Obama Moves to Counter China With Pentagon-NASA Link

[Psephos]

Source: Bloomberg News

President-elect Barack Obama will probably tear down long-standing barriers between the U.S.’s civilian and military space programs to speed up a mission to the moon amid the prospect of a new space race with China.

Obama’s transition team is considering a collaboration between the Defense Department and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration because military rockets may be cheaper and ready sooner than the space agency’s planned launch vehicle, which isn’t slated to fly until 2015, according to people who’ve discussed the idea with the Obama team.

The potential change comes as Pentagon concerns are rising over China’s space ambitions because of what is perceived as an eventual threat to U.S. defense satellites, the lofty battlefield eyes of the military.

“The Obama administration will have all those issues on the table,” said Neal Lane, who served as President Bill Clinton’s science adviser and wrote recently that Obama must make early decisions critical to retaining U.S. space dominance. “The foreign affairs and national security implications have to be considered.”

<snip>

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aOvrNO0OJ41g&refer=worldwide

[Xipe Totec]

1. No offense, but that's how we got fucked the last time

That's how we ended up with the space shuttle that we have today; bigger, heavier, more expensive, and more dangerous.

Because the military insisted that the shuttle should be able to handle polar orbits for spy satellites, or the military would not support the project.

We need a civilian space program divorced from the military.

[MannyGoldstein]

3. However...

The rockets for Mercury and Gemini launches were military vehicles. So collaboration can be fruitful.

[Xipe Totec]

4. Can be expedient, but never fruitful

What were the fruits of the Mercury and Gemini launches?

None that I can see.

The Apollo program was back to the drawing board.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. I Disagree

Mercury proved people could operate in space. Gemini worked out the skills necessary for lunar missions - EVA (space walking), rendezvous, duration, and a host of other things. Apollo was the culmination of these, and could not have been done successfully without them.

[Xipe Totec]

9. You're forgetting the Russians

1961: First person in space (International definition) and in Earth orbit, Yuri Gagarin on Vostok 1
1962: First dual manned spaceflight and approach, Vostok 3 and Vostok 4
1963: First woman in space, Valentina Tereshkova, Vostok 6
1964: First multi-man crew (3), Voskhod 1
1965: First EVA, by Aleksei Leonov, Voskhod 2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_space_program

All of these accomplishments were old news by the time we sent the Mercury and Gemmini capsules up into space.

[MannyGoldstein]

11. But *We* Had To Learn How To Do All Of These - And Do Them Well

Well we did do the first rendezvous, and docking, something the Soviets did not do, IIRC, until many years later.

We were building the scaffolding that would allow us to land a man on the moon and bring him home safely by the end of the decade. For example, Ed White was the first American to do an EVA - he basically just drifted around. OK, so we demonstrated that we could drift in space like the Soviets did. On the next Gemini flight, Gene Cernan tried to actually do work out there - it ended up being a catastrophe, which is another way of saying "huge learning experience". NASA learned from these incremental pushes forward, until we were on the Moon.

DId you see the first moon landing? It was a damned fine thing, something all of humankind was proud of. For a few hours, we were all one.

[NutmegYankee]

14. Exactly - The Russians didn't share.

[Wilms]

18. NASA hijacking an existing rocket is different than the Pentagon hijacking a program.

The latter is kind of what happened to the Shuttle's design phase. And of course, after Challenger the Air Force turned tail and ran.

I concur with Xipe Totec's concern.

[FogerRox]

23. Fooey, see my other post (SpaceX)

MErcury et al certainly had fruits, to claim so is simply not factual.

[Gore1FL]

16. Mercury and Gemini made Apollo possible. n/t

[DCKit]

2. $10 Trillion in debt and they want to revisit the moon.

Even worse, they're using a bogus threat to our military supremacy in space to justify the cost.

:banghead:

[jwirr]

5. I think I agree with you but I also think PE Obama is doing this because

if the opposition he is getting from NASA.

[tclambert]

15. NASA is a much better jobs program than war.

Good jobs here on the ground. Technological innovation that leads to spinoff industries, and advancements in many more. It's one of the best economic stimulus programs we have.

[FogerRox]

21. Remember its Bloomberg, the article is very poor. Many facts are left out

Those military rockets are not human rated, using them for launching humans will require redesign. SpaceX will be launching a demonstration launch 1st Q of 2009, and should be delivering cargo by 2010. Space X beat out Planetspace, which is Boeing and some other Military Ind contractors, this is very good news.

[FogerRox]

24. Bloomberg is, not Team Obama see my longer post below.

[MikeNearMcChord]

6. Nervermind that China graduates far more engineering students

and other students in scientific disciplines than the US, They probably can do moonshots and other space explorations cheaper too. I think Mr. President we should get our education system back on track before we go mano a mano against the Chinese.

[Pavulon]

10. They still are technical consumers.

they dont make hi tech stuff for resale. Not consumer shit, but real high end cnc equipment or supercomputers.

Quantity and quality matter, I am sure the good ones will come here where they get paid more and arent squashed by a shitty communist government.

