You would think with the 1000 of shuttle lovers, SOME would TRY to ORGANIZE an Effort to get it RESTARTED!!
If interested in organizing a restart effort, my email is bobbygmartin1938@ gmail.com.
Phone 5808913343. Like to hear from a few!
More on global warming Hoax
Antarctic sea ice sets another record – for most ice ever this time of year
1
21 Sep 2012antarctic, antarctica, climate change, global warming, ice, nasa, science by Jacque Fresco
Antarctic sea ice set another record this past week, with the most amount of ice ever recorded on day 256 of the calendar year (September 12 of this leap year). Please, nobody tell the mainstream media or they might have to retract some stories and admit they are misrepresenting scientific data.
National Public Radio (NPR) published an article on its website last month claiming, “Ten years ago, a piece of ice the size of Rhode Island disintegrated and melted in the waters off Antarctica. Two other massive ice shelves along the Antarctic Peninsula had suffered similar fates a few years before. The events became poster children for the effects of global warming. … There’s no question that unusually warm air triggered the final demise of these huge chunks of ice.”
NPR failed to mention anywhere in its article that Antarctic sea ice has been growing since satellites first began measuring the ice 33 years ago and the sea ice has been above the 33-year average throughout 2012.
Indeed, none of the mainstream media are covering this important story. A Google News search of the terms Antarctic, sea ice and record turns up not a single article on the Antarctic sea ice record. Amusingly, page after page of Google News results for Antarctic sea ice record show links to news articles breathlessly spreading fear and warning of calamity because Arctic sea ice recently set a 33-year low.
Sea ice around one pole is shrinking while sea ice around another pole is growing. This sure sounds like a global warming crisis to me.
Update: To provide more perspective on global warming and Antarctica, I would like to update this column with some additional information:
As meteorologist Anthony Watts explains, new data show ice mass is accumulating on the Antarctic continent as well as in the ocean surrounding Antarctica. The new data contradict an assertion by global warming alarmists that the expanding Antarctic sea ice is coming at the expense of a decline in Antarctic continental ice.
The new data also add context to sensationalist media stories about declining ice in small portions of Antarctica, such as portions of West Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula (see here, for example). The mainstream media frequently publish stories focusing on ice loss in these two areas, yet the media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass.
Interestingly, a new NASA study finds Antarctica once supported vegetation similar to that of present-day Iceland.
“The southward movements of rain bands associated with a warmer climate in the high-latitude southern hemisphere made the margins of Antarctica less like a polar desert, and more like present-day Iceland,” a co-author of the NASA study reports.
Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/
With Orbiter flyover enthusiasm , STRANGE not much uproar over placing in museum!!
A A A
The Case to Save the Shuttle
By Allen J. RichardsonPosted 10.14.08NOVA
In August of 2003 the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) issued its report and concluded, among other things, that the space shuttles were aging, old technology, and too risky. Shortly thereafter President Bush initiated the Constellation program to retire the space shuttles and to replace them with the Ares Launch Vehicles and the Orion Spacecraft, patterned after the Apollo Program. As it stands, the space shuttles are to be retired during 2010, and the Constellation Project is well under way. This is a severe under-utilization of a valuable and still-usable national asset.
SHUTTLE ADVOCATES: SAVE THE SHUTTLE
To alert the public, my colleagues and I formed the Shuttle Advocates Team (SAT), an informal group of mostly retired Rockwell and Boeing engineers, with many years of experience working on the space shuttle Orbiter vehicle, from contract initiation through mission operation. We represent a cross section of space shuttle engineering and provide authoritative information regarding space shuttle performance and future capability. Many of us were also deeply involved in the Apollo Project and are therefore qualified to make comparisons between the space shuttle approach and the Constellation approach to space exploration. We call our team the Shuttle Advocates Team because our mission is to extend the use of the space shuttle system beyond the current end date of 2010. Much of the following information is drawn from material supplied to this writer by SAT engineers.
SPACE SHUTTLE HISTORY AND ITS CURRENT CAPABILITY
To clarify a point, what everyone commonly calls the shuttle or the space shuttle is what our team calls the Orbiter vehicle, that stubby-looking, winged spacecraft that holds the crew and payload. It is this unique United States vehicle that America and the world have come to identify with manned space travel, our “space truck,” so to speak. The total space shuttle system consists of four major components: two Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs), one External Tank (ET), and the Orbiter. The SRBs and the ET are necessary to enable the Orbiter to achieve Earth orbit. Our comments and statements primarily concern the Orbiter vehicles.
The Orbiter named Challenger was lost due to a problem with the SRB circumferential field joint seals (“O-rings”) losing their resiliency during a cold winter launch. The improved SRB joint seal has solved that problem. The Columbia spacecraft was lost when a large piece of the ET’s external insulation inexplicably detached from a critical area on the tank surface. The critical area is a 15-foot-wide area opposite the Orbiter, which extends aft about five feet from the forward attach point of the Orbiter. The piece of foam struck the Orbiter on the lower surface of the left wing’s leading edge, causing a mortal hole that resulted in the loss of the vehicle and crew from reentry overheating. Extensive corrective actions by the ET Project have restored confidence, and successful spaceflights have resumed.
We cite these two accidents to make the point that they were caused by the other shuttle components used during ascent to orbit. The Orbiter spacecraft has never been the cause of any failures. The Orbiter has a perfect record of 123 consecutive successful missions, and we are confident that this record number will grow. We also have a dedicated team of new engineers trained by their mentors, thus insuring that the Orbiter can continue to be operated correctly.
The Orbiters are, of course, aging but have two thirds of their 100 mission design lives (per vehicle) still ahead of them. Sean O’Keefe, a former head of NASA, states in the NOVA documentary that prior to the Columbia accident NASA was planning to keep the space shuttles in operation till 2020. One of the members of SAT recently delivered a technical paper on the built-in space shuttle longevity and compared it to the Douglas DC-3, an aircraft that has been flying for over 70 years and is known for its reliability and ruggedness. The vehicles are well maintained and to this day remain pristine. If you look inside one of the Orbiters today, for example, it looks very similar to the first Orbiter on its maiden voyage back in 1981.
Each of the Orbiters was designed and qualified by tests and analysis for a minimum of 100 space missions. Many of the component test programs were extended to 400 missions to flush out any hidden or unexpected failure modes. The most-used Orbiter in the fleet has only performed 35 missions, so today there is plenty of useful life remaining for additional space missions.
Furthermore, the space shuttles are not old technology. The Orbiter is very similar to military and commercial airplanes, and only evolutionary changes have occurred in airplanes over the last 27 years, as opposed to radical redesigns. Furthermore, those changes are mostly in the avionics, which are readily updated. The more familiar examples of this are the Boeing B-52 and B-1 bombers and the Boeing 747 airliner, all of which are still flying after a longer period, and in the latter case the plane is still in production. The fact is if a spacecraft were designed today to do all the things the space shuttle can do, it would be virtually no different from the existing proven hardware.
A former Orbiter Chief Engineer and VP of Engineering reports, “Many people are unaware that NASA has long maintained an upgrade process to provide current technology to the Orbiter. Starting with the early space missions, many upgrades were installed to improve performance, enhance system reliability, and improve operational safety. More than $1 billion was spent after the Challenger accident on the SRBs, the ET, and the Orbiter. The successful flights after the Columbia accident also show that NASA keeps these shuttle components operating with technology that can meet the mission requirements, consistent with the available funding for modification kits and their installation. Over the years of shuttle operations, these upgrades have received lots of attention as recorded in Reference (1).” (The reference is to a 1999 National Research Council Report entitled “Upgrading the Space Shuttle,” published by the National Academy Press.)
As summarized by a former Chief Engineer at Kennedy Space Center, “The Orbiter is the most fantastic flying machine built by man. Its retirement in 2010 is premature and shortsighted. What a waste of unique hardware and all the associated infrastructure and people skills that have been developed at Kennedy Space Center. (This applies as well to the other NASA Centers and to the Corporate Suppliers.) The knowledge base and support for complex space launches take a significant time to establish, and now we’re planning to dismantle the talented workforce at that site, together with the software and procedures established over 123 flights, to begin a new program. Skills will be lost as we wait on the Constellation hardware to materialize—a situation very similar to the tough six years between the last Apollo launch (Apollo Soyuz) in 1975 and the drawn-out buildup for the shuttle that finally culminated in its first launch in 1981. Such an extended development with the Constellation elements in these days of budget shortfalls could seriously impact the first scheduled launch of Orion in 2015.
MANNED SPACE VEHICLE EXPLORATION UTILIZING THE SPACE SHUTTLE
The space shuttles, used in concert with the International Space Station (ISS), could provide a viable means of launching manned space vehicles to destinations in our solar system, such as the moon, Mars, or an asteroid. In a single launch, the space shuttle can orbit a 50,000 lb payload, a capability that has allowed us to construct and operate the ISS, which weighs one million lbs. By designing the interplanetary vehicles in modular form and assembling them in orbit utilizing the ISS, we can assemble vehicles of enormous size, if required. This capability would be of indispensable value in the case of a Trans Mars vehicle, which would require the transport of considerable energy to power the vehicle there and back. Should additional single payload launch capability (either in weight or size) be required, a Space Shuttle-C (an unmanned space shuttle variant with increased payload capability) could be built. An additional benefit of this approach is that the ISS could serve as a mission return stopping point, followed by space shuttle transport of astronauts to Earth. This could provide an extra margin of safety for astronauts with unforeseen needs.
