Shuttle Mission Delays

I don't think that this is truely a surprise. Delays with AMS and, consequently, postponement of STS-134 have been reported on the 'Net for a while. However, this does give an excuse for manifest stretch into 2011 and possibly, extra missions as the 'end by 2010' rule is no longer
applicable. This is a good thing for the future of the ISS.

I have long said that skipping the AMS was a foolish omission, but there is no excuse on why they should not be ready. As I recall it was originally supposed to be launched almost a decade ago. We cannot move on from the space shuttle until we stop spending money on it. If they are not ready pretty soon, we should not extend the time line for the shuttle just for them.

I've went back and forth on it myself but it's clear to me.

Extend Shuttle!

Pony up congress!

Do it!

Extending the shuttle will do nothing but 1. keep us parked in LEO that much longer and 2. take money allocated for other programs. I love Methuselah ( STS) as much as the next guy but its time to look forward.

Damn the Gravity!

I was under the impression that Lori Garver had given a distinct "no" to any shuttle delay just for AMS but then I suppose that the mission is AMS so flying without it is daft...

President Obama and Dr. Holdren are both said to be personal fans of the AMS project. Ms. Garver knows to dance to the tune of her ultimate masters.

AMS is being delayed so they can swap the cryo magnet (with a three year lifetime) to a permanent magnet which will allow the instrument to operate as long as the station does.

That's the launch I was planning on taking my family to see (kids out of school). This complicates things!

Ms. Garver knows to dance to the tune of her ultimate masters.

You say that like it's a bad thing. It's just Bureaucrat 101, and it's pretty universal in big organizations.

Let's consider a hypothetical: if Jeff Hanley disobeys HQ openly, how long do you think he'll last in his current position? Would getting fired help advance his objectives?

It was a comment, not an expression of approval or disapproval.

I'm not sure how your question is on-topic. Howevever, it might be that Mr. Hanley smells blood in the water and hopes that the current situation in Congress menas he can outlast Administrator Bolden and Deputy-Administrator Garver. His current course would then (in his mind) mean that he will be remembered as "The Guy Who Risked Everything To Save Ares".

The question was about appropriate obedience in a large organization. Your comment seemed to question the appropriateness of Garver's obedience; I posed another example for comparison.