Although it might be hoped that the present political situation might loosen the purse strings a tad and fully fund at least two programs, I have to wonder how much it would help schedule wise at this stage. Particularly with a company that does pretty much everything in house, having more money available might not make things happens that much sooner once the program is settled into the schedule. I'd really hate to see the Russians and other ISS partners part ways badly at this point. Soyuz and it's builders have kept the Station going for a while now and deserve all the credit for saving our bacon while we farted around, trying to figure out what to do next. People caught up in unrelated problems or petty issues can lose sight of what a fantastic partnership this has been.
This is probably NASA's most important development program, so why Congress is starving this and instead throwing money at the Russians is a mystery to me.
Well according to NASA, the cuts to commercial crew delayed the program by 2 years. So I believe it is correct to assume that more money would accelerate things (or at least prevent further slips).
Although it might be hoped that the present political situation might loosen the purse strings a tad and fully fund at least two programs, I have to wonder how much it would help schedule wise at this stage. Particularly with a company that does pretty much everything in house, having more money available might not make things happens that much sooner once the program is settled into the schedule.
I'd really hate to see the Russians and other ISS partners part ways badly at this point. Soyuz and it's builders have kept the Station going for a while now and deserve all the credit for saving our bacon while we farted around, trying to figure out what to do next. People caught up in unrelated problems or petty issues can lose sight of what a fantastic partnership this has been.
Edit:Were are these providers commercial customers?
Nice article, thanks Chris. I still don't know which of these aspiring crew launch providers I'd be most happy to see win the contract - it all looks good.I seem to remember there was some talk of increasing (redirecting?) funding to the SLS (or maybe Orion?) to an accelerated scheduled "just in case" there was no commercial provider ready. This seems like the least efficient use of government funds towards stated objectives. There appears to be no doubt that adding funding for the commercial developments would be the most effective way of securing early crew launching capability - or, on the converse, that directing funding away from these projects will delay them.
Very good overview Chris, good job of summarizing the situation.In view of what's going on internationally right now, this program is very important to NASA.
Quote from: Bubbinski on 03/04/2014 07:52 pmVery good overview Chris, good job of summarizing the situation.In view of what's going on internationally right now, this program is very important to NASA.Thanks! And yes, I'd say it's priority number one for NASA.
Quote from: Danderman on 03/04/2014 12:27 amThis is probably NASA's most important development program, so why Congress is starving this and instead throwing money at the Russians is a mystery to me.Why? Simple. For politician, it is better to spend 1$ in his district and 9$ to Russia than 10$ going to different district in same country.
Unless spending the money produces a scandal that will hurt the politician.