Obama Heads To The Space Coast

This isn't good at all. My take is that this means he is digging in and not willing to make any changes to his reckless new space policy. Looks like Plan B is dead in the water. He seems to think the magic of his personality always heals policy differences. Houston we have a problem....

The Review is now insight.

ex-CxP people have it chance to show what they have developed for $10billion over the last four years from the worlds best rocket scientist plan.

Finally the review is going to take place!
In typical fashion they(ex-CxP)will hide from the light and seek shelter so they will not be exposed to different ideas and thoughts.

I cannot wait for this to happen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqRXJtPwqOk

Small Government conservatives can't advocate a moon base or a mars mission without pissing off their 'no new taxes', 'the deficit is too big' supporters.
Liberal Democrats can't advocate a budget increase for NASA, when their 'health care for everyone' plan is being criticized for being too expensive.
If your center is about to be downsized, you are going to call congress and bitch.
So NASA needs to change, but it can't.
Net result: NASA is screwed.

Solution: UN space exploration.

"Houston we have a problem...."

Sorry SpacePol - we have a problem here too ...

The first mistake was Griffin choosing the most expensive architecture to attempt to replace the shuttle and return to the Moon. The second mistake was when Griffin decided to turn a lunar base program into an Apollo redux program. So all we needed to do was to recommit ourselves to a lunar base program and choose one of the cheaper return to the Moon architectures.

But the Obama administration wanted none of that. Instead, its using Griffin's mistakes as a way to dramatically reduce NASA's commitment to manned space flight! Just look at the numbers!

In 2009, we were spending approximately $3 billion on the space shuttle, $2 billion on the ISS, $3.4 billion for the Constellation program, and about $700 for space and flight support. That's $9.1 billion a year committed for manned space flight.

But the Augustine Commission suggested that the annual support for manned space flight should be raised by $3 billion. That would have raised the manned space flight related budget to about $12.1 billion a year. So what did the Obama administration do?

Instead of increasing our commitment to manned space flight, the Obama administration slashed our commitment to fund manned space flight-- even if you include funds for private commercial space flight and 'game changing' technological investment-- from $9.1 billion to only about $6.1 billion a year.

So instead of increasing our commitment to manned space flight by $3 billion, as recommended by the Augustine Commission, the Obama administration actually cuts our investment in manned space flight by $3 billion.

A potential $6 billion a year change in fortune for our manned space program towards the negative. Take that NASA!

Marcel F. Williams

This is awesome. I can't think of any political leader, including JFK, of any nation, who was willing to go this far, and put so much time, into getting a vision of future HSF worked out.

Oh, jeez. After his brilliant success in snagging the Olympics, stopping climate change, and ushering through health care reform, I can't wait to see Obama sprinkle his magic on NASA.

Any hope I had for this budget is gone now that Obama's called a "summit."

So more lectures and hubris like with healthcare?

He will fail to win hearts and minds on this as well.

He doesn't get it folks, and at this point if he hasn't he never will.

Congress is going to be very reluctant to support him on this, especially with his plunging approval.

All the lectures in the world will not change this.

Meanwhile unemployment is at 10+% and deficit spending is $1.2T this year. Real "vision".

The President, along with top officials and other space leaders, will discuss the new course the Administration is charting for NASA and the future of U.S. leadership in human space flight.

It will not change a thing. Look what Nelson said a few days ago. This policy is as dead as a door nail.

Not sure where you will be, I plan on attending. should be great fun!
CxP is dead I agree, however its best parts will be cloned, morphed and grafted as best they can.

On to MARS!

Congress is already starting to support this. All the most recent ideas are delta variations on the basic Presidential vision.

So will Obama be bring the beer to this one? Hold a conference for a photo op, smile, talk alot and spread some magic pixy-dust? Seems to be his M.O. for trying to fix his screw ups. Poor guy needs some adult supervision.

Meanwhile my freinds, while we wring our hands and point fingers at who's got a better plan, China laughs at us and moves foward. Not sure how to set up the link, but simply go to AviationWeek.com and the first page features; "China Studies Moon Rocket" with a Saturn V class "Long March 7" vehicle on the drawing board.

