NASA says first manned flight of Orion spacecraft could be delayed nearly 2 years

[bananas]

Source: Washington Post

The first manned test flight of NASA's new rocket and space craft could be delayed by nearly two years, the agency said in a statement Wednesday. Previously, that flight was scheduled to take place in 2021, but now NASA said it could be pushed back to as late as April 2023, which it said "is consistent with funding levels in the president’s budget request."

The announcement was immediately criticized by Rep. Lamar Smith, the Republican chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, who accused the Obama administration of "choosing to delay deep space exploration priorities."

<snip>

The Space Launch System, NASA's new rocket, and the Orion capsule, manufactured by Lockheed Martin, are two of the agency's top priorities and the vehicles that it says will take humans into deep space, and eventually Mars. But the Government Accountability Office has said the agency’s human exploration program is plagued by “inconsistent and unrealistic schedule goals,” as well as “significant technical and funding issues.”

Its first unmanned test flight of SLS has already been delayed to 2018, and the GAO has said that even once astronauts are able to eventually fly on it "future mission destinations remain uncertain.”

<snip>

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/09/16/nasa-delays-first-manned-flight-of-orion-spacecraft/

[SCVDem]

1. This is a job for....

Ted Cruz!

He is in charge of NASA, isn't he?

Be a hero, asshole!

[Baclava]

2. If you want to go to space, you have to pay Russia, comrade

[Warren DeMontague]

5. different question.

The Orion's mission is not Low Earth Orbit back and forth transport- SpaceX and Boeing will be able to handle that, among other entitites.

Orion is specifically designed for human exploration beyond LEO.

[LongTomH]

3. The SpaceX Crew Dragon should be ready before then.......

From 'Bad Astronomer' Phil Plait:

For its part, Congress has asked the president why he is underfunding SLS. That’s pretty audacious, given these facts (and given that Congress actually funded SLS at levels higher than what NASA requested). Coincidentally, the amount of money cut from Commercial Crew is about the same as what we’ve been sending to Russia for seats on their Soyuz. I'll also note that at the very best, SLS won't be ready to put humans in space for four years after a commercial vehicle could. How many billions of dollars would that mean giving to Russia to cover that gap if Commercial Crew is still underfunded?

That estimate was before this latest delay!

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2015/08/24/congress_and_nasa_commercial_crew_program_is_underfunded.html

[Warren DeMontague]

6. Orion and SLS aren't designed to ferry people back and forth to Low Earth Orbit, anyway.

That's not their job, and frankly I'm glad NASA is getting out of the business of taxiing people somewhere they've been going 50 years.

Orion and SLS are specifically being built for human exploration beyond low Earth orbit. (Although there are other uses for a heavy lift rocket, like a Europa mission) Conflating that with commercial crew/LEO/ISS transport is disingenuous.

That said, we should increase funding for both.

[Peace Patriot]

4. This is a very important matter.

It may not be THE most important matter to many people (probably the majority) for whom putting food on the table, keeping a roof over their heads, finding decent jobs and caring for the young, the sick or the elderly in their families are of intense and immediate importance.

But it IS important, in my view, for many reasons. Some of those are:

1. Space funding--like infrastructure funding--spreads out in the economy, creating many jobs and businesses, and educational projects.

2. Space projects are uniquely inspiring--and we, as a people, desperately need inspiration.

3. Space projects feed into MANY other scientific endeavors and discoveries--in astronomy, physics, biology, geology, electronics, etc.

4. With the INCREDIBLE discoveries of the last ten years--thousands of planets around other suns, water all over our solar system (on the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, on Pluto, on Mars, on asteroids, on our own moon! --whole huge oceans of it on the moons of Jupiter and Saturn moving under the icy surfaces) and throughout the Milky Way and the Universe, and other staggering advances in astronomy and cosmology, NOW is the time for the human race to take this next step, fully into space. It is time. Carpe diem!

5. Our own planet is in very big trouble from climate change--VERY big trouble. We NEED the new science and the new insights that will come from exploring our Solar System, because, believe me, we are surely going to need a geo-engineering solution to save our planet and ourselves. The discoveries that are being made with telescopes and remote probes and landers are amazing, but humans in space and on other planets and moons will be the best observers and experimenters for developing the sorts of technology that we are going to need HERE.

6. We may well need another planet to migrate to, if the human race does not slow down its population growth. We are too many for one planet NOW. In 50 years, it is likely going to be much worse, in terms of competition for basic needs and the impact of that on Earth's environment. This may seem like a far-out assertion, but, when you look at the sobering facts, it isn't. We are outgrowing our planet's ability to support us.

7. Space projects are far better for all of us than wars. We should stop the wars, wherever we can--especially this U.S. Forever War that we are engaged in--and spend some of that money on Space! The Forever War is not inspiring to anybody, except to a few rich Pentagon privateers and Neo-Cons. It is creating U.S. enemies all over the planet (and not just in the Middle East, also in Latin America, for instance, which the Pentagon calls its "Southern Command" and where the U.S. "war on drugs" has ravaged country after country). How much better would it be if we were known for establishing human bases on Mars, instead of military bases in Colombia or Honduras! How much better would it be if we were known for sending the first humans to Jupiter's moon Enceladus, which very likely has life in the ocean under the ice--the discovery of which would be the most important in human history!

End of rant. I really believe this--and I'm to the left of Bernie Sanders. We MUST adequately fund human space exploration and other space projects!

[Octafish]

7. What Peace Patriot said.

Every word.

[LongTomH]

8. Keep talking -- I'm on your wavelength!

[postatomic]

11. Excellent Points. Each and every one

Thanks!

[Frank Cannon]

9. I'm so old, I remember when the Orion spacecraft...

Was a theoretical space rocket powered by nuclear explosions that could achieve a pretty decent percentage of the speed of light. (Well, something like 30%, which is not bad.) Carl Sagan talked about it in the first Cosmos series.

Kind of sad we're not talking about THAT spacecraft, but still cool, I guess.

[FM451]

10. I remember that Orion too!

The Orion concept was mentioned in Arthur C. Clarke's book "The Lost Worlds of 2001". Kubrick and his creative team looked hard at the Orion concept for propelling the Discovery spacecraft. Clarke noted that, with Cold War tensions at that time, the idea of a spaceship "Putt-Putting" away using nuclear explosions wasn't the best idea. I believe they want with plasma drive instead.

They kept the Orion name for their really cool Space Shuttle (do I hear the Blue Danube waltz?).

[Frank Cannon]

12. I'm a huge Kubrick, Clarke, and 2001 fan...

And I did not know that! Thanks for all that!

I actually think the nuclear drive concept would have worked better in that movie, in that it would show that, by 2001, we had learned how to beat at least some of our "swords" into "plowshares". But maybe that wasn't keeping with the theme of the movie.

[Baclava]

13. yes - Freeman Dyson's secret project - Project Orion Interplanetary Space Flight