http://science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/hearings/052611_Charter%20CommCargo.pdf

page 1 goes over the budget numbers for the COTS/CRS program totaling $5.119 billion.
Page 5 shows cost per pound to ISS of $21,268 for shuttle, and $26,770 for Falcon/Dragon

As to “SpaceX proves commercials not viable”

SpaceX launches to ISS have high cost per pound compared to traditional NASA bureaucratic heavy hand gov acquisition process providers, higher problem and accident rates, needed NASA to pick up their R&D costs, etc. So “clearly” this “proves” they can’t cut it without NASA carrying them.

Hey they killed RLV work that way.

http://science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/hearings/052611_Charter%20CommCargo.pdf

page 1 goes over the budget numbers for the COTS/CRS program totaling $5.119 billion.
Page 5 shows cost per pound to ISS of $21,268 for shuttle, and $26,770 for Falcon/Dragon

“Bolden mentions no cuts to Orion, SLS, or the SLS ground systems budgets, nor am I able to devine any, in his letter.”

Then you must have missed it, or maybe he didn’t mention it, but there are cuts to the infrastructure account the SLS depends upon for launch.

Now maybe they will still have time to catch up so it is not a major impediment to launching the SLS on schedule (which it likely won’t do anyways), but the same could be said for Commercial Crew – that these impeding cuts are just temporary slowdowns.

In fact, the commercial folks are more able to make up these types of slowdowns than government programs, so sequestration is less of a danger to Commercial Crew than it is SLS, which is already behind it’s budget curve to meet the current public schedules.

Bolden mentions no cuts to Orion, SLS, or the SLS ground systems budgets, nor am I able to devine any, in his letter. In FY12, Orion, SLS, and SLS ground systems were appropriated $1.2B, $1.544, and $317M respectively. For FY13, for Orion, SLS, and SLS Gnd Systems the House appropriated $1.025B, $1.544B, and $454M; the Senate appropriated $1.2B, $1.482B, and $394M; the final FY13 NASA Appropriation will likely budget $1.2B, $1.544B, and $394M respectively.

“All the NASA Sequestration cuts should be applied to NASA’s subsidies to the Commercial Crew Projects.”

Since the Commercial Crew program is not a subsidy, then I guess that would result in $0 cuts.

“Shouldn’t risk capital be providing all the funding for these commercial projects?”

If you had a background in business you would understand that the customer who wants a custom service needs to bear some portion of the risk of developing the custom service.

And if you’ve ever been a private company that does work for the government, then you’d know how flaky Congress can be in providing any long-term guarantees that the government will actually buy government-specific services from you in the future.

However the Commercial Crew participants are risking their own money, which is why the program is called a public/private partnership.

“Looks like Sequestration is a good oportunity to put NASA funding of Comercial Crew projects out of their misery!”

Are you Russian? Only Russia wins if the Commercial Crew program fails. I would rather that the U.S. gains a robust, competitive crew transportation system, wouldn’t you?

Not necessarily, Public/Private partnerships (commercial companies and government agencies) have been around almost since America was formed. They’re not new.

Aren’t these projrcts just another example of ‘Big Government’?

No, Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Constellation, and SLS are examples of big government. In those programs the taxpayers had to pay the whole bill. Companies in the NASA commercial crew and cargo program(s) are risking their own capital in the endeavor. The taxpayers are risking some as well but they are not paying for the whole thing.

I noticed that some people get upset because some companies are getting money from the government. If you have a business then anyone who wants the products or services you provide is a legitimate potential customer. Even if it’s the government. Government money usually spends like private money. What is a business to do if the government wants to purchase their product or service? Say, “No! We’re not going to do business with you ’cause you’re the government!” Be sensible people.

“The society that exists, I hope will be far more rational and intelligent, again I could be wrong.”

No doubt corrupt politicians will still exist, since they know how to survive. If that’s the case, then I wouldn’t describe the civilization that is around at that point as “far more rational and intelligent” than what we have today.

“Chemical rocketry can never provide low cost access to space due to the low exhaust velocity of chemical reactions.”

“Low cost” is relative. So far chemical rockets are what we have, and the economics of them are understood. Besides, SpaceX is significantly lowering the cost to access space, and if SpaceX is successful with their Grasshopper initiative, costs will go down even more.

Regardless the propulsion method, volume is what’s needed to drive down the cost to access space, since that creates competition, and competition more than anything determines the best technologies to use.

Besides, the anti-nuclear sentiment world-wide won’t allow nuclear rockets here on Earth, and it would even be hard to send up the fuel for in-space only nuclear engines. I doubt that will change in 20 years, no matter what “far more rational and intelligent” people are around – and who’s to say they’ll want to do space exploration?

”
the Marxist in the White House is driven out by a battered enraged public”

it is babble like this where I usually just lean back and laugh for a bit and then dont reply…Sorry I have been to the PRC and The Soviet Union (while it was still the Soviet Union) and I know Marxist; you apparantly dont

(and I supported Howard Dean so I know Liberals so dont go there)..

but in the rhetoric that is right wing nuttery I found this to laugh at

“Crony capitalists like Musk reinventing 1950′s ICBM’s and 1960′s space capsules to ride on them”

Crony capitalist is a goofy right wing phrase that is like the Marxist comparison…but “reinventing 1950’s ICBM’s blah blah blah” is just nuts

other then the fuel, there is nothing similar to a Falcon9 and an Atlas…and other then the fact that they carry passengers there is nothing similiar between a Gemini and a Dragon…

however in the world of the right wing a sound bite is what replaces facts. RGO