The specific advantages of continuing the space shuttle approach to solar system exploration discussed above, as opposed to the current Constellation “space shuttle replacement” approach, are numerous:
1) The space shuttle is a proven and predictable system. In contrast, the Ares-1 Launch Vehicle (ALV) is already beset with technical uncertainties regarding weight limitations and excessive vibration.
2) The space shuttle system is a combination of launch vehicle and spacecraft. The space shuttle Orbiter’s on-orbit capabilities include a remote arm capable of manipulating and repairing satellites. The Orbiter also includes an airlock to support extravehicular activities such as space repairs and component assembly. The Constellation system (the shuttle replacement) is a combination of the ALV and the Orion spacecraft. The Orion spacecraft does not have the above capability.
3) The space shuttle system can return both payloads and astronauts from orbit to Earth via a runway landing, while the Constellation approach will revert to parachuting a capsule and the returning astronauts into the ocean, as was the case with the Apollo system.
4) The space shuttle will provide uninterrupted U.S. support to the ISS. Pursuing the Constellation approach will result in a gap of five years or more, when the U.S. will have no capability of delivering supplies to the ISS or of delivering astronauts to the ISS and returning them. Relying on the Russians to fill this gap has become more problematic with the controversy over the Russian invasion of Georgia and the reluctance of the U.S. Congress to renew the legislative exemption that enables NASA to continue to purchase Soyuz spacecraft services as a backup to the space shuttle. The current exemption expires in 2011. Therefore, Congress will need to extend the exemption till the ALV/Orion system is operational.
5) The space shuttle approach will insure ongoing utilization of the ISS, a space colony that humankind should keep in place and operating for the foreseeable future.
6) With the space shuttle system, both the Orbiter and the SRBs are reusable. With Constellation, a relatively larger part of the system, the ALV, is a single-use component.
7) The space shuttle and supporting facilities are paid for!
The advantages of the Constellation approach over the space shuttle approach appear to be nil, the switch to the Constellation approach being predicated primarily on the unwarranted fear of another shuttle “accident” as put forward by the President’s CAIB. Fortunately, there is time to reconsider. Even though the dismantling of the space shuttle system has begun, it probably would be more advantageous to stay with this system than to design and construct a whole new system to support the Constellation program. At a minimum, the shuttle system should be extended till its replacement is operational.
The next President and his NASA administrator should also consider a change in the next goal of the U.S. manned space program as well as a change in the hardware to achieve that goal. Scientific interest now centers on Mars rather than on the moon. Four of the five elements of a manned mission to Mars are already in place:
1) The space shuttle (the launch vehicle)
2) The International Space Station, or ISS (the assembly and launch platform for the Trans Mars vehicle)
3) Extensive experience with on-orbit assembly
4) Numerous unmanned precursor missions to Mars
The only missing element is the Mars Aerobraker Vehicle (MAV) to transport the expected three astronauts to and from Mars. Conceptual designs already exist for this vehicle. At an estimated departure weight of 400,000 pounds, a dozen shuttle flights could deliver all needed modules of the MAV to the ISS over a period of years at a cost of perhaps $10 billion. This would leave most of $200 billion (the amount currently contemplated for lunar exploration) to design, build, and assemble the MAV. This redirection would focus the attention and resources of NASA and the aerospace community on the MAV, and would sharpen skills valuable to the nation for further exploration of our solar system. With the manned space program thus redirected, the goal of landing humans on Mars within the next decade appears to be feasible.
My e-mail address is alrichardson2@aol.com
On behalf of the members of SAT, thank you for your interest.
Allen J. Richardson,
Former Orbiter Stress Analysis Supervisor
Editor’s Note:
As documented in Space Shuttle Disaster, the Columbia Accident Investigation Board’s report makes a strong case for the shuttle’s retirement, based on the design and safety issues laid bare by the loss of both Columbia, in 2003, and Challenger, 17 years earlier. Fourteen astronauts died in those accidents. The Bush administration accepted the board’s recommendations and announced that the shuttle would be retired in 2010. NASA was ordered to develop new spacecraft that could take astronauts back to the moon and beyond, and many in the space community are excited by the new vision.
But there are dissenters who fervently believe that retiring the shuttle is a mistake. The movement to delay the shuttle’s retirement picked up steam in September 2008, as both John McCain and Barack Obama voiced support for extending the shuttle’s operation, and a leaked e-mail written by NASA’s top administrator revealed that the space agency was studying the feasibility of extending shuttle missions past 2010. It’s no surprise that engineers who have worked on the shuttle and its development are among the most passionate advocates for keeping it flying. One of those engineers, Allen Richardson, who appears in the NOVA documentary as well as assisted with technical questions during the film’s production, requested the opportunity to express his viewpoint.—Arun Rath, one of the producers of “Space Shuttle Disaster”
Allen Richardson was a structural engineer for Boeing/Rockwell’s space operations for nearly 30 years, and worked on both the Apollo and Shuttle programs. He and the other members of the Shuttle Advocates Team will be submitting a version of this letter to Congress.
RELATED LINKS
Space Shuttle Disaster
An investigation uncovers the human failures and design flaws behind the 2003 Columbia tragedy.
A Space Age Controversy
In this opinion piece, aerospace expert John Logsdon makes the case to retire the space shuttle.
The Insider Who Knew
NASA engineer Rodney Rocha, whose warnings about the Space Shuttle Columbia went unheeded, looks back at the disaster.
TV SCHEDULE
EDUCATION
SHOP NOVA
Search NOVA Beta
SPACE & FLIGHT RESOURCES
TEXT
(46)
The Star In You
Just what do astronomers mean when they say we’re all made of star stuff?
A One-Way Trip to Mars?
Initial shock aside, some space scientists argue this is the only way to go.
Saving Hubble Update: Expert Q&A
Astronauts John Grunsfeld and Mike Massimino answer questions about their highly risky 2009 mission.
Give me 's
"A People that Values its Privileges above its Principles soon Loses
Both"
-Dwight D. Eisenhower"
Subject: True story at the dealership.....
From Tom Selkis' (Latham Ford) Facebook......
"I'll try to make this as short and to the point as I can. One of my
salesmen here had a women in his office yesterday wanting to lease a brand
new Focus. As he was reviewing her credit application with her he noticed
she was on social security disability. He said to her, "you don't look like
your disabled and unable to work". She said, "well I'm really not, I could
work if I wanted to but I make more now then I did when I was working and
got hurt.(non-disabling injury)"
She said the gov't sends her $1500.00 a month in 1 check, she gets
$700.00 a month on an EBT card (food stamps), and 800.00 a month for rent.
Oh yeah and 250 mins free on her phone. That is just south of $3500.00 a
month.
When she was working she was taking home about $330.00per week. Do the
math and then ask yourself why the hell should she go back to work. If you
multiply that by millions of people you start to realize the scope of the
problem we face as a country. Once the Socialists have 51% of the population
in that same scenerio we are finished. The question is when do we cross that
threshold if we haven't already.
She didn't lease the Focus here because the dealer down the road beat
our deal by $10.00 a month. Glad to know she is so frugal with her hard
earned money."
Losing capability Fast!
Future of this country is at Risk---Cernan. Anybody Listening!!!!
Cernan--“If we abdicate our leadership in space today, not only is human spaceflight and space exploration at risk, but I believe the future of this country and thus the future of our children and grandchildren as well… Now is the time to be bold, innovative and wise in how we invest in the future of America. Now is the time to re-establish our nation’s commitment to excellence
Posted by keeptheshuttleflying.com at 7:28 PM
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Sent from my iPad
Old Geezers---good stuff!
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2012 11:38:35 -0500
Subject: You & I Are Members
YOU & I ARE MEMBERS, DON'T DELETE, JUST READ AND PASS ON!!!!!!!!
Since most of the ones receiving this e-mail are all members of this GREAT BRIGADE , I think you will like this one! Read & pass along if you agree, please!
Grey-Haired Brigade
They like to refer to us as senior citizens, old fogies, geezers, and in some cases dinosaurs. Some of us are "Baby Boomers" getting ready to retire. Others have been retired for some time. We walk a little slower these days and our eyes and hearing are not what they once were. We have worked hard, raised our children, worshiped our God and grown old together. Yes, we are the ones some refer to as being over the hill, and that is probably true. But before writing us off completely, there are a few things that need to be taken into consideration.
In school we studied English, history, math, and science which enabled us to lead America into the technological age. Most of us remember what outhouses were, many of us with firsthand experience. We remember the days of telephone party-lines, 25 cent gasoline, and milk and ice being delivered to our homes. For those of you who don't know what an icebox is, today they are electric and referred to as refrigerators. A few even remember when cars were started with a crank. Yes, we lived those days.
We are probably considered old fashioned and out-dated by many. But there are a few things you need to remember before completely writing us off. We won World War II, fought in Korea and Viet Nam . We can quote The Pledge of Allegiance, and know where to place our hand while doing so. We wore the uniform of our country with pride and lost many friends on the battlefield. We didn't fight for the Socialist States of America ; we fought for the "Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave." We wore different uniforms but carried the same flag. We know the words to the Star Spangled Banner, America ,and America the Beautiful by heart, and you may even see some tears running down our cheeks as we sing. We have lived what many of you have only read about in
history books and we feel no obligation to apologize to anyone for America .
Yes, we are old and slow these days but rest assured, we have at least one good fight left in us. We have loved this country, fought for it, and died for it, and now we are going to save it. It is our country and nobody is going to take it away from us. We took oaths to defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that is an oath we plan to keep. There are those who want to destroy this land we love but, like our founders, there is no way we are going to remain silent.
