Shuttle Man - 30/10/2005 12:09 AMAnd this is after Griffin had spoken to JAXA? That would make this very interesting for the relevant to the 19 flight mandate.
kcowing - 30/10/2005 10:22 AMQuoteShuttle Man - 30/10/2005 12:09 AMAnd this is after Griffin had spoken to JAXA? That would make this very interesting for the relevant to the 19 flight mandate.Kibo will almost certainly fly. JAXA's small logistics module (which would be attached to the top docking port on the aft end of Kibo) may not fly, and the Centrifuge Accommodation Module which JAXA has been building for the U.S. will most certainly not fly.
kraisee - 30/10/2005 12:25 PMQuotekcowing - 30/10/2005 10:22 AMQuoteShuttle Man - 30/10/2005 12:09 AMAnd this is after Griffin had spoken to JAXA? That would make this very interesting for the relevant to the 19 flight mandate.Kibo will almost certainly fly. JAXA's small logistics module (which would be attached to the top docking port on the aft end of Kibo) may not fly, and the Centrifuge Accommodation Module which JAXA has been building for the U.S. will most certainly not fly.Everything could fly if we use the SDLV later on...
Ben - 30/10/2005 11:08 AMYea, Kibo and Columbus are the major Int'l contributions and are certain to fly as Keith pointed out.
kcowing - 30/10/2005 3:13 PMQuotekraisee - 30/10/2005 12:25 PMQuotekcowing - 30/10/2005 10:22 AMQuoteShuttle Man - 30/10/2005 12:09 AMAnd this is after Griffin had spoken to JAXA? That would make this very interesting for the relevant to the 19 flight mandate.Kibo will almost certainly fly. JAXA's small logistics module (which would be attached to the top docking port on the aft end of Kibo) may not fly, and the Centrifuge Accommodation Module which JAXA has been building for the U.S. will most certainly not fly.Everything could fly if we use the SDLV later on...Not true. Some things i.e. the Centrifuge Accomodation Module and its payload hardware are being halted now so as to save funds to pay for future launch vehicle development. You can't launch something that does not exist.
Spacely - 30/10/2005 4:33 PMI'm not totally up to speed on the ISS and what could/should/might-have been.Any opinions here on whether the defunct Crew Hab module or the Centrifuge module is the bigger loss?
kraisee - 30/10/2005 5:50 PMQuotekcowing - 30/10/2005 3:13 PMQuotekraisee - 30/10/2005 12:25 PMQuotekcowing - 30/10/2005 10:22 AMQuoteShuttle Man - 30/10/2005 12:09 AMAnd this is after Griffin had spoken to JAXA? That would make this very interesting for the relevant to the 19 flight mandate.Kibo will almost certainly fly. JAXA's small logistics module (which would be attached to the top docking port on the aft end of Kibo) may not fly, and the Centrifuge Accommodation Module which JAXA has been building for the U.S. will most certainly not fly.Everything could fly if we use the SDLV later on...Not true. Some things i.e. the Centrifuge Accomodation Module and its payload hardware are being halted now so as to save funds to pay for future launch vehicle development. You can't launch something that does not exist.If you cancel Shuttle now & stop building ISS, even after you allocate the money freed up to build SDLV early, it will leave you at least $1Bn spare change for other projects. I'm sure some of that could be used to finish the last few elements of ISS which are currently never going -to be used.Ross.
Spacely - 30/10/2005 3:33 PM...Any opinions here on whether the defunct Crew Hab module or the Centrifuge module is the bigger loss?
lmike - 30/10/2005 7:07 PMQuoteSpacely - 30/10/2005 3:33 PM...Any opinions here on whether the defunct Crew Hab module or the Centrifuge module is the bigger loss?Here's a brief description of the Centrifuge module+CAM: http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/spacestation/components/centrifuge_module.htmlI, for one, am puzzled as to why a (IMHO, THE) most important experiment to our progress for the out-of-LEO manned spaceflight, and even survival of humans on varying G level planets, on the ISS (and one reason I would fully support the ISS research for) would be in sent into limbo now.
Terrible Twosome - 30/10/2005 10:20 PMSpace Station Freedom? I'm only young and thus do not know about this. Can anyone show me links or pictures?
kcowing - 30/10/2005 7:41 PMTrust me, there will be no "spare change". There never is. Every penny will be spent on CEV, CLV, SDLV, and lunar architecture development and other things - NASA will make absolutely sure of that. These items are being cancelled to save money, plain and simple. As for finishing these elements, given the state that various elements to be cancelled are currently in - and what it would take to pick up years hence, it would be cheaper in the long run to find additional money and finish them now and put them into long term storage than to simply start all over again years from now - more or less from scratch. You can't just put the development of things like the CAM up on a shelf and get back to it later. But NASA is not thinking about the long term consequences - they need as much money as they can find just to build the CLV and SDLV and they are taking it from things they now deem "unnecessary". If they don't find enough money they will deem more things to be "unnecessary". Once the CAM is cancelled, it is gone.
kraisee - 30/10/2005 10:27 PMQuotekcowing - 30/10/2005 7:41 PMTrust me, there will be no "spare change". There never is. Every penny will be spent on CEV, CLV, SDLV, and lunar architecture development and other things - NASA will make absolutely sure of that. These items are being cancelled to save money, plain and simple. As for finishing these elements, given the state that various elements to be cancelled are currently in - and what it would take to pick up years hence, it would be cheaper in the long run to find additional money and finish them now and put them into long term storage than to simply start all over again years from now - more or less from scratch. You can't just put the development of things like the CAM up on a shelf and get back to it later. But NASA is not thinking about the long term consequences - they need as much money as they can find just to build the CLV and SDLV and they are taking it from things they now deem "unnecessary". If they don't find enough money they will deem more things to be "unnecessary". Once the CAM is cancelled, it is gone.Keith, I wholeheartedly agree with your view that the ISS modules should be finished ASAP and then stored until flight - but there are a couple of other points I'd like to comment on.One, NASA isn't spending any significant money now on the SDLV development. The CEV & CLV are getting all the Exploration Systems money, not the SDLV. A relatively tiny bit of design work and conceptualization is going on on the big booster, but no real work will take place until Shuttle has already retired.And two, IF STS were to finish next year, NASA would then use the $5Bn from the STS to allocate to the SDLV program and speed up the development of CEV too, but they could do that without having to close down the currently allocated funding used to build the last few outstanding ISS elements. If NASA wants to fly them still, they wouldn't HAVE to cut that development work.As you say, if CAM or SPP is shelved at all, they're done for. But what I'm saying is that by going with the "accelerated program", they wouldn't have to be cancelled - they could really still fly and we could have the full ISS again - oh, AND accelerate both the moon and Mars programs by 5 years too.-Ross.
Peter NASA - 30/10/2005 10:26 PMQuoteTerrible Twosome - 30/10/2005 10:20 PMSpace Station Freedom? I'm only young and thus do not know about this. Can anyone show me links or pictures?http://www.friends-partners.org/partners/mwade/graphics/grame138.htmEnjoy.
kcowing - 30/10/2005 11:44 PMThere is no "accelerated program" for SDLV. NASA will fly shuttles until 2010 or so. There will be no funds sitting around to accelerate SDLV. How many Shuttle flights? TBD. They barely have enough to get CEV/CLV started as it is and admit privately that things will get delayed by several years. Any funds saved - regardless of how that is done - will be poured into CEV, CLV, and then SDLV - in that order of priority. They are not going to shut shuttle down early - that is politically impossible - end of discussion. You guys need to get over this "SDLV sooner" notion. It ain't gonna happen.
kraisee - 30/10/2005 10:56 PMQuotekcowing - 30/10/2005 11:44 PMThere is no "accelerated program" for SDLV. NASA will fly shuttles until 2010 or so. There will be no funds sitting around to accelerate SDLV. How many Shuttle flights? TBD. They barely have enough to get CEV/CLV started as it is and admit privately that things will get delayed by several years. Any funds saved - regardless of how that is done - will be poured into CEV, CLV, and then SDLV - in that order of priority. They are not going to shut shuttle down early - that is politically impossible - end of discussion. You guys need to get over this "SDLV sooner" notion. It ain't gonna happen.I believe you've got some of the best contacts out there, and if anyone can find the real SP on this, I think it'd be you.But I have heard this from a number of different sources, some NASA, some contractor - including one fairly high up in the ESMD itself. He believed it was directly tied to Griffin's comments after the Andy Card meeting at the White House about Shuttle not flying any more.These same guys tipped me off that the decision about SDLV design had been made in favour of the In-Line concept about six weeks before you broke the story on NASAWatch. That info being correct gives me a reason to have some faith in what they've said to me this time too.I'm guessing you've already got many feelers out though, so I'm certain that you will find any real paydirt if there is any to be found.-Ross.