Another threat to the House of Cards

[Me2]

This one is more is more real.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/new...buy-soyuz.html

"Campaign sources have said that Obama space policy advisers were looking at the possibility of tapping commercial aerospace companies to see if they might be able to use existing rockets to develop a fast, safe and inexpensive rocket that could more quickly replace the shuttle to get astronauts to the space station while NASA continues to work on a larger moon rocket."

It is wide spread outside of NASA and the NASA pumpers that know that Ares is not the answer

[Rick]

This one is more is more real.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/new...buy-soyuz.html

"Campaign sources have said that Obama space policy advisers were looking at the possibility of tapping commercial aerospace companies to see if they might be able to use existing rockets to develop a fast, safe and inexpensive rocket that could more quickly replace the shuttle to get astronauts to the space station while NASA continues to work on a larger moon rocket."

It is wide spread outside of NASA and the NASA pumpers that know that Ares is not the answer

Me2,
Its apparant that Robert Block is your friend, so to speak!

The problem with this, is that Obama hasn't won anything, he flips flops so much concerning space policy that he's like a fish out of water. In a nutshell, I personally am really confused as to what he would do IF he was elected President in regard to the VSE.

Oh, and this article is 'more real'? Great line.

[Rick]

Me2, no reply? Why do you skip some posts that are responded to?

[Patricia Phillips]

IMHO, Obama has flip-flopped so many times on space that it's no longer just a simple flip flop. It's more like the head whirling before the split pea soup starts flying!

I truly think he's just racing to play catch-up to McCain and to make it seem as though he really has a clue about space.

Yea, right. The commercial launch sector has been so successful launching manned flights to this point.

[Me2]

The commercial launch sector has been so successful launching manned flights to this point.

The ULA is commercial contractor and who heritage companies, General Dynamics and Martin Marietta launched Altlas and Titan for Mercury and Gemini.

[jdhouse4]

Yes, so many NASA outsiders know how to do NASA's job better than NASA, but the problem is that their rockets...keep...blowing...up! I mean, it looks almost retro, like living in the Cape in the 50's and early 60's, when NASA was testing the Atlas, but it's instead the Falcon spreading its payload all over the Atlantic.

I support Commercial Space and its problems are normal growing pains. But let us at least not be disengenuous and admit that "New Space" hasn't put anything into Space and that it is more likely that Ares V, never mind Ares I, will be flying before an Ares I payload comparable booster from a New Space firm is flying.

As has been discussed here in detail, Delta IV Heavy as is will not do the trick to get Orion to ISS, that F!=mg. And as for manned spacecraft, there's no alternative to Orion that will be ready, even by the most dreamy of estimates, before mid-to-late-decade. I'm sure a new Administration and NASA will direct that study be done about uprating the Delta IV Heavy EELV, but my guess is that the result will be that all the time and money to uprate her will still not get Orion in orbit but a few months ahead of Ares I.

These views do not necessarily reflect those within the McCain Campaign.

[Me2]

I support Commercial Space and its problems are normal growing pains. But let us at least not be disengenuous and admit that "New Space" hasn't put anything into Space and that it is more likely that Ares V, never mind Ares I, will be flying before an Ares I payload comparable booster from a New Space firm is flying.

n.

So you think NASA's COTS program is a waste of money? Or the ISS CRS contract a folly? These will have a manned capable spacecraft going to the ISS in 2010-2012 long before Ares I is ready.

NASA is banking on these to sustain the ISS. Are you saying NASA is making a bad decision by relying on COTS/CRS?

Also the point isn't a "Ares I payload comparable booster", it is a launch system capable of getting a manned spacecraft to the ISS

[J.McDonald]

Yes, so many NASA outsiders know how to do NASA's job better than NASA, but the problem is that their rockets...keep...blowing...up! I mean, it looks almost retro, like living in the Cape in the 50's and early 60's, when NASA was testing the Atlas, but it's instead the Falcon spreading its payload all over the Atlantic.

