http://keeptheshuttleflying.com/
Sent from my iPad
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Fwd: [New post] New Year’s Greeting from Crew of International Space Station
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: AmericaSpace <donotreply@wordpress.com>
Date: January 1, 2013 3:39:40 PM GMT-06:00
To: bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com
Subject: [New post] New Year's Greeting from Crew of International Space Station
ISS & Hubble were planned with STS operational-- now in danger with Shuttle Termination
Soyuz lacks shuttle's ability to repair space station, warn space experts | Science | The Guardian
Lost the Capability to explore solar system utilizing STS payload to EO !
MANNED SPACE VEHICLE EXPLORATION UTILIZING THE SPACE SHUTTLE payload to EO capability!
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.
Sent from my iPad
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.
Sent from my iPad
Shuttle Capability critical to National Security
America, the big loser re: shuttle termination
Re: Pinchefsky 5 horrifying "facts" you didn't know about the space shuttle--Forbes
Seven losses America can not afford:
Seven losses America can not afford:
1. Shuttle is critical to national security
2. Shuttle is critical to ISS survival---& Hubble. Significantly reduces cancer & other zero g medical research.
3. Shuttle is expensive, look at what capability you get! Costs could be reduced as in commercial shuttle. Re: nasaproblems.com
4. No new development of this magnitude is without losses of life, could have been automated sooner, with crew escape pods, still should be done. This automation could minimize human risks. Improved management could have avoided the two failures, red flags were up.
5. Maintenance of the type of effort critical to America technological preeminence.
6. Shuttle provided a dream for many of the young Americans.
7. INABILITY to use the STS to place modules in orbit to explore the universe!
So , Ms. Pinchefsky, if you want to talk about things that are expensive, & buy you very little or ZERO, look at foreign aid, UN, & Colburn's list.
I am surprised Forbes would print an article so void of factual information & biased against the space program.
Fwd: Morning Bell: Tax Hikes to Start the New Year
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: "The Heritage Foundation" <morningbell@heritage.org>
Date: January 1, 2013 8:18:19 AM GMT-06:00
To: Bobby Martin <bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com>
Subject: Morning Bell: Tax Hikes to Start the New Year
Reply-To: morningbell@heritage.org
To ensure email delivery directly to your inbox, please add
morningbell@heritage.org to your address book now.If you're having trouble viewing this message, please view it online.
01/01/2013 Help Heritage enact our blueprint for conservative revival. Deadline Dec. 31. Click here to learn more >>
Tax Hikes to Start the New Year
While you were sleeping—or ringing in 2013—the Senate voted to raise taxes.
After missing the midnight deadline, Congress and the President have technically sent the nation over the fiscal cliff, meaning higher tax rates are already in effect for all income tax brackets. But the Senate's deal, brokered by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (KY) and Vice President Joe Biden, would target the tax increases on those making more than $250,000.
The Senate voted 89-8 to limit deductions for taxpayers making more than $250,000, which would raise their taxes, and to hike tax rates for those making more than $400,000.
As Heritage has pointed out, trying to tax the top income brackets to close the deficit is impossible. To overcome the massive federal deficit, top earners would have to be taxed at more than 100 percent. And J.D. Foster, Heritage's Norman B. Ture Senior Fellow in the Economics of Fiscal Policy, reminds us that President Obama has already raised taxes on "the wealthy":
Never mind that Obama already raised taxes on upper-income taxpayers through the 3.8 percent Medicare surtax imposed under Obamacare. Never mind that tax rate hikes would weaken an economy stumbling so badly the Federal Reserve doubled its risky efforts to keep the economy from recession. Never mind Obama's approach would likely put the kibosh on any hopes for tax reform. Never mind the resulting revenues would be a small drop in a very big bucket compared to projected budget deficits. Never mind that the only justification for higher taxes is spite and envy to be exercised through the extortive power of the federal government.
Some of the key points in the Senate deal, which could go to the House as early as today:
- Raises taxes on incomes over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for households
- Raises taxes on investment income for those taxpayers as well
- Limits tax deductions for incomes over $250,000—raising their taxes, too
- Increases the death tax rate for estates over $5 million
- Extends long-term unemployment benefits for one year
- Postpones sequestration's automatic spending cuts (including those to defense) by two months
Meanwhile, the United States also ran up against the debt ceiling yesterday. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said the Treasury would do some short-term creative accounting to make sure the country doesn't default on its loans, which will buy two months before lawmakers have to fight it out again over increasing the debt limit.
The deal does nothing to address the reasons that the U.S. budget is out of control. Its focus on tax hikes rather than spending cuts is completely the opposite of what the country needs. As Heritage's Romina Boccia explains:
Federal spending on entitlements and interest on the debt drives the federal budget crisis. Together the three major entitlements of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid (including Obamacare), as well as net interest, make up more than half of all spending in the federal budget today. Their share of the budget will grow to over two-thirds of all spending in 10 years. By 2025, the major entitlement programs and net interest together will eat up all tax revenues collected in that year.
Hiking taxes simply isn't a solution. Until Congress and the President pursue serious spending cuts, the country and the budget will keep chugging in the same direction. And that's certainly no cause for celebration.
FEATURED POSTS
Beware Obamacare's Looming Conscience Cliff (VIDEO)
Top 10 Heritage Charts of 2012
Top 10 Heritage Videos of 2012
QUICK HITS
Forbes has a breakdown of the Senate's fiscal cliff deal.
"A scathing Senate committee report on the Benghazi terrorist attack faults the State Department for failing to adequately respond to mounting security threats in the lead-up to the assault," reports Fox News.
Doctors say Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has a blood clot near her brain but will recover.
Iran is conducting annual missile tests.
The fiscal cliff isn't the only big change kicking in today—many employers will face the harsh decisions brought by Obamacare's HHS mandate. Heritage's Sarah Torre has the details.
Know anyone who shares your conservative values and principles and may want to receive the Heritage Foundation newsletters? Please refer them to Heritage today!Connect with Heritage
YouTube Kindle Flickr
Support our work by becoming a member. Donate today.
The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002-4999 Call us at (202) 546-4400 Add morningbell@heritage.org to your address book
to ensure that you receive emails from us.
You are subscribed to this newsletter as bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com.
If you want to receive other Heritage Foundation newsletters or opt out of this newsletter please click here to update your subscription preferences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)