If Russia takes ISS Bolden recommends killing all US manned space programs.

[sferrin]

"
Bolden: Without ISS, No Need for SLS, Orion

Aviation Week & Space Technology Mar 31, 2014 , p. 21

Jen DiMascio






Bolden outlines need for U.S.-Russia civil space cooperation

Printed headline: Space Shutdown

As a Marine general who came of age during the Cold War, Administrator Charles Bolden may have found it odd to be defending Russia along with NASA's fiscal 2015 budget request to the House Science space subcommittee.

Badgered last week by Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.), who represents the district that includes the Marshall Space Flight Center, over the possibility Russia may “deny access” to the International Space Station (ISS), Bolden noted that Russia depends as much on U.S. power, communications and “navigation” at the ISS as the U.S. does on Russia's Soyuz capsules. Without U.S. access, “the partners would probably have to shut the space station down; if you are thinking that the Russians will continue to operate the International Space Station, it can't be done,” Bolden said. Russia has proved to be a reliable partner over the years, he said, and that is unlikely to change over the Crimean crisis. But if it does, he said, “I will go to the president and recommend that we terminate [the Space Launch System] and Orion, because without the International Space Station, I have no vehicle to do the medical tests [or] the technology development. And we're fooling everybody that we can go to deep space if the International Space Station is not there.” Development of the heavy-lift Space Launch System to carry the Orion crew vehicle into deep space is managed at Marshall, and Brooks quickly changed the subject. "

That's Obama-level stupidity right there. I wonder how he thinks we'll ever get back to space if we cancel the tools to get there?

 

[Triton]

This is a news report from yesterday.


Source:
http://www.scpr.org/blogs/politics/2014/03/27/16210/nasa-chief-congress-debate-economic-wisdom-of-mann/

It's budget time on Capitol Hill. Thursday it was NASA's opportunity to defend its proposed $17.5 billion budget for next year — four percent above what the Obama administration has proposed.

The top man at NASA, administrator Charles Bolden, outlined the White House priorities, which push for funding weighted toward human, rather than robotic, space exploration. He emphasized the need for a heavy launch vehicle that will eventually allow NASA to move cargo and humans to Mars, working out the kinks by trying it out on the moon.

Bolden told members of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee he hoped they would agree with him that the "ultimate goal in our lifetime is to see humans on Mars."

But not everyone agreed.

Huntington Beach Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher told Bolden that human travel to Mars would be expensive and take away resources from other projects "that might be more important to humankind than ... a symbolic mission of putting a human being on Mars." Rohrabacher pointed out "that we have robots and rovers and all sorts of other things that are on Mars already."

NASA didn't include a dime in its main budget for the Mars rover program that landed a pair of robotic explorers on the red planet a decade ago. Instead, Bolden touted a separate, $35 million “Planetary Science Extended Mission Funding” proposal, saying "we have to find innovative ways to fund missions when budgets are reduced.” But there is little enthusiasm in the House for the supplemental funding proposal.

The office of Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff, whose district includes JPL, says the current budget for the Spirit and Opportunity rover programs is $13.2 million. Opportunity is the only one of the two still functioning.

The fight over human vs. robotic space exploration is a fight Congress and the administration have been fighting since 2010 when Barack Obama proposed a U.S.-crewed Mars mission by the mid-2030s.

Lawmakers at Thursday's hearing had their own ideas about NASA's funding priorities. They asked about the agency's commitment to education outreach. They also asked about a pair of telescopes — an airborne variety known as SOFIA (The Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy), and the James Webb Space Telescope, which promises to peer into the atmosphere of distant planets. And the lawmakers wanted to ensure NASA would continue its earth science program, which provides weather information. Most of these programs have research or development facilities in these lawmakers' districts.

Current events also figured into this year's NASA budget debate. Lawmakers wanted to know how Russia's aggression in Crimea might affect the International Space Station. Currently, Russia provides transportation to and from the station. Bolden told lawmakers the U.S. could begin launching its own rockets to the station by 2017. When asked about NASA's contingency plan, should Russia decline to fly American astronauts, Bolden chided lawmakers, reminding them "this Congress" chose to rely on the Russians because lawmakers didn’t fully fund its own program. "You can’t have it both ways," Bolden said.

Bolden tried to downplay Congressional fears, saying NASA deals with the Russian space agency, known as Roscosmos, not with the Russian government. Even when there were previous international tensions over Russian actions in Georgia, Bolden said, there was no effect on space cooperation. Besides, he added, the Russians may provide the ride to the space station, but they are "dependent on us to operate it."

 

[Avimimus]

I wonder how he thinks we'll ever get back to space if we cancel the tools to get there?

I think that was his point - if the politicians use the ISS as a political football, then space development may as well be abandoned.

We need the ISS to make expansion into space easier, we need cooperation with the Russians if we want to make the ISS work, don't let things which happen on earth mess up current plans.

Of course, he could have added: Give us several times the budget, build a new (non-international) space-station and we will only be set back ten years.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Locked.


Scott, please examine the statement "Obama-level stupidity right there" and see if it in any way seems to be political.