Author Topic: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC  (Read 27818 times)

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17400
  • Liked: 2067
  • Likes Given: 1262
Re: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #40 on: 04/01/2008 05:03 pm »
Quote
wingod - 1/4/2008  12:36 PM

You need to look to John Marburger's 2006 Goddard Symposium speech to see why NASA did not get the increases that were promised.  It is down toward the end of the speech.  The ESAS architecture ignored economic development of the solar system as a core value and the administration has been unwilling to fund a science project.  Until this seeps into everyone's bones that this is the case, this will continue to happen.
Do you think with realigned goals that NASA would have evaded the fiscal effects of Hurricane Katrina or the continuing resolutions in FY 2006 and 2007?

Has Marburger offered more overt criticism -- or at least commentary critical of Constellation -- since then?

Thanks.

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6694
  • Liked: 1005
  • Likes Given: 140
Re: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #41 on: 04/01/2008 05:20 pm »
Quote
OV-106 - 1/4/2008  8:37 AM
You can't have it both ways.  If you also look at the speech it had a funding profile which never materialized.  You can hate Griffin how ever much you want to but if you don't have the money it takes and you were promised you cannot meet the dates.

He's supposed to fit the architecture and project goals to the available time and money, not fit the time and money to the chosen architecture and goals.

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #42 on: 04/01/2008 05:29 pm »
Quote
Lee Jay - 1/4/2008  12:20 PM

Quote
OV-106 - 1/4/2008  8:37 AM
You can't have it both ways.  If you also look at the speech it had a funding profile which never materialized.  You can hate Griffin how ever much you want to but if you don't have the money it takes and you were promised you cannot meet the dates.

He's supposed to fit the architecture and project goals to the available time and money, not fit the time and money to the chosen architecture and goals.

Actually, if had any real experience with this business or project managment you would know that these should be the same.  

And just so you know the funding was quoted and known what was to be requested long before ESAS or the current architecture.  That funding never happened so the point you are attempting to make is invalid.
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline Analyst

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 8
RE: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #43 on: 04/01/2008 05:37 pm »
People lament about the high costs of the Space Shuttle program. Where do you think this money is going? Not into a big hole or some big companies. People get it. And when this program ends AND there is almost nothing to do in US manned spaceflight launch processing for a long time which gets longer each day, what do you think will all these people do? Correct, nothing. This was clear from the start: Gap means jobs and skills at KSC will be lost, the longer the gap the more.

But hey, where do you think will all the money for these shiny new spacecraft will come from? It is said we can't operate a manned spacecraft and develop a new one in parallel, something I strongly doubt, but people keep saying ("every year of shuttle operation means the gap only moves to the right").

So we will shut down an operating (working and needed) program, cut the operating jobs, hire people for spacecraft development, develop five to ten years, fire these people, hire launch operation people again, lament about the lost skills, operate the new vehicle, after a few decades start the cycle again. Sounds stupid? Because it is. But has been done before and will be again.

Analyst

Offline wingod

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1305
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #44 on: 04/01/2008 05:49 pm »
Quote
OV-106 - 1/4/2008  11:55 AM

Quote
wingod - 1/4/2008  11:36 AM

You need to look to John Marburger's 2006 Goddard Symposium speech to see why NASA did not get the increases that were promised.  It is down toward the end of the speech.  The ESAS architecture ignored economic development of the solar system as a core value and the administration has been unwilling to fund a science project.  Until this seeps into everyone's bones that this is the case, this will continue to happen.



That's a little silly if you believe that is the case.  Economic development can only happen if you have the means to get there.  How can you tout economic development of anything if you don't have the funding to develop the very vehicles baselined to take you there?  

The promised funding never showed up even in the first or second budget after the VSE was announced and endorsed by Congress with the NASA Autorization Act.

Silly or not read Marburgers speech and look what happened to DOE and NSF funding, both of which he said would be higher priorities than NASA.  Their funding went up a lot more than NASA's.

Until you start looking at the reality of these things instead of relying your preconceptions this is going to continue to happen.  It was obvious the day that it came out that the ESAS architecture was a rocket scientist's plaything and not a serious attempt to carry out what the President spoke about in the VSE speech.



Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #45 on: 04/01/2008 05:50 pm »
Quote
Analyst - 1/4/2008  12:37 PM

People lament about the high costs of the Space Shuttle program. Where do you think this money is going? Not into a big hole or some big companies. People get it. And when this program ends AND there is almost nothing to do in US manned spaceflight launch processing for a long time which gets longer each day, what do you think will all these people do? Correct, nothing. This was clear from the start: Gap means jobs and skills at KSC will be lost, the longer the gap the more.

But hey, where do you think will all the money for these shiny new spacecraft will come from? It is said we can't operate a manned spacecraft and develop a new one in parallel, something I strongly doubt, but people keep saying ("every year of shuttle operation means the gap only moves to the right").

So we will shut down an operating (working and needed) program, cut the operating jobs, hire people for spacecraft development, develop five to ten years, fire these people, hire launch operation people again, lament about the lost skills, operate the new vehicle, after a few decades start the cycle again. Sounds stupid? Because it is. But has been done before and will be again.

Analyst

Ding, ding, ding.  We have a winner.
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline wingod

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1305
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #46 on: 04/01/2008 05:55 pm »
Quote
psloss - 1/4/2008  12:03 PM

Quote
wingod - 1/4/2008  12:36 PM

You need to look to John Marburger's 2006 Goddard Symposium speech to see why NASA did not get the increases that were promised.  It is down toward the end of the speech.  The ESAS architecture ignored economic development of the solar system as a core value and the administration has been unwilling to fund a science project.  Until this seeps into everyone's bones that this is the case, this will continue to happen.
Do you think with realigned goals that NASA would have evaded the fiscal effects of Hurricane Katrina or the continuing resolutions in FY 2006 and 2007?

Has Marburger offered more overt criticism -- or at least commentary critical of Constellation -- since then?

Thanks.

Look at his 2008 speech at the Goddard Symposium where he reiterated what he said in 2006.  The problem is that this entire dance has been danced before in the early 90's.  No coordination between the White House and NASA after O'Keefe  left and NASA went their own way as before, with the same results coming to a channel near you soon.

Online Chris Bergin

RE: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #47 on: 04/01/2008 05:57 pm »
Quote
Analyst - 1/4/2008  6:37 PM

People lament about the high costs of the Space Shuttle program. Where do you think this money is going? Not into a big hole or some big companies. People get it. And when this program ends AND there is almost nothing to do in US manned spaceflight launch processing for a long time which gets longer each day, what do you think will all these people do? Correct, nothing. This was clear from the start: Gap means jobs and skills at KSC will be lost, the longer the gap the more.

But hey, where do you think will all the money for these shiny new spacecraft will come from? It is said we can't operate a manned spacecraft and develop a new one in parallel, something I strongly doubt, but people keep saying ("every year of shuttle operation means the gap only moves to the right").

So we will shut down an operating (working and needed) program, cut the operating jobs, hire people for spacecraft development, develop five to ten years, fire these people, hire launch operation people again, lament about the lost skills, operate the new vehicle, after a few decades start the cycle again. Sounds stupid? Because it is. But has been done before and will be again.

Analyst

And therein lies the problem of the gap. Nicely worded.

Offline Smatcha

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 645
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #48 on: 04/01/2008 05:57 pm »
Hopefully this is just one big April Fools joke.  Okay you got us Mike, ha ha ha..  I’ll just go back to your statement when you rolled out ESAS after you knew the budget was not increasing, almost three years ago I might add.

