Author Topic: LIVE: Congressional Hearings into Obama's NASA Budget FY2011 - Feb 24-25 Part 2 (Read 363343 times)

Bill White · « **Reply #380 on:** 02/25/2010 01:20 pm »

Quote from: mmeijeri on 02/25/2010 01:05 pm

Or better yet in an open market with fixed prices, milestone based payments and performance bonds.

But that cannot happen until we end NASA's monopsony.

Monopoly = one seller many buyers

Monospony = one buyer many sellers

mmeijeri · « **Reply #381 on:** 02/25/2010 01:22 pm »

Of course it can. One buyer, many sellers. We'd still get transparent prices. And I'm all for ending NASA's monopoly.

Cog_in_the_machine · « **Reply #382 on:** 02/25/2010 01:24 pm »

Do you mean having other entities that send not just com. sats, but people and cargo in space like NASA? Would other governments or space tourists count?

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #383 on:** 02/25/2010 01:26 pm »

I can see this edging off topic. Keep it on the main points of yesterday's hearing.

mmeijeri · « **Reply #384 on:** 02/25/2010 01:29 pm »

You can "see it edging off topic", now there's some of that famous British understatement. Point taken.

zerm · « **Reply #385 on:** 02/25/2010 01:49 pm »

In reading around it appears to me that following yesterday's hearings, a lot of people, aside from my pal Miles, are simply not buying into the Obama budget as is. Most seem to see what I noticed in the first House hearing two weeks ago- the Congress is not favoring this proposal... and there are many more hearings ahead.

Today's hearings should be watched closely.

Cog_in_the_machine · « **Reply #386 on:** 02/25/2010 01:56 pm »

I think the biggest mistake in the new budget was the rapid transition. I'm sure if there wasn't such an abrupt shift from shuttle to commercial outlined in it, it would have gotten very little opposition (if any). Perhaps the lack of goals would have been criticized, but I doubt anyone would have cared much as long as there weren't massive layoffs.

marsavian · « **Reply #387 on:** 02/25/2010 01:57 pm »

I did say it would not survive its first Congress encounter intact

. Just the start of the rewrite. I don't know whether anyone mentioned it before but Nelson said he has never seen Congressional Authorization and Appropriation Committees so united which is not good news for this budget's proposers. This budget may have done a favor in the long run if it spurs serious thought and funding on HSF direction.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #388 on:** 02/25/2010 01:57 pm »

Quote from: mmeijeri on 02/25/2010 01:29 pm

You can "see it edging off topic", now there's some of that famous British understatement. Point taken.

Heh

Quote from: zerm on 02/25/2010 01:49 pm

In reading around it appears to me that following yesterday's hearings, a lot of people, aside from my pal Miles, are simply not buying into the Obama budget as is. Most seem to see what I noticed in the first House hearing two weeks ago- the Congress is not favoring this proposal... and there are many more hearings ahead.

Today's hearings should be watched closely.

When do they start, and is it worth a new thread (I won't be able to cover due to being in transit).

bad_astra · « **Reply #389 on:** 02/25/2010 01:58 pm »

I think the good thing that came out of the hearing is that we understand there is still a destination: Mars. In that regard portions of the VSE are still alive.

I think the main problem people, apart from those most ardent adherants to the Cult of Direct, is the gap. There was, and remains only one way to solve that, which is shuttle extension. If Congress is concerned it should fork over the money to maintain a couple of flights a year until 2015 without touching the current budget's allocations. Will it do that?

Instead the congressional troglodytes will use this as an excuse to bemoan global warming, while the supporters of Obama will try to stand firm but find their spines still made of cartillage. As usual in this country Nothing will be done.

Cog_in_the_machine · « **Reply #390 on:** 02/25/2010 01:59 pm »

Quote from: Chris Bergin on 02/25/2010 01:57 pm

Quote from: zerm on 02/25/2010 01:49 pm
Today's hearings should be watched closely.

When do they start, and is it worth a new thread (I won't be able to cover due to being in transit).

I think they're going to start any moment now...

EDIT - it is starting now.

psloss · « **Reply #391 on:** 02/25/2010 02:05 pm »

Will be interested in whether Representative Gordon plays any cards, so to speak, in this hearing.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #392 on:** 02/25/2010 02:07 pm »

Copy. Changed the thread title to include this hearing. Please add notes of interest.

psloss · « **Reply #393 on:** 02/25/2010 02:07 pm »

Interesting (sort of) that members outside the committee are going to ask questions. (But not their purpose -- such as Rep. Posey.)

Cog_in_the_machine · « **Reply #394 on:** 02/25/2010 02:11 pm »

I can't read the name of the guy talking now but he opens the hearing by saying this basically:

NASAs' FY2011 budget has positive features - i.e. the 6bln extra $, increased earth sciences and aeronautics funding, long term tech R&D, extending ISS to 2020.

But the budget is a radical change that has happened under questionable circumstances.

psloss · « **Reply #395 on:** 02/25/2010 02:12 pm »

Quote from: Cog_in_the_machine on 02/25/2010 02:11 pm

I can't read the name of the guy talking now but he opens the hearing by saying this basically:

Bart Gordon -- the chairman on the committee. Very important.

Cog_in_the_machine · « **Reply #396 on:** 02/25/2010 02:13 pm »

Olson is talking now.

Columbia taught us not to do unbound R&D programs and that we need fixed goals. Canceling Constellation would undermine crew safety.

psloss · « **Reply #397 on:** 02/25/2010 02:13 pm »

Ralph Hall couldn't attend; Pete Olson is the ranking member today.

marsavian · « **Reply #398 on:** 02/25/2010 02:15 pm »

Gordon questioned the rationality behind relying solely on commercial companies who by virtue of extra COTS funding implication are already struggling with the cargo contracts.

Cog_in_the_machine · « **Reply #399 on:** 02/25/2010 02:17 pm »

Olson - "NASA is a mission driven organization which works best with clearly defined goals"

Now Boldens' going to talk.