DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1

[kraisee]

Robert,
The current plans also set a really bad precedent for those children:

If you grow up, go to university, learn valuable engineering and science skills, and put your hearts, minds and lives into the government backed space program which benefits the whole nation -- you need to expect the government to just discard you when they don't want you any more.

Its not quite the message I think we should be sending, is it?

One of my colleagues recently said: "When the President talks about American leadership in science and technology *these* are the people he is talking about. Its kinda hard to see how laying off your leaders and those who will train the next generation is acceptable?"

Ross.

[fotoguzzi]

it's a shame really

The space program is an economic boon to the nation!

Apparently the market has not developed a heat shield material independently of the space program.

Just that one requirement for Orion might spawn a range of new products or improve existing products.  That material or any other space spin-off may end up commonly used in society with hardly a thought as to its origin.

Modify: grammar

[cro-magnon gramps]

I was wondering what your own views on the subject are

Mars should be the primary goal and no later than 2019. I was born almost 15 years after the Apollo 11 flight and I definitely not want to be fifty (or older) when the first crew lands on Mars.

I'm already over fifty, and we're not even back to the Moon yet, much less Mars ... just hoping it happens while I'm still here to see it! 

I was 21 when Apollo 11 landed on the moon, I sure as shootin' don't want to wait another 40 years... the way things are goin' I'll probably not remember my own name by then ;( Direct is my last best chance at seeing another moon landing, this side of sitting on a cloud cheering them on... GO TEAM DIRECT!!

[zapkitty]

Apparently the market has not developed a heat shield material independently of the space program.

Just that one requirement for Orion might spawn a range of new products or improve existing products.  That material or any other space spin offs may end up commonly used in society with hardly a thought as to its origin.

?

Orion's heat shield material was developed by the space program... half a century ago.

[Drapper23]

CBS Poll-July 20,2009-Majority of Americans favor sending humans to Mars-    http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/07/20/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5173978.shtml

[cro-magnon gramps]

If the "Captains" ego's are interfering too much that they simply aren't willing to change their minds, then perhaps they should go down with their ship then.

But they don't have to.   All they have to do is get past this stupid schoolyard "Anything but DIRECT" mentality and they too can be saved, along with all the passengers.

But the water is up to their ankles already and it is now time to make that final choice.

Ross.

I'd call it "moving deck chairs around, on the Titanic!!"

modify: perhaps the Titanic isn't the ship to compare this to... just reading about Jupiter being hit by 'something BIG', and NASA JPL being involved... perhaps Mike became obsessed with Constellation/Ares 1 & V (to the detrement of other departments)... it took him down and is about to take down a few of his crew who can't let go of the harpoon/stick...

[cro-magnon gramps]

Apparently the market has not developed a heat shield material independently of the space program.

Just that one requirement for Orion might spawn a range of new products or improve existing products.  That material or any other space spin offs may end up commonly used in society with hardly a thought as to its origin.

?

Orion's heat shield material was developed by the space program... half a century ago.

 Yes, and SpaceX has improved on that formula... so in my mind, the only space race that matters, is between SpaceX and NASA... RIGHT NOW, with Falcon 1 - launch 5, I'd say that SpaceX has the edge... unless NASA wakes up and smells the rocket fumes from the Pacific...

[cixelsyD]

CBS Poll-July 20,2009-Majority of Americans favor sending humans to Mars-    http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/07/20/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5173978.shtml

Yeah, well the majority of Americans think that money grows on trees, and think NASA is spending trillions of dollars.

I'd like Mars too, but honestly, lets just get a vehicle that can do SOMETHING before we start having large ambitions.