NASA HEADQUARTERS
NEWS CONFERENCE
MIKE GRIFFIN, NASA ADMINISTRATOR
DEAN ACOSTA, MODERATOR
EXPLORATION SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE STUDY
SEPTEMBER 19, 2005

http://www.nasa.gov/news/speeches/admin/mg_speech_collection_archive_4.html

Page 13

“It (referring to the ESAS plan) provides an orderly transition of the space shuttle workforce. We estimate that we can use about 85 percent of the facilities that are in play today for the space shuttle.” – Mike Griffin

It would seem to me that since we are now basically gutting both KSC and MAF of all pesky STS hardware and infrastructure we might be just bit below your 85% preservation mark at this point don’t you think?.  Any chance that this could be one of the reasons we need to decimate the STS workforce in order to out do Wernher Von Braun’s Saturn V.  Sorry, with the upgrade to Ares-6 in the wings I mean out do the Nova.

Well at least we are preserving those SRB steel cases.  That must represent at least 0.0001% of the STS hardware cost so we got that going for us under your plan which is nice.  Oh that’s right, with the yet to be announced modifications to the Ares-I even those are gone bringing us to exactly 0% STS hardware and infrastructure retention.  And they said a STS derived launch system could never achieve a 0% retention rate of STS hardware and infrastructure by definition.  How wrong those nay-sayers are.

All you KSC and MAF employees in the cross hairs of ESAS.  Now would be a good time to write your representatives on any alternate plans you may know about that could spare you this pain.  Like DIRECT, that get us back to the ISS by 2012, actually finishes the ISS, performs an Apollo-8 mission by 2014, all while solving the Mars sample return mass problems and enabling us to placing telescope capable of directly resolving ‘other’ Earths.

Or we could just stick to ESAS where everyone leaves their house key in the door all to field a system that is less capable and more expensive than what routinely takes off from Cape Canaveral right now.

Now…………
“Do we want to go to the moon or not?”
John C. Houbolt - November 15, 1961
Question posed in Letter to Dr. Robert C. Seamans Jr, NASA Associate Administrator

Ralph Ellison “I was never more hated than when I tried to be honest”




Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6694
  • Liked: 1005
  • Likes Given: 140
Re: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #49 on: 04/01/2008 05:59 pm »
Quote
OV-106 - 1/4/2008  11:29 AM

Quote
Lee Jay - 1/4/2008  12:20 PM

Quote
OV-106 - 1/4/2008  8:37 AM
You can't have it both ways.  If you also look at the speech it had a funding profile which never materialized.  You can hate Griffin how ever much you want to but if you don't have the money it takes and you were promised you cannot meet the dates.

He's supposed to fit the architecture and project goals to the available time and money, not fit the time and money to the chosen architecture and goals.

Actually, if had any real experience with this business or project managment you would know that these should be the same.  

And just so you know the funding was quoted and known what was to be requested long before ESAS or the current architecture.  That funding never happened so the point you are attempting to make is invalid.

The point I'm attempting to make is 2014 is unacceptable, and the architecture chosen requires way too many engine (3) and stage (4) developments to take a reasonable period of time and money.  Complaining that Congress didn't provide the needed funding is completely ridiculous because no one really ever expected them to in the first place, and so they should have chosen an architecture that required less development - i.e. more Shuttle-derived as was the intent of Congress in the first place.  As soon as they knew 2012 was unattainable under any realistic anticipated funding scenario, they should have begun looking for architectures that had fewer engine and stage developments.  That point was virtually at the beginning of the program.

Online Chris Bergin

RE: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #50 on: 04/01/2008 06:00 pm »
Actually, before this turns into a Direct thread, might be an idea to start up a related thread on the alternative section......

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17400
  • Liked: 2067
  • Likes Given: 1262
RE: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #51 on: 04/01/2008 06:20 pm »
Quote
Analyst - 1/4/2008  1:37 PM

It is said we can't operate a manned spacecraft and develop a new one in parallel, something I strongly doubt, but people keep saying ("every year of shuttle operation means the gap only moves to the right").
It's not that "we" can't.  We don't.  We could spend one percent on space, but we choose not to, on an annual basis.  There's no law saying NASA's budget has to be a zero-sum game, but it is right now and has been for a long time and that's a choice that occurs on an annual basis, too.

Shuttle operations is projected to be about $3B in FY 2010.  Where is that money going to come from?

Offline Coolhand77

  • Member
  • Member
  • Posts: 52
  • Space Coast
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #52 on: 04/01/2008 06:53 pm »
Reference Chart 22 of the Workforce Transition Strategy Briefing (5.5 Mb PDF) for numbers of jobs at the various centers.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/transition/home/index.html

Offline Paul Adams

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
  • United Kingdom and USA
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 24
RE: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #53 on: 04/01/2008 06:55 pm »
Right on the Money!!!!
Quote
OV-106 - 1/4/2008  1:50 PM

Quote
Analyst - 1/4/2008  12:37 PM

People lament about the high costs of the Space Shuttle program. Where do you think this money is going? Not into a big hole or some big companies. People get it. And when this program ends AND there is almost nothing to do in US manned spaceflight launch processing for a long time which gets longer each day, what do you think will all these people do? Correct, nothing. This was clear from the start: Gap means jobs and skills at KSC will be lost, the longer the gap the more.

But hey, where do you think will all the money for these shiny new spacecraft will come from? It is said we can't operate a manned spacecraft and develop a new one in parallel, something I strongly doubt, but people keep saying ("every year of shuttle operation means the gap only moves to the right").

So we will shut down an operating (working and needed) program, cut the operating jobs, hire people for spacecraft development, develop five to ten years, fire these people, hire launch operation people again, lament about the lost skills, operate the new vehicle, after a few decades start the cycle again. Sounds stupid? Because it is. But has been done before and will be again.

Analyst

Ding, ding, ding.  We have a winner.
It's all in the data.

Offline Analyst

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 8
RE: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #54 on: 04/01/2008 07:11 pm »
Quote
The ESAS architecture ignored economic development of the solar system as a core value and the administration has been unwilling to fund a science project. Until this seeps into everyone's bones that this is the case, this will continue to happen.

This is the part I never got: “Economic development of the solar system”. I still don’t and probably will never get it.

What do you want to do “in the solar system” to make a profit? Because this is what "economic" means in the end (at least within the lifetime of the investor): profit. This profit - and with it the economic development - is soooo far into the future, we all born and living today will never see it. Everything economically useful will center arround earth, as all (few) current commercial space activities do (communication, earth observing, etc.). Because the people using and paying for these services live on earth, not on the Moon or elsewhere in the solar system. And the verse will stay this way for a long time. Noone there, noone benefitting, noone paying. Other than scientific interest, there is no reason for spaceflight - manned or unmanned - beyond the sphere of earth, where people live, can use it and pay for it.

The same can be said about the “national security argument”. Military satellites in earth orbit effect people on earth, may decide wars on earth. This is not true for satellites arround Mars or elesewhere. Because there is noone who can enjoy any security beyond earth and therefore noone pays for it.

So for a very long time - at least a decade, maybe longer - the economic development of the solar system is not possible and can’t be almost by definition. And national security is not enhanced by going to the moon, Mars and beyond (Maybe indirect, but this could be (and has been and still is) achieved much cheaper by dedicated development projects).

So all what remains is science. And if the administration is unwilling to fund a science project, there will be nothing done in space beyond the sphere of earth. Apollo was a one time event, there will never be another Apollo – on steroids or not.

Analyst

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10484
  • Liked: 419
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #55 on: 04/01/2008 07:30 pm »
Analyst, thats really a topic for a different thread, but I tend to agree.   There isn't much commercially viable use for space yet beyond what we already use it for (communications, tourists, science) - at least not for a while.

But it *will* come eventually.

