Unaffordable and Unsustainable, NASA’s failing Earth-to-orbit Transportation Strategy |
Unaffordable and Unsustainable, NASA’s failing Earth-to-orbit Transportation Strategy |
Guest_DonPMitchell_* |
Jul 25 2006, 04:11 AM
Post
#1
|
Guests |
The Space Frontier Foundation has gotten a lot of attention from the mainstream press with their latest Whitepaper.
They advocate a more extensive support fo free enterprise and entrepreneurship in the American space program. They suggest that NASA should no longer be allowed to develop and own new launch vehicles, and that CEV and CLV development should be cancelled. They also advise that NASA rely on Altas 5 and Delta 4 rockets, and transfer more funding to the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services program. I cannot find the actual white paper on the SFF website. I don't know if SFF is particularly professional (certainly their gaudy website doesn't look it), but I have to agree with some of their points. |
|
|
Guest_DonPMitchell_* |
Jul 28 2006, 10:37 PM
Post
#2
|
Guests |
There certainly is a lot of government involvement in the launch industry. The US military in particular consideres it strategically essential to have multiple vendors. Europe granted a monopoly on commercial launching to Arianespace.
I agree with Richard that in theory a committee made up of ideal people is best. But I've never seen such a thing in my life. Coming out of the research community (in computer science) I am very cynical about the kinds of people who join powerful committees, and the self-serving behavior of those bodies. Industry often is forced to ignore or actively impede imcompetent committees who gain power (e.g., W3C). I've just never seen creative behavior, and I think it is because truly creative people are elsewhere -- they are tinkering in the laboratory and the factory, not serving on committees. I don't see atropy in the US industry. We don't have an Apollo program going on now, but nobody else seems to be doing better. China's rocket technology is crude. Ariane's use of LH2 is nice, but the Vulcain engines are not particularly modern (still tinkering with gas-generator and gas-expander cycle engines). The Delta IV seems to be a solid design, all LOX/LH2, cheap disposable staged-combustion engines with some distinctly Russian design tricks. I disagree with the SFF white paper in areas where probably many folks here would not. I'm tired of politically motivated agendas in space, like ISS or Bush's Moon/Mars programs. I'm hoping commercial enterprise will find more intersting things to do. A money-making space station than regular people can visit would make ISS irrelevant. |
|
|
Jul 31 2006, 11:04 AM
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 307 Joined: 16-March 05 Member No.: 198 |
I'm hoping commercial enterprise will find more intersting things to do. A money-making space station than regular people can visit would make ISS irrelevant. Let's face it. "Regular people" will not be going into orbit any time soon. Space stations--hopefully of a profitably money-making kind--may well get sent up there, but as long as the cost of visiting them requires winning a lottery or two first they and space travel will remain the playground of millionaires and astronauts on government payrolls rather than "regular people". In fact by the time the cost does come down far enough for "regular people" to go up the ISS will probably have been designated an historical monument. (In any case an orbital tourist trap does not strike me as the sort of place where much science is likely to be done. How many science laboratories are there in Las Vegas?) ====== Stephen |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 21st June 2024 - 01:32 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |