CxP Fights Back: The Video

Thanks for posting this video Keith, and having some kind words to say about it.

It truly is nice these days to see someone saying something positive about the work we've done over the years, rather than bashing it.

Not all of us make big bucks, not all of us are in positions to make the "big decisions," what I do know is that all of us, especially contractors, put in 110% every day.

Working 50-60 hour weeks (mostly uncompensated time over 40, time that you could be spending with your family) is about as far from "government welfare for engineers" as you can get.

Again, Thanks.

Your work will be even more appreciated when the US is still not in space 10 years from now.

If SpaceX is the best commercial prospect we have then the US space program is in worse shape than we thought.

Does anyone really believe a private company is going to send a man into space by 2020? I heard one engineer say that SpaceX rockets would not even pass the most rudimentary NASA safety standards.

@Frank:

Unfortunately, despite what you say, the constant fear of layoff is not new to us. We have been undergoing layoffs periodically at USA for at least a year now.

There is a certain amount of sadness about canceling this program, but quite honestly, we should never have been led down this path this far. The problem with this program isn't that a lot of great work hasn't been done, there has been some good work. But the reality is this program is far more costly than NASA could ever hope to afford. This program was already on the verge of financial collapse and was in position to have to push the federal government for a doubling of its annual budget to keep an already delayed schedule. Read the Augustine commission report, Option 1, CxP on its current funding path. Ares I arrives years after ISS is de-orbited (it needs the ISS budget for even that to happen). Ares V doesn't come online until late 2020's. Ten years of Orion in LEO with no ISS as a destination, what do you do with that? OK, now Ares V and EDS are available in 2030 to go to the Moon. But wait, I can't land because Altair won't be available for another decade. Now it's almost 2040 and all we can do is plant a flag and make footprints. A moon base would be tens of billions more and pushing 2050. All that is assuming the funding increases projected in the 2010 budget, which are not guaranteed. It takes all the money from Shuttle, all the money from ISS, all the projected increases to keep up with inflation, plus another $3 to $5 billion per year for the next two decades to bring this program back in line. All of NASA would have to be sacrificed and it still wouldn't be enough. Oh sure, the US can afford to throw a couple of hundred billion at this and make it happen, but in today's environment, the country is not up to it. And it's not Obama's fault. This all happened on Bush's watch. We went from having a budget surplus to doubling the national debt in 8 short years, more debt than had been accumulated in the entire 230-year history of this country. This is what happens when you increase defense spending from $280 billion to $610 billion per year and simultaneously implement the largest tax cut in history. If this is anybody's fault, it is NASA's fault. We should be able to do a lot more with the billions we get. I believe that is what the new path is going to do.

I have to believe that if I gave a LM or Boeing $8 billion and 5 years, they could human-rate and fly EELV's with astronauts. That's what CxP has taken to get to PDR (30% design). They are a decade away from the first operational flight no matter what their schedule says.

Frank
A sense of entitlement is not unique to Constellation. Research
civil servants have it in spades too and now they're fat 'n happy.
Who is going to curb them?

With Freedom, we always knew there would be a space station eventually. That goal always remained. The dream was always alive.

With cancelling Constellation, beyond LEO is now a distant dream again, return to moon? on to Mars?

GONE GONE GONE!

"saving" Constellation is more about saving it's goals worthy of our nation born of the frontiers, goals that hold precious the legacy of Apollo and all pioneers that build this nation.

Obama is so wrong on this.

It is shocking, this isn't like Freedom at all, it is a deeply dark and disturbing direction that offers little to inspire anyone.

> If SpaceX is the best commercial prospect we have

But that is not even close to reality. SpaceX is skilled and ambitious but also a child compared to ULA. What do you think will happen when ULA actually tries to beat SpaceX to crew transport?

This budget is a starter's pistol waiting to go off.

None of these guys are getting humans back to the moon or to Mars.

They will be challenged enough just to get to LEO for god sake.

They are not immune to the same challenges Constellation had either!

Definitely a very good video which begs the question:

Why do you try to market the product to the American people only when you are getting canceled? These types of videos should be widely marked to high skrools, colleges, universities, and other institutions of higher learning. NASA PAO FtL.

I love NASA but the culture we find ourselves in is baffling.

I'll be showing this video to all of my friends, colleagues, and students.

Good Night and Good Luck.

VR
RS327

Lest everybody has forgotten, no tears shed here for CxP folks - these are the same folks (regular and mgmt) that arrogantly dissed the Shuttle and Apollo workforce and their expertise, refused to listen to anything but their own self-proclaimed betterness at all things, and outright ran off anybody that really did know better than to go along with the charade!

I'd expect their mourning will subside quite abit when the newly awarded Seven start hiring.......
(yeah...that's the ticket...hehehe)

My question would be how much of a setback is this really?

The shuttles are dangerously old and all the other options are small on payload. Unless Obama can pull a venture star out of his rear we're going to have a serious problem before his first term is out.

I'm half hoping this is just a name game (Constellation is dead, long live Obama-Stellation!) and the hardware can still be salvaged from this experience.

Perhaps all of the nay-sayers should stop bitching and get behind this new direction to support it. If all of these "Merchant 7" companies don't have what it takes to get astronauts on orbit safely, then, perhaps, NASA should provide all of the support necessary to ensure that they do.

But alas, no, this will not happen. There will be too much complaining, resistance, in-fighting, and out right refusal to accept a new direction that we, the United States of America, will be further behind our goals of manned exploration of space, and remain there for a long time to come.

That isn't appropriate to be sent over gov't email systems.

Is there much to get behind at the moment?
Simply saying your going commercial is not a magic solution to all that troubles the space program.

There are very few business models that work in the space industry. If we propose that "sell it to NASA" is the new model (NASA, an organization accustomed to paying a billion dollars per flight) what's to make the commercial systems affordable for other businesses?

Saving a few bucks now could still cost us down the road.
Personally I'm holding out for a bit more illumination on this deal... and praying Obama has something farking brilliant up his sleeves.

Growing up in Daytona Beach as a kid we would often go outside to watch the rockets go up during class. My family watched a shuttle launch just this summer. It is awe inspiring.

I think the problem today is a lack of direction or focus. I am not saying it's anyone's fault at NASA but all government programs tend to blur over years as administrations come and go. One administrations great plane, ship or tank falls under the next administrations hatchet.

Such is the case here.

After all these years of driving the shuttle back and forth to the ISS we don't seem to have accomplished much.

As a teen in the 60's I had imagined us having personally explored Mars, and several moons by now. I have to admit a great disappointment and I think it goes back to a lack of direction or focus. We went to the moon in 69. What have we done since that was as monumental?

1. What do we want to accomplish?
2. How do we get to that?
3. How do we keep a long range plan viable over
years?

Add some military concerns, stir in many side projects like Hubble and you can see where everything got all blurry.

Possibly the biggest mistake was keeping the shuttle program too long. A lot of money was spent ferrying people and supplies back and forth. The original purpose was to make it cheap to get into space because it was reusable. That never happened. Seems nobody had a better idea and nobody wanted to shut down the program.

By now we should have a permanent colony on the moon and be visiting planets and moons in the inner system every year. ISS? Done that.

All I can say is Wow, What happened? Wheres the Technology we expected to have by now? 40 yrs + removed from putting a man on the the moon? Where are we? Stuck in LEO? Some might say that, yes. Still Relying on the same basic Chemical Rocket Technology? Yes! Why? Is there nothing better after all this time from the early 50's? What about all the think tanks and so called " smart guys" what are they doing making Ipads and Aps? I thought we understood chemical compositions and formulas now? Why does it still cost so much just for LEO? I know in this little rant I have used alot of questions. Because in my opinion right now looking at human space flight in the united states to LEO or anything beyond is nothing but questions and question marks.

Fred Sanford

P.S. my off world salvage deal stock fell yesterday:|

While I am not necessarily in agreement with canceling the Constellation program at this time (how long are we going to rely on the Russians for transport to ISS?), it's time for a new beginning.

It's time to move space into the commercial sector, and leave NASA to exploration. In order to make this happen, there need to be incentives. For example, space tourism and the potential related profits are motivating the likes of Virgin to make a big move. We need to concentrate on the things that will help this along. Energy and raw materials could be big motivators (eg. mining the asteroids and perhaps the moon for raw materials including Helium3).

Let's face it, we haven't returned to the moon in 40 years. Do you really think we would return in the next 40 years with the likes of the USGov and NASA running such a program? Will all the stopping, starting, funding/de-funding, political bickering and other crap that goes on in the government? Not gonna happen. And with what has been going on in the political arena for the past 15 years, this is less likely.

The commercial folks will make it happen, now it's time for NASA to move out of the may or better yet, help the process along. Focus on exploring in areas where we might drive commercial investment, go back to the moon and the asteroids with robots and do it soon!

I have no doubt that commercially-built spacecraft and launch vehicles are perfectly viable alternative to NASA. If NASA establishes a mechanism for cooperation for industry all the better.

After all, who else is going to hire all those folks laid off by NASA? So let's not cry over this but instead look at it as an opportunity to move ahead, even faster than before.

Paul

I am hoping that NASA will pay for missions not for taxi service. The reason for that is if NASA is flying it's own astronauts then it has to be involved in the design and the costs will go up. I would prefer the companies find their own astronauts to fly the mission and provide the information, data, or samples that NASA paid for.

Think of the risks people take all the time. Riding motorcycles at 150 mph without helmets, cave diving, sky diving, ect. I bet that a private company would be able to send people on a one way trip to Mars and get volunteers. That is something that NASA could never do but might be able to get away with paying for.

@Fred

The answer is simple and two fold.

1) Americans have been made to fear nuclear energy in any capacity.

2) NASA cannot take risks. Their culture will not allow for it.

VR
RS327

If Ares I-X would of used the 4 segment SRB and the SSME upper stage we wouldn't be cancelling the program. If Ares I would be ready by 2012 it would be impossible to cancel. To bad, so sad. If NASA gets another chance to build a rocket, next time make the requirements and than design the rocket.

This video comes across as so much whining... NASA is getting MORE MONEY going forward, and has the opportunity to do new work - things no one has done before. As with anything worthwhile in life, new achievements will be difficult; people will have to work hard to take skills they've honed, add new skills, and contribute. More money for NASA will directly result in more jobs for the aerospace industry.

How is this not a good thing?

Don't worry Fred, you and Lamont are going to have a big payday salvaging the processing facilities and the Pads at KSC in the next few years. Better get some new shocks for the truck.