Poll

Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?

Yes
77 (24.4%)
No
158 (50.2%)
Still waiting for the final plan
80 (25.4%)

Total Members Voted: 315

Author Topic: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?  (Read 78546 times)

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7082
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #20 on: 02/02/2010 06:13 pm »
Interesting that all the Direct supporters now support shutting down the lunar program completely.

What the heck would make you think that?  It's almost certainly untrue.

As a DIRECT supporter (sort of), I voted no in this poll, but I'd still like to see a shuttle-derived heavy-lift vehicle being stacked in the VAB, rolled out on the MLPs and crawlers, and launched from LC-39 a and b.  And, yes, I'd like some of these launches to have people on them destined for locations beyond Earth orbit.
I look at this as having a silver lining, by pushing so much of this on contractors, NASA could encourage more frugally designed HLV options.  While I'd *like* a DIRECT rolling out, I'd still cheer on a 7-core Delta heavy, or a Falcon 99 Superheavy.
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37442
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #21 on: 02/02/2010 06:37 pm »
but not the launch pads because of Ammonium Perchlorate contamination.


No such thing.  That is not hazard

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7082
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #22 on: 02/02/2010 06:38 pm »
but not the launch pads because of Ammonium Perchlorate contamination.


No such thing.  That is not hazard
it would dissolve too fast to be dangerous so I would understand.
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #23 on: 02/02/2010 06:40 pm »
I said yes, because I think a sensible, pragmatic restructuring (perhaps along the lines of DIRECT) makes a lot more sense than throwing away a national treasure and betting everything on the private sector, with no set goals or timetables and hence no way to measure failure or success.

Last time I checked, economic theory says companies measure success or failure the old fashioned way: profit.  Unlike governments, which can spin results whatever way they wish, companies go out of business if they don't provide value.

Unless they are GM [Government Motors], of course.

The corollary to this is that NASA's state projects have measured progress in the form of the number of congressional districts with project jobs.

Offline JK Lee

  • Member
  • Posts: 47
  • Houston, TX
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #24 on: 02/02/2010 07:06 pm »
There is something that is really bothering me- and it is that people are committing the same mistake with this new direction that they did the last time... and the time before that.

They are assuming that this "plan" will come to fruition and judging it based upon that assumption.  Given history, what is more likely: that a) commercial space will take the reigns and lead us back into LEO within a reasonable budget and before the touted 2017 IOC of Orion/Ares, or b) we will be back here again on this very same forum discussing NASA's redirection from some new blue-ribbon planel in 2016 appointed by the newly elected GOP executive branch because this current realignment of focusing on R&D has failed to bear fruit?

Offline mr_magoo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 424
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #25 on: 02/02/2010 07:57 pm »
There is something that is really bothering me- and it is that people are committing the same mistake with this new direction that they did the last time... and the time before that.

They are assuming that this "plan" will come to fruition and judging it based upon that assumption.  Given history, what is more likely: that a) commercial space will take the reigns and lead us back into LEO within a reasonable budget and before the touted 2017 IOC of Orion/Ares, or b) we will be back here again on this very same forum discussing NASA's redirection from some new blue-ribbon planel in 2016 appointed by the newly elected GOP executive branch because this current realignment of focusing on R&D has failed to bear fruit?

All options carry risk.  Some pay off, some don't.  What else is there to say?  ISS and shuttle both barely survived themsevles.

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7692
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #26 on: 02/02/2010 08:22 pm »
I voted "still waiting".

Plenty you could still use from the CxP plan, but Ares I/V was not it. Waste of time and money best spent elsewhere.

We can have a Jupiter-based HLV using everything we have now, it supports R&D on various fronts, and can make excellent use of the projects announced in the budget like propellant depots, ISRU, VASIMR, AND it can help support the ISS for large ORUs.

We need a goal. We need at least one more shuttle flight. We need to retain the skilled workforce.

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #27 on: 02/02/2010 08:53 pm »
{snip}

We need a goal.

Try.
1. Return to LEO during Obama's first administration. 
2. Produce further goals by 2013.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #28 on: 02/02/2010 09:02 pm »
There is something that is really bothering me- and it is that people are committing the same mistake with this new direction that they did the last time... and the time before that.

They are assuming that this "plan" will come to fruition and judging it based upon that assumption. 

Nope. This is a completely different approach.

Suppose someone was going something crazy, over and over again, and expecting different results. Then, one day, they stop doing the crazy stuff, and try a rational approach.

THAT'S what going on here.

NASA has done the Big State Project approach many times and failed. Now, they are doing something different. You are assuming that the purchase of commercial space transportation could fail, because NASA has failed so many times before, but this one ain't on NASA.

Do you really believe that there is some barrier out there that would prevent private companies from developing more affordable space transportation? If so, please identify that barrier.


Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #29 on: 02/02/2010 09:05 pm »
Dissapointing to see the voters throw away 50 years of Apollo hardware.  The VAB, Saturn launch pads, crawler transporter, launch control centers, orbiter processing facilities, & basically the entire North half of KSC is going to be shut down.  They may allow visitors inside the VAB but not the launch pads because of Ammonium Perchlorate contamination.

Interesting that all the Direct supporters now support shutting down the lunar program completely.  Do any Americans still think individual thoughts or do they just copy whatever the latest ruler says?

No. I realized that the Bush plan of:


Make a promise during an election year, followed by:

Leave the big spending to his successor

was not really a plan, it was a gimmick.


So I was not playing follow the leader back then.

What Obama is doing now is leadership: identifying the problem, and then coming up with a solution to solve the problem. The problem is that space development is not affordable today.  You don't solve that problem by shoveling money at NASA field centers.


Offline vt_hokie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3054
  • Hazlet, NJ
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 436
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #30 on: 02/02/2010 09:07 pm »
Maybe it'd be easier to swallow if we were asking the commercial sector to provide transportation beyond LEO rather than just to LEO.  I think people are getting sick of waiting for us to move beyond ISS!

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #31 on: 02/02/2010 09:08 pm »
Maybe it'd be easier to swallow if we were asking the commercial sector to provide transportation beyond LEO rather than just to LEO.  I think people are getting sick of waiting for us to move beyond ISS!

The commercial sector will be asked to provide transportation beyond LEO.

BTW, its not only a good idea, its the law:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expendable_launch_system#cite_note-4


"On November 5, 1990, United States President George H. W. Bush signed into law the Launch Services Purchase Act. The Act, in a complete reversal of the earlier Space Shuttle monopoly, ordered NASA to purchase launch services for its primary payloads from commercial providers whenever such services are required in the course of its activities."


« Last Edit: 02/02/2010 09:13 pm by Danderman »

Offline Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2641
  • South Africa
  • Liked: 949
  • Likes Given: 2056
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #32 on: 02/02/2010 09:46 pm »
Interesting that all the Direct supporters now support shutting down the lunar program completely.

What the heck would make you think that?  It's almost certainly untrue.

As a DIRECT supporter (sort of), I voted no in this poll, but I'd still like to see a shuttle-derived heavy-lift vehicle being stacked in the VAB, rolled out on the MLPs and crawlers, and launched from LC-39 a and b.  And, yes, I'd like some of these launches to have people on them destined for locations beyond Earth orbit.
I look at this as having a silver lining, by pushing so much of this on contractors, NASA could encourage more frugally designed HLV options.  While I'd *like* a DIRECT rolling out, I'd still cheer on a 7-core Delta heavy, or a Falcon 99 Superheavy.

I would cheer too. From a bunker appropriately far away from the launch.  ;D

Voted no, I grew up with Apollo on the history books and on the TV. I want colonies and my private ticket to space.

ISS *is* a destination. The public has watched it grow over 10 years. You can see it with a good enough scope. Over the next ten years, there will be new spacecraft: Dreamchaser, Dragon, New Glenn (?), the Bigelowoeing... these all might make it up to demo stage. Blame will shift away from NASA if/when these screw up. And private enterprise will help fund them too... when was the last time a shuttle launch was subsidised by a commercial payload or even a paying passenger?
« Last Edit: 02/02/2010 09:53 pm by Lampyridae »

Offline JK Lee

  • Member
  • Posts: 47
  • Houston, TX
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #33 on: 02/02/2010 09:48 pm »
Nope. This is a completely different approach.

Suppose someone was going something crazy, over and over again, and expecting different results. Then, one day, they stop doing the crazy stuff, and try a rational approach.

THAT'S what going on here.

NASA has done the Big State Project approach many times and failed. Now, they are doing something different. You are assuming that the purchase of commercial space transportation could fail, because NASA has failed so many times before, but this one ain't on NASA.

