ATK push for US space flight independence via Liberty

[Rocket Science]

Integrating multiple different components in order to create a reliable launch system is challenging, especially when they were never designed to be used together in the first place.  The devil is in the details…  In the end is always “just a matter of time and money”… How long and how much you got?

I can tell you if the impale themselves over this thing financially I won't shed a tear. Its their demon, if they want to keep it alive on their head be it, and all its wonderful quirks.

Well at least we'll have a front seat...

[notsorandom]

Here's Barbree's elaboration on why chooses Liberty and thinks SpaceX is inexperienced. SNC is thrown under the bus.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48205926/ns/technology_and_science-space/

The coincidence between this article and the pending CCiCap decision can't be ignored.  It could influence somehow.  Part of the ATK push?

Its very doubtful that an opinion article will sway those making the decision one way or the other. Even one written by a veteran space journalist. It may also be possible that this article has not been read by anyone in the capacity to influence CCiCap.

Those deciding which company gets a CCiCap award will be taking into account things such as the ability of each company to field and operate their respective systems, the safety of those systems, and their cost. Their rubrics for evaluating those criteria are no doubt more quantitative and less subjective then the opinion of Mr. Barbree or any other observer of the process.

[rmencos]

The coincidence between this article and the pending CCiCap decision can't be ignored.  It could influence somehow.

A bit too late for that, isn't it?

Probably yes, unless it's a really close race and a decision has not been made yet.  Bolden and Garver could weigh in.  The White House could also weigh in, although the ethics are tricky and probably not worth it.   More likely though the influence is a long term effect that could be worked into popular opinion, which in turn can be worked into political opinion.  That's useful for a protest (think Boeing in the tanker dispute) or for a future competition.   

[Rocket Science]

Its very doubtful that an opinion article will sway those making the decision one way or the other. Even one written by a veteran space journalist.

Of course this is true, but it may be that Mr. Barbree is writing what he is writing not because he wants to influence opinion, but because he knows which way the wind is blowing, at least at KSC.  His opinion reflects, I think, the desires of a great many of those who work, or who once worked, at Kennedy.  The reason is simple.  Only one of the alternatives promises to keep Launch Complex 39 alive.

 - Ed Kyle

Are you saying that he is pandering to the crucial Florida Space Coast voters that seem to have an influence in election outcomes? So we are treading on political science and not rocket science…

[Prober]

Here's Barbree's elaboration on why chooses Liberty and thinks SpaceX is inexperienced. SNC is thrown under the bus.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48205926/ns/technology_and_science-space/

The coincidence between this article and the pending CCiCap decision can't be ignored.  It could influence somehow.  Part of the ATK push?

never thought I'd see this from NBC:
 
"and the thousands of high-tech workers who lost their jobs when the space effort was outsourced to Russia need work."
 

[FinalFrontier]

Its very doubtful that an opinion article will sway those making the decision one way or the other. Even one written by a veteran space journalist.

Of course this is true, but it may be that Mr. Barbree is writing what he is writing not because he wants to influence opinion, but because he knows which way the wind is blowing, at least at KSC.  His opinion reflects, I think, the desires of a great many of those who work, or who once worked, at Kennedy.  The reason is simple.  Only one of the alternatives promises to keep Launch Complex 39 alive.

 - Ed Kyle

Wrong. Way to throw SNC and Boeing under the bus.

[Rocket Science]

Its very doubtful that an opinion article will sway those making the decision one way or the other. Even one written by a veteran space journalist.

Of course this is true, but it may be that Mr. Barbree is writing what he is writing not because he wants to influence opinion, but because he knows which way the wind is blowing, at least at KSC.  His opinion reflects, I think, the desires of a great many of those who work, or who once worked, at Kennedy.  The reason is simple.  Only one of the alternatives promises to keep Launch Complex 39 alive.

 - Ed Kyle

Are you saying that he is pandering to the crucial Florida Space Coast voters that seem to have an influence in election outcomes? So we are treading on political science and not rocket science…

No.  It's not political.  It's news-related.  I think that Barbree is talking up the side that he thinks is most likely to win, based on what he's hearing "on the ground" as they too often say.  If Liberty gets money, he looks more like a prophet - a wise old news hound. 

 - Ed Kyle

I mention it Ed because of who is advising Romney on space, is also the father of Ares 1, brought to you by ATK…  Just connecting dots, or I could just be seeing spots again…

[QuantumG]

Griffin [..] is not the "father of Ares 1".  The concept was conceived before he even came to work at NASA.

Yeah, back in 2004 by Owen Garriott and Mike Griffin.

[woods170]

Here's Barbree's elaboration on why chooses Liberty and thinks SpaceX is inexperienced. SNC is thrown under the bus.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48205926/ns/technology_and_science-space/

A little over 10 years ago I decided to stop reading Jay's articles and books after I found increasing fault in his writings.

