White House Responds To Congress on FY 2011 Budget

What is the bold new human space flight initiative that Obama refers to?

do we have the OMB letter?

He wants $100 million transfered from the NASA FY2011
budget to the departments of Labor & Commerce as the
"pay for" for the employment assistance for displaced
NASA contract workers who are loosing there jobs from
the discontinuation of the Shuttle and Constelation
programs.

Of course under the budget rools of the congress, any
increase in spending or decrease in taxation has to be
paid for by offsetting spending cuts or tax increases.

Not a lot to it.

".....which revitalizes NASA"

It's Orwellian the language at times.

why................
its in that OMB letter!
perhaps if you look at the NASA 2011 budget sexy power points and compare them with the sexy ESAS power points the answer may be in those tea leaves.

I found the text-

Agency:
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE
ADMINISTRATION
Heading:
Exploration
FY 2011 Budget
Appendix Page:
1172
FY 2011
Pending Request:
$4,263,400,000
Proposed Amendment:
Language
Revised Request:
$4,263,400,000
(In the appropriations language under the above heading, add the following new language immediately after "2012" and just before the colon preceding the proviso:)
, of which $30,000,000 shall be transferred to "Economic Development Assistance Programs, Economic Development Administration", Department of Commerce, to spur regional economic growth in the area around the Kennedy Space Center; of which $10,000,000 shall be transferred to "Training and Employment Services, Employment and Training Administration", Department of Labor, for job training activities in the area around the Kennedy Space Center; of which up to $45,000,000 shall be transferred to "Economic Development Assistance Programs, Economic Development Administration", Department of Commerce, to spur regional economic growth in other areas affected by job losses associated with programmatic changes in this account; and of which up to $15,000,000 shall be transferred to "Training and Employment Services, Employment and Training Administration", Department of Labor, for job training activities in other areas affected by job losses associated with programmatic changes in this account
This amendment would fund an initiative from within the funds requested for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Exploration account to develop a plan to spur regional economic growth and job creation along the Florida Space Coast and other affected regions in furtherance of the Administration's bold new course for human space flight, which revitalizes NASA and transitions to new opportunities in the space industry and beyond.
The proposed Budget totals would not be affected by this amendment.

Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget_amendments/
Estimate #7, bottom of page.

Bold new course? pffft. His is a going out of business plan. At least for HSF. What happens first, a man rating for Falcon 9 or a public revolt against sending hundreds of millions in hard currency to Russia for rides in a can?

The degrading of American Excellence continues. Thank you Obama.

So yes, by all means.

F9/Dragon is the quickest and cheapest path to USA HSF, which is very much on everyone's mind, including Musk, Bolden, and Obama.

So accelerate and support COTS and COT-D, get as many flights under our belt, and meanwhile develop the BEO vehicles and technologies.

If ULA can become competitive, for sure, the more the merrier. However, it's time to move beyond the Cost-Plus single contractor mode of doing business.

Sounds like a plan to me.

Never before have the actions of a president screwed up my life so directly and immediately as this past year. It's really hard not to take it personally.

This is a est msg. to see if my PC is working.

Doesn't the new budget buy science and research in amounts not seen for decades? So isn't "revitalizes NASA" accurate?

The Constellation failure-deniers probably think Constellation revitalizes NASA!

"What happens first, a man rating for Falcon 9 or a public revolt against sending hundreds of millions in hard currency to Russia for rides in a can?"

NASA astronauts are already Soyuz to go to the ISS. Two just arrived there.

Please note that the public didn't even yawn about it.

Congress, desperately hoping that all the finger pointing at NASA will somehow absolve them of the three fingers pointing back at them. Where were they when Cx STARTED to go awry?
"You can fool some of the Space Cadets..."

RC, the admin may in fact revitalize NASA tomorrow, but it is un-vitalizing NASA today.

"What is the bold new human space flight initiative that Obama refers to?"

Go to an asteroid some time in the 2020s in a spaceship that is yet to be designed using technology yet to be designed (or even adequately researched at present, in some cases). Then go to Mars some time in the 2030s and land on the planet before the sittitng president dies.

Note that, at no point, has anyone said that any of these things will be done more than once. Also note that the decision on exactly how to do these things and how to pay for them will only be taken after the incumbent is either out of office or a lame duck. A true plan from a politician's politician.

Oh, and before I forget, throw billions of dollars at commercial aerospace companies in the hope that at least one of them can come up with a crew vehicle to carry astronauts to the ISS before it is de-orbited some time after 2020.

Oh, that's rich, Brit. As if Area was anywhere on a faster track and as if the Lunar plan was anywhere close to happening in this decade.

"Throw Billions at commercial companies" - so far all that's been "Thrown" is a contract FOR SERVICES RENDERED. And at a good price.

What is driving all this bitterness? We're getting cheaper launch and more money to pursue whatever we want to put on top of the launcher. How good is that?

Jobs are being lost, and on a personal level I feel for those people, but we can't confuse that with the evaluation of the space program. The jobs may be part of an inefficient and expensive system, but the people are not individually superfluous.

Since the overall budget increases, the money will go to salaries in the sector. But there will be a period of re-shuffling, and not everyone will come out unscathed.

For the Space Program, this is a good thing, and that's the real goal.

"The degrading of American Excellence continues."

SpaceX and Masten and some of the others are all about American excellence.

America has lead the world in aviation (and other things but I like aviation) from the sands of Kitty Hawk to the New Boeing coming off the line now not because of massive government spending in aviation; but because of government policy which encouraged companies to find new service, build new and great products and make them affordable.

At one point in history, Boeing, Grumman, Cessna, Douglas and others were all in the same boat SpaceX and Masten are now...small innovative companies betting almost everything on a better mousetrap.

Boeing did, in response to a government contract a lot like COTS, about what SpaceX has done. It took off the shelf technology, rewrote how things were used...and built the B-17.

That is American excellence. SpaceX if they work will 1) bring the commercial launch industry back to the US, 2) start the price going down to launch humans into space and 3) open up a price bar that is substantially lower then anything that exist today to access space.

That is American excellence.

Contrast that with the Union Rep on NASA TV who told Garver something like (sorry didnt save it on TIVO) "I need government to give me a job".

That is not. But that is NASA hSF.

Robert G. Oler

nasaengineer, everyone wants to deliver a fair share of sympathy to those whose job security is affected. But NASAWATCH has reported on the failures of Constellation for years... and years. The sympathy rope is getting short.

"NASA astronauts are already Soyuz to go to the ISS.
Two just arrived there. Please note that the public
didn't even yawn about it."

I would also note that according to the ISS agreement,
Russia has primary responsibility to deliver people to
the ISS, while the US has primary responsibility to
deliver cargo. The US also has the responsibility to
provide a life boat. Which we were planning to do with
the X33, which was cut to provide funds for Cx. So
the gap is disappointing maybe even humiliating, but
it is consistent with the ISS agreement we signed. What
isn't consistent is that there is no life boat and we
will have to quickly and expensively develop the over
priced and over engineered Orion Capsule to perform that
duty. We should just buy some Soyuz launches, while we
get the Dragon, CT-100, and Cygnus, etc. on line.

JFK in 1961: Go to the moon in a spacecraft not yet designed aboard a rocket not yet invented using materials and alloys that don't yet exist navigating thru space using technologies unproven.
Sounds like Obama's approach is rooted in history, doesn't it?
Oh yes, Howard Hughes was told in the 1930s :"Who the hell are you to design aircraft for the masses, with nothing but oilfield experience?" Like Elon, Hughes laughed all the way into the history books. If it weren't for the BP oil disaster, he'd be on the cover of Time Magazine. Small thinkers have always missed the point of a technological revolution. Just like the one we are in the midst of today. Go Spacex!

RC:

Sympathy is not the point. People are educated and experienced and things will pretty much work out. It's a big inconvenience for them, and a big inconvenience for NASA when it tries to work on whatever it is that comes next because so many people will be gone. It's a "middle class" problem. Things could be worse.

Do you think people actually liked working all of 2010 on a "zombie" program that won't fly? If so, don't.

Give people more credit. They want to work on a program that is the right one, and one that will go somewhere.

It's easy to spout off on the blogs. But when you are working on contract, you work on what the contract says, not what you think it should be.

It is not logical to blame the workers just because you don't like the program.

Frank, are you really comparing Obama to JFK? JFK set a goal, a timetable, and supported both of those with a budget. Obama has not done any of those things. All Obama has done is cancel a program. This is not visionary or showing leadership.

JFK in 1961: Go to the moon in a spacecraft not yet designed aboard a rocket not yet invented using materials and alloys that don't yet exist navigating thru space using technologies unproven. Sounds like Obama's approach is rooted in history, doesn't it?

You left out one piece of very important information....JFK challenged the Nation to do it in a decade. Obama's "approach" has shallow roots.

Eddie, for the record, I am also anti-Ares. I consider the ALS to be one of the major causes of the current problems. That said, I remain unconvinced that this 'dash for commercial' will do anything significant for human space exploration.

They want to work on a program that is the right one, and one that will go somewhere.

The problem is that there may not be a job for them on a program that is the right one. Hey, I'd like to work for a space program that is going somewhere, but it ain't gonna happen. As long as the program is less important than who gets to work on it, we'll never go beyond LEO with it. Jobs program or effective space program, take your pick, we can't have both.

@ crazy eddie ('crazy'; how appropriate!)

"What is driving all this bitterness? We're getting cheaper launch and more money to pursue whatever we want to put on top of the launcher. How good is that?"

What's driving the bitterness is the fact that those of us who have been in this business for quite a while (either on the CS or contractor side) know that the business case these upstarts are depending on will fall apart when they really learn what it takes to safely orbit and deorbit a spacecraft with humans inside. Unfortunately, by that time, it will be too late (or cost a ton of money...) to reverse course. Then, we'll toss money down the black hole of SpaceX or Orbital or whoever else convinces Holdren (Garver? Obama?) they can do it on the cheap.
The resulting gap in U.S. HSF capability will make the gap between Apollo and Shuttle look like a extended weekend holiday. How good is that? Not good at all.

Frank, you've got to be kidding.

JFK laid out a specific goal and timetable. Obama: neither.

The Saturn vehicle was already in preliminary design when JFK made the speech. Engine testing (F-1's no less!!) began TWO YEARS earlier in *1959*!

And, geez...I wonder when aluminum (like the Saturn was made of...) was first "invented"?

You post is so full of bs I almost didn't reply, but then I thought, "there's probably some folks on here that actually believe what he says..."

FAIL.

> JFK set a goal, a timetable, and supported both of those with a budget. Obama has not done any of those things.

Obama has. A small minority of fanatics are in denial about the documentation released thus far, not even acknowledging their existence. Nor do the fanatics acknowledge the amount of time it takes such plans to solidify further, like the VSE eventually did.

> Obama's "approach" has shallow roots.

This chap must be kicking himself for that bit. Because of course everyone knows JFK's approach had shallow roots too. And it still didn't matter.

What has Obama done? Proposed the largest increase for NASA in a generation, and is proposing to refocus the agency on developing the technology that will be needed for BEO missions. You may not believe him; that's your right. But give the man credit-when all the rest of the federal government is being slashed, he's adding to the NASA top line. Bush 43 didn't, Clinton didn't. Give the guy the benefit of the doubt.

Frank,

I agree it is hard to blame any one person or politician for what is going on. It is way too simplistic to blame one group or person. This is a very large and complex issue that has been festering for twenty years but here is the bottom line:

To me the sad part about all of this is the single moms and young families who are about to be fired. Yes I know the Cx and government haters who come to this site don't care about these people but most normal thinking humans have sympathy for people even if they don't like the program they are working on. These good people went to school, got up early and went to work every day and all this mess has brought them down to the unemployment line.

Sure blame can be spread around to just about any one and any thing if you want to point fingers but I am not talking about who to blame - I am talking about the lives of people who played by the rules and did what they were asked to do. Wasn't there a better way to handle this? Why not a slow process so the industry and local towns could absorb a couple hundred people a quarter? Why this intense hatred and insanity toward these good people?

Don't be fooled by the pundits who say "oh they can go find good jobs - this layoff is not a big deal." That is not true - there are not enough jobs in Houston or Huntsville to absorb these people and yes the older guys will be able to use their experience to transition to something else.

So all this has come down to hurting thousands of good people at a time in our economy where there is little hope of them finding a job. Think about it. Where does a young single mom with an engineering degree in aerospace engineering with specific Ares rocket motor experience go find a job?? She won't. She will lose her house, go on unemployment and end up working (maybe) in a few years away from her mom and dad in an industry that pays half as much. Can't anyone feel the real story here? Sorry to be so negative but someone needs to point out the reality of this situation.

This is a very sad day for these young people and with all the bailouts of bankers, insurance companies, automotive companies, local and state governments, mortgage and credit card companies I am sure they will search for years trying to reconcile why they were selected to be punished so severely.

It is the strangest thing I've seen in my entire working career.

"Obama has. A small minority of fanatics are in denial about the documentation released thus far, not even acknowledging their existence. Nor do the fanatics acknowledge the amount of time it takes such plans to solidify further, like the VSE eventually did."

I guess the congressional panels and committees responsible for approving NASA's budget are included in that "small minority of fanatics"?

Please let all of the fanatics know where all the documentation is, besides the original 2011 NASA Budget Proposal. What's going to be cut to build the Orion CRV? Is it an asteroid or Mars? Any links you could provide to this documentation would be appreciated!

Try the presentations here:
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/new_space_enterprise/home/workshop_home.html

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/sbag/meetings/sbag2/presentations/PlymouthRockasteroidmission.pdf

http://www.airspacemag.com/space-exploration/Million_Mile_Mission.html

http://iaaweb.org/iaa/Studies/nextsteps.pdf

Exciting stuff!

From the televised committees I have seen to date one gets the impression that your politcal class have not read any of these documents.
But I blame their staffers...

Please get back to this 'NEO fanatic' if you have any more questions :)

BTW the VSE never "solidified." Except around the ESAS study. Which was, IMHO, the antithesis of what the original VSE was about.

"What's driving the bitterness is the fact that those of us who have been in this business for quite a while (either on the CS or contractor side) know that the business case these upstarts are depending on will fall apart when they really learn what it takes to safely orbit and deorbit a spacecraft with humans inside."

Once again, atleast one of these "upstarts" are being led by the best and brightest that Elon poached from ULA, USA, NASA, etc, etc. They're not new to the business like people like you would like everyone to believe. They know what it takes.

"Unfortunately, by that time, it will be too late (or cost a ton of money...) to reverse course. Then, we'll toss money down the black hole of SpaceX or Orbital or whoever else convinces Holdren (Garver? Obama?) they can do it on the cheap."

Funny thing, when you started talking about "costing a ton of money" and "throwing money down the black hole" I thought you were talking about the Program of Record.

"The resulting gap in U.S. HSF capability will make the gap between Apollo and Shuttle look like a extended weekend holiday. How good is that? Not good at all."

Yeah spending $10 Billion so far and still having a 7-9 year gap ATLEAST with the Program of Record's first Ares I/Orion flight to LEO (and since ISS won't be there with the POR sucking up all HSF funding I don't know exactly why they're flying to LEO) ? I think I'll take my chances with a new route to LEO......

Well Robert I was not aware that Obama started any of the commercial entities you site. Hopefully, these excellent companies will overcome the degrading commited by Obama.

The links you reference may be exciting stuff, but no where in these links does it say these are NASA's plans. The Plymouth Rock Asteroid Mission is a 2007 document proposing using the Ares I & Ares V with an Orion capsule (all to be canceled under current plans). The article from Air & Space Magazine is from 2008 and nowhere does it say it is current policy to pursue. The NASA New Space Enterprise page talks about a workshop that is putting out requests for information on technology. That is the problem people have when they say there is no plan. These links do not refer to any NASA/Obama endorsed plan. Can you provide a link to a document that says what NASA's plan is other than a list of vague goals and how they intend to accomplish it?

@ spaceman85
"...They're not new to the business like people like you would like everyone to believe. They know what it takes."

If they knew what it took, then they'd know they cannot safely and routinely orbit and deorbit a spacecraft with humans inside and meet their business case. It can only be one way or the other.
Perhaps the business/marketing types in these companies are not listening to their own engineers? I don't know, but there is a serious discrepancy one way or the other.

Regardless, by the time they discover this (or admit it...), it appears that the NASA capability will be decimated. Then we'll all be screwed.
I understand that you want to "take [your] chance with a new route to LEO," but I don't like to gamble against stakes that high and with such low odds. And I don't think our government should either.

@ Frank
"What has Obama done?"

Yes, he added a little bit to the budget (~3% a year), I acknowledge that. However, more importantly, he's put NASA in a perpetual study mode. That does 2 things:
1) It makes the technology funds ripe for cherry-picking by any other idea/project that comes along (whether of scientific, social, "pressing national need" interests ... or even just Congressional perrogative). I've seen this happen time and time again over 25+ years....surely you have too?
2) It unnecessarily delays things that don't need to be studied any more. Heavy lift? C'mon, this has been studied to death - plenty of excellent designs exist and are ready...what the hell are we waiting for?

Bottom line: the funds will be stripped away before we build a damn thing.