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.'"

46 of 342 comments (clear)

  1. Duh - help his state out by PKFC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    a $350 million rocket-engine testing tower at Stennis Space Center in Mississippi

    compelled by legislation from Sen. Roger F. Wicker (R-MS)

    will cost taxpayers $840,000 a year to maintain.

    Hey let's pour money into my home state plzkthx

    1. Re:Duh - help his state out by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Informative

      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).

    2. Re:Duh - help his state out by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Interesting

      and Florida (a whopping 50% of Florida's economy consists of net transfers).

      Just curious does that number include SS payments to individuals? For the sake of argument if it does SS is national program after all, and Florida tends to have lots of retirees relocating to it.

      Sure they have adopted some policies that make it more favorable for that demographic but that is because the retirees were already there to vote for them; so it might be less fair to tar Florida with the same "hand in the federal cookie jar" brush as MS, and SC.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    3. Re:Duh - help his state out by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      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).

      Eh, it's not particularly abnormal for 'developing' nations to depend heavily on foreign aid and diaspora remittances...

    4. Re:Duh - help his state out by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is states like MS have low value added economies, poor residents and crummy education systems.

      Their residents have very limited class mobility.

      http://www.motherjones.com/fil...

    5. Re:Duh - help his state out by nitehawk214 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well I am fine with giving the state money from the federal coffers to help the needy out. However building a 300ft tall penis\H\H\H\H\H\H tower that nobody is going to use is not going to help the plight of the poor in any way.

      Republicans rail against government waste and against welfare... unless it is getting directed into their pockets.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    6. Re:Duh - help his state out by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well I am fine with giving the state money from the federal coffers to help the needy out. However building a 300ft tall penis\H\H\H\H\H\H tower that nobody is going to use is not going to help the plight of the poor in any way.

      He's a Republican. If he gave money to the poor, who would it trickle down to?

      An ideology of hating the poor and worshipping the rich ubermenschen tends to lead to some amounts of cognitive dissonance and accompanying weird decisions when your home state counts amongst the former.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    7. Re:Duh - help his state out by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The article you link to doesn't say the figures are incorrect, it merely whines that liberals are inaccurately characterizing states like most of those in the North East as "Blue states", and states in the South as "Red States". The basis of his complaint is that many of the states in the Red or Blue columns seem to kinda sorta vote the opposite way in congressional elections, which might sound sensible except he's not using aggregate figures, but simply numbers of representatives elected, which means his figures don't consider the gerrymandering - intentional and natural - that means # reps rarely represents % support.

      He also complains that local party support also dismisses the complaint, arguing that, for example, New Jersey is a "red" state because it has a Republican governor. This makes little sense - local parties and local party candidates reflect the extremes within a particular state, you can't compare a Republican governor in New Jersey to one in Alabama.

      It's a bad argument and he should feel bad. Liberals are right to use Presidential candidates as the basic shorthand. It's the one case where the majorities in each state can be determined, and where the same point of view is on display and voted upon in each state.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    8. Re:Duh - help his state out by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why not spend the same $350 million to hire the workers directly to dig ditches and fill them in, or break rocks? (Or how about repairing crumbling bridges and other infrastructure that is actually useful, for christ's sake.) In effect, that's what you are doing. Building single-purpose infrastructure that isn't going to be used. The only difference is that you are paying wealthy contractors a 20% premium to subcontract out the work to less wealthy subcontractors, who take 15% and to subcontract out the work to the guys who actually do the work.

      The only reason you do it this way is that those wealthy contractors kick-back some of their cut into the Senator's reelection PACs. Whereas if you directly hired $350m worth of workers, they wouldn't give the Senator anything.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    9. Re:Duh - help his state out by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If he gave money to the poor, who would it trickle down to?

      My view of trickle-down economics is that it's better described as tinkle-down economics: It's just dandy for those who are on top and don't care about anyone else, but the rest of us just get pissed on.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  2. Typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have several friends that work at General Dynamics here in Metro Detroit and the government spending has them in a quandary: they are forced by politicians to create a bill as high as possible - mandatory junkets and overtime, even when there's nothing to do. "Research" projects are the only thing that they do and they just post youtube videos, cancel the project and start something new. None of them can quit, even though the economy has recovered, because they are being paid so well as a result of the requirement to bill taxpayers so much.

    Does anyone know why the Republicans came right to the table on the sequester this time around? Because offense spending (thinly veiled as "defense" spending) was to be rolled back to 2003 levels. That is absolutely evil if you are a member of the Republicans.

    1. Re:Typical by stenvar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Does anyone know why the Republicans came right to the table on the sequester this time around? Because offense spending (thinly veiled as "defense" spending) was to be rolled back to 2003 levels. That is absolutely evil if you are a member of the Republicans.

      Both parties love wasting tax dollars on useless things on a massive scale. Republicans pay lip service to small government but fail to deliver; Democrats swear and complain about big corporations and bankers but then use legislation for economic stimulation, job creation, and consumer protection to shove even more money in the hands of the groups the claim to hate. Both are "absolutely evil". Pick your poison.

  3. Tower to Nowhere... by theodp · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:Tower to Nowhere... by artor3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Difference being that Palin was a national candidate, whereas Senator Wicker likely has no ambitions beyond his current position. Robbing the nation to provide pork to your constituents back home plays much better when those constituents are the only ones with a say in whether or not you keep your job.

    2. Re:Tower to Nowhere... by cold+fjord · · Score: 4, Informative

      Robbing the nation to provide pork to your constituents back home ...

      I realize we have to flog Sarah Palin at every opportunity we get, but If you are talking Washington politics, which is where the money for those bridges was to come from, the "bridge to nowhere" was the baby of Ted Stevens and Don Young, not Sarah Palin. Sara Palin was a state official, not a member of Congress that had a hand in the funding.

      Alaska's 'bridges to nowhere'

      Two Alaska Republicans with clout in Congress, Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young, are pushing for funds that could send the Anchorage suburbs leapfrogging into those hinterlands.

      Alaska 'bridge to nowhere' funding gets nowhere / Lawmakers delete project after critics bestow derisive moniker

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  4. Re:Poor planning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work for Lockheed-Martin (I work for a completely different program that is within budget) and I can say that we have to keep the Gov. from changing the rules to the game every few seconds. It is like playing "calvin-ball" with calvin (of calvin and hobbs). They come up with an idea, and all of the sudden another part must be added to keep another senator/representative happy (jobs in his/her state). If we could stick to ONE design for any true length of time we could be ahead of the game, but not when the rules get changed ALL THE FREAKING TIME.

  5. What was spent already? by Zorpheus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The article acts as if they are wasting $350 million by completing it. But it does not say how much has been spent already. Maybe there is not that much money to save by cancelling it?
    And I can't believe that the NASA will not use it in the future, the article also gives no real reason for that.

  6. Pork-grubing from a medicaid obstructor! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But they only shower federal dollars on business owners in Mississippi. No medicaid expansion for the poor in Mississippi. Fuck the poor!

  7. Re:It's NASA by beltsbear · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  8. Re:BS by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I see nothing but deflation right now.

    Either you are not looking very hard, or you are basement dweller raiding your parents fridge. Seriously if you actually track what your spending on groceries, gasoline, clothing, and healthcare; I would be STUNNED if you still claim there is deflation.

    The only deflation out there in recent years has been in heating costs (for folks using nat gas) and electricity in some areas. Housing had its big gaps down in 2008-2010, but has pretty well been inflating if slowly since that time. I don't rent but friends tell me rents have gone way up everywhere and its keeping them in their current apartments.

    There has been no deflation in the things 99%ers spend their money on other than housing. I don't care what the FED claims; because their numbers are fucking retarded, I don't buy a new TV every week, I sure as hell do buy bread and gasoline though.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  9. Re:BS by buswolley · · Score: 3, Interesting
    As a matter of rule, the U.S. can always pay back its debts by printing enough money to cover that debt. What that action would do to inflation is another thing altogether.

