It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why NASA Is Spending Half a Billion Dollars on a Canceled Rocket

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:
jra

posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by anon72
reply to post by Gazrok
 


I concur but they could amend those contracts. Well, at least from here forward.

You would think the two sides (govt & contractor) could come up with a better way to utilze the money. The Best Bang for the Buck theme.


This is the Government we're talking about right? Asking them to be wise with spending is... well... unrealistic. Most Politicians could care less about NASA it seems. They just care about there State getting a cut of the money, which allows those people (who work on NASA projects) to keep their jobs, which keeps them happy and in turn keeps those politicians elected. They couldn't care less if NASA ever launches another rocket, so long as they keep getting money for it.

I believe that was one of the main reasons for the Constellation program to reuse as much Shuttle hardware as possible for the Ares rockets. It helps them keep jobs at places like ATK who make the Solid Rocket Boosters and at the Michoud Assembly Facility who make the External Tank.

And speaking of ATK. Of this $500 million, $165 of it is going to ATK to continue development of there five segment SRB which was to be used on the Ares 1. It seems like it could get used on the new HLV that NASA will develop which will still be a Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicle, so it might not be a complete waste, if this new HLV actually gets made and used.


Originally posted by chiponbothshoulders
I say that NASA should just be shut down until there is something done about the greater economy.


Brilliant idea. Lets kill more jobs and add more people to the unemployment lines. I'm sorry but that's a horrible idea. NASA's budget is a drop in the bucket. Of the entire US Federal budget, NASA gets 0.53% (link. Besides, if you kill thousands of jobs, they're going to have to pay termination fees like severance pay.


NY Times
In response to letters from NASA this year, Lockheed Martin and Alliant, more commonly known as ATK, said that for decades the space agency paid for termination costs like severance pay for workers and that the companies had not reserved money to cover that. Lockheed Martin has estimated its cancellation costs at $350 million, ATK at $500 million.


It may be more cost effective to keep them employed.


Shooting bazillions of dollars out into space does very little to help the majority of people.


You do understand that they don't actually launch the money into space right?


The space program can employ a lot of people and companies and you can get a return on investment from it.


Distribution of NASA funds by state
A November 1971 study of NASA released by the Midwest Research Institute of Kansas City, Missouri ("Technological Progress and Commercialization of Communications Satellites." In: "Economic Impact of Stimulated Technological Activity") concluded that “the $25 billion in 1958 dollars spent on civilian space R & D during the 1958-1969 period has returned $52 billion through 1971 -- and will continue to produce pay offs through 1987, at which time the total pay off will have been $181 billion. The discounted rate of return for this investment will have been 33 percent.”


But yeah, NASA hasn't done anything to help anyone. Who needs better water and air filters, weather satellites, satellite navigation, or further advancement on solar power or on medical imaging technology. Nah, no one needs any of that [/sarc]

NASA Spinoffs
Top 25 things NASA has done
more NASA Spinoffs




posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
Ya know what? We are no longer moved when we hear these amounts anymore.

What's a million?
What's a billion?
What's a trillion?

An average NYC Stockbroker makes a million
Oprah makes a couple of billion a year.
Rumsfeld loses a couple of trillion

It's paper. There's no value to the dollar so how are we supposed to react when we hear this (nothing against you OP...I'm just sayin')?

We simply can't care anymore. It's bigger than we can possibly wrap our minds around.
So....who cares? Print 'em up.........give 'em out, cancel your plans then, tell us all about 'em. It's almost humorous now!




edit on 30-12-2010 by Human_Alien because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by chiponbothshoulders
I say that NASA should just be shut down until there is something done about the greater economy.

There aren't that many jobs tied into it to be lost in the grand scheme of things anyway.

Shooting bazillions of dollars out into space does very little to help the majority of people.

It really doesn't.......

I think you're quite ignorant of the impact of spaceflight. The future will be determined by the nation with the greatest foothold in space. You cannot simply shut it down and think that you can just "turn it back on" later when the economy improves. The expertise needed to run it will have already found jobs in other countries or fields. If you really understood just how many of the daily conveniences you take for granted were generated or improved by spaceflight programs then you probably wouldn't hold this position.



new topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join