A congressman from the state that stands to lose the most called a NASA move to cut moon program funding a backdoor means to kill Project Constellation and "a pretty sleazy way of doing it."The backlash from U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, came after NASA told Congress it intends to cut $1 billion from Constellation -- including $500 million to Utah Ares rocket contractor ATK -- to bring the agency within compliance of a 140-year-old federal spending law.
U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Orlando, was not as harsh. He likened the move to a call to action for Congress, where legislators in both chambers and the White House remain in a stalemate over the future of the U.S. human space flight program.
Take a look at the details HERE.
IMAGE NOTE: With more than 12 times the thrust produced by a Boeing 747 jet aircraft, NASA's Ares I-X test rocket roars off Launch Complex 39B at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida last October. The rocket produced 2.96 million pounds of thrust at liftoff and went supersonic in 39 seconds. Click to enlarge and save the NASA photo. Photo credit: NASA/Carl Winebarger.
51 comments:
Tell me what Owe-Bama has done thats NOT sleezy. All he is interested in is the weakening of the US.
What's "sleazy" is a Congressman expecting American taxpayers to fund a bloated jobs program for his district that won't produce anything the American people actually need.
Bishop is the yokel who thinks the Ares I will be used to attack our nation's enemies. Shows you what a buffoon he is.
"that won't produce anything the American people actually need."
Please educate yourself about the benefits that have been derived in the private sector from the US Space Program. The number of ignorant people who actually believe they get nothing from it is alarming.
A big price to pay for tang.
Next time you use your cell phone, thank the Space Program.
The problem is the ignorant folks who think the US Space Program hasn't "done anything for them" don't want to educate themselves. They're content to use all the modern conveniences, medical advances, and improvements in every facet of their uneducated, ignorant lives and believe that NASA is a "bloated jobs program" because they "read it somewhere" or "someone on TV said it."
http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/
Of course, if Tang is all you can think of when you try to come up with ways that NASA has benefited this country and the private sector, you're not going to bother reading anything on that website anyway.
Anonymous.... (no kidding)
"Tang"
I really appreciate that tired old joke. In light of THOUSANDS of people not being able to support their families, and the methodical dismantlement of the NASA manned spaceflight program, I do appreciate the simpleton humor. Knowing that the majority of Americans have the attention span of a Gnat, I shall not endeavor to enlighten those who should already know the benefits of exploring space and the technologies involved. I'm sure that the money would be better spent GIVING welfare recipients money, since we will all be there soon. I wonder what the plan is, when we run out of room on this planet, what with all the state-sponsored babies and polution? Print more money? We'll have no-where to go.
I for one, try to envision a future PAST my current generation.... that of my children, and their children....and..
Jody, I don't have kids of my own, just two little nephews and a niece, but I feel exactly the same way. My oldest nephew (8) is a space FREAK! He loves anything about rockets and the shuttles. Sadly, his future may end up being limited by the selfish and ignorant of THIS generation.
Bill Gates has done much more with private funds than NASA with the billions of dollars of Taxes paid by ordinary people such as myself.As far as space settlements keep on dreaming.
Where was all the outrage when Bush, and NASA for that matter, didn't fully fund Constellation?? If this project had received the proper funding starting years ago we wouldn't be in this mess. Oh wait, we had to attack Iraq and all their WMDs. The Ares-1 is under powered and a piece of crap. It can't launch in any wind more than a light breeze. The Orion capsule is a very nice space craft but needs a better launch platform. I hope congress and NASA can come up with a good compromise to allow this to go forward.
Most Americans call anything that does not directly involve a "Whats In It For Me" wothless. People have no clue what the Space Progam has done for us
I have no specific love for space nor do I hate it. I would love to see the space programs continue, but, I don't see a particular need for non-cooperational space flights to the moon. The constellation program being a return to the moon, (which is long overdue), could be carried out under multi-national programs and not just the US. There is a shared benefit to returning there and justly should have a shared expense.
If they want to skip the moon and aim straight for Mars, then great. Either way, we need a viable space program. Russia and China aren't cutting theirs. We need to maintain what little technological edge we might still have in this world.
New Vision (Obama vision) for NASA ist NOT inspiring. ONLY Constellation is step forward.
@ Anonymous 9:51....
shut up.
19 billion for space versus 1000 billion for education each year...Cut Constellation 900 million but give Palesinians 400 million Where do we get more bag for our buck???
