Obama Budget Preview: Moon Is Still In The Plan

Is this all dealing with the same financial year? And if so does that actually mean they'll get more money than they had asked for in the budget proposal?

If it's not the same year, how is it split? Also, what's the state of the 2009 budget?

Pardon me if this is elementary stuff or has been convered (a quick search didn't find it) but as someone who doesn't do high finance it's confusing sometimes.

This is good. It still leaves open the question of sticking with the Stick or trying EELVs or Direct. Something there needs to be firmly committed to with the backing of the President and hopefully soon a new administrator.

Thank God!
Looks like the major goals Bush set forth stay.

Too Bad. I was hoping he would shut down this return to retro spam cans

It's not clear when the stimulus money becomes available, but it is available through Sept. 2010 according to the bill that was signed into law. The president's budget request each year has a 5-year plan and Bush's 2009 budget request had a request for NASA of $18.026 billion for 2010. The 2010 budget request by Obama requests $18.7 billion for 2010 , a $675 million increase over Bush's budget last year. Next, we see how much Congress will actually appropriate for 2010. If they grant Obama's request for 2010, the stimulus plus the 2010 increase would total $1.7 billion.

Bush's 2009 budget request for NASA was for $17.614 billion. The FY09 budget is currently operating under a 6-month long Continuing Resolution. The House version of an omnibus bill to fund the government for the rest of this fiscal year has $17.8 billion or NASA which is $170 million more than Bush's 2009 budget request. If this holds in the Senate, the total money NASA will get this year and next will be nearly $2 billion more than planned based on Bush's 2009 budget request.

It remains to be seen how Congress will spread this money among NASA's seven appropriations accounts which will dictate how we can spend the money. We can't move money around like we used to without approval from Congress. For those who feared Obama would decimate NASA's budget, so far your fears are not being realized. It remains to be seen what policy changes will be made when Obama names a new administrator.

"Too Bad. I was hoping he would shut down this return to retro spam cans"

There's always one in the crowd...

Anyways, this is great news. I'm looking forward to seeing Orion and Ares I becoming reality in the coming years...

This is great news. Now its time to finally stop worrying about funds being canceled, get back to work, and show the American people that NASA is still a working agency. A year ago, two years ago I thought Ares was a bad plan which was jammed down our throats. Now, I think we're too far along to change direction. Good or bad, right or wrong we have the expertise to make this program a complete success. I for one am very excited about the prospect of a permanent American presence on the Moon. I look forward to the day that I'll be able to tell my grand children that I lived during a time when people only lived on the Earth, and brag that I had the smallest inconsequential part in making the manned exploration of our solar system a reality. This is a worthy goal and I'm proud and thankful that the American taxpayer has given me the opportunity to try.

Graham -

The budget figure proposed for FY 09 - 10 is $700 million higher than what was projected for this period in current budget plans for future budget years.

This is in addition to the $1 billion for NASA in the just passed recovery / stimulus bill.

The Obama space policy announced during the campaign generally endorsed exploration goals, but found fault with the budget and management approach that was leading to NASA both cannibalizing its own program and having a growing gap. It is worth rereading and can be found at:

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/policy/Space_Fact_Sheet_FINAL.pdf

Last year, Sen. Obama supported the addition of $2 billion proposed by Sen. Mikulski and others to offset return to flight costs and other NASA budget shortfalls, but this was opposed by the Bush administration. The stimulus bill money can be seen as getting half of that loaf.

President Obama can be expected to support a robust but more disciplined and effected national program of space exploration, and also to support commercial space goals as part of advancing strategic national economic interests.

um...please make that "effective" not "effected".

my bad

Obama coughs up some of the money that Bush wouldn't? Wow, this the opposite of what I thought would happen, but its what I was hoping for. These may be retro spam cans on the outside, but we can't afford to fall behind at this critical period in spaceflight. Our spam can will still hold more crew than Soyuz or Shenzhou or whatever India puts up. We can go back to the future once we've actually utilized the moon instead of just visiting for a few days.

At last some sign of oxygen for the space program. I'd be a lot more reassured if he would pick an administrator with a taste for exploration. We'll know more when we see the full budget and can follow the money. If development money for a heavy lift vehicle or a lunar lander is cut, delayed or otherwise diverted we'll know the true nature of the Administrations commitment to space exploration.

Since we have all decided that we are Keynesian's now and are about to pop for 2-3 trillion dollars in government spending, surely we can afford a few billion dollars to push back the frontiers of human exploration, especially if it will put a lot of people to work expanding the nation's technical competence in a vital technology for the new century.

I wish to God they'd stop calling it the "Bush Space Plan" or the "Bush Plan".

Also: >>Obama coughs up some of the money that Bush wouldn't? Wow, this the opposite of what I thought would happen

What ever happened to H.R. 6063? It raised NASA's 2009 FY budget by over $2 billion to $20.21 billion. It was passed 409-15 in the house in June and unanimously in the Senate. It was signed into law by the President on October 15, 2008 and became Public Law number 110-422. $1 billion was supposed to go directly to CEV and CLV.

I know the budget is still in continuing resolution limbo - but shouldnt NASAs 2009 budget (once the 2009 budget leaves continuing resolution limbo) be $20.21 billion and not $17.6?

And really, I can't get excited about the proposed 2010 budget at this point when 2009s budget is still in limbo. Esepcially considering that even with that increase it is still below $19 billion. I will get excited about a 2010 budget when I see it over $20 billion.

Am I the only person who remembers this bill?

Interesting. "The President proposes and the Congress disposes." This may mean the administration has examined NASA's present cpurse, including COTS, and determined (with congressional meetings) to let stand the last Congress' alterations and language put into long-term planning and the present FY. This probably retirement of the Shuttle, already underway in terms of all the impacts, etc. on paper. Should be interesting how this develops, particularly how the new admin handles the PlanetSpace challenge. This budget plan is a proposal for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1 2009 (FY 2010).

The "stimulus" is heavily earmarked for Green Party priorities, and I would imagine a replacement for the CO2 sat that tanked.

No radical changes, hopefully. The system is not built around long-term planning, so that's quite a milestone.

Obama coughs up some of the money that Bush wouldn't? Wow...

Non-existant dollars, that is. Going deeper in the red to save good jobs, build new energy technologies and infrastructure or make health care better is necessary. Throwing resources at something that is marginally justified and initiated on questionable grounds is flushing money down the toilet.

I'm starting to seriously regret voting for this guy now. It looks like he's going to let NASA continue down its current course without any serious challenge or reevaluation. This is completely ill-informed.

This is excelent news "Retro Spam in the can is the future"
there is no need for loss of payload with wings to go to the moon

Robert

Sanity prevails, thankfully. The moon will be the most significant astronomical body for us other than earth for some time to come. Proximity matters, Gospodin.

So does this mean that shuttle retirement will happen basically as currently planned? Without any major change in plans, since they are apparently continuing on with the Constellation program, and without a major influx of money ($3B a year to fly 2 or 3 shuttle missions), it would appear that shuttle will be retired as planned, sometime in 2010. Will they fly the extra mission with AMS under this plan? Just some questions I am very curious to know the answer. If anyone has some inside information to these an answer would be greatly appreciated.

@ spacey

Public Law number 110-422 was an authorization bill NOT an appropriations bill, or in other words Congress said, "Wow it would be nice to give NASA all this money.", but didn't really give them anything.

NASA, and the rest of the government, has been funded under a continuing resolution since last year. The House, day before yesterday, began the process of, hopefully, passing an omnibus appropriations bill for 2009. This contains about $17.8 for NASA (less whatever they've spent so far).

Re: "Retro Spam in the can"

That's like calling modern cars outdated because they use 4 wheels.

FY10 budget summary came out, see summary of NASA funding at page 103-104:

http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/02/26/fy10.budget.pdf

The FY 2010 budget outline mentions the continued objective of reaching the moon by 2020, the Shuttle Retirement in 2010 (with one more flight added if possible) and it also mentions support for COTS-D. No mention of Ares I. It mentions the continued support for the ISS but it doesn't say if funding for it will continue until 2020.

It seesm like good news for NASA.

"I will get excited about a 2010 budget when I see it over $20 billion."

Well then you are going to be waiting for a very, very long time....

Hope some balance can be restored in the budget, meaning more funding for Aero and Science also.

This is great, all those who are unemployed due to the economy going through the floor can tune into the NASA channel and watch how the hundreds of millions of tax money from those who are still working and their kids and there kid’s kids will be spent on exploration and earth science. Will it be worth it, probably NOT, but by gum we will be back to the Moon and all those who think we are going to land on MARS in our lifetime keeping believing in Santa Claus, we can’t afford the trip, run the numbers. This stimulus package just pass by our government will bankrupt this nation; come to think of it we are already bankrupt! Try living on your credit cards and see what happens when they say no more credit, pay up and by the way look whose holding most of the debt paper on this country – China, not the best friend of this nation.

This is only a quick preview of the NASA budget. The hammering out process can decimate our budget as we have seen in the past. Hopefully the Altair/Orion projects and Constellation in general will get a nice boost as we finally get off the pad this summer. Currently the language by Scolese in the statement today are devoid of any Constellation reference. Lets hope we will be using the moon as our next space station in 11 years.

It seems like good news for NASA.

Yeah, but at what cost? As Jay mentions, it's merely one manifestation of fiscal irresponsibility that is sending our nation into the toilet. Hello Moon, goodbye U.S.A.!

The Constellation program & the ESAS (Exploration Systems Architecture Study) have won the day.

The tipping point has been reached for the near term of our space exploration.

This victory should be credited to the hard work of each and every NASA engineer & scientist & support staff. Former administrator Griffin deserves credit too in that he stuck to his guns on the shuttle being unsafe long term,& he helped craft policies & actions that the new architecture can deliver on:

#1
LEO Access on a man rated system(lower g's) with crew escape with LEO/ISS cargo supply supplemented by Private sector. COTS will flourish, prosper and be a major factor in the next 10 years, even commonplace

#2
Global Moon Access, poles & all

#3
Heavy lift capability that allows more metric tonnes to be taken to the moon and Mars & Large Telescope Opportunities
(fuel depot would make these even better)

The Next Battle/tipping point will be developing & launching ARES 5 and new propulsion technologies for faster more powerful access to deeper space;

A)
Re-funding NERVA (Nuclear Engine for Rocket Nuclear Application)

B)
Re-starting a cheaper version of Prometheus Nuclear initiative with ESA Help maybe

C)
Take VASIMR (Variable Specific MagnetoPlasma Rocket)up to 500 kw Units with RTG's in the next 10 years & see what they can really do...

Now we just have to wait for who President Obama will pick as the Next Administrator....

I vote for Dr.Alan Stern

The harsh reality of putting humans on the moon was exposed during the Apollo program. Dust, dust, dust. This undeniable fact is slowly sinking in and causing slow changes to the original gung-ho-go-to-the-moon rampage where astronauts are joyfully bouncing around on the lunar surface and hitting golf balls around.

The changes occurring are the sudden appearance of pressurized rovers (lunar RVs), i.e., the presidential inauguration parade. The crews land, get in their RV and start exploring. They deploy little robots for local vicinity exploring and sample collecting. They also have jump-in-and-go EVA suits that are sealed to an airlock to help eliminate any trace of dust inside of the manned rover. This will be extremely fascinating for the public to witness due to the magnitude of potential discoveries by manned missions versus unmanned missions. The increased return on investment, however, is going to cost more in funding and human risk. History has shown that those who take a reasonable risk and succeed, change things forever. Without risk, nothing changes.

As long as the funding is persistent or increased over a long period of time, we will put people operating robots on the lunar surface doing things that Mars Rovers can’t do. It’s a healthy competition that benefits both manned missions and unmanned missions.

Any decreases in funding may result in numerous remotely operated robots on the lunar surface. They work without a person right there quite well with much less risk to human life and at a lower cost as shown for years and years by the Mars Rover’s huge successes.

spacey,
H.R. 6063 was the NASA Authorization Bill of 2008. It is merely a policy statement and it set funding limitations. The $20.21 billion was actually an upper limit set by Congress. In the bill, Congress set certain policies and required various reports from NASA on its projects and their progress. The last Authorization bill was in 2005 and the "proposed" funding in that bill was never realized either.

These authorization bills do not provide funding. Each year appropriations bills are passed to fund NASA and the rest of the government. You can find these appropriations bills at this site: http://www.thomas.gov/home/approp/app09.html