Orion's pilots will have in-the-loop control on many phases of operation, such as launch abort, orbital burn abort, 6DOF proximity ops, docking, remote control from other spacecraft, and entry/landing (roll).
There is inertia at JSC to keep some things for the astronauts to do so that they can have some control vs being passengers.
In general it is cheaper to train an astronaut to fly a vehicle then it is to design a fool-proof automated system to fly the vehicle. Obviously there are reasons why most vehicles need to be able to fly autonomously, but it does come at a cost. There is also an issue with trying to attract the best to the astronaut core and keeping good morale; massaging commanders' egos might not be that big a sacrifice in that respect.
1. It is a dangerous thing to ascribe motive to anyone for the things that they do. 2. We would all do well to ... steer clear of making pronouncements wrt to "why" she did or did not do something. There is really no way of knowing short of asking her. 3. Has anyone on this thread actually done that?
I. NASA HSF doesn't matter, US HSF is what matters2. The 5 strategic needs are NASA's and not Garver's3. NASA's charter says nothing about manned space exploration.
...why is Lori Garver pushing commercial operations of HSF, even at the risk of killing our HSF program?
1. Lori Garver seems to be immune to the risk of killing existing NASA/contractors HSF expertise. Charlie Bolden - not so much. 2. Lori Garver is an expert in politics. Charlie Bolden has flown the Shuttle. 3. Lori Garver has 5 strategic needs for NASA to serve, and none has anything to do with manned space exploration. Charlie Bolden said Joe Shmuck won't make an ascan. 4. Lori Garver finds a potential victory in the Senate Bill. Charlie Bolden is MIA.
...Quote from: renclod on 09/07/2010 09:23 pm... 3. Lori Garver has 5 strategic needs for NASA to serve, and none has anything to do with manned space exploration. ...3. I took a quick googol to no avail. What are these five things?...
... 3. Lori Garver has 5 strategic needs for NASA to serve, and none has anything to do with manned space exploration.
My question has to be does the author of this post understand that Spacex might be after this October launch 6-8 months from starting Cargo delivery to the ISS? Does the author also realize that Orbital Sciences is only 6 months away from testing their Taurus 2 vehicle and less than a year away from ISS cargo delivery as well? Does the author also realize that Boeing is well along with development of their CST-100 manned capsule and that at about the same time Spacex should have their own manned capsule ready as well. 2011 will be the year commercial cargo will be realized. There is no going back, one way or another commercial cargo spaceflight is going to be here next year. I suggest we get used to it.
Let's put those guys on one team
Folks who think NEO missions are just a little bit more than lunar missions might look up the delta V for NEO vs Mars missions.
QuoteIn that time, it has made only six launch attempts... ...and I've made how many attempts? Oh. Right. This is not about me. People are gonna complain: Look, Ares was painted a different color than Falcon. You can't compare apples and oranges, but that's wrong. In this business, I think it's about time to start comparing apples and oranges. Why does this delicio.us little red apple cost $500M, but this huge, pulpy orange cost $13B? What apple do you get when you give pre-reform NASA $500M? Hint: we're sending it to the scrapyard, unused.So yeah, NewSpace is somewhat behind schedule. And the "experts in Utah" are ahead of schedule?
In that time, it has made only six launch attempts...
Garver likes commercial because.. 1. her boss says that... and 2. she thinks Nasa made everything seem much harder than it is..... ( they didnt , it is very hard !!! ).witness Rutan's space ship one............However, Rutan only went 1500 mph... and it was not easy nor cheap...... 17,500 up then down... that separates the men from the boys.We succeeded because we had the best in the country, maybe the world, and I am not sure even Nasa has that right now.
perhaps she has eyes, that are hooked to a brain, and watched the spacex and nasa tests on youtube and came to the same conclusion anyone with eyes and a brain would, nasa is losin' it.ares-1x with a dummy 2nd stage that the first stage rams into.falcon9 with a working 2nd stage. orion crashes.dragon gently sets down perfectly.maybe we need to give eyes and brains to our opinions.where did all that nasa money go anyways?, not towards a working rocket thats for sure.
Quote from: dks13827 on 09/12/2010 08:29 pmFolks who think NEO missions are just a little bit more than lunar missions might look up the delta V for NEO vs Mars missions.LEO to lunar surface: 5.93 km/sLEO to a close NEO: 5.22 km/sLEO to Martian surface: 10.22 km/sSource: en.wikipedia.net/wiki/Delta-V_Budget What exactly are you getting at?
Quote from: Tony Ostinato on 09/12/2010 11:04 pmperhaps she has eyes, that are hooked to a brain, and watched the spacex and nasa tests on youtube and came to the same conclusion anyone with eyes and a brain would, nasa is losin' it.ares-1x with a dummy 2nd stage that the first stage rams into.falcon9 with a working 2nd stage. orion crashes.dragon gently sets down perfectly.maybe we need to give eyes and brains to our opinions.where did all that nasa money go anyways?, not towards a working rocket thats for sure.NASA is capable but atm they are ham strung. Political reality supports shuttle derived even if shuttle derived isn't the best tool(Ares-1). NASA choose an Orion capable of lunar flight almost asap(block I is LEO only but has many lunar requirements). This drives up the cost for ISS missions with Orion. Like Orion, Apollo had a need for a LEO booster. NASA wisely choose the existing Saturn I. They upgraded it to Saturn IB and Apollo could do it's unmanned LEO tests without much delay. Imagine if Orion were on an EELV and NASA put that $10 billion into an HLV, instead of Ares 1. They might not have made it but they would be much closer to the goal today.
... she had a specific Houston to Orlando astronaut travel in mind when she wrote that
With or without the blank checks of the Apollo era?
LEO to lunar surface: 5.93 km/sLEO to a close NEO: 5.22 km/s