Keith’s note: I just got this from the “Alliance for Space Development – Seminary Road – Alexandria, Va 22311 – USA” today who proclaims: “You’re invited! To an announcement of the formation of a new coalition of organizations focused on space development – with special guests Rep. Dana Rohrabacher and Rep. Chaka Fattah. The National Space Society and the Space Frontier Foundation, along with 9 other space organizations, are joining together to create a new strategic alliance for space development and commerce.”
Yawn. Yet another space group – except there already are several space alliances/coalitions in place that seek to speak about space with one voice (Space Exploration Alliance, Coalition for Space Exploration, Commercial Spaceflight Federation, etc.). So … is this new thing an alliance of alliances or just another rearrangement of the deck chairs occupied by the usual suspects? The organizations that are excluded from this group are of equal importance to those that are included. Since this latest creation is not totally inclusive will there need to be a higher level of space group alliances that includes everyone who has been omitted (or who belong to rival alliances/coalitions)? Does this have anything to do with Rick Tumlinson’s self-indulgent Pioneering Space National Summit held this week in Washington? This is getting to be hopelessly bureaucratized?. But who cares. Space people just love to announce alliances and initiatives and movements etc.
The Alliance for Space Development email goes on to say:

“We will be unveiling the details on this new alliance, as well the details on our joint national legislative campaign to advance space policy in 2015. We are pleased that Congressmen Chaka Fattah and Congressman Dana Rohrabacher will join us, along with representatives of other space organizations, to explain why this is important to space development, commerce, and settlement, and how we will implement our legislative agenda. Please join us in Rayburn 2325 on Feb. 25th at 10 am for the press conference announcing the formation of this exciting new partnership. We will explain how the legislative agenda of our alliance will create a trillion-dollar space economy, improve national security, and establish America as the unequivocal leader in space far into the 21st Century.”
– Space Advocates Work Together By Not Working Together, earlier post
– Move Along. This Is Not The Space Policy You’re Looking For., earlier post
– Yet Another Plan For Outer Space, earlier post

Biologist, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA Space Biologist and Payload integrator, Editor of NASAWatch.com and Astrobiology.com, Lapsed climber, Explorer, Synaesthete, Former Challenger Center board member...

14 replies on “Alliance for Space Development: Yawn – Yet Another Space Group”

  1. Funny how the bureaucratic layers of space supporters seems to match the bureaucratic layers of space exploration.

    That said, speaking as one voice is a good thing.

    1. Except that there are several space alliances/coalitions that seek to speak about space with one voice – so is this thing an alliance of alliances?

      1. Hmmm, maybe the Federation of Allied Coalitions for the Exploration of Space (FACES)? I guess in the end we’ll run out of these new groups once we run out of synonyms.

  2. Where’s the money?

    Oh well, hopefully they’ll at least pay for some refreshments if you go and sit through a bunch of crap that will get ignored by next month anyways.

    1. From Piet Hein’s Grooks:

      Experts have
      their expert fun
      ex cathedra
      telling one
      just how nothing
      can be done.

    2. Brilliant point – “The Money” always starts with government dollars. Government dollars go to corporations that then go to a middle man and end up, sometimes, supporting events such as this.

      Sadly – your question of where’s the money – is still the most predominate question to be asked. That being said, we are much closer to a point where you will not need the taxpayer to fund the space program.

      1. I would amend that to say “not need only the taxpayer.” The government will always be needed for pure science, exploration, and longer-lead, riskier R&D. Commerce is taking off now and will soon take more of a lead role in the partnership. Once that happens, the taxpayers’ money will go a lot farther.

          1. Really bad examples. Pharmaceuticals depend hugely on government research. Oil still depends to a degree and depended a lot more fairly recently. Counter example – aviation. Plus remember, the US no longer has a physical frontier. Space development will have a physical frontier forever.

          2. Actually pharmaceuticals do NOT rely on a lot of government funding. That is why they are priced as they are so as to recoup the immense costs to the companies that develop these drugs.

          4. So what? The Pharmaceutical Industry is second only to the Semiconductor Industry in the percentage of spending that is on research and development. And for some context, why don’t you find the numbers showing that Pharma is somehow unusual in spending more on advertising than drug development?

          5. Moreover, the pharmaceutical industry does nearly all actual development of drugs from the finding of potential drug targets. Government support mostly consists of basic science, along with some drug target finding.

Comments are closed.