Post by sandi66 on Sept 30, 2010 8:29:07 GMT -5
House likely to pass Senate's vision for NASA
By Gautham Nagesh - 09/28/10 02:53 PM ET
The House appears poised to pass the Senate's $19 billion reauthorization of NASA on Wednesday, preserving the space shuttle program through next year but giving the White House most of their desired cuts to the human spaceflight program.
If the House approves the bill, which passed the Senate unanimously last month, it would mean an end to most of the Constellation program and increasing reliance on Russia and the commercial space industry to ferry American astronauts to the International Space Station.
The move would also put a temporary stop to a year of wrangling over the agency's future. Lawmakers, particularly those from Florida and Texas with numerous NASA jobs in their districts, have strongly resisted the administration's attempts to privatize human spaceflight. The authorization would lay out a three-year vision for NASA but would still require appropriators to fund the bill's priorities at a later date.
House Science Committee chairman Bart Gordon, (D-Tenn.) said he will support what he considers a flawed Senate bill because there isn't enough time to reach a deal before the start of the new fiscal year on October 1. Gordon offered a compromise of his own last week but that effort stalled after meeting opposition in the upper chamber.
The bill includes $1.6 billion to boost the commercial space industry, $400 million more than in Gordon's bill but still less than half the amount requested by the White House. But the Commercial Spaceflight Foundation said passing the Senate bill would be vastly preferable to continued uncertainy, which may result in layoffs.
The Senate bill also deviates from President Obama's plans by continuing the space shuttle program for one final flight next year. The bill would also preserve aspects of the Constellation program including the Orion crew capsule and a heavy-lift rocket designed to travel to Mars, both of which are opposed by the administration. The projects survived partly due to the vocal efforts of Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Texas) and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.).
A Senate aide the bill would also substantially invest in advanced exploration technologies and robotics. The Senate bill moves up the timetable for the development of a long-range space vehicle in response to lawmakers' concerns about relying on Russia for human spaceflight.
Source:
thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/121399-house-likely-to-pass-senates-vision-for-nasa
The contents of this site are © 2010 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.
Comments (4)Senate bill not as good as President Obama's original proposal but a definite step in the right direction. Once the Republican & Democrat porkers get past the election they'll appreciate what it does for the American business community and both will be calling it there own by next election cycle.
sftommy
BY sftommy on 09/28/2010 at 15:56
Human spaceflight is the main reason NASA exists. Gutting it and setting our space program back years is shameful, especially because this proposal produces no budget savings at all.
There's no need to wait decades for advanced propulsion. Plain old chemical rockets, in a heavy-lift booster, just as called for in the Vision for Space Exploration and the Mars Direct Plan, will do just great.
BY Carney on 09/28/2010 at 16:43
Carney, gutting government HSF is not the same as gutting all HSF. The gap between shuttle and the next crew launch system is the product of decades of political neglect and Griffin's bold brinksmanship — and not a distinction between the commercial and government paths. Commercializati on may not save money this year, but will for generations to come. Government monopoly on HSF is too expensive, because there is no incentive for driving costs down.
Chemical rockets at a colossal scale might work, but that still implies depots and other advanced on-orbit facilities that don't exist. Even so, the risks of radiation and normal medical emergencies for astronauts during a placid multi-year transit to Mars are not trivial. Have you accepted the possibility of losing astronaut lives during each trip? I am sure the country hasn't.
BY Papa on 09/28/2010 at 19:13
The possibilities for new and advanced technology propulsion systems, e.g. ion, fusion and solar will cut exposure time of astronauts to deep space radiation. The Senate measure directs investment in such technologies. Commercial access to low earth orbit and the moon will enable the space agency to look to deep space and advance new propulsion technologies and gain the means to mitigate against the health consequences of long-term deep space flights. Suspend the rules and 'let's go!'
BY JackKennedy on 09/28/2010 at 20:00
thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/121399-house-likely-to-pass-senates-vision-for-nasa
By Gautham Nagesh - 09/28/10 02:53 PM ET
The House appears poised to pass the Senate's $19 billion reauthorization of NASA on Wednesday, preserving the space shuttle program through next year but giving the White House most of their desired cuts to the human spaceflight program.
If the House approves the bill, which passed the Senate unanimously last month, it would mean an end to most of the Constellation program and increasing reliance on Russia and the commercial space industry to ferry American astronauts to the International Space Station.
The move would also put a temporary stop to a year of wrangling over the agency's future. Lawmakers, particularly those from Florida and Texas with numerous NASA jobs in their districts, have strongly resisted the administration's attempts to privatize human spaceflight. The authorization would lay out a three-year vision for NASA but would still require appropriators to fund the bill's priorities at a later date.
House Science Committee chairman Bart Gordon, (D-Tenn.) said he will support what he considers a flawed Senate bill because there isn't enough time to reach a deal before the start of the new fiscal year on October 1. Gordon offered a compromise of his own last week but that effort stalled after meeting opposition in the upper chamber.
The bill includes $1.6 billion to boost the commercial space industry, $400 million more than in Gordon's bill but still less than half the amount requested by the White House. But the Commercial Spaceflight Foundation said passing the Senate bill would be vastly preferable to continued uncertainy, which may result in layoffs.
The Senate bill also deviates from President Obama's plans by continuing the space shuttle program for one final flight next year. The bill would also preserve aspects of the Constellation program including the Orion crew capsule and a heavy-lift rocket designed to travel to Mars, both of which are opposed by the administration. The projects survived partly due to the vocal efforts of Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Texas) and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.).
A Senate aide the bill would also substantially invest in advanced exploration technologies and robotics. The Senate bill moves up the timetable for the development of a long-range space vehicle in response to lawmakers' concerns about relying on Russia for human spaceflight.
Source:
thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/121399-house-likely-to-pass-senates-vision-for-nasa
The contents of this site are © 2010 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.
Comments (4)Senate bill not as good as President Obama's original proposal but a definite step in the right direction. Once the Republican & Democrat porkers get past the election they'll appreciate what it does for the American business community and both will be calling it there own by next election cycle.
sftommy
BY sftommy on 09/28/2010 at 15:56
Human spaceflight is the main reason NASA exists. Gutting it and setting our space program back years is shameful, especially because this proposal produces no budget savings at all.
There's no need to wait decades for advanced propulsion. Plain old chemical rockets, in a heavy-lift booster, just as called for in the Vision for Space Exploration and the Mars Direct Plan, will do just great.
BY Carney on 09/28/2010 at 16:43
Carney, gutting government HSF is not the same as gutting all HSF. The gap between shuttle and the next crew launch system is the product of decades of political neglect and Griffin's bold brinksmanship — and not a distinction between the commercial and government paths. Commercializati on may not save money this year, but will for generations to come. Government monopoly on HSF is too expensive, because there is no incentive for driving costs down.
Chemical rockets at a colossal scale might work, but that still implies depots and other advanced on-orbit facilities that don't exist. Even so, the risks of radiation and normal medical emergencies for astronauts during a placid multi-year transit to Mars are not trivial. Have you accepted the possibility of losing astronaut lives during each trip? I am sure the country hasn't.
BY Papa on 09/28/2010 at 19:13
The possibilities for new and advanced technology propulsion systems, e.g. ion, fusion and solar will cut exposure time of astronauts to deep space radiation. The Senate measure directs investment in such technologies. Commercial access to low earth orbit and the moon will enable the space agency to look to deep space and advance new propulsion technologies and gain the means to mitigate against the health consequences of long-term deep space flights. Suspend the rules and 'let's go!'
BY JackKennedy on 09/28/2010 at 20:00
thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/121399-house-likely-to-pass-senates-vision-for-nasa