tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post7825841556659364403..comments2024-03-21T08:00:48.696-07:00Comments on No Shortage of Dreams: Evolution vs. Revolution: The 1970s Battle for NASA's FutureUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-5176111199845716152015-08-17T03:50:35.347-07:002015-08-17T03:50:35.347-07:00"The story is, of course, much more complex a..."The story is, of course, much more complex and nuanced than bad JSC/good MSFC..."<br /><br />Just to be clear, I never thought you were making such a claim - only that JSC's role in *this* particular policy debate was unfortunate. Athelstanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07346012062816580296noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-46500272242116125462015-08-13T05:21:51.593-07:002015-08-13T05:21:51.593-07:00Clearly agree on Manned Mars. "It's alway...Clearly agree on Manned Mars. "It's always 20 years away" really holds true. Indulge me my analysis:<br />1. Federal space budget is not oriented toward that level of expense.<br />2. No plan or commitment to a plan. (Lots of tech development in play though)<br />3. Administrations and goals change in 4-year cycles.<br />4. Commercial efforts do not have the infrastructure (or Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17639020344662007725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-26220455950283035502015-08-12T18:30:42.687-07:002015-08-12T18:30:42.687-07:00NASA JSC has long exerted a powerful influence on ...NASA JSC has long exerted a powerful influence on NASA; when I worked there, the consensus seemed to be that it *was* NASA and that no one would give a damn about space at all if it weren't for JSC's piloted missions. The belief was strong that everyone shared JSC's view of itself. <br /><br />I have a real fondness for the place and many of its people. That said, I believe that the David S. F. Portreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15818906581595028816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-16250786169245953742015-08-12T13:29:46.303-07:002015-08-12T13:29:46.303-07:00I recall when you ran the first version of this at...I recall when you ran the first version of this at the old place, and I still think it's one of the most eye-opening - and depressing - pieces of space program history that you've done.<br /><br />I think there's a consensus now that the STS was a misguided program, however marvelous its capabilities were in certain ways. But had MSFC had its way, we could have gotten a good deal moreAthelstanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07346012062816580296noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-25428669614070467672015-08-12T13:25:19.851-07:002015-08-12T13:25:19.851-07:00"It's an attempt to get a space station a..."It's an attempt to get a space station access capability on the cheap."<br /><br />It is, but that's because NASA wouldn't be able to afford to do it on its existing budget (not without cutting something else), and it would take much longer. As it is, Orion will end up costing something around $18 billion for development - and take 12 years to develop and build (perhaps Athelstanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07346012062816580296noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-44044082553767121002015-08-11T18:13:53.329-07:002015-08-11T18:13:53.329-07:00I think one significant point of the MSFC scenario...I think one significant point of the MSFC scenario is that a single station can't serve any one purpose well; to accomplish the best results across the board one needs multiple automated platforms and specialized stations in a variety of locations. These stations can exist at the same time or can occur in a logical series. Personally, I do not think that having paid an excessive cost is a David S. F. Portreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15818906581595028816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-33090291530437480292015-08-11T16:22:57.410-07:002015-08-11T16:22:57.410-07:00We don't need a new Skylab, the ISS is a much ...We don't need a new Skylab, the ISS is a much better long duration Space Station.<br />The ISS did not face any major hazards like the MIR did:<br />- A fire inside did destroy unknown content.<br />- The module Spektr was hit by a Progress transporter.<br /><br />The ISS was so expensive to build, let's support this base above for more than the next fifteen years. More we will not get dgbrthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08444761728758364208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-32301661463801085152015-08-10T17:21:58.526-07:002015-08-10T17:21:58.526-07:00Ben:
We have very seldom done space stuff because...Ben:<br /><br />We have very seldom done space stuff because space. We've nearly always done it because of the Cold War, pork distribution, the quest for intl. prestige, the desire to foster a body of scientists and engineers whose experience and talents could be tapped in time of war, etc., etc. Add the fact that few people really *get* space - and that not infrequently includes people who David S. F. Portreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15818906581595028816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-79158907431241061592015-08-10T06:47:59.983-07:002015-08-10T06:47:59.983-07:00This is what befuddles me with the US government t...This is what befuddles me with the US government thinking in space:<br />1. Several plans for a space-station/orbiting laboratory but most went unrealized.<br />2. Went to the Moon, but so what, no further development.<br />3. A very cool space plane, but many changing, if not confusing mission purposes. (OK, I know it was oversold relative to its capabilities, so it makes sense).<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17639020344662007725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-18464466660697827622015-08-09T20:04:08.078-07:002015-08-09T20:04:08.078-07:00I bought several of those. NASA was talking about ...I bought several of those. NASA was talking about using Space Station modules as lunar base modules, so I built several lunar outposts from those kits. <br /><br />dsfpDavid S. F. Portreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15818906581595028816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-22367581898297479692015-08-09T20:02:43.052-07:002015-08-09T20:02:43.052-07:00The Shuttle was meant to convey a crew and supplie...The Shuttle was meant to convey a crew and supplies to a Space Station; it only ever was used as a laboratory because no one wanted to pay for a U.S. Space Station. So, it wasn't a very good laboratory - one might say experiments performed on board only hinted at what might be feasible on board a long-term Space Station. Over time, however, we upped its endurance, so that the STS-107 crew, David S. F. Portreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15818906581595028816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-84958012875345911712015-08-09T06:25:31.642-07:002015-08-09T06:25:31.642-07:00I never realized that the shuttle was that limited...I never realized that the shuttle was that limited by lack of long-duration power generation. Reading this makes sense of why shuttle flights never lasted all that long. I remember hearing about he power module a long time ago and did wonder where it went. Also explains why the Spacelab missions were so short in comparison to what the Russians were accomplishing at the same time. It's also Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09342961462271564757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6633940777526327846.post-85018606836672335892015-08-09T05:33:12.503-07:002015-08-09T05:33:12.503-07:00Ah, the things that could have been. That is why ...Ah, the things that could have been. That is why I love your blog! At least Revel gave us a Space Operation Center model kit!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com