Quote from: Blackstar on 12/16/2014 04:28 pmSo he's a tea party supporter, but also a government contractor, also a union member, also unhappy at "government waste" but also perfectly willing to take the money...And we blame the worker instead of the politicians who authorized it?Look, I'm not a Tea Party supporter by any means, but if Congress authorized taxpayer money to be spent it's going to be spent, so blaming the people that worked on the contract - regardless if they knew it was pork or not - is nonproductive.
So he's a tea party supporter, but also a government contractor, also a union member, also unhappy at "government waste" but also perfectly willing to take the money...
Never mind that Bloomberg wrote almost the same story nearly a year ago; the Post’s piece puts NASA in a rather harsh spotlight just as a new Congress is about to be seated
Quote from: savuporo on 12/16/2014 05:39 amQuote from: yokem55 on 12/16/2014 02:09 amYeah, NASA does what Congress tells them to do. This is such a cop-out. It should have been the responsibility of NASA's top management to actively campaign against and eliminate waste like that. There are huge opportunity costs involved here. Why was ASRG cancelled, again ?Remember how NASA tried to stop SLS but Congress took them out to the wood shed and told them to start building it...
Quote from: yokem55 on 12/16/2014 02:09 amYeah, NASA does what Congress tells them to do. This is such a cop-out. It should have been the responsibility of NASA's top management to actively campaign against and eliminate waste like that. There are huge opportunity costs involved here. Why was ASRG cancelled, again ?
Yeah, NASA does what Congress tells them to do.
Quote from: Rocket Science on 12/16/2014 10:15 amQuote from: savuporo on 12/16/2014 05:39 amQuote from: yokem55 on 12/16/2014 02:09 amYeah, NASA does what Congress tells them to do. This is such a cop-out. It should have been the responsibility of NASA's top management to actively campaign against and eliminate waste like that. There are huge opportunity costs involved here. Why was ASRG cancelled, again ?Remember how NASA tried to stop SLS but Congress took them out to the wood shed and told them to start building it...Yes. But I also remember that the Administration / NASA cancelled the Constellation program (justifiably so) but then failed to provide a coherent plan forward. Nature abhors a vacuum. So Congress filled it and well...here we are. This is all a well tread road of incompetence, traveled by many so I'm not going to rehash.Suffice to say, it is important these types of articles are brought to the fore. After all, the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have one. Yes..."Houston, we've had a problem here" and frankly, we still do.
Yes. But I also remember that the Administration / NASA cancelled the Constellation program (justifiably so) but then failed to provide a coherent plan forward. Nature abhors a vacuum. So Congress filled it and well...here we are. This is all a well tread road of incompetence, traveled by many so I'm not going to rehash.
Suffice to say, it is important these types of articles are brought to the fore. After all, the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have one. Yes..."Houston, we've had a problem here" and frankly, we still do.
This is quite a long and critical article re. the A-3 test stand. The author spreads blame, unfairly I believe, equally between NASA and politicians.http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2014/12/15/nasas-349-million-monument-to-its-drift/
If the US does decide to build the 130 t version of SLS, its going to need J-2X for a new upper stage. That's when this stand will be properly used.
Quote from: Rocket Science on 12/16/2014 10:15 amQuote from: savuporo on 12/16/2014 05:39 amQuote from: yokem55 on 12/16/2014 02:09 amYeah, NASA does what Congress tells them to do. This is such a cop-out. It should have been the responsibility of NASA's top management to actively campaign against and eliminate waste like that. There are huge opportunity costs involved here. Why was ASRG cancelled, again ?Remember how NASA tried to stop SLS but Congress took them out to the wood shed and told them to start building it...Yes. But I also remember that the Administration / NASA cancelled the Constellation program (justifiably so) but then failed to provide a coherent plan forward. Nature abhors a vacuum. So Congress filled it and well...here we are.
Quote from: rcoppola on 12/16/2014 08:29 pmSuffice to say, it is important these types of articles are brought to the fore. After all, the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have one. Yes..."Houston, we've had a problem here" and frankly, we still do.Well said.
But is a vacuum test stand actually needed? How are/were other upper stage engines tested? How was M1D-Vac tested? Or RL-10C? Or BE-3?How were the RL-10-A4 and RL-10B tested? How was Castor 30B/30XL tested?
It's J2X being tested at atmospheric Pressure at Stennis already?
Did there used to be vacuum test stands, and there just aren't any more? Or just not one large enough to accomodate J2X?
I think that SpaceX uses some type of simplified vacuum simulation test stand at McGregor. So yes, this type of testing is needed. Subtle things can happen in vacuum that don't happen at sea level pressure. - Ed Kyle
Probably cheaper to do the best you can in computer modeling and component testing and then just launch a flight test article to prove it all-up in vacuum. If you can't afford a test flight, then you have a more fundamental problem...It's not entirely out of the question that somebody might find this property convenient at some point in the future. But I can't imagine that it would be essential for anything. Anyone developing a large upper stage at this point would have a better test plan.