Now I know my knit-picky Comrads here will claim that a study is long way from actually building something, but with the leader of the PLA publishing books declaring that it is time for Chinese dominance globally and politically, backed by outstanding economic growth, (remember, they are buying bonds on OUR debt, not visa-versa), I would not put it past them to achieve their goals while we still bicker.

For Pete's sake this guy can't win with some posters. No matter what he does it's either not enough or too much. Can't we give Obama the benefit of the doubt at least? Let's see what good comes from this approach before we declare defeat.

O.K. Frank, so how many approaches do you want to give this guy before we declare defeat?

Lets at least see what happens at this Florida summit. It will go a long way in demonstrating exactly what Obama expects from his space policy. No ambiguity just the president on the record. After that people can criticize whatever he said - or not said.

So why didn't he demonstrate EXACTLY what he expects from his space policy when it was announced over a month ago? I will wait and see but a clear message is not something on which I would bet.

Oh great. Just what we need. More professional obfuscation. The amateurs need more crap to fling around.

He flip flops so much, what difference does it make what he says?

All that matters is what congress will vote on and if the flip flopper thinks it's worth fighting over when he has bigger problems to worry about.

This will be a PR stunt for himself and little more. Pretty much the guys M.O.

Don't know why Mike but all we can do is focus on what's ahead and make the best of the opportunity at hand.

Not a lot of thought here. Just a lot of fear. (I'd be fearful too if I needed government to do everything for me)

Mike, President Obama probably didn't "demonstrate EXACTLY what he expects from his space policy when it was announced" because his staff had not had time to work out the details yet. They had to get the cancellation of Constellation out with the budget or waste an entire year's funding.

You may not believe this, but space probably isn't the highest priority right now. There are some other things, you know, like the economy, Iraq, Afghanistan, health care, etc. If you haven't dealt with it yourself, you would not believe the tyranny of the budget cycle or what it takes to produce a well-coordinated policy document.

My favorite part about this whole thing are the wingers who are bashing Obama for doing something that offers no political gain while at the same time lauding those in Congress who support NASA only to bring money and jobs to their state/district.

Anyone care do guess why 99% of those in Congress who are opposed to the new budget are from states with NASA centers or contractors? Coincidence? I think not.

Signing out... :(

I'm tired of listening to all the Congressmen pretending to fight for the future of space but merely fighting for money for their districts.

I'm tired of listening to the current space supporters who suddenly think Constellation was suddenly the end-all and be-all, when, under all budget scenarios it couldn't do anything at all for a generation. It was no more than a re-hash from 40+ years ago, but no one supporting Constellation seems to care about that.

I'm tired of listening the arrogance (only they have the ability to build rockets) and entitlement attitudes of the current Constellation employees and contractors, which was designed specifically to keep shuttle employees and contractors employed.

I remember being greatly disappointed when the Aldridge report was delivered with no mention of NASA facilities "realignment" as had been done in the military because the commission was told the report would have been "dead on arrival" had they mentioned that.

This is the first time in 35+ years that serious NASA money was up for grabs, that those who has been getting it for decades, were not pretty much guaranteed to get it in the future. And the Congressmen, contractors, and employees freaked.

My only conclusion is that NASA is simply welfare for rocket scientists, an entitlement for a narrow group of employees, contractors, and congressmen. Watching them fight to keep the status quo is like watching the elderly fight to maintain an unsustainable social security program.

I had been a big supporter of human spaceflight since the early 1970s. I used to dream about working for NASA. I remember being crushed when I needed glasses in 4th grade because I knew I couldn't be a pilot, which I felt meant I couldn't become an astronaut. As I came close to graduating from college in 1987 I traveled across the country in visiting several NASA facilities. I followed the Aldridge and Augustine committees closely hoping to see the vision of the future.

But now the government human spaceflight program just disgusts me.

CadetOne is right on the money.

Its all about jobs and saving one's political neck.

NASA long ago stopped putting technical achievement first and the HSF program is little more than a huge jobs program with little too show for the billions and billions poured into it. At least other parts of NASA still do cool things even when the HSF side scarfs down most of the money.

Short term thinkers cannot see that money needs to go for new technologies some of which no one knows about now.

