This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
SLS and Orion

Frustration

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
December 5, 2014
Filed under ,

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

31 responses to “Frustration”

  1. TheBrett says:
    0
    0

    I assume people are saying that NASA is doing great because the Orion launch went well.

  2. Paul Newton says:
    0
    0

    I agree. Its great that after the billions of dollars and 9 years that it worked flawlessly, though I do not foresee the need for such a vehicle. I think Orion takes us in completely the wrong direction. Bolden even said it earlier, that we really ought to be in the business of pioneering; Orion is not a vehicle for pioneering, its only for exploring. Chris McKay said we ought to be planning to go to stay. Orion does not support this. Orion is strictly a vehicle for flags, footprints and bringing back some rocks. Apollo redux; Its the wrong plan. We need to get out of the Apollo mold.

    • Odyssey2020 says:
      0
      0

      I wish we were going to at least go plant some flags and get those rocks but we’re not even going to do that.

      And nowadays, do we really expect NASA to truly lauch humans into space with the horrendous budget problems the U.S. has..and will continue to have? If you’re being realistic the answer is a big fat NO.

      • JadedObs says:
        0
        0

        Horrendous budget problems? Have you used Fox as your news source? Have you noticed that the deficit is below historic averages as a percent of GDP, interest rates for T-Bills are low and the cost of health care has risen less than forecast for five years in a row? US job growth, stock markets, oil prices and GDP are all the best in the world – it’s not the 60’s but things are looking better all the time – “we can’t afford it” is just an pathetic excuse. Escape the Tea Party bubble and look at the facts!

        • dogstar29 says:
          0
          0

          Hey, I’d be glad to pay a little more in taxes to support spaceflight. Buy I’m in a pretty small minority. I think the politicization of America is part of the problem. It is difficult for both sides to work together on anything.

          • JadedObs says:
            0
            0

            Given how little NASA gets as a percent of the budget, who says we have to raise taxes by even the .4% needed to double it? And don’t even start by suggesting cutting welfare or foreign aid (see my Fox reference earlier). How about reducing prison expenditures by matching the incarceration rate of, say, Australia or Canada instead of exceeding that of China and Cuba? How about ending the stupid “war on drugs” that is becoming increasingly irrelevant as more states like Colorado and Washington choose to legalize and regulate Marijuana as a drug? How about requiring 20 year retired military service veterans to wait until they are 55 – not 38 – to begin collecting a lifetime inflation adjusted pension? We spend tons of money in lots of stupid places – we can advocate more money for space without seeking to tax more to do it.

          • dogstar29 says:
            0
            0

            I am entirely sympathetic, but having tried to raise money for everything from human spaceflight to medical research, I would suggest that every tax dollar is spoken for, and to get even one additional dollar you have to convince Congress to raise taxes or borrow money. I agree there are unneeded programs but if they are cut the taxpayers want the money back in tax cuts or used to reduce the debt. It doesn’t remain as a surplus, and if it does there are lots of other programs that will fight for it.

  3. dogstar29 says:
    0
    0

    We are trying to recreate what we remember of a glorious past that never actually existed.

    • yokohama2010 says:
      0
      0

      many of us were not around to see Apollo or were too young to understand what the astronauts were doing bouncing away on the moon.

      our space program has been low earth orbit flights to the ISS or orbits by the space shuttle.

      for us the closest we can get to the Apollo program is Apollo 13 with Tom Hanks…

  4. dogstar29 says:
    0
    0

    Keith you are trying to apply logic again. This is America we’re talking about. People want spaceflight to be extravagant and exciting. I have great difficulty persuading them that it should be affordable, commonplace and routine. You want excitement? Go to a movie.

    • DTARS says:
      0
      0

      I have never seen a rocket launch before but I am thinking about driving to the cape for the 16th. I know that there is less than a 50/50 chance that they will do it. But if they do I could say that I saw it in person. I was there at the beginning of the Reusable Space Age. A historic event that will change everything.

    • DTARS says:
      0
      0

      The American people are ignorant and that’s just how most at NASA like it. Congress provided the money. NASA put on the show. ULA and Lockheed did the stunts.

      And then some here have the nerve to call Musk a showman.

      • Michael Spencer says:
        0
        0

        You want ignorance? Guess who is in charge of space and nasa stuff in the House starting January? Senate, same.

        We live in a country that requires students carry >$50k in debt after graduation. It’s so laughable I am crying.

  5. DTARS says:
    0
    0

    Keith

    When I was ten, flew from New York to Florida to visit my great aunt that Lived in Daytona. She picked me up in Jackson. On the way we visited marine land. The dolphins were wonderful! They did tricks, walked on water, it was so cool. I loved all the things about the sea. I was soon to become a scuba diver.

    Some twenty years later on a trip to Florida with the kids, I went to the same Marine land. It hadn’t changed. This time I saw poor abused creatures kept in tiny cages being forced to do stupid stunts for our amusement. It was horrible! I couldn’t wait to get out of there and sorry i had spent my money to support such nonsense.

    That’s how I felt yesterday.

    Thanks for the part you have played in opening my eyes.

