Not Closing the Gap

To NASA Observer's point, NASA could minimize the gap if they redirect to COTS-D some or all of the funding currently going to Russia. Obviously, it's getting a little late in the game to do so.

I think I'm one of the few people around here that think this part of the Obama budget plan is actually a good idea for the space program. Of course, I don't work at KSC. However, by effectively forcing a gap of at least 4 years between Shuttle and Orion, Obama may be betting on generating political pressure to, and bolstering public support of, increasing the NASA budget overall and solidifying the Moon/Mars initiative.

Once the American public starts seeing our proud Astronauts being ferried up in the dirty tuna can that is the Soyuz, and on the side sees the immense steps that the Chinese have taken in the last few years of human spaceflight, they will be compelled to shell out more money and give our space program the funding it needs to put us on top again.

NASA is planning to pay Russia to fly US crews to the ISS. That is bad enough, as Russia will be at best a very unreliable partner. Wait, it gets worse - The USA is also paying Russia to fly European and Japanese crews to and from the ISS because the US will not have the capability.
This is crazy!

Editor wrote: "Obama's budget does not "create" a agap - rather, it does not close the one that already existed - and has existed since 2004."

Yes, very true, but it happens on his watch.

Shane, you are living in a dream world. The average American doesn't care one wit about who launches whom to the ISS-they don't even KNOW that ISS is even up there.
The growing scientific and space illiteracy threatens our very way of life in the decades ahead.

Frank,

"The average American doesn't care one wit about who launches whom to the ISS-they don't even KNOW that ISS is even up there.
The growing scientific and space illiteracy threatens our very way of life in the decades ahead."

This is so sickenly true. In 2002 I had a high level meeting with a top executive at Sony America. He was Japanese but that is no excuse. He was a technology guru, someone with a 20 year history in one of the worlds leading technology companies.

I had brought three NASA civil servants to discuss the International Space Station as a perfect vehicle (no pun intended) for a great video game. After about an hour into the meeting, this gentleman stopped one of the NASA folks and asked, "This space station, is it real?"

We did not know what to say. We all just stood there with our mouths open, until someone (maybe me) broke the silence with a "Yes, it has been continually manned for some time now and has both US and Russian modules attached."

Wow.

Bill

I agree with Frank. American Idol rules dude.. Space? Huh - what space??? There's a space station - really?? NO WAY DUDE!!!

Anyway - Hey - where's my XBOX controller.... I'll show you space (the vacuum between their ears with all the XBOX usage)... HEY - turn that back to the Disney channel Mom!!! Wahhhhhhhh......... I don't wanna watch Rachel Ray - again!!!

Heck - most kids today don't even know theres a major financial crisis going on... They are so so clueless - absolutely clueless......

With the trillions of dollars being thrown around, why hasn't there been any money earmarked for a COTS D competition, or at least to fund the COTS D option that NASA has with SpaceX? It is very important that our private/commercial space companies develop manned space transport, not just for the gap that grows closer all the time, but so that they can give us a back-up system to Ares 1/Orion.

Where is the outcry from those in power? Why is the choice being made to pay the Russians for transport, rather than using that same money to strengthen our private/commercial space companies and put American workers to work?

On change at a time. To keep control the SpaceX COTS-D option should wait for the Falcon 9 and Dragon to fly. Then upgrade.

For some other company - that is a different matter. I suspect that more money will be needed.

A special thanks to all those that made this possible...

Mike Griffin
Doc Horowitz
The ESAS Team
ATK

Re Charlie:

Videogames aren't considered an excuse for bad parenting, nor should they count as an excuse for bad PR...

Everyone's heard of Predator drones & all sorts of other military technology, but when it comes to space?

I'd assume the average person would say:
"What is Constellation, what is the point of the ISS besides endless clips of things floating in 0G, oh yeah we flew some robots to Mars & didn't find any aliens."

Is it really that hard to make rockets & spaceships sound cool/interesting?

FFS, I just realized that "ion thrusters" weren't only in sci-fi & I found out about the XCOR engine & that Cryogenic Engine on Gizmodo...

Gizmodo says 48,710 views on the cryogenic engine post; NASA says ~10,000 for all 3 of its posts on the engine. Notably NASA is missing a link to the frickin video which every other blog seems to have..

This is only a guess, but I've got the feeling that President Obama has been warned that NASA is in a 'one step forward, one step back' situation with Shuttle replacement. In simple language, he has possibly been advised that any money diverted to Shuttle extension will further slow the introduction of Orion. So, the only way to reduce the gap is to add money. Unfortunately, that money doesn't currently exist thanks to the recession.

The only bright side that I can find with my (admittedly hasty) reading of these details is that the bill does not specify the Ares-I by name as the new manned launcher. The best way to reduce the gap now is to kill the Stick and replace it with an LV that will be ready earlier. As Orion should be ready for space tests by around 2013, a few years can yet be saved.

It is because of crap like this that NASA Watch is so good. It is amazing how often the media get some of the most basic facts about NASA wrong. Obama did not create the gap. He inherited it.

Keep fighting the misinformation Keith!

Posted by: O Glenn Smith. "NASA is planning to pay Russia to fly US crews to the ISS. That is bad enough, as Russia will be at best a very unreliable partner."
Has Russia been "unreliable" over the past 14 years? They need the money, you need the ride.

The American human space program is in grave peril. The former president gave us a strong initiative on paper, but did not stay engaged to ensure its success. The current president has essentially endorsed a status quo approach, ensuring that we continue to squander our leadership role. Anyone who believes that the gap is limited to 4-5 years is not a realist; there is a far higher chance of an infinite gap than a five year gap.

Let's see what the NASA Authorization Act for FY10 funding says. The FY10 Presidents budget has been released but not the Congressional Authorization Act and Appropriations Act for FY10 funds.

Lets be realistic, everyone knows the CxP program is broke from the decisions Griffen and Hanley made. It's not going to launch in 2015. Money can't buy the schedule when their is design changes after PDR, not enough reserves, their estimates are below a 30% probability of happening, and many open high risks. I don't want to get into a discussion on this in this thread, I really want to make the point that there is the minimal of a five year gap before CxP goes live. Something has to be done to keep the ops folks on the payroll. You can't release that type of expertise and expect to get it back.

Just wait until you see how much more expensive the seats on the Soyuz will become once the shuttle is gone! Our Russian partner will take full advantage, if we don't pay the increases, then we do not fly. At that point it will become the Russian space station. It is too bad that all the cash we will be sending to Russia, could not stay in this country and in the pockets of American workers.

I was reading the article in this mornings Huntsville Times (www.htimes.com) in which Congressman Parker Griffith-D Huntsville, AL. talks about his meeting with MSFC Director David King to confirm that the program has a solid commitment from the administration & congress to make this happen by the 2020 time table laid out by the previous administration.
Now I know full well that things may slip/change but this should be regarded as GOOD news. Yes, I have clearly stated that I am NOT a fan of this congress or administration but I am willing to give him a chance on this. I have always been extremely concerned about his intentions regarding the manned space program from several of his comments during the primaries. Hopefully he is a man of his word, we will see.
It is good to see there appears to be solid support across both aisles of congress to get the manned space program the funding necessary to be able to accomplish the things we all in this forum so want to happen. I was also very pleased to see the results of the www.space.com poll that was released last week showing an 86% approval/support rating for the manned space program and the goals of getting boots back on the Moon!

AD ASTRA!!!

Dallas Schwartz (R)
USMC (Ret.)
ASCE Member

I plan on mailing all the California congressional delegation, as well as the delegations from the Houston, TX area, also Florida, MS, and Alabama, and other states with NASA interests to let them know that the 5 year gap is unacceptable and that the shuttle is a viable option to fill that gap. I do this not just because it is common sense, but also I hope to keep my job for a few more years!

This site really is a liberal cess pool. The Republicans have always supported NASA and have funded it over the years, yet the opposite is said. Obama's plan is pathetic.

Gee - there's a gap?

Could it be because some folks on high have forgotten (if they ever knew) system engineering 101, which is that you start with an ops concept, then requirements, THEN a design? Could it be that the whole program is full of Tech Readiness Level 1 and 2 ideas that are causing delay after delay due to major technical concerns? Could it be that some groups in the program office have sold neat ideas to higher-ups without any rational justification except "it's neat"?

Seems I saw somewhere that there was a program-level requirement which said (pretty clearly) that, absent a very compelling reason, tried-and-true working solutions (such as telemetry, command, link, etc) would be re-used from existing programs. Would only this were true.

It appears that, like other NASA startup programs, when Constellation was staffed at Level 2, the existing and working programs were reluctant to give up their best experienced people, so the new program attracted the leftovers, without significant experience in development, operations, system engineering, or budget responsibility. Folks who have interesting ideas that belong in a lab for years until (if) proven. Now those same folks are entrenched high in the program office cramming their half-baked ideas into the program. Funny - it seems to have gone to the highest level, too, with Griffin and his "stick".

Because of this, NASA's new programs seem to attract new and unproven ideas like mutant psychedelic moths to a bright light. By now, one would have thought that upper management would have gotten wise, seen the budget issues and schedule slips, and said "STOP" - go back to what we know works. One would have thought...

SpaceX seems to be the only reasonable hope for US crew transport to earth - assuming, of course, that NASA doesn't find a way to kill that, too.

Don't give a penny more to the Russians for Soyuz. We already gave them enough with ASTP. Depending on Soviet designs for American access to space is disgraceful.
Dragon can be ready when shuttle is retired after AMS, and America will have begun the true commercial space age with a full crew on ISS. Obama needs to realize that history is waiting for him to flip the switch.

A special thanks to all those that made this possible...

Mike Griffin
Doc Horowitz
The ESAS Team
ATK

Posted by: Pad Rat at February 27, 2009 11:34 PM

>

The real reason why there is a gap is nuthing to do with the above , after the loss of columbia in 2003 , the CAIB recomended retiring the shuttle in 2010 , and replace with a new space craft , you cant develop a space ship instantly , both apollo and shuttle took many years and the chinese space craft was in development for 10 years.
so unfortunatly there is going to be a gap, and that is not president obamas fault. president bush took the write desision to finnish the space station before starting the constaleation program , to speed up the gap would mean a huge increase in NASA's budget which congress would not agree to .

Robert Law
Dundee Scotland

ew wrote:
"SpaceX seems to be the only reasonable hope for US crew transport to earth - assuming, of course, that NASA doesn't find a way to kill that, too."

I don't think that Space-X are the only runner by any stretch.

I have this feeling that Lockheed-Martin are holding DreamChaser and the Bigelow modules back as their 'jokers in the pack' (they have a stake in both, IIRC). They'll wait until NASA steers Shuttle replacement onto a sandbank and then waltz over to Congress with cheap alternatives which (or so they will tell the politicos) they can have in space within a few short years so long as Uncle Sugar can provide the required $$$.

Lockheed gets an enormous amount of public cash, all the credit for 'saving' US manned spaceflight and becomes the sole provider for a huge swathe of America's space capability (Atlas-V being both the CLV and, in its super-heavy form, the CaLV). Can you say "license to print money"?

president bush took the write desision to finnish the space station

It seems that the 'education gap' is an international problem as well.

I don't see a gap in manned access to space as any strategic loss to the US. It will only be a loss if there is waffling with Constellation. The sacrifice of not having a manned launch ability for four years or so (which could be much less if SpaceX comes through) is mostly a matter of pride, considering our only manned off planet installation is a science lab serving no military purpose.

We will be glad we made this choice once Ares I and V are brought online. Ares V will be a huge asset to the country. 188MT to LEO means we can actually talk Mars mission and will certainly allow us to create outposts on the moon.

>> Has Russia been "unreliable" over the past 14 years? They need the money, you need the ride.

I agree with Chris. Relations haven't always been smooth with the Russians, but they bailed us out of a bind when US human access to space was unexpectedly grounded due to Columbia - heck, they've launched every CDR and FE-1 since then because we can't reliably keep a shuttle launch date. Why run through hoops to keep the Russians out of the equation for a *planned* outage?
Sure, do what can be done to sensibly close the gap, but if a gap is left while we're transitioning (and creating) jobs to build far beyond a simple ferry capability, I think the Russians are a great partner to get us there.

Concur with ew:

"Could it be because some folks on high have forgotten (if they ever knew) system engineering 101, which is that you start with an ops concept, then requirements, THEN a design? Could it be that the whole program is full of Tech Readiness Level 1 and 2 ideas that are causing delay after delay due to major technical concerns? Could it be that some groups in the program office have sold neat ideas to higher-ups without any rational justification except "it's neat"?

Seems I saw somewhere that there was a program-level requirement which said (pretty clearly) that, absent a very compelling reason, tried-and-true working solutions (such as telemetry, command, link, etc) would be re-used from existing programs. Would only this were true.

It appears that, like other NASA startup programs, when Constellation was staffed at Level 2, the existing and working programs were reluctant to give up their best experienced people, so the new program attracted the leftovers, without significant experience in development, operations, system engineering, or budget responsibility. Folks who have interesting ideas that belong in a lab for years until (if) proven. Now those same folks are entrenched high in the program office cramming their half-baked ideas into the program. Funny - it seems to have gone to the highest level, too, with Griffin and his "stick".

Because of this, NASA's new programs seem to attract new and unproven ideas like mutant psychedelic moths to a bright light. By now, one would have thought that upper management would have gotten wise, seen the budget issues and schedule slips, and said "STOP" - go back to what we know works. One would have thought..."

They won't succeed until the above personnel and processes are revamped.

The whole thing is screwed up. Morale at work stinks. I've got managers talking about all the Constellation work that never comes. The sim being used for a lot of development work stinks, yet civil servant folks think its the best thing since sliced bread. Constellation has a serious leadership problem, as detailed in an earlier post (It is so true about folks who are not the best and brightest being in Level II positions). And don't even get me started about Windchill.....

