News: October 2013 Archives

Dream Chaser has rough landing in test flight, but firm hails 'successful day' for space plane

"Sierra Nevada is perhaps the underdog in the competition to win the NASA contract to haul astronauts to the international space station."

Keith's note: You just toss this out there, Joel Achenbach, and never provide a source or data to substantiate your statement. Why is SNC the "underdog"? Boeing has yet to fly their CST-100 in space. Why aren't they "underdogs" too? There's a pattern to your reporting.

Keith's note: Bernard Edwards, A NASA employee, is making a presentation "Overview of the Laser Communications Relay Demonstration Project" during the work day on a telecon co-sponsored by NASA - yet the agency won't publish the invitation online such that taxpayers can participate. But if you go to this webpage it states "Note: This is NOT a public telecon. You may share this link only with qualified participants." This is the link that can only be shared with "qualified" participants. Taxpayers are paying for this presentation, as such all taxpayers are quailfied, right? Are you "qualified"? Of course you are.

Here is how to dial into this stealth NASA telecon (but only if you are "qualified" !): Future In-Space Operations (FISO) Working Group Telecon Presentations Co Chairs: Harley Thronson Harley.A.Thronson@nasa.gov & Dan Lester dfl@astro.as.utexas.edu Wednesdays, 3pm EDT Dial in: 877 921 5751 Passcode: 623679

Oh yes, they still tell people to go to this website http://futureinspaceoperations.com/ which still features the article "Skin Lightening Options For Those On A Budget".

- NASA FISO Telecon Organizers Are Confused, earlier post
- Stealth Future In-Space Operations (FISO) Working Group Telecons, earlier post

NASA ROSES 2013 Amendments 23-27: new proposal due dates for MDAP, PMDAP, HGCR, OVWST, and OPR

"During the Government shutdown, the proposal due dates for three ROSES programs were set to TBD in order for Government proposers to have time to prepare their submissions. Now that the Government has resumed work, new due dates have been set for these programs. In addition, new proposal due dates have been set for two programs with original due dates in the near future. Updated due dates are as follows:"

NASA Research Opportunities in Fundamental Physics: Due Date Extended

"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has set a new due date for proposals submitted to the NASA Research Announcement (NRA) NNH13ZTT002N, entitled "Research Opportunities in Fundamental Physics."

NAI Cycle 7 CAN Amendment 1: Step-1 and Step-2 proposal due dates changed

"The NASA Astrobiology Institute (NAI) Cycle 7 Cooperative Agreement Notice (CAN) provides an opportunity for the submission of team-based proposals for membership in the NAI. The goal of CAN Cycle 7 is to maintain a multidisciplinary institute by selecting focused, interdisciplinary teams that complement without replicating the strengths of the continuing teams. The teams selected in Cycle 7 will replace the teams selected in Cycle 5, whose five-year Cooperative Agreements are expiring."

Lost in space -- and on Earth, David Ignatius, Washington post

"The world of 2013 is different: We don't even attempt manned space programs anymore. They are too expensive, and what's the point? Thank goodness for the plucky little Voyager I probe, which has just left the solar system, 36 years after it was launched, carrying sounds of Earth, including a baby crying, a whale's song and Chuck Berry's "Johnny B. Goode."

Keith's note: Nothing is more annoying than uninformed and pontificating op eds by know-it-alls prominently displayed on the editorial pages of a large national newspaper such as the Washington Post. This quote by David Ignatius really makes that point: "The world of 2013 is different: We don't even attempt manned space programs anymore. They are too expensive, and what's the point?"

It would seem that Ignatius is unaware of the fact that the International Space Station, built and maintained mostly with American funds, is in orbit - with 2 Americans on board - and that there are plans to extend its lifetime well into next decade. Nor is Ignatius apparently aware of the multiple commercial firms, spurred on by heavy NASA Investments, who are looking to provide new and less expensive ways to put more Americans into orbit.

Ignatius is also clearly oblivious to America's Orion program that is building a human-rated spacecraft that will be test launched next year or the plans already being formulated for Americans to travel to - and capture an asteroid and bring it back to near-Earth space. Of course there's also Dennis Tito's plan to send a human crew to Mars and back and Virgin Galactic, XCOR, and Blue Origin who seek to send an exponentially larger number of people into space for a similarly cheaper cost. Ignatius is oddly silent about these efforts as well.

If anything, people - from both government and the private sector - are more interested in going into space than at any time in the past. Not only is their space agency putting its money where citizens want it to be, but citizens are putting additional money down in terms of spaceflight deposits and propelling "Gravity" to the top of the box office for yet another week.

Doesn't the Washington Post have a research staff to fact check these op eds before they are published? Obviously not.

Keith's note: I just got a press release from the Alaska Aerospace Corportation (as did 53 others) with this legal disclaimer on it:

"The U.S. Export Control Laws regulate the export and re-export of technology originating in the United States. This includes the electronic transmission of information and software to foreign countries and to certain foreign nationals. Recipient agrees to abide by these laws and their regulations -- including the U.S. Department of Commerce Export Administration Regulations and the U.S. Department of State International Traffic in Arms Regulations -- and not to transfer, by electronic transmission or otherwise, any content derived from this email to either a foreign national or a foreign destination in violation of such laws."

Since no one has told me what might be ITAR sensitive in this email - or the citizenship/nationality of everyone who might read anything I might write/post, I guess that I cannot "transfer, by electronic transmission or otherwise, any content derived from this email to either a foreign national or a foreign destination in violation of such laws." Why do people put wording like this on press releases contained in emails which are, by their very nature, supposed to spur the republishing of their content as widely as possible by the news media? Goofy.


Loading

 



Monthly Archives

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries in the News category from October 2013.

News: September 2013 is the previous archive.

News: November 2013 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.