[NutmegYankee]

12. With nearly 5 times the population, not hard to do... n/t

[Still Sensible]

7. I'm glad they are looking at all options

and while they are at it, they should also look at the overall goals of the program

[StudsT]

13. Only a Dem, i suppose, could fully implement STAR WARS

I wonder if this is the kinda stuff Biden was alluding to during the campaign :shrug:

Now if he would have said link up with our education department I'd be right on board but this is, nuts.

StudsT

[jimlup]

17. This is interesting

It may be a good solution. NASA's current problems are substantial. I've read reports that the constellation program is in trouble. The booster is inadequate to orbit the crew module. If true, this is a serious problem and requires a creative solution.

I don't believe that the failures of the Shuttle apply in this case. In that case NASA modified the vehicle to meet military demands. In this case NASA modifies its vehicle to get it launched by adapting military hardware. A solution that was successful for:

1. America's first satellite.
2. Mercury and Gemini

What happens next will be interesting. I personally am concerned that the US spend 5 years without a way of getting humans to low earth orbit.

[FogerRox]

25. THe Military rocket needs to be redesigned to human rated

SpaceX about to demonstrate ISS delivery capacity in the 1st quarter of 2009. The Military rockets are not human rated and have too much vibration, and surging gee forces.

[jimlup]

27. Problem is...

so does the Orion booster. (At least I've heard rumor of this http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/115037/how_nasa_became_massively_dysfunctional__/ ) I don't know if this is true but it is troubling if so and puts the Orion program in serious jeopardy without help from somewhere else.

[FogerRox]

28. See comment 20 & 22, the word is spaceX

They should be delivering cargo to the ISS end of 2010, Lunar landing by 2012-2013. SO really theres is no problem.

[David__77]

19. Should be done regardless of China.

I believe Obama, like Clinton, will treat China as a friend and strategic partner, as he should. The space program should be linked to military leadership regardless of China or anyone else.

[bananas]

20. There's an interesting discussion of this at nasawatch.com

Two discussion threads there so far:

January 2, 2009: Confusion over "The Pentagon's Rockets"

<snip>

Editor's note: There are several things getting mixed up in this story. EELVs are not the Pentagon's rockets. They were developed (partially) with DoD money so as to assure that the DoD had viable commercial launch options. But they have always been sold on a commercial basis (currently by Boeing/Lockheed Martin- ULA) for use by both DOD and non-DoD customers alike. NASA's New Horizons and MRO were launched on one (Atlas) as have been a number of commercial communications satellites on both Atlas V and Delta IV EELVs.

The Obama Administration may well be thinking of pairing up NASA and DoD to compete with China, but that is a different issue than using EELVs which you can buy today from the ULA catalog.

Editor's update: Looks like the Washington Examiner and ZDet fell for the Bloomberg story too as they rewrote their story around its inaccuracies.

<snip 24 comments>

January 5, 2009: NASA/DoD Wedding Speculation Runs Wild Over the Holidays

<snip more news articles>

Editor's note: This is what happens when newspapers write articles based only on articles written by other news sources with a long holiday vacation stuck into the process - articles which themselves originally contained inaccurate information. No one is talking about "militarising" NASA or "merging" it with DoD.

<snip 1 comment>

[FogerRox]

26. Nice post bananas, see my #22. Bloomberg article really sucks.

[FogerRox]

22. Not a factual article.

President-elect Barack Obama will probably tear down long-standing barriers between the U.S.’s civilian and military space programs to speed up a mission to the moon amid the prospect of a new space race with China.

Simply not factual, NASA and the military have been working together for decades.

Obama’s transition team is considering a collaboration between the Defense Department and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration because military rockets may be cheaper and ready sooner than the space agency’s planned launch vehicle, which isn’t slated to fly until 2015, according to people who’ve discussed the idea with the Obama team.

Hey Bloomberg, got a citation? No ? Not a single quote or un named Obama source?

SpaceX won a contract to deliver cargo and humans to the ISS. Planet Space is made up of Boeing, Lockhead Martin & ATK, and did not get a COTS contract. So Bloomberg is basically lying.

Now lets get to the meat of the article:

NASA faces a five-year gap between the retirement of the space shuttle in 2010 and the first launch of Orion, the six- person craft that will carry astronauts to the International Space Station and eventually the moon. Obama has said he would like to narrow that gap, during which the U.S. will pay Russia to ferry astronauts to the station.

The Obama team has asked NASA officials about the costs and savings of scrapping the agency’s new Ares I rocket, which is being developed by Chicago-based Boeing Co. and Minneapolis- based Alliant Techsystems Inc.

How can this be remotely accurate, SpaceX launched last Oct, putting its 2 stage vehicle 397 miles in orbit. SpaceX's Dragon vehicle should be docking with the ISS within 2 years, there is simply no other company that has a chance in that time window. SO Ares simply may not be needed as far as getting to the ISS.

What BLoomberg is asking you to do is to believe the OBAMA team knows zero about SpaceX, and then claims that Obama will turn to the Russians. NASA faces no 5 year gap, BLoomberg is lying.