Author Topic: Soyuz independence drive continues as CCP companies progress  (Read 24137 times)


Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9646
  • Liked: 375
  • Likes Given: 465
This is probably NASA's most important development program, so why Congress is starving this and instead throwing money at the Russians is a mystery to me.

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3758
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 10319
  • Likes Given: 412
 Although it might be hoped that the present political situation might loosen the purse strings a tad and fully fund at least two programs, I have to wonder how much it would help schedule wise at this stage. Particularly with a company that does pretty much everything in house, having more money available might not make things happens that much sooner once the program is settled into the schedule.
 I'd really hate to see the Russians and other ISS partners part ways badly at this point. Soyuz and it's builders have kept the Station going for a while now and deserve all the credit for saving our bacon while we farted around, trying to figure out what to do next. People caught up in unrelated problems or petty issues can lose sight of what a fantastic partnership this has been.
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3267
  • Liked: 654
  • Likes Given: 931
Although it might be hoped that the present political situation might loosen the purse strings a tad and fully fund at least two programs, I have to wonder how much it would help schedule wise at this stage. Particularly with a company that does pretty much everything in house, having more money available might not make things happens that much sooner once the program is settled into the schedule.
 I'd really hate to see the Russians and other ISS partners part ways badly at this point. Soyuz and it's builders have kept the Station going for a while now and deserve all the credit for saving our bacon while we farted around, trying to figure out what to do next. People caught up in unrelated problems or petty issues can lose sight of what a fantastic partnership this has been.
Well according to NASA, the cuts to commercial crew delayed the program by 2 years. So I believe it is correct to assume that more money would accelerate things (or at least prevent further slips).

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4426
  • Liked: 195
  • Likes Given: 397
This is probably NASA's most important development program, so why Congress is starving this and instead throwing money at the Russians is a mystery to me.
Agreed it's even more important then SLS and orion.

As for getting it more money just take it from the NSA domestic spying program and maybe also defund the TSA as well.

Other good places to get money defund the DEA's funding for raids on legal clinics that sell pot.
« Last Edit: 03/04/2014 01:06 am by Patchouli »

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8599
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 375
  • Likes Given: 167
Well according to NASA, the cuts to commercial crew delayed the program by 2 years. So I believe it is correct to assume that more money would accelerate things (or at least prevent further slips).

There is one area that additional money can help with - the unforeseen problem.

The official purpose of the money may be "for additional testing requested by NASA".  The real purpose would be to pay to fix what ever the company messed up.  Something always gets messed up!

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4431
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 3075
  • Likes Given: 4196
Although it might be hoped that the present political situation might loosen the purse strings a tad and fully fund at least two programs, I have to wonder how much it would help schedule wise at this stage. Particularly with a company that does pretty much everything in house, having more money available might not make things happens that much sooner once the program is settled into the schedule.

Just because they do the work in-house doesn't mean that they don't pay those people - the money to do the work has to come from somewhere.  And Boeing especially hasn't been going out of it's way to use it's own funds to move the CST-100 further along, so I would say all Commercial Crew participants could move up their flight dates if NASA was allowed to fully fund the program.  The sooner the better

I'd really hate to see the Russians and other ISS partners part ways badly at this point. Soyuz and it's builders have kept the Station going for a while now and deserve all the credit for saving our bacon while we farted around, trying to figure out what to do next. People caught up in unrelated problems or petty issues can lose sight of what a fantastic partnership this has been.

I think we've all learned that the people of a country are usually more "normal" than the people that run their countries, and I think that's definitely true for Russia.  Unfortunately Putin exercises an extraordinary amount of influence in Russia, so he can cause mischief wherever he wants, regardless the consequences.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
I see no excuse that the CST-100 and Dragon should not be ready before December 2017 for first crew to ISS.
There is no excuse to say that the provider(s) would need to take shortcuts that would affect safety by having the vehicles ready by December 2017 instead of a later date.

I hope the Dragon is not delayed for land-landing and would use water recovery to get it launching soon as possible. Then later add in land-landing if it is not ready by December 2017.

Why should America even keep going to the ISS if it won't even use it's own vehicles to get crew to the space station?

