At Long Last, an Inspiring Future for Space ExplorationThe Apollo Moon landing was one of humanity’s greatest achievements. Millennia from now, when the vast majority of the 20th century is reduced to a few footnotes known only to erudite scholars of history, they will still remember that was when we first set foot upon a heavenly body. It was a mere 66 years after the first powered airplane flight by the Wright brothers. In the 41 years that have passed since 1969, we have yet to surpass that achievement in human spaceflight. Since then, our capability has actually declined considerably and to a degree that would yield shocked disbelief from anyone in that era. By now, we were supposed to have a base on the Moon, perhaps even on Mars, and have sent humans traveling on great odysseys to the outer planets. Instead, we have been confined to low Earth orbit and even that ends this year with the retirement of the Space Shuttle. In 2003, following the Columbia accident, President Bush began development of a system to replace the Shuttle, called the Ares I rocket and Orion spacecraft. It is important to note that this too would only have been able to reach low Earth orbit. Many in the media mistakenly assumed it was capable of reaching the Moon. As is not unusual with large government programs, the schedule slipped by several years and costs ballooned by tens of billions. By the time President Obama cancelled Ares I/Orion earlier this year, the schedule had already slipped five years to 2017 and completing development would have required another $50 billion. Moreover, the cost per flight, inclusive of overhead, was estimated to be at least $1.5 billion compared to the $1 billion of Shuttle, despite carrying only four people to Shuttle’s seven and almost no cargo. The President quite reasonably concluded that spending $50 billion to develop a vehicle that would cost 50% more to operate, but carry 50% less payload was perhaps not the best possible use of funds. To quote a member of the Augustine Commission, which was convened by the President to analyze Ares/Orion, “If Santa Claus brought us the system tomorrow, fully developed, and the budget didn’t change, our next action would have to be to cancel it,” because we can’t afford the annual operating costs. Cancellation was therefore simply a matter of time and thankfully we have a President with the political courage to do the right thing sooner rather than later. We can ill afford the expense of an “Apollo on steroids”, as a former NASA Administrator referred to the Ares/Orion program. A lesser President might have waited until after the upcoming election cycle, not caring that billions more dollars would be wasted. It was disappointing to see how many in Congress did not possess this courage. One senator in particular was determined to achieve a new altitude record in hypocrisy, claiming that the public option was bad in healthcare, but good in space!Thankfully, as a result of funds freed up by this cancellation, there is now hope for a bright future in space exploration. The new plan is to harness our nation’s unparalleled system of free enterprise (as we have done in all other modes of transport), to create far more reliable and affordable rockets. Handing over Earth orbit transport to American commercial companies, overseen of course by NASA and the FAA, will free up the NASA resources necessary to develop interplanetary transport technologies. This is critically important if we are to reach Mars, the next giant leap in human exploration of the Universe. Today, the President will articulate an ambitious and exciting new plan that will alter our destiny as a species. I believe this address could be as important as President Kennedy’s 1962 speech at Rice University. For the first time since Apollo, our country will have a plan for space exploration that inspires and excites all who look to the stars. Even more important, it will work.--Elon--
One senator in particular was determined to achieve a new altitude record in hypocrisy, claiming that the public option was bad in healthcare, but good in space!
Elon should not have released that before Obama actually makes his speech.Gazumping the President's News Cycle is a really bad way to make friends with any of the WH staff, let alone the occupant of the Oval. And those folk have long memories.Ross.
QuoteOne senator in particular was determined to achieve a new altitude record in hypocrisy, claiming that the public option was bad in healthcare, but good in space! Now, now Elon be nice to Senator Shelby...
I think if he'd sung the praises of SDLV, the Cult would be cheering him on, right now. I'm with Buzz and Elon.
What has he DEMONSTRATED thus far?
Quote from: dks13827 on 04/15/2010 06:03 pmWhat has he DEMONSTRATED thus far?SpaceX has demonstrated the ability to design from scratch a new booster using new propulsion systems and successfully place payloads into orbit using it. While he did have some learning curve issues, that's a feat that NASA hasn't done successfully in the past 30 years (in spite of blowing through several dozen times the amount they've spent on SpaceX to-date).That isn't everything they need to do by a long-shot, but they've actually got a better recent track record than MSFC.~Jon
I will LOL if f9 flight one crashes back to the cape in pieces.
The "us versus them" mentality is most of the reason you are recieved the way you are by some, especially me.
I will LOL if f9 flight one crashes back to the cape in pieces. Or any of the f9 flights for that matter. I want them to suceed but not if the price of sucess is overblown arrogance.
