THE RALLYING POINT

[mattblack]

FROM THIS DAY FORWARD, whether we have issues minor or major with the Vision ESAS, everyone on this board and others like it out there have an opportunity to build towards a permanent human presence in space. Mankind could become a multi-planet species with this first step forward.<br /><br />Too glib, too hopeful, you say? Well, we’ve all seen what dreams can build. Just as the re-building dreams in Louisiana & Mississippi will and must take hold, our future dreams can take hold, too.<br /><br />What? Too much like Apollo? It takes the good parts from Apollo and builds upon them. This is merely the first step, as I keep saying.<br /><br />What, too expensive at $100 billion+ plus bucks? Spread over a decade-and-a-half, it’s less than the cost of a new fighter plane project. Also, adjusted for inflation, it’s actually less than Apollo but has twice the capability. And with added Habitation and Science modules, far more than twice the capability.<br /><br />Already, the various left-wing, flat-Earth navel-gazing media outlets around the world (including and especially the BBC) have started b1tching on about the cost of this project. Some already have the $100 billion pricetag editorially bumped up to $120 and even $150 billion dollars. Lies and falsehoods are already attacking the expansion of man’s frontiers. Some people in this world wont be happy until we’re all riding donkeys and camels, scrubbing ourselves with rocks and living as hunter-gatherers in primitive but Socialist utopias. This our chance to rise up out of our warring, primitive states of existence and move beyond mere capitalism and feudalism into an era where manned spaceflight can be one of the rallying points for a better future for our children and grandchildren.<br /><br />As I’ve said on these boards before in several soapbox ways, it’s time for every space fan and forward thinker to get behind America and the world’s space programs and lift the future from the pages of science fiction and bring them <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>

 

[shuttle_rtf]

><br /> <br />THE RALLYING POINT <br />Reply to this postReply <br /><br />FROM THIS DAY FORWARD, whether we have issues minor or major with the Vision ESAS, everyone on this board and others like it out there have an opportunity to build towards a permanent human presence in space. Mankind could become a multi-planet species with this first step forward. <<br /><br />But it has to be kept in perspective.....from this day in particular.<br /><br />Right now, the proposal is to do manned sortie missions to the Moon. They'll be no Moon base (Griffin's words) unless it works out it will be viable to do so.

 

[vt_hokie]

Bring back ambitious RLV programs, and I will support them. We need to pursue new technologies to open the space frontier. Pouring billions into obsolete technology to recreate Apollo is a waste.

 

[tmccort]

<br />Obsolete technology? How so?

 

[vt_hokie]

Every dollar we spend feeding shuttle contractors for political reasons so they can produce 1970's hardware indefinitely is a dollar that won't go toward R&D efforts to bring us new and innovative solutions, such as scramjets or maglev assisted launch. A NASP type of program would excite and interest me. This program of using existing hardware to get us "back to 1972" by the year 2018 is a big disappointment. <br /><br />You know what would interest me even more? A program to design and build a new generation of supersonic airliners, or a national network of high speed maglev trains. Those would be ambitious technology programs that I and millions of other people could actually use! Instead, we get to spend billions so that 4 lucky individuals can spend a few days on the moon. I'd rather see a NASP type of vehicle open up access to LEO for many people than for a handful of people to venture beyond LEO. In the long run, of course I want to see humans return to the moon and venture beyond. I just don't see this as a very effective or fiscally responsible way to do it.

