Community > Forum > National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) > End of Constellation

End of Constellation

Posted by: TerraMrs - Mon Feb 01, 2010 5:37 pm
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 40 posts ] 
End of Constellation 

Is the end of Constellation good or bad for the US Human Spaceflight program?
Good 52%  52%  [ 14 ]
Bad 15%  15%  [ 4 ]
A bit of both 33%  33%  [ 9 ]
No opinion 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 27

End of Constellation 
Author Message
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 11:59 pm
Posts: 188
Post Re: End of Constellation   Posted on: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:36 pm
I don't think Nuclear Thermal Rockets would be politically acceptable, no matter how much you R&D them in the near-medium term. So that's another example of spending that would occur, without the technology being used.

Meantime, there would be no successor manned vehicle for a long time.


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 11:59 pm
Posts: 188
Post Re: End of Constellation   Posted on: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:53 pm
MFL wrote:
going to have to disagree with you on that one. the ARES V may have been somewhat on the right track, but Ares I was way off. and what they had to do to the Orion because of Ares I was just.... wrong.


Hmm, what was done to mangle the Orion capsule?


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
User avatar
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:25 pm
Posts: 160
Location: Ireland
Post Re: End of Constellation   Posted on: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:55 pm
sanman wrote:
I don't think Nuclear Thermal Rockets would be politically acceptable, no matter how much you R&D them in the near-medium term. So that's another example of spending that would occur, without the technology being used.

Meantime, there would be no successor manned vehicle for a long time.


Pre-emptively attacking countries based on fabricated lies isn't politically acceptable. Bailing out greedy financial institutions using taxpayers money isn't politically acceptable. Media and Internet censorship isn't politically acceptable. Un-elected military Juntas aren't politically acceptable. But you'll find all this and much more going on in countries all over the world. Why are NTRs a special case? The first country to use them will have a massive advantage over any competitors who refuse to use them.

johno


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 9:51 am
Posts: 442
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe, Earth
Post Re: End of Constellation   Posted on: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:21 pm
sanman wrote:
MFL wrote:
going to have to disagree with you on that one. the ARES V may have been somewhat on the right track, but Ares I was way off. and what they had to do to the Orion because of Ares I was just.... wrong.


Hmm, what was done to mangle the Orion capsule?

It's capabilities have been reduced numerous times just because Ares-I didn't turn out in a way that could handle the more "powerfull" (read: heavy) Orion.

So the soft landing system that would have allowed to land on ground and not only on water had been canceled, the pressurized cargo container got thrown out of the window and the last thing that I've heard (iirc) was that the 6-crew to ISS version had to be dropped as well (leaving questions about the feasibility of the 4-crew Lunar version, etc).

I'm sure anybody who did follow Cx more closely than I did (didn't like it right from the start), can tell you more accurate things about this.

_________________
pride comes before a fall


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:43 pm
Posts: 146
Location: Webster, TX
Post Re: End of Constellation   Posted on: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:25 pm
Marcus Zottl wrote:
I'm sure anybody who did follow Cx more closely than I did (didn't like it right from the start), can tell you more accurate things about this.


removed the toilet...

but yeah they had to cut alot of the systems and some of the redundancies as well as reduce the physcial size of the capsul itself. yay fun.... :roll:

johno wrote:
Pre-emptively attacking countries .... Why are NTRs a special case? The first country to use them will have a massive advantage over any competitors who refuse to use them.


dude, i lolled. you hit the nail right on the head.


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 4:01 am
Posts: 747
Location: New Zealand
Post Re: End of Constellation   Posted on: Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:02 am
Paranoia about flight gaps is why the shuttle never got upgraded, which is why we don't have better components on the shelf right now.

Paranoia about flight gaps *causes* big flight gaps.

_________________
What goes up better doggone well stay up! - Morgan Gravitronics, Company Slogan.


Back to top
Profile ICQ YIM
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 11:59 pm
Posts: 188
Post Re: End of Constellation   Posted on: Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:40 am
If the US had built even a modest backup system to transition past the flight gap between the Shuttle and the "real successor", then you wouldn't have to worry about "paranoia". (SpaceX, Orbital Sciences, etc don't count as a real backup, but more of an audacious hope, since they haven't even flown anybody yet)

The Russians still have their Soyuz and Proton workhorses chugging away reliably, which is why so many depend upon them. While the US still has Atlas, Delta, Titan, etc, these still aren't man-rated -- perhaps that should have been done before the Shuttles came to the end of their lifespan.


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 11:59 pm
Posts: 188
Post Re: End of Constellation   Posted on: Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:24 am
Here's an article in the Financial Times on the great American space debate:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7fdfa9d0-3204 ... abdc0.html


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:43 pm
Posts: 146
Location: Webster, TX
Post Re: End of Constellation   Posted on: Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:53 am
a couple things to remember here.....
Columbia and Challenger each changed plans in progress for upgrades, replacement programs etc.
Until Bush, NASA was looking to fly shuttle till 2020 or farther.

it really wasn't paranoia about flight gaps, as all upgrades are done when the shuttle goes in for maintenance and overhaul, which was a routine deal done every so many years/flights. there have been upgrades to the shuttles, many in fact. They're just not usually publicized.

NASA's tried working successor programs over the years, all of whichhave been cancelled for one reason or another.


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 11:59 pm
Posts: 188
Post Re: End of Constellation   Posted on: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:49 am
I liked the Reagan admin's idea of the "National Aerospace Plane" (aka "Orient Express") because that was a practical link between Man's space ambitions and the everyday need for convenient rapid travel.


Back to top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


© 2014 The International Space Fellowship, developed by Gabitasoft Interactive. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Use