Rocketforge

Via HobbySpace: NASA Seeks $16.2 Billion; Cuts Shuttle, Station, Next eneration Launch Tech Programs. to me the most interesting part is this:

The space station budget request also includes $10 million in new funding for “a flight demonstration initiative to pursue launch services with emerging launch systems.” Industry and government sources said that money is earmarked for start-up firms such as Kistler Aerospace and Space Exploration Technologies.The budget also includes $70 million in funding for robotic lunar missions. According to budget documents, NASA plans to spend $420 million through 2009 on lunar exploration missions.

Clark laments the small amount but I’m much more concerned with whether or not O’Keefe will drive the institutional changes to make that happen. IMHO, some of that should be sent to Andrew Beal as an apology.

Cowing corrects Tumlinson. Then Lindsey corrects Cowing. And then everyone jumps in on the tag team cage match.

Everyone makes good points. Even Keith, bad example not withstanding. So even if there are times when an REI biner isn’t appropriate, I’m willing to bet that there are simpler solutions than this. Heck, just teach your astronauts how to tie good sailing nots and just tie the teather to an external hitch.

Via SpaceRev: Appointments to the Presidential Commission on Implementation of United States Space Exploration Policy:

Carly Fiorina, chairman and chief executive of Hewlett-Packard (this one I just don’t get)

Michael P. Jackson of Virginia.

Laurie Ann Leshin, a planetary geochemist at Arizona State University. (not much known here. The only reference I can find is something called the Solar System Exploration Subcommittee from NASA)

Retired Air Force Gen. Lester Lyles.

Paul Spudis, a visiting scientist with the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston. (You can find Paul on the Space Frontier Foundation’s Return To The Moon Board)

Neil deGrasse Tyson of the Rose Center for Earth and Space at the American Museum of Natural History in New York.

Former Rep. Robert S. Walker, R-Pa.

Mars scientist Maria Zuber of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Some of these I simply don’t understand. Especially Carly. I can’t see how she’d have any time to spare for this considering how much work HP needs. I’d hate to have to chair this group of very disparate view points.

Update: According to this article its because she moved her yacht?

Sciscoop has a two-fer for today: Boosting The American Space Program. Its an article by someone asking about the future US heavy lift capability if NASA isn’t the one developing that heavy lift capability.

As some of you may have noticed, I’ve started carrying a self-developed line of merchandise over on the right and side of the page. I’m mostly sticking to items that are specific to particular industries or academic disciplines and which only members of that community will get. For example, this coffee mug has the standard Rocket Equation on it. Another is a bumper sticker that reads: “My other car is in a Hohmann transfer orbit“.

I’m also taking requests. If anyone has any suggestions, send me email and I’ll get right on it!

Thanks to a note from Arthur, I found this: Fly My Stuff to the Moon: Private Mission Slated for Fall Launch. Which is uber cool since I payed to put my business card on Trailblazer.

To anyone who reads Rocketforge: if you even remotely agree with the stuff I put here, then you should be buying a slot on Trailblazer.

Arthur Smith has a nice overview of the President’s plans and the recent history.

The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a hearing this morning on National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Future Space Mission. The witnesses and their testimony were:

Sean O’Keefe, NASA: testimony
Dr. Louis Friedman Executive Director, The Planetary Society: testimony
The Honorable Neal Lane, Ph. D.: testimony
Dr. Howard McCurdy: testimony
Mr. Richard Tumlinson President, Space Frontier Foundation: testimony (this includes some interesting policy shifts for Richard)

Overall there’s nothing really new here. Even Rick’s testimony was largely a cut and paste from his previous commiteee appearance. He is dropping his idea of the Space Station Authority (but his alternative still sounds like the same thing). As was expected, Dr. Friedman kept to his “its all about science, right?” meme that I find emmensely uninspiring. He was the representative for the “Mars! Ra! Ra! Sis boom ba!” community. Dr. Lane pretty much said the same thing except that he focused on orbiting observatories. Dr. McMurdy went into NASA’s management issues and was somewhat interesting, but not new.

The most interesting was O’Keefe’s remarks since it had some tantalizing details. In his introduction he does include this:

· Promote international and commercial participation in exploration to further U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests.

as one of four ‘planks’ that support the overall goal. The most interesting paragraph was this one:

As we begin the process of retiring the Space Shuttle from service, NASA will separate to the maximum practical extent crew and cargo transportation for both ISS and exploration missions. NASA will acquire ISS crew transport as required and cargo transportation as soon as practical and affordable. NASA envisions that commercial and/or foreign capabilities will provide these services. The CEV may supplement these ISS capabilities, but its design will be driven by exploration requirements.

The way I read that is that we will use Russia for as long as we have to. The first instant there is a usable American alternative we will use that. And that includes CEV capabilities if no one else can provide the service by the time we’d like to be using it. Which to my mind means that our launch startups have a limited window in which to produce an alternative launcher. I suspect this jives with Elon’s more aggresive time frames for his heavy launch capability.

Nothing much beyond that though…. If I find a transcript (the questions are often far more interesting) I’ll post it here.

HobbySpace links to, and expands on, James Oberg’s “Bringing space costs back down to Earth”. The Artemis Society’s cost estimates for a for-profit mission put a lunar base at $1.42 billion.

From FloridaToday.com comes the article Space plan not a done deal which has this to say:

One of NASA’s human space flight planners, Wendell Mendell of Johnson Space Center, told Florida Today that one important solution is showing progress — showing achievements are being made for the money spent. He compared it to how Europeans built great cathedrals over many generations.

“While you’re building the cathedral, people have to see things that actually happen so they can relate to the cathedral,” Mendell said.”So whatever the plan is, whatever you come up with, whatever NASA agrees to, whatever the president says, it ought to have built into it something that the public can see that’s tangible, about every three to five years, something that happens that people are proud of that they’ve accomplished.”

Well, call me naive, but give me a bazaar any day of the week.