I think that the tax payers get a heck of a return on their investment from a program that only gets 4/10's of 1 percent of the entire budget.
FT reports that Pres.Obama is dropping the moon project. Later same day FT reports NASA says they are going to stop using their budgeted $$ on the moon project. Makes sense, project is getting scrapped. Next day FT reports congressmen are screaming at NASA, "you can't do that, you didn't get our permission". Okay, hypothetical situation. My landlord tells me he has sold the house I'm renting. According to "congress logic" I should continue to pay him rent even tho' I'm now living somewhere else and the landlord no ;onger even owns the house. Brilliant.
I don't remember congress approving George Bush shutting down the Shuttle program.
I think anyone who says neg things about the space program just wasnt related to anyone like a father, sister and B in law. Maybe jealousy? I bet if we cut money for your stupid gadgets like i touches, and BS like that, heck even your cell phones the adults would act just like the spolied brats at the schools, they would CRY!! Maybe they didnt go to school here, or live here since 1970. Go ahead and text, and buy frivalous things you adults, and when the hammer falls, cry like the B..tches you are!! Your pathetic!!Go back North
FT isnt reading OWE BAMA things and taking them off?? Come on FT, whats up with the censorship? Is this Good Morning Vietnam all over again Robin Williams?
Anonymous@2:46 pm: I reserve the right to edit or delete my own comments.
Truly the Constellation program has some major technical problems that may or may not have been workable. However, Obama Bin Laden killing man space flight was to be expected. It gives nothing to his supporters and makes the US look like an idiot.
The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage."
We are clearly past apathy and complacency that began in the 1990's with clinton and bush administrations. obamacare, bailouts of banking and automotive industries are forcing this nation into dependence thru bankruptcy.
This move was inevitable.the Ares J2X is grossly underpowered, NOT CAPABLE OF LIFTING PIG that is orion capsule. Face It ....the days of milker contractors are over. It is not possible to simultaneousely serve USA, BOEING/Lockheed Shareholders and still serve Exploration and crew safety.
SpaceX and it's 400 employees have gone from the chalkboard to a working launch vehicle in 4 years....and at the same time has shown the big defense contractors with their 20,000 plus UNION employees for the money grubbing failures that they are....
GO SPACEX....
I find it kind of funny all the pro space program people out there the only argument they have is well look at everything the space program has brought us. If it wasn't for the space program we would still be living in caves! You people are STUPID!!! First off NASA hasn't developed anything!!! Their contractors have and those companies are the ones that develop everything, and I got news for you I'd bet 90% of what was developed and now is commercially available wasn't specifically developed for the space program is was an existing product or concept modified to work with the space program! Do you honestly think Dow wouldn't have developed Teflon if the space program wouldn't have used it? Do you think any of the products developed "because" of the space program wouldn't have been developed with out it?? You people are why everyone thinks the south is a bunch of uneducated rednecks! Just because something exists doesn't make it of any value and a perfect example is our space program!!!!
Sorry Anonymous@3:37 p.m. I can't publish that note to Jackamo until you edit out the second and third sentences.
To Steven C. Smith,
If you don't understand the need to maintain our solid rocket industrial base, then go educate yourself before you cristen others as Yokels. No one ever said Ares would be used to attack our enemies. Just ask Rob Bishop to dummy it down for ya next time, don't walk away confused. It's not Rob Bishops fault you don't get it.
Steven,
Just read your bio, now I understand the arrogance.....
I think "sleazy" is being too nice. How about a gutless kick in the teeth to the company that has worked with NASA for more that 30 years. Way to go Obama and Bolden! Thats the way to thank people...Those two won't be happy until ATK is completly bankrupt and everyone who has ever worked there is penniless. Watch out SpaceX, as soon as something different comes along you'll get the same treatment. You wont be the flavor of the week for ever.
Anon@11:36.....Blame Bush? What a novel concept! Don't believe anyone has tried that one before.
Anon@4:16 - Interesting you gave no argument to the contrary.
If Bolden was really concerned about complying with federal law he'd apply the same standard across all NASA Programs and not just Constellation. But, he is not. He's merely carrying out Obama's plan to kill America's Manned Space Program. If Bolden wanted the Shuttle contractors to carry the termination liability burden as well we'd also have to shut the Shuttle Program down now. I expect sleazy from Obama, but frankly Bolden's arrogance is really disappointing from a Marine who is supposed to have integrity.
Close the Space Center, turn the VAB into a great big Casino and watch the money fly!
Anyone seen or heard anything from Billy Nelson? He is such an Qbama suck-up.
I see the carpetbagger from California is here. Based on your bio, I would say you've basically been an overpaid lobbyist. You don't say what you moved here for, other than you want to be "part of America's future", and I assume your vision of the future is Space X. So, how is it working for Elon?
Liberals hate America, NASA is or was a symbol of our greatness. Killing the HSF was high on Owebama's agenda, he even said it early in his campaign. Than he needed Florida votes so he was the pro space candidate. Now he doesn't need votes its on to ruining the American dollar and any symbols of our great country. I expect in the next year we will see massive military spending cuts and attacks on our Constitution. The American news media has failed to protect us. Investigative journalism is dead. With our debt growing at 5 billion dollars a day I concur with Anonymous (3:02) we are heading to bondage at warp speed.
o bama and sleazy in the same ft sentence, imagine that!
Obama is ashamed of the US and would rather give NASA's budget to ACORN.
Slaming Bolden for backing Obama's policy is damning a man for advocating a policy consistant with what he has advocated for years. Respectfully tha's called 'smear'. Let's leave it to the polls and pundits, can we? ;)
To the backers of Constellation, one question only - can you tell me what exactly we LOSE with it's cancellation?
Atlas and Delta have flown many successful flights. DeltaIV Heavy - with the lifting capacity of the Shuttle - has flown three times, with only a partial failure on it's maiden test flight( wrong orbit ). What does Constellation offer that doesn't expensively duplicate capabilities we could leverage from existing, core-tested( Atlas heavy, provisionally Falcon 9 ), or near-term( TaurusII, Provisionally F9 Heavy ) technologies far cheaply and far sooner?
Spacex has a capsule heat shield capable of lunar re-entry, a listed shuttle-class launcher( F9 Heavy ) available for contract, and a Liquid Ox/Liquid hydrogen upper stage and 'Merlin 2' ( Based on the licensed RS-84 ) with lift approaching SaturnV class in development, plus a stated goal of making mankind a muliplanetary species and a trajectory from a handful of employees with a blueprint to where they are today and seven years; they are NOT staying in Earth orbit!
Neither - if called upon - are United Launch Alliance( of the Delta and Boeing lines ) - Boeing, for the gods own sake!. Or Orbital Sciences.
We're not stuck in LEO with the new plan. Bank on it!
Solid fuel rockets aren't exotic tech, and military tech insn't the stated focus of the CIVILIAN human space program; Putting 'humans' into 'space' IS.
People have been making the jobs complaint since the dawn of the industrial age. Freeing funds and manpower rather than locking it down tends to work to the common good in time. As it does here. A jobs program is NOT a policy defense! And how many jobs would the increased demand for Delta, Atlas, Falcon9, etc. create under the president's plan?
And for the record: No. We. DON'T. 'need' a government, 'American' space program to keep India, China et all from embarassing us in space. The label on the side of the rocket means NOTHING. The question of NASA driven vs. commercial contracting model - with the exact same set of contractors and builders, in either case! - means nothing. That we GO, in a way that allows us to go to stay, means _everything_. The benefit of or expendability of EVERYTHING else is measured solely in relation to that end. If that end is helped by the cancellation of the 'program of record', then we, the country, and the manned space program lose nothing, and gain much.
Look, I lean right. Respect NASA and it's contributions. Don't trust Obama or his motives. But some of you conservatives out there are letting yourselves be willingly conned by a handful of Space-RINO's in congress. Ever read the line in 'The Screwtape Letters', where's Screwtape writes to the effect that the real 'fun' is having everyone rushing to the side of the boat that's overloaded, and bailing form the the end that doesn't leak? Obama's close to Bush's orinal, pre-Griffin plan, for godsakes! :P Open up your eyes!
So, the ball's in your court, Constellation backers: Show, with careful, point-by-point comparison against available alternative - and I mean, ALL alternatives! - what in blazes we're supposed to actually LOSE with the cancellation of Constellation. Or, pack it in. *Raises eyebrow* Any takers? ;)
@ Stephen C. Smith: "Bishop is the yokel who thinks the Ares I will be used to attack our nation's enemies. Shows you what a buffoon he is."
Can you provide a link where he actually said that? He, and many others, have pointed out that civilian space launch programs share much technology and fabrication facilities with defense programs, so killing one will kill, or greatly harm, the other.
Retire Air Force One !
Obama should take commercial aircraft to save money.
You probably can continue the Space Shuttle program
if Obama did teleconferencing and retire Air Force One planes!
Eliminate Obama's wars, Air Force One, foreign aid, Presidential trips, Presidential parties.
Use those dollars to invest in U.S. -- Manned space flight, second generation Space Shuttle, hypersonic aircraft and Ares programs.
Save U.S. jobs!!!
I don't think it's a background way of terminating Constellation. Rather, I think it's NASA finally making a stand and telling the government to make up its damn mind. They've been bleeding money trying to cover all the bases that Congress asked them to, trying to be ready for whatever Congress would finally decide, if and when Congress ever remembered that NASA was in a holding pattern waiting for a decision. I think Bolden is making a, well, bold move. He's telling them to put up or shut up. They do not have the money to do what they've been ordered to do. That is a fact, and only Congress can change that.
They're just not used to a NASA administrator who's willing to actually stand up to them, rather than smiling, nodding, and not making a fuss when given an impossible task.
@Joel,
What will we lose? How about the loss of thousands of small businesses? Any idea what their contributions have been in the overall space programs? Given the lack of NASA/Government influence in the space program contracting, there will be NO small business participation and these companies will die. Don't believe it? Simply look at SPACEX. They refuse to use small business. Most large companies refuse to work with small business unless their contracts (as do ALL government contracts) mandate a small business participation.
Orbital Sciences? They don't play well with Small Business either unless they are on a government contract spelling out the participation requirement.
So, JOEL, in answer to your smart assed comment about loss? Try the thousands of small businesses that have been doing work of the space flight programs for decades.
THAT Joel is one thing among many that we lose when Obama and the SpaceX suckups wind up killing the National Manned Space Program.
But then again you really don't want to hear it anyway. Being a proponent of the private take over, you simply want to mouth the freaking platitudes espoused by the profit mongers of the johnny come lately space folk.
Want commercial space? Fine, let them get it on, no government backing, nothing from NASA, let them find their own damn markets and sell their customers (not NASA and the Federal Government, but COMMERCIAL customers) on the space program they have built with their own funds.
Me? I will stick with the safety and quality focus of the NASA programs over the past 50 plus years.
You keep on sucking up to the cretinous slugs like Elon Musk.
'What will we lose? How about the loss of thousands of small businesses? Any idea what their contributions have been in the overall space programs? ...So, JOEL, in answer to your smart assed comment...'
First, it was an HONEST question; pehaps my reply was a little – shorter – than it might have been, but it really was written in good faith. Sorry if it sounded like I was deriding the importance of NASA or the accomplishments of the manned space program. Do you accept that?
Second, -why- don't these companies 'work well with small business'? Is it because they believe they can purchase what they need elsewhere for much lower cost, or are there other complicating factors I'm unaware of? For example, you mention SpaceX specifically; Are you referring, by chance, to the fact that to control costs they manufacture most of their components in-house? If so – respectfully, let me ask a direct question: Should they? Bluntly stated, do you believe that as a matter of what's 'right', a company such as SpaceX should cease looking to drive costs lower and accept the hike of paying other, local, small businesses to do the work, even if it costs( possibly a great deal )more? If I may ask another direct question, do you further propose that at least in this industry, driving down costs and requiring fewer men and resources to deliver similar goods and services only REDUCES available jobs in the workforce? I can certainly say that over any time period that matters, the last is certainly a principle I don't hold to! :-/
I DO hold that a private space sector, off and running, will offset those jobs tenfold and more, and at the current pace may well do so 'sooner', rather than later. Still, heart of the question being argued seems to be this: Should NASA'S manned space program focus on conserving jobs and/or 'knowledge bases'? Or should it, rather, focus first and mainly on obtaining the goods and services it requires in the shortest time, at the lowest cost, without compromising the safety of it's astronauts? I absolutely hold to the latter. And the last part of that question brings me to -
'Me? I will stick with the safety and quality focus of the NASA programs over the past 50 plus years.'
The last NASA manned 'program of record' carried through to completion was development of the Shuttle and Shuttle engines. That was thirty - THIRTY - years ago. The current one has one – ONE – partial, suborbital test, a shelf of assessments and predictions on paper , and the NASA brand behind it to support claims of safety and reliability. In dead seriousness, do I overlook something? Do I mis-characterize or mis-state? Compare that to the DeltaIV and DeltaIV Heavy's record and opportunities to learn about the system, to United Launch Alliance's and Orbital's. God, compare it to SpaceX even, first three 'failures of decreasing significance' and all( and the nature of those failures DO strongly suggest, to me at least, kinks to be worked out of a fundamentally sound system. All but flight one reached stage sep., for example, making the Merlin engine – between it's two iterations - five of six and five-for-five.) How much development experience do their engineers have now, do you think?
