Slashdot Mirror
Utah vs. NASA On Heavy-Lift Rocket Design
FleaPlus writes "Utah congressmen Orrin Hatch, Bob Bennett, Rob Bishop, and Jim Matheson issued a statement claiming that NASA's design process for a new congressionally-mandated heavy-lift rocket system may be trying to circumvent the law. According to the congressmen and their advisors from solid rocket producer ATK, the heavy-lift legislation's requirements can only be met by rockets utilizing ATK's solid rocket boosters. They are alarmed that NASA is also considering other approaches, such as all-liquid designs based on the rockets operated by the United Launch Alliance and SpaceX. ATK's solid rockets were arguably responsible for many of the safety and cost problems which plagued NASA's canceled Ares rocket system."
You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out what lobbyist wrote that clause of the bill...
So... if I understand correctly, what's actually happening here is that a Utah company claims that NASA cannot meet the legal requirements by using the competition's designs, and the various Utah congressmen are joining in the chorus to support that Utah company.
Company discredits competitors, congressmen support their state's industry. Surprising? Hardly.
Why the heck would you take 6 testicles? Short of making sperm they are useless. Not to mention the security risk of tripling the size and intensity of "the hit zone". Take the double heart or double thumb instead, way more useful.
A law to dictate which supplier to use? That sounds like something from soviet Russia.
Every time I think I remotely understand the US something shows that doesn't make sense.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast!
We got bought by this rocket manufacturer right here and we promised them that, with our legislation, they'd get all the business from NASA. Now, NASA is tossing a monkey wrench into the whole works because they want to consider other rocket manufacturers, and our feet are being held to the fire to deliver on what we promised. We can't let NASA just select any old rocket manufacturer or we'll end up in cement shoes at the bottom of the ocean.
If the people in Utah are happy, what does it matter what the other 49 states think of them? That's what freedom is all about.
Of course if Utah came begging for a bailout, like what Greece and Ireland did in the EU, then I suggest we tell them "too bad" and let them figure it out by themselves. Same goes for California, New York, or any other state that overspent beyond their means. But overall I think Utah has been well-behaved and limited spending, and therefore doesn't deserve the criticism you aim at them.
In 2005 (the last year I could easily find number for) CA received 79 cents of federal spending for every federal tax dollar paid, NY was 78 cents and Utah was $1.07. To give you some framework for those numbers, CA works out to have sent ~$286,627,000,000 to the Federal Government, and received ~$242,023,000,000 dollars worth of federal funding. A disparity of 44 billion.
Who's bailing out who exactly?
I needed a sig so people would know who I am, but I was too drunk to make something witty, so you get this instead.
...because the engineers are trying to figure out a way around one of his pet earmarks!
Oh, NASA, NASA, when will you learn? You keep trying to make spacecraft, when as we all know your job is to build precision pork delivery vehicles.
Now how much of that $287 billion was paid by the top 1% of income earners. Sure, THEY are paying way more than they receive in services. But to extend that to the entire state, including the poor who vote Democrat?? It's ridiculous.
I guess the election is over and Republicans don't have to play pretend anymore.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Hey, wait, you're considering designs that don't mandate using boosters built by a specific contractor based in our state? That can't be legal.
Too bad we can't vote to recall senators from other states.
The pork must flow.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Back when Wernher Von Braun created the Saturn 5, he was given the freedom to design the BEST rocket for the job. And that rocket put 12 men on the surface of the moon.
When they built the space shuttle, they made compromises in its design in order to ensure companies located in key congressional districts got contracts and as a result, the Shuttle Challenger blew up and killed 7 people. (I have no clue if the aforementioned design compromises were responsible for Columbia)
The politicians need to leave NASA alone and let NASA buy and fly the BEST rocket for the job. Regardless of whether that rocket is made by ATK, Boeing, SpaceX, the Russians or some guys on a sheep station in the Australian Outback. And they need to get out of the way of the private space industry and let it thrive, only getting involved in so far as ensuring that 3rd parties and their property are not harmed/damaged and that the work done by these space companies is not turned into nuclear missiles aimed at downtown DC.
there was nothing wrong with the O-ring joints PROVIDED that the booster was used within it's environmental limitations... It was a serious case of press-on-itis from senior management who overrode the misgivings of their own engineers. They were under severe pressure to launch and there had already been several delays.
A one piece design is not necessarily safer either as it would have been extremely difficult to get a single pour without any voids in such a large volume of propellant. It was far easier to produce smaller sections without defects and then assemble the entire booster from good sections.
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
To be fair, the engineers knew that the idiot PR flacks at NASA were trying to launch the Shuttle under conditions explicitly noted as being out of spec.
Said idiots forced the launch anyway. There are probably more conditions that disallow the Shuttle to launch than allow it - temperature is just one of many variables. That's why there is a countdown sequence. But you can't fault ATK / Thiokol for NASA's dramatic blunders. And yes, the did redesign the O-Rings (and pretty much everything else on the Shuttle over time). You'd be insane not to. The Challenger was 100% NASA's fault.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I never understood why people keep bothering tossing around those numbers. Those dollars aren't paid by the state, but rather are paid by the businesses and individuals within the state. Since those tax rates aren't well linked to standard of living rates (which is significantly higher in New York and California), and people in California and New York tend to earn higher salaries to make up for the higher standard of living, it is only logical that those states would end up sending more money to the Federal government since they are more likely to hit the higher tax brackets.
It's not Utah's fault that people can live on 35k a year when it would require 70k or more a year to have the same lifestyle in New York or California.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
You mean the top 1% who are wealthy because of everyone else's labor? How dare they be asked to give back to society
"Even a slave labour using Nazi SS-Major like Von Braun refused to strap someone on a solid rocket booster! But perhaps you think Hitler was too soft, Herr Hatch?"
It's politics. Sling mud. Especially when it's well deserved.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
the heavy-lift legislation's requirements can only be met by rockets utilizing ATK's solid rocket boosters
The military-industrial-congressional complex in all its glory. The point is to transfer money to specific highly influential businesses. The rest is pure bullshit.
These politicians are from Utah and they are stealing for the people of Utah. You don't vote out the crooks when they are your crooks.
Let's use this motto from now on, please NASA?
The problem is that "best" has many components, often conflicting:
* Best design for launching heavy payloads once or twice a yaer
* Best design for launching light payloads many times a year and attaching them together in space
* Best design to push technological boundaries
* Best design to minimize development cost
* Best design to minimize operation costs
* Best design to ensure astronaut safety
* Best design to promote the US space industry as a whole
* Best design to ensure future support from "space state" congressmen, who are the only people in congress willing to push for NASA funding