jump to navigation

Rick Boozer, Monday, 1-27-14 January 28, 2014

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rick Boozer, Monday, 1-27-14


Your Amazon Purchases
Can Help Support The Space Show/OGLF (www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm

Guest:  Rick Boozer.    Topics:  SLS, NASA, Commercial Space, Space Development Steering Committee.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.

We welcomed back Rick Boozer to continue discussing his premise that congressional mismanagement as adversely impacted NASA and that money going to SLS is money better spent elsewhere.  During the first segment of this 1 hour 45 minute program, Mr. Boozer reintroduced his book to us (he was a guest on TSS regarding his book on August 12, 2013), talking to us about adverse congressional management of NASA the why he believe SLS is damaging to NASA.  Mr. Boozer is very effective in sating his case, with lots of passion.  He references earlier proposals by ULA and SpaceX to build larger heavy lift rockets than the full size SLS for a fraction of the SLS cost but those proposals were dismissed, paving the way for SLS.  We also talked about private sector efforts in making rockets rather than the government doing it, also COTS and Commercial Crew.  At times I countered Rick’s perspective with a few of the better known pro-SLS arguments such as SLS is a place holder for key parts of the aerospace workforce.  Don’t miss what Rick had to say about this idea.

In the second segment, Doug called in with SLS questions based on the assumption that SLS does fly.  Our guest talked about a heavy lifter not needed for the Moon but most likely needed for human spaceflight to Mars.  Another listener asked Rick if he had a Plan B if SLS continued to be funded.  Rick said the Plan B is today’s status quo.  During both segments of this program, our guest mentioned SLS & competing private heavy lift vehicle studies carried out by Dr. Alan Wilhite of Georgia Tech.  Rick provided me with several URLs to this information.  Check out this information at www.newspacewatch.com/docs/IAC-12.D3.2.3.x15379-NASAStudy.pdf & http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Wilhite_2-13-13/Wilhite_2-13-13.pdf.  Also, Rick suggested a debate on the SLS topic.  I would be willing to do a Space Show debate with Rick opposing SLS.  If you have a suggestion for someone to represent support for SLS, please let know.  Toward the end of the program, we asked Rick about his future book plans and he talked about a crowd funding program regarding the preservation of valuable astronomical data.  Also, visit Rick’s own blog, http://astromaven.blogspot.com.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  Contact Rick through his blog or through me.  If you buy his book and I strongly suggest you do so, please go through the OGLF/The Space Show Amazon portal as described at www.thespaceshow.com, www.onegiantleapfoundation.org and all archive summaries on the website and blog, Amazon will donate a percentage of your purchase to The Space Show.


1. Kelly Starks - February 8, 2014

Listening to the show on the 27th with Rick Boozer and the SLS wars and I think the reason they flame so much is that both sides pretty much agree, except for a assumption.

Both sides pretty much agree that Constellation/SLS is pretty crappy. (I wrote the Augustine commission and my rant against these retro Apollo designs got partly quoted in the final report.) Congress pretty much agrees. But the divergence is the assumptions.

Kill SLS folks assume:
– If SLS is killed, the money will go to Falcon 9 heavy or something that can do it much faster better.
– The folks, infrastructure, and expertise in the existing companies supported by SLS are either unnecessary, or will go to SpaceX etc.
– The public won’t accept the high costs of SLS, and will prefer a cheaper alternative, and its only evil-space-industria-complex corporations supporting it..

The we need the SLS program (or a new replacement program).
– If SLS is killed the money will just go, just like when Space Station Freedom was canceled, the money went out from the agency.
– Even things like CST-100 and Dream Chaser would die since they use SLS supported companies, that likely wouldn’t be retained with no SLS scale project to support them.
– New Space companies in total have staffing funding levels far too small to absorb any critical core fraction of those who would be laid off, and given the peoples ages – they are not likely to start a second career with a start up New Space company with so little opportunity or challenge.
– All else the same, the public support drops dramatically with the reduced size of the budget.
– Decades of the big commercial trying to get launch services commercialized to lower costs failed to get any public support.
– Congress can’t organize a new space direction/program, so past what they did (keep Constellation going as SLS – rather then kill it all like Obama wanted.) they just can’t start a major new SLS replacement project.

Also given The high cost per ton, and lower quality, of SpaceX – it could really drive the final nail in the coffin of any political support for NASA in DC.

2. Space-for-All at HobbySpace » Space policy roundup – Jan.28.14 - January 28, 2014

[…] Rick Boozer, Monday, 1-27-14 – Thespaceshow’s Blog – Rick gives an update on the SLS/Orion boondoggles. […]

3. Rick Boozer - January 28, 2014

I noticed only one mistake I made during the show. I said that some people had given launch costs for SLS as low as four hundred thousand dollars. I meant to say as low as four hundred million dollars.

Rick Boozer

Kelly Starks - February 8, 2014

$400M a flight? Hell the COTS flights to ISS are more then that. I’ld be surprised if the SLS, flown under FAR rules by NASA could be as low as $400m a flight total cost?
Could you mean margin cost?

Kelly Starks - February 8, 2014

At the max proposed version of 130 metric tons, or 286,000 pounds, $400M dollars would come to $1,395 per pound. A bit more then shuttles $1,100 per pound of cargo margin cost.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: