----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark L. Hammond" <[email protected]>
To: "Armando Mercado" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AO-40 Replacement
Reading on a bit in that transcript...
"Our second goal is to develop and test a new spacecraft, the crew
exploration vehicle, by 2008, and to conduct the first manned mission
no later than 2014.
The crew exploration vehicle will be capable of ferrying astronauts
and scientists to the space station after the shuttle is retired. But
the main purpose of this spacecraft will be to carry astronauts beyond
our orbit to other worlds. This will be the first spacecraft of its
kind since the Apollo command module.
Our third goal is to return to the moon by 2020, as the launching
point for missions beyond."
So where do we stand on those goals, and to whom is credit/blame placed?
This is almost fun ;)
Mark N8MH
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Armando Mercado <[email protected]>
wrote:
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 11:15:35 -0500
From: "Kevin Muenzler" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: AO40 replacement !!!
Message-ID: <003101cd8b81$ae8e3610$0baaa230$@org>
I can understand that!
What I meant was that it could be launched as so many have been
launched -- from the shuttle cargo bay. But, no more >shuttles...Mr.
Obama gave them all away. :(
-------------------
Hello,
Nothing like an AO-40 discussion to liven up the mail list.
Not to get into politics, but the above statement is incorrect.
Jan. 14, 2004, President Bush gave a speech on America's new vision for
space
exploration, In part he said...
"...The Shuttle's chief purpose over the next several years will be to
help finish
assembly of the International Space Station. In 2010, the Space
Shuttle -- after
nearly 30 years of duty -- will be retired from service..."
The shuttle last flight was July 8,2011, after the current administration
approved the
flight of STS-135, using the last flight ready SRB's and external tank.
Transcript of the speech can be found at:
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/54868main_bush_trans.pdf
73 Armando, N8IGJ
++++++++++++++++
From AO-40 replacement to US space policy...
The Columbia Accident Investigation Board, (CAIB), determined
that the shuttles were actually experimental vehicles being flown
as if they were operational vehicles. The aging shuttles had so
many design/architectural flaws that they could never be made
"safe" fly. So the correct decision was to retire them.
Sadly, with 6+ years of advance notice the shuttle would retire,
the US currently does not have a way to send astronauts into
space (other than buying seats on the Soyuz).
The history of this predicament is long and tortured, but
essentially comes down to flat budgets. NASA had to
retire the shuttle to free up funds to develop a follow on
vehicle. In the past several years, COTS, Commercial
Off The Shelf, has shown great promise. SpaceX is
probably the closest to having a manned capsule ready.
So, who get credit/blame..? It is said support for the space
program is broad... a mile wide and an inch deep.
Ultimately a disinterested public gets what it deserves.
73, Armando N8IGJ
_______________________________________________
Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