Well, don't worry youngsters, the Grey-Haired Brigade is here, and in 2012 we are going to take back our nation. We may drive a little slower than you would like but we get where we're going, and in 2012 we're going to the polls by the millions. This land does not belong to the man in the White House nor to the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. It belongs to "We the People" and "We the People" plan to reclaim our land and our freedom. We hope this time you will do a better job of preserving it and passing it along to our grandchildren. So the next time you have the chance to say the Pledge of Allegiance, Stand up, put your hand over your heart, honor our country, and thank God for the old geezers of the "Grey-Haired Brigade."
Author, Anon. Grey-Haired Brigade Member
Footnote:
I am another Gray-Haired Geezer signing on. I will circulate this to other Gray-Haired Geezers all over this once great county. Will you help? Can you feel the ground shaking??? It's not an earthquake, it is a STAMPEDE.
Look at Orbiters, they are in prime-- should not be in museum. You should be upset with our leaders & demand Shuttle Restart!!!
Thoughts on the Last Flight of the Shuttle Dennis Wingo - SpaceRef.com (Viewpoint) I was at NASA Ames last week when the final flight of the final space shuttle Endeavour on its way to its final destination occurred. As many people did, I stood outside, on top of our MacMoon's at Ames and took pictures. There were over 20,000 people at NASA Ames that waited hours for an event that took no more than one minute to consummate. Beyond that there were hundreds of thousands more people all around Silicon Valley who were outside and watching when the shuttle flew overhead. They were on bridges, they were on the patio at Specialties Coffee with binoculars, they were pulled over on the 101 freeway, all to catch a last glimpse of a space shuttle, not even in space, but simply flying overhead on the back of a 747, the same way that we first saw the Enterprise in 1977. The same thing happened all over the country. Washington D.C. was almost shut down by the flight of Discovery coming into Dulles. Tens of thousands of people were wowed by the sight and image of two orbiters nose to nose on the tarmac. It is if Americans collectively all wanted to be a part of a history that many fear is passing us by.... I am the Shuttle Generation The Time Before the First Launch The Space Shuttle has been a part of my/our life for almost forty years now. Not like the people that designed them, built them and operated them, but part of my/our life none the less. As a kid I read the articles about why the Saturn V was giving way to a new and routine way of getting to space (naive child that I was) in the early 70's. I read the articles about how we would be building space stations, deploying satellites, and constructing huge telescopes in orbit. In 1976 I watched the news reports of the roll out of the Enterprise and its display at Edwards AFB with the crew of the fictional 23rd century starship Enterprise. In 1977 we saw on TV the captive carry and first free flights of the Enterprise at Edwards AFB. In 1979 I made a special trip to the cape to see the Enterprise, fully stacked on the launch pad as it was being used as a facilities fit check and test vehicle. I mourned with everyone else when I found out that the Enterprise was never going to fly, for what to some are still mysterious reasons. We also mourned in that year when we found out that because of the delays caused by problems with the SSME engine development, the shuttle would not be available to save Skylab, which then died in its death in fire over the Australian outback. We worried in 1980 when reports of the continuing problems with the SSME development further pushed back the first launch. I read the Playboy article in late 1980 that went through all of the reasons that the first launch would fail, including faulty tiles, an unreliable APU, an untested system flying with humans, etc.... The First Launches I did not get to see the first launch in person, but as part of the launch of a new life for myself, I watched the launch in a motel room in Tucson Arizona as I was moving to California to be involved in the computer industry. It was an amazing launch. Our generation who remembered the Saturn V launches were used to seeing the Saturn V lumber off the pad in slow motion, seeming to claw itself into the sky by brute force. The Shuttle virtually leapt off the pad, seemingly determined to prove its naysayers wrong. Watching for the first time the orbiter flying, the APU's working, and the successful barely two day mission, everyone was waiting with anticipation for the landing. For the first time in Human history, the people of southern California heard the double boom...boom of the orbiter's reentry that mildly shook houses for hundreds of miles and the picture perfect landing at Edwards AFB. I did not get to see the first landing but I did see the landing of STS-4. We left work from Thousand Oaks CA late, not thinking that we would have any problems. However, when we got to Pear Blossom highway there was a massive 40 mile long traffic jam. As time was getting late we knew that we were not going to make it. We were in a small truck and drove on the sand for a while and made progress but got to a spot where we would have gotten stuck so we got back in line. At about this time four big 4x4's came whizzing by on the wrong side of the road! Of course we got in behind them and were soon breezing by the slow moving traffic at 60 miles per hour. The lead truck had big CB antennas on it and when it would veer off to the left, off the road, the rest of us followed. This allowed the sparse oncoming traffic to go by while we continued forward! We did this for over 30 miles until we saw the base entry checkpoint ahead and got back in line. We made it into the base literally five minutes before they closed the gates. This was still a couple of hours before landing and so we started playing. We saw a bunch of trucks driving out on the lake bed and joined them. About 20 minutes later a fully armed Huey helicopter came whizzing by and stopped us while the fully armed door gunner screamed at us to get the hell off the lake bed, didn't we know the Shuttle was coming? We immediately left and drove to the viewing area, where about half a million of our closest friends were already there. Those early Shuttle landings were a huge party and we all waited for the landing while buying food, and drink and generally raising merry hell. Since the lake bed area was so large we still were able to get a good viewing site across the lake bed where president Reagan was also waiting for the landing. His reviewing stand was really neat, being between two hangers with our old friend, the Shuttle Enterprise behind the stand. We were warned that the Shuttle was on the way in and started looking for it. The announcer was calling out over loudspeakers the progress. I first saw Columbia when she was still about 105,000 feet up in altitude and the belly of the orbiter was still glowing a dull orange. From that instant until she landed across from us it was no more than an amazing five minutes. The orbiter was sitting on the tarmac very close to where Reagan and the other dignitaries were waiting. Then another amazing thing happened! As Reagan was speaking the 747 showed up again, this time carrying the Shuttle Challenger on its back! As it flew over, for a brief moment, we saw three orbiters together in one thrilling view. The Early Years The early years of the Shuttle program were perhaps its most innovative. From launch and rescuing communications satellites to the recovery and repair of NASA's Solar Max, exciting and ground breaking missions were the norm. On the flight where Solar Max was rescued (STS 41C) and repaired NASA deployed the LDEF materials in space 21,300 bus, and the shuttle went to a then record of 300 nautical miles altitude using a direct ascent trajectory. Science missions flew using the European built Spacelab module in the cargo bay with materials and life sciences experiments. Spacelab components flew on a total of 22 shuttle missions over its lifetime. On other missions orbital assembly experiments were performed such as the EASE/ACCESS where large truss assemblies were built as a test for the future space station. The materials sciences experiments were very exciting to industry and the first non government employee, Charles Walker, flew twice as a payload specialist for McDonnell Douglas. Student experiments were first flown in space in the Getaway Special Program where payloads are flown in the cargo bay in a self contained experimental system that replaced ballast that would normally be used to balance the orbiter. Dozens of these payloads were eventually flown and many students who built them are now senior professionals in the space industry. On a minor note the Shuttle could be very annoying. During that era it landed often in California at Edwards Air Force base. It would usually land early in the morning. I was living in Thousand Oaks California at the time and the mission frequency was high enough that the double sonic booms of its reentry would wake me up in the morning to not very charitable thoughts about it doing so. The first seeds of NASA's problems also came in this era. NASA was jealous of its hardware and rejected out of hand the proposal from Rockwell International to build a fifth orbiter that would be owned by and flown by Rockwell. Problems with the Shuttle system itself were found but not corrected during this era that eventually led to the first shuttle tragedy. Challenger Just about everyone can remember where they were at when we lost the Challenger on that cold January morning in 1986. I was in a computer room in Morristown, New Jersey when a computer operator ran in to tell us about it. A group of us left and went to a local bar to watch replay after replay of the explosion that took seven fine lives, including the first teacher in space from us. President Reagan's eloquent eulogy of the crew helped a shocked nation to help heal the loss. The Shuttle program was never the same after that. My own closer affiliation with the Shuttle program began during the stand down after Challenger. I wanted to work closer to the space program and finally get my degree after working as a non degreed engineer for several years. I left the computer industry to move back to Alabama to enroll at the University of Alabama in Huntsville where I figured I could get work related to the space program and get my degree. I worked at a small company in Huntsville Alabama that built a computer that had a telemetry system that would process the data stream from the SSME's during launch. This system was going into the firing room at the cape and it was fought tooth and nail by the people down there who were quite happy with their ModComp computers and did not like these newfangled microprocessors. The Second Age of the Shuttle When the first launch of the Shuttle happened after Challenger in 1988 with the Shuttle Discovery. I was able to get a seat in the Morris auditorium at NASA MSFC building 4200 as I had worked on the return to flight. It was full to overflowing and it seemed that everyone held their breaths when the "go at throttle up" command came from the CAPCOM. A huge cheer range out when the solid rocket boosters separated from the stack after two and a half minutes. No one moved though until the SSME's finally shut down and we knew that the orbiter was going to make it to orbit. There were still a lot of cool missions though the flight rate never approached the nine flights of 1985. I flew my first payload on the Shuttle on STS-46 with a MacIntosh computer interfaced to a microgravity measurement system that I designed called 3DMA. This mission deployed the European EURECA free flying platform and deployed (unsuccessfully) the Italian TSS-1 20 km tether. At this time I was learning about tethers and we were slated to fly a small satellite on a 20 km tether later in the decade on STS-85. We flew more payloads as I was working the Consortium for Materials Development in Space (CMDS) at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. We flew our 3DMA payload on the