(Trying to) Save Constellation

Avast there, ye scurvy dogs!
In the face of a perfect storm of partisan intransigence and, it would seem, bull-necked stupidity. I mean what part of: "the program was on an unsustainable trajectory" do these people not get?

My recommendation to the Administration borrows from a nautical tradition: helm hard to windward and watch the sails tear themselves to tatters.
That way you at least save the mast and rigging...
In these turbulent seas the clamour to clap on more canvas could end up with a pitchpole and broken back!

Captain Bolden and First Mate Garver are tasked to bring the good ship NASA to a safe harbour for a much needed refit! Anything else is rank mutiny!
Filibuster: One of a class of piratical adventurers who pillaged the Spanish colonies (the Spanish Main) in the West Indies during the 17th Century.
http://blindkat.hegewisch.net/pirates/nautical_lexicon.html#f

What part of Americans do not want a lesser NASA does Obama/Garver/Bolden not get?

Captain Bolden and First Mate Garver are following Admiral Obama's mad orders, Chase the commercial white whale.

Congress is saying no thanks in no uncertain terms.

Arggggh - it be any port in a storm. I thought "International Talk Like a Pirate Day" was in September but I can get behind an interim day. While NASA may have embarked on an unsustainable journey with Constellation it doesn't mean we throw away everything we've done over the last 5 years - AGAIN. The President's space advisor's plan (who nobody seems to identify) follows the path of NASA for the last 20 years. It's low cost expendables (ALS/NLS). No, it's fully reusables (X-33, SSTO). No, it's shuttle forever (LFBB). No, it's fully reusable again (SLI, TSTO). No, it's exploration to the Moon, Mars, beyond (Constellation). No, it's commercial start-ups using low cost expendables (ObamaVision - I do see stars whenever I get hit on the head).

I hope Keith is right and there's a compromise brewing. We keep wasting billions in pursuit of something we never finish. Parts of ALS/NLS went on to inform the design of the Delta IV so that wasn't completely wasted. Parts of X-33 have rolled over into the Ares upper stage engine. Maybe parts of SLI can be scavenged for the kerosene boosters envisioned under the new plan. What scares me is that I don't hear anyone discussing what can we use from Constellation, just how do we throw everything out and divorce the NASA from space launch. Maybe we're better served by looking at Constellation-like constructs built without the onerous Constellation rules that if applied to any existing launcher would deem them non-human ratable. Safety is paramount but there has got to be a cheaper way to get it.

Putting all of our eggs in the commercial launch basket seems particularly short sighted since there is a very poor business case for commercial launcher development to service LEO. Many have tried and ALL have lost money. The notion of being subsidized by wealthy adventure travelers is particularly crazy since those are the people the administration's tax policy proposes to subsidize many of the more deserving social programs like healthcare reform. Any plan based on "we'll just take money from the rich" and isn't based on real goals with real timelines is destined to failure. This is doubly crazy when it comes to heavy lift who's only customer is the fickle, short-attention-spanned NASA. We're only a few years away from the next "Hey, I have a better idea - let's change everything" which eliminates the market and sinks the investment.

CxP as it's planned and being executed doesn't fit into the budget plan however that doesn't mean we need to scrap everything and ignore all the vast array of weapons we've already developed as we go forward. Every independent expert has stated that heavy lift launch vehicles can be Saturn, Shuttle, or even EELV derived. Let's modify our path and press on. It'll cost much, much more to have to redevelop the capability far in the future.

A comment about one group or another holding up opinions of various astronauts as "proof" of their "correctness"...

My affection and admiration for the Astronaut Corp is unending.

However, the notion that their opinions on space policy are more valuable and more correct than others, because of their status is plain wrong.

Of course, by the same token, their opinions are no less valuable.

(Ok...yes...I am getting a bit fed up by these 'appeals to authority'.)

"What part of Americans do not want a lesser NASA does Obama/Garver/Bolden not get?
Captain Bolden and First Mate Garver are following Admiral Obama's mad orders, Chase the commercial white whale.
Congress is saying no thanks in no uncertain terms."

Yeah - haven't they heard the public *clamoring* to spend MUCH more tax money on NASA? Why on Earth does that crazy Obama want to slash billions from the NASA budget when the far-seeing Bush had set NASA on it's current brilliant and properly-funded trajectory. Oh, wait a sec, none of that's true, is it?