Otherwise, the HSF program will just continue to go nowhere and be little more than a nice show.

If Obama backs down and Nelson and the others get their way then NASA might as well be given up for just another waste of taxpayer money.

I put as much faith in the tooth fairy as I do in any Obama space initiative that he might announce in Florida next month.

The only reason -- and it is the ONLY one -- is because someone in his political office sent a memo to something I have been saying all along: the I-4 corridor is critical to winning Florida's electoral votes, which in turn is critical to re-election.

Obama came to Florida during his campaign and made all kinds of promises to win some critical votes there in 2008. He got those votes and then he essentially announced shuttering KSC this year. With that in mind, he's "fooled me once" so shame on him. "Fool me twice, shame on me."

The bottom line here is that the President really doesn't care about a serious space exploration program, instead, he cares about getting votes and getting reelected. Who's to say he won't change his mind again in his second term, and who's to say that Congress will go along with his ideas anyway?

Truly, the American space program is just another example of the lack of leadership we see from Washington. Instead of doing what's right for the country, those fellows would rather play Mutually Assured Destruction political games and leave us all floundering while they run to the bank with our money. They are indeed interested in doing the right thing, but the only problem is that they are interested in doing the right thing for themselves.

CadetOne, I wish you wouldn't use the word "welfare" in this context. The emphasis should be on the word "entitlement", i.e. the premise that working on CxP is, or should be, a guarantee of lifetime employment. As a contractor, I have never felt that secure, and frankly I don't think it's healthy for any employee (or institution) to feel that secure. Instead, you should feel that you serve at the pleasure of your customer -- in this case Congress and the American people. You should be prepared to earn your job again and again, and sometimes have to go find another one.

CharlesBoyer, I disagree that "the President really doesn't care about a serious space exploration program," so I wish you wouldn't assert that as a fact. It's an unhelpful shortcut in thinking, as unhelpful as the word "welfare." I think Obama earnestly believes this is cod liver oil for HSF, that it will eventually make us stronger in space. If he didn't care, he'd just cut CxP without saying anything. Instead, he promotes commercial HSF and research, and boosts annual spending on NASA.

So let me get this straight... you think Obama's master plan to get reelected is to kill CxP (thereby angering Space Coast voters) and then hold a "Space Summit" in Florida to woo those same voters?

Are you kidding me?

Killing CxP and the other proposals in this budget is the opposite of being politically astute. That leads me to believe he approved it (I won't say it's his idea, that's what staffers are for) because be believes it's the right thing to do.

If you want to talk about playing politics, look at all the CxP supporters (and new budget bashers) who are making all the noise in Congress. 99% of them are from states with NASA centers or contractors. There's a reason for that.

"If you want to talk about playing politics, look at all the CxP supporters"

Those against CxP were playing the politic game long before this current battle. So don't just call out those in favor of CxP.

FWIW, I seriously doubt that he expects his space policy to have more than a negligible effect on his re-election chances. If he thought otherwise, I would have expected him to have spent more energy on it.

I don’t anybody suggested that to kill CxP was part of a master plan by Obama to get reelected. But holding the "Space Summit" could be to repair much of the damage that has been done.

I'm not calling out all CxP supporters. I'm specifically talking about members of Congress.

@Keith

"Announcing something like this on a Sunday afternoon - with no NASA follow up is weird enough. In addition, the choice of a date is weird."

Sadly, I think this is one of those cases where that classic Seymour Cray line applies: 'I think that's a question that answers itself.'

I think everone is puzzled at how a team which at one point was running like a Swiss watch now seems to be the team that can't shoot straight.

I think that those who are resting their hopes on the idea they are entitled to work at NASA will be in for a surprise in the coming years. Obama and company have placed a bet. They increased the budget of NASA and other research agencies with the hope that there will be an economic payoff. And not in the long term, but the short term. If the tax receipts do not improve greatly in the coming years the government will need to increase taxes or cut budgets. And, at that time, NASA will need to show they contribute since I doubt any mercy will be shown or that NASA will be a sacred cow. The politicking will probably be intense. Much more than what we see today. This is just practice. Back in '92 the military was cut back under the concept of "peace dividend." The next round won't have a "peace dividend".