And an exploration program like Apollo, and now Constellation, represents the "Lewis & Clark" first steps into the unknown - the steps upon which all future expansion will be based.

It took a long time after L&C before real "commercially viable" ventures got established in the US interior.   It will be the same here - just with a longer time-frame.  Give it 100 years and we will have mining of the moon and asteroids.   By then we should have a solid infrastructure below allowing *lots* of space work and payload, and that's when the costs come down considerably.

100 years from now the economy of the space program could be very different from today, and could be far more "viable" for commercial exploitation.

But any further discussion probably needs its own thread...

Ross.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline Norm Hartnett

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2306
  • Liked: 56
  • Likes Given: 2
RE: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #56 on: 04/01/2008 07:41 pm »
Quote
Analyst - 1/4/2008  10:37 AM

It is said we can't operate a manned spacecraft and develop a new one in parallel, something I strongly doubt, but people keep saying ("every year of shuttle operation means the gap only moves to the right").

Analyst

Quote
wingod - 1/4/2008  10:49 AM

Until you start looking at the reality of these things instead of relying your preconceptions this is going to continue to happen.  It was obvious the day that it came out that the ESAS architecture was a rocket scientist's plaything and not a serious attempt to carry out what the President spoke about in the VSE speech.


Quote
Analyst - 1/4/2008  12:11 PM

Quote
The ESAS architecture ignored economic development of the solar system as a core value and the administration has been unwilling to fund a science project. Until this seeps into everyone's bones that this is the case, this will continue to happen.

This is the part I never got: “Economic development of the solar system”. I still don’t and probably will never get it.

So for a very long time - at least a decade, maybe longer - the economic development of the solar system is not possible and can’t be almost by definition. And national security is not enhanced by going to the moon, Mars and beyond (Maybe indirect, but this could be (and has been and still is) achieved much cheaper by dedicated development projects).

So all what remains is science. And if the administration is unwilling to fund a science project, there will be nothing done in space beyond the sphere of earth. Apollo was a one time event, there will never be another Apollo – on steroids or not.

Analyst

ARRRRG!!!

 Please look at the quote in my signature. The VSE challenged NASA to break the mold and begin to design a sustainable space program. What we got was “Apollo on Steroids”. What we got was the same old cycle of big, expensive, programs that do not think beyond the next 20-30 years with no chance of sustainability. Does the Constellation program tell us when the moon base expands to 8 men? 16? 32? 10,000? It is a dead end, just like Apollo, STS, ISS.
It will be fifty years by the time man once again sets foot on the moon and what will we have to show for that fifty years?
“You can’t take a traditional approach and expect anything but the traditional results, which has been broken budgets and not fielding any flight hardware.” Mike Gold - Apollo, STS, CxP; those that don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it: SLS.

Offline Norm Hartnett

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2306
  • Liked: 56
  • Likes Given: 2
RE: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #57 on: 04/01/2008 09:23 pm »
Here is how it should be done.

http://www.google.com/virgle/index.html
“You can’t take a traditional approach and expect anything but the traditional results, which has been broken budgets and not fielding any flight hardware.” Mike Gold - Apollo, STS, CxP; those that don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it: SLS.

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17400
  • Liked: 2067
  • Likes Given: 1262
RE: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #58 on: 04/01/2008 09:27 pm »
Quote
Norm Hartnett - 1/4/2008  5:23 PM

Here is how it should be done.

http://www.google.com/virgle/index.html
The idea is likely to get lost in the joke.

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17400
  • Liked: 2067
  • Likes Given: 1262
Re: 6,400 jobs to be lost at KSC
« Reply #59 on: 04/01/2008 09:39 pm »
Congressman Weldon's press release:
http://weldon.house.gov/News/DocumentPrint.aspx?DocumentID=87528

And the (unchanged) state of play with the bill he introduced around Christmastime:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR04837:@@@X

Tags: