Video: Think Big Picture - For Just a Moment

Love this video. Quick and to the point. Although I fear that NASA won't even look for it's mojo until it finds it's funding. Oh well ... nicely done Ms. Lau and Mr. Sanders.

We not only need to find our mojo and our vision...we need to re-kindle our ability to inspire those outside our hallowed halls.

Sadly, with the exception of this excellent video (that I myself watch periodically for inspiration), it seems we have largely lost both.

T.C. / @st_polycarp

Holy crap, that gave me chill bumps! Thanks, I forgot I cared.

Along with mojo, I think we need some kind of a plan for people to rally behind.

I do not think we have one but from what I can tell based on the recent Congressional compromises here is all I can envision:

If Lockheed keeps building Orion, then we have to assume at some point we will need a launcher for it. Is the launcher the Shuttle derived heavy lift rocket? Is the main job then, use of Orion for ISS flights beginning sometime around 2020? Then we need to begin to develop some upper stage capacity, on-orbit storage capacity, and refueling capability. Those shouldn't take more than 5 or 10 years. With Orion and those capabilities, in about 20 years, by around 2030, we should be able to do an Zond-like circumlunar mission. Next comes a modules for extra in-space living volume and redundancy. With that we should be able to go into lunar orbit and maybe even do some asteroid fly-bys by around 2035.

This would mean that we have skipped to the next generation.

Next comes a lander. Maybe by 2040 we will be able to land a man on the moon.

What this amounts to Apollo on geritol. Constellation at a slower pace than even Constellation was proceeding.

It makes little sense to me.

What would make sense is continuing use of much of the Shuttle infrastructure by development and assembly line manufacture of a Shuttle derived heavy launcher. Add to that a new, small, winged or fly-back mini-shuttle sortie vehicle to replace Shuttle crew capabilities. This would mean NASA is not competing with Space-X or Boeing commercial. Leave the earth to orbit ballistic approach to commercial. Add to that the extension of existing ISS elements and systems to develop a free-flying deep space sortie vehicle. Use that as a test bed for some of the advanced technologies and for advanced propulsion systems.

This sort of a robust architecture begins to develop an infrastructure for the future.

What we really need is some visionary leadership.

That was made by students competing to win a contest?

So what NASA really "got" was that competition produces good things?

And that NASA should encourage others rather than do things itself?

This video shares more in common with the X-Prize foundation than the NASA we know.

Apparently NASA did not "get" it.
NASA cancelled the student competition program last year.
http://www.tsgc.utexas.edu/nmb/

The video appears not Safety is first to me. Lets stack the chair on the plastic toy bin and have a go of it.

I never did like the spiral of spirals approach, however given the steroid injection it now makes more sense to me.
NASA has plenty of MOJO however it is not within HSF which was receiving the bulk of the funding.

We shall see what happens. It maybe someone will make a NASA pork barrel video.

> Apparently NASA did not "get" it.
> NASA cancelled the student competition program last year.
> http://www.tsgc.utexas.edu/nmb/

Oh dear. That really does make this newsworthy IMO. NASA produced good results with competition and canceled it? Huh? There's a news report for you Keith...

Editor's note: already reported it.

90 year old Ray Bradbury recently expressed his views on "the big picture" at San Diego Comic Con when asked about space exploration..........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gchIFcMdDl0&NR=1

NASA will go nowhere until it gets some Leadership. The current team makes the Goldin era look like the good ol' days!