The primary purpose of the CCP has always been to develop a national capability to restore domestic access to the International Space Station (ISS) as quickly and safely as possible. Currently, the ISS is scheduled to complete its mission by 2020, and NASA has no definitive plan yet to extend the mission beyond that date.
Frankly, I don't see the big deal and frankly the CCDev/CCiCAP money is NASA money well spent. And I'm sure a cost/benefit analysis will prove that.
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 01/14/2014 01:29 pmQuoting from page 161:"That not less than $1,918,200,000 shall be for the Space Launch System, which shall have a lift capability not less than 130 metric tons and which shall have an upper stage and other core elements developed simultaneously"(Many thanks to Yves for the salient reporting)Quote from: Simple SimonThe total value of the FY2014 Omnibus Bill is $1.012 trillion. If that figure is the Federal Budget, then NASA's budget of $17.646 billion is about 1.74%.NASA doesn't even get the two cents that we get here on this forum! At least this legislation is modestly more honest regarding the throw weight of SLS as being "not less than" 130 tonnes. The previous legislation pretended to what I thought was a reasonable effort to grow the launch vehicle from 70 to 130 tons (or tonnes).Now, the sky truly is the limit on the throw weight, since that is the legal meaning of "not less than". Worse, no budgeted or prioritized missions for this LV. How do they ever expect to get to Mars? Can anybody here report briefly on the SLS current schedule? Are they meeting their milestones? Are they on budget?There's my two cents.PS: I like the like button!How do you read this? I'm reading this as ....let's get directly to Block II.
Quoting from page 161:"That not less than $1,918,200,000 shall be for the Space Launch System, which shall have a lift capability not less than 130 metric tons and which shall have an upper stage and other core elements developed simultaneously"(Many thanks to Yves for the salient reporting)Quote from: Simple SimonThe total value of the FY2014 Omnibus Bill is $1.012 trillion. If that figure is the Federal Budget, then NASA's budget of $17.646 billion is about 1.74%.NASA doesn't even get the two cents that we get here on this forum! At least this legislation is modestly more honest regarding the throw weight of SLS as being "not less than" 130 tonnes. The previous legislation pretended to what I thought was a reasonable effort to grow the launch vehicle from 70 to 130 tons (or tonnes).Now, the sky truly is the limit on the throw weight, since that is the legal meaning of "not less than". Worse, no budgeted or prioritized missions for this LV. How do they ever expect to get to Mars? Can anybody here report briefly on the SLS current schedule? Are they meeting their milestones? Are they on budget?There's my two cents.PS: I like the like button!
The total value of the FY2014 Omnibus Bill is $1.012 trillion. If that figure is the Federal Budget, then NASA's budget of $17.646 billion is about 1.74%.
I completely disagree. Jon's entire argument is that the current path and program provides "no benefit" to the country. That is his opinion, paraded as undeniable fact with the only way to prove it being having knowledge of some alternate universe where his preferred method is the path forward.
Well, I think the upper stage (the advanced versions, at least, capable of long duration, etc) is more important than the rest of the vehicle anyway, though I do understand it's probably intended to make sure J-2X continues (and J-2X isn't a very good in-space engine since it's optimized more for thrust than for Isp... thus more appropriate as part of a launch vehicle's second stage... I'd prefer something with RL-10 heritage or the like).
Quote from: simpl simon on 01/14/2014 12:51 pmThe total value of the FY2014 Omnibus Bill is $1.012 trillion. If that figure is the Federal Budget, then NASA's budget of $17.646 billion is about 1.74%.The human spaceflight budget I assume comprises Exploration Systems + Space Operations (at least a major part of Space Ops is for ISS Ops). So the FY2014 human spaceflight budget is ($4.113 billion + $3.778 billion), say $7.891 billion, equivalent to about 0.78% of the Federal Budget.These figures seem to be higher than the figures currently used (1% and 0.5% respectively).Corrected typo: NASA's budget is $17.646 billion.That figure is the discretionary Federal budget. Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are not factored in. The oft-quoted 0.5% figure is for the total including so-called "Mandatory" spending (the above programs).
The total value of the FY2014 Omnibus Bill is $1.012 trillion. If that figure is the Federal Budget, then NASA's budget of $17.646 billion is about 1.74%.The human spaceflight budget I assume comprises Exploration Systems + Space Operations (at least a major part of Space Ops is for ISS Ops). So the FY2014 human spaceflight budget is ($4.113 billion + $3.778 billion), say $7.891 billion, equivalent to about 0.78% of the Federal Budget.These figures seem to be higher than the figures currently used (1% and 0.5% respectively).Corrected typo: NASA's budget is $17.646 billion.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 01/14/2014 07:19 pmWell, I think the upper stage (the advanced versions, at least, capable of long duration, etc) is more important than the rest of the vehicle anyway, though I do understand it's probably intended to make sure J-2X continues (and J-2X isn't a very good in-space engine since it's optimized more for thrust than for Isp... thus more appropriate as part of a launch vehicle's second stage... I'd prefer something with RL-10 heritage or the like).Unless you want to use massive kerolox advanced boosters I'm afraid something with J-2X level thrust will be necessary to reach 130 tons.
Quote from: kraisee on 01/14/2014 06:08 pmSLS has become just another boondoggle just as bad as Ares-I + Ares-V ever was (and most people on the forum a few years back likely recall my opinions of that!). Sadly, the current situation has occurred for much the same reason too; a few usual suspects in DC who want to plus-up the funding for a single project, with the returns heading for their own districts/regions.SLS is ahead of schedule and under or on budget. Those are facts. You come across as arm-waving. Good day.
SLS has become just another boondoggle just as bad as Ares-I + Ares-V ever was (and most people on the forum a few years back likely recall my opinions of that!). Sadly, the current situation has occurred for much the same reason too; a few usual suspects in DC who want to plus-up the funding for a single project, with the returns heading for their own districts/regions.
Quote from: Go4TLI on 01/14/2014 06:14 pmQuote from: kraisee on 01/14/2014 06:08 pmSLS has become just another boondoggle just as bad as Ares-I + Ares-V ever was (and most people on the forum a few years back likely recall my opinions of that!). Sadly, the current situation has occurred for much the same reason too; a few usual suspects in DC who want to plus-up the funding for a single project, with the returns heading for their own districts/regions.SLS is ahead of schedule and under or on budget. Those are facts. You come across as arm-waving. Good day.Dismissing a highly respected member like Ross in the way you just did makes me wanna hit the Do-Not-Like button. Unfortunately, we don't have such a button.
Quote from: Go4TLI on 01/14/2014 05:31 pmI completely disagree. Jon's entire argument is that the current path and program provides "no benefit" to the country. That is his opinion, paraded as undeniable fact with the only way to prove it being having knowledge of some alternate universe where his preferred method is the path forward. Actually, even worse than just being my opinion, it's *your* opinion about what my opinion is. I've never said that SLS provides no value to the country. I just think that when you look at the alternatives we're forgoing to pursue SLS/Orion/JWST (ie the opportunity cost), it isn't worth it. Maybe that's too nuanced of an opinion, but to me there's a huge difference between something being valueless, and something not being as valuable as many worthy alternatives that I think we ought to be pursuing. In fact, I'd probably be willing to shut up and ignore the waste if they didn't keep strangling almost everything else that I value at NASA (planetary science, non-JWST astrophysics, space technology development and tech demos, commercial crew, actual money to fund ISS utilization, etc).~Jon
Quote from: woods170 on 01/14/2014 07:37 pmQuote from: Go4TLI on 01/14/2014 06:14 pmQuote from: kraisee on 01/14/2014 06:08 pmSLS has become just another boondoggle just as bad as Ares-I + Ares-V ever was (and most people on the forum a few years back likely recall my opinions of that!). Sadly, the current situation has occurred for much the same reason too; a few usual suspects in DC who want to plus-up the funding for a single project, with the returns heading for their own districts/regions.SLS is ahead of schedule and under or on budget. Those are facts. You come across as arm-waving. Good day.Dismissing a highly respected member like Ross in the way you just did makes me wanna hit the Do-Not-Like button. Unfortunately, we don't have such a button.Not only that, but Go4TLI is making an association error. Whether it's on schedule or on budget has absolutely nothing to do with whether it's a boondoggle.
@rr - I think your first link is broken (goes to discussion of fusion Orion). Cheers, Martin
If there was funding for a real SLS-sized payload (other than Orion), I would be very excited. My biggest issue with SLS is that it eats up all the funding for payloads, but if there actually WERE payloads funded for it (and continually funded!), I would be much more receptive to it.
166
Author
Topic: FY 2014 Appropriation bill is released (Read 77187 times)