I support Commercial Space and its problems are normal growing pains. But let us at least not be disengenuous and admit that "New Space" hasn't put anything into Space and that it is more likely that Ares V, never mind Ares I, will be flying before an Ares I payload comparable booster from a New Space firm is flying.

As has been discussed here in detail, Delta IV Heavy as is will not do the trick to get Orion to ISS, that F!=mg. And as for manned spacecraft, there's no alternative to Orion that will be ready, even by the most dreamy of estimates, before mid-to-late-decade. I'm sure a new Administration and NASA will direct that study be done about uprating the Delta IV Heavy EELV, but my guess is that the result will be that all the time and money to uprate her will still not get Orion in orbit but a few months ahead of Ares I.

These views do not necessarily reflect those within the McCain Campaign.

Comparing Falcon to EELV is silly. EELV is a proven design with a very good record.
Falcon, on the other hand, is a new design, which on paper promised very high reliability. In that regard it is more comparable to Ares-I. Yet it has failed to deliver- so far. I wish Elon the best of luck, of course, but this is a tricky business.

Secondly, on another thread I have asserted that EELV can meet the CLV requirements, and I do not seem to have been corrected. Delta is being uprated anyway by DOD with the RS68A. In fact, given that Ares has abandoned three-fault tolerance, the only argument left in it's favour appears to be the contracts that have been signed. If that's indeed the case, a sad situation.

[Rick]

Me2, no reply? Why do you skip some posts that are responded to?

A second request for a response Me2.

[Rick]

the only argument left in it's favour appears to be the contracts that have been signed. If that's indeed the case, a sad situation.

So John, you have no faith in NASA's engineering staff at all?

[J.McDonald]

So John, you have no faith in NASA's engineering staff at all?

How do you jump to that conclusion?

I do not believe that it is impossible that NASA can make Ares-I fly. I'm sure that the engineers are doing their best. But that doesn't make it the right choice. I'm just trying to work out why it continues to be the chosen path when it appears to be no longer needed.

As I have mentioned in several posts now, none of which have been refuted, the EELV option would be faster, cheaper, and probably as safe as Ares. On safety, I am of course talking here of the current Ares-I, with its TO issues and single fault tolerance, not the frankly irrelevant ESAS version.

The only argument anybody on this board has put in favour of Ares is that it has contracts and inertia. Yet Ares will take so long to develop that it will take until about 2013 before it becomes a faster option than an EELV.

[J.McDonald]

Me2,
Its apparant that Robert Block is your friend, so to speak!

The problem with this, is that Obama hasn't won anything, he flips flops so much concerning space policy that he's like a fish out of water. In a nutshell, I personally am really confused as to what he would do IF he was elected President in regard to the VSE.

Oh, and this article is 'more real'? Great line.

Me2, no reply? Why do you skip some posts that are responded to?

Perhaps it's because you didn't actually ask him a question

[Rick]

How do you jump to that conclusion?

I do not believe that it is impossible that NASA can make Ares-I fly. I'm sure that the engineers are doing their best. But that doesn't make it the right choice. I'm just trying to work out why it continues to be the chosen path when it appears to be no longer needed.

As I have mentioned in several posts now, none of which have been refuted, the EELV option would be faster, cheaper, and probably as safe as Ares. On safety, I am of course talking here of the current Ares-I, with its TO issues and single fault tolerance, not the frankly irrelevant ESAS version.

The only argument anybody on this board has put in favor of Ares is that it has contracts and inertia. Yet Ares will take so long to develop that it will take until about 2013 before it becomes a faster option than an EELV.

Fair enough, and my apologies for jumping to a conclusion that I should probably not of done.

And in all seriousness here, if you believe that your qualifications could help the VSE, why not apply for employment? All I have to go on are well meaning, for the most part, critics, that mention how to do things better or in a different way, and don't want to jump into the game, or worse, current employees (Not You ME2) that are afraid of speaking up, and criticize under a cloak of anonymity. I hope you can see my point.

No joke here, I am seriously asking.

[Rick]

Perhaps it's because you didn't actually ask him a question

Point taken.