And the problem with this is? Do we put sensitive payloads on forigen launchers which would give them a chance to maybe Damage or try and analyse our tech? Hmmm even if we keep two flying we have manned space mission that can overlap Orion/Aries Good idea i think

"Whenever NASA gets caught in a study, but doesn't want anybody to know it is a study, then they try to call it something else," said Cowing."

For sale: Ocean-front property on scenic Mare Tranquilitatus, Luna. Purchase dreck from an American. No need to conduct transaction in Mandarin Chinese.

Wonder if a series of launchers utilizing 8.4 m dia. tankage and two or three RS-68's with one of the two LV's using an upper stage might be included in the "study"? (Call it...ah...the direct approach?)

And the beat goes on...

I think the main thing is that they don't want the public to think that we're committing full resources to this, i.e. we're irrevocably going down a path with no return. By making this informal request, instead of officially dedicating resources, we keep options open and maintain flexibility on our future plans.

It makes good sense to look at all the options, although this should have been done much earlier. Providing safety is not compromised and the budget to do it however much it costs is provided without any negative effect to any other NASA programs then keeping the shuttle flying till at least 2015 is no bad thing, just look at the post appollo years, because the budget was not provided to keep the Saturns flying while the shuttle was developed the US lost one of it's greatest assets: the Saturn V.

What exactly does it mean to be "caught in a study?" Large organizations do studies all the time--DOD is one of the most common practitioners. It's part of the planning process, and usually demonstrates that the leadership has some idea of what they will do if X should happen. It is considered a productive alternative to reacting at the last minute, for which NASA would (rightly) get pounded just as mercilessly, right?

The money we spend to extend shuttle stays in this country. The money we send Russia does not.

Of course NASA started shutting down the shuttle 'assembly line' a few years ago. Be ready for NASA to give us a BIG bill for reopening the line.

The shuttles(orbiters) were designed for 100 flights each. Apparently the shuttle program managers were not.

Thanx,
Jim Bates - 42 Yrs NASA (retired)

Jim Bates tells us to get ready for NASA to give us a BIG bill for reopening the line.

Actually, it's the US President and Congress which would be responsible for this BIG bill, not NASA. The government's shortsightedness and incompetance is firmly to blame here...not only for now having to find a way around a continually deteriorating Russian transport option but also for creating this crap hole in the first place by not adequately funding either program. Bad decisions of collosal proportions have been made here and the US taxpayers should firmly place blame where it is due.

This is actually a bit of forward thinking for NASA. To have information ready before the political system (read: funding source) asks for what it will cost. Let's be real. This is no formal study, this is thinking ahead. Hats off to NASA.

Just wanted to throw the "why not invest that money in COTS" hat into the ring...

Imagine what could happen if even a small, small portion of the billions it would take to fly Shuttle beyond 2010 were invested in the COTS program. With an initial investment of only $500 million, they have produced a vehicle capable of flight.

I know...I know...There are the detractors who are quick to point out that they have not reached orbit yet, but what they have done is a significant accomplishment for a private entity with funding in the low hundreds of millions of dollars. With even a fraction of the money that has been spent on the Ares vehicles, imagine what they could do.

While they may not be a permanent solution to deliver astronauts to the Moon, they could certainly sustain our needs until we do get Ares designed, tested, and in the air. IF...they were provided with funding.

We don't need another rocket. We have already got 2; Atlas-V and Delta-IV. What we need is a manned spacecraft to fly on one of those two rockets.

Building a manned orbital spacecraft is a damn sight harder than building a rocket, and he hasn't even gotten his first rocket into orbit yet.

Let's stop wasting money on rockets and build the spacecraft!!!