You are not logged in.
As Dook put it in the NASA 2006 Budget "I know that it is early" to plan for the 2007 budget for Nasa but there is noise that due to the short fall blamed on shuttle use through 2010 that more funds are needed inorder to carry out the many programs, projects and so much more that Nasa does do.
The commitment to cary on with the use of the shuttle, completion of the ISS and moving forward with the CEV developement has placed a major part of its budget towards these efforts while cutting and delaying many science programs as well as probes, telescopes and more making Nasa at risk of failing. When it can ill afford to.
While congress did whine about the lack of details in the 2006 process it however is wanting to set that striaght in the coming 2007 year.
NASA is reminded that the primary purpose of budget justifications is to provide needed information to the Committees on Appropriations, and therefore must be submitted in a format with the necessary level of detail required by the Committees so that funding requests may be analyzed. In order for the budget justifications to be of value to the Committees, NASA shall present the fiscal year 2007 budget justification with detailed information on the prior year, current year, and requested funding levels for each program, project or activity funded within each division and directorate in each account, and provide detailed information on all proposed changes being requested.
These are the numbers finally settled on for 2006:
The conference agreement provides $16,456,800,000 for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), instead of $16,471,050,000 as proposed by the House and $16,396,400,000 as proposed by the Senate.
Of course there are some expectations with regards to these funds, thus affecting the VISION FOR SPACE EXPLORATION:
AIP FYI #163: NASA Appropriations
CREW EXPLORATION VEHICLE:
HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE:
MARS EXPLORATION PROGRAM:
EUROPA MISSION:
And the list goes on..
Of course this all leads to the lobbying for more money now as indicated by Letter from the Coalition for Space Exploration to White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card
The Coalition for Space Exploration, consisting of 42 aerospace companies and 11 industry associations, respectfully urges your support for an FY07 NASA budget of not less than $16.962B --- the funding proposed in the President's budget submittal last year for FY07.
I think the last thing we should be doing is giving more money to Nasa if they are not capable of fixing the on going issues that are already on there plate.
Offline
Like button can go here
I think that M.Griffin needs help... Presidential help, to get authorization to start really cutting, or else NASA is in trouble.
[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]
[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]
Offline
Like button can go here
NASA's FY 2007 Budget Submission to OMB
Handout chart not spoken of in its meeting
(Budget authority, $ in millions) FY 2006 FY 2007 Deltas
Science 5,304.8 5,650.4 6.5%
Exploration Systems 3,228.8 3,839.3 18.9%
Aeronautics Research 807.4 694.4 -14.0%
Space Operations 6,557.0 7,228.1 10.2%
Cross-Agency Support 526.0 451.7 -14.1%
Inpsector General 32.4 33.5 3.4%
TOTAL 16,456.3* 17,897.7* 8.8%
*numbers do not total due to rounding errors
Now if I only had a key to indicate where the space shuttle and ISS are in this chart...
Offline
Like button can go here
Here is to a month of Iraq war spending going to NASA. I wish this country would take care of its best and brightest like it takes care of foreigners. 20 billion for foreign aid and AIDS? Please.
Offline
Like button can go here
It has been rumorred that Bush wanted to give Nasa 1 billion more this year but with that he also wants to get more for the war in Iraq. Part of the increase was to cover the Huricane one two damage.
Shortly Nasa will submit a budget request and though it will take a while to pass it could also be not recieved all to well in congress. Matters could even go real bad if the next launch is still plagued by more foam falling from the ET.
Offline
Like button can go here
Don't ask me how I know, but it's about 80% certain that once the budget has gone through confrence to patch up the differences between the senate and house versions anothing $850m-$1.1b will find it's way into NASAs budget.
Things are looking up, they are just looking up through some very back channel ways.
Offline
Like button can go here
This budget isn't going to get pasted till October or November. The next Shuttle flight will make or break the Shuttle program. We will either finish the ISS in the intended way, or pour everything into CLV/CaLV and the CEV, and possibly finish the ISS that way.
With that in mind, its far too early to be begging for billions for a series of Shuttle flights they have yet to prove they can fly.
"Yes, I was going to give this astronaut selection my best shot, I was determined when the NASA proctologist looked up my ass, he would see pipes so dazzling he would ask the nurse to get his sunglasses."
---Shuttle Astronaut Mike Mullane
Offline
Like button can go here
[url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11203481/]NASA budget increases focus on moon trips
Exploration program boosted; science program, aeronautics downplayed[/url]
NASA’s budget would rise just 1 percent, or about $170 million, under the 2007 request the White House sent to Congress on Monday. NASA officials, however, are quick to point out that the $16.792 billion budget request amounts to a 3 percent increase if $350 million in hurricane-recovery money
Step taken for the CEV and the Moon.
The big winner in NASA’s 2007 budget request is the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, which is responsible for developing the Crew Exploration Vehicle, two new launchers and the lunar landers needed to return astronauts to the moon by 2020. Its budget would rise 30 percent, or $928 million, in 2007 to $3.978 billion — nearly $300 million ahead of previous budget forecasts.
