction, at a loss for what has real purpose, lacking gritty leadership and done with no sense of urgency. You know, business as usual.
China knows this and is counting on at least ten more years of U.S. ineptness, a window of time they will use to leapfrog and assume World leadership. Read any blog. The U.S. is hosed up, everywhere and China and the rest of the World for that matter, see it. Unfettered by any U.S. competition and strength, China can progress confidently and calmly forward. No rush. The U.S. is that screwed up.
Possibly, around 2020 or 2025, as U.S. erosion continues, in whatever sort of linear decay, the U.S. will, no, may finally wake up. The alarm will be some event driven moment. You might think it would be the moment the Chinese step on the Moon or some similar milestone, but it might be something more fundamental and lasting. LIke when the U.S. moves from todya’s 23rd place to absolute last place in the World, technologically.
Then, as Winston Churchill’s quote goes: “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing – after they’ve tried everything else.” If there are any brains left in the U.S in 2025, there may be a slight chance of the U.S. regaining strength, say by 2040, if the U.S. hasn’t been completely sold off long before then.
I think you are being a little to optimistic! Lol
In his article, Douglas MacKinnon uses the term that commenters here are obviously thinking, but refrained from using – that term is “space race.” I would have thought that anyone who was paying attention would realize that the very last thing we want with China is a space race. China clearly has much greater financial and labor resources that it can bring to bear, but much more important is the fact that China sees space in multiple ways, but the primary aspect is its military potential. This desperately needs to be deflected, or at the very least, minimized in any way we can. And the only way that I can see for the US, or any other country, to offset this very real threat is to partner openly with China and change the situation into an economic matter that’s too lucrative for China to walk away from.
Dean Cheng, I think, clearly recognizes this because, in his article, Cheng says, “Cooperation [with China] needs to be mutually beneficial.” This is a very important point which anybody who dealt with the Japanese during their “coming out” in the 1970’s will recognize. Suddenly, the US was faced with an economic partner who always played hard ball and apologized to no one for it. We would have to be careful not to fall into the same trap with China by negotiating smartly, and strongly, from the outset.
The catch is, with every day that passes, the US’s ability to do that diminishes. Instead of paranoid fossils like Wolf, the US desperately needs someone with the initiative, and the smarts, to take the first steps in “partnering” with China while the situation is still somewhat fairly balanced. China’s advantage is growing quickly and they will soon be in a position to either dictate terms or simply outright say, we don‘t want to work with you. America’s blind insistence that it is and will always be the best and most powerful nation on Earth is going to make them a third world country long before another century has passed.
Democracy is based on the concept of elected officials representing their constituents, and those constituents making informed decisions about public matters. Unfortunately, both of those requirements have gone by the wayside – the people are not making “informed” decisions; in fact, on average, they’re not even paying attention to the issue that affect them; and the elected officials represent only themselves and those who keep them in power. This sad summary obviously doesn’t describe everybody in the US, but it’s more than widespread enough to make the whole idea of democracy irrelevant.
The need to partner with China, as an equal, is desperately real, and the window of opportunity is closing rapidly. Although the consequences of failing to do this will not be immediate, they are certainly severe enough that the names of those who allowed it to happen will be reviled for decades, perhaps centuries, as future generations of Americans find themselves living in poverty and misery. This is not about space; it’s about survival and maintaining an acceptable quality of life for Americans. It’s time that The People woke up to their imminent danger and demanded some sanity from their elected representatives. You have nothing to gain and everything to lose by ignoring this situation. This is all just my opinion, of course, but I think it will be hard to seriously dispute it by anyone who is willing look at the facts to be honest with themselves.
Steve
🙂
> It’s time that The People woke up to their imminent danger
It seems to me when presenting issues about declining US technology base to non-engineers/non-techies, I get this deer-in-the-headlights look and I feel like I’m talking into a vacuum. If they ask questions, it is the standard “why did Obama kill the space program?” and “can’t we just go back to the moon like in the 1960s, but NASA destroyed all the S-5 blue prints” and [arrg!] “NASA spent millions on space pens, Russians use pencils.” It seems to me Chinese don’t have this “baggage” to take along on their way to space.
However………. wild card is commercial space i.e. SpaceX that may cause a paradigm shift (gotta be a car analogy to this one).
Correction
Only card!
What’s the race again cheaper space flight to unleash our strength.
ELONS fly back booster is key
You guys realize that the Chinese are literally 50 years behind us in manned space accomplishments, right? A full half-century. These discussions are like pro football fans obsessing over a junior college team. We are not even in the same league. Let’s see where we both are in 20 years and revisit this topic…
Appealing, but scary. It’s probably easy to think that the Chinese have the same steps on the same ladder that took us to space. This isn’t the case at all.
They benefit mightily from our research and experience as well as that of the Russians–a formidable body of work indeed– and the Europeans, to a lesser extent. And I don’t mean in direct transfer, for example, of hardware, although that has happened.
Once everyone knows something can be done, the work becomes finding a better and cheaper way to do it. In this sense they stand on a much shorter ladder.
In short: don’t make the mistake of thinking that we have decades before facing a true challenge. The challenge is now.
Let’s be real simple about it the first time you take a lawn mower apart if you don’t have the right tools. It takes a while. Lets say an hour. The next time you do it. It takes 10 minutes!
Chinese benefits from our learning curve.
Plus don’t forget we went to the moon on antique technology. They don’t need to catch up with us technically to do great things in space. Just be smart!!!
Fact is they are building space stations and we can’t even safely Reproduce mercury.
They are kicking our dumb asses!
Yet We spend billions!!!!!!
Give me a porky pie break!
Much better. Thanks!
Msadesign I’m just a Joe too. Be ready to get an education lol
Msadesign
Part of what people talk about here is how to communicate the case for space to the public. Anyway for fun I’ll try to type for you what I have learned here the last few years if you want. Briefly lol. I’ll see if I can hit the important points without getting my ass in trouble lol. You can be the Joe citizen guinea pig.
Joe Q
That is what we keep telling ourselves, “we did that already”. Well, they are doing it and we cannot. How does that put them in the junior league?
Regretfully, I agree with Gerst’s philosophy of not having a destination because once you pick one, the anti-x will kill it and kill the program. So, while we prepare for the next, undefined, giant leap in 10 or more years, we have no significant capability.
I disagree. If this is Gerst’s attitude, it is why we have no goals, no plans, nothing to look forward to for ten years or longer. It is exactly this attitude that threatens to permanently kill the NASA program.
He is building things he does not know how he will use or whether they will be needed, and as likely as not they will be cancelled: Orion and SLS. In the meantime he is spending and potentially wasting a lot of money. In the meantime we have ISS elements that could be transformed into a cis-lunar vehicle capable of flying to higher orbits, serving as a systems testbed for future missions. That is something that could be done starting now based on the work, systems and people we have already invested in.
It is very easy to adopt an attitude of ‘better say nothing so no one can attack anything I have to say’. In that case you have already capitulated and the program is going no where.
Gerstemeir came from Ops, Is Ops, and will never be the one that Briam-_M spoke of in the other thread as a leader that can explain where we are going or how we are going to get there1
Then this is not leading and you
have to wonder how someone who will not or can not lead is in such a high position?
That leadership was a critical, absolutely crucial need five years ago. It may
now be too late.
No sir. You misunderstand this moment in time.
The transition to “commercial” means the economic development aspect of the game influences the scope of leadership. Can work differently than before.
Traditional leadership that started with Eisenhower / Kennedy was intentionally disrupted by the special interests to get at the lucrative “cost plus” opportunity the “space race” presented – a direct example of Eisenhower’s fears of the “military industrial complex”.
“Commercial” disrupts the prior disruption. At least temporarily. During this time, it’s possible for weak POTUS leadership to defer to medium strength “commercial” leaders to bypass the all too obvious lobbyist that hamfistedly force Congressional yokels into overreach and then back-off positions when they’re obviously inept.
So, like Theodore Demming predicted, the monkey wrenched dysfunctional offical structure is worked around by an ad hoc structure called “commercial”, which affords the only success, until the plague of lobbyists die off due to failure to compete.
You will know that has occurred when ATK gives up on Liberty.
You are right in that it is allowing newspace commercial the opportunity to move in and take a significant role, and if that happens then maybe the new way of doing business displaces the old way.
So what you are saying is that its a strategy on the part of top level NASA management to go through a significant pardigm shift, sacrifice the existing cost-plus projects, and come out the other side in five or ten years with all commercial support and reduced expense.
In the meantime, for five to ten years, the longer term direction remains unclear. We’ll regroup and decide how to proceed in 2023.
Yes we should have leadership.
No we won’t get leadership. Why?
Because we as a people resent being told what to do…
No, these discussions are like retired pro football players whining about the new kids, and how much better we were in our day, back when we weren’t fat, and old, and broken.
“We are not even in the same league.”
The Chinese have openly expressed their intent to assert
their rights to the moon, Those who are saying “don’t worry, be happy” are
deluding themselves and trying to do the same to others. This is a danger that
must be addressed now. Do not be lured to sleep. Lets keep our eye on the ball.
We must act now to protect the long term interests and security of the United
States. No race, you say – those perceptions will definitely differ from
reality soon enough – to our lasting regret.