sad news. sad state of affairs.

[rstaff3]

illini868891 -DoD has had its share of programs that sacrificed integrity, most notably to the public in the area of test/success criteria. However, as a rule I suspect you are right. Now that I think back on some of my more recent satellite control center experience, they were very protectionist and had a big 'not designed here' chip on their shoulder. Lots of conferences on cheaper solutions, lots of studies, then back to business as usual.

Chilly-The idea of having military involvement/presence is space is a good thing. The track record of cooperation however is not good. My (somewhat meager) experience is that DoD sets driving requirements which inflates the costs within the NASA infrastructure, then they don't like the compromises or the high bills so they change their minds and drop out of the program. I'm not especially blasting the DoD, just the way the programs have been managed. I also don't claim to know what the solution is. Maybe they need to drive the boat on OSP? I don't know.

 

[illini]

You are most assuredly right. Integrity is not a universal trait of DoD.

I don't know how you get DoD and NASA to work together either. If they try to run every program "jointly", then what will probably happen is that DoD will lay on a bunch of requirements that NASA can't afford. Rather than have joint programs, they'll probably have to carve out areas of responsibility. For example, part of the approach is to develop a family of capabilities. So let DoD manage the booster programs it already manages and let NASA take the lead on areas where it dominates, like OSP. Now NASA has to ensure that OSP is compatible with DoD boosters (where it makes sense) and vice versa. Still not a clean solution since there's room for requirements creep, but its a start.

 

[illini]

Momentum is building. Here's another one from the ultra-conservative National Review:

https://www.nationalreview.com/comment/powell200312030858.asp

Anything less than a return to the moon would be a huge letdown. Still no guarantees even if Bush delivers the speech we expect. But, having followed the congressional hearings on this and seen many previous half-hearted efforts to reinvigorate NASA, I sense a convergence of attitudes and opinions that we must either do this or we must prepare for our decline.

 

[als57]

Originally posted by astronboy

Additionally, I personally know a number of high quality engineers who are in the 45-55 range, but are unemployed because a newly minted college grad will accept 1/4 of the salary that the experienced engineers last earned.

That's why they call NY an "at will" employment state. Perfectly leagal to blow you out the door and hire a cheaper replacement. Now that's a lousy state of afairs.

Al

 

[illini]

More:

Bush wants mission to the moon

 

[astronboy]

Well, NASA sure coul benefit from actually having a concrete goal, rather than the current... "let's see how many thousand times we can fly the shuttle...."

 

[KermieD]

I agree that NASA could use the regiment and structure that DoD brings. The argument of the DoD's integrity and/or willingness to cooperate/take responsibility is a different discussion and certainly one that should be had (probably not here though--that could be a hot one).

We all rationalize NASA's existence to our peers by talking to them of the technological advances we've made due to NASA. Fact is that most of those advances went through their infancies through DoD. It may not be a pleasurable fact of life, but it *is* a fact of life that the biggest and the best of our technological advances come from just what illini has been talking about--the DoD demanding results.

As far as what NASA's been doing after the Shuttle, I agree that there's nothing big. That doesn't mean, though, that nothing's going on. The ion drive could be huge, and some of these small packages that they're having other people design are definitely evolutionary, if not revolutionary.

In the 60's, we lived in a society where it was acceptable to say that we were gonna hit the moon and costs were not an issue. We had to beat the Soviets and that took precedence. Now, there are no Soviets and the general populace are asking why we can (could) put men on the moon but can't house thousands of people. Without getting into too many politics (all men are created equal means equality of opportunity, not outcome), and considering the fact that our kids would prefer to play Playstation as opposed to reading a book (I want an Oompa-Loompa NOW, Dad-eee!), I'm not optimistic about the country's will to put the funding into a long term goal like going to the moon (long term these days is any goal extending beyond a 4 year Presidential term), even with DoD involvement. A perfect example is the super collider project.

Yeah, we're all fans of this and we're right, but we're not the majority. There's a really big circular tunnel in Texas to prove it (it IS in Texas, right?). Any society, in order to thrive, needs to find a way to expand. When it stops expanding, stagnation is just around the corner. The best way to do it is to go up. It expands in territory, science, and technology without impinging on anyone else's sovereignity. Too bad more people can't see that.

 

[illini]

Kermie,

You are exactly right. The issue is not whether we should make a concerted effort in space. The real issue is whether we as a nation have the will to ride this thing out for the long haul, fully expecting there will be ups AND downs and not being scared off by momentary setbacks. This really is a barometer indicating our national health. If we can't see this through, then I fear for what our nation has become (bringing things fully back into the original topic of this thread! )

 

[rstaff3]

You really hit the nail on the head, like you said, bringing the discussion full circle. We are more and more becoming a nation that wants instant gratification. This is partially due to video games, computers, and cable TV replacing things like modeling, rocketry, and even 'kick the can'.

Aside: In my earlier posts I didn't want to come off anti-DoD. I brought up the intergity issue to ballance the equation. I don't think integrity is the main issue. People are fallable no matter where they work. I also may have mis-represented their cooperativeness. In my experience, NEITHER NASA or DoD were highly cooperative towards one another.

 

[daveyfire]

I have experienced no instant gratification better than pushing the button on a minimum diameter M rocket and sending it supersonic in a second! I think it's just that the kids of my generation haven't seen the power of rocketry... they think "Rockets? Estes? That's kid stuff!"

I tell my friends I don't work on cars, I work on rockets. After all, rockets have no speed limit, right?

 

[daveyfire]

BTW, that was my 400th post

 

[rstaff3]

So, davey, on that project you didn't build it? Pushing the button don't count unless its yours.

 

[DavRedf]

Originally posted by powderburner
I don't disagree, I think all the comments above are well put.

That having been said, I think this is still the greatest country on Earth (and that's with a small apology to the TRF Brits, but you could still be our 51st state). Whatever the conditions are, I don't think you will find anyplace better.

Gee thanks, I think.

 

[arthur dent]

hi davredf and welcome to the rocketry forum. Its great to see another brit onboard and if your into anything rocketry this is the place to be

 

[cydermaster]

To echo Arthur - Hello DavRedf, good to see another Brit posting. Add this site to your favorites, and come back regularly - you won't regret it!

 

[daveyfire]

Originally posted by rstaff3
So, davey, on that project you didn't build it? Pushing the button don't count unless its yours.

I sure as heck built it. And I sure as heck dug it out of the ground when it augered in two miles away too!

 

[rstaff3]

So 'pushing the button' was a bit of gratification after a more lengthy build process and is therefore not 'instant' in my definition

But I guess I don't know whether beating a video game after 500 hours of playing it is any more instant, so my premise may be flawed