en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/282748 Comments by Eric_Storm http://change.gov/open_government/entry/coalition_for_space_exploration/#IDComment13002361 Has the NASA team considered this?: Delta IV Medium or Atlas V- able to transport three member crew to LEO by 2015 Delta IV Heavy - able to transport six member crew to LEO by 2019 Ares V - Able to transport 4 member crew from LTO to Moon by 2020-2025 Ares VI -Able to transport ? member crew to beyond the Moon by 2030 Tue, 23 Dec 2008 13:37:56 +0000 http://change.gov/open_government/entry/coalition_for_space_exploration/#IDComment13002361 http://change.gov/open_government/entry/coalition_for_space_exploration/#IDComment13001204 Do we really think an Atlas V, or Delta IV can get a crew of six astronauts to the space station, or four astronauts to the Moon? If so, then can we get this project completed by 2015 without soaring costs? This has to do with whether the United States can retain its leadership position in space by spearheading international cooperation, not to mention taking care of its own human spaceflight needs. Please tread carefully! I'm worried. Tue, 23 Dec 2008 12:09:38 +0000 http://change.gov/open_government/entry/coalition_for_space_exploration/#IDComment13001204 http://change.gov/open_government/entry/coalition_for_space_exploration/#IDComment12813985 It seems that with each successive presidency comes a new plan. Can we come to an agreement on the basic building blocks that will fit a variety of plans in future administrations? For example, we will need a launcher that can get Americans as well as international partners to the ISS and space. Can we work on a basic heavy launcher that will be able to carry such large payloads that would enable missions, like the ones grs describes, off the ground? And can we all come together around a new break-through propulsion method of the future enabling fast missions to deep space destinations like Mars? It seems like we need to work from the ground up so that our plans can transcend time and be amended when needed. Fri, 19 Dec 2008 07:54:40 +0000 http://change.gov/open_government/entry/coalition_for_space_exploration/#IDComment12813985 http://change.gov/open_government/entry/space_solar_power_ssp_a_solution_for_energy_independence_climate_change/#IDComment12730083 Although I share the excitement regarding a future energy solution, especially space based, I haven't been satisfied by discussions on how we are going to pay for it. NASA is no where near the $30 billion annual budget it should have and NASA hasn't even figured out how to significantly lower the cost of access to space, which is a prerequisite for SSP. So as much as I want this to happen I can only suggest that DoD and DOE pay for it while NASA works on the access to space cost issue. But I'm not savvy on the DoD and DOE budget issues, which must be in nearly the same boat as NASA. If you're going to get NASA on this boat you better boost its funding way, way up there! Tue, 16 Dec 2008 17:51:12 +0000 http://change.gov/open_government/entry/space_solar_power_ssp_a_solution_for_energy_independence_climate_change/#IDComment12730083 http://change.gov/open_government/entry/nasa_alumni_league/#IDComment12571795 The Executive Branch and Congress must realize that large NASA projects can rarely stay within budget parameters, and in fact, it is naive to expect such a thing. There should be budget goals and thorough over-site to prevent waste but budgets should be estimated and not set. NASA needs to be given much greater funding to keep up with inflation. NASA should keep it focus on the Constellation program. Every time a new President takes office and cancels programs of the predecessor we undermine our long term goals. Every NASA project, no matter how big, or small, is a long term goal and should not be eliminated due to politics, or to set historical precedent unless there is a large consensus for doing so, or the project is clearly a legacy project that is obsolete. This has to do with the Constellation Program, which I believe is relevant and strategic in these globally competitive times. Although there are other projects that clearly deserve funding, it should be left to Executive and Legislative branch to find new funding for these projects instead of cutting critical existing projects. With the cost of Constellation expanding the Executive branch should begin aggressively approaching potential international partners like Europe, Japan, India, Russia and Perhaps, even China. ITAR should be relaxed to work more closely with partners like Europe and Japan. It seems that such countries should be able to bear a large cost burden in establishing permanent bases on the Moon, Asteroids and Mars. Some projects that should be implemented and given additional funding are the Terrestrial Planet Finder and the Space Solar Power concept. I cannot imagine greater contributions to all mankind that discovering habitable planets in near-by solar systems and harnessing low cost and clean energy from space. If we can find a habitable planet within 20 light years the human race would be spurred to begin seriously contemplating interstellar voyages for the first time in history. This is truly the greatest step mankind could ever make. We also need to find a cure for global warming and a Space Solar Power Initiative is a solution. NASA however, cannot be expected to take on the entire burden of projects as costly and complex as a Space Solar Power project. Since such a concept would be a valuable military asset (provided it isn't blown out of space by the enemy) the DoD should be the principle investor in starting such an initiative while the DoE takes care of ground infrastructure for the project. DoD should also be the principle developer of a hybrid ramjet/scramjet, which could lower the cost of access to space. NASA should be the principle investigator in developing more affordable access to space to allow Space Solar Power to be affordable. NASA is already working with small aerospace companies to do this and should increase funding to do so. NASA should also help these companies like SpaceX to human-rate their vehicles and to integrate with NASA projects to allow eventual retirement of Ares I and expand private spaceflight after 2015. Perhaps the same can be implemented with Ares V after 2020. NASA should work with the NSF and Japanese partners to develop low-cost mass production of carbon nano-tubes to build a space elevator if this is possible. Last, but not least NASA needs additional funding for climate observation with generous help from the NOAA. Although exploration is NASA's main responsibility, so much of the task of exploration is based on transportation and R&D for transportation should be closely coordinated with the DoT to benefit our every-day lives. The Small Airplane Transportation System (SATS) should be reborn and expanded in cooperation with DoT in order to expand the use, ease, safety, and affordability of small airplanes for the general public. That's all for now folks Sun, 14 Dec 2008 03:36:58 +0000 http://change.gov/open_government/entry/nasa_alumni_league/#IDComment12571795