There was a bit of debate of the SpaceX vs NASA race in the spacex thread. It's honestly all a matter of delays. Will the Falcon 9 be delayed less than Ares I-X? Hmmm... I'm sort of leaning thinking the Falcon 9 will have a better chance of launching before the end of the year before Ares I-X

[yinzer]

Likely not. People will be up in arms as it's a "luxury" expenditure in the eyes of the majority.

it's a shame really

Think about it. If you spend $35 billion on the space program, where do you think that money goes? Do they box it up, offload it on the lunar surface and scatter it there? No. It's ONE HELL of an economic stimulus package. Every dime of that money gets spent right here in salaries, mortgages, rents, groceries, clothing, gas for cars, going to the movies, spending in the retail outlets, families going to restaurants, kids buying school lunches, etc, etc. It ALL STAYS HERE FOLKS! It gets spent in the economies all over the country. The space program is an economic boon to the nation!

While true, this is irrelevant.

If we spent a $35 billion on public health care (say), the money also stays right here.  But in addition to all the salaries we pay nurses and doctors and lab techs, people get health care too!  If we spent it on roads or railroads or universities, we'd get the benefits of those instead.

Now I happen to think that space exploration is pretty awesome, and should probably continue to be funded at or a bit above its current levels.

But it's not a stunning endorsement to say that the money isn't rocketed into space, but spent here.  You have to find a pretty bad use of money for that not to be the case.

(note: the current war in Iraq is an example.  we spend a lot of money to on bombs, armored cars, and airplane parts.  not only do they end up destroyed, but they usually destroy something else in the process.  and lord knows how much petroleum we buy from overseas in the process...)

[Ronsmytheiii]

If the "Captains" ego's are interfering too much that they simply aren't willing to change their minds, then perhaps they should go down with their ship then.

But they don't have to.   All they have to do is get past this stupid schoolyard "Anything but DIRECT" mentality and they too can be saved, along with all the passengers.

But the water is up to their ankles already and it is now time to make that final choice.

Ross.

I'd call it "moving deck chairs around, on the Titanic!!"

modify: perhaps the Titanic isn't the ship to compare this to... just reading about Jupiter being hit by 'something BIG', and NASA JPL being involved... perhaps Mike became obsessed with Constellation/Ares 1 & V (to the detrement of other departments)... it took him down and is about to take down a few of his crew who can't let go of the harpoon/stick...

"Some people say changing the cabinet around is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. That's not true; this administration isn't sinking. In fact, this administration is soaring; if anything, it's like rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg. "'

=Stephen Colbert

[TrueBlueWitt]

I'm starting to lose track..

Is a Direct 3.0 Thread?  Or is it a U.S./NASA Politics thread?
Although it seems the two are irrevocably intertwined..

[cro-magnon gramps]

I'm starting to lose track..

Is a Direct 3.0 Thread?  Or is it a U.S./NASA Politics thread?
Although it seems the two are irrevocably intertwined..

While I admit my Ahab/Harpoon comment was obscure in regard to this thread, my underlying point is that so much can become added value with Direct, as Ross has repeatedly said... wrt the Jupiter planetary strike, coming near the anniversary of the Shoemaker/Levy impacts, and additionally, only becoming known by chance, the question of what the Jupiter LV could be used for becomes answered... a network of astroid/comet detectors out beyond the moon would be a must... without Direct, this is going to be impossible... if we are to survive long enough to become a space faring species, we have to be able to protect the one world we have... therefore, the Nasa Administrator and his Assistant, have as much interest in a capable LV for this and other Nasa endeavours as they have with reaching the Moon or Mars... be it Jupiter 130/246 or the Falcon 1/9... the Ares line is a DEAD-END

[fotoguzzi]

Apparently the market has not developed a heat shield material...
 

Orion's heat shield material was developed by the space program... half a century ago.

Apparently, I'm an inaccurate.  I thought I had read that they were baking from scratch.  Nope!

Modfiy: idiot id10t

[gladiator1332]

I'm starting to lose track..

Is a Direct 3.0 Thread?  Or is it a U.S./NASA Politics thread?
Although it seems the two are irrevocably intertwined..

I think it is just a matter of the state we are in. To me, the engineering side of Direct 3.0 is mostly done. Sure the design always evolves, but right now the Direct Team is playing the political game.

So it would be impossible to have a Direct 3.0 thread without discussing the political side of things.

[Drapper23]

Is it overly ambituous to say that we can & should send people to Mars? Ridiculous!! We could have sent people to Mars in the 1980s!!!. I agree that we must focus on the correct launch vehicle for manned lunar, NEO, Phobos & Mars missions, but we shouldn't lose sight of the destinations. That's why we need Direct 3. It allows us to visit all of these destinations safely & at a reasonable timetable & cost.

[winkhomewinkhome]

I do not know if this is a sign but I found the following VERY interesting this evening.

I was watching the "NASA Celebrates the Apollo Program - 40th Anniversary" on NASA TV

During the video montage of "the future" and where we are going - We saw an EDS with Orion and Altair - but guess what we did not see - Ares I and V which normally start the roll were missing.  Maybe I am seeing too much into it - and I had to shut it off and go to dinner, so maybe it popped up later - but that is where it should have been.

Did anyone else watch it this eveing?

Toughts anyone?

[SoFDMC]

Is it overly ambituous to say that we can & should send people to Mars? Ridiculous!! We could have sent people to Mars in the 1980s!!!. I agree that we must focus on the correct launch vehicle for manned lunar, NEO, Phobos & Mars missions, but we shouldn't lose sight of the destinations. That's why we need Direct 3. It allows us to visit all of these destinations safely & at a reasonable timetable & cost.

How things might be different today if we had reached Mars by that time.

We would be probably talking about boat rides on Triton by now.

[kraisee]

I'm starting to lose track..

Is a Direct 3.0 Thread?  Or is it a U.S./NASA Politics thread?
Although it seems the two are irrevocably intertwined..

I think it is just a matter of the state we are in. To me, the engineering side of Direct 3.0 is mostly done. Sure the design always evolves, but right now the Direct Team is playing the political game.

So it would be impossible to have a Direct 3.0 thread without discussing the political side of things.

As long as pretty-much all space money comes from the US Treasury, you can make a very safe bet that the politics will continue to be the driving force behind everything in this business.

From a personal perspective, when I started this, nearly 4 years ago, my only real interest was the launchers and the spacecraft.   I knew nothing about the politics, nor the budget aspects.

But I quickly came to the understanding that without the politics falling into line the money won't flow.   And without the money, NOTHING else happens.   Steve Squires said of the Mars Exploration Rovers that they "follow the water", well to understand the US Space Program you must always "follow the money".

No, its not a perfect situation.   But the total amount of money actually coming into this industry from non-government sources is pretty darn small -- less than 5% of the total.

Its going to take a while for that to change -- and until it does, Congress and the White House are the actual "customer", and just like a guy buying a new car, the "sellers" have to make their solutions appeal to the customer, otherwise the customer simply starts shopping somewhere else.

On DIRECT, we have spend an incredible amount of time working out precisely how to address all of the critical issues in a comprehensive way:   Politics, Budget, Schedule, Workforce, Risk, Safety, Performance, Infrastructure, Mission Objectives and a host of other 'requirements' must all be addressed fully in order to get a truly acceptable solution.

Every other solution we have seen so far is aimed at appealing to only one or two specific companies, or one or two specific states.   They are all very short-sighted solutions.

My colleague Steve Metschan once phrased it thus:   "You shouldn't try to make 20% of the market 100% happy, you need to make 80% of the market 80% happy".

This has been *PROVEN* now -- twice -- in practice.

First, O'Keefe & Steidle proposed an all-EELV solution which promised to satisfy Boeing & Lockheed (~20% of the industry), but which would have resulted in ATK, KSC and MSFC essentially being shut down.   The political interests for those organizations fought back and we ended up getting those plans completely overturned.

The "opposition" didn't take very long to replace that plan with Griffin's plan, which switched it all around.   ATK and MSFC (~20% of the industry) were essentially put in the drivers seat and a few bones were carefully handed out to LM and Boeing to keep them quiet -- although those bones were often threatened any time either company stepped out of line.   Today that plan is also dying and is going to be replaced.


In both situations only a very small part of the market was ever satisfied, leaving the bulk of the market to fight hard behind the scenes to get things changed.   Neither plan lasted because of this.


Well, today we're about to choose a new, third, plan which its is safe to say will satisfy some and annoy others.   If it satisfies only 20% of the marketplace again, you can bet that within 3-4 years it too will be overturned as well -- the market is getting real good at overturning things!

But if we choose a solution which doesn't give total dominance to just one or two entities, but which carefully "spreads the wealth" in a reasonable and acceptable fashion, it can appeal to 80% of the market.   Those entities may not be 100% happy, as if they each got complete dominance, but if they are 80% happy with a good, fair share -- and if this plan includes at least 80% of the players -- then it will be a dominant GROUP, controlling 80% of the interests in this market.


This sort of "Alliance" is how you build a strong political position.

*NOBODY* else, except for DIRECT, has even attempted to suggest such an alliance.

We have excellent profits to be made for (alphabetical) Aerojet, Alliant Techsystems, Boeing, Pratt & Whitney, Rocketdyne, Lockheed Martin, Orbital Sciences, Space Exploration Technologies, United Launch Alliance, United Space Alliance and a host of other sub-contractors too.   And we are offering a solution which benefits MSFC, JSC, KSC, Stennis, Michoud and all the other centers as well.   The political aim is to keep the money which funnels from NASA to the various space states fairly intact and "as is".

Unfortunately, Senator Shelby is a hurdle here.   He has been fighting to get MSFC's budget doubled.   Well, that isn't going to happen and he isn't likely to be very happy about that.   MSFC won't double in size any more, but MSFC's $3bn/year budget also doesn't shrink at all under DIRECT's plans -- so it should still be an acceptable compromise (80% happy).    More than that, KSC, JSC, MAF, SSC, Ames, Glenn, Goddard and all the other centers (80%) don't have to shrink in order to pay for MSFC's expansion either -- and the Senators and House Representatives for all those areas need to push hard for their own states interests.

Its sad, but true, that the politics of the situation are at least as important as any other aspect of the program.   Getting the politics right is half the battle to making a program really work -- and if you fail to get the politics right (as we have twice before) you only guarantee the ultimate doom of the plans.

While it would be nice, you really can't remove the Politics from the equation.

Ross.

[MagDes]

I love to speculate about where we should have been right now assuming the Saturn vehicles had enjoyed sustained support for the last 40 years, but the bottom line is that after Apollo 12 support and the political will evaporated. Now I'll bend anyone’s ear off trying to go through the list of NASA spin offs before their eyes glaze over, but the sad reality is that even if you have regular bold new missions people will lose interest until something goes wrong. Where does that leave us?

NASA and its contractors need something like Direct to leverage what they already do extremely well (field heavy launch vehicles), but for much less money. Only a robust, economical launch vehicle program, which can absorb the swells and troughs of the political cycle, has any hope of surviving in the long term. That’s the first thing Apollo was missing. The second thing Apollo was missing was a way for private business to participate and make money, directly off of the space infrastructure. This time, Direct lets us build a large, robust, sustainable, infrastructure in space as well as providing a business model for private industry to latch onto. For some reason, most people will undervalue the Space Program, but we’ve already seen that the space economy is large enough to lobby for itself. I believe they will continue to be successful in ensuring some reasonable level of funding for the Space Program. We just need a Program that won’t break the bank. 

The infrastructure the Direct team proposes seems like it could be sustainable in the long run, and that’s what space development desperately needs to be successful. They have restored the hope I lost 3 years ago when we started to see the cracks in the Ares program. 

[SoFDMC]

Also with international participants supplying fuel for depots in exchange for seats on space tours will make it that much harder for the government to quit the program, since its no longer solely their call.