"Captain Bolden and First Mate Garver are following Admiral Obama's mad orders, Chase the commercial white whale." - actually, dude, that's following the Augustine commission's suggestion.

I'm not sure what part of this let so much crazy out, but I guess any major shake up is going to have some people upset - and then you get junk like this spewed forth.

Please, let's not save constellation.

I'd agree if that includes Sally Ride, Buzz Aldrin, and a few former astronauts now working for the private commercial human space ventures.

Some defenders of the President's plan don't hesitate to flash those at every occasion possible, especially when trying to justify doing away with JSC being involved in the certification process for the proposed alternatives.

neither the noisy Republican's CxP folly nor the bumbling Democrat's Merchant 7 farce will work.

This is the Shuttle workforce's (bi-partisan & hsf majority):

NASA Has Supplies For 4 More Space Flights
http://www.wesh.com/spacenews/22972626/detail.html

Obama never promised the CxP workforce to save their jobs.

It was the Shuttle workforce that Obama promised full retention to.

Local republicans may just be trying to schmooze up Shelby, and/or their typical subversive orneriness, because CxP was doing very little for the KSC Shuttle workforce anyway.

CxP wasn't going to save much, if any, Shuttle workers anyway and the few that did get in left in disgust or were run off (ref CornDogRocket & Ares PDR comments elsewhere).

I wondered if a different meme might stir up some new perspective.

Exploration Believer (March 28, 2010 9:55 AM) has hit the nail on the head. Whilst the Russian space program might be said to be 'plain sailing' their economic woes, infighting between design bureaus and chief designers falling in and out of political 'favour' have caused a few waggles in their wake over the past 60 odd years. They found a tall ship and a star to steer by and stuck with it!

Compare and contrast with the constant 'tacking' of USS(S) NASA. With Shuttle, the last reach has been costly, both in human and financial terms. Nevertheless it has been long and productive. Culminating in the construction of our first offshore port o'call: ISS. To abandon the distance gained by this course would be foolish and, indeed, any further exploration MUST include the ISS as a harbour/water/fuel station. The first of many. So it's time to heave to and get out the charts and plan for the future.
Surely everyone must see that any future needs multiple ports o' call: refuges from the all too real storms and useful stopping points where cargo and personnel can be transferred; supplies warehoused and plunder divided according to the Code! It is these "Port Royals" and "Bridgetowns" that the various space agencies should be setting their sights to. And to that end, funding the necessary research to build 'em!
But it should be realised that build on what we have, will take several MORE decades of 'going round in circles'!
The next time you hear that as a complaint, I would suggest the rejoinder: "Well closing the life support loop would be a start!"
Before we can even think about going back to the Moon, or anywhere else for that matter, certain members of Congress and other detractors should be made aware that we will require more than just a space potty. For that reason alone, let alone everything else, Cx failed its expectations.
No basic sanitation, no Buck Rogers?

Dear Obamanaut,
This is exactly what Buzz said in his Orlando Sentinel op-ed.
If this does form the basis of some compromise, I hope he'll get the credit that he deserves. He took some heat for his views...

Yes...you are correct...and in regards to my comments it certainly does.

Personally, I try to evaluate the arguments they make and attempt to determine if they have done their due diligence.

I find that the opinions of some of those from an earlier era or those with VERY close ties to certain contractors correlate highly with what, in my opinion, are poor reasoned stances. Many of these stances seem to have a high degree of bias.

Another issue, especially with SOME of the astros from an earlier era, is that they don't seem to have a firm grasp on the current issues. They remind me of those old warriors that see all conflict in Cold War terms. This does not bode well for making good policy.

Heros? yes. Policy experts? No necessarily.

Gene Cernan, Harrison Schmitt, Jim Lovell, Frank Borman, Tom Jones, Winston Scott, Kent Rominger, Charles Duke, Scott Carpenter and others have greatly critizized the Obama "plan".

Musgrave personally told me it was a "fatal" plan.

Think they know a thing or two about it?

"Obama never promised the CxP workforce to save their jobs.

It was the Shuttle workforce that Obama promised full retention to."

