The Senate’s version of a spending plan for NASA, unveiled today, contains an extra $1 billion for testing and development of a so-called heavy lift vehicle. The extra money would be used to build a rocket needed to move heavy objects into space where we could launch a ship to Mars. The added sum is about $726 million more than what the President has asked for in the NASA budget, which the White House unveiled in February. If the extra money is approved, it would save hundreds of jobs at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in a program to continue testing of a version of a deep-space rocket. “If we’re going to Mars, as the president has said, then let’s get going,” Nelson said today. “We shouldn’t wait five years.”
Interesting news from Senator Bill Nelsonhttp://billnelson.senate.gov/news/details.cfm?id=324027&QuoteThe Senate’s version of a spending plan for NASA, unveiled today, contains an extra $1 billion for testing and development of a so-called heavy lift vehicle. The extra money would be used to build a rocket needed to move heavy objects into space where we could launch a ship to Mars. The added sum is about $726 million more than what the President has asked for in the NASA budget, which the White House unveiled in February. If the extra money is approved, it would save hundreds of jobs at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in a program to continue testing of a version of a deep-space rocket. “If we’re going to Mars, as the president has said, then let’s get going,” Nelson said today. “We shouldn’t wait five years.”A Senate version of a spending plan for NASA? Is this document available?Jeff Foust has more including a video/audio link . . .http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/21/nelson-makes-a-move-for-heavy-lift/= = =Video / audio link is very interesting.http://billnelson.senate.gov/audiofiles/NelsonBudget.wmv
first- There are reasonings and discussions going on in the Congress, the focus of which are not public, and these will be large motivators going forward. Later Nelson says to the rest of the members in referance to the DOD and National Security aspect "Everyone here knows what I'm talking about" (paraphrase). In other words- every member of the committee has had a secure briefing.
second- Nelson's referance to the Ares I-X, although some may find puzzeling is not, nor is it an error if you place it into a context where he is speaking of the of I-X not in terms of last October's launch of a single vehicle, but rather as that configuration becoming a project to be used for testing large SRBs. Such a morph would politically provide cover for the sunk costs. (and anyone coming on here who wants to spout that sunk costs are a "myth" or "are easily ignored" has not beeen following the hearings going back as far as last August. The sunk costs of Constellation and Ares I keep coming up over and over again by the members- it IS a huge concern)
lastly- Nelson was probably quite disapointed with Obama at KSC (IMO). Nelson went out in public in front of the people of Central Florida and said (prior to the Obama visit) that he'd talked to the president and Obama was going to make big changes to his proposed budget. He then added "If he doesn't, we (the Congress) will." Obama didn't- now they will....if you want to know what is to come, put aside your disdain for CxP, Ares, Griffin and anything else and simply watch and listen to the Congress- it is all there.
Thank you, 51D Mascot.Bill Nelson's words "The Senate’s version of a spending plan for NASA" seem rather more significant than what you describe.However, Bill Nelson surely knows all of this as well therefore his "over-statement" also is itself a statement. Ain't politics marvelous?
This is going from confusing to mega confusing faster than I can twist my head from Congress to POTUS and back again. So first Nelson glowingly supports the president, goes on NBC and claims he's "been won over", then turns around and starts putting in money for (potentially) more ares 1 test flights? I am not sure how all this will turn out, but I fear we may end up worse off than we are now. Why can't they just do what the data says is the most reliable, most affordable, most powerful, and quickest way to do it? Or a comprimise of various options that match up to those needs?
The situation with the budget proposal is so dire that supporting Senators are in a "leave no stone unturned" mind-set right now to build more flexibility and elbow room for what will hopefully become a consensus congressional alternative position to offer up in the authorization and appropriations settings.
If you want to start now, without a 1Mlbf kerolox engine or a regenerative-nozzle RS-68, then a D-SDLV powered by the stock SSME is the logical and obvious choice. This is especially the case given the clear political objective of saving as many KSC jobs as possible. The 1Mlbf kerolox R&D funds would then be spent on RS-25e whilst early aerodynamic, system and integration tests are done using the remaining stockpiled SSMEs (plus whatever new production that can be quickly made available). The only question about the Nelson Plan is: In-line or Side-mount?
Atlas V Phase 1/Phase 2 creates jobs as well, can immediately be started and does provide a viable path towards a new HLV with the money baselined for HLV development in the next 5 years.
Atlas V launches for NASA are conducted from KSC...
If politically required, the RD-180 can be produced under licence in the US.
Quote from: 51D Mascot on 04/22/2010 03:02 amThe situation with the budget proposal is so dire that supporting Senators are in a "leave no stone unturned" mind-set right now to build more flexibility and elbow room for what will hopefully become a consensus congressional alternative position to offer up in the authorization and appropriations settings.Many thanks for illuminating.Can I clarify - does that relate just to the NASA budget, or the wider all-of-2011 budget?cheers, Martin
If you want to start now, [...] then a D-SDLV powered by the stock SSME is the logical and obvious choice.
Ares II-X ("the monster rocket") could fly in late 2012 if the Administration agrees to that kind of extra money noted in the budget resolution.
Quote from: renclod on 04/22/2010 11:44 amAres II-X ("the monster rocket") could fly in late 2012 if the Administration agrees to that kind of extra money noted in the budget resolution.I assume that you're talking about essentially two SRMs either side of a central payload (with liquid upper stage, of course). I'd be very interested to know for what purpose you think such a machine would ultimately be.
Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 04/22/2010 11:52 amQuote from: renclod on 04/22/2010 11:44 amAres II-X ("the monster rocket") could fly in late 2012 if the Administration agrees to that kind of extra money noted in the budget resolution.I assume that you're talking about essentially two SRMs either side of a central payload (with liquid upper stage, of course). I'd be very interested to know for what purpose you think such a machine would ultimately be.No. Ares II-X and Ares III-X are names for single-stick 5 segment test launches. Follow-ups to Ares I-X.
Quote from: renclod on 04/22/2010 11:57 am Ares II-X and Ares III-X are names for single-stick 5 segment test launches. Follow-ups to Ares I-X.What happened to Ares I-Y?cheers, Martin
Ares II-X and Ares III-X are names for single-stick 5 segment test launches. Follow-ups to Ares I-X.