Everyone that works at KSC should make signs, bring their families and friends, and stake out all access points to this conference. Make sure he, the other participants, and the media see them.

Brevard County is fighting for their survival and the survival of Human Space Flight. The whole county should mobilize and fight. Don't stay home and let Obama kill HSF. Fight for it! Show them how many people this poor decision will affect. Don't stay home, get out there and be heard.

Keith:

"the choice of a date is weird": Think about it. What is 4/15 any year? Tax day! Weird my fanny. Smart, he isn't going to tell us space cadets his plan is better. He is going to tell us any other plan is not going to be paid for. It is the big flaw in the pro Constilation argument or the pro shuttle argument. NASA'
budget will be lucky to stay flat and the first thing you would have to do with Constilation or the Shuttle on there successful completion is cancel them. Obama' plan regardless of what people may think is probably the only space program that is sustainable.

As Keith always places this phrase at the top of his web page, "...It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU!", do so. Make sure Mr. Obama and his cronies have a large reception of KSC workers waiting for him when he comes to Brevard County. Make sure he and the media cannot miss you, your families, your friends, and the communities as they make their way to the summit. Make sure they can hear you inside the building even if they are hidden miles away inside KSC. Fight for Constellation, fight for America's Human Space Flight Program. Make NASA work for you!

Maybe this is the cynic in me, but what is the bet that the only thing allowed near Obama is uncritical support? All 'other views' will be kept in "Free Speech Zones" several miles away from him and the cameras by unsmiling State Police and USSS officers with unfeasably large weapons.

You are probably correct, but the local media will seek out the people demonstrating. The Orlando media market covers nearly all of the I-4 corridor and web media should cover it too. The I-4 corridor is key for any politician that wants to win Florida.

If you have several thousand people show up to demonstrate, it will be hard for other media to ignore. But, it can't happen if the KSC people and the communities of Brevard don't come.

It is my sincere hope that they will come and fight for America's Human Space Flight. It would be nice to see the local media and community leaders lead the way and promote the demonstration.

To those of you who are fighting to keep Constellation, don't forget, it is also your duty to fight to make Constellation work with the resources you have! I wish someone would clue me in on where the Constellation time and money went. Maybe a good starting place would be for someone to explain why the Ares 1-X cost $450 million? And why did NASA do the test with that configuration anyway? Yes it is important to verify the computer simulations, but I would think that NASA could have at least given the second stage the same outer mold line as the Ares and given it a reaction control system to stabilize it. And, if NASA is doing simulations of the Ares 1-X to compare to the test, isn't that, to a degree, just a waste? These computer codes and simulations are all about capturing non linearities, so how comfortable are people with mapping the Ares 1-X nonlinearities to the Ares?

Or is Ares 1-X a case of NASA having a budget for it and needing to spend the money before the money went away? The use it or loose it issue.

what is the bet that the only thing allowed near Obama is uncritical support?
No, you have him confused with the previous President. Bush couldn't face a critical audience at any public meeting in the last couple of years, and scarcely ever before that. The worst he ever had to dodge was two shoes from a journalist in Iraq.

Meanwhile, you may recall just a few weeks ago Mr. Obama held a meeting with leaders of both parties in Congress about health care. A few weeks before that he held a testy debate with the entire Republican caucus. He isn't afraid of heated debate, and he has no history of regulating attendance as a way to avoid it.

So everybody in Florida, definitely go show your interest, but please behave. It might be a fruitful meeting, unless it descends into shouting. You learn by listening. You speak by voting.

And what about all those who support the new budget? Should they rally at KSC to "Save" U.S. human spaceflight as well?

Show me in that budget where HSF is preserved. I see nothing but promises and wishful thinking.

Constellation actually has hardware, ground support equipment, launch facilities, and a workforce that has devoted 6 years and already has had one successful launch.

Show me in Obama's budget where he can get our people launched on an American rocket sooner than Constellation can.

Show me.

"...he has no history of regulating attendance as a way to avoid it."

That is not true. His rallies and summits are very tightly regulated as to whom can come, and if opponents to his views are allowed to come, their opportunities to speak and be heard are limited severely.

