AMS is about jobs, not Science.
Interesting: "We are not hardware limited" (but fiscal).
The February "deadline" comes from the September 2010 deadline (18 months), which itself can (and probably will) be redecided by the next Congress or administration. In the end: plenty of time, not hardware limited.
The Senate's authorization bill is different:http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=b5f84adf-fb01-40f3-93dc-4e74d8af12b0&Month=6&Year=2008More confusion ensues.
Is the reality of the gap starting to sink in?
This has probably already been asked, but I can't find it. Could AMS be converted to a free-flyer, and launched by a heavy ELV?
Quote from: psloss on 06/24/2008 07:57 pmThe Senate's authorization bill is different:http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=b5f84adf-fb01-40f3-93dc-4e74d8af12b0&Month=6&Year=2008More confusion ensues. Bigger than this thread alone:"The bill includes a number of provisions to ensure the United States has uninterrupted human access to space. Specifically, the bill would prevent the Administrator from retiring the Shuttle in 2010""The bill requires the agency to develop a plan to support the operations of the International Space Station beyond 2015 and to ensure the Station’s scientific capabilities are utilized to the maximum extent"Is the reality of the gap starting to sink in?
"We don't think that it's a decision that should be made in the near term that could affect our $100 billion investment [into the space station]."