While science wiil see this:
the agency’s Science Mission Directorate — which builds and operates planetary probes, space telescopes and Earth-observing satellites — would see its budget increase of just 1.5 percent to $5.33 billion in 2007, and then level off to 1 percent annual increases thereafter.
Aeronautics spending would fall to $724 million, a $160 million drop."
Offline
Like button can go here
Highlights Of The NASA FY 2007 Budget Request
A good breakdown of whats in.
Frankly I'm shocked at the cost of continuing to operate robotic probes. After launch the only thing needed to operate them is a small team and a bunch of computer consoles. Why does that cost tens of millions of dollars?
I also find it interesting that the CEV/CLV budget is getting damn near close to the Shuttle budget. No doubt an insurance policy. But we'll have no need for for the CEV without a complete station, and we won't have a complete station without the shuttle (theoretically) without the CaLV. If the ISS is to be an international effort, let the Russians handle the manned launches. We are the only ones with the resources, shuttle or otherwise, to get the rest of it off the ground. The CEV will do nothing for ISS construction.
"Yes, I was going to give this astronaut selection my best shot, I was determined when the NASA proctologist looked up my ass, he would see pipes so dazzling he would ask the nurse to get his sunglasses."
---Shuttle Astronaut Mike Mullane
Offline
Like button can go here
Frankly I'm shocked at the cost of continuing to operate robotic probes. After launch the only thing needed to operate them is a small team and a bunch of computer consoles. Why does that cost tens of millions of dollars?.
I guess Deep Space Network costs. it's more than a small team and a bunch of computers, it's an global operation, huuge infrastructure... Spread out over inhospitable places etc. 'hiring' Arecibo listening time alone would cost a pretty dime, I guess.
Still, that's a hefty price-tag they quote...
Offline
Like button can go here
I also find it interesting that the CEV/CLV budget is getting damn near close to the Shuttle budget. No doubt an insurance policy. But we'll have no need for for the CEV without a complete station, and we won't have a complete station without the shuttle (theoretically) without the CaLV. If the ISS is to be an international effort, let the Russians handle the manned launches. We are the only ones with the resources, shuttle or otherwise, to get the rest of it off the ground. The CEV will do nothing for ISS construction.
It's far more than an insurance policy, the CEV/CLV is a replacement for the Shuttle with the primary purpose of supporting Lunar and Mars missions. Crew and cargo transport to the ISS is a secondary function that will happen first because of the delay in building the HLV. In time ISS crew and cargo services are expected to be provided by commercial services, freeing the CEV/CLV for exploration beyond LEO.
[color=darkred]Let's go to Mars and far beyond - triple NASA's budget ![/color] [url=irc://freenode#space] #space channel !! [/url] [url=http://www.youtube.com/user/c1cl0ps] - videos !!![/url]
Offline
Like button can go here
I guess Deep Space Network costs. it's more than a small team and a bunch of computers, it's an global operation, huuge infrastructure... Spread out over inhospitable places etc. 'hiring' Arecibo listening time alone would cost a pretty dime, I guess.
Still, that's a hefty price-tag they quote...
It sure does. According to the 2007 budget request Deep Space Mission System (DSMS) cost $258m in 2005, and AFAIK most of that money is consumed by the DSN supporting the approximatey 30 legacy missions such as Voyager, MGS, MERs etc etc. On top of that would be the cost of the staff supporting each extended mission.
[color=darkred]Let's go to Mars and far beyond - triple NASA's budget ![/color] [url=irc://freenode#space] #space channel !! [/url] [url=http://www.youtube.com/user/c1cl0ps] - videos !!![/url]
Offline
Like button can go here
Some other interesting pieces to note are the cancellation of the Terrestrial Planet Finder, Plans for a Europa probe and more science items. It also appears that the total shuttle flights seem to have been reduced to 17 as noted by The Planetary Society
Offline
Like button can go here
It is not that science missions are cut back but rather postponed. With the new more powerful SDLVs, larger science payloads become possible. Europa landers are quite do-able with HLLV.
Offline
Like button can go here
It would appear that more details are required before the subcommittee members will go along with the requested funding level for 2007.
NASA ADMINISTRATOR GRIFFIN TO TESTIFY ON FY07 BUDGET REQUEST
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Full Committee on Science – Hearing
NASA’s Fiscal Year 2007 Budget Proposal
10:00a.m. – 12:00p.m.
2318 Rayburn House Office Building (WEBCAST)
NOTE: Real Player version 7 or higher is needed to play webcast
Offline
Like button can go here
Interesting that the Subcommittee (see NasaWatch) have voice there thoughts in that for the last 2 years of budgets that they would feel that they have been under budgeted for the goals that are to be achieved. House Science Committee Debates NASA Budget
Statement of NASA Administrator Griffin before the House Committee on Science
Offline
Like button can go here
It seems that Griffin's honeymoon with the House committee is over. Yet as he sits with his new partner he seems quietly confident that his new budget will be approved, or better still backfilled with pork for those cancelled and delayed aeronautics, life and space sciences projects. What's the betting that the 2007 budget comes in at over $17 billion?