 

[barrykirk]

Why is everybody so attached to RLV? With this system, the largest cost item that is lost is the 5 SSME on a cargo launch. I've heard estimates of as much as $40 million each engine. I don't know if that is current costs, or the cost if we start mass producing them.<br /><br />Either way, that is a loss of $200 million per launch for the engines. How much would the total cost be for a heavy lifter launch with this system? $300 million? Could somebody answer that one?<br /><br />What is the current cost of a shuttle launch? I'll bet it's a lot more expensive than that and it doesn't carry half the cargo of the new heavy launch vehicle... And I'll bet it's nowhere's near as safe. It's certainly a lot less safe than the new Crew launch vehicle.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

I understand where you are coming from, and we are like smelly farts in this forum (say Shuttle or VentureStar and something positive and expect several slappings) <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />However, simple as this, I trust in Griffin. He's far cleverer than me, so are all the engineers and designers that have come up with this (at the cost - and that's a key point - they have to work with).<br /><br />Maybe I'm a launch fan and nothing looks better than a Shuttle going uphill. But people are right when they say capabilities over looks, so we look to the positives of leaving LEO, again.<br /><br />The key is that so much could change in 13 years. I am not at all convinced this plan is set. We can but hope - but we're best not getting carried away past the Moon sorties mentioned today.........and I blame the way this was presented for the cautionary tone.<br /><br />I do understand your point about back to 1972 to get to 2018 in a Back to the Future way, but again, there's Engineers who say this is the way to go, who am I to argue.<br /><br />It does break my heart a little to know this is really a sure-fire phyiscal begining of the end to those beautiful Orbiters, they got me into NASA and Space Flight, so they mean a lot to me, but I'll go and see them at an exhibition, I'm sure.<br /><br />So, after being up for 20 hours on this today, I'm feeling happy about the day.

 

[yurkin]

I can only assume that the people who have been studying this full time for over a year know more about it then myself. So I’m not going to second guess it.<br />Even if this is not the very best approach its sure better then sitting around here. And I don’t see any major engineering obstacle to its success. This is all proven technology. Instead of complaining about not having a space elevator and peace on earth we should try and do the best with what we have.<br /><br />So the Vision for Space Exploration has my full support.<br />

 

[mattblack]

Bless you, yurkin. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>

 

[thecolonel]

I echo those sentiments also mattblack. Yurkin, your post is the epitome of what VSE needs right now.

 

[kane007]

Yes, right on.

 

[centsworth_II]

<font color="yellow">"They'll be no Moon base (Griffin's words) unless it works out it will be viable to do so."</font><br /><br />It all boils down to money. Griffen said that the CEV would be designed to be able to maintain in lunar orbit for six months. If money were allocated for base modules to be built and landed on the moon, two launches a year could rotate crews. He compared it to maintaining a presence on the space station. <br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[spacester]

Yep, it all boils down to money. Which means that the plan better spend the money very wisely.<br /><br />The Apollo architecture was very well thought out. It provides excellent bang for the buck. It is a wise choice, and just because it isn't as far-reaching as we had hoped does not mean we should forget that it is fundamentally sound.<br /><br />I think Dr. Griffin's plan will make more and more sense to more and more people as time goes on. As he gets the chance to flesh out the vision, I expect to see lots of opportunities for private industry to get in on the act.<br /><br />Folks, don't be foolish and detract from the only NASA space program you've got. Hey, they're going to build new rockets! Thats a very good thing, right? <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jatslo]

<font face="verdana">Why not launch them by the end of this year? Do you think if we had to intercept a doomsday asteroid by the end of this year, do you think NASA could get a spacecraft in space in time? Do we have to wait 10-15 years to do something we did 50-years ago? WTF?<br /><br />If you want to create jobs for our country, then lets get the whole country involved, like when we built the A-Bomb. What a accomplishment! Where is that spirit? We're all going to be dead and dusted before any significant space exploration happens. WTF?<br /><br />If you work for NASA, then tell them that Jatslo said to get off your slacker butts and get their Asses to the Moon like ASAFP; YESTERDAY; 50-years ago!!! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /></font>

 

[centsworth_II]

It's good to see a reasonable viewpoint. I'll trust the NASA rocket scientists any day over space opera comic book collectors. I guess comic book collecting is an honorable activity... as long as their contents aren't mistaken for reality. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[shuttle_rtf]

I don't work for NASA, but I can pass on your comments <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

 

[mattblack]

Please do, and any other Nasa employees. Those in the world of practical rather than make-believe need to know that there are plenty of folk out there who support leaving Earth orbit. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>