As for listening, the workers at KSC have the right to participate in this summit and to be heard. When Obama refuses to allow the people that are being affected by this bad decision to be heard, he is a coward and forgets he governs by consent and is not a "ruler."

I pity any Florida politician that allies themselves with this man come election time.

If they wish too. It would be interesting to see them try to explain to the others their support for this science fiction program that only exists in Obama's budget.

"To those of you who are fighting to keep Constellation, don't forget, it is also your duty to fight to make Constellation work with the resources you have!"

They have been making it work or have you not noticed all the hardware, testing, Ares I-X launch, ground support equipment, etc despite the underfunding? The workforce has been doing their "duty", now what about the rest of you armchair critics? Are you doing your "duty" towards America's HSF? Or are you just enjoying throwing stones at the ones that are actually producing for our country?

"The President, along with top officials and other space leaders, will discuss the new course the Administration is charting for NASA and the future of U.S. leadership in human space flight.

Well if the whole of KSC fits the above description you will be welcome. Protesting will get you no where but you will be the laughing stock of the USA.
**
Constellation actually has hardware, ground support equipment, launch facilities, and a workforce that has devoted 6 years and already has had one successful launch.
**
The above is what rocket launchers think about. This is complete nonsense.
The FLIGHT was not successful as it did not meet many of the flight test plan goals. The Rocket design is/was faulty from the beginning as many designers have stated over a 6 year period. Yet the CxP workforce would not listen and just kept burning the budget and stealing all it could before Congress shut the door and emergency authorization that NASA reprogram funding at will. This ended on Oct 1 1009. The CxP starts crying foul when it displays major cost overruns in the out years and in no way can it fly to ISS in 2011 with 6 crew members as it was never designed to do so. This is why Griffin could and did try to close ISS for NASA business in 2015 as Congress would and could do not a thing about this.

I feel for all you CxP huggers, the game is now over you tilted the machine and your score is null! have a great day, The agency is much more then KSC launching Rockets!

Good Luck

If this is what you want to work on and this is all you understand, best wishes!

I am really looking forward to Obama's time travel and light speed initiative. Ok, it is not going to happen in 2020, but it will most likely happen in 2030!
CHANGE!!

The Ares I-X launch was successful with the exception of a parachute problem despite the naysayers that said it couldn't fly.

Also, just for the record on this forum. I do not have a financial interest in seeing Constellation continued. I chose to leave during the first round of layoffs and am now retired. My interest is to see that These United States do not lose our Human Space Flight Program and leadership in space.

As for the focus on KSC, it is where Obama is having his "summit" and therefore that is why KSC is getting the focus in this particular forum. Constellation and the cancellation of our Human Space Flight Program affects all NASA space centers and not just KSC.

I hate to break the news to you but the United States will lose it's leadership in manned spaceflight the day the Shuttle is retired.

Or will it?

What do you consider leadership? We're the majority stakeholder in a huge space station that we will continue to use. Is that not leadership?

Regardless, Constellation was more of a paper program that Falcon 9/Dragon or EELV/Orion Lite. Arex 1-X was a fine flight but it was also a huge PR stunt. In addition, there was no actual Ares 1 hardware on the flight. Shuttle SRB? Check. Atlas avionics? Check. Dummy fifth SRB segment? Check. Dummy upper stage and Orion? Check. Other than the ground support there is nothing else but reams of data. No flight hardware exits. It's a fantasy.

The administration (and every administration before it) schedules potential "bad news events" like this for the weekend purposely. The idea is to avoid the Monday through Friday news cycle.

The Ares I-X launch was successful with the exception of a parachute problem despite the naysayers that said it couldn't fly.

The above is complete nonsense

Read the test plan. It is on the web at the NASA Aerospace Technical Information Center.

The reason the summit is scheduled to be held in Florida is because the biggest crying sound is coming from Florida. All other centers have productive work for the agency and nothing to be concerned with.

have a great day

Two years ago I left my former employer because I was drawn to starting my own company within the "rocket" business. By trade I'm an aerodynamicist. Since then I've had to tighten my belt a lot to get this going. While at my former employer I worked on projects for Orbital (Pegasus, X-34, X-43), ATK, BAE, Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed-Martin, Orbital, Kelly Space, Kistler Aerospace, Beal Aerospace, NASA, Navy, and Air Force. Am I a critic? Yes. As an engineer I criticize a lot of things. And, a lot of the criticism and skepticism is directed at my own work. Am I doing this from an armchair? I'll let others decide.

