Griffin speech 1 Nov 05

[cuddlyrocket]

I think international cooperation works best where one party is in control and is responsible for the bulk of the mission, and the other provides a specific item in return for some specified benefit. Make them more 'equal' - or even have 3 or more 'equals' and infighting has a tendency to break out.<br /><br />So for the CEV etc, I agree that it is better for NASA to build it itself, and then barter access for specific equipment items used in later missions.

 

[gaetanomarano]

to-day europen economy is the same of U.S. economy, in 2020 russian and indian economy will be the same of to-day's U.S. economy (that has NASA, Shuttle, etc.) while chinese economy will be probably TWICE than 2020 U.S. economy...<br /><br />I don't think that the rest of the world (and expecially China) will accept that the "bulk" of the missions will be american-only while they will be contracted by NASA only for catering...<br /><br />look, the world is changing quickly!<br />

 

[cuddlyrocket]

I don't think they have any say in whether the US has a US-only or an international Moon programme. I agree that other countries aren't likely to leave this field to the US, but if the US decides to go it alone that means they'll have to develop their own program.<br /><br />For any individual program, I think it preferable (from the point of view of executing it successfully) that one country dominates it.

 

[dobbins]

I Think the big problem with the ISS is it's too dependent on any one partner so if something goes wrong with one space program it screws the whole project, like what happened with the Shuttle, or what would happen if the Russians had had problems with the Soyuz.<br /><br />I would like to see an international Moonbase in the future, but one where any partners problem wouldn't have a domino effect that screwed up everything. For example instead of everyone in one habitat each program would have it's own habitat and means of getting there, but the programs would share some resources at the base and help support each others programs.<br /><br />

 

[gaetanomarano]

thanks to fast growing of global economy and falling costs of technologies and research, in 2020 sky we will se LOTS of sub-orbital and orbital vehicles... CEVs, Klipers, new Shenzhous, SpaceShipsSeven, Nine, Twelve... then we can decide which vehicle is better, not now<br /><br />I think that if "US decides to go it alone" (with CEV...) may risk to need rent foreign vehicles in 2020...<br /> <br /><font color="yellow">and, don't forget that CEV is a "15-SHOTS-ONLY" gun!!! (see my post on SpacePlane's thread or wait for my next post here!) </font>/safety_wrapper>

 

[gaetanomarano]

"...too dependent on any one partner..."<br /><br />this was due to a bad ISS design that implies a perfect respect of all details of the "plan"<br /><br />"...domino effect..."<br /><br />sorry, but the BEST delay and domino-effect in ISS assembly (and, probably, then ISS' death cause) was the crash and safety problems of Shuttles... since, all ISS modules (and also ISS resupply!!!) was designed to be sent in space and assembled ONLY with Shuttles!

 

[dobbins]

Reread what I wrote before you try to disagree with it. The ISS was too dependent on any one partner not having problems. The USA happened to have been the partner, but it could have been the Russian program or the ESA program. Either way it screws up everything.<br /><br />If the ESA had it's own manned program then it could have taken on a bigger role in assembly plans and the loss of Shuttle support wouldn't have been as bad. That is the problem you need to be working on instead of telling NASA what it's doing wrong. Go to work on getting the ESA to have it's own manned program. The combined EU economy is certainly large enough to support a first class manned space program. Europe has the technical ability to develop one.<br /><br />

 

[gaetanomarano]

<br /><br />"...ESA had it's own manned program..."<br /><br />I agree, and probably it will soon happen, expecially if NASA will really build the "american-only-old-capsule".<br />