The Washington Post is owned by the same person who owns Blue Origin.
If Congressional salaries were dependent on having a balanced federal budget, you wouldn't see foolishness like this going forward. Companies have to make difficult decisions all the time to pare back research and to scrap tooling and facilities. I once saw a very-well-known tech company sell millions of dollars worth of brand-new assets for pennies on the dollar because they had cancelled the program for which the assets were purchased. It was a huge money loss for them, but they did it because they didn't want to throw good money after bad.
Quote from: notsorandom on 12/16/2014 02:32 amThe Washington Post is owned by the same person who owns Blue Origin.Blue Origin needs to test its engines. Does A-3 have a rival?
Quote from: notsorandom on 12/16/2014 02:32 amThe Washington Post is owned by the same person who owns Blue Origin.Does that change the facts of the matter?I think it will be more interesting to see if any other media outlets notice this, especially any in Mississippi. I mean, the pipefitters foreman that helped build the now mothballed test stand is quoted as saying:“It’s heartbreaking to know that, you know, you thought you’d done something good,” Forshee said. “And all you’ve done is go around in a damn circle, like a dog chasing his tail.”That's a pretty powerful statement from an average U.S. Taxpayer...
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 12/16/2014 03:57 amQuote from: notsorandom on 12/16/2014 02:32 amThe Washington Post is owned by the same person who owns Blue Origin.Does that change the facts of the matter?I think it will be more interesting to see if any other media outlets notice this, especially any in Mississippi. I mean, the pipefitters foreman that helped build the now mothballed test stand is quoted as saying:“It’s heartbreaking to know that, you know, you thought you’d done something good,” Forshee said. “And all you’ve done is go around in a damn circle, like a dog chasing his tail.”That's a pretty powerful statement from an average U.S. Taxpayer...He's free to give back to the Treasury all the money that he received from other U.S. taxpayers.
Yeah, NASA does what Congress tells them to do.
Quote from: yokem55 on 12/16/2014 02:09 amYeah, NASA does what Congress tells them to do. This is such a cop-out. It should have been the responsibility of NASA's top management to actively campaign against and eliminate waste like that. There are huge opportunity costs involved here. Why was ASRG cancelled, again ?
Quote from: Blackstar on 12/16/2014 04:01 amQuote from: Coastal Ron on 12/16/2014 03:57 amQuote from: notsorandom on 12/16/2014 02:32 amThe Washington Post is owned by the same person who owns Blue Origin.Does that change the facts of the matter?I think it will be more interesting to see if any other media outlets notice this, especially any in Mississippi. I mean, the pipefitters foreman that helped build the now mothballed test stand is quoted as saying:“It’s heartbreaking to know that, you know, you thought you’d done something good,” Forshee said. “And all you’ve done is go around in a damn circle, like a dog chasing his tail.”That's a pretty powerful statement from an average U.S. Taxpayer...He's free to give back to the Treasury all the money that he received from other U.S. taxpayers.That taxpayer was hired to do a job, and they did it, and part of the money they earned even went to pay for the test stand. And you think the worker/taxpayer is to blame for the situation, and not the politicians that authorized the waste of money? That's a pretty odd point of view...
So he's a tea party supporter, but also a government contractor, also a union member, also unhappy at "government waste" but also perfectly willing to take the money...
Quote from: Blackstar on 12/16/2014 04:28 pmSo he's a tea party supporter, but also a government contractor, also a union member, also unhappy at "government waste" but also perfectly willing to take the money...And we blame the worker instead of the politicians who authorized it?Look, I'm not a Tea Party supporter by any means, but if Congress authorized taxpayer money to be spent it's going to be spent, so blaming the people that worked on the contract - regardless if they knew it was pork or not - is nonproductive.
