Besides continuing the science they are doing now, five things. 1. Scrap the vomit comet. Preferably on tuesday. 2. Immediately leave the space transportation business. Not just LEO, the lander designs have clearly shown that Marshall can't build efficient systems for lunar missions either.3. As soon as a commercial alternative is available, give the ISS to the europeans and russians and cut all funding to the program. Build no more human habitable hardware ever again. Ever. Both the Space Shuttle and Space Station Freedom/Fred/Fe/ ISS should be ample proof of why this is a good idea.4. Devote a substantial portion of the agencies resources on non-chemical propulsion technology development. No more powerpoints, I want them to fly boilerplate designs (without driving up costs and getting the program cancelled by bolting on scientific payloads), and I want them to fly often.5. Develop a low mass fission reactor for lunar and exploration missions in both the 100kWe and MWe range.
Christine - 30/4/2007 10:57 AM As soon as a commercial alternative is available, give the ISS to the europeans and russians
Christine - 30/4/2007 10:57 AMBesides continuing the science they are doing now, five things. 1. Scrap the vomit comet. Preferably on tuesday. 2. Immediately leave the space transportation business. Not just LEO, the lander designs have clearly shown that Marshall can't build efficient systems for lunar missions either.3. As soon as a commercial alternative is available, give the ISS to the europeans and russians and cut all funding to the program. Build no more human habitable hardware ever again. Ever. Both the Space Shuttle and Space Station Freedom/Fred/Fe/ ISS should be ample proof of why this is a good idea.4. Devote a substantial portion of the agencies resources on non-chemical propulsion technology development. No more powerpoints, I want them to fly boilerplate designs (without driving up costs and getting the program cancelled by bolting on scientific payloads), and I want them to fly often.5. Develop a low mass fission reactor for lunar and exploration missions in both the 100kWe and MWe range.
E_ E_ H - 30/4/2007 12:36 PMJosh I must say I find myself slightly perplexed by your two Threads. In one you propose "Surgical Strikes" and Militarised Space, and in the other you're asking about what we want from NASA? What's your angle?
Christine - 30/4/2007 12:42 PMJim the OP asked what I wanted, not what I thought was politically feasible. Secondly, if it's not Marshall, which center came up with the current LSAM plans?
Jim - 30/4/2007 11:56 AMQuoteChristine - 30/4/2007 12:42 PMJim the OP asked what I wanted, not what I thought was politically feasible. Secondly, if it's not Marshall, which center came up with the current LSAM plans?ESAS
Christine - 30/4/2007 1:19 PMThanks Jim. I just did a little followup and googled the final ESAS report and found the core members page. It turns out that just about every center was involved, Expand Marshall in my original post to all centers.
Shorty Powers - 30/4/2007 1:46 PM(Hey, NASA, ever heard of an "OPEN HOUSE?" Stage a few!)