I'm still curious why the Ares 1-x cost $450 million. So, please fill me in if you can.

As for the Constellation project being underfunded, I guess that depends on how one feels about the initial cost estimates.

Anyway, if one assumes it was underfunded, at least on paper, the management at NASA knew that cancellation was a risk. Was there a fight back then to minimize that risk and ensure that the project would meet the budget? Or was the attitude "we'll cross that bridge when we get to it?"

And how much will Obama's Science Fiction program will cost? How many humans will it fly? When will they fly? Before Constellation could have?

As for being the majority stakeholder in the ISS, since we have to bum a ride there from the Russians, how long before they get "squatter's rights" and claim it for their own by denying us a ride?

As for Ares I-X being a success...it flew and Obama's science fiction doesn't.

I wanted to stay out, but I just couldn't anymore. There are so many ignorant comments being made by people who obviously haven't worked on Constellation and DO work in the technology arena or the industry/academia who felt shut out and now feel Obama is letting them in, it's ridiculous ! I've worked both Ares and Orion over the past 4 years. The FY11 "plan" is not a "plan" at all but a work in progress. Was Ares and Orion perfect or the best designs ? No, there IS NO ONE SOLUTION to get to LEO. We chose one, have worked it, successfully launched a version of it, and could succeed if allowed to go forward. The biggest problem all of NASA has had is the annual use of Continuing Resolutions which forces all funding to the previous year's funding until a budget is passed. Schedules have to be adjusted for ALL NASA projects when stuck with lower than planned budgets on Oct. 1 and usually continuing to the spring of each year. There are too many of you to call to the mat who have been spewing garbage about Constellation, Ares, and Orion. Parts of Constellation MUST COME BACK for the health of the space industry and leadership by this country. Obama campaigned on it but has seemingly abandoned it. I've worked two massive technology programs and several flight hardware programs all of which were cancelled due to a lack of specificity over the last 10 years. Obama's FY11 budget gives only top level numbers and no specific purpose. Mars may be a goal but all of us working toward it know there are MANY steps to getting there and they are not unspecific research projects, engine developments, etc. And despite what Bolden has actually repeated several times, probably from Franklin Diaz, THERE IS NO TECHNOLOGY THAT WILL GET US TO MARS IN DAYS ! Obama's Summit in April will hopefully reveal a compromise preserving a heavy lifter from Constellation as well as some extension of the Shuttle program. I liked one comment I saw, no Buck Rogers, no bucks. I'll gladly answer questions about Constellation to any of the hypocrites who whine on this site or gleefully proclaim what a "bold" "exciting" plan the President has suggested ! This is a classic fight between the "haves" and the "have nots". The researchers/start-ups/academia who were bitter 4 years ago when Constellation was launched are the "have nots" and the Cx people are the "haves". Somehow, the "have nots" got hold of Lori Garver and Obama staffers. This is now the mess we have because of it. And Bolden, please. He should have stepped down or had a plan to offer in case the President nixed Constellation, and he had NOTHING. He had the job for 7 months and had NOTHING. The best thing about that has been it's been easy for both parties to rally on this.

Actually, as some might know, I'm for Constellation and I was disappointed that it was canceled. I was hoping that NASA would step up to bat, tighten their belt, and get it finished. I know they can do it. One paper study after another is a downer, especially for engineers. But I don't think Obama thinks like that. I think he is into paper.

The odd thing is that I know some extremely talented rocket engineers and scientists, young and graybeard, at NASA. And I believe that if you put them together in the same room with talented drafts people, aerospace manufacturing people, and civil engineers and gave them the same time as the Augustine committee, you would have a launch system designed to go to the moon and back. But, for some reason, this is not happening. Either I'm wrong about the talent at NASA, or a person who can build such a team doesn't exist or isn't given the chance. And, if the later part is true, that frustrates me.

"I'll gladly answer questions about Constellation to any of the hypocrites who whine on this site or gleefully proclaim what a "bold" "exciting" plan the President has suggested!"