Never mind that Bloomberg wrote almost the same story nearly a year ago; the Post’s piece puts NASA in a rather harsh spotlight just as a new Congress is about to be seated
Quote from: savuporo on 12/16/2014 05:39 amQuote from: yokem55 on 12/16/2014 02:09 amYeah, NASA does what Congress tells them to do. This is such a cop-out. It should have been the responsibility of NASA's top management to actively campaign against and eliminate waste like that. There are huge opportunity costs involved here. Why was ASRG cancelled, again ?Remember how NASA tried to stop SLS but Congress took them out to the wood shed and told them to start building it...
Quote from: Rocket Science on 12/16/2014 10:15 amQuote from: savuporo on 12/16/2014 05:39 amQuote from: yokem55 on 12/16/2014 02:09 amYeah, NASA does what Congress tells them to do. This is such a cop-out. It should have been the responsibility of NASA's top management to actively campaign against and eliminate waste like that. There are huge opportunity costs involved here. Why was ASRG cancelled, again ?Remember how NASA tried to stop SLS but Congress took them out to the wood shed and told them to start building it...Yes. But I also remember that the Administration / NASA cancelled the Constellation program (justifiably so) but then failed to provide a coherent plan forward. Nature abhors a vacuum. So Congress filled it and well...here we are. This is all a well tread road of incompetence, traveled by many so I'm not going to rehash.Suffice to say, it is important these types of articles are brought to the fore. After all, the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have one. Yes..."Houston, we've had a problem here" and frankly, we still do.
Yes. But I also remember that the Administration / NASA cancelled the Constellation program (justifiably so) but then failed to provide a coherent plan forward. Nature abhors a vacuum. So Congress filled it and well...here we are. This is all a well tread road of incompetence, traveled by many so I'm not going to rehash.
Suffice to say, it is important these types of articles are brought to the fore. After all, the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have one. Yes..."Houston, we've had a problem here" and frankly, we still do.
This is quite a long and critical article re. the A-3 test stand. The author spreads blame, unfairly I believe, equally between NASA and politicians.http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2014/12/15/nasas-349-million-monument-to-its-drift/
If the US does decide to build the 130 t version of SLS, its going to need J-2X for a new upper stage. That's when this stand will be properly used.
Quote from: Rocket Science on 12/16/2014 10:15 amQuote from: savuporo on 12/16/2014 05:39 amQuote from: yokem55 on 12/16/2014 02:09 amYeah, NASA does what Congress tells them to do. This is such a cop-out. It should have been the responsibility of NASA's top management to actively campaign against and eliminate waste like that. There are huge opportunity costs involved here. Why was ASRG cancelled, again ?Remember how NASA tried to stop SLS but Congress took them out to the wood shed and told them to start building it...Yes. But I also remember that the Administration / NASA cancelled the Constellation program (justifiably so) but then failed to provide a coherent plan forward. Nature abhors a vacuum. So Congress filled it and well...here we are.
Quote from: rcoppola on 12/16/2014 08:29 pmSuffice to say, it is important these types of articles are brought to the fore. After all, the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have one. Yes..."Houston, we've had a problem here" and frankly, we still do.Well said.
But is a vacuum test stand actually needed? How are/were other upper stage engines tested? How was M1D-Vac tested? Or RL-10C? Or BE-3?How were the RL-10-A4 and RL-10B tested? How was Castor 30B/30XL tested?
It's J2X being tested at atmospheric Pressure at Stennis already?
Did there used to be vacuum test stands, and there just aren't any more? Or just not one large enough to accomodate J2X?
I think that SpaceX uses some type of simplified vacuum simulation test stand at McGregor. So yes, this type of testing is needed. Subtle things can happen in vacuum that don't happen at sea level pressure. - Ed Kyle
Probably cheaper to do the best you can in computer modeling and component testing and then just launch a flight test article to prove it all-up in vacuum. If you can't afford a test flight, then you have a more fundamental problem...It's not entirely out of the question that somebody might find this property convenient at some point in the future. But I can't imagine that it would be essential for anything. Anyone developing a large upper stage at this point would have a better test plan.