Do you really believe that there is some barrier out there that would prevent private companies from developing more affordable space transportation? If so, please identify that barrier.



It's not completely different.  My point is that the root cause of the issue still exists: Government IS involved.  And government funding can be redirected and cancelled on a whim.  Who is to say that there won't be an Augustine III that will come along and identify that the private sector was not ready and through political bias or otherwise, with the mandate of the next White House administration, pull the funding on this new commercial endeavor two years down the road just as things are about to get rolling?

Is this approach more capitalistic?  Definitely.  But to say that it is purely capitalism when the government is writing the checks would be an abject contradiction of the definition.

Offline Aobrien

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Tampa, Florida
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #34 on: 02/02/2010 09:53 pm »
I miss the idea behind Constellation. Not the way it was set-up. I think the presidents new plan should have been to keep constellation as a program but to start from scratch as far as hardware and everything goes.
NSF L2=The Ultimate Space Passport

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #35 on: 02/02/2010 10:33 pm »
No. With the money freed up, we could actually see something meaningful come out from NASA for once.
Like a probe to the lunar poles, for ground truth on water ice, some ISRU demos, advanced deep space propulsion development, in-space power beaming. Things that actually matter and move us forward.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline telomerase99

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 325
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #36 on: 02/03/2010 01:21 am »
No. I am sorry that this will cause some hardship in those working in the industry but I do not believe that we need to "retain the skilled workforce." The problem with the skilled workforce is that it is hard to tell who is skilled. All I know is that at 1.5 billion per launch the shuttle derived hardware can not be all that valuable, and the workers who produce this hardware, no matter how skilled, are too expensive.

I am so thankful that CxP is cancelled becuase now there is a real possibility of open competition. The Direct guys should no more than anyone how frustrating it can be when an organization with so much power is sullied by special interests.

I welcome the new Mercury 7 over Griffin's pork barrel jobs program.

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7082
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #37 on: 02/03/2010 01:25 am »
No. I am sorry that this will cause some hardship in those working in the industry but I do not believe that we need to "retain the skilled workforce." The problem with the skilled workforce is that it is hard to tell who is skilled. All I know is that at 1.5 billion per launch the shuttle derived hardware can not be all that valuable, and the workers who produce this hardware, no matter how skilled, are too expensive.

I am so thankful that CxP is cancelled becuase now there is a real possibility of open competition. The Direct guys should no more than anyone how frustrating it can be when an organization with so much power is sullied by special interests.

I welcome the new Mercury 7 over Griffin's pork barrel jobs program.
As a DIRECT fan, I celebrate this decision, for it follows the DIRECT program, even if it does not the vehicle within it.
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline sewand

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 227
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #38 on: 02/03/2010 02:10 am »

As a DIRECT fan, I celebrate this decision, for it follows the DIRECT program, even if it does not the vehicle within it.

Well I, for one, welcome our NewSpace overlords. 
(sorry. couldn't resist)   ;)

I think DIRECT phase 3 would have been the ultimate "Constellation" architecture.  A good mix of prudent design with commercial opportunity.   I'm just not very confident this new direction will lead to anything tangible - it all feels very cancellable to me. 
If something like Boeing's ACES-based lunar architecture is chosen - that would be fine.   But if all they are going to do is spread the money to little startups like Sierra Nevada, then it's just a stunt.  Why don't we sign up Kistler one more time? 


Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7082
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: POLL: Do you wish we still had CxP now it's gone (going)?
« Reply #39 on: 02/03/2010 02:21 am »

As a DIRECT fan, I celebrate this decision, for it follows the DIRECT program, even if it does not the vehicle within it.

Well I, for one, welcome our NewSpace overlords. 
(sorry. couldn't resist)   ;)

I think DIRECT phase 3 would have been the ultimate "Constellation" architecture.  A good mix of prudent design with commercial opportunity.   I'm just not very confident this new direction will lead to anything tangible - it all feels very cancellable to me. 
If something like Boeing's ACES-based lunar architecture is chosen - that would be fine.   But if all they are going to do is spread the money to little startups like Sierra Nevada, then it's just a stunt.  Why don't we sign up Kistler one more time? 


Actually, single big programs are easy targets for cancellation.  Lots of smaller ones, not so much.  Look at Skylab vs ISS, Skylab was basically abandoned w/o the funds to support it, while ISS is in constant upgrades, due to it's modular, smaller-piece nature of design.
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1