"Most towns have eliminated the job of dog-catcher!"
Posted on 03/08/2015 8:21:10 AM PDT by rktman
NASA's Administrator Charles Bolden acknowledged Wednesday there is no back-up plan to fly the International Space Station if Russia cuts off U.S. access to space.
"We would make an orderly evacuation," Bolden said during a U.S. House Appropriations subcommittee hearing. Because both countries are dependent upon one another, the $140 billion station would be lost.
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
We know it can’t be for the vodka. They drill for their own. ‘Course, I don’t know how much it takes to fill one of those boosters or how much the space station requires to generate power, but, still, there is no reason Russia can’t meet its need for the foreseeable future.
Bigelow Aerospace is exactly who I would turn to for building a station on the moon.
I remember during the early days of the shuttle program, we did do some studies into letting the external tanks get to orbit and after venting off the left over LH2 and LO2, using them for habitats. Heck, the LH2 tank was 53k cubic feet by itself. Of course it never came to fruition.
One of the many instances of NASA being too risk averse.
Probably not enough input from the muslim community on where on/off the erf they would put their minaret. :>} According to “someone”, there’ ain’t nuthin’ sweeter to hear in the morning than the call to prayer.
NASA has ordered four additional launches to deliver cargo to the International Space Station in 2017 — three from SpaceX and one from Orbital ATK — to cover the research lab’s logistics needs until a new set of resupply contracts take effect.The extra missions for SpaceX and Orbital ATK will serve as a bridge between the contractors’ current contracts and new commercial cargo deals that will cover resupply missions launching from 2018 through at least 2020.
SpaceX and Orbital ATK won Commercial Resupply Services contracts from NASA in December 2008, covering 12 cargo deliveries by SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft and eight missions with Orbital ATK’s Cygnus supply ship.
Today, NASA selected SpaceX’s Falcon 9 launch vehicle and Dragon spacecraft to fly American astronauts to the International Space Station under the Commercial Crew Program. SpaceX is deeply honored by the trust NASA has placed in us, and we welcome today’s decision and the mission it advances with gratitude and seriousness of purpose. Under the $2.6 billion contract, SpaceX will launch the Crew Dragon spacecraft atop the Falcon 9 launch vehicle from Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida.Commercial crew demo missions manifested for Dragon 2 and CST-100
Mission planners at NASA have installed four Commercial Crew demonstration missions into the International Space Station (ISS) manifest. Both SpaceX’s Dragon 2 (V2) and Boeing’s CST-100 will conduct uncrewed and crewed qualification missions – beginning as early as December, 2016 – prior to the awarding of the US Crew Vehicle -1 (USCV-1) mission for NASA.Personally, I would be in favor of using BOTH SpaceX and Boeing (assuming both demonstrate comparable mission-worthiness). It's good to have at least two vendors, in case one has issues.
Not so much drones but droids.
Too bad that Sierra Nevada Corp wasn’t in bed with NASA like Boeing and Elon Musk/Space X. Splash down in the ocean like in the 60’s or land on a runway. Runway would have been my choice. Same for some former astronaut buddies of mine.
Repeating what the head of NASA clearly said, makes FR look foolish. How does that work?
yeah he said in 2010 and was a dick. That can’t be argued. However, we’ve does Curiosity, the ISS, Dawn, and many more to not let that one idiotic statement ruin NASA for conservatives.
So what muslim outreach is being done and how much is being spent on it?
If having a colony in space is a good idea, why don’t we have colonies in Antarctica (real self sufficient ones) and at the bottom of the oceans?
Well, there is always GISS....
"Most towns have eliminated the job of dog-catcher!"
Muslim outreach = manned flights × 10
Can you dispute that? We have less capability for manned space flight than we had in 1965. Sure seems apparent to me that NASA has different priorities, or are we just incapable?
In other words you don’t have an answer.
LOL
Yeah, it makes some posters on Free Republic look like mindless freaks ... LOL ...
I gave a clear answer. Which part confused you?
The issue is whether NASA is doing what its supposed to be doing or whether it has other priorities, as its director stated.
If the head of Apple stated that their #1 priority was dance programs, and they stopped bulidng computers, would you be demanding proof of dancing.
It may be that NASA sucks at muslim outreach, but how does that make them excel at putting men in space? Did you forget the subject of the thread, that is hitching a ride to the ISS?
Obama stated that NASA’s highest priority is addressing AGW. Are you ignorant of NASA’s work on that too?
I see a lot more press releases on AGW than a new orbiter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
