DESTROYING USA space Capabilities!!!!

Saturday, September 6, 2014

Bolden/Obama Destroying USA SPACE CAPABILITIES –YET NO BOLDEN RESIGNATION, NOR NETWORK COVERAGE!!!
Charles Bolden traveled to orbit four times on board shuttle & he recommend to the president that it be retired.  In his 2009 interview with a space magazine re nasaproblems.com, he said he didn’t know where NASA is headed that was the prerogative  of the president.   Surely, with all the other astronauts along with many others , he understood the importance of EO access.  Further, he ordered the ignorance of the Boeing x37c proposal which would enabled  access to EO  must faster than cots plus being a lifting body runway lander & an overall better approach. Remember the x37b is presently in orbit!   THIS DOES NOT PASS THE SMELL TEST!

The USA must be Absolutely Preeminent in EO Space Capabilities. We had with the shuttle an excellent first start in a vehicle that would do the job. The next generation would be even improved overall. Now, we must pay the Russians to get to ISS in a capsule. A capsule does not compare to a large payload lifting body runway lander. Look at the way capsules land & compare to runway landers—-get serious,!! 

Look at the number of people & companies involved in the shuttle system & it’s impact on the USA economy & remember the USA needs this for its survival. And remember how many years & how many billion dollars we have invested in the shuttle system. 

And now after all this , our ” leaders” will not even consider the the operational X37B for a shuttle replacement ( re Boeing X37C proposal). Instead they opt for non runway lander capsules AND do not FUND these programs adequately—-so we wind up with NOTHING. 

Americans, this is not RIGHT, this ridiculous situations needs to be broadcast far & wide—- THIS IS TRULY THE DESTRUCTION of the AMERICAN SPACE CAPABILITY!!!!

Sent from my iPad
Posted by keeptheshuttleflying.com at 9:57 AM No comments:
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Share to Pinterest

Fwd: Cathy Bohn Fitzgerald has asked for your help to help bring military service dogs home to retire.
Bring home the dogs !

Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: Cathy Bohn Fitzgerald via Causes
Date: September 6, 2014 9:58:52 AM CDT
To: bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com
Subject: Cathy Bohn Fitzgerald has asked for your help to help bring military service dogs home to retire.

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
Cathy Bohn Fitzgerald has invited you to pledge:
“Here’s the chance to do our part. Take the pledge with me today.”
Pledge to bring the war dogs home. Don’t leave them behind as Equipment
We can’t dump these dogs in war areas

PLEDGE
or Read more about the pledge
 
 
 

   
       

Causes, 548 4th St, San Francisco, CA 94107 United States  ·  Privacy Policy
Don’t want to receive emails like this? Unsubscribe now.

Posted by keeptheshuttleflying.com at 9:01 AM No comments:
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Share to Pinterest

Posted by keeptheshuttleflying.com at 5:01 AM No comments:
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Share to Pinterest

Posted in Space news | Leave a comment

DESTRUCTION of AMERICAN SPACE CAPABILITIES

http://americanspacep.blogspot.com/2014/09/boldenobama-destroying-usa-space.html

Posted in Space news | Leave a comment

Lost shuttle capabilities & oberg thinks we ought to replace them—Imagine that!!

6 July 2011—For 30 years, the space shuttle fleet—Columbia, Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis, and Endeavour—strutted its stuff in low-Earth orbit. The spacecraft’s missions included simple payload deployments, science module sorties, and the delicate assembly and servicing of the International Space Station. They were also used for in-flight repairs to themselves and to other satellites, hyperprecision orbits for radar mapping, tethered experiments, and gentle close-in maneuvering with smaller spacecraft. Those capabilities were originally unimagined by their designers, and they firmly refute the old maxim that “form follows function.” Indeed, the shuttles performed functions beyond the dreams of their builders.

The current stable of heavy-launch vehicles can carry deployable satellites and rocket stages as big as or bigger than any that the shuttles have ever launched. With replacement vehicles already being designed for specific manned missions, such as Earth-to-orbit taxi services or for beyond-low-Earth-orbit sorties, the biggest engineering questions must be these: What operational capabilities are we giving up by retiring the shuttles? And are we sure we can dispense with them? Because if the answers are “Too many” and “No!” we need to start planning how to regain them with new vehicles.

Here’s what we’re losing.

Lost capability No. 1: Gentle delivery of large modules for attachment to existing complexes. Compared with other means, the shuttle provides an environment in its payload bay with relatively minimal acceleration, vibration, and noise, and that means very large components can be built a lot less expensively. The savings comes from several sources. The shuttle’s own hardware delivers cargo close to its destination, after which robot manipulators can install it carefully. Without this capability, the items would have to be built with structural enhancements to survive the attendant stresses, making them significantly heavier. What’s worse, without the shuttle, the module might need its own maneuvering capability—resulting in significant mechanical stress as the add-on connects to the existing structure. Such stress leads to design headaches: For example, the size of any connecting pressurized tunnels must be restricted. Furthermore, in the event of a mishap, the shuttle design is supposed to allow for intact retrieval of the payload for relaunch, mitigating the need to build expensive backup hardware. 

Lost capability No. 2: Bringing cargo down gently. The shuttle payload bay can carry specialized laboratory modules into orbit and then back to Earth for reuse. It can also retrieve and return large spacecraft and their components for repair or redeployment. Entry stresses do not exceed 1.5 g’s, and to demonstrate that, several astronauts have remained standing throughout most of the descent. Without the shuttle, the scale of returnable objects is greatly limited, and the stress and shock of descent is severe. To replace this large-scale capability, NASA might have to develop inflatable heat shields that could be scaled up in size as needed—but even with such shields, cargo would still be subject to significant entry and landing stresses.

Photo: Nikolai Budarin/Russian Space Research Institute/NASA
Lost capability No. 3: Safe “proximity operations.” The length of the shuttle allowed use of nose- and tail-mounted thrusters to provide extremely gentle maneuvering, bringing the craft right up to such small targets as “round-trip” satellites and orbital instruments in need of repair. Once such objects were over the payload bay, the shuttle switched to a control mode called z axis. In this mode, the target object was mostly out of the way of the forward and aft thruster plumes, allowing the shuttle to maneuver without pushing the target around or contaminating it with propellant. An even gentler mode called low-z-axis worked by firing counterbalanced forward-pointing nose thrusters and aft-pointing tail thrusters that are slightly canted above the horizontal. Though this maneuver looked bizarre, low-z-axis mode was one of those lucky accidents of the original shuttle design that proved really useful. No other vehicle ever built or designed had this specialized “gentle approach” capability, which was critical to a number of satellite retrievals and repairs, including the Hubble Space Telescope missions. Any other vehicle would have seriously damaged such rendezvous targets.

Lost capability No. 4: Temporary deployment of a workbench in orbit for experiments, repairs, and other assembly. The boxcar-size shuttle payload bay has been the stage for delicate repairs to satellites such as Hubble. It has also been used in the following capacities: for attaching new rocket stages to stranded satellites, for test deployments of solar panels and girders (which were later upgraded to become the backbone of the space station), as a base for deployment of payloads with 20-kilometer-long tethers, and for special-purpose space station assembly and maintenance. Repeated two-person (or once, even three-person) spacewalks gave extended “hands-on” capabilities and allowed components to be readily transferred from exterior to interior work areas and back. The shuttle’s size provided flexibility in the complement of tools and spare parts you could carry into orbit, and it provided external utility power and communications that no Apollo-, Orion-, or Soyuz-class manned vehicle could ever dream of.

Lost capability No. 5: High-precision research orbits with specialized instrumentation. Several special-purpose shuttle missions required “threading the needle” in space with observational equipment that mandated incredibly accurate physical positioning. For instance, ground-mapping radar missions needed to be navigated so precisely that data from multiple missions could be overlaid as if they had been acquired by several shuttles flying simultaneously in formation. Trajectory disturbances of all types had to be counterbalanced by continual course corrections using very gentle thruster firings. 

Lost capability No. 6: Flexibility of crew composition. Carrying six or seven (or once, even eight) people into orbit allows three or four career astronauts to host visits from real scientists active in their fields. Some professional astronauts are former scientists, but they must spend up to 10 years away from their labs to prepare to fly. Smaller past and future vehicles are limited to highly specialized professional crew members who, though very talented, are frankly often out of touch with advanced research or other specialized skills. A seven-person crew could even have room for occasional VIPs—politicians, teachers, or even journalists.

Many of these capabilities were expensive, and the whole program wound up costing a lot more than had been projected. Worse, when operated carelessly, the machine killed two crews. But the shuttle’s capabilities were often far more valuable than expected, with many surprising uses that only became clear over the years.

That last point leads to perhaps the greatest lesson of the shuttle for future spaceship designers and space exploration theorists: If you build a spacecraft, or any other machine, with a predetermined and limited set of capabilities (as NASA is now doing), you will usually get just those predictable capabilities and little more. You will not, as happened with the shuttle, learn to use it more and more efficiently and keep discovering new ways to do new things not even imagined when the vehicle was first conceived. These capabilities, in the case of the shuttle, turned out to be the only way to respond to many unexpected problems. And nobody should be surprised that the unexpected awaits us in outer space.

Space vehicles with these next-generation designs are sure to face both unanticipated challenges and opportunities. Until we realize that some out-of-the-blue, unplanned need cannot be satisfied, we won’t even know what we’re missing with these new designs. As for the shuttle, we are just starting to recognize the full extent of the capabilities we gained and are now going to lose—and we’d better start thinking of how to replace them. If we do that, we can wisely build future spacecraft that will allow us to be ready when we are inevitably caught by surprise out there in space.

Posted in Space news | Leave a comment

Think about it, Americans—-we need shuttle like capability!

Think about it Americans!!!!!!! DESTRUCTION OF AMERICAN SPACE CAPABILITY!!!! Re nasaproblems.com
Think about it Americans!!!!!!! DESTRUCTION OF AMERICAN SPACE CAPABILITY!!!!
The USA must be Absolutely Preeminent in EO Space Capabilities. We had with the shuttle an excellent first start in a vehicle that would do the job. The next generation would be even improved overall. Now, we must pay the Russians to get to ISS in a capsule. A capsule does not compare to a large payload lifting body runway lander. Look at the way capsules land & compare to runway landers—-get serious,!! 

Look at the number of people & companies involved in the shuttle system & it’s impact on the USA economy & remember the USA needs this for its survival. And remember how many years & how many billion dollars we have invested in the shuttle system. 

And now after all this , our ” leaders” will not even consider the the operational X37B for a shuttle replacement ( re Boeing X37C proposal). Instead they opt for non runway lander capsules AND do not FUND these programs adequately—-so we wind up with NOTHING. 

Americans, this is not RIGHT, this ridiculous situations needs to be broadcast far & wide—- THIS IS TRULY THE DESTRUCTION of the AMERICAN SPACE CAPABILITY!!!!

Re nasaproblems.com
Posted by keeptheshuttleflying.com at 1:32 PM No comments:
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Share to Pinterest

Posted in Space news | Leave a comment

American preeminence depends on regular access to EO !

http://americanspacep.blogspot.com/2014/08/american-preeminence-depends-on-regular.html

Posted in Space news | Leave a comment

CSS

Nasaproblems.com
Our only hope for Preeminence in space is Commercial Space Shuttle!

Posted in Space news | Leave a comment

A bold vision –use shuttle beyond 2020

NASA shuttle privatization report—rejected own conclusion
NASA Shuttle Privatization Report
In response to the 107th Congress’s request to investigate privatizing the space shuttle program (SSP), NASA issued the following:

“CONCEPT OF PRIVATIZATION OF THE SPACE SHUTTLE PROGRAM”
Ronald D. Dittemore September 28, 2001
Manager, Space Shuttle Program
Summary
It is believed that utilization of the Space Shuttle for human access to space will continue through at least 2015 and possibly beyond 2020. The longevity and operational aspects of this program demand a different approach to operational management for the future. A different management strategy needs to be employed.
Privatization of the SSP has the potential to provide significant benefits to the Government. However, timing is critical. The continuing erosion of NASA skills and experience threatens the safety of the program. It is critical to take advantage of the existing NASA SSP expertise before further erosion affects the ability to plan and safely implement privatization. Today, the skill and knowledge legacy still remain to formulate the appropriate merger of the NASA SSP and private industry.
 
NASA REJECTED THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS AND SENT OUR FUTURE IN SPACE TO MUSEUMS!

Posted in Space news | Leave a comment

Gross waste–Allen nailed it!

Myth vs. Reality
Sunday, April 13, 2014 Myth vs. Reality –Space dollars to Russia!!! 4. Cost of Shuttle Based System is Far Less Than the Constellation System or the Proposed Obama System This claim results from simple arithmetic. At a shuttle cost per mission of 500 million for the round trip transport of 6 astronauts, the per man cost of shuttle transport is 80 million. The system to be developed in the Constellation program or the Obama plan would duplicate the Russian Soyuz system. The Russians are to be paid 50 million per astronaut per trip. When the huge cost to develop a new U S system is added in, the resulting per seat cost would greatly exceed that of the existing shuttle system. Considering the cargo superiority of the shuttle makes the shuttle system even more cost effective, and it is in place now, no interruption, no space dollars spent overseas. Origin and Impetus for the Redirection Six years ago the Bush Administration unilaterally redirected the manned space program to (1) terminate the shuttle system and (2) to recreate the Apollo system, consisting of large boosters and a capsule and parachute crew transport system. If you accept the SAT positions why did NASA opt for the redirection and for and sustain the disassembly of a 200 billion dollar Space Shuttle System? One can only speculate but one reason for the redirection could have been a nostalgic desire within the NASA leadership and the Bush Administration to remake the Apollo experience. A second and perhaps more compelling reason could been a desire within NASA leadership to reclaim the prestige associated with creating a new massive heavy lift vehicle similar to the Apollo Saturn V. . The Obama Administration has basically endorsed the redirection by supporting creation of a new heavy lift vehicle, the return to a capsule and parachute system and allowing the termination of the more advanced shuttle system to continue. Pressure has apparently been put on pro shuttle astronauts to stifle it. Again one can only speculate as to the reason. Certainly any desire within NASA for new heavy lift vehicle would be ongoing.The fact that two presidents have sided with the heavy lift segment of NASA shows the power of this group. On the president’s side it one could add – lack of vision, political pressure, and the effects of the anti shuttle propaganda. It makes one wonder if the SAT information reached him. Anti Shuttle Propaganda Part of the shuttle termination initiative has been a deceptive ongoing anti shuttle propaganda campaign by a cadre of ” Space Experts”and the then NASA Administrator. The PBS Columbia Documentary is the most extensive example. In it the shuttles are labeled as “worn out, old technology, too risky, too costly, a mistake and not capable of supporting solar system exploration” none of which is true.The initiative has been very effective and after six years the anti shuttle rhetoric has become a media myth. Myth versus Reality Even with the approaching termination of the Public’s 200 billion dollar shuttle system the nation still has a choice. Considering the facts above it is clear the reality is the shuttle based system for space exploration is the correct choice both technically and financially. . The press could make the difference. SAT has approached numerous media publications with our message and they have chosen to continue to support the myth. These include PBS, the NY Times ,Flight International, the Orange County Register, NASA News and the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. It is my hope that you will read the pro shuttle information noted and will arrange for me to meet with you and your editor for a one hour question and answer session. It is your choice as to time place and agenda. It is vital to the nation that someone of your stature in the press investigates and acts on this information. I have an impressive list of engineer sources (Bob Thompson and three former Chief Engineers for a start) ready to answer any question you might have, people you would be honored, as I am, to associate with and people who are true space experts. By Interviewing these guys you would become the most space shuttle knowledgeable reporter on the planet. Without media support to get our message out the shuttle legacy will probably be similar to that of the Titanic and the Hindenberg, manned space travel will regress fifty years, the Public’s money invested in the Space Shuttle System will have been wasted, and America’s leadership in space will be forfeited. Allen Richardson SAT Spokesman  Sent from my iPad

Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Share to Pinterest

Posted in Space news | Leave a comment

Shuttle summary

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/552580main_Reflections_of_a_Chief_Engineer_Buzzard.pdf

Posted in Space news | Leave a comment

Why?

Why do we keep paying the Russians???
Subject: DESTRUCTION of AMERICA ‘S SPACE CAPABILITIES —WHY did NASA say no to X37 ? NEED Select Congressional Committee to Investigate!!!

WHY ???  Did NASA say no to making x37 a crewed vehicle?????
And those in Congress specializing in space are well aware that, had getting independent access to ISS for our nation really been Job #1 for NASA’s leadership, then the Administration would have approved Boeing’s proposal for the X-37B follow-on, the 5 crew X-37C. We are talking about a dependable spacecraft that can sit in orbit for over a year and NASA said no to making it a crewed vehicle. Why?  Jim Hillhouse of American Space

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/03/x-37b-expanded-capabilities-iss-missions/

Gross Misuse of Nation’s Resources Shuttle & x37b
Termination of shuttle is a gross misuse of the Nation’s resources. We must get the attention of Congress to get either the shuttle or an equivalent vehicle flying as soon as possible. To accomplish this we must educate the average person to the unique capabilities of this system. To this end we must get the benefits of this concept in the minds of the average American so they will demand the restart of this system/equivalent. Amazingly, we have a near equivalent, the x37b but the idiots we have in DC did not even consider the Boeing proposal–the x37b is operational—-google x37 & read the details!!!!!! Boeing proposal ( x37c)—link below. The x37b is an amazing vehicle also!
The media has not done a story on what could be accomplished with the x37 system operated by DOD. The fact we are paying the russians 72 m per ride on soyuz is totally NUTS. To get this changed we need bloggers to get out the word so we can get a large number of people to contact the media constantly and demand that we use the vehicles we have & stop wasting money !!To get this done we need programing in every state on radio/tv bring out the benefits of the program. This will require each of you to constantly contact your local stations encouraging /demanding programs supporting this approach. It is up to you, we are Americans and can make this happen.Keeptheshuttleflyingc.blogspot.com

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/03/x-37b-expanded-capabilities-iss-missions/

Posted in Space news | Leave a comment