It will be sad day for America if we don't get at least one commercial crew taxi launching before December 2017 with crew.

Now if Blue Origin launches crew before December 2017 on it's own dime  ;D! What will that make Congress and White house look like since the program started and before with all their delay debates.

Edit:
Were are these providers commercial customers?
« Last Edit: 03/04/2014 04:17 am by RocketmanUS »

Offline manboy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2082
  • Texas, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 539
Blue Origin will probably never launch crew.
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6875
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1864
  • Likes Given: 1910
Edit:
Were are these providers commercial customers?

It's OT here but they won't appear before Commercial Crew launches.

Offline newpylong

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1499
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 343
I know it's been around, but the 4th image in the article of the two astronauts walking up to Dreamchaser is pretty boss.

Online Joffan

  • NSF Irregular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1437
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 1327
Nice article, thanks Chris. I still don't know which of these aspiring crew launch providers I'd be most happy to see win the contract - it all looks good.

I seem to remember there was some talk of increasing (redirecting?) funding to the SLS (or maybe Orion?) to an accelerated scheduled "just in case" there was no commercial provider ready. This seems like the least efficient use of government funds towards stated objectives. There appears to be no doubt that adding funding for the commercial developments would be the most effective way of securing early crew launching capability - or, on the converse, that directing funding away from these projects will delay them.
Max Q for humanity becoming spacefaring

Online Chris Bergin

Nice article, thanks Chris. I still don't know which of these aspiring crew launch providers I'd be most happy to see win the contract - it all looks good.

I seem to remember there was some talk of increasing (redirecting?) funding to the SLS (or maybe Orion?) to an accelerated scheduled "just in case" there was no commercial provider ready. This seems like the least efficient use of government funds towards stated objectives. There appears to be no doubt that adding funding for the commercial developments would be the most effective way of securing early crew launching capability - or, on the converse, that directing funding away from these projects will delay them.

Thanks!

I don't think any increase in funding for SLS as the back up role was viable (or announced). That's a throwback to the initial SLS drive per the 2010 Authorization Act.

It seems almost traditional to look at SLS and Commercial Crew funding, but I'd say we need to look at what's mentioned in the article, the decision of paying for more Soyuz seats or "gambling" that end of 2017 isn't too much (and it really should not be) for Commercial Crew and using any projected Soyuz money to bolster Commercial Crew.

If we're looking at current funding mistakes, I'd look at JWST.


Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Love that George Jetson

Offline Bubbinski

Very good overview Chris, good job of summarizing the situation.

In view of what's going on internationally right now, this program is very important to NASA.
I'll even excitedly look forward to "flags and footprints" and suborbital missions. Just fly...somewhere.

Online Chris Bergin

Very good overview Chris, good job of summarizing the situation.

In view of what's going on internationally right now, this program is very important to NASA.

Thanks! :)

And yes, I'd say it's priority number one for NASA.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11377
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 8430
  • Likes Given: 6774
Very good overview Chris, good job of summarizing the situation.

In view of what's going on internationally right now, this program is very important to NASA.

Thanks! :)

And yes, I'd say it's priority number one for NASA.

WE'D say that. But do the Powers That Be think so? I'm dubious.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Mader Levap

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 963
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 501
This is probably NASA's most important development program, so why Congress is starving this and instead throwing money at the Russians is a mystery to me.
Why? Simple. For politician, it is better to spend 1$ in his district and 9$ to Russia than 10$ going to different district in same country.
Be successful.  Then tell the haters to (BLEEP) off. - deruch
...and if you have failure, tell it anyway.

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8599
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 375
  • Likes Given: 167
This is probably NASA's most important development program, so why Congress is starving this and instead throwing money at the Russians is a mystery to me.
Why? Simple. For politician, it is better to spend 1$ in his district and 9$ to Russia than 10$ going to different district in same country.

Unless spending the money produces a scandal that will hurt the politician.

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3267
  • Liked: 654
  • Likes Given: 931
Unless spending the money produces a scandal that will hurt the politician.
Hasn't so far, so why do you think it would?

Tags: