Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis
euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.
Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan.
Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem,
suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.
I was in Kindergarten when Challenger happened (yeah, I know, that makes me a young ‘un). We were watching it live on TV. Fortunately I was young enough not to really understand what had happened, or I probably would’ve been traumatized for life.
To the degree I believe Obama is serious about the overall new policy, I support it (I am very suspicious of his actual commitment to a more capitalist approach to space access, given his hostility to capitalism everywhere else). On the practical side, I don’t see outright cancellation as being politically sellable, so a compromise that preserves Orion, at least, may be what is necessary to get the rest of the policy approved by Congress. A stripped-down Orion (simplified crew module plus minimized service module and no LAS) is probably the least expensive way to go about that, and the path with the least opportunity for NASA to unfairly rig the game by “competing” with the private options with an in-house vehicle. Yet, it still preserves the opportunity for completing Orion as previously planned should the commercial alternatives somehow fail to materialize.
Any chance of Orion reverting back to the original pie-wedge lifting body shape? (If Orion will never be anything more than an escape pod, I assume the answer is no)
I always thought that canceling Orion was the most telling aspect of the new Obama policy. That indicated to me that Obama really didn\\\’t care about manned exploration, and all the babble about beyond LEO missions was just lip service. Even if commercial vendors provide access to LEO, NASA would still need a spacecraft for pursuing missions beyond LEO. Orion could still be the vehicle for that job.
In fact it seems to me that the original Lockheed-Martin concept for Orion would be ideal for Flexible Path type missions. Too bad that the current leadership in Washington D.C. seems blind to that. With the new policy freeing Orion from the manned launch job, Orion could become a less expensive craft, more specialized for the deep space mission; returning crews safely to Earth after high energy missions, such as to Mars or a near Earth passing asteroid.
Sorry about the duplicate comments. But every time I hit the submit comment button, all that would happen is an error message claiming I had failed to match the security code!
I was in Kindergarten when Challenger happened (yeah, I know, that makes me a young ‘un). We were watching it live on TV. Fortunately I was young enough not to really understand what had happened, or I probably would’ve been traumatized for life.
~Jon
Off topic question:
What is your reaction to the most recent announcement that Orion will continue, but only as an escape capsule for the International Space Station?
It keeps me employed a while longer. [/cynicism]
To the degree I believe Obama is serious about the overall new policy, I support it (I am very suspicious of his actual commitment to a more capitalist approach to space access, given his hostility to capitalism everywhere else). On the practical side, I don’t see outright cancellation as being politically sellable, so a compromise that preserves Orion, at least, may be what is necessary to get the rest of the policy approved by Congress. A stripped-down Orion (simplified crew module plus minimized service module and no LAS) is probably the least expensive way to go about that, and the path with the least opportunity for NASA to unfairly rig the game by “competing” with the private options with an in-house vehicle. Yet, it still preserves the opportunity for completing Orion as previously planned should the commercial alternatives somehow fail to materialize.
Thanx for the feedback!
Any chance of Orion reverting back to the original pie-wedge lifting body shape? (If Orion will never be anything more than an escape pod, I assume the answer is no)
I always thought that canceling Orion was the most telling aspect of the new Obama policy. That indicated to me that Obama really didn\\\’t care about manned exploration, and all the babble about beyond LEO missions was just lip service. Even if commercial vendors provide access to LEO, NASA would still need a spacecraft for pursuing missions beyond LEO. Orion could still be the vehicle for that job.
In fact it seems to me that the original Lockheed-Martin concept for Orion would be ideal for Flexible Path type missions. Too bad that the current leadership in Washington D.C. seems blind to that. With the new policy freeing Orion from the manned launch job, Orion could become a less expensive craft, more specialized for the deep space mission; returning crews safely to Earth after high energy missions, such as to Mars or a near Earth passing asteroid.
Nope. That ship has long since sailed.
Sorry about the duplicate comments. But every time I hit the submit comment button, all that would happen is an error message claiming I had failed to match the security code!