So there was a leak of an internal NASA document a few weeks ago which showed that space transportation architectures that employed the use of orbital storage of propellants, rather than lifting them all at once on a heavy-lift vehicle (such as the Senate Launch System), would save the taxpayer tens [...]
…who are writing open letters to the NASA administrator.
Why are you only calling for competition on one particular component of the SenateSpace Launch System? It is a huge project, estimated to cost many [...]
At least partly (presumably) as a result of a letter sent by California Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, I am pleased to report that senior senator of Alabama Richard Shelby’s office has released a letter to the NASA administrator, dated this past Friday, in which he states his [...]
Over at Tea in Space web site, the Senate Launch System earmark is explained:
Do the senators who authored this language have more knowledge about systems engineering than NASA employees and contractors? Do the senators who authored this language have more knowledge about acoustical flight dynamics of SRBs than NASA employees and [...]
I have a new page up on the web site describing the anti-competitive nature of some aspects of last year’s NASA authorization bill. Briefly, we urge that Congress stick to defining broad goals, and let NASA make the technical and economical transportation procurement decisions to achieve them.
That’s the headline of an op-ed I have at the Washington Times (it should be in print on Monday).
Unfortunately, at least for now, or at least in the eyes of Congress, it’s not true.
[Crossposted at Transterrestrial Musings]
On Wednesday the full House, debating the full-year continuing resolution HR 1, voted 228-203 to approve an amendment [...]