first quasi-commercial module on the Shuttle from SpaceHab. We learned about the politics of the Shuttle, how to work with the safety panel in Houston and the various rivalries between the NASA centers involved in the Shuttle program. After our small satellite was moved off of the Shuttle and flown on a Delta II in 1998 I began to move away from the Shuttle program. The Shuttle program did several more firsts, including a launch to high inclination out of Florida that went right up the east coast of the U.S. The TSS-1R mission flew, and the tether broke at 19.5 kilometers, but not before confirming the viability of using tethers to generate electrical power in space. The historic first docking of the Space Shuttle to the MIR space station happened in this timeframe as well. The long delayed Hubble space telescope was finally lofted into orbit in 1990 and found to have a badly ground mirror, it was the shuttle to the rescue with a modified optical system. By the time of the fifth Hubble servicing mission in 2009 the telescope was virtually rebuilt in its entire power system, electronics, guidance, and scientific instruments. It was during this era that I finally got to see some launches. I saw STS-40 from a highway overpass near Coca Beach. I saw STS-46 with my hardware take off from the VIP stands. All together I got to see at least four launches and three additional scrubs of launches. There was one launch that was especially memorable. There was a hold due to weather for too many clouds in the area of the launch site, which would cause problems if there was an abort to launch site scenario. There was near constant chatter with the weather officer about a possible break in the clouds. Finally the break happened and the hold at 9 minutes was lifted and it seemed that the launch team rushed to get the Shuttle launched. The Shuttle lifted off in a hole in the clouds that almost immediately closed back in. Fortunately no abort was needed but you could just tell from the sounds of the voices from the CAPCOM and launch control that they were not going to let a few clouds stop the launch that day. The Station Era As the redesigned International Space Station (ISS) began to be a reality the Shuttle program became fun again. The crew persons who actually were involved in the construction of the station were able to gain new and valuable skills and for the first time in human history, half a million pounds of hardware in space, most of it carried up in the orbiters became our first outpost in space. The Shuttle was very well qualified for this task and the combination of the Shuttle remote manipulator and the station remote manipulator made a powerful combination for the successful construction in space of large platforms. Columbia By the time of the loss of Columbia on STS-107 I no longer had the small pit in my stomach for the landing. To see it disintegrate over the Texas skies was as shocking as the loss of Challenger. The aftermath was even more painful as the distinct impression was had that we should have caught this one while she was flying. The loss of corporate knowledge when Boeing bought Rockwell and moved the people from California to Texas was wrenching when you read that the engineer who created the program to assess damage to the tiles (who refused to move to Texas and left Rockwell) stated that it was never intended to be used in the way it was used during STS-107. The testing afterward of the RCC panels from the venerable Shuttle Enterprise that showed their fragility shocked everyone who saw it. The Third and Final Act The Shuttle returned to flight quicker this time. A controversial rule was adopted that would have precluded the Shuttle being used to service the Hubble telescope one last time that was reversed in 2005 by incoming administrator Mike Griffin. The last servicing mission was in 2009 and it was the final flight to a non station destination. With the station completed in late 2010 and with no further payloads in the pipeline it seemed the logical decision to terminate the program and move onward. What Could Have Been Politicians love to say that no one cares about space. The literally millions of people who stopped and clogged highways in Washington, the Bay Area and Los Angeles might disagree with you. Americans love space. To use an out of vogue phrase, we have seen it as our manifest destiny and have since that July day in 1969 when mankind of the American flavor set foot on the Moon. The Shuttle was originally supposed to help us get back to the Moon with the construction of the station and of space vehicles that could go from low Earth Orbit to the Moon. One of my favorite lunar lander designs from Boeing, as illustrated by Paul Hudson in the late 1980's was a dual engine vehicle that would have been carried into orbit by the Shuttle. The Shuttle was a heavy lift vehicle that we threw away, just like we threw away the Saturn V. The Shuttle was never perfect and it never reached its full potential but every time it launched it carried more than a quarter of a million pounds of hardware into orbit and most of it came back. Several proposals were made for Shuttle system upgrades that should have happened but did not. One proposal was to go to electromechanical actuators for all of the moving parts of the orbiter such as the SSME's and flight surfaces. This would have eliminated the hydraulic system and the hydrazine powered APU's in favor of an upgraded fuel cell system. This would have cut costs and time for turn around dramatically. Another proposal was to get rid of the bipropellant Orbital Maneuvering Engines and replace them with more powerful LOX/Methane engines. This would have improved performance and cut the turn around time further. A companion upgrade would have swapped out all of the RCS thrusters on the orbiter with the same LOX/Methane system. This would have eliminated toxic propellants from the Orbiter and would have also cut the time, effort, and cost to turn around the system. There was a proposal from as far back as 1977 to add solar arrays that could be deployed on orbit and married to a regenerative fuel cell system that would have extended the time on orbit to near indefinitely. There were ideas floating about by some to keep an orbiter on orbit at the station to provide extra living space and a construction facility for large space structures at the station. Atlantis was already modified to accept power from the station and thus could have, with some further modifications, have remained at the station. This would have caused other problems with the station but none that were unsolvable. The Legacy It is amazing to think now that the last flight of the Shuttle was barely a year ago (from September 2012). With the completion of the station, the Shuttle did not seem to have a purpose anymore. Though many proposals were made for a smooth transition to a quasi-heavy lift Shuttle C, none of the proposals made it past the desire by NASA for a really big shiny new heavy lifter, damn the cost involved and damn the loss of now 35 plus years of operational experience with manned spaceflight. Was it worth it? The answer to me is yes, if we learn the lessons that the Shuttle program taught us. From the amazing success of the process of orbital assembly that brought together modules from Europe, Russia, Japan, and the United States and put them into a successful half million pound space station, to the satellite servicing missions and microgravity research, the Shuttle does have a proud legacy of accomplishment. The biggest problem today, is like what we did in the aftermath of the Apollo era, we seem bound and determined to forget the lessons of the Shuttle program. NASA chose a capsule for a renewed exploration program when the lesson of the Apollo program was that they were very expensive throw away systems. Say what you will but if the Shuttle program had thrown away all of those expensive engines every flight the cost would have been much higher. Most of the Shuttle's high cost came due to the low flight rate. Even in the mid 1990's the marginal cost of a Shuttle mission was only about $120 million dollars, quite a deal to put a quarter of a million pounds of hardware into space. The Space Launch System advocates claim that each of those missions will only cost $500 million each. This is a rank fantasy as the Saturn V launches cost $400 million each 40 years ago. It is interesting that this number is probably the marginal launch cost. The infrastructure and overhead cost is what kills you and there is little indication that they are going to save a lot of money there compared to the Shuttle. Throwing away all of your hardware each mission is insane but that is what NASA wants to go back to for the future. The Fly Over It was truly amazing the number of people who came out to NASA Ames for the flyover. I was at my office at 7:00 am and there were already people there waiting for something that was not going to happen until ten o'clock. By the time of the flyover there were over 20,000 people waiting there at Ames for this event. There were hundreds of thousands of other people that took a break from their jobs to do likewise all across Silicon Valley and the rest of California. Americans love the Shuttle. Many amazing things were done with them and we mourned together for those whose lives were lost in them. There is a deep urge in this country to support the exploration and development of space. To build a space program around making the solar system the province of a few government employees, around doing a few science experiments, is not what we as a nation signed up for in the 1950's. We want more from our space program than what the narrow view of NASA has provided. NASA fought space tourism tooth and nail. It killed the idea of a privately built and operated orbiter in the 1980's and today is fixated on a rocket to no where, with no payloads and no destination within the remaining lives of those who first walked on the Moon. This is a national tragedy and one that if the government will not get beyond, we will. Romney and Obama space plans Orlando Sentinel (Editorial) With Florida once again considered a must-win state in this year's presidential race, space policy is finally lifting off as an issue for the candidates. Some coincidence, huh? Last week at the University of Central Florida, Mitt Romney running mate Paul Ryan vowed the U.S. would remain the world's "unequivocal leader" in space. Romney's campaign issued a policy statement promising he'd make space a priority as president, but it included few details. Ryan rightly declared that the U.S. space program needs a clear mission — ironic, because the policy statement didn't offer one. Meanwhile, President Obama's campaign gave him credit for the burgeoning commercial space industry, the Mars rover mission and a long-term plan for deep-space exploration. All positives, but each falls short of securing U.S. space leadership. Leaked documents from NASA indicated that the agency is seeking White House support to build and locate a new orbiting outpost that would serve as a staging area for future deep-space missions. But key details in this plan also are missing, starting with its cost. Floridians, who have seen the state lose thousands of space jobs, should be hopeful but skeptical about the candidates' proposals. In 2008, Obama vowed to narrow the gap between the end of the shuttle and the next manned program. After he was elected, he canceled the next program and replaced it with another one that will probably widen the gap. Voters who consider space a national priority should demand details from both campaigns. END
Sent from my iPad
Is NASA better off than it was 4 years ago?
Saturday evening, the Romney campaign released it’s space policy white paper, Securing U.S. Leadership in Space. As Obama showed on Aug. 3, 2008 when he told the Space Coast of his unwavering support for NASA’s Constellation program, hope can be an important selling point to the Space Coast, and to winning the eastern anchor of the I-4 Corridor and Florida in 2008. Compared with what President Obama has in the last four years given the space community in general and the Florida Space Coast in particular, Romney’s space policy appears downright reassuring.