'Want commercial space? Fine, let them get it on, no government backing, nothing from NASA, let them find their own damn markets and sell their customers (not NASA and the Federal Government, but COMMERCIAL customers) on the space program they have built with their own funds.'
They ARE; SpaceX's last contract announcement quotes their flight manifest at 40 – that's 28 non-governmental contracts. SpaceX, and at least some other private space companies, will survive without government assistance, though things – industry, JOB creating things – will move more slowly in that case. I'm not so sure the inverse is true.
Continued below...
And with respect, what do you MEAN? Are you advocating a 'closed system' for the manned space program, where government( i.e. our tax )money pays 'government contract only' businesses, to pay other( gov. contract only ) business, to build the parts, for them to assemble into vehicles that carry only government astronauts to government facilities in space? Otherwise, you're dealing with companies profiting from outside revenue.
And if I may respectfully ask, just what is a manned space program FOR in that scenario? To boldly pioneer excludes duplication of existing capabilities in the commercial sector. To provide services available in the public sector in the public market would imply competition, possibly – if providing commercial services – at prices substantially less than the program's expenses( we don't – justifiably – like it when corporations do this. ), and at it's worst the possibility of suppressing competing options. Operating in isolation from the market, yet duplicating activities available in the commercial market, with NO commercial customer or funding, would mean a 'black hole', into which( our ) tax dollars fly without return. If NASA is to go where the private sector can't, then do so, and drop the expense of redundant efforts; If it's to support and nurture an aerospace sector and create jobs at ALL levels and size of business, then push for higher flight rates and lower cost.
Final section...
'But then again you really don't want to hear it anyway. Being a proponent of the private take over, you simply want to mouth the freaking platitudes espoused by the profit mongers of the johnny come lately space folk.'
Do I support a 'private takeover'? If by 'takeover' you mean, as I suspect, 'the hijacking of our our manned space program by a group( perhaps one, especially? )of two-faced swindlers in collusion with two-faced politicians, who won't deliver on their promises of cost and safety, at risk of astronaut's lives, while leaving us stuck in low Earth orbit for the foreseeable future, reducing aerospace jobs, gutting our intellectual capital in aerospace and routing our lead over other nations – China, specifically – possibly fatally; Then the answer is a resounding NO!! I most emphatically do not. And all my faculties of sight and reason argue that SpaceX - and other private contractors as well, I think – advance no such thing. If you had meant, however, an advocate of private industry 'taking over' the dominant bulk of activity in the space launch arena....
As noted above, Shuttle was thirty years ago. Thirty years! Thirty years of waiting, waiting and, eventually, resigning ourselves that for anything like our lifetimes space would remain an unfathomably expensive, elite, primarily government-funded affair, with a future little different from it's past. The shuttle, for all of it's wonders, failed spectacularly to deliver on it's goal of making space routine and affordabe – and wasn't ever going to leave earth orbit besides. Reagan forced the use of commercial providers for unmanned services, but contracting practices and politics kept prices high. The 'Delta Clipper' came and went. X-33 came and went. Space Launch Initiative, too, came and went, like the others. ISS hasn't fully lived up to it's promise, to put it mildly. Constellation plans for a few launches a year. At tremendous cost. When it's fully operational around 2030. Or possibly later. If congress would pony up the cash it was assumed would when the program was initially planned out -
I'm only thirty, but I'm TIRED of waiting, Harvey. Tired of waiting on those small businesses, and safety standards designed and over-designed for no-fail instead of manageable failure, on congressional funding and all the rest. *Points to the stars* I want to see us go out THERE! And I want us to go there to stay, on the backbone of a growing, thriving industry, falling costs, incremental innovation and a booming jobs sector. I want it to stick, Harvey. And I want it to happen in my lifetime! And I'll cheer any company, back any program, and support any initiative that advances us toward that goal.
Like you said, it's NASA'S 'funds' – contractors build the rockets. We BOTH want a manned space program America can be proud of. It's on the form and structure of that program that we part ways.
Aren't YOU tired of waiting, Harvey? Aren't you?
Joel
Post a Comment