Good points about OSC COTS launching from Wallops and satellite servicing, Red. I missed those.

FWIW…

Constellation budget overruns are also a long-term threat to the sorts of Earth observation and other robotic missions that GSFC is known for. The case is similar for NASA robotics and technology development from the Applied Physics Lab. Removing that threat is a big win for MD.

Some reports and rumors have NASA switching some of its focus to satellite/observatory assembly and servicing. This could benefit GSFC and the Hubble Telescope Institute (eg: if it means more astronomy, heliophysics, and Earth observation missions and/or data to process).

Orbital has some facilities in/near Maryland, and its COTS effort could benefit from a longer ISS life and greater use of the ISS, which isn’t possible with Constellation.

There are various other space businesses in the DC Beltway area (in MD or within commute distance from MD) that are liable to benefit from a less-threatened NASA robotic mission suite, technology development, better prospects for Wallops launches, possibility of lower-cost commercial rockets for payloads MD businesses develop or use, etc.

Overall, it seems like the rumored changes would be a huge win for Mikulsky and Maryland.

The changes also sound like they’d be good for California (Ames, SpaceX, Mojave, JPL, etc), Ohio (see above), Nevada (Bigelow), Virginia (DC Beltway, Langley, Wallops), Colorado (satellites, etc), and others. There would be changes for places like Florida and Alabama, but it’s not clear they’d be bad overall for them. As Major Tom mentions, these states could still end up with HLV work, and could also get more commercial work (more EELV work in Alabama and Florida, more SpaceX work in Florida). Getting rid of Ares 1 with all of its schedule, budget, political, and technical problems, and replacing Ares V and its similar problems with an HLV that has a more realistic schedule, budget, and technology, should be a long-term win for them (even though an HLV may still threaten the budgets of MD, etc).

There are more winners than with the POR simply because the dollars are leveraged better with the commercial focus, which comes with commercial money pitched in to add to the government investment, and because of the potential for new non-NASA business with the commercial approach. Technology development also comes with the prospects of new non-NASA business when the technology can result in spin-offs for non-space business or applications in non-NASA space missions.

The various Congressional interests without many space constituents at all will probably be indifferent. However, their constituents are well-served by the rumored changes, with their greater potential for general economic, security, science, environment, and similar national benefits than the HSF POR.

In short, in the weeks and months to come, whoever in Congress benefits.

According to multiple reports, there will be a boost for Earth Science in the White House’s 2011 budget request. That benefits GSFC, which benefits NASA employees and voters in Maryland, which benefits Mikulski. (Same goes for exploration technology work and APL.) At the end of the day, it’s unlikely that the NASA marks in the bill coming out of the Senate’s Commerce, Science, Justice, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee that Mikulski chairs will deviate substantially from the White House 2011 budget request.

According to multiple reports, there will also be HLV work in the White House’s 2011 budget request. That benefits MSFC, which benefits NASA employees and voters in Alabama, which benefits Shelby. (Same goes for commercial crew, EELV, and Decatur. And for exploration technology work and MSFC.) At the end of the day, it’s unlikely that Shelby, as the ranking member of the Senate’s Commerce, Science, Justice, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, will oppose Mikulski and seek NASA marks that deviate substantially from the White House 2011 budget request.

Those are appropriators with real budget power.

Authorizers like Nelson and Kosmas matter only if they get an authorization bill passed into law (for which there is an irregular and checkered history). And their authorization bill will only tie the appropriators’ hands if they authorize fewer dollars than what the White House is requesting. And at the end of the day, they are unlikely to do that, because it would put them on the record as opposed to NASA spending with their NASA employees and voters (and political opponents) back home.

And even then, there are reports that there will be funding in the White House’s 2011 budget request to deal with the KSC workforce after Shuttle retirement. That benefits NASA employees and voters in Florida, which benefits Nelson and Kosmas. (Same goes for commercial crew, EELV, HLV, and exploration technology.) At the end of the day, it’s unlikely that Nelson or Kosmas are going to vote for authorization bills with NASA marks that are substantially lower than the White House 2011 budget request.

And even if there’s not something in the White House 2011 budget request for a particular NASA congressman — even if the number of NASA employees and voters in their district or state is suppossed to go down — they’re unlikely to cut off their nose to spite their face. There are relatively few NASA supporters in Congress, and appropriations subcommittees only have so much money to work with. If a NASA congressman tries to sink the White House’s budget request, then they run a high risk of losing NASA funding to competing appropriations subcommittee or committee interests and driving the number of NASA employees and voters in their district or state even lower than what the White House proposed.

Historically, as long as the White House request involves substantial funding (and not marginal study money as happened with SEI), the Congress follows the White House’s lead on major changes in the direction of NASA’s human space flight program. This history has played out time and again with Apollo, Shuttle, Freedom, ISS, and the VSE.

The real threat to the White House’s budget request is not among congressmen representing NASA districts and states. The real threat is with appropriations committee and subcommittee chairs with limited or no stake in NASA. We saw that last year with Alan Mollohan, who cut Constellation by over a half billion dollars in the relevant House appropriations bills. Same goes of Dave Obey in prior years. If the White House loses its bid to boost NASA’s budget by $1.3 billion, that’s likely where it will be lost.

Congressmen with lots of NASA employees and voters in their states and districts have a choice — they either hang together behind the White House budget request or they risk losing that budget to other congressmen with other priorities. They’ll almost always choose the former. That will be even more true this year thanks to the historically high deficit driving a highly competitive budget environment.

