Thursday, September 23, 2010

House Committee releases compromise NASA bill

A U.S. House committee released today what they are calling a compromise bill on NASA spending priorities that increases funding for commercial space.

The compromise measure calls for $1.2 billion to be spent on commercial cargo and crew activities. That's up from the $464 million originally proposed (much of that part of a loan program) and much closer to the Senate's proposed $1.3 billion for commercial crew activities.

The compromise provides $600 million for an additional "launch on need" shuttle flight. The Senate bill set aside money for the additional flight as well.

Funding for exploration dropped slightly in the compromise measure, with robotic precursor missions going from $5 million to $150 million. It wasn't immediately clear what the compromise did with the development of a heavy-lift vehicle, a key-sticking point for the Senate.

"This is a good, bipartisan, and fiscally responsible bill," said U.S. Rep. Bart Gordon, chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology.

Here are the differences between the compromise bill and the original House bill, which had gutted funding for commercial space and sought to continue much of the former Constellation program.

The key will be the Senate's take on this. Will this be a compromise that flows easily through both chambers, or did the House do this alone?

Sen. Bill Nelson told FLORIDA TODAY's Bart Jansen in Washington that talks were ongoing to find a compromise with the House.

"We're trying to match up," he said. "We're talking."

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Looks like Musk' payolla trip to D.C. "paid off".

The House caved on Commercial funding and jacked it 300%.

Anonymous said...

Commercial funding = slush fund for programs that will never get off the ground

Anonymous said...

Negativistos will be blooming on this story. This is a great investment in privatizing a government enterprise, but now those who complain about big gov't will have some other "the glass is half full" comments.

Anonymous said...

"Commercial funding = slush fund for programs that will never get off the ground"

Yea, cuz we all know that Boeing or ULA could never get anything off the ground...

Anonymous said...

"the GREAT INVESTMENT" should be made by those private companies and not taxpayers who are losing jobs by the millions. Its not that these swine can't afford it or anything.

This is totally two faced: on one hand they don't want to spend tax money on the gov't space program but they are more than happy to give it private industry.

How...Repugnant!

Anonymous said...

Better a flawed bill than no bill, we should just pass it and get well in the out years.
CharlesHouston

Gaetano Marano said...

.
.
.
.

the “commercial space” CAN’T replace the Space Shuttle and can put the $200 billion ISS under the serious risk to DIE soon!!!

http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/072issdeath.html

some people are pro-Shuttle, others are against it, but ALL know the DETAILED Space Shuttle data

some people are pro-Ares1/5, others are against them, but ALL know the DETAILED Ares1/5 NASA studies

some people are pro-EELVs, others are against them, but ALL know the DETAILED Delta/Atlas/Ariane/etc. data and launches

well, now, some people are pro “commercial space”, others are against it, but HOW they/we can be PRO or AGAINST it, if they/we STILL don’t know the EXACT data and info of the “commercial” vehicles??????????

well, SpaceX hasn’t given yet any detailed info and data about the Dragon

the specs available in the .pdf published on the SpaceX site aren’t so clear

so, it’s hard to evaluate this vehicle to know what it really can or can’t do

these are the exact data we need to know from SpaceX about the Dragon:

- payload adapter mass ________

- empty service module mass ________

- service module propellants mass ________

- empty capsule mass ________

- ejected nose cone mass ________

- max ISS pressurized cargo mass ________

- max ISS unpressurized cargo mass ________

- max returned cargo mass ________

- cargo Dragon GLOW ________

- crewed Dragon GLOW ________

- Dragon LAS mass ________

- max crew life support mass ________

- max crew+seats+spacesuits mass ________

- max mission autonomy (days) ________

- max Falcon-9 “dumb” payload to ISS orbit ________

all data should be in kg. or mT (1000 kg.)

the data of the crewed Dragon should be for a full, seven astronauts, mission

could the “commercial” SpaceX give CLEAR data and answers to the space community, the american taxpayers (that will pay $2 billions to SpaceX…) and the (potential) investors?

remember that NASA and USA should RELY (mainly or only) on the Falcon-9 and Dragon for the next TEN+ years!!!

just read this article about the NASA “future”:

http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/062nasadecline.html

.
.
.
.

Anonymous said...

The GhostNasa Ignatz has landed...on Pluto!

Anonymous said...

Where s the heavy launch vehicle we keep hearing about ?

Anonymous said...

>Where s the heavy launch vehicle we keep hearing about ?

That would be the entire US Government...as expected it is huge, bloated, no clearly defined goal and will never get off the ground...

Tip: Learn Mandarin

SpaceToday said...

If Constellation dies and commercial crew gets funded over a billion, then this would be a good compromise in my opinion. Also, need to make sure the new space technology programs are a go. http://www.spacetoday.com

Anonymous said...

"Manned Space Flight is Dead"
No manned launch vehicle, no Space Shuttle, astronauts are being unemployed, T-38 are being scrapped.

China is going to the moon by 2025. The U.S. has become a second rate nation. WE CAN THANK PRES OBAMA, PRES BUSH, DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS/SENATE AND REPUBLICANS.

Gaetano Marano said...

.

it’s a suicide for NASA and the future of the US spaceflight

all the proposed space plans (Constellation, Augustine, Obama, House and Senate) are 70% to 90% WRONG and the ONLY guys happy for these delays and (bad) choices are those that sell the Soyuz and Progress…

.