Alabama Hates Norm

There's no chance that these lawmakers developed these arguments from reading the report. They were fed a list of objections from a technical support group. Now who would that be?

There's a boost for commercial launch services to LEO, but also a boost for NASA heavy launch capability for beyond LEO. The reason these guys are swinging swords is so that NASA can keep a monopoly on "trucking services" to LEO?

HSF is about jobs, not space. MSFC and its Alabama politicians exemplify that fact. This is why it takes $35 billion to design and build an Ares I rocket using "heritage" hardware. The Shuttle was a completely new design developed for $10 billion, even inflation doesn't explain that difference. The difference is supporting a bloated infrastructure and workforce amassed over the last 3 decades. For every 5 contractors NASA lays off, it should have to lay off a civil servant.

One for five, thats great! Can you imaging the process that would need to be completed in order for NASA to figure out the requirements of who/what at NASA gets the axe? And that just the requirements. Then they would have to figure out an implementation plan followed by executing a pilot program. Some secondary center that wasn't in vogue would be given the short straw to fall on it's sword.

It's a great idea to get rid of all the actual scientists since there won't be any money left for real science anyway.

It would take years and millions of bucks to happen.

The sad reality is that a lot of worker bees are going to hit the street while the drones continue to feed. And those are mean streets nowadays.

As sickening as these politicians are, it's not really the politicians that are the underlying problem -- it's the people vote for them. Members of Congress cause vast harm to the country as a whole for relatively minor local benefits because that's what gets them elected.

I'm not singling out Alabama -- they just happen to be the villains in this case because they happen to have the government jobs that are being protected. If MSFC were anywhere else I'm sure the representatives from that region would just a viciously defend the status quo.

The requirements and the process are already defined. It's called a Reduction-In-Force (RIF). I was talking about a RIF for HSF Centers (KSC, MSFC and JSC), not Science Centers. This is where the huge layoffs will occur for contractors, mainly KSC, where I work as a civil servant. BTW, this site started as RIF Watch back in the early '90s when Space Station Freedom was cancelled and ISS was born and NASA was threatening a RIF.

I just read up on the RIF stuff from OPM. Yeah, I remember the RIF panic back then, now. Never happened to my knowledge. Has here ever been a RIF at NASA, or for that matter anywhere in the Fed? I know that things got pretty dark at the Cape after Apollo. They probably had a different mechanism in place then. I really don't know. I am pretty sure the contractors at KSC are doomed one way or another unless NASA get it's pin money.

Possum: Commenting *only* on the cost figure you gave: I've seen SSP development costs for the period 1972-1982 consistently listed in current year (2009) dollars at close to $46 Billion.

Shuttle should not fly after 2010 according to the 2003 Columbia accident report based on assessment of Shuttle architecture. Any decision to fly Shuttle past 2010 is a decision to fly until there is another accident.