NASA's Ares Rocket Dead, But Congress Lets You Pay $500 Million More For It

Thanks to congressional inaction, NASA must continue to fund its defunct Ares I rocket program until March -- a requirement that will cost the agency nearly $500 million at a time when NASA is struggling with the expensive task of replacing the space shuttle.

About one-third that money -- $165 million -- will go to Alliant Techsystems, or ATK, which has a $2 billion contract to build the solid-rocket first stage for the Ares I, the rocket that was supposed to fill the shuttle's role of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station.

Read the whole story

Comments

[elfish]

08:09 PM on 01/13/2011

nov52011 Wrote
 
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt h.o.rney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
 
Another Republican trying to Make Barney Franks the scapegoat.
 
1. 2001 to 2006 - The republicans controlled the White House and the congress for six years and never passed a single piece of legislation to regulate FANNIE and FREDDIE or the financial sector.

2. In 2005, Mike Oxley (Republican) and Barney Franks authored H.R. 1461 to regulate Fannie and Freddie and tighten banking regulations. The bill had wide support from both parties and passed the House 331 to 90, a veto proof majority.

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by Mc.Cain, Dole and Sununu.

4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequently ki//ed the bill:

5. When the Democrats took power of the congress in 2006, the republicans voted against every attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie. In March 2007 Franks authored a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it passed with all Democrats for and 103 Republicans voting against it. It was the only regulatory bill Bush signed.

6. Later Franks tried to pass a bill to restrict subprime mortgages. All democrats voted for it and 127 Republicans voted against it. It was later filibusterered by the Republicans and d.ied in the Senate.

http://www.house.gov/frank/articles/2009/03-18-09-antidote_republican-amnesia.html
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8780c35e-7e91-11dd-b1af-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24851

[elfish]

08:09 PM on 01/13/2011

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by Mc.Cain, Dole and Sununu.

[elfish]

08:08 PM on 01/13/2011

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.

[elfish]

08:08 PM on 01/13/2011

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.
4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequent­­ly ki//ed the bill:

[elfish]

08:07 PM on 01/13/2011

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.
4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequent­ly ki//ed the bill:
 
5. When the Democrats took power of the congress in 2006, the republican­s voted against every attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie. In March 2007 Franks authored a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it passed with all Democrats for and 103 Republican­s voting against it. It was the only regulatory bill Bush signed.

[elfish]

08:07 PM on 01/13/2011

nov52011 Wrote
 
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt h.o.rney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
 
Another Republican trying to Make Barney Franks the scapegoat.
 
1. 2001 to 2006 - The republicans controlled the White House and the congress for six years and never passed a single piece of legislation to regulate FANNIE and FREDDIE or the financial sector.
 
2. In 2005, Mike Oxley (Republican) and Barney Franks authored H.R. 1461 to regulate Fannie and Freddie and tighten banking regulations. The bill had wide support from both parties and passed the House 331 to 90, a veto proof majority.
 
3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.
4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequently ki//ed the bill:
 
5. When the Democrats took power of the congress in 2006, the republicans voted against every attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie. In March 2007 Franks authored a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it passed with all Democrats for and 103 Republicans voting against it. It was the only regulatory bill Bush signed.
 
6. Later Franks tried to pass a bill to restrict subprime mortgages. All democrats voted for it and 127 Republicans voted against it. It was later filibusterered by the Republicans and d.ied in the Senate.
 
http://www.house.gov/frank/articles/2009/03-18-09-antidote_republican-amnesia.html
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8780c35e-7e91-11dd-b1af-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24851

[elfish]

08:05 PM on 01/13/2011

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.

4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequent­­­ly killed the bill:

5. When the Democrats took power of the congress in 2006, the republican­­­s voted against every attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie. In March 2007 Franks authored a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it passed with all Democrats for and 103 Republican­­­s voting against it. It was the only regulatory bill Bush signed.

[elfish]

08:04 PM on 01/13/2011

nov52011 Wrote
 
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion­­­­. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt h.o.rney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
 
Another Republican trying to Make Barney Franks the scapegoat.
 
1. 2001 to 2006 - The republican­­­s controlled the White House and the congress for six years and never passed a single piece of legislatio­­­n to regulate FANNIE and FREDDIE or the financial sector.

2. In 2005, Mike Oxley (Republica­­­n) and Barney Franks authored H.R. 1461 to regulate Fannie and Freddie and tighten banking regulation­­­s. The bill had wide support from both parties and passed the House 331 to 90, a veto proof majority.

[elfish]

08:04 PM on 01/13/2011

nov52011 Wrote
 
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion­­­. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt h.o.rney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
 
Another Republican trying to Make Barney Franks the scapegoat.
 
1. 2001 to 2006 - The republican­­s controlled the White House and the congress for six years and never passed a single piece of legislatio­­n to regulate FANNIE and FREDDIE or the financial sector.

2. In 2005, Mike Oxley (Republica­­n) and Barney Franks authored H.R. 1461 to regulate Fannie and Freddie and tighten banking regulation­­s. The bill had wide support from both parties and passed the House 331 to 90, a veto proof majority.

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.

4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequent­­ly killed the bill:

5. When the Democrats took power of the congress in 2006, the republican­­s voted against every attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie. In March 2007 Franks authored a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it passed with all Democrats for and 103 Republican­­s voting against it. It was the only regulatory bill Bush signed.

6. Later Franks tried to pass a bill to restrict subprime mortgages. All democrats voted for it and 127 Republican­­s voted against it. It was later filibuster­­ered by the Republican­­s and d.ied in the Senate.

http://www­­.house.go­v­/frank/a­rt­icles/2­009­/03-18­-09-­antid­ote_r­epub­lican-­amn­esia.ht­ml
http://www­­.ft.com/c­m­s/s/0/87­80­c35e-7e­91-­11dd-b­1af-­00007­7b076­58.h­tml?nc­lic­k_check­=1
http://www­­.presiden­c­y.ucsb.e­du­/ws/ind­ex.­php?pi­d=24­851

[totaldisbelief]

01:25 PM on 12/28/2010

Right Hand : " Hi, What are you doing these days ?"
Left Hand: : " I have no freakin" idea !"

[Bogey907]

12:27 PM on 12/28/2010

That's a lot of money to waste, but it's peanuts compared to what we're wasting in Iraq and Afghanistan (and Pakistan and Yemen...).

[Andy95]

12:12 PM on 12/28/2010

If this is how the federal govt manages the space business, why would anyone want them managing our health care?

[Downix]

01:03 PM on 12/28/2010

Because a single Health Insurance company (whom I used to contract to hence will not use their name, but it rhymes with "Pet Wife") wastes, on average, $4-$5 billion per year. The IOM estimates that the Health Insurance industry (just the insurance industry, not the actual medical care itself) wastes over $800 billion per year, and is 2/3rds of all medical wasted expenditures.

Wasting $500 million, compared to $800 billion, I'll take the US Government, please. (A reminder, the whole Constellation program was a $50 billion program, with $500 million wasted, I'd call that a very good waste ratio)

[Andy95]

01:47 AM on 12/29/2010

Actually, the whole $50B Constellation program was a waste. 100% waste is even worse than your IOM stats and at least we have health care to show for it. Waste would be even worse if govt run.

[cdecisneros]

11:31 AM on 12/28/2010

Ah Teabaggers? Anyone? Anyone?Hello?

[devildog21]

11:19 AM on 12/28/2010

Your government at work. I wonder how long it will take us to realize just how completely dysfunctional our government is.

[PalmReader]

10:28 AM on 12/28/2010

Who came up with the idea of an Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) as first stage? That's outright dangerous (in manned spaceflight) and has never been done before, by no nation or company, as far as i can tell.

It was always liquid engines because you can shut them down in case something goes wrong and then eject or use other means of rescue. Once you've lit a first stage SRB you are commited and need a HUGE rescue system to get the capule away from the rocket (in case it takes the wrong curse under full power for example). Even if you attach the SRB's on the sides you can't just dump them, they might hit the rocket or the capsule or turn towards earth and hit outside the safety-zone.

No, this was a stupid idea on so many levels it boggles the mind. Scraping it would be correct, liquid is the way to go (in manned spaceflight). And to lower costs you don't have two different systems but one "mass-produced" (so to speak), so it's not useful for cargoflights either. The money invested was a waste and what happens now is bordering on insanity. BTW: remember the Challenger accident? Caused by an malfunctioning SRB...

[Downix]

01:08 PM on 12/28/2010

That would be ATK, who also built it. They sold the idea to former Administrator Mike Griffin.

Imagine how things would be if NASA was allowed to, in the 1970's, use the Shuttle-Saturn concept. No solid boosters. Instead, the shuttle and tank would sit on top of a Saturn V flyback first stage.

Here's a concept picture of how it looked:
http://sites.google.com/site/spaceodysseytwo/stg1969/2sts_f1.jpg

[Downix]

02:16 AM on 02/05/2011

I had to addendum a bit. This is not the first time it was tried. In the 1960's, they were going to replace the Saturn IB's first stage with a solid rocket engine, the AJ-260. Still the most powerful SRM ever made. When they fired it, they realized it would shake the crew to death. Same as Ares would have.