Quote from: dks13827 on 04/15/2010 06:03 pmMusk is an Obama contributor, and as such, stands to gain Nasa funds. What has he DEMONSTRATED thus far ? His naivete about manned flight being 'not that difficult' is unbelievable. Unrealistic people like that are not a good thing, they cause harm. Witness the past few months re: Nasa.Could cause his company to fail if he remains arrogant. I will LOL if f9 flight one crashes back to the cape in pieces. Or any of the f9 flights for that matter. I want them to suceed but not if the price of sucess is overblown arrogance.
Musk is an Obama contributor, and as such, stands to gain Nasa funds. What has he DEMONSTRATED thus far ? His naivete about manned flight being 'not that difficult' is unbelievable. Unrealistic people like that are not a good thing, they cause harm. Witness the past few months re: Nasa.
Quote from: FinalFrontier on 04/15/2010 06:19 pmQuote from: dks13827 on 04/15/2010 06:03 pmMusk is an Obama contributor, and as such, stands to gain Nasa funds. What has he DEMONSTRATED thus far ? His naivete about manned flight being 'not that difficult' is unbelievable. Unrealistic people like that are not a good thing, they cause harm. Witness the past few months re: Nasa.Could cause his company to fail if he remains arrogant. I will LOL if f9 flight one crashes back to the cape in pieces. Or any of the f9 flights for that matter. I want them to suceed but not if the price of sucess is overblown arrogance. Could you quote which parts of the statement are "overblown arrogance"?
Quote from: FinalFrontier on 04/15/2010 06:19 pmI will LOL if f9 flight one crashes back to the cape in pieces. And so what if it does? India's latest booster also ended up in the drink, is that actual proof they're incompetent of actually doing it right eventually?
Of COURSE they can do it eventually. The problem with the statement made is that he assumes he can already do it sucesfully and f9 has not even flown yet.
Quote from: neilh on 04/15/2010 06:34 pmQuote from: FinalFrontier on 04/15/2010 06:19 pmQuote from: dks13827 on 04/15/2010 06:03 pmMusk is an Obama contributor, and as such, stands to gain Nasa funds. What has he DEMONSTRATED thus far ? His naivete about manned flight being 'not that difficult' is unbelievable. Unrealistic people like that are not a good thing, they cause harm. Witness the past few months re: Nasa.Could cause his company to fail if he remains arrogant. I will LOL if f9 flight one crashes back to the cape in pieces. Or any of the f9 flights for that matter. I want them to suceed but not if the price of sucess is overblown arrogance. Could you quote which parts of the statement are "overblown arrogance"?Like the fact that he assumes he has the credibility to make these remarks. He has not sufficently demonstrated the viability of his LV's yet IMO. That he appears to assume that he is a serious player at this point is the arrogant part. Not until f9 has a few flights under its built would I have made ANY statement (let alone his statement) if I was in his position.
Boy, you guys are quick. I just got this:The Apollo Moon landing was one of humanity's greatest achievements....the next giant leap in human exploration of the Universe. Today, the President will articulate a new plan for America's space effort. I will be commenting on it as soon as I have had a chance to study the details. an ambitious and exciting new plan that will alter our destiny as a species. I believe this address could be as important as President Kennedy's 1962 speech at Rice University. For the first time since Apollo, our country will have a plan for space exploration that inspires and excites all who look to the stars. Even more important, it will work.Fixed that for ya, Mr. Musk.
The Spacex hangar is at the "pad"
Could cause his company to fail if he remains arrogant. I will LOL if f9 flight one crashes back to the cape in pieces. Or any of the f9 flights for that matter. I want them to suceed but not if the price of sucess is overblown arrogance.
Like the fact that he assumes he has the credibility to make these remarks. He has not sufficently demonstrated the viability of his LV's yet IMO. That he appears to assume that he is a serious player at this point is the arrogant part. Not until f9 has a few flights under its built would I have made ANY statement (let alone his statement) if I was in his position.
Quote from: FinalFrontier on 04/15/2010 06:42 pmOf COURSE they can do it eventually. The problem with the statement made is that he assumes he can already do it sucesfully and f9 has not even flown yet. Point me to where exactly he assumes he can already do it in that statement.
...He is shucking for his industry and organization...
What some people view here as arrogance, I see as a "CAN DO" spirit....
Quote from: SpacexULA on 04/16/2010 03:52 am...He is shucking for his industry and organization...And I flat out don't have a problem with that either.Quote from: R.Simko on 04/16/2010 03:54 pmWhat some people view here as arrogance, I see as a "CAN DO" spirit....And I flat out don't have a problem with that either. It's not arrogance, it's confidence.I was just already tired of reading that mushy stuff at the end.
Yeah that sounds like the best thing to say before the most powerful man in the world shows up to check out your vehicle.
