Keith’s 23 Mar note There were two Congressional hearings this week, one with House Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies on NASA’s FY 2013 budget – and the other by the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology’s Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics on the FY13 FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation budget. Both hearings made frequent and repeated mention of many aspects of commercial space issues. Yet there hasn’t been a peep out of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation about the issues raised.
While the CSF was ostensibly created to focus on commercial space, other organizations – and companies – were all rather quiet too. Given some of the borderline hostile things said this week (and previously in a Senate hearing) about funding for – and regulation of commercial space, one would think that the industry would be out there talking this up. Its not like there isn’t anyone out there to do this – indeed, Rep. Wolf made specifc note of the large number of lobbyists etc. that have been hired to promote/protect commercial space.
Keith’s update: Commercial space came up at yesterday’s hearings. Commercial Spaceflight Federation continues to be silent – just as they were last week when the topic was raised at two other hearings.
NASA administrator warns agency may have to cut ‘everything’ but top 3 priorities if no budget deal
“Shelby also criticized Bolden’s defense of the commercial space company SpaceX, which Shelby said, “was originally scheduled to complete three demonstration flights by September 2009 (but has) only completed one and many expect the date of their second launch to slip again soon, as it just did in February.”
I think they are waiting for the Falcon 9, Dragon launch to the ISS , April 30th. If a success, that will do the talking for them.
Yes, actually, that would make a rather clear and emphatic point.
Keith, I think 1) There’s no transparency on how decisions get made at CSF and 2) If they’re not “ready” through agreement by the membership on an issue, they’ll pass.
Success of SpaceX does not mean all members of CSF will be celebrating. The $180 million per flight guys, for example.
CSF used to be much more responsive and proactive. Now they are simply inert.
Or perhaps very busy. I know SpaceX, probably the most vocal proponent of commercial space, has the pedal to the metal–though perhaps Musk’s “Mars for $500,000” projection is their response. Meanwhile Blue Origin typically says as little as possible, and Orbital tends to take a softly-softly approach to Congress.
Beyond that, as you said, some of the statements were hostile; personally, I would want all my ducks in a row before saying something I might otherwise come to regret.
As compared to … when, exactly?
They had been rather blase-faire until they got the new President in. Commercial Crew funding and commercial crew safety as dictated by NASA seems to be the issues they want to “own” at the moment.
I think after that — specifically NASA budget reallocation — it’s a negative sum game between the old guard and the new guys.
The membership of CSF has not changed. The people who run CSF on a day to day basis has changed.
It could be that CSF has already shot all of the proactive arrows in their arsenal, and now they are limited to responding to events and using those events as opportunities to replay their presentations. Over the last little while there haven’t really been any events of note for them to respond to; lots of talking and recapping, but nothing new that they can hang their hat on. I think it’s become a very much wait and see game for everybody.
Also, as straight forward as the issues would seem to be, I’d be surprised if there was complete consensus within the CSF on every issue, so they may be testing the winds to see who comes out on top. If this is by chance true, it’s bad news for commercial space and the future of US space, so I hope I’m wrong. But it would be consistent with human nature
Steve
WHY IS AN “advocacy group” or non-profit foundation being criticized here?
At best it is a “secondary source” of potentially news-worthy information!
GO TO THE PRIMARY SOURCES – Some companies actually DOING “commercial space” – such as Scaled Composites, Virgin Galactic, X-COR Aerospace, then even The X-Prize Foundation — all in Southern California.
FURTHER = Perhaps interested scribes or researchers could start with a Smithsonian “Air – Space Magazine” recent edition on a Norwegian commercial spaceport planned above the Arctic Cricle, for instance?