US spaceflight website space.com has revealed that in a teleconference yesterday the US government's Office of Management and Budgets' director Peter Orszag and the White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer confirmed that president Barack Obama's fiscal year 2011 budget request for NASA does not include the Constellation programme
But with the NASA aprorpiations bill for FY2010 requiring Congressional approval to cancel the Constellation programme the mere fact that Obama has requested in his budget for FY2011 that it be cancelled does not make it so. Healthcare bills anyone?
OMB releases NASA budget higlhights - care of Jeff Foust
But with the NASA aprorpiations bill for FY2010 requiring Congressional approval to cancel the Constellation programme the mere fact that Obama has requested in his budget for FY2011 that it be cancelled does not make it so. Healthcare bills anyone?
OMB releases NASA budget higlhights - care of Jeff Foust
on February 1, 2010 3:56 PM | Reply
.
why don't (simply) accomplish the same missions with the given NASA budget?
it only needs to avoid to "burn" money in crazy and expensive projects like the Ares-1, COTS, CRS, etc.
I've a proposal (to be applied NOW) that costs less than 1% of the money burned by NASA to (only) add a 5th segment to the SRB
http://ow.ly/10hxl
.
on February 1, 2010 6:52 PM | Reply
Ububba's plan looks like a copy of the ESA. Focus on basic science & robotics. Buy all launches from "commercial" businesses. Make endless powerpoint slides about the commericial human transportation coming someday in the future.
on February 2, 2010 3:27 AM | Reply
It seems to me that NASA has a habit of spending billion of dollars on a Project then dumping it when the next president gets elected. Anyone remember the DCX X-33? If they would just stay with one project through to completion than maybe the Americans would have been the ones back to the moon,not the chinese
on February 2, 2010 11:25 AM | Reply
Gaeto: after a day like today, I beg you -- once and for all, man give it a damned rest!!!
on February 3, 2010 5:50 PM | Reply
After all this, I now find myself surprised that Obama (via OMB granted)has indeed cancelled Constellation as I originally suspected once Augustine was announced! The manned orbit commercial direction is also a surprise. However I agree wholeheartedly with NASA returning to being an R&D agency. One could go one step further, and resurrect the old NACA acronym, but with Aeronautics being replaced with Aerospace.
Looking at the Boeing/Bigelow tie-up, it seems to me this has been a long time coming behind the scenes. I think people in the Industry are fed-up with NASA's stifling ways, and despite Bean Counter dominance ATT, are feeling the urge to be creative once more.
I've a strange feeling that in the long term, this move - on the surface, the END - may turn out the opposite. Still plenty of competition there, now NASA top Brass aren't controlling things.
Now if someone would just lend a helping hand to Kistler Aerospace, REAL reuseability would become reality. I live hope!
on February 18, 2010 10:11 PM | Reply
True to an extent, which is a big piece of the reason the Conservatives begun departing the Republicans a whole decade ago, or at the very least discontinued voting for their nominees. Im fairly middle-of-the-road, but no way was I going to vote for a Bush or McCain. However, the Presidency only has so much force - they CANNOT legislate and a more true assesment of spending comes from looking at who is working the House and Senate, not the White House. The Obamabots are casting a differentiation when it befits them as their President sputters to enact his agenda, and the Bushies did the same when the situation was reversed later in his Presidency.