Are you sitting down? Prepare for a real shocker. A bunch of astronauts, many of whom have the program as their current meal ticket, support continuation of the fiasco. And the joint statement was put out by ATK. Yeah, they don’t have a dog in this fight…
I found this particularly annoying:
In the joint statement, provided by Alliant, the former astronauts say: “Our top concern…is to ensure the safest possible system is utilised. This requires a proven track record, building on important lessons learned…NASA’s Constellation programme is exactly that type of effort – infused with generational lessons learned.”
Well, of course that’s your top concern. But as a taxpayer, and space enthusiast, my top concern is having a system that’s affordable, and actually contributes to opening up space, things at which Constellation will be an epic fail even if it meets its stated program objectives. If the system isn’t safe enough for them, I know where we can find a lot of other people to fly it.
If the goal was that the safest possible system was utilized they wouldn’t be using parts that have failed in the past (shuttle solids) and are known to have nasty failure modes. The whole thing is a handout to ATK.
There’s safe, and then there’s “safe.” I’m remembering a line in Blazing Saddles about jobs…
“Our top concern…is to ensure the safest possible system is utilised. This requires a proven track record, building on important lessons learned…”
Proven track record… like, not having designed and certified a new orbital system since the late 1970’s? As opposed to, say, 26 successful flights and counting for EELVs?
I was wondering when NASA’s PR machine would be kicking in. This is just the opening gun.
The safest system is one that never flies. An unaffordable system will never fly. Therefore ….