I was always under the impression that 'Cost-Plus' evolved due to government's inability to keep its fingers out of the development cookie-jar. Namely the tendency to announce a 'system' in which the target of development never stopped moving.Therefore, to my way of thinking, Fixed costs implies fixed requirements. You give me X end result for Y dollars. Cost-plus implies that there isn't a design so much as a concept that needs developed. Both types of contracting have their place and their uses. The big problem that I see is that both sides have gotten way too used to the 'moving target' mentality with DoD and NASA contracts and thus, the 'cost plus' mentality has expanded to areas it should never have been.
MPCV is just a rebranded Orion, as far as I'm aware.
An alert from the Space Frontier Foundation:"The U.S. House of Representatives' Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies has asked your Member of Congress for their input on what programs in NASA (and other agencies) should receive increased or decreased funding in FY2012. This gives you an opportunity to have your Representative support vital NASA initiatives like Commercial Crew and Space Technology."Call your Representatives' office in Washington, D.C. ASAP(before noon on Friday, May 20th)Ask to speak to the staff person who handles "NASA appropriations" and ask that staffer to take two actions: 1. Submit a request to the House Appropriations Committee recommending that the Committee fully fund NASA's Commercial Crew program in FY2012 at the President's requested level of $850 million. 2. Submit a request to the same Committee recommending that the Committee fully fund NASA's Space Technology (including Exploration Technology) program in FY2012 at the requested level of $1.024 billion. To make their job easier, tell the staffer they may contact Congressman Dana Rohrabacher's or Zoe Lofgren's office for a copy of the specific language to use for these two funding requests.Additional Information: If you need arguments as to why Commercial Crew and Space Technology deserve full funding, here are the draft descriptions from the appropriations request language:NASA Commercial Crew Program - When the Space Shuttle retires this summer, America will be wholly dependent on Russia to launch our astronauts to the Space Station, sending nearly $400 million overseas each year. Commercial Crew will competitively fund the fastest-possible development of safe and affordable made-in-America vehicles, creating thousands of American jobs and enabling full use of the Space Station. We strongly support full funding of the requested level of $850,000,000 in FY2012. NASA Space Technology Program (STP) - America must invest in new technology to stay ahead of foreign space powers like Russia and China. NASA's Space Technology Program, which now includes Exploration Technology Development and Demonstration (ETDD), is NASA's primary cutting edge R&D initiative. STP/ETDD funding enables NASA's research centers and America's small businesses and innovators to assure America's leadership in space. We support funding at the requested level of $1,024,200,000. "A note from me: whenever contacting a congressional office, first off, make sure you are their constituent, and secondly, letters (even faxes) are better than phone calls.