[color=darkred]Let's go to Mars and far beyond - triple NASA's budget ![/color] [url=irc://freenode#space] #space channel !! [/url] [url=http://www.youtube.com/user/c1cl0ps] - videos !!![/url]
Offline
Like button can go here
Sherwood and Bart are the two biggest hold-ups. They think that just because the engineers like Griffin are finally having something go their way for a change--that it is bad. My guess is the white coats and pointy heads that had a Delta II flight every other week under Goldin have been acting like spoiled brats.
Science is not being nixed, just postponed until the STS albatross is removed and CEV, Stick and CaLV can take their place. The CaLV will be able to loft very large science packagers with the margin to land good Europa landers, Mars sample returns, Kuiper-craft, etc. Even the Stick will have a role in launching such craft--perhaps more cheaply than EELV.
The scientists are just used to having a Goldin-supplied sucker in their mouths every five min. to keep them busy. Griffin justs wants them to do without candy so they can have a more filling meal at the end of the day.
If the scientist types don't shut their insipid mouths--there won't be a NASA and all they can hope for are Rutans litte ME-163 Komet contraptions.
And then who will be sorry?
Offline
Like button can go here
Ther has been a decision to keep the budget increases small and to tighten the belt. NASA's Budget Blunder
All of which has lead to a decrease in the efforts of science and associated missions probes.
Lots of commotion on capitol hill on the issue of science being cut as well.
[url=http://www.house.gov/science/press/109/109-199.htm]SCIENCE LEADERS ARGUE FOR DIFFERENT PRIORITIES IN NASA’S SCIENCE BUDGET FOR FY07
NASA Agrees to Reexamine Allocation[/url]
Offline
Like button can go here
some more sad news
Dawn mission is over
We already heard in other threads that research on the Red-planet has been cut by $243.3 million to $700.2 million
NASA Science in Free Fall By Jonathan McDowell
http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_1691_1.asp
...
The 2007 budget also axed the Terrestrial Planet Finder, delayed the SIM interferometry testbed, and slated the SOFIA airborne infrared observatory for almost-certain cancellation. SOFIA was in the final stages of construction. The Beyond Einstein series of high-energy missions, including Constellation-X and the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA), is being kept alive with only a trickle of funding. Even ground-based projects such as the long-planned Keck Interferometer outrigger telescopes have been sent to a premature grave.
http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_1691_1.asp
Morale is plummeting in the US space science community as senior scientists see years of work evaporate with a stroke of the financial pen, and young astronomy PhDs are wondering whether a career in the field is even possible. How US astronomy will take shape in the coming months and years remains in question as the food fight over how to reslice the shrinking funding pie begins.
'first steps are not for cheap, think about it...
did China build a great Wall in a day ?' ( Y L R newmars forum member )
Offline
Like button can go here
some more sad news
Dawn mission is over
We already heard in other threads that research on the Red-planet has been cut by $243.3 million to $700.2 million
NASA Science in Free Fall By Jonathan McDowell
http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_1691_1.asp
...
The 2007 budget also axed the Terrestrial Planet Finder, delayed the SIM interferometry testbed, and slated the SOFIA airborne infrared observatory for almost-certain cancellation. SOFIA was in the final stages of construction. The Beyond Einstein series of high-energy missions, including Constellation-X and the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA), is being kept alive with only a trickle of funding. Even ground-based projects such as the long-planned Keck Interferometer outrigger telescopes have been sent to a premature grave.
http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_1691_1.asp
Morale is plummeting in the US space science community as senior scientists see years of work evaporate with a stroke of the financial pen, and young astronomy PhDs are wondering whether a career in the field is even possible. How US astronomy will take shape in the coming months and years remains in question as the food fight over how to reslice the shrinking funding pie begins.
Kill the ISS now?
Dig into the [url=http://child-civilization.blogspot.com/2006/12/political-grab-bag.html]political grab bag[/url] at [url=http://child-civilization.blogspot.com/]Child Civilization[/url]
Offline
Like button can go here
Kill the ISS now?
I totally agree that ISS has been over-priced and very badly managed, but there are worse programs.
However all the ISS burden isn't on NASA, Russia has built iss modules and airlocks and laucnhed many payloads, the ESA have given money to the ISS for experiments, Olsen paid for his trip, the Canadians have built the arm to the station and Japan has invested in the ISS.
The ISS is a total mess and costs have over run,
however some good science might come out of it yet. Studies in material science, Microgravity experiments, investagation of long duration space flight, building a fully functional space station that we can use as a test bed for human Mars missions, there are plans for Multipurpose Labs and the Japanese Kibo module, the next astronaut/cosmonaut fom Brazil may be doing experiments in nano-tech.
Shuttle started good - it had done great missions in the past and has been a complex vehicle, however it is not safe and hasn't met the goal of greatly reducing launch costs. Counting up the cost of building Shuttle, training and facilities...we discover Shuttle costs $1 billion per launch
and unlike the Space station ( international burden ) only NASA/USA are paying for Shuttle
'first steps are not for