"The White House will announce their support of this bill tomorrow"
Bill Nelson speaks . . .http://demradio.senate.gov/actualities/billnelson/billnelson100714.mp3Listen to the mp3 link from demradio at senate.gov Money quote:Quote"The White House will announce their support of this bill tomorrow"
"......chanCe of Obama supporting it......."Politcally naive as usual. Obama is not interested. He wants NASA ethier A. Gone or B. Made into a slush fund for other things lik climate change. It has always been that way, and I expect he may rubber stamp this cause he simply doesn't care that much. But he could also veto it knowing that doing so would probably lead to the inviability of SDHLV and a workforce collapse.......He isn't stupid or misinformed, he is very smart and does get some good info. But he has A. bad advisors around and B. some very "polarized" opinions on how the world works. If he cares enough that he really wants that funding for something else he will veto, otherwise he will stamp (quietly ofc).
Quote from: FinalFrontier on 07/15/2010 04:06 am"......chanCe of Obama supporting it......."Politcally naive as usual. Obama is not interested. He wants NASA ethier A. Gone or B. Made into a slush fund for other things lik climate change. It has always been that way, and I expect he may rubber stamp this cause he simply doesn't care that much. But he could also veto it knowing that doing so would probably lead to the inviability of SDHLV and a workforce collapse.......He isn't stupid or misinformed, he is very smart and does get some good info. But he has A. bad advisors around and B. some very "polarized" opinions on how the world works. If he cares enough that he really wants that funding for something else he will veto, otherwise he will stamp (quietly ofc). Boxer is offering an amendment, mark my words, this bill has been pre approved by the executive. I have worked in politics so trust me I am not politically naive. When you see 1st rung Senators proposing amendments this early, this bill has made the rounds behind closed doors. This bill is likely headed in one fashion or the other to the executives desk. One does not change direction for NASA without fan fair. Trust me, the bill as written by Nelson, with a few tweeks, is a bill all Senators and the Executive can walk away from with things to brag about. It's that way by design.
Quote from: Bill White on 07/15/2010 04:13 amBill Nelson speaks . . .http://demradio.senate.gov/actualities/billnelson/billnelson100714.mp3Listen to the mp3 link from demradio at senate.gov Money quote:Quote"The White House will announce their support of this bill tomorrow"Extra Shuttle, accelerated Heavy Lift, Commercial Crew, and Research & Development mentioned, but not one word about Orion in this clip, which is interesting. - Ed Kyle
To do so would be pretty embaressing for the WH because it would mean admitting a massive, very incompetent mistake on a large government program..........
Quote from: SpacexULA on 07/15/2010 03:45 amQuote from: neilh on 07/15/2010 02:59 amI'm personally wondering if they're going to announce an attempt at increasing the top-line for NASA, perhaps to the level the Augustine Committee proposed. An increased top-line could potentially accommodate both the HLV folks and the White House. The White House wouldn't want the political cost of proposing an even larger budget increase for NASA in the current economy, but the members of the Commerce committee might try it. Of course, it'd then be interesting to see what would happen when it reached the Appropriations committee...Senator Nelson, & Boxer both are close with the President, I seriously doubt Nelson would put his neck out, and Boxer would bother to amend if there wasn't some change of Obama supporting it. They don't legislate in a vacuum.If Senator Boxer and Warner's amendments get attached, everyone will walk away with a piece of the Flat little 20B pie. Work force intact, Commercial given it's leg up for the year, SDHLV fast tracked, flexible path implemented, and ATK get's it's pound of flesh.Think of it this way this bill finally kills the unkillable Ares 1 "......chanCe of Obama supporting it......."Politcally naive as usual. Obama is not interested. He wants NASA ethier A. Gone or B. Made into a slush fund for other things lik climate change. It has always been that way, and I expect he may rubber stamp this cause he simply doesn't care that much. But he could also veto it knowing that doing so would probably lead to the inviability of SDHLV and a workforce collapse.......He isn't stupid or misinformed, he is very smart and does get some good info. But he has A. bad advisors around and B. some very "polarized" opinions on how the world works. If he cares enough that he really wants that funding for something else he will veto, otherwise he will stamp (quietly ofc).
Quote from: neilh on 07/15/2010 02:59 amI'm personally wondering if they're going to announce an attempt at increasing the top-line for NASA, perhaps to the level the Augustine Committee proposed. An increased top-line could potentially accommodate both the HLV folks and the White House. The White House wouldn't want the political cost of proposing an even larger budget increase for NASA in the current economy, but the members of the Commerce committee might try it. Of course, it'd then be interesting to see what would happen when it reached the Appropriations committee...Senator Nelson, & Boxer both are close with the President, I seriously doubt Nelson would put his neck out, and Boxer would bother to amend if there wasn't some change of Obama supporting it. They don't legislate in a vacuum.If Senator Boxer and Warner's amendments get attached, everyone will walk away with a piece of the Flat little 20B pie. Work force intact, Commercial given it's leg up for the year, SDHLV fast tracked, flexible path implemented, and ATK get's it's pound of flesh.Think of it this way this bill finally kills the unkillable Ares 1
I'm personally wondering if they're going to announce an attempt at increasing the top-line for NASA, perhaps to the level the Augustine Committee proposed. An increased top-line could potentially accommodate both the HLV folks and the White House. The White House wouldn't want the political cost of proposing an even larger budget increase for NASA in the current economy, but the members of the Commerce committee might try it. Of course, it'd then be interesting to see what would happen when it reached the Appropriations committee...