Unlike the President’s 2010 space policy, Romney will, as he first discussed in Florida in January, bring together experts from several disciplines to develop new goals for NASA. This point alone would differentiate in a large way a Romney Administration in developing a roadmap for NASA from that of the Obama Administration. As Neil Armstrong noted in his May 12, 2010 testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee,
Rumors abound that neither the NASA Administrator nor the President‟s Science and Technology Advisor were knowledgeable about the plan. Lack of review normally guarantees that there will be overlooked requirements and unwelcome consequences. How could such a chain of events happen? A plan that was invisible to so many was likely contrived by a very small group in secret who persuaded the President that this was a unique opportunity to put his stamp on a new and innovative program. I believe the President was poorly advised.
Photo Credit: NASA
Moments after the Romney campaign released its space paper, GOP Vice-Presidential nominee Rep. Paul Ryan gave a space policy speech at the University of Central Florida. During his speech, Ryan noted,
“It’s important that we have a space program that has a clear mission, a space program where we know where we are heading in the future, and a space program that is the unequivocal leader.”
The Obama re-election campaign quickly responded that the Romney campaign was only pandering to the Space Coast while giving no specifics. But as Space Coast residents will recall, in early August 2008, candidate Obama came to the Space Coast to make many specific promises, very nearly all of which were subsequently broken in February 2010.
Today, there is little debate within Congress that NASA is not better off today than it was four years ago. NASA people at JSC, MSFC, LaRC, and KSC all say the same thing; that NASA’s spaceflight engineering talent is slowly being disassembled.
Voters now have two visions for NASA. One that seeks to strengthen the Agency so that it can lead, with the help of the commercial space companies, the march outward from low-Earth orbit. The other will see the continued transformation of NASA into a mere contracting agency for companies whose own technical skills and understanding of human space flight do not match that of NASA circa 1964, much less today. The latter vision is one that will not get us to the Moon, asteroids, and beyond and was the reason that in 2010 Neil Armstrong came out of retirement to oppose President Obama’s vision for NASA.
Friday, September 28, 2012
Have we lost our minds? QE3 will be disaster--make things worse for poor!
Higher food, energy, materials prices will make conditions even worse for poor.
It has been proven over and over in history that printing money will not work.
Credit : Cavuto program
With strong interest in shuttle--Obvious Superb Capabilities--Unbelievable That Program Terminated--where is the Uproar?
Thoughts on the Last Flight of the Shuttle Dennis Wingo - SpaceRef.com (Viewpoint) I was at NASA Ames last week when the final flight of the final space shuttle Endeavour on its way to its final destination occurred. As many people did, I stood outside, on top of our MacMoon's at Ames and took pictures. There were over 20,000 people at NASA Ames that waited hours for an event that took no more than one minute to consummate. Beyond that there were hundreds of thousands more people all around Silicon Valley who were outside and watching when the shuttle flew overhead. They were on bridges, they were on the patio at Specialties Coffee with binoculars, they were pulled over on the 101 freeway, all to catch a last glimpse of a space shuttle, not even in space, but simply flying overhead on the back of a 747, the same way that we first saw the Enterprise in 1977. The same thing happened all over the country. Washington D.C. was almost shut down by the flight of Discovery coming into Dulles. Tens of thousands of people were wowed by the sight and image of two orbiters nose to nose on the tarmac. It is if Americans collectively all wanted to be a part of a history that many fear is passing us by.... I am the Shuttle Generation The Time Before the First Launch The Space Shuttle has been a part of my/our life for almost forty years now. Not like the people that designed them, built them and operated them, but part of my/our life none the less. As a kid I read the articles about why the Saturn V was giving way to a new and routine way of getting to space (naive child that I was) in the early 70's. I read the articles about how we would be building space stations, deploying satellites, and constructing huge telescopes in orbit. In 1976 I watched the news reports of the roll out of the Enterprise and its display at Edwards AFB with the crew of the fictional 23rd century starship Enterprise. In 1977 we saw on TV the captive carry and first free flights of the Enterprise at Edwards AFB. In 1979 I made a special trip to the cape to see the Enterprise, fully stacked on the launch pad as it was being used as a facilities fit check and test vehicle. I mourned with everyone else when I found out that the Enterprise was never going to fly, for what to some are still mysterious reasons. We also mourned in that year when we found out that because of the delays caused by problems with the SSME engine development, the shuttle would not be available to save Skylab, which then died in its death in fire over the Australian outback. We worried in 1980 when reports of the continuing problems with the SSME development further pushed back the first launch. I read the Playboy article in late 1980 that went through all of the reasons that the first launch would fail, including faulty tiles, an unreliable APU, an untested system flying with humans, etc.... The First Launches I did not get to see the first launch in person, but as part of the launch of a new life for myself, I watched the launch in a motel room in Tucson Arizona as I was moving to California to be involved in the computer industry. It was an amazing launch. Our generation who remembered the Saturn V launches were used to seeing the Saturn V lumber off the pad in slow motion, seeming to claw itself into the sky by brute force. The Shuttle virtually leapt off the pad, seemingly determined to prove its naysayers wrong. Watching for the first time the orbiter flying, the APU's working, and the successful barely two day mission, everyone was waiting with anticipation for the landing. For the first time in Human history, the people of southern California heard the double boom...boom of the orbiter's reentry that mildly shook houses for hundreds of miles and the picture perfect landing at Edwards AFB. I did not get to see the first landing but I did see the landing of STS-4. We left work from Thousand Oaks CA late, not thinking that we would have any problems. However, when we got to Pear Blossom highway there was a massive 40 mile long traffic jam. As time was getting late we knew that we were not going to make it. We were in a small truck and drove on the sand for a while and made progress but got to a spot where we would have gotten stuck so we got back in line. At about this time four big 4x4's came whizzing by on the wrong side of the road! Of course we got in behind them and were soon breezing by the slow moving traffic at 60 miles per hour. The lead truck had big CB antennas on it and when it would veer off to the left, off the road, the rest of us followed. This allowed the sparse oncoming traffic to go by while we continued forward! We did this for over 30 miles until we saw the base entry checkpoint ahead and got back in line. We made it into the base literally five minutes before they closed the gates. This was still a couple of hours before landing and so we started playing. We saw a bunch of trucks driving out on the lake bed and joined them. About 20 minutes later a fully armed Huey helicopter came whizzing by and stopped us while the fully armed door gunner screamed at us to get the hell off the lake bed, didn't we know the Shuttle was coming? We immediately left and drove to the viewing area, where about half a million of our closest friends were already there. Those early Shuttle landings were a huge party and we all waited for the landing while buying food, and drink and generally raising merry hell. Since the lake bed area was so large we still were able to get a good viewing site across the lake bed where president Reagan was also waiting for the landing. His reviewing stand was really neat, being between two hangers with our old friend, the Shuttle Enterprise behind the stand. We were warned that the Shuttle was on the way in and started looking for it. The announcer was calling out over loudspeakers the progress. I first saw Columbia when she was still about 105,000 feet up in altitude and the belly of the orbiter was still glowing a dull orange. From that instant until she landed across from us it was no more than an amazing five minutes. The orbiter was sitting on the tarmac very close to where Reagan and the other dignitaries were waiting. Then another amazing thing happened! As Reagan was speaking the 747 showed up again, this time carrying the Shuttle Challenger on its back! As it flew over, for a brief moment, we saw three orbiters together in one thrilling view. The Early Years The early years of the Shuttle program were perhaps its most innovative. From launch and rescuing communications satellites to the recovery and repair of NASA's Solar Max, exciting and ground breaking missions were the norm. On the flight where Solar Max was rescued (STS 41C) and repaired NASA deployed the LDEF materials in space 21,300 bus, and the shuttle went to a then record of 300 nautical miles altitude using a direct ascent trajectory. Science missions flew using the European built Spacelab module in the cargo bay with materials and life sciences experiments. Spacelab components flew on a total of 22 shuttle missions over its lifetime. On other missions orbital assembly experiments were performed such as the EASE/ACCESS where large truss assemblies were built as a test for the future space station. The materials sciences experiments were very exciting to industry and the first non government employee, Charles Walker, flew twice as a payload specialist for McDonnell Douglas. Student experiments were first flown in space in the Getaway Special Program where payloads are flown in the cargo bay in a self contained experimental system that replaced ballast that would normally be used to balance the orbiter. Dozens of these payloads were eventually flown and many students who built them are now senior professionals in the space industry. On a minor note the Shuttle could be very annoying. During that era it landed often in California at Edwards Air Force base. It would usually land early in the morning. I was living in Thousand Oaks California at the time and the mission frequency was high enough that the double sonic booms of its reentry would wake me up in the morning to not very charitable thoughts about it doing so. The first seeds of NASA's problems also came in this era. NASA was jealous of its hardware and rejected out of hand the proposal from Rockwell International to build a fifth orbiter that would be owned by and flown by Rockwell. Problems with the Shuttle system itself were found but not corrected during this era that eventually led to the first shuttle tragedy. Challenger Just about everyone can remember where they were at when we lost the Challenger on that cold January morning in 1986. I was in a computer room in Morristown, New Jersey when a computer operator ran in to tell us about it. A group of us left and went to a local bar to watch replay after replay of the explosion that took seven fine lives, including the first teacher in space from us. President Reagan's eloquent eulogy of the crew helped a shocked nation to help heal the loss. The Shuttle program was never the same after that. My own closer affiliation with the Shuttle program began during the stand down after Challenger. I wanted to work closer to the space program and finally get my degree after working as a non degreed engineer for several years. I left the computer industry to move back to Alabama to enroll at the University of Alabama in Huntsville where I figured I could get work related to the space program and get my degree. I worked at a small company in Huntsville Alabama that built a computer that had a telemetry system that would process the data stream from the SSME's during launch. This system was going into the firing room at the cape and it was fought tooth and nail by the people down there who were quite happy with their ModComp computers and did not like these newfangled microprocessors. The Second Age of the Shuttle When the first launch of the Shuttle happened after Challenger in 1988 with the Shuttle Discovery. I was able to get a seat in the Morris auditorium at NASA MSFC building 4200 as I had worked on the return to flight. It