    I got distracted when I posted the previous post. I meant to say that taxes don't actually fund expenditures since the government can print money to pay for any expenditures it authorizes.

    So what are taxes for? 1) If you have to pay taxes in dollars, then you better have some dollars. Taxes help ensure that a government's currency is used by its citizens. 2) Taxes can control inflation by destroying money (i.e. taking it out of the economy) 3) to implement policies (e.g. redistribution)

    --

    A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

  10. Re:For safety of course by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Informative

    How did the Saturn V ever get off the ground without such a rigorous test infrastructure as this?

    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
  11. Re:BS by turkeyfish · · Score: 4, Funny

    "I see nothing but deflation right now."

    Evidently, this guy doesn't get a cable bill.

  12. Re:BS by buswolley · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh and yeah,we have weak inflation, not full deflation. So prices are rising, but lower than the 2% target inflation rate. The problem for 99%ers isnt inflation so much as a stagnant wage.

    --

    A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

  13. Re:National Taxpayer's Union? by Jeremi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe this facility is useless, maybe it's not.

    NASA thinks it's useless, and I think they are the ones most likely to know.

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  14. Re:Pork by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why did the rest of the senate go along with this? And what about the house?

    They'll need his vote when a project in their state comes up...

  15. Jesus? by AndyKron · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe they can rework it into a 300 statue of Jesus?

  16. Actually useful car analogy by Jiro · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You tella car company that you're going to pay them a half million dollars for a special custom car. You sign the contract, which requires that you pay them $500000 and that they give you a car when it's completed. Halfway through the process you suddenly decide that you don't want the car after all.

    Well, tough. You already signed the contract and they're already building the car. You have no choice but to pay for a car that you aren't going to use.

    That's what goes on in vases like this. The government signed the contract saying that they'll pay. They can't renege on the deal just because they decided they didn't want what they were paying for any more, so instead they have to pay for it and let it gather dust once they have it. I can guarantee that if you or I signed a contract that said we'd pay for something we wouldn't be able to get out of it just because we no longer wanted what we were paying for.

    This isn't so much about grandstanding politicians that want money for useless programs, but about grandstanding politicians who like to decide the government doesn't want something for which the contract has already been signed.

  17. Re:Poor planning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I work for Lockheed-Martin (I work for a completely different program that is within budget) and I can say that we have to keep the Gov. from changing the rules to the game every few seconds. It is like playing "calvin-ball" with calvin (of calvin and hobbs). They come up with an idea, and all of the sudden another part must be added to keep another senator/representative happy (jobs in his/her state). If we could stick to ONE design for any true length of time we could be ahead of the game, but not when the rules get changed ALL THE FREAKING TIME.

    And why do you think this is? Do you not think it benefits Lockheed-Martin? Every time a requirement is changed and the contracts are re-written there is an opportunity to pack on some more lard. And do you think it is an accident or "neutral business planning decision" that the major aerospace contractors have subsidiaries and major suppliers in pretty much every state? Every time an unnecessary carbuncle is added to a project to satisfy a senator, the contractor has an opportunity to renegotiate costs, and also gains another ally who will not want to see the project die, no matter how irrelevant it becomes to the nation's needs. In some ways it's like bribery, except the cash is flowing in the opposite direction to normal...

    Sure it might be irritating to an outcome-focussed engineering type who wants to work on technically successful projects, but from management's perspective a politically unkillable project that meanders on for decades, neither finishing or being allowed to fail, can be a far lower career risk.

  18. SpaceX anyone? by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Interesting

    SpaceX just cut a deal with stennis for testing of their new raptor family. The first engine of this family will be 1/3 of an F1. And yes, it is using these towers. So, this is wrong.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  19. Re:BS by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

    We can use the vacuum test chamber to see how Time Warner Cable executives breathe at 100,000 feet altitude, film it and charge $1 pay per view. I'm thinking recovery of the 350 million won't take long.