FWIW…

1. The darn program doesnt work. No matter how many times someone quotes out of context the AC…the reality is that Ares has had 9 billion dollars and done nothing. Musk has “blown up” more rockets then Ares has flown and yet his development cost are under 1 billion…

2. The program wont get us to the Moon in a foreseable future…and the cost are bound to balloon. they always do on a NASA hsf program… See More

3. It is an act of good governance to kill malfunctioning programs. the Ares huggers use words like “rounding” error to describe the cost of Ares…and yet the cost are substantial part of the HSF budget. It will be stunning as to how much is freed up when that program goes away.

4. Worse it is the wrong kind of program. Musk is going to launch PEOPLE with a control center of under 50 people.

5. it opens up the future to a wide group of possibilities. It is hard to imagine what is possible if the Ares/Constellation program dies. Because a robust LEO/GEO human spaceflight commercial effort is just what we need to push out into space.

6. The reasons for Ares/Constellation are nutty. Racing the Chinese…comeon.

This is a good move. It will change, for the better the course of human spaceflight, and I predict help put America on the road to a strong economy and to the stars.

Robert G. Oler

I would love to be incorrect, because around me more and more of my friends are losing their jobs…and it is far Ronaldus the great was having similar problems politically although his economic problems were far easier.

In my view the SOTU was a bust because it did not change the political dynamics of Obama’s Presidency. But I suspect that the reaction by the GOP has helped him along.

I have never watched a more stupid group of politicians then the ones that engaged Obama in Baltimore this afternoon (Friday)…it was as if they were simply setting up Obama to hit pitches out of the park, capped of by Hensarling of TX (what a dolt).

I think that Obama has made some serious errors in what he engaged in (health care) and how he did some of the things he did engage in (the stimulus) BUT it seems today at least that he might be successful in painting the GOP as obstructionist because in many respects they are.

They have few alternate ideas, they are stuck with their ideological babble which is mostly useless (or got us into this problem)…and seem unable to present fresh new ideas.

And that is accurate on space policy.

If I were in Olsens seat in 22 right this instant and for sometime now I would have been working with Bolden and Garver and have formed a sort of coalition of the “space pork club” to try and move the debate from Ares to something reasonable in terms of what NASA does after (as expected) it loses human lift to orbit toward the space station.

My read is that there is going to be a billion or two maybe pot to do things …and the trick is to try and do things that have value. But no the best Olsen can do is babble on about keeping the shuttle or Ares…and that is not going to happen.

Say what one wants for rhetoric…but in the end when one closes the oak paneled doors one has to figure out “how do I move this thing to my and the districts advantage based on what IS going to happen”.

The GOP right now is just tone deaf

Robert G. Oler

Simberg, yes its true, Augustine never used my words “progessing well”.

Augustine did in fact say this about Ares I and Orion …”We found those programs to be reasonably well managed,…” He further said ” ..we think the program within itself has a very good likelihood of succeeding”. …

the key phrase here is “ample time and funds” which is government speak for “throw enough money at it and not care about when the thing actually flies and you can succeed”

Robert G. Oler

Augustine did in fact say this about Ares I and Orion …”We found those programs to be reasonably well managed,…” He further said ” ..we think the program within itself has a very good likelihood of succeeding”.

So yes my words “Progressing well” fairly describe what he said.

Full quote:

“We’ve reviewed the Ares I and Orion elements of that program, which are the two parts that are principally underway,” Augustine said Thursday. “We found those programs to be reasonably well managed, we found them to have technical problems of a nature that’s probably not uncommon for complex undertakings of this type.

“It’s our belief that given ample time and funds, the engineers at NASA and their contractors are certainly capable of solving those problems. So we think the program within itself has a very good likelihood of succeeding. The issue that comes up under Ares I is whether the program is useful when it has succeeded because of a mismatch of the time schedules and the costs with what will be needed for it to do.”

Actually it will go pretty easy.

1. Whittington’s comparison is nonsense.

Health care (or the Obama/Dem version of it) is floundering because it is unpopular. It is a lot of bureaucracy little defined “cost” and almost no benefits that have salable value.

Wow what does that sound like? The Bush “go back to the Moon program”.

Going back to the Moon is UNPOPULAR (see the latest Rasmussen poll) There is no appetite for it in The Republic (outside of pork ville) and that is going to be its prime undoing.

2. Despite the frantic gestures of its supporters Ares/Constellation etc is not going well. At best it needs massive infusions of more money…about 3 billion a year…and that is not happening.

As the facts role out either more money and the thing barely creeps along to a 17 flight (and that is not back to the Moon) OR no more money and the schedule keeps flailing behind on a day to day basis…well thats it.

the money is where it is going to die.

3. Obama is out manuevering the GOP. His SOTU was a bust, but he has seized on what I think are some pretty good issues in terms of painting the GOP as the party of “no”…and in this case the party of “pork”… The GOP is going to respond by latching onto this “freeze” and that runs into #2.

4. Shortly NASA corporate is going to be all for commercial lift to space and whatever else Bolden has holding up his sleeve…hence the various studies NASA is going to do.

The Ares tree huggers need to start getting out their versions of “death panels”…Ares is having the plug pulled just as they watch.

fun day flying…now working on Software…not so fun

Robert G. Oler