PDA

View Full Version : Panel rejects full funding for shuttle replacement program



Balu
06-14-2015, 07:23 AM
WASHINGTON (USA TODAY (http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/2015/06/11/panel-rejects-full-funding-for-shuttle-replacement/71075816/)) — A key Senate committee voted Thursday to narrowly reject a proposal to add $300 million to the program that will replace the space shuttle, despite NASA's insistence it needs the money to end U.S. reliance on Russia for rides to the International Space Station.
The Senate Appropriations Committee voted 16-14 along party lines against an amendment by Maryland Democrat Barbara Mikulski that would have increased funding for the Commercial Crew program from $900 million to $1.2 billion in fiscal 2016.
The proposal was part of a $3 billion package of increases Mikulski tried adding to a $51 billion bill to fund the Commerce and Justice departments as well as science agencies in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. Republican senators rejected the package, citing a budget deal that spells out how much money is available to spend across all agencies.
"Given the fiscal boundaries that have been set, I believe this bill does a good job of balancing the priorities of our committee members and the nation," Alabama GOP Sen. Richard Shelby said before the vote. Shelby chairs an Appropriations subcommittee that voted Wednesday to approve $900 million for the Commercial Crew program.
Thursday's action makes it all but certain NASA won't meet its 2017 target deadline for launching the first private rockets that will carry astronauts from U.S soil to the space station.
Last week, the House approved a fiscal 2016 budget for NASA that would provide $1 billion for the Commercial Crew program. It's highly unlikely the two chambers will settle on a final number that comes close to matching NASA's request of $1.24 billion, which it said is necessary to meet the 2017 launch target.
Instead, NASA will continue paying Moscow about $75 million per seat to transport astronauts to the orbiting lab on Soyuz rockets. At the same time, the agency will continue working with private aerospace firms Boeing and SpaceX to develop a replacement for the space shuttles, which were mothballed in 2011.
Unless both the House and Senate change course and agree to fully fund Commercial Crew, astronauts won't be launched from U.S. soil until at least 2018.
NASA currently is contracted for six seats on Soyuz rockets each year through 2017. The agency has begun the process of buying six more seats to be used from 2018-2020.
Prior to Thursday's vote, NASA Administrator Charles F. Bolden Jr. said shortchanging Commercial Crew would pose long-term consequences.
"By gutting this program and turning our backs on U.S. industry, NASA will be forced to continue to rely on Russia to get its astronauts to space — and continue to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into the Russian economy rather than our own," he said in a statement Wednesday.
NASA officials have repeatedly told lawmakers that anything less than full funding will require NASA to adjust delivery deadlines for Boeing and SpaceX under Commercial Crew contracts.

http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/2015/06/12/panel-rejects-full-funding-for-shuttle-replacement-program/71160642/

Bilgerat
06-14-2015, 07:34 AM
The "look alike" Russian Buran Space Shuttle and it's fate

https://humannaires.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/2-russian-space-shuttles-left-in-a-hangar-at-the-baikonur-cosmodrome/


https://humannaires.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/space-shuttle-24.jpeg

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
06-14-2015, 07:41 AM
WASHINGTON (USA TODAY (http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/2015/06/11/panel-rejects-full-funding-for-shuttle-replacement/71075816/)) — A key Senate committee voted Thursday to narrowly reject a proposal to add $300 million to the program that will replace the space shuttle, despite NASA's insistence it needs the money to end U.S. reliance on Russia for rides to the International Space Station.
The Senate Appropriations Committee voted 16-14 along party lines against an amendment by Maryland Democrat Barbara Mikulski that would have increased funding for the Commercial Crew program from $900 million to $1.2 billion in fiscal 2016.
The proposal was part of a $3 billion package of increases Mikulski tried adding to a $51 billion bill to fund the Commerce and Justice departments as well as science agencies in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. Republican senators rejected the package, citing a budget deal that spells out how much money is available to spend across all agencies.
"Given the fiscal boundaries that have been set, I believe this bill does a good job of balancing the priorities of our committee members and the nation," Alabama GOP Sen. Richard Shelby said before the vote. Shelby chairs an Appropriations subcommittee that voted Wednesday to approve $900 million for the Commercial Crew program.
Thursday's action makes it all but certain NASA won't meet its 2017 target deadline for launching the first private rockets that will carry astronauts from U.S soil to the space station.
Last week, the House approved a fiscal 2016 budget for NASA that would provide $1 billion for the Commercial Crew program. It's highly unlikely the two chambers will settle on a final number that comes close to matching NASA's request of $1.24 billion, which it said is necessary to meet the 2017 launch target.
Instead, NASA will continue paying Moscow about $75 million per seat to transport astronauts to the orbiting lab on Soyuz rockets. At the same time, the agency will continue working with private aerospace firms Boeing and SpaceX to develop a replacement for the space shuttles, which were mothballed in 2011.
Unless both the House and Senate change course and agree to fully fund Commercial Crew, astronauts won't be launched from U.S. soil until at least 2018.
NASA currently is contracted for six seats on Soyuz rockets each year through 2017. The agency has begun the process of buying six more seats to be used from 2018-2020.
Prior to Thursday's vote, NASA Administrator Charles F. Bolden Jr. said shortchanging Commercial Crew would pose long-term consequences.
"By gutting this program and turning our backs on U.S. industry, NASA will be forced to continue to rely on Russia to get its astronauts to space — and continue to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into the Russian economy rather than our own," he said in a statement Wednesday.
NASA officials have repeatedly told lawmakers that anything less than full funding will require NASA to adjust delivery deadlines for Boeing and SpaceX under Commercial Crew contracts.

http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/2015/06/12/panel-rejects-full-funding-for-shuttle-replacement-program/71160642/

Somebody is building a whole new world, a whole new world government(one world government). And America as its founded has to be destroyed to do that. How about that muslim outreach the bamboy put NASA in charge of--think that had a damn thing to do with space exploration or keeping America ahead in technology/innovations, etc????
New directives from the Executive branch are made to destroy certain things in this nation , not to advance it..
Traitor in our midst , has now become the traitor in charge--just that simple, just that grave a situation IMHO. -Tyr

sundaydriver
06-14-2015, 09:28 AM
Somebody is building a whole new world, a whole new world government(one world government). And America as its founded has to be destroyed to do that. How about that muslim outreach the bamboy put NASA in charge of--think that had a damn thing to do with space exploration or keeping America ahead in technology/innovations, etc????
New directives from the Executive branch are made to destroy certain things in this nation , not to advance it..
Traitor in our midst , has now become the traitor in charge--just that simple, just that grave a situation IMHO. -Tyr

You need a vacation, badly! :laugh2:

sundaydriver
06-14-2015, 09:37 AM
The space shuttle was a fine tool for building the ISS, launching a few satellites, and one high risk mission to repair the Hubble. It was also only a low orbit truck, most deadly space craft ever flown, and the most expensive to launch with costs between $1-1.3 billion per shot.

The shuttle served it's missions and a newer one would be fine if you only want to go 200 miles or so into orbit and nowhere else at high cost. It's well past time to move outward.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolpinchefsky/2012/04/18/5-horrifying-facts-you-didnt-know-about-the-space-shuttle/