I, for one, refuse to drink the Kool-Aid. We went to the Moon without calculators, ISO-9000, Lean Six Sigma, and non-consensus leadership. They took risks, didn't spend weeks to make decisions. What happened?

This sure isn't the NASA I envisioned working for when I was younger.... Maybe SpaceX will be hiring when we're out of jobs next year.

@tutiger: "The whole thing is screwed up. Morale at work stinks." "And don't even get me started about Windchill....." LoL, there might actually be a consensus on that!!

"We went to the Moon without calculators, ISO-9000,..." They did have computers though, pre-historic as they were. They also had procedure docs and engineering specs, and quality stuff, just weren't labelled as ISO etc. & such back then. There were rooms full of them in archive somewhere, paper & fiche/film. (If any graybeards try to claim otherwise, they're fibbing or have faded memories)

@ew:"cramming their half-baked ideas into the program" Seems like the half-bakers mgmt might have convinced Wayne Hale that the half-baked ideas are the cause of the low morale (within CxP) rather than addressing the low morale of the dissenters, like tutiger, stuck trying to work with the half-baked crap that isn't working right!

The new administrator's gonna have to clean up the CxP mgmt mess or no success on any new manned flight plan, whatever the vehicle.

It is interesting to me to read how many people run they mouths about who did what and why when they really have no clue as to what is going on! The agency has known for some time that the shuttles needed to be replaced and have not been proactive in getting it done for a slew of reasons. Now anyone who knows anything about space hardware and man rated vehicles knows you can’t produce them like aircraft so we will need to use the alternate modes available until a replacement system is validated, end of story. The major question is can Constellation produce a viable system?

tutiger,

Could you contact me directly at bill@vision-play.com?

Moderator. If this is an inappropriate email, or if there is a better way to contact a member off forum, please delete or do not post this message.

Thank you.

@Anybody:

"I'd assume the average person would say:
"What is Constellation, what is the point of the ISS besides endless clips of things floating in 0G, oh yeah we flew some robots to Mars & didn't find any aliens."

Is it really that hard to make rockets & spaceships sound cool/interesting?"

One more thought for the Why Moon? folks to consider, apparently NASA may be perceived by the general public like an old Budweiser commercial:

Life after the "Whazzzup?" commercials
http://www.studlife.com/cadenza/life_after_the_whazzzup_commercials-1.1590408

After being underwhelmed by a Clydesdale horse going to the circus to find the love of his life, I realized I missed it. I missed one of the most spoofed cultural icons of the decade. Something every comedian has made fun of. Something that if said, will be responded to with “Are you serious?” stares. I missed the “Whazzup?” commercial.

I feel sorry for Anheuser-Busch...

It’s the same sorrow I feel for NASA, since they haven’t done anything as impressive as put a man on the moon in the past 40 years.

An uneducated view from one of the un-silent on the inside, about waist high:

It makes perfect sense... retire the shuttle (1960's tech, ahead of its time then and now) so we can dedicate all of our resources to Developing and then Researching a capsule with the same '60's tech but with 2K lip stick in the form computer animated marketing.

We will stack it on top of a D&R'ed 2nd stage and mate it to a hopped up version of our current solid rocket (more '60's tech responsible for at least one catastrophic failure) so that someday in the 2020's this CEV, after exploring low earth orbit, will vector the pacific ocean for its landing. Perfect.

Please pardon, my sarcasm knows no bounds. Never the less, I can't help but cite the old childhood rhyme,

"as we get closer to Jupiter, we get more stupider".

Before we can explore the Moon, Mars, and other planets, we need a space infrastructure. The Shuttle was our first attempt at doing this. It didn't meet all of its original goals but it does work. We have had more Shuttle flights than all the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo flights combined.
Orion is nothing more than Apollo on steroids. Apollo could have had all the capabilities of Orion if it was allotted the same two launch scenario Orion is. Orion once again is bypassing space infrastructure. Worse yet, NASA appears to have resigned itself to the fact that splashing down in disposable spam cans is and will Forever be the way Astronauts will travel. That 30 years from now, they will return from mars slashing down in an Orion capsule.
Not going to happen! Like Apollo, Congress will get tired of throwing away all that hardware. As Armstrong and Aldrin took off from the Moon, Walter Cronkite bemoaned all the hardware they were leaving behind. Everything from the cameras to the life support backpacks to all of the other equipment. The NASA spokesman of the time assured Walter that this was only about meeting Kennedy's goal of getting there before the end of the decade and that in the future, there would be Shuttles and single stage landers which would not litter the Lunar surface with descent stages and re usable hardware. Orion will litter the surface with even more junk than Apollo did. Even the air lock is to be left behind. Scrap it and start again!