Comments on: The next round in the JWST funding battle http://www.spacepolitics.com/2011/09/14/the-next-round-in-the-jwst-funding-battle/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-next-round-in-the-jwst-funding-battle Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: DCSCA http://www.spacepolitics.com/2011/09/14/the-next-round-in-the-jwst-funding-battle/#comment-354008 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 02:38:41 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=4999#comment-354008 This turkey is headed for Uncle Sam’s Thanksgiving table to be carved, cut up and devoured by the budgeteers.

]]> By: Doug Lassiter http://www.spacepolitics.com/2011/09/14/the-next-round-in-the-jwst-funding-battle/#comment-353980 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 20:57:22 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=4999#comment-353980 The Senate CJS subcommittee dispatched their markup responsibility in about 20 minutes. JWST is in their bill, not surprisingly. It’s not an unfunded mandate either. The Senate number for NASA is $17.9B, $1.1B higher than the House. Much closer to the President’s budget. So JWST is easily reinserted, and other plus-ups are made as well, compared to the House bill.

Of course, life was made easy by their relatively generous 302(b) allotment. Mikulski didn’t need to sell her soul or sacrifice others to put JWST in.

So assuming this survives full committee tomorrow, the fate of JWST will be determined in conference.

]]> By: Doug Lassiter http://www.spacepolitics.com/2011/09/14/the-next-round-in-the-jwst-funding-battle/#comment-353941 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 16:18:36 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=4999#comment-353941 Fair sentiments about establishing blame and wielding hatchets. What’s coming out of the JWST replan is sort of a “don’t worry, we’ve got it all fixed”. JWST has budgetarily gone off the rails several times in the last decade, so one has to wonder why we should believe them now.

I have to suspect that the problem is less blameable on personal incompetence, and more on NASA standard project management rules applied to missions that are extremely large. There is some management mismatch going on. Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean that you fix anything by just chopping heads off. Program restructuring seems the only credible route, though it isn’t clear anyone really knows how to do it.

]]> By: amightywind http://www.spacepolitics.com/2011/09/14/the-next-round-in-the-jwst-funding-battle/#comment-353927 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:05:44 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=4999#comment-353927 When is anyone associated with this thing going off the rails going to get the axe (as it were)?

Agreed. The focus has been on a drastic cutoff of funding, not what is needed to restructure the program.

]]> By: E.P. Grondine http://www.spacepolitics.com/2011/09/14/the-next-round-in-the-jwst-funding-battle/#comment-353921 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:05:04 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=4999#comment-353921 Weiler should have been fired in 2006 for his role in Griffin’s Contempt of Congress on the George Brown Jr. instructions.

Griffin had ATK as his “Khrush” then. (Great Russian word – literally “roof”)

The JWST ground segtment will be in Mikulski’s district.

How bad is it at NASA? No one was “relieved” for Columbia.
It’s no wonder Lisa Novak lost it. Anyone would have.

]]> By: G Clark http://www.spacepolitics.com/2011/09/14/the-next-round-in-the-jwst-funding-battle/#comment-353911 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 11:28:35 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=4999#comment-353911 When is anyone associated with this thing going off the rails going to get the axe (as it were)? There should be consequences for this level of mis-management. Civil service rules be damned.

]]>