NASA Admin, of course. But I hope Bridenstine gets to keep the position, regardless of who the next POTUS is. I think he's been doing a decent job.
In terms of the Obama Administration, they certainly deserve a lot of credit for commercial crew
Artemis isn't about flags and footprints. Why go to the South pole of the Moon if your objective is flags and footprints?
Besides, I think that the idea of selecting commercial, reusable landers is to ensure a sustainable presence to the Moon as soon as 2026.
There is also the idea of a base camp.
Just to be clear I know that Garver deserves a lot of credit for pushing for commercial
Perhaps, it would have been difficult to start a commercial HLS program in 2010 given the political environment at that time but the Obama Administration could have tried it again later on.
Incidentally, the same people that opposed commercial crew in Congress back then are now opposing commercial HLS. The environment is better than in 2010 but pushing for commercial partnerships still isn't easy.
Quote from: yg1968 on 05/28/2020 10:48 pmWhat Presidents propose makes a difference. The Obama administration proposed canceling Constellation and it got cancelled. Artemis got funded because the Trump administration proposed it. Commercial crew got funded because the Obama administration proposed it.True but Alpha got greatly reworked. WH's trip to Mars was DOA. H's Constellation was cancelled. O's desire for how Constellation was cancelled was thwarted. Time will tell.I guess Nixon won though. He wanted deep cuts and got them.Sorry, only thing the brain can dredge up for C is changing Alpha into the ISS.
What Presidents propose makes a difference. The Obama administration proposed canceling Constellation and it got cancelled. Artemis got funded because the Trump administration proposed it. Commercial crew got funded because the Obama administration proposed it.
...Just a note though. While the Commercial Cargo & Crew programs had some semblance of possible commercial use outside of NASA, there is no demonstrated non-NASA demand for such services at the Moon. So I don't really call the companies winning contracts "commercial", I would just call them New Space.
Quote from: MATTBLAK on 05/28/2020 07:54 amNASA Admin, of course. But I hope Bridenstine gets to keep the position, regardless of who the next POTUS is. I think he's been doing a decent job.Jim B. certainly has the right amount of enthusiasm for the job. But his record is mixed IMO. He has made bold moves forward with regards to returning to the Moon. ...But he also has made several glaring mistakes. Getting rid of Gerst was a notable one. Loverro as his replacement turned out to be a bad choice.
[Jim B.] also failed to deliver "the plan" for lunar exploration on time, despite US Congress asking for said plan multiple times. That in turn led to failing to gain sufficient support in US Congress (and thus funding) to properly execute on Artemis.
IMO in everything Jim B. does it is very clear that he is a politician first and an administrator second. I won't be sorry if he has to leave, regardless of who the next POTUS is.
Can't wait to read more about what happened behind the scenes at NASA in the 2009 to 2014 timeframe.
Artemis isn't about flags and footprints. Why go to the South pole of the Moon if your objective is flags and footprints? Besides, I think that the idea of selecting commercial, reusable landers is to ensure a sustainable presence to the Moon as soon as 2026. There is also the idea of a base camp.
The Obama administration proposed canceling Constellation and it got cancelled.
Artemis got funded because the Trump administration proposed it.
Sorry, only thing the brain can dredge up for C is changing Alpha into the ISS.
It's not just New Space. It's a fixed price contract where NASA pays for a service. BAAs are also much better than FAR contracts.
I disagree that there is no market for the Moon. There is a market (but not with SLS).
Incidentally, the same people that opposed commercial crew in Congress back then are now opposing commercial HLS.
Quote from: yg1968 on 05/28/2020 08:35 pmIncidentally, the same people that opposed commercial crew in Congress back then are now opposing commercial HLS.Are you sure about that? The Republican-controlled Senate is today by and large in favor of commercial landers but until Russia invaded Ukraine continually underfunded commercial crew. The Democratically-controlled House was more favorable to commercial crew but today is pushing against commercial landers.
SpaceX has a customer to fly around the Moon on Starship. I am pretty sure that he would rather land on the Moon, if that was an option. Same thing for the spaceflight participants that have gone to the ISS.
Quote from: yg1968 on 05/28/2020 07:55 pmJust to be clear I know that Garver deserves a lot of credit for pushing for commercial No because this isn't what happened. The credit here goes to:1. ULA for proposing a commercial BEO architecture before CXP even really got going, as they had the foresight to know it could not work.
2. Bill Nelson Joe Biden KBH and others in congress, who did not entirely trust the conventional contracting structure post CXP.
3. Augustine Comission.
4. Commercial space advocacy groups.