was full to overflowing and it seemed that everyone held their breaths when the "go at throttle up" command came from the CAPCOM. A huge cheer range out when the solid rocket boosters separated from the stack after two and a half minutes. No one moved though until the SSME's finally shut down and we knew that the orbiter was going to make it to orbit. There were still a lot of cool missions though the flight rate never approached the nine flights of 1985. I flew my first payload on the Shuttle on STS-46 with a MacIntosh computer interfaced to a microgravity measurement system that I designed called 3DMA. This mission deployed the European EURECA free flying platform and deployed (unsuccessfully) the Italian TSS-1 20 km tether. At this time I was learning about tethers and we were slated to fly a small satellite on a 20 km tether later in the decade on STS-85. We flew more payloads as I was working the Consortium for Materials Development in Space (CMDS) at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. We flew our 3DMA payload on the first quasi-commercial module on the Shuttle from SpaceHab. We learned about the politics of the Shuttle, how to work with the safety panel in Houston and the various rivalries between the NASA centers involved in the Shuttle program. After our small satellite was moved off of the Shuttle and flown on a Delta II in 1998 I began to move away from the Shuttle program. The Shuttle program did several more firsts, including a launch to high inclination out of Florida that went right up the east coast of the U.S. The TSS-1R mission flew, and the tether broke at 19.5 kilometers, but not before confirming the viability of using tethers to generate electrical power in space. The historic first docking of the Space Shuttle to the MIR space station happened in this timeframe as well. The long delayed Hubble space telescope was finally lofted into orbit in 1990 and found to have a badly ground mirror, it was the shuttle to the rescue with a modified optical system. By the time of the fifth Hubble servicing mission in 2009 the telescope was virtually rebuilt in its entire power system, electronics, guidance, and scientific instruments. It was during this era that I finally got to see some launches. I saw STS-40 from a highway overpass near Coca Beach. I saw STS-46 with my hardware take off from the VIP stands. All together I got to see at least four launches and three additional scrubs of launches. There was one launch that was especially memorable. There was a hold due to weather for too many clouds in the area of the launch site, which would cause problems if there was an abort to launch site scenario. There was near constant chatter with the weather officer about a possible break in the clouds. Finally the break happened and the hold at 9 minutes was lifted and it seemed that the launch team rushed to get the Shuttle launched. The Shuttle lifted off in a hole in the clouds that almost immediately closed back in. Fortunately no abort was needed but you could just tell from the sounds of the voices from the CAPCOM and launch control that they were not going to let a few clouds stop the launch that day. The Station Era As the redesigned International Space Station (ISS) began to be a reality the Shuttle program became fun again. The crew persons who actually were involved in the construction of the station were able to gain new and valuable skills and for the first time in human history, half a million pounds of hardware in space, most of it carried up in the orbiters became our first outpost in space. The Shuttle was very well qualified for this task and the combination of the Shuttle remote manipulator and the station remote manipulator made a powerful combination for the successful construction in space of large platforms. Columbia By the time of the loss of Columbia on STS-107 I no longer had the small pit in my stomach for the landing. To see it disintegrate over the Texas skies was as shocking as the loss of Challenger. The aftermath was even more painful as the distinct impression was had that we should have caught this one while she was flying. The loss of corporate knowledge when Boeing bought Rockwell and moved the people from California to Texas was wrenching when you read that the engineer who created the program to assess damage to the tiles (who refused to move to Texas and left Rockwell) stated that it was never intended to be used in the way it was used during STS-107. The testing afterward of the RCC panels from the venerable Shuttle Enterprise that showed their fragility shocked everyone who saw it. The Third and Final Act The Shuttle returned to flight quicker this time. A controversial rule was adopted that would have precluded the Shuttle being used to service the Hubble telescope one last time that was reversed in 2005 by incoming administrator Mike Griffin. The last servicing mission was in 2009 and it was the final flight to a non station destination. With the station completed in late 2010 and with no further payloads in the pipeline it seemed the logical decision to terminate the program and move onward. What Could Have Been Politicians love to say that no one cares about space. The literally millions of people who stopped and clogged highways in Washington, the Bay Area and Los Angeles might disagree with you. Americans love space. To use an out of vogue phrase, we have seen it as our manifest destiny and have since that July day in 1969 when mankind of the American flavor set foot on the Moon. The Shuttle was originally supposed to help us get back to the Moon with the construction of the station and of space vehicles that could go from low Earth Orbit to the Moon. One of my favorite lunar lander designs from Boeing, as illustrated by Paul Hudson in the late 1980's was a dual engine vehicle that would have been carried into orbit by the Shuttle. The Shuttle was a heavy lift vehicle that we threw away, just like we threw away the Saturn V. The Shuttle was never perfect and it never reached its full potential but every time it launched it carried more than a quarter of a million pounds of hardware into orbit and most of it came back. Several proposals were made for Shuttle system upgrades that should have happened but did not. One proposal was to go to electromechanical actuators for all of the moving parts of the orbiter such as the SSME's and flight surfaces. This would have eliminated the hydraulic system and the hydrazine powered APU's in favor of an upgraded fuel cell system. This would have cut costs and time for turn around dramatically. Another proposal was to get rid of the bipropellant Orbital Maneuvering Engines and replace them with more powerful LOX/Methane engines. This would have improved performance and cut the turn around time further. A companion upgrade would have swapped out all of the RCS thrusters on the orbiter with the same LOX/Methane system. This would have eliminated toxic propellants from the Orbiter and would have also cut the time, effort, and cost to turn around the system. There was a proposal from as far back as 1977 to add solar arrays that could be deployed on orbit and married to a regenerative fuel cell system that would have extended the time on orbit to near indefinitely. There were ideas floating about by some to keep an orbiter on orbit at the station to provide extra living space and a construction facility for large space structures at the station. Atlantis was already modified to accept power from the station and thus could have, with some further modifications, have remained at the station. This would have caused other problems with the station but none that were unsolvable. The Legacy It is amazing to think now that the last flight of the Shuttle was barely a year ago (from September 2012). With the completion of the station, the Shuttle did not seem to have a purpose anymore. Though many proposals were made for a smooth transition to a quasi-heavy lift Shuttle C, none of the proposals made it past the desire by NASA for a really big shiny new heavy lifter, damn the cost involved and damn the loss of now 35 plus years of operational experience with manned spaceflight. Was it worth it? The answer to me is yes, if we learn the lessons that the Shuttle program taught us. From the amazing success of the process of orbital assembly that brought together modules from Europe, Russia, Japan, and the United States and put them into a successful half million pound space station, to the satellite servicing missions and microgravity research, the Shuttle does have a proud legacy of accomplishment. The biggest problem today, is like what we did in the aftermath of the Apollo era, we seem bound and determined to forget the lessons of the Shuttle program. NASA chose a capsule for a renewed exploration program when the lesson of the Apollo program was that they were very expensive throw away systems. Say what you will but if the Shuttle program had thrown away all of those expensive engines every flight the cost would have been much higher. Most of the Shuttle's high cost came due to the low flight rate. Even in the mid 1990's the marginal cost of a Shuttle mission was only about $120 million dollars, quite a deal to put a quarter of a million pounds of hardware into space. The Space Launch System advocates claim that each of those missions will only cost $500 million each. This is a rank fantasy as the Saturn V launches cost $400 million each 40 years ago. It is interesting that this number is probably the marginal launch cost. The infrastructure and overhead cost is what kills you and there is little indication that they are going to save a lot of money there compared to the Shuttle. Throwing away all of your hardware each mission is insane but that is what NASA wants to go back to for the future. The Fly Over It was truly amazing the number of people who came out to NASA Ames for the flyover. I was at my office at 7:00 am and there were already people there waiting for something that was not going to happen until ten o'clock. By the time of the flyover there were over 20,000 people waiting there at Ames for this event. There were hundreds of thousands of other people that took a break from their jobs to do likewise all across Silicon Valley and the rest of California. Americans love the Shuttle. Many amazing things were done with them and we mourned together for those whose lives were lost in them. There is a deep urge in this country to support the exploration and development of space. To build a space program around making the solar system the province of a few government employees, around doing a few science experiments, is not what we as a nation signed up for in the 1950's. We want more from our space program than what the narrow view of NASA has provided. NASA fought space tourism tooth and nail. It killed the idea of a privately built and operated orbiter in the 1980's and today is fixated on a rocket to no where, with no payloads and no destination within the remaining lives of those who first walked on the Moon. This is a national tragedy and one that if the government will not get beyond, we will. Romney and Obama space plans Orlando Sentinel (Editorial) With Florida once again considered a must-win state in this year's presidential race, space policy is finally lifting off as an issue for the candidates. Some coincidence, huh? Last week at the University of Central Florida, Mitt Romney running mate Paul Ryan vowed the U.S. would remain the world's "unequivocal leader" in space. Romney's campaign issued a policy statement promising he'd make space a priority as president, but it included few details. Ryan rightly declared that the U.S. space program needs a clear mission — ironic, because the policy statement didn't offer one. Meanwhile, President Obama's campaign gave him credit for the burgeoning commercial space industry, the Mars rover mission and a long-term plan for deep-space exploration. All positives, but each falls short of securing U.S. space leadership. Leaked documents from NASA indicated that the agency is seeking White House support to build and locate a new orbiting outpost that would serve as a staging area for future deep-space missions. But key details in this plan also are missing, starting with its cost. Floridians, who have seen the state lose thousands of space jobs, should be hopeful but skeptical about the candidates' proposals. In 2008, Obama vowed to narrow the gap between the end of the shuttle and the next manned program. After he was elected, he canceled the next program and replaced it with another one that will probably widen the gap. Voters who consider space a national priority should demand details from both campaigns. END
Sent from my iPad
Shuttle mission was only about $120 million dollars, quite a deal to put a quarter of a million pounds of hardware into space. The Space Launch System advocates claim that each of those missions will only cost $500 million each. This is a rank fantasy as the Saturn V launches cost $400 million each 40 years ago.