I'm not for Obama's plan and I definitely don't think it is bold or exciting, but I'll ask a few questions anyway. Why didn't the design team for the Ares capture more of the overall design at the beginning of the design process? For example, why is the nose shape for the Ares 1 different than the 1-X? Also, why was the number of people in the capsule not known earlier in the design cycle? I know NASA engineers who were frustrated by that downgrade. Oh, and how about the change from a four segment first stage to a five segment one? Why wasn't this captured earlier in the design? Please don't take this as criticism. The answer to these questions will help me, and maybe others, align our expectations. Are we expecting too much?

Again, I'm not for the current budget. I know what is going to happen. If NASA gets this budget it will be easier to slice and dice them down the road. The disappearance of Constellation is easier to challenge then the disappearance of x amount of research projects.

Honestly, I'm not really sure where the "get to Mars in days" thing came from. Even Diaz's VASIMR engine would take 39 days to get there, according to theory. Granted, that's still a massive improvement over 6 months, and in my opinion that makes it something well worth researching, but it's still more a matter of "weeks" than "days".

Keith's comments about the KSC crowd are right on, depending on which camp from KSC is in the majority at the event, that is.

just a few suggestions, imho:

-the Rocketizing Solids CxP huggers at KSC are a tiny fraction of the KSC workforce and as CornDogRocket conveyed many moons ago, most of 'em had no clue what the heck they were doing in the first place & still don't (including former stationers on CxP)- so don't let 'em dominate the event

-the Privatizing NASA Merchant7 huggers are also a tiny fraction of the CCAFS workforce - make sure ya get that - they're NOT KSC - I repeat (this is important) - ULA Delta/Atlas and SpaceX are NOT KSC workforce - they are CCAFS workforce - not the same and they're almost as clueless about hsf as the CxP folks were/are

-the Shuttle huggers ARE the majority of the KSC workforce and are mostly USA and their NASA counterparts - those are the ones ya pay attention to - not only because of their numbers but their expertise - especially the trenches engineers and project engineers - most anybody that's been working Shuttle 10 years or more - they're the real hsf rocket scientists, do know what they're doing, and have the right stuff to make an intelligent and reasonably reliable judgement call as to...well, how idiotic the above Rocketizing Solids vs. Privatizing NASA camps are

- the Shutle workforce have actually been the quieter ones for the most part, most hoping to just retire themselves when Shuttle retires rather than go forth into the snakepit camps of the above (they may need to be coaxed a little to speak up, most feel the way CornDogRocket did - after 4+ years of watching CxP from either the sidelines or part-time useless attempts to make it better somehow, reality and rational rocket scientist thinkers feel lower than pond scum about NASA's future)

- but most of those working folks in the Shuttle USA & a few NASA remnant trenches will have the right feel for what's actually achievable, sane, and reasonably feasible within the next 4-6 yrs for a NASA run hsf program to somewhere.

Remember that addressing NASA and contractor Shuttle employees in a CEO role is not the same as addressing politicians nor the general public nor political office staff in politi-speak manner. they're employees, not the neighborhood town hall gang - twisted half-baked logic based on uninformed and unknowledeable opinion rather than tech/scientific data and logic doesn't resonate with them, try to proclaim a plan with an arrogant but - the ol' ya don't know what ya don't know thing - will just raise contempt instead of inspiration

Remember Keith's words, the KSC Shuttle (& JSC as well) rocket scientists are not your average bears

Remember that when JFK made his Moon goal, the trenches types knew in their bones that it was achievable, they were challenged and streched building on what they already knew - but they were not overwhelmed - big diff!

NASA was never given the funds to make a lunar, much less a Martian manned mission. With adults now minding the store, the mission for NASA is to make space pay its way. If you wish to go to LEO, you can buy a ride from Russia, and anyone else who wishes to get into the business. NASA develops technology, and can do the basic science. Industry will step forward if there is a ROI.

STS is way beyond its expected service life, and has become too great a hazard to continue operation. Aside from the experience of long duration at zero G, ISS does not add any value, it is stuck at LEO. It could serve as a way station to L5, where more science is needed, but right now it just a big fat target for all the FOD that shares that orbit.