Senator Nelson Previews 2010 NASA Reauthorization Billhttp://www.aip.org/fyi/2010/074.html
Tread carefully things are changing minute by minute it seems.
Quote from: JDCampbell on 07/14/2010 07:18 pmQuote from: Jim on 07/14/2010 06:39 pmWrong. Where do you come up with this stuff? Your claims are either unsubstantiated or OBE. Use of EELV for manned mission predates Constellation, they were to be used for OSP.Manrating the EELV's is not a big deal, schedule or cost wise. It can be quickly, before any NASA development vehicle flies.Also, your comment about Orion to Mars shows that you don't know what you are talking about. You are correct Jim. I am required to agree with everything you have to say.Arguing the facts of EELV with Jim is like arguing the facts of STS with OV-106, or the facts of suborital with Jon Goff. Your welcome to do it, but you will look like a fool in the process.
Quote from: Jim on 07/14/2010 06:39 pmWrong. Where do you come up with this stuff? Your claims are either unsubstantiated or OBE. Use of EELV for manned mission predates Constellation, they were to be used for OSP.Manrating the EELV's is not a big deal, schedule or cost wise. It can be quickly, before any NASA development vehicle flies.Also, your comment about Orion to Mars shows that you don't know what you are talking about. You are correct Jim. I am required to agree with everything you have to say.
Wrong. Where do you come up with this stuff? Your claims are either unsubstantiated or OBE. Use of EELV for manned mission predates Constellation, they were to be used for OSP.Manrating the EELV's is not a big deal, schedule or cost wise. It can be quickly, before any NASA development vehicle flies.Also, your comment about Orion to Mars shows that you don't know what you are talking about.
Extra Shuttle, accelerated Heavy Lift, Commercial Crew, and Research & Development mentioned, but not one word about Orion in this clip, which is interesting.
Quote from: Bill White on 07/15/2010 04:13 amBill Nelson speaks . . .http://demradio.senate.gov/actualities/billnelson/billnelson100714.mp3Listen to the mp3 link from demradio at senate.gov Money quote:Quote"The White House will announce their support of this bill tomorrow"Wow thanks for posting. Also explicitly mentions a Delta for crew. Wonder what the vehicle on board will be.
Quote from: marsavian on 07/14/2010 10:48 pmSenator Nelson Previews 2010 NASA Reauthorization Billhttp://www.aip.org/fyi/2010/074.htmlWhat I would like to know is the relationship between the Nelson bill and the Hutchison bill thrown out here a few months ago.
WOW that's it then. The reports of a fatigued DNC and President are true. They're giving up battles the closer we get to big votes. They are very scared about losing seats.Hope all the "budget to nowhere" naysayers are happy with the new mission objective. What do they plan on flying on this rocket again? Orion? To where? Apollo again? I recognize that. It was called Constellation in the early 21st century. We've lost new technology, deep space missions, and maximum funding to close the gap, all in favor of... how did Nelson put it? "The much more expensive heavy lift rocket"The President trades the future for votes. See you in 5 years when this latest toy rocket is canceled.
No, I take fy2011 as an attempt to right size NASA. Let’s face it the shuttle has the biggest work force of any rocket and keeping all these people employed is going to eat the budget. If spaceflight is advancing it should take fewer people to do the same amount of work. It is one of those sad facts in life. Heck I once worked at a dairy that produced ten times more than it did in the 70ies, yet employed less than half as many people. I am no fan of shuttle derived. I might have been before cxp, but as the quote goes the shuttle’s parts are not Lego pieces and the flight rates they were talking about (1-2 a year) during cxp did not justify keeping it. I think shuttle C’s time has come and gone. I think NASA is at a critical fork in the road. It can keeping doing things the same way it has been and hope for a budget increase(Which becomes less and less likely as the boomers start to drain social security). It can refocus itself for the 21st century by bring in new technologies and new approaches to the problem of space flight. If it chooses ye old HLV topped with disposable capsule, habitat, and lander ala Apollo it is going to eat its budget and become less and less relevant. If it chooses not to use commercial in LEO it will never have the funds or political support for BEO. If it employs new technology such as propellant depots, solar electric tugs and closed loop life support it can build Infrastructure in orbit which over time will reduce the cost of BEO flight. For instance if you tug you hab back into earth orbit after a NEO mission then you only need to resupply it (a role for commercial). If you dump it after each mission because using chemical rockets without a depot you can’t afford the mass to bring it back don’t be surprised if one day the budget is lowered to the point where you can’t afford to buy a new hab. By the way that was how Apollo was ended. Congress refused to purchase a second round of upgraded Saturn V’s in 1968, leaving NASA as a space program that was running out of rockets before the 1st moon landing had taken place.