Burt Rutan has released the following statement:
To my friends in the Press...
Since the WSJ chose to cherry-pick and miss-quote my comments to Cong
Wolf and since the blogs have taken that to further mischaracterized my
comments, I am forwarding the Wolf memo in its entirety, in the hopes
that some of this gets corrected. Some additional clarification of my thoughts follow:
My basic concern is that the real value of NASA's contributions that
America realized in the 60s and early 70s is now being completely
discarded. How can we rationalize a surrender of our preeminence in
human spaceflight? In my mind, the important NASA accomplishments are
twofold: 1) The technical breakthroughs achieved by basic research (not
by Development programs like Constellation) and 2) The Forefront Manned
Exploration that provided the inspiration for our youth to plan careers
in engineering/science and that established the U.S. as the world leader
in technology.In short, it is a good idea indeed for the commercial community to
compete to re-supply the ISS and to bring about space access for the
public to enjoy. I applaud the efforts of SpaceX, Virgin and Orbital in
that regard and feel these activities should have been done at least two
decades ago. However, I do not see the commercial companies taking
Americans to Mars or to the moons of Saturn within my lifetime and I
doubt if they will take the true Research risks (technical and
financial) to fly new concepts that have low confidence of return on
investment. Even NASA, regarded as our prime Research agency has not
recently shown a willingness to fly true Research concepts.For years I have stated that a NASA return-to-moon effort must include
true Research content, i.e. testing new concepts needed to enable
forefront Exploration beyond the moon. The current Ares/Orion does not
do that. While I have been critical of Constellation for that reason, I
do not think that NASA should 'give up' on manned spaceflight, just that
they should be doing it while meeting the 1) or 2) criteria above.Some have guessed that my recent comments are based on my overall
displeasure with the Obama Administration. they are not; however it does
seem that the best technical minds in U.S. industry are still striving
to find HOW America can continue to be "exceptional", while the
Administration does not want America to BE "exceptional".Burt Rutan
Rutan has not forwarded the Congressman Frank Wolf "memo" as he calls it or letter as its referred to elsewhere. Hyperbola was sent a copy of it by a third party a few days ago but due to concerns about possible privacy implications this blog is not publishing it for now
on February 26, 2010 8:34 PM | Reply
Attn Instalanche: The memo has been posted in another post.
on February 26, 2010 9:11 PM | Reply
Before we toss the baby out with the bath water we need to reflect on what once was. We need to move forward in a way that compliments the accomplishments of the past. For those who missed it... the NASA that once was. I strongly suggest watching Ron Howard's film "In The Shadow of The Moon". For those who never witnessed a live launch of a Saturn-V this film truly captures the spirit of those heady days. I'm not advocating Griffin's Constellation program or a return to Apollo. I am suggesting that commercial "New Space" and Boldin have an obligation to the past. An obligation to get it right this time. Anyone who watches Ron's film will realize there was more going on than just a space race. There was a shared outward projection of the human spirit. Something that has been sadly missing from the NASA of recent years. Whether the flex path can restore that spirit remains to be seen. Recent commercial capsule based concepts that splash down lead me to question whether "New Space" has "The Right Stuff". I question whether they have the true spirit or are simply out to make a quick buck and feed upon a rotting technology carcass. A carcass that was one the premiere space program on the planet. I would hope that at least some of the commercial companies will come forth and field worthy world class spaceships. So far Space Dev is the only company that has chosen to take the high road to LEO access. Their spaceship the “Dream Chaser” is a worthy 21st century design. Now it remains to be seen if the new NASA will afford Space Dev an opportunity to take it into the realm of reality where it belongs.
on February 26, 2010 9:15 PM | Reply
Mr. Rutan is a class act, a real American Visionary. I applaud his reasoned support of manned spaceflight!
on February 26, 2010 9:53 PM | Reply
Buzz Aldrin may have more Frequent Flyer miles than me; but he's apparently not an independent thinker when it comes to the Obama Administration's desire to make us a dingy ghetto instead of the Shining City President Reagan envisioned...
on February 26, 2010 10:35 PM | Reply
NASA used to have the Right Stuff.
They lost it about the same time
they decided to turn a functional
Saturn V stack into the world's
largest lawn ornament; The money,
and lives they have wasted since
then are a national disgrace.
NASA was and is a State supported
roadblock to the exploitation of
space for profit, whose mission
is to prevent any _independent_
private company from demonstrating
just how much money there is to be
made; The Chinese are likely to go
where the US fears to fly, and reap
both the economic and military
rewards.
on February 27, 2010 1:01 AM | Reply
I agree with Rutan.
1. The decision to turn over transportation to LEO to private companies like SpaceX was a good one.
2. The decision, in effect, to kill human exploration beyond LEO by NASA was very poor.
Human space flight has always been strongly opposed by two groups. There are those who think that the funds could be better spent on social programs despite the fact that Health and Human Services would eat NASA's budget in about a week with no lasting effect. Then there are those inside of NASA who think that human exploration is a waste of money ... more could be done with robots. What the second group fails to realize is that the first group will turn on them if human exploration is ever eliminated. I would guess that Obama definitely falls into the first group and maybe into the second group as well ... or at least his science advisors fall into the second group. The combination of both has led Obama to effectively end human exploration beyond LEO.
on February 27, 2010 8:44 PM | Reply
While I've always been a big fan of Burt Rutan, I'm not sure I follow the last paragraph of what's quoted.
1. I define "getting out of LEO" as orbital propellant depots, space habitats capable of existing for long terms without Earth resupply, and nuclear-powered propulsion. We discontinued what little research we were doing into these and other advanced space exploration concepts in order to fund Constellation; therefore, contrary to what's being said, Constellation was dooming us to stay in LEO.
2. I read and listen to real news and CSPAN a great deal. I have heard nothing from the Obama administration other than ideas to help keep the U.S. from dying into the dust of countries that are paying more attention to education, internet access, basic infrastructure and the health of citizens than we are, a constant drumbeat of "We need to do these things in order to stay competitive!"
I heard Paul Otellini comment last night, as Warren Buffett and and a large number of other business leaders have also commented, that this administration has talked to them more in one year than the previous administration did in eight. I can only conclude that Rutan gets his news from Fox, and therefore has very little idea what the administration is really doing.
I have read literally hundreds of research papers presented at conferences I've helped put on for engineering, construction and development in space. I spend many hours every week on the topic. The program proposed by the administration is, flat out, the best space program that's ever been proposed for this nation since the Johnson administration.
Dave Klingler