Which brings to the next issue for practical space flight. LEO is getting to be a busy place, and with China, India, and Japan all joining the fray, the issue of how to deal with all that junk needs to be addressed.

There could be some rendezvous missions to the bigger stuff to bump them out of orbit before we have the next Iridium smack up.

Think Glomar Challenger, for the next LEO mission. What would it be worth to see what went into the last Chinese booster? You could go up, latch-on, cut it up, pack it into a nice tidy fiberglass lifting body, and return. A few LEOs might have a nasty payload, but we have airborne lasers for that event.

None of this requires a manned component.

also recommend taking a look at this new big picture book for prep:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/09/science/space/09space.html

Reaching for the Stars When Space Was a Thrill

"Naturally, there was a hook to those recruitment ads, as Ms. Prelinger points out. The real business of most of those aerospace companies was not the space program but defense — building fighters, bombers, missiles and other implements of the cold war, not to mention commercial airliners. For many of these places, the space program was more of a hindrance than a boost to the bottom line, a sort of prestigious loss leader to attract cutting-edge talent.

Occasionally, as Ms. Prelinger reports, the darker side of this work bled through into the trade press and the ads, like when the Marquardt Corporation, which made small control rockets for satellites, showed a spy satellite aiming its lens down at Earth."

LoL & hmmmmmmmmmm....... how timely

NG pulls out of the Tanker bid - so no new Space Coast jobs in FL, big new NASA IT project thing that would have had new KSC jobs cancelled.......

Obama has already been to the Space Coast, remember? He promised to close the gap, extend shuttle, speed up Constellation, save our jobs, and to support us in every way.

Why in heck should we believe what this guy says a second go around? He outright lied to us on his first visit here. If it's up to Florida in 2012 he doesn't stand a chance of being re-elected!

Obama's science fiction has already flown as many people as Constellation, for a start. And there is a good chance that CCDEV will get to fly at least once while he's in office.
The cancellation of Constellation was also in line with what Obama said in his campaign (and then walked back later): delay Constellation for five years. So this budget is not much of a surprise in that respect.
Despite the hardwork of most people involved, the cancellation of Constellation was thoroughly deserved. Saturn V cost 30-40 billion in today's dollars and Constellation was well on its way to costing the same (with $9bn already down the drain). NASA cannot continue to do business like this, especially when for a few hundred million, and in the course of 7 years, SpaceX has built two rockets, 3/4 types of engines, a cargo-carrying capsule, flown two successful missions, has become profitable, and has actual hardware (80% of their own design) currently on the pad for its first mission of a potentially crew-carrying vehicle. Compared to these achievements by a start-up, Cx is indeed science fiction - a cheesy, blockbuster-type SF movie really.
Having said this, I do hope that a NASA backup for CCDEV is developed (maybe an SD-HLV) even at NASA's ridiculous development costs, otherwise the US runs a serious risk of giving up all pretensions to a serious HSF program, in case something goes wrong with CCDEV. In the meantime, US national interest should also drive NASA to find ways of dramatically reducing costs for any HSF vehicle development/operation.
BTW and despite a deeply flawed program he's put forward, I honestly admire Obama's courage in going to Florida to defend it. If he doesn't have a solution by April, and even if he does, he's going to have an extremely hard time there. I have to say I agree with Keith in that he probably feels his personal responsibility to do so, and that really says something. Now if only he got his act together...

"Saturn V cost 30-40 billion in today's dollars"

I'm sorry, I totally disagree. The NASA budget in 1965 alone was (in 2007 dollars) $33.514 billion!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Budget I won't even bother adding up NASA's budget between 1962 and 1973. And of course not all of the budget went towards Saturn V, but the majority did up till the time it flew. Anyway, I don't think you'll be able to determine the true cost of Saturn V since the accounting methods back then were totally different. Geez, I don't even know if they had much of an accounting method. If someone needed something they got it, cost was not considered.

Sorry, were you comparing Constallation to Apollo or Ares to Saturn V? In my earlier post I wrote Saturn V but was think Apollo.

The cost I remember was $26 billion for the whole Apollo project in 1969 dollars. I don't recall ever seeing the Saturn V pulled out separately.