Quote from: gladiator1332 on 04/16/2010 05:57 pmYeah that sounds like the best thing to say before the most powerful man in the world shows up to check out your vehicle. Speaking of which... Originally, Obama was supposed to visit the Atlas pad If I'm not mistaken. I wonder why the late change of plan. No doubt this will cement the erroneous notion of "commercial = SpaceX" in many people's minds so maybe it wasn't such a good idea in that regard.
Quote from: FinalFrontier on 04/15/2010 06:40 pmLike the fact that he assumes he has the credibility to make these remarks. He has not sufficently demonstrated the viability of his LV's yet IMO. That he appears to assume that he is a serious player at this point is the arrogant part. Not until f9 has a few flights under its built would I have made ANY statement (let alone his statement) if I was in his position. He is shucking for his industry and organization, no different than ULA talking up Fuel Depots, even though they have never built them, Virgin Galactic talking up their passenger vehicle wen they've never carried more than a single person at a time, or Shuttle Managers talking up the benefits of SDLV, even though their numbers are based off projections, just like ULA's.Let's all just hope, no matter what Congress decides to green light, they fund it fully this time.
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 04/16/2010 05:26 pmQuote from: SpacexULA on 04/16/2010 03:52 am...He is shucking for his industry and organization...And I flat out don't have a problem with that either.Quote from: R.Simko on 04/16/2010 03:54 pmWhat some people view here as arrogance, I see as a "CAN DO" spirit....And I flat out don't have a problem with that either. It's not arrogance, it's confidence.I was just already tired of reading that mushy stuff at the end.I agree. I mean what do people expect Musk to say? "I am 100% confident my company cannot meet the deadlines. Our reliability numbers are completely made up, and I am pretty sure this thing will fail. And if you are wondering which vehicle I think is best for the job, well I would go talk to those Shuttle guys over there, or maybe ULA, they sure as hell have a better idea about what it is going on than I do!" Yeah that sounds like the best thing to say before the most powerful man in the world shows up to check out your vehicle.
Mr Musk has put small payloads, very small, into orbit. Nasa did that in the 1950's.And by magic Mr Musk will leap forward many years of capability in 3 years ? Come on !!!
Read ANGLE OF ATTACK or any other Apollo history book, learn a little physics. You will see that Apollo was at least 100 times harder than what you might think. It is true. It is physics.
Mr Musk is naive, he's a kid. I bet he would find fault with 1000 decisions made during Apollo, ask him !! But it worked and it was based on reality. Note that I did not say I wish him ill. Also the can do spirit must be based somewhat on reality, also.
...I wonder why the late change of plan...
...Mr Musk is naive, he's a kid...
Constellation attempted to be Budget, Time line, and Safety optimized. When you try to do that all 3 will fail spectacularly.Flexible path is Safety and Budget optimized, not Time line optimized. That's why you see people so up in arms. You don't get all 3 in ANY development program I have ever seen. Something has to give.
Quote from: SpacexULA on 04/17/2010 03:20 pmConstellation attempted to be Budget, Time line, and Safety optimized. When you try to do that all 3 will fail spectacularly.Flexible path is Safety and Budget optimized, not Time line optimized. That's why you see people so up in arms. You don't get all 3 in ANY development program I have ever seen. Something has to give.But how to keep Congress' interest alive through a 25-year programme that doesn't even intend to land on Mars?cheers, Martin
But how to keep Congress' interest alive through a 25-year programme that doesn't even intend to land on Mars?
It does intend to land on Mars. Didn't you see the president's speech?
QuoteIt does intend to land on Mars. Didn't you see the president's speech? Thanks! I needed a laugh tonight.
By the mid-2030s, I believe we can send humans to orbit Mars and return them safely to Earth. And a landing on Mars will follow. And I expect to be around to see it.
You will probably call me naive for believing what Obama said. However, I think it is perfectly correct to say that according to the speech that Obama made on the 15th, his plan for NASA does intend to land on Mars. Call me optimistic but I think it could happen.
Mars might as well be in the 22nd century. There will be no Mars landing till possibly the latter part of the 21st century. These predictions for the 2030's are way off. More like 2050's or 2060's. Bigelow has announced landing their inflatable space habitat on the Moon first before anything on Mars. Right now NASA is talking about flyby's not landings.
Quote from: Rabidpanda on 04/20/2010 04:45 amYou will probably call me naive for believing what Obama said. However, I think it is perfectly correct to say that according to the speech that Obama made on the 15th, his plan for NASA does intend to land on Mars. Call me optimistic but I think it could happen.With all due respect, I do believe it is naive to assume that in return for dismantling our existing infrastructure and experience base, we will receive some wonderful breakthrough that enables a vastly superior HLV after 2015.
Then I would agree with you. I never said that I thought any of that, I personally would prefer an EELV derived HLV to a completely new design. My post was about whether or not Obama's plan intends to land us on Mars.