  20. Re:BS by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    no matter if it were a republican (low tax, low spend)

    Ha, you're funny. As this article demonstrates, Republicans can spend (and/or waste) just as much, if not more than, Democrats. They just don't want to spend any of it on poor people or minorities.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  21. Re:TEA PARTY by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Insightful

    yeah, that approach has worked great for reagan and W. Certainly helped balance our budget.
    Oh wait, .....

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  22. Re:BS by cold+fjord · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The government's ability to repay debts is mainly based on its power to tax to raise the funds. Governments that rely on printing currency to repay debts or for general spending tend to end up in the history books (Weimar Republic) or the newspapers (Zimbabwe) as economic basket cases crippled by hyperinflation.

    Apparently nobody with mod points is reading your sig.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  23. Re:BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Protip: decreased inflation != deflation. Intro to calculus would have taught you that much. The article you linked to mentioned fears about deflation, but no actual deflation. Being afraid of something doesn't make it manifest.

    So basically your own source, were you to deem it credible, would serve to show that even the EU is still experiencing inflation.

  24. *all* Government contracts can be terminated..... by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 5, Informative

    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

  25. Re:Whatever by cheesybagel · · Score: 3, Informative

    The President didn't want SLS either. It was pushed by Senate.

  26. Re:BS by stenvar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As a matter of rule, the U.S. can always pay back its debts by printing enough money to cover that debt.

    True. And while US politicians might not give a damn whether the Chinese hate us, that would devalue huge amounts of debt held by US retirees, banks, and small investors, and they do vote.

    I meant to say that taxes don't actually fund expenditures since the government can print money to pay for any expenditures it authorizes.

    Printing money is, effectively, a tax on everybody who happens to hold money.

  27. Re:Poor planning by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.
  28. Re:Real inflation statistics from a reliable sourc by dcw3 · · Score: 3, Informative

    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
  29. simple maths example by fritsd · · Score: 4, Informative

    Quadrupling is a 400% increase that would take 40 years at 10% via simple math, and even then it would be right.

    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?
  30. Re:Real inflation statistics from a reliable sourc by vakuona · · Score: 4, Informative

    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

  31. the Ghosts of Jamie Whitten and John Stennis by Virtucon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Ghosts of Jamie Whitten and John Stennis live on in Mississippi. Bringing federal dollars to pork barrel projects.

    Jamie Whitten was the ranking member of the House Ways and Means Committee and any appropriations bill that passed by had to have something for Mississippi. Stennis was the same way in the Senate and together they always got something for Mississippi it seems in every appropriations bill.
    That was true when the Advanced Solid Rocket Motor was mandated by Congress after the Challenger incident. NASA didn't want it but if they wanted to fund the shuttle and other programs, they had to take the ASRM too. Things like having to deliver the ASRM rockets on barges were put into bid contracts to prevent Thiokol (the supplier of RSRM engines for the shuttle) from bidding on the contract. Oh, they just happened to have the site at Iuka MS, which among being the site of a defunct Nuclear Reactor project by the TVA and was also a former weapons depot.

    You see that's the problem with the seniority system in Congress, you can get politicians re-elected by people and they just move up the ladder on all these committees and it's the committees where all the power is in Congress. You can't just put legislation on the floor of either the House or Senate, it has to go through Committee first and if you have ranking congressmen and senators blocking projects until they get what they want, then important legislation can be held up indefinitely. It's been that way since our Federal Government was formed and handcuffs well meaning legislation with bad things that garner support from fringe members of Congress to get the votes necessary to pass the whole package.

    Even though everybody thinks that Earmarks are supposedly a thing of the past, they're still around. The testing facility in MS shows again that port barrel spending is alive and well and a lot of things still get through, for example with the recent budget deal. Did you also know we have a STARBASE program as well? Well in 2012 it received $5m in funding and while most won't consider it a lot, it's really a glorified recruiting program.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  32. Re:BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  33. Re:One senator can't do this alone ... by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Informative

    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 /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  34. How's this for irony by jos7237 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Name the tower after the Senator. Boy, will he look foolish.