Thoughts on the Last Flight of the Shuttle Dennis Wingo - SpaceRef.com (Viewpoint) I was at NASA Ames last week when the final flight of the final space shuttle Endeavour on its way to its final destination occurred. As many people did, I stood outside, on top of our MacMoon's at Ames and took pictures. There were over 20,000 people at NASA Ames that waited hours for an event that took no more than one minute to consummate. Beyond that there were hundreds of thousands more people all around Silicon Valley who were outside and watching when the shuttle flew overhead. They were on bridges, they were on the patio at Specialties Coffee with binoculars, they were pulled over on the 101 freeway, all to catch a last glimpse of a space shuttle, not even in space, but simply flying overhead on the back of a 747, the same way that we first saw the Enterprise in 1977. The same thing happened all over the country. Washington D.C. was almost shut down by the flight of Discovery coming into Dulles. Tens of thousands of people were wowed by the sight and image of two orbiters nose to nose on the tarmac. It is if Americans collectively all wanted to be a part of a history that many fear is passing us by.... I am the Shuttle Generation The Time Before the First Launch The Space Shuttle has been a part of my/our life for almost forty years now. Not like the people that designed them, built them and operated them, but part of my/our life none the less. As a kid I read the articles about why the Saturn V was giving way to a new and routine way of getting to space (naive child that I was) in the early 70's. I read the articles about how we would be building space stations, deploying satellites, and constructing huge telescopes in orbit. In 1976 I watched the news reports of the roll out of the Enterprise and its display at Edwards AFB with the crew of the fictional 23rd century starship Enterprise. In 1977 we saw on TV the captive carry and first free flights of the Enterprise at Edwards AFB. In 1979 I made a special trip to the cape to see the Enterprise, fully stacked on the launch pad as it was being used as a facilities fit check and test vehicle. I mourned with everyone else when I found out that the Enterprise was never going to fly, for what to some are still mysterious reasons. We also mourned in that year when we found out that because of the delays caused by problems with the SSME engine development, the shuttle would not be available to save Skylab, which then died in its death in fire over the Australian outback. We worried in 1980 when reports of the continuing problems with the SSME development further pushed back the first launch. I read the Playboy article in late 1980 that went through all of the reasons that the first launch would fail, including faulty tiles, an unreliable APU, an untested system flying with humans, etc.... The First Launches I did not get to see the first launch in person, but as part of the launch of a new life for myself, I watched the launch in a motel room in Tucson Arizona as I was moving to California to be involved in the computer industry. It was an amazing launch. Our generation who remembered the Saturn V launches were used to seeing the Saturn V lumber off the pad in slow motion, seeming to claw itself into the sky by brute force. The Shuttle virtually leapt off the pad, seemingly determined to prove its naysayers wrong. Watching for the first time the orbiter flying, the APU's working, and the successful barely two day mission, everyone was waiting with anticipation for the landing. For the first time in Human history, the people of southern California heard the double boom...boom of the orbiter's reentry that mildly shook houses for hundreds of miles and the picture perfect landing at Edwards AFB. I did not get to see the first landing but I did see the landing of STS-4. We left work from Thousand Oaks CA late, not thinking that we would have any problems. However, when we got to Pear Blossom highway there was a massive 40 mile long traffic jam. As time was getting late we knew that we were not going to make it. We were in a small truck and drove on the sand for a while and made progress but got to a spot where we would have gotten stuck so we got back in line. At about this time four big 4x4's came whizzing by on the wrong side of the road! Of course we got in behind them and were soon breezing by the slow moving traffic at 60 miles per hour. The lead truck had big CB antennas on it and when it would veer off to the left, off the road, the rest of us followed. This allowed the sparse oncoming traffic to go by while we continued forward! We did this for over 30 miles until we saw the base entry checkpoint ahead and got back in line. We made it into the base literally five minutes before they closed the gates. This was still a couple of hours before landing and so we started playing. We saw a bunch of trucks driving out on the lake bed and joined them. About 20 minutes later a fully armed Huey helicopter came whizzing by and stopped us while the fully armed door gunner screamed at us to get the hell off the lake bed, didn't we know the Shuttle was coming? We immediately left and drove to the viewing area, where about half a million of our closest friends were already there. Those early Shuttle landings were a huge party and we all waited for the landing while buying food, and drink and generally raising merry hell. Since the lake bed area was so large we still were able to get a good viewing site across the lake bed where president Reagan was also waiting for the landing. His reviewing stand was really neat, being between two hangers with our old friend, the Shuttle Enterprise behind the stand. We were warned that the Shuttle was on the way in and started looking for it. The announcer was calling out over loudspeakers the progress. I first saw Columbia when she was still about 105,000 feet up in altitude and the belly of the orbiter was still glowing a dull orange. From that instant until she landed across from us it was no more than an amazing five minutes. The orbiter was sitting on the tarmac very close to where Reagan and the other dignitaries were waiting. Then another amazing thing happened! As Reagan was speaking the 747 showed up again, this time carrying the Shuttle Challenger on its back! As it flew over, for a brief moment, we saw three orbiters together in one thrilling view. The Early Years The early years of the Shuttle program were perhaps its most innovative. From launch and rescuing communications satellites to the recovery and repair of NASA's Solar Max, exciting and ground breaking missions were the norm. On the flight where Solar Max was rescued (STS 41C) and repaired NASA deployed the LDEF materials in space 21,300 bus, and the shuttle went to a then record of 300 nautical miles altitude using a direct ascent trajectory. Science missions flew using the European built Spacelab module in the cargo bay with materials and life sciences experiments. Spacelab components flew on a total of 22 shuttle missions over its lifetime. On other missions orbital assembly experiments were performed such as the EASE/ACCESS where large truss assemblies were built as a test for the future space station. The materials sciences experiments were very exciting to industry and the first non government employee, Charles Walker, flew twice as a payload specialist for McDonnell Douglas. Student experiments were first flown in space in the Getaway Special Program where payloads are flown in the cargo bay in a self contained experimental system that replaced ballast that would normally be used to balance the orbiter. Dozens of these payloads were eventually flown and many students who built them are now senior professionals in the space industry. On a minor note the Shuttle could be very annoying. During that era it landed often in California at Edwards Air Force base. It would usually land early in the morning. I was living in Thousand Oaks California at the time and the mission frequency was high enough that the double sonic booms of its reentry would wake me up in the morning to not very charitable thoughts about it doing so. The first seeds of NASA's problems also came in this era. NASA was jealous of its hardware and rejected out of hand the proposal from Rockwell International to build a fifth orbiter that would be owned by and flown by Rockwell. Problems with the Shuttle system itself were found but not corrected during this era that eventually led to the first shuttle tragedy. Challenger Just about everyone can remember where they were at when we lost the Challenger on that cold January morning in 1986. I was in a computer room in Morristown, New Jersey when a computer operator ran in to tell us about it. A group of us left and went to a local bar to watch replay after replay of the explosion that took seven fine lives, including the first teacher in space from us. President Reagan's eloquent eulogy of the crew helped a shocked nation to help heal the loss. The Shuttle program was never the same after that. My own closer affiliation with the Shuttle program began during the stand down after Challenger. I wanted to work closer to the space program and finally get my degree after working as a non degreed engineer for several years. I left the computer industry to move back to Alabama to enroll at the University of Alabama in Huntsville where I figured I could get work related to the space program and get my degree. I worked at a small company in Huntsville Alabama that built a computer that had a telemetry system that would process the data stream from the SSME's during launch. This system was going into the firing room at the cape and it was fought tooth and nail by the people down there who were quite happy with their ModComp computers and did not like these newfangled microprocessors. The Second Age of the Shuttle When the first launch of the Shuttle happened after Challenger in 1988 with the Shuttle Discovery. I was able to get a seat in the Morris auditorium at NASA MSFC building 4200 as I had worked on the return to flight. It was full to overflowing and it seemed that everyone held their breaths when the "go at throttle up" command came from the CAPCOM. A huge cheer range out when the solid rocket boosters separated from the stack after two and a half minutes. No one moved though until the SSME's finally shut down and we knew that the orbiter was going to make it to orbit. There were still a lot of cool missions though the flight rate never approached the nine flights of 1985. I flew my first payload on the Shuttle on STS-46 with a MacIntosh computer interfaced to a microgravity measurement system that I designed called 3DMA. This mission deployed the European EURECA free flying platform and deployed (unsuccessfully) the Italian TSS-1 20 km tether. At this time I was learning about tethers and we were slated to fly a small satellite on a 20 km tether later in the decade on STS-85. We flew more payloads as I was working the Consortium for Materials Development in Space (CMDS) at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. We flew our 3DMA payload on the first quasi-commercial module on the Shuttle from SpaceHab. We learned about the politics of the Shuttle, how to work with the safety panel in Houston and the various rivalries between the NASA centers involved in the Shuttle program. After our small satellite was moved off of the Shuttle and flown on a Delta II in 1998 I began to move away from the Shuttle program. The Shuttle program did several more firsts, including a launch to high inclination out of Florida that went right up the east coast of the U.S. The TSS-1R mission flew, and the tether broke at 19.5 kilometers, but not before confirming the viability of using tethers to generate electrical power in space. The historic first docking of the Space Shuttle to the MIR space station happened in this timeframe as well. The long delayed Hubble space telescope was finally lofted into orbit in 1990 and found to have a badly ground mirror, it was the shuttle to the rescue with a modified optical system. By the time of the fifth Hubble servicing mission in 2009 the telescope was virtually rebuilt in its entire power system, electronics, guidance, and scientific instruments. It was during this era that I finally got to see some launches. I saw STS-40 from a highway overpass near Coca Beach. I saw STS-46 with my hardware take off from the VIP stands. All together I got to see at least four launches and three additional scrubs of launches. There was one launch that was especially memorable. There was a hold due to weather for too many clouds in the area of the launch site, which would cause problems if there was an abort to launch site scenario. There was near constant chatter with the weather officer about a possible break in the clouds. Finally the break happened and the hold at 9 minutes was lifted and it seemed that the launch team rushed to get the Shuttle launched. The Shuttle lifted off in a hole in the clouds that almost immediately closed back in. Fortunately no abort was needed but you could just tell from the sounds of the voices from the CAPCOM and launch control that they were not going to let a few clouds stop the launch that day. The Station Era As the redesigned International Space Station (ISS) began to be a reality the Shuttle program became fun again. The crew persons who actually were involved in the construction of the station were able to gain new and valuable skills and for the first time in human history, half a million pounds of hardware in space, most of it carried up in the orbiters became our first outpost in space. The Shuttle was very well qualified for this task and the combination of the Shuttle remote manipulator and the station remote manipulator made a powerful combination for the successful construction in space of large platforms. Columbia By the time of the loss of Columbia on STS-107 I no longer had the small pit in my stomach for the landing. To see it disintegrate over the Texas skies was as shocking as the loss of Challenger. The aftermath was even more painful as the distinct impression was had that we should have caught this one while she was flying. The loss of corporate knowledge when Boeing bought Rockwell and moved the people from California to Texas was wrenching when you read that the engineer who created the program to assess damage to the tiles (who refused to move to Texas and left Rockwell) stated that it was never intended to be used in the way it was used during STS-107. The testing afterward of the RCC panels from the venerable Shuttle Enterprise that showed their fragility shocked everyone who saw it. The Third and Final Act The Shuttle returned to flight quicker this time. A controversial rule was adopted that would have precluded the Shuttle being used to service the Hubble telescope one last time that was reversed in 2005 by incoming administrator Mike Griffin. The last servicing mission was in 2009 and it was the final flight to a non station destination. With the station completed in late 2010 and with no further payloads in the pipeline it seemed the logical decision to terminate the program and move onward. What Could Have Been Politicians love to say that no one cares about space. The literally millions of people who stopped and clogged highways in Washington, the Bay Area and Los Angeles might disagree with you. Americans love space. To use an out of vogue phrase, we have seen it as our manifest destiny and have since that July day in 1969 when mankind of the American flavor set foot on the Moon. The Shuttle was originally supposed to help us get back to the Moon with the construction of the station and of space vehicles that could go from low Earth Orbit to the Moon. One of my favorite lunar lander designs from Boeing, as illustrated by Paul Hudson in the late 1980's was a dual engine vehicle that would have been carried into orbit by the Shuttle. The Shuttle was a heavy lift vehicle that we threw away, just like we threw away the Saturn V. The Shuttle was never perfect and it never reached its full potential but every time it launched it carried more than a quarter of a million pounds of hardware into orbit and most of it came back. Several proposals were made for Shuttle system upgrades that should have happened but did not. One proposal was to go to electromechanical actuators for all of the moving parts of the orbiter such as the SSME's and flight surfaces. This would have eliminated the hydraulic system and the hydrazine powered APU's in favor of an upgraded fuel cell system. This would have cut costs and time for turn around dramatically. Another proposal was to get rid of the bipropellant Orbital Maneuvering Engines and replace them with more powerful LOX/Methane engines. This would have improved performance and cut the turn around time further. A companion upgrade would have swapped out all of the RCS thrusters on the orbiter with the same LOX/Methane system. This would have eliminated toxic propellants from the Orbiter and would have also cut the time, effort, and cost to turn around the system. There was a proposal from as far back as 1977 to add solar arrays that could be deployed on orbit and married to a regenerative fuel cell system that would have extended the time on orbit to near indefinitely. There were ideas floating about by some to keep an orbiter on orbit at the station to provide extra living space and a construction facility for large space structures at the station. Atlantis was already modified to accept power from the station and thus could have, with some further modifications, have remained at the station. This would have caused other problems with the station but none that were unsolvable. The Legacy It is amazing to think now that the last flight of the Shuttle was barely a year ago (from September 2012). With the completion of the station, the Shuttle did not seem to have a purpose anymore. Though many proposals were made for a smooth transition to a quasi-heavy lift Shuttle C, none of the proposals made it past the desire by NASA for a really big shiny new heavy lifter, damn the cost involved and damn the loss of now 35 plus years of operational experience with manned spaceflight. Was it worth it? The answer to me is yes, if we learn the lessons that the Shuttle program taught us. From the amazing success of the process of orbital assembly that brought together modules from Europe, Russia, Japan, and the United States and put them into a successful half million pound space station, to the satellite servicing missions and microgravity research, the Shuttle does have a proud legacy of accomplishment. The biggest problem today, is like what we did in the aftermath of the Apollo era, we seem bound and determined to forget the lessons of the Shuttle program. NASA chose a capsule for a renewed exploration program when the lesson of the Apollo program was that they were very expensive throw away systems. Say what you will but if the Shuttle program had thrown away all of those expensive engines every flight the cost would have been much higher. Most of the Shuttle's high cost came due to the low flight rate. Even in the mid 1990's the marginal cost of a Shuttle mission was only about $120 million dollars, quite a deal to put a quarter of a million pounds of hardware into space. The Space Launch System advocates claim that each of those missions will only cost $500 million each. This is a rank fantasy as the Saturn V launches cost $400 million each 40 years ago. It is interesting that this number is probably the marginal launch cost. The infrastructure and overhead cost is what kills you and there is little indication that they are going to save a lot of money there compared to the Shuttle. Throwing away all of your hardware each mission is insane but that is what NASA wants to go back to for the future. The Fly Over It was truly amazing the number of people who came out to NASA Ames for the flyover. I was at my office at 7:00 am and there were already people there waiting for something that was not going to happen until ten o'clock. By the time of the flyover there were over 20,000 people waiting there at Ames for this event. There were hundreds of thousands of other people that took a break from their jobs to do likewise all across Silicon Valley and the rest of California. Americans love the Shuttle. Many amazing things were done with them and we mourned together for those whose lives were lost in them. There is a deep urge in this country to support the exploration and development of space. To build a space program around making the solar system the province of a few government employees, around doing a few science experiments, is not what we as a nation signed up for in the 1950's. We want more from our space program than what the narrow view of NASA has provided. NASA fought space tourism tooth and nail. It killed the idea of a privately built and operated orbiter in the 1980's and today is fixated on a rocket to no where, with no payloads and no destination within the remaining lives of those who first walked on the Moon. This is a national tragedy and one that if the government will not get beyond, we will. Romney and Obama space plans Orlando Sentinel (Editorial) With Florida once again considered a must-win state in this year's presidential race, space policy is finally lifting off as an issue for the candidates. Some coincidence, huh? Last week at the University of Central Florida, Mitt Romney running mate Paul Ryan vowed the U.S. would remain the world's "unequivocal leader" in space. Romney's campaign issued a policy statement promising he'd make space a priority as president, but it included few details. Ryan rightly declared that the U.S. space program needs a clear mission — ironic, because the policy statement didn't offer one. Meanwhile, President Obama's campaign gave him credit for the burgeoning commercial space industry, the Mars rover mission and a long-term plan for deep-space exploration. All positives, but each falls short of securing U.S. space leadership. Leaked documents from NASA indicated that the agency is seeking White House support to build and locate a new orbiting outpost that would serve as a staging area for future deep-space missions. But key details in this plan also are missing, starting with its cost. Floridians, who have seen the state lose thousands of space jobs, should be hopeful but skeptical about the candidates' proposals. In 2008, Obama vowed to narrow the gap between the end of the shuttle and the next manned program. After he was elected, he canceled the next program and replaced it with another one that will probably widen the gap. Voters who consider space a national priority should demand details from both campaigns. END
Sent from my iPad