Slashdot Mirror
Senator Makes NASA Complete $350 Million Testing Tower That It Will Never Use
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Phillip Swarts reports in the Washington Times that NASA is completing a $350 million rocket-engine testing tower at Stennis Space Center in Mississippi that it doesn't want and will never use. 'Because the Constellation Program was canceled in 2010, the A-3's unique testing capabilities will not be needed and the stand will be mothballed upon completion (PDF),, said NASA's inspector general. The A-3 testing tower will stand 300 feet and be able to withstand 1 million pounds of thrust (PDF). The massive steel structure is designed to test how rocket engines operate at altitudes of up to 100,000 feet by creating a vacuum within the testing chamber to simulate the upper reaches of the atmosphere. Although NASA does not expect to use the tower after construction, it's compelled by legislation from Sen. Roger F. Wicker (R-MS), who says the testing tower will help maintain the research center's place at the forefront of U.S. space exploration. 'Stennis Space Center is the nation's premier rocket engine testing facility,' says Wicker. 'It is a magnet for public and private research investment because of infrastructure projects like the A-3 test stand. In 2010, I authored an amendment to require the completion of that particular project, ensuring the Stennis facility is prepared for ever-changing technologies and demands.' Others disagree, calling the project the 'Tower of Pork' and noting that the unused structure will cost taxpayers $840,000 a year to maintain. 'Current federal spending trends are not sustainable, and if NASA can make a relatively painless contribution to deficit reduction by shutting down an unwanted program, why not let it happen?' says Pete Sepp, executive vice president of the National Taxpayers Union. 'It's not rocket science, at least fiscally.'"
It's a pretty big part of what MS does. Measured as a percentage of GSP (the state-level version of GDP), Mississippi is the 4th-largest net recipient of transfers from other states, which equal about 20% of the state's economy. The only three larger are South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida (a whopping 50% of Florida's economy consists of net transfers).
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
...meet Bridge to Nowhere
It is hard to re-purpose it. The best thing to do would be to stop and preserve it the way it is or finish key parts that are already paid for or nearly complete. The only people who might use it would be SPACEX but considering the location that is not too likely. SPACEX would need to change enough stuff around that the work should be halted until there is a known need.
May I introduce you to the Saturn V Dynamic Test Stand?
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
The amount already spent is irrelevant because it is a sunk cost.
At least any I've come across. Yes, the Gov't has to pay for work already performed, but it's a recognized fact that one Congress can't bind future ones to financial deals, and money to finish a particular contract may never arrive.
So by and large, as someone else pointed out, the Government has a clause in contracts allowing it to terminate the contract for convenience.
--PM
The President didn't want SLS either. It was pushed by Senate.
I used to work on the government side of things, and this was a political requirement. Congress insists on individually approving annual funding for any program over a certain value. If a program was to be funded, we had to ensure that there were significant subcontractors in every relevant political district. This made no engineering sense, it raised costs immensely, and it made us all want to declare open season on Congresscritters (no bag limit).
It's the system. It needs changed, but the very people to change it (Congress) are the primary beneficiaries. It's nothing more or less than corruption: one of the reasons that being elected to Congress is the same as being elected to the millionaire's club.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
A quadrupling of price is not a 400% increase. It's the original price, plus 300%. Also, it would take much less than 40 years. "Simple math" doesn't include compounding. Someone please correct this if I'm wrong, but I believe the actual answer would be a bit over 14 years via the Rule of 72.
Just another day in Paradise
No. Much shorter.
.
Simple math says:
(1+10/100)^y = 4 =>
log (1.10^y) = log(4) =>
y * log(1.10) = log(4) =>
y = log(4) / log(1.10) = 14.54
After 14.54 years you quadruple; after 15 years you would have a 418% increase.
Didn't they teach you exponentials and logarithmics in high school?
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
You obviously need to learn some comprehension, as well as math.
The poster above was disputing the fact that inflation has been hovering around 10% because of what that would imply about the price level since 2000.
1.1^13 = 3.45. So not quite quadrupling, but that would be pretty close.
And a 300% increase does in fact correspond to a quadrupling (a 100% increase is a doubling etc.)
QED
Henry Ford paid his workers $5/day in the 1920s. About $0.62 per hour. The value of gold at the time was about $20/oz.
Gold is currently valued at about $1200/oz. So if you think gold represents an intrinsic non-inflationary value, as goldbugs do, then the "inflation corrected" equivalent of Ford's $5/day is $37.50/hr.
(Likewise, the median weekly wage in 1925 was about $25/week. So a gold-equivalent of $1500/week today. The actual median wage today is $510, and the median houshold income is about $860)
Of course, there's a gold bubble. But I think the point is useful to make. The growth in the US economy has not gone to the majority US citizens.
Wages have been stagnant because a lot money has been transferred to non-wage benefits.
That's a myth. It came from a paper (from Heritage, IIRC) that assumed that every worker takes 100% of available benefits. Which is functionally impossible.
but a lone senator can't keep a program funded
Sure he can. Here's how: Put a hold on all legislation going through his committee. Any senator can do this, and the effect is to gum up the works so much that the rest of the Senate can either do as the one senator asks, or not be able to engage in any legislative activity at all that relates to whatever committee he's on. The other senators will likely decide that it's easier to fund his pork project than to deal with the hold.
I am officially gone from