Problem is that to save Shuttle jobs you have to have a follow on progam to transfer them to and the vast majority of the CxP workforce has and was to come from the Shuttle program. No Constellation, No jobs for ex Shuttle employees. Adding extra Shuttle flights just kicks the can down the road and is unconscionable to ask astronauts to risk their lives on flights that serve no purpose.

I wonder how long is it going to take for CNN etc. to figure out the conspiracy that NASA is involved in hiding their secret spaceship? Looks like Jay is starting to figure it out. It took a pretty face to wake him up though. The first NASA COTS-C in July,Dragon will be about 95% ready for crew. NASA is trying to hide this fact by saying it is just a cargo ship. It is a returnable capsule,has windows, it has to be crew rated so that people can go inside at ISS. I heard one of them actually say it was a bare shell.
I have been writing officials for 2 years trying to find out why no coverage of Dragon on NASA TV. This is why. They are trying to hide the fact that the gap does not need to happen. They could qualify,under 8705,Dragon with the 3 demo test flights. Are the President,leadership and rank and file in on the conspiracy? Or will they get mad at NASA when all they have heard is the Gap and the Russians are taking over? It would work just fine to send our Astronauts on a US ship and launch Canadian,Japanese,European and Russian on Russian ships. That would free up some seats for Russia to sell to someone else.
Orion is a Moonship. It has a big rocket motor attached to go to the Moon and back. Is it suitable to be used to chase down ISS? Orion can only carry people. Dragon has a 12,000lb. cargo hold. So NASA has spent 30 times more(so far) for less capability that was available?

SpaceX also just tested their C3I comms for Dragon on ISS, too. Yup, it is pretty amazing that folks don't realize that there's an almost flight-ready Dragon sitting at SpaceX right now, getting ready to fly in only three months, and we're years from Orion flying in anything but boilerplate!

Add LAS, buy Ham-Sun life-support systems, add pilot controls, and you've got a powerful S/C. Hard to imagine that part can't happen within 3 years, which means years earlier than Orion on POR.

However, Orion-Lite could also be fast.

"the vast majority of the CxP workforce has and was to come from the Shuttle program."

that's where there may be a huge misconception,
about the full-time KSC CxP workforce that's already been there for the past 2-4 or so years already.

Of the often quoted "2,000 jobs" that KSC CxP had full time, how many positions were aleady filled by non-USA & other non-direct-Shuttle experienced contractors & mgmt?

ya know, like the UCF crowd, the mlp/pad contractor(s), ex-station, ex-CLCS, etc. etc.???

From the perspective of fulfilling the Obama 100% Shuttle workforce rentention - which is what he'll be on the hot seat most for besides the commercial bad idea..............

every current USA & subs employee would need to have something specific in hand that states a guarantee of transition from their current job to a specific new job in whatever the next hsf program is going to be.

So the "new program" has to have at least what, 9000 or so HSF jobs at KSC guaranteed for the KSC shuttle workforce.

Obamanaut,

Actually the headline for the article is misleading.

NASA Has Supplies For 4 More Space Flights
http://www.wesh.com/spacenews/22972626/detail.html

[[[In a news conference on Friday, NASA revealed that it has parts to assemble three more tanks.

"They could be flying before the end of 2012," said shuttle program manager John Shannon.

For 7,000 workers whose jobs end with the last scheduled shuttle flight in September, that would mean up to four flights added to the four already on the books, for a total of eight more. That fits nicely with a plan being cooked up in Congress to keep the shuttle flying twice a year through 2013, Billow said.]]]

In short there are actually enough tanks for 8 additional missions. And by 2013 new tanks could be available for additional shuttle flights as well as to support a SDV Heavy Lift vehicle along the lines Buzz Aldrin has proposed if his idea is accepted. So Buzz's idea looks better and better as a compromise every day.

Think for example the science that could be done on the ISS if the capacity of those Shuttle missions were available. Or if NASA used the capacity to restart the Get Away Specials program and focused it on K-12 STEM education to motivate students?

And as for cost, at $200 million a month, $2.4 billion a year, it will cost less then 2 cents a day for each American. I wonder if asked how many Americans would be willing to spend 2 cents a day to keep the Shuttle proudly flying?

"Hard to imagine that part can't happen within 3 years"

If your only talking about the design and integration efforts, maybe, but if you are going to do the proper and appropriate testing and certification prior to flight 5 years is a more realistic number. You only can make the 3 year goal by cutting out testing.