Slashdot Mirror
1,200 NASA Layoffs, Shuttle Fuel Tank Plant Shuts Down
As the space shuttle program winds down, 1,200 NASA workers were laid off today, and thousands more will lose their jobs in the months ahead. "Many shuttle workers held out hope that they could find new jobs in the Constellation program, which would have included two new rocket systems and a new crew module to transport astronauts into space. From the beginning, Constellation was plagued by underfunding. This year, Obama killed the program's future funding because of budget overruns and because it was behind schedule. That could affect more than 20,000 workers along Florida's space coast, according to Rice." This comes alongside news that Lockheed Martin has stopped work at the production plant that supplied 136 external fuel tanks for the space shuttles since 1973.
Why is this marked "Flamebait", he's right on the ball. We have private companies that produce better results, higher level technology, and at a cheaper price than NASA ever had. These people should be out of job.
That's going to hurt. 2 billion dollars. Perhaps more.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Reading the article, Bush actually ended the shuttle program back in 2004. The article further says that if Obama signs a NASA budget bill that authorizes another shuttle mission, those workers could stay employed for one mission longer.
What Obama is ending is Bush's proposed "shuttle replacement" program, the Constellation. Much as I'd like to see space exploration continue, if the Constellation is already behind schedule and over budget I can understand it. Especially in this current climate.
It's definitely going to hurt Democrats in Florida though.
The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
The Constellation is the official Shuttle replacement. Wasn't there an unofficial replacement being designed (and maybe developed) by ex-NASA guys? That was cheaper, on-schedule and likely to actually work?
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
"This year, Obama killed the program's future funding because of budget overruns and because it was behind schedule."
Two things:
1) The shuttle program was killed years ago by a previous President. It's been a long time winding down the program, but its fate was sealed well before the 2008 election.
2) The Ares 1, even if completed, would have had serious operational deficiencies. It may be worth paying a lot for a launcher that works well for the mission at hand, but it's been clear for a long time that Ares was never going to be that launcher.
With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
Check out the DIRECT Program. That might be what you are referring to. There are also a lot of other possible shuttle replacements that rely on various degrees of existing vs. nonexisting technology. A little Googling can reveal a lot of them, but I will leave that as an exercise to the reader.
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
I haven't heard about that. Love to see some info it.
Check out more here.
Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
So, is NASA going to build a DIRECT launcher now or will there be yet another politically-driven paper study of an over-engineered, under-performing white elephant?
The 2010 NASA Authorization bill recently passed by Congress mandates a new vehicle called the Space Launch System that will have to lift a minimum of 70 tons, evolvable to 130 tons with a second stage.
The bill states that the vehicle will have to be completed by the end of 2016 within a budget of $11.5 billion.
The only real option for a rocket of this capacity that can be built within this time and budget is something like the DIRECT architecture. NASA still has to decide the specifics though.
Space X used private funding to develop all of their space launch vehicles
False. A significant portion of the development cost of Falcon 9 came from NASA funding under the COTS contract.
If the DoD budget was trimmed even by half (which is still too bloody much spending) and the monies redirected toward, infrastructure, education, health, technology research, etc.. Inside of a very few short years we'd be looking at realizing a Utopian society. I don't think anyone really understands just how bloody big their budget is relative to all other spending. DoD spending was between $880 billion and $1.03 trillion in fiscal year 2010. We've spent over $44.75B on the B-2 bomber program, a device whose sole purpose is to destroy. How many children could you put through college with that? We've spent $65B on the F-22 program. What kind of a telecommunication infrastructure could that buy? What is the point of spending incomprehensible amounts on tools to destroy? I'm not naive, I understand the notion of protecting oneself from rogue actors but the amount spent is exceeds the definition of unconscionable.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once