So, after a decade I decided to read this most recent article of Jay's hand. Unfortunately, that effort only served to re-confirm my decision from over 10 years ago.

It's sad to notice that such a well established name in space-journalism manages to put so many factual errors into his opinion article.

[Comga]

Griffin [..] is not the "father of Ares 1".  The concept was conceived before he even came to work at NASA.

Yeah, back in 2004 by Owen Garriott and Mike Griffin.

Oh, say it ain't so, Joe!
Owen Garriott was a hero of mine, the skinny, PhD engineer, Skylab astronaut.
Then there was this under "Conclusions and Recommendations"

"At this point, SDV designs including both an SRM-based vehicle for CEV services and an in-line heavy-lift configuration appear to be very attractive options for leveraging the investment in infrastructure and people for a quick response."

Thanks for the link, QuantumG.

[Downix]

Griffin [..] is not the "father of Ares 1".  The concept was conceived before he even came to work at NASA.

Yeah, back in 2004 by Owen Garriott and Mike Griffin.

Oh, say it ain't so, Joe!
Owen Garriott was a hero of mine, the skinny, PhD engineer, Skylab astronaut.
Then there was this under "Conclusions and Recommendations"

"At this point, SDV designs including both an SRM-based vehicle for CEV services and an in-line heavy-lift configuration appear to be very attractive options for leveraging the investment in infrastructure and people for a quick response."

Thanks for the link, QuantumG.

The design they put in there could have been done with relative quickness, but then they brought on the 23 metric ton Orion, which it could not lift....

[sdsds]

"The original concept for [Ares I] originated in the astronaut office at JSC in the fall of 2003." That's how Doc Horowitz tells the story, anyway. At the time he was head of the Shuttle SRB Program at ATK.

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1555/1

He says there's a NASA Form 1697 (Disclosure of Invention and New Technology) dated December 4, 2003 lending credence to this. Horowitz was reportedly approached by Garriott, who asked him to confirm the concept would work for an LEO-only capsule.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=3613.msg55009#msg55009

but then they brought on the 23 metric ton Orion

What they brought on was the requirement that Orion have a service module capable of providing the delta-v for lunar orbit departure and return to Earth.

[Chris Bergin]

The coincidence between this article and the pending CCiCap decision can't be ignored.  It could influence somehow.

A bit too late for that, isn't it?

Correct.

[Rocket Science]

Chris, I feel that this new aspect of ATK might be best discussed on the policy side since it could have a great impact on what happens at KSC, HQ, Florida and Election 2012...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29410.15

[Rocket Science]

I mention it Ed because of who is advising Romney on space, is also the father of Ares 1, brought to you by ATK…  Just connecting dots, or I could just be seeing spots again…

Is Jay Barbree a Republican?  As for Griffin, who has nothing to do with Jay's commentary, he is not the "father of Ares 1".  The concept was conceived before he even came to work at NASA.

 - Ed Kyle

Oh Ed… Some of us guys here “didn't just fall off the turnip truck”…

[QuantumG]

It was before that.  The concept was conceived during 2003, apparently inside NASA.  Griffin first saw it in a December 2003 briefing when he was still head of APL.  It wasn't his idea. 

So.. what you're saying is.. he didn't build that?

 

[Prober]

Griffin [..] is not the "father of Ares 1".  The concept was conceived before he even came to work at NASA.

Yeah, back in 2004 by Owen Garriott and Mike Griffin.

It was before that.  The concept was conceived during 2003, apparently inside NASA.  Griffin first saw it in a December 2003 briefing when he was still head of APL.  It wasn't his idea. 

 - Ed Kyle

It was before that.  The concept was conceived during the late 1990's.  Would have a hard time pointing you to the NASA paper, but read it about two weeks ago.
 

[Jim]

Griffin [..] is not the "father of Ares 1".  The concept was conceived before he even came to work at NASA.

Yeah, back in 2004 by Owen Garriott and Mike Griffin.

It was before that.  The concept was conceived during 2003, apparently inside NASA.  Griffin first saw it in a December 2003 briefing when he was still head of APL.  It wasn't his idea. 

 - Ed Kyle

It was before that.  The concept was conceived during the late 1990's.  Would have a hard time pointing you to the NASA paper, but read it about two weeks ago.
 

1993 ATSS Solid Booster In-Line Concepts

[kirghizstan]

"1993 ATSS Solid Booster In-Line Concepts (NASA)

The Advanced Transportation Systems Studies effort was a paper study of heavy lift launch system requirements for returning humans to the Moon.  It was triggered by a concept named "First Lunar Outpost" that had been headed, interestingly enough, by NASA's Office of Exploration head Dr. Michael D. Griffin, who is today's NASA Administrator."

http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/ares1.html

[Rocket Science]

And MLAS was sketched by Griffin on a paper napkin and low and behold it’s on Liberty…

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/researchernews/rn_mlasfolo.html