Il primo e l’ultimo uomo ad aver posto piede sulla Luna, verranno ascoltati domani dal “Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee” del Senato a riguardo della loro recente lettera aperta al Presidente Obama in cui definivano la sua scelta sulla politica spaziale USA una “decisione devastante”.
All’audizione parteciperanno anche l’Amministratore NASA Charlie Bolden, il Direttore del White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy e Norman Augustine.
Bella prova di democrazia… Si vede che il Senato vuole sentire tutte le campane 
oppure vuole ritornare sui suoi passi 
Apprezzabile che Armstrong non parli ai quattro venti e nei talk shows, ma utilizzi l’unica sede seria preposta a questo scopo…
Infatti credo che l’ultima volta che Armstrong abbia parlato inutilmente risalga a quando andava all’asilo.
Quoto! 
Come diceva la moglie: quando dice NO ha fatto un comizio!
E ritorniamo al solito aneddoto…
Non è sceso per primo sulla Luna perchè era il più vicino al portello…
NASA TV trasmetterà la diretta a partire dalle 20.30 ITA…
(edit: orario)
… ma perché Deke Slayton conosceva bene i suoi polli. (cit. Carmelo Pugliatti se non sbaglio)
Non ho inserito la citazione perchè non ricordavo la fonte…l’autore mi perdonerà!
Ho corretto il mio post con l’orario, avevo erroneamente scritto 18.30 al posto di 20.30! ops…
Sono già disponibili le testimonianze in PDF…
Holdren & Bolden hanno letto il loro statement (niente di nuovo), ora stanno rispondendo alle domande dei Senatori.
Non le hanno mandate a dire 
Certo che dalla prima audizione di febbraio non è cambiato molto, le domande son sempre le stesse…
Ho letto solo le parole di Armstrong… Vorrei sottolineare i passaggi che ritengo più importanti e a cui mi permetto di dare un titolo:
Accuse alla nuova dirigenza NASA?!
How could such a chain of events
happen? A plan that was invisible to so many was likely contrived by a very
small group in secret who persuaded the President that this was a unique
opportunity to put his stamp on a new and innovative program. I believe the
President was poorly advised.
Dubbi sull’ industria privata
I am very concerned that the new plan, as I understand it, will prohibit us from
having human access to low Earth orbit on our own rockets and spacecraft until
the private aerospace industry is able to qualify their hardware under
development as rated for human occupancy. I support the encouragement of the
newcomers toward their goal of lower cost access to space. But having cut my
teeth in rockets more than 50 years ago, I am not confident. The most
experienced rocket engineers with whom I have spoken believe that will require
many years and substantial investment to reach the necessary level of safety and
reliability. Business analysts believe that at least two qualified competitors
would be required to have any chance of reducing ticket prices. They further
believe that a commercial market large enough to support even one competitor is
unlikely.
Bocciatura di Orion Safety
Amendments to the 2010 plan were announced in the President’s April 15 speech
at the Kennedy Space Center. He stated that the cancelled Orion Spacecraft
would be given new life as an emergency return vehicle from the International
Space Station. Such a craft would be necessary if an Orbiter or Soyus was not
available, if the ISS had a major emergency, or in case of a medical emergency.
In the first decade of ISS operation we have not needed such a spacecraft, and,
hopefully, in the remaining ISS lifetime, we will not need one. However, there
certainly is merit in having emergency escape ability. […]
The complexities of such a craft, required because of the wide variety of
emergency situations that could be encountered, indicated that a near ballistic
shape such as Orion would be inferior to a configuration with higher
aerodynamic performance.
Because the Orion Light, as described, would be capable of carrying humans on
only a return to Earth trajectory and not from Earth to the ISS, its utility would
not seem to compare well with the Soyus and its 2-way trajectories that are
currently used. The time and cost of this development including the
autonomous or remotely controlled rendezvous and docking would appear to be
significant. It appears that this would be a very expensive project with limited
usefulness.
Consiglio di progettare un SDHLV
Knowledge in Heavy Lift rockets is currently substantial. A great deal of such
study has been completed in recent years as a part of the normal NASA and
military studies. As of the time I write this testimony, NASA’s web site describes
the Ares V as follows: “Under the goals of NASA’s exploration mission, Ares V
is a vital part of the cost-effective space transportation infrastructure being
developed by NASA’s Constellation Program to carry human explorers back to
the moon, and then onward to Mars and other destinations in the solar system. […]
A heavy lift rocket derived from the Shuttle (SDHLV) has often been suggested
as a useful vehicle and could be produced in far less time than that proposed in
the 2010 plan, The technology and hardware, for this development is already
largely available and would not require five years of study to implement.
Non vedo l’ora di sentire Live Neil…
E di leggere domani tutte le reazioni al suo intervento.
Mi trovo PERFETTAMENTE d’accordo con i due “vecchi” ragazzi.
P.S.
Altro che Bolden:; ma un Armstrong amministratore della NASA?
E siamo in due per quel che ne capisco io da rookie ignorante quale sono.
Purtroppo qui devo risponderti che per la mentalità americana è “troppo vecchio” 
(e d’altronde a 80 anni quest’anno… anche anagraficamente non è proprio un giovincello!)