And So It Begins

Hmmm, an officer of the executive branch doing an act which the officer had no legal right to do...seems to me there is a legal term for that...oh yeah, "malfeasance".

This is about to get interesting.

Interesting. So far KSC NASA seems to be the only center "getting over" Constellation and "getting with the program". With the Shuttle still flying I figured they'd be the last to keep some semblance of morale up. Guess the top brass just don't care. Remember how fought for you FL voters.

The PEOPLE through congress have not had their say yet on your budget *proposal* Mr. Obama!

Are Obama appointees now breaking the law?

Where did the order originate from?

Who is responsible?

Posey is lying. The 2011 budget pays for Cx (that's why there's a billion+ in there for the closeout of Cx). NASA is fulfilling the rest of its contracts.

Not accepting new solicitations should be standard procedure. The law doesn't say they must accept new solicitations.

Hey "The Rat", no, we who thrive at KSC are not "getting over" anything. We're angry. Very angry that the correct course for the country is not the course the country chose to take.... yet. But it's always about the "yet". Nobody, NOBODY missed Apollo and Moon landings until years after they had ended. The same is true today. We won't be out of LEO until at least 2030, I'll probably be dead by then. My dreams are gone and so are those of my generation. That's all there is to it.

I've been wondering what's going on at Nasa, and why they were going ahead with shutting down Constellation. This is a strong rebuke from congress and I'm glad to see them standing up for us.

Y'all just noticed that the Obama administration tends to disregard laws that it finds inconvenient?

Just like its predecessor but with considerably more panache... :)

Now people are counting "jobs lost" before they ever existed.

The language in the FY2010 bill that was passed is very generic in regards to human space flight so I doubt anyone can make a case for misappropriation. The sentence that was inserted to supposedly protect Constellation only says that any changes in the current program or the creation of any new programs must be approved by congress in the next funding act which will be the FY2011 budget, so in effect it really says nothing.

I don't really agree with what the White House has done but I don't see where they have broken any law.

Although I sympathize with NASA support people and their job concerns, and I seriously question the current lack of manned-space direction, the basic fact here is that NASA is an Executive Branch organ, not Legislative Branch.

Congress may be forcing a Constitutional issue.

This is definitely getting interesting, and it seems precedence has been established. Too bad the whole program has become a political football, but one could expect that by canceling something so large.

The battles have just begun.

Spacearium,

Did you see the last email from the KSC Director? In 2 of the first 3 points, it said that KSC has to learn how to do things the way LSP and its predecessors have be doing for decades. This was brought up during OSP. Griffin then came in and wanted to go back to the outdated paradigms of Apollo. Now, the bulk of KSC is out on a limb.

Interesting.

However, did you notice how all the signers of that letter from Congress were from TX, AL, UT, and FL?

@ Spacerium

I sympathize. I'm upset too and am taking notes as to which Representative is supporting the POR. The others won't get my vote till they're out of office. Sen. Nelson rolled over pretty quick.

If my sources are correct though, KSC NASA has already stopped work on specific Ares I design activities with the executed contract in place, so EGLS is just the start. Someone as KSC HQ has decided to follow Bolden's path, even if it defies Congress.

"Interesting.

However, did you notice how all the signers
of that letter from Congress were from TX, AL, UT, and FL?"

interesting, but not true

Not soliciting EGLS is not defying Congress. The act was about existing contracts not new ones.

The jobs lost from the loss of Constellation only affect a fraction of 1% of the current jobs.

People who read this blog constantly forget that no one really cares about going to space.

Four out of 50 states (8%) standing their ground are merely bluffing their support for Constellation so they cannot be blamed when the layoffs come and they lose their seat in Congress because getting laid off is a pretty good incentive to vote for the other guy or gal running in November. They know it is not easy to go against what most states consider a smart decision.

Its also good incentive for other's who's jobs were barely spared that maybe this seat needs to change so it doesn't happen again and put me through all of this stress of losing my job.

Their only reason for whining about space jobs in their district is their job. Had they eroded (gerrymandered) their districts with non-space employed people totally immune to loss of space jobs, they would be silent now as is the case for 92% of the states.

These people are facing an enormous challenge and will likely suffer or strengthen based on whether they eventually go with the flow and agree that cheaper access to space using commercial space ventures is better for our country than paying Russians $51M per astronaut delivered to and from the ISS.

BTW, $51M is a huge bargain compared to the cost to deliver and return an astronaut to and from the ISS using Constellation. The Russians know that and fully support the Constellation path. The Constellation represented a do-all vehicle with a huge price and constant schedule delays. Is this what you think is going to compete with the Russians? Or is an out-of-the-blue commercial space vehicle designed just to get safely into low earth orbit and dock to the ISS, a better way to compete with them?

A competitive space company will likely take 50% of the astronauts and cargo to and from the ISS. A non-competitive space company like the Constellation, however, will likely be flown only once a year, just so they can say they have access to the ISS, at a well-hidden cost of $1.5B, 5 years from now, and take only 5-10% of the astronauts to and from the ISS and begin to do so long after a cost competitive space company can do the same thing. Even if none of this turns out to be true, it has some merit based on a study of space history which constantly repeats itself.

These cost competitive space companies only need a little technical help to make it happen. NASA is currently finding a way to make proprietary information they paid for in the past available to support the goals of these cost competitive space companies of the future.

Just because Constellation shows up on a plan that accesses the ISS every two weeks does not mean it is going to work out that way. The way it works, is based on cost, schedule, and how much money NASA has to spend. Ever notice how the Shuttle launch plan constantly gets delayed, extended and the cost goes up more than originally planned? It is a standardized process that is not written down. Now, take that perspective and compare it to the Russian launch plan. Did you notice that when the Russians say it will cost X amount and launch on X date, they live up to their business commitments? How ironic, this is what commercial space companies are competing with.

The President of the United States made a choice; a new direction full of risk and change. Some people like it. Some don't. The people who don’t aren’t really wasting their time. They are consuming it.

Oops, I was wrong, of the 28 signers - there was one each from OH, CA, NJ, and LA. The remaining 24 were from TX, FL, UT, and AL.

The point I'm trying to make is that you can't justify Constellation as a jobs program for Southern states (and Utah). Its either the right direction for the manned space program or the wrong one. That's the only way you'll get broad support for an initiative like this.

I have been reading this forum for many years and have only once posted to a thread.

It has been extremely difficult, reading the diatribes from uninformed NASA haters with seemingly nothing better to do than attempt to cripple the US space program. I have often wondered if some of you anonymous heal biters were doing just that and just exactly who or what country you were working for.

I admit I have a vested interest in Constellation and am mourning the current state of affairs. No, the program was not perfect. But is was so underfunded. I don't know what anyone could expect. And now it looks to be gone, and our hope for a US manned space flight program with it.

Congratulations.

@Vision Systems

I couldnt agree more. It is obvious by the posts here, that at least half the people posting do not now and have never worked for a human space flight program. About 10% used to work for the space program but are now bitter because they too poured everything into some earlier program that was taken away from them. For some reason these people are reveling in the cancellation rather than empathizing with those who are affected. Many are idealistic college students who think their ideas are "radical", but they dont realize that there will be no aerospace jobs for them when they graduate.

To those people who do not work in any of the human spaceflight programs I say, none of your so called facts about Constellation, Orion, Ares or even SpaceX for that matter, are anywhere near the truth as is made obvious by those of us who actually work for these programs. Go find some other place to Troll and stop gloating in 10 of thousands jobs. No, there will not be new work for a minimum of two years after this becomes law, so we are looking at nearly 3 years before any new significant contracts are awarded and jobs are created. Everybody will be gone by then.

"you can't justify Constellation as a jobs program"

A view like that ignores the specialized skills these people have and how long it takes to replace them. This isn't flipping hamburgers or making sales calls on the phone. In addition to BS and MS degrees, these skills involve many years of experience that could be lost and take many years to recover.

I just returned from Huntsville where I was able to speak with a few congressman as well as Mike Griffen and get their thoughts on the current direction. As you can imagine none of them were happy about it and the two congressman vowed to fight the change. However, the deciding factor will be how congressman from non NASA states view this change. Interestingly the view points that I got from most people I talked to was that a version of ARIES V may survive, ARIES I may be turned into a man rated ATLAS or Delta. It was the hope of some that I talked to that money not being spent on ARIES I go to space nuclear development for space power and nuclear rocket propulsion. It will be interesting to see what happens.

"And so it begins" - I guess the hot war has begun, but this conflict began last year when the legislation was passed.

Second, NASA's mission is ultimately owned by the people of the United States, and our representatives who speak for us are in the legislative branch. If Congress wants Constellation as is today, the president does have the option to veto, alter, or propose other alternatives, all subject to the authority of our representatives. The president does not have the authority to develop and execute a plan that does not receive congressional support.

I agree with the post that says contract solicitations can be cancelled without congressional approval, delay was warranted and cancellation was not illegal- but existing NASA programs cannot be eradicated without congressional approval, that is the law as it is written today. The right thing to do is to consider Obama's plan to gut manned space flight as a proposal, and put this issue into the hands of Congress, bring this issue to a head and see what direction Congress is willing to go. Given the present administration's confused and weak vision for NASA, Congress may need to show more leadership than ever before. Let's see how our Senators and Reps react.

I work in the Shuttle program and have Bachelors and Masters degree in engineering. I know better than anyone the scary level of attrition that will occur. But I believe that engineering skills aren't lost, nor will they every be lost.. They evolve. Meaning people will move onto other programs and jobs and continue to develop their skills. In 2020 (which is the best hope for a NASA operational manned space program at current funding levels) if they stayed at JSC or KSC or left, either way they'd have 10 years of lost skills since the Shuttle ended. So you can either leave them at the spaceflight centers in an effort to keep certain jobs in certain locations, or those skilled folks will make the difficult choices and take jobs at Orbital or SpaceX or Google or GE or Lockheed or wherever and use their engineering skills in parts of the country's economy that need those skills rather than spinning around like hamsters in wheels working on an endless series of canceled programs. In the meantime new workforces will be learning new skills. Science, technology, engineering evolves with the needs of the time.

About two weeks ago Senator Shelby of Alabama announced that he would filibuster all of the president's appointments until he got specific earmarks for his state - namely, securing the Air Force's aerial refueling tanker acquisition and the FBI's Terrorist Device Analytical Center.

Legislators do not care about what is right, only about getting money to their districts and states. Fighting for Constellation is simply fighting for money for their constituents. Nothing more.

The extension of ISS until 2020 pretty much sealed Constellation's fate. Even if not cancelled, Constellation did not have the budget over the next two decades to even do what Apollo did.

Constellation has no meaningful purpose other than as a welfare program for rocket scientists and a means for politicians to buy votes.

I disagree with you akear, If constellation were to survive the science crowd will loose not win, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. The fact is, NASA was chartered as an engineering directorate, but ended up becoming a science directorate, which I think was the wrong direction. All space science should be done by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), not NASA. The reason we have gone nowhere and done nothing since Apollo is because science has drained NASA of the budget it needed to advance the state of the art. between shuttle operational costs and the cost of science missions their has been nothing left over for new engineering developments. I think this is ironic since NASA was chartered to do engineering, not science. I think money would have been better spent if space science was given to the NAS and leveraged NASA launch vehicles. Every time we try to do something new in space the science community cried fowl because the funding is taken from them, but the fact of the matter is, if the project was funded by NASA, the money never should have gone to them in the first place.

I have no doubt that you are incredibly competent at what you do, but with the utmost respect, many other individuals posting comments have the same level of education if not more education than you and also have an equal amount of work experience in the aerospace disciplines. It is not as simple as you make it sound to just merely quit your job, move across the country and take a new job at a different location. I think that you will find that these small start up companies do not have the infrastructure to hire thousands of new engineers, and many will be left without work, and that experience as well as NASA infrastructure will be lost. Someone else mentioned that the letter from congress to Bolden only had TX, AL and FL representatives on the signature block; however, that is not true, it also contains signatures from LA, OH and NJ representatives. More importantly some of the representatives who signed it are powerhouses in congress who carry a lot of authority. Not playing nice with congress on this issue will have huge ramifications to the Obama administration, not to mention the mixture of democrats and republicans in the letter. In fact this may represent the most bi-partisan issue on the floor at this moment.

"Constellation has no meaningful purpose other than as a welfare program for rocket scientists and a means for politicians to buy votes."

So why spend money on GM or Chrysler than? $33 billion in automaker bailouts and we'll never see it again. That money could have gotten us two years closer to Mars, but now only FIAT knows what it bought.

Double dip recession here we come. "Let's start watching our pennies while unemployment is still double digits" Obama thinks to himself. The higher the unemployment the lower the tax revenue and the more gets cut. See you in the unemployment line CadetOne. In two years you'll be begging for a "jobs program".

Keith, Mike Coffman is from Colorado, not Texas.

I feel your pain. Its got to be scary not knowing if you will have a job next week. I kind of know how you feel working in the auto industry. Heck, about 6 months ago half the GM dealerships were put out of business without so much as an explanation why curtain dealerships were chose to close. All that being said I'd like to explain why so many people didn't like Ares 1. Safe, Simple, Soon, by 2012, SSME with 4 segment SRB. That was the sales pitch. Than came the bait and switch, J2-X with 5 segment SRB. Why? Because it was a top down decision by Mike Griffin and Scott Horowitz. Rocket science be damned. The constant stripping of safety and weight from Orion. Cx was a all or nothing gamble. The decisions that were made to pick Ares 1 is why you may lose your job, not because idiot bloggers such as myself publicly criticized the decision. Sometimes when you bet all or nothing you get nothing.

Well

Good to see all the sack cloth and gnashing of teeth is still going on here. We are once again at the same crossroads we stood at in the mid 70's and we once again have a cardigan sweater speech giving snake in the white house. As I said in earlier postings the workers that believed the lies in the cape stump speech and gave up the vote have no one to point to but back at themselves. The ships are burning in the harbor and we will be stranded ashore with dreams of what we could have done. Lori Garver is the worst thing that could have happened to the program and Charlie has proven Himself to be a puppet on a string. I was so embarrassed for Him when I saw the press conference with Him trying to explain the budget roll out screw-ups ups. We need to crank up the fuel tank production line and keep flying until this circular firing squad can kill themselves off in 2 years.

Carl Hewlett,

A ship in harbor is safe -- but that is not what ships are built for.