A new video on YouTube raises questions about the direction a presidential panel is steering NASA and asks viewers to weigh on the future of U.S. human spaceflight by contacting the White House and/or their congressional representatives."At President Obama's request, a committee known as the Augustine Committee is reviewing America's plans for Human Space Exploration," says an introductory note posted by "Rounderb" with the video, which is titled "The Deciders of NASA's future -- Augustine Committee."
"Although a thorough review was conducted four years ago -- and a direction chosen, contracts awarded, tests conducted, and rockets built -- the Augustine committee wants to stop work and do something new," the note says.
"This will widen the gap between the retirement of the shuttle and its replacement vehicle, waste billions of dollars and threaten Americas presence in space," the note says. "You can STOP this."
Check out the video: HERE.
Let us know what you think. Post your comments below.
17 comments:
President Obama does not have the leadership skills necessary to make a Kennedy-like decision. Therefore, he defers the decision to some subordinates on some unknown commmittee to mull things over.
The result of said committee work will be a four-legged beast that the committee will swear is a horse but all the world will see is a camel.
Rick Steele
Sarasota, Florida
This YouTube video is worthy of a post on a Florida Today blog?
Reviews of complex programs can be beneficial, providing suggestions for improvement and future guidance. However, to throw away years of work and progress, diligently reviewed and vetted, in favor of viewgraph engineering and "promises" of a better, cheaper way is misguided. The outcome will result in increased delays and increased cost as unforeseen issues and challenges arise with any new path. The stakes are high as we, America, stand to lose our leadership in human space flight as we continually debate the path, change directions, and tread water, wasting billions along the way. Stay the course.
I watched every hour of the committee public meetings. If I had an agenda to push, I too could create an attractive video to push it.
The difference is I'd have an easier time making the video. Why? Because the meetings are filled to the brim with different ways of saying "Cancel Constellation."
.
here you can find the speech that I think (and hope) Barack Obama should say about the manned Mars mission:
http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts/047gotomars.html
.
Also: GWB did not cancel funds for NASA like the video suggests...
Instead NASA budgeted to have money OMB never promised to provide...
21:
You are just flat out wrong. NASA was held to year-before budget levels as a result of continuing resolutions in 2005 and 2006 and 2007 and 2008 -- so the agency never got increases in funding that the Bush Administration promised NASA for Project Constellation. So in the early period, when closing or minimizing the gap was at least possible, the White House and Congress starved the so-called Prpgram of Record, and that in fact is the reason why there is an Aerospace Committee, uh, I mean an Augustine Committee, deliberating right now.
It's about time someone highlighted how these hearings have been. It's a "Kangaroo Court" and the fix has been in. Finally some NASA insiders tell it like it really is. The bias of the panel has been "dripping." The most accurate comment I've heard is when Norm said, "There aren't major technical problems with Constellation. If NASA had been funded the way it was promised, we wouldn't be having this Commission because there wouldn't be a gap."
Interesting compilation of the committee's deliberations. In my opinion, regardless of its agenda, this video does underscore how daunting the committee's task is.
While I have heard lots of opinions to the contrary, I am convinced that staying the course is the option that provides the greatest assurance of successfully reaching out nation's ambitions for human space exploration.
Wow!
Did you REALLY just report someone posting a PERSONAL video
on Youtube as a news story?
This video isn't endorsed, produced, written by the Obama Administration, NASA, The Augustine Commission, etc.
Oh, and for the record regarding Nixon....
President Nixon - January 5th 1972.
http://history.nasa.gov/stsnixon.htm
or
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/reference/basics/history/index.html
Exactly what is short-sighted about developing the most successful space vehicle in the history of humankind that has functioned for nearly 3 decades?
Todd,
It's interesting that the video's producer both vilifies and nevertheless quotes the Committee members to make his or her point. I guess the producer is a little schizophrenic.
- Jim Muncy
I guess the whole point is there was no reason for the committee - although I don't envy their task. I agree with "anonymous" above, who stated, "I am convinced that staying the course is the option that provides the greatest assurance of successfully reaching our nation's ambitions for human space exploration." It's a no-brainer.
My opinion? The video does not rate a serious mention in an actual news site. It is advertising - I like many of the things it says but it is NOT news.
Now, if Florida Today reported on the background, who did it, various points of view, that would be news.
CharlesTheSpaceGuy on TypePad - but this system frequently does not recognize accounts there
"Now, if Florida Today reported on the background, who did it, various points of view, that would be news."
Hear. Hear! Some investigative journalism please. This is no mere advert. On the contrary the above is clearly propaganda by vested interests; rather than a personal view.
Are there any Bob Woodward's or Carl Bernstein's in the Florida Today Corps to: "Follow the money."
Dave Lermit
We've shared this video partly because it's yet another voice in the debate. We've shared many voices in the debate. We'll continue to share all voices in the debate as this goes on. Coming starting Sunday, we'll have a week long online town hall forum and poll on the options being presented to the president. It's worthwhile to hear everyone's point of view, including those you might not agree with. That's part of our country's heritage and tradition. The video wasn't presented as fact, but rather as another voice in the crowd -- one of many voices. We hope everyone appreciates us sharing as many points of view on this matter as we possibly can. Thanks for participating.
Isn't peculiar that all of the top options ultimately benefit Lockheed Martin? The cost already invested in Ares and Orion was mysteriouly ignored, and should be added to the cost of any other system if Constellation is canceled. What about lost jobs? Also, some options assume Orion and the center tank (Jupiter and EELV concepts for example) can just be placed on the replacement system without any cost, delay, or redesign. It is obvious the commitee was biased.
Todd, Who created this video? Could it be that it was funded by the companies behind the Ares rocket? Who bankrolled this and why? Maybe they are biased too.
Post a Comment