  6. rockofritters says:
    0
    0

    Keith I’m not sure why you’re surprised by that attitude. you’ve got a website largely devoted to providing a platform for observers interested in space to throw rocks and mud at “old space”. you have piles of comments on every story that don’t just imply they flat out state that “old space” has as it’s only objective screwing the taxpayer in one big giant orgy between ULA, Boeing, LM, AF and NASA. so why are you surprised that you’re seeing a bunch of guys who don’t even work in the space/launch business saying this was a wasted effort Musk would do so much more?

    a while back Musk mockingly dismissed his competitor as using engines from a barn from the 60’s. it was a valid point and he got a good laugh line out of it. now he looks even smarter.

    but what if ULA came along and tried to look just as small and said hey this guy that wants to compete with us has A. a mixed track record of success and B his main engine is such a low performing dog he has to design a vehicle to use 27 of them to compete with us (27? ha ha ha ha). And here’s the best part since that implies production rates of 10 or 12 engines a month he’s convinced his fans that re-usability is a key technology in space flight because he simply can’t get enough raw materials on time to produce enough of these low performing engines a month/year to fly the missions we fly flawlessly by the way.

    so nobody’s going to Mars. because NOBODY has a serious plan to do it. last time i looked even St. Elon isn’t able to print his own money…

    • DTARS says:
      0
      0

      NOBODY has a mars plan??? You must have missed the news yesterday 🙂

      • yokohama2010 says:
        0
        0

        I think he meant nobody has a “serious” Mars plan.
        The Orion flight is only one piece of the Mars jigsaw puzzle.

        It is known that no matter what spacecraft is used to shuttle astronauts to Mars there must be an interplanetary habitation craft.

        Easiest way to launch it is on an SLS…
        Like putting a big interplanetary Skylab with propulsion back up…

        • DTARS says:
          0
          0

          The easiest way is the cheapest. There is nothing cheap about SLS therefore it is not easier. It would be easier to launch it on falcon H’s and develop refueling systems that other rockets can use. NASA has to help us get into space cheaper. Not burn up giant throw away rockets pretending to explore.

          • yokohama2010 says:
            0
            0

            Easy does not equal cheap.
            Cheap usually indicates that corners have been cut and short cuts taken.
            We saw this with Mars Polar Lander.
            “Faster, Better, Cheaper” ended being equated with failure.
            Falcon-Heavy has not yet launched.
            Zubrin’s plan included the Ares V rocket (which has been replaced…)
            Either plan would probably use an Orion capsule to shuttle astronauts to the Mars Transit vehicle.

          • Michael Spencer says:
            0
            0

            “Cheap usually indicates that corners have been cut”: really? Mr. Musk will have a different view no doubt.

          • LPHartswick says:
            0
            0

            No doubt, but time will tell. Lets see what happens when all that has been said by him starts hitting the road. I wish him the best, but we will see…

        • DTARS says:
          0
          0

          Are you talking about Robert Zubrins mars direct or NASAs semi direct? Which module is Orion in them?

      • DTARS says:
        0
        0

        Yesterday we were told two lies by NASA The first being that NASA has Mars Plan

        The other lie

        We were told that Orion was a manned space capsule. What flew yesterday was not a manned space capsule. It was an empty shell with a heat shield no more a manned space capsule than cargo dragon on its first test flight.

    • LPHartswick says:
      0
      0

      All too true. As Tom Wolfe said, “no bucks, no Bucks Rodgers”.

      • objose says:
        0
        0

        Consider this alternative: No Buck Rodgers, no bucks. The video of this capusle launch overwhelmed the capacity of NASA to provide feed. Many people, taxpayers, young people are interested. There interest peaks when something new, something creative comes around. Politicians cannot ask taxpayers for money anymore with “plans.” So if you do not have any “Buck Rodgers” moments, you will not get any bucks. NASA had the imagination of the public in the 70’s and did not figure a marketing plan.

    • DTARS says:
      0
      0

      Mr. Fritters

      You are right!

      St. Elon is fore told in scripture.

      Look!!!

      http://spaceksc.blogspot.co

  7. JadedObs says:
    0
    0

    One of the biggest reasons NASA can’t get more support and more money is its supporters spend more time fighting among themselves than in fighting for more resources. If we can’t even agree that a successful Orion mission is good or whether to go to the Moon or Mars (or do ARM), then why should politicians fund space? Orion has been blessed by multiple votes in Congress and even this Administration now supports it (now that Garver’s gone); should we throw it away? Who in Congress will believe us the next time we say that now, we really have the “right” program?!

    • dogstar29 says:
      0
      0

      I absolutely agree that we should come to a consensus, but I suspect Congress is more likely to listen to lobbyists and wealthy contributors than to us.

      If someone can show the source of funds that would make it possible to fly a meaningful sequence of exploration missions to Mars with Orion, SLS and the additional resources that would be needed, I would be happy to support it. As far as I can tell, that money does not exist in any credible projection of NASA funding.

      Despite the lack of fanfare SpaceX is flying missions of equal or greater complexity with equal precision, and soon Boeing Commercial will be doing so as well. Both will fly frequently and at a small fraction of the cost.

  8. rockofritters says:
    0
    0

    buying RD180s when they did was A less costly and B seen as a national benefit because it would keep Russian engineers from going to former eastern block allies to help them with their missiles. Building a vehicle around 27 low performing engines isn’t going to get anybody to Mars or anywhere close to it. If ULA wanted to compete with merlin they’d just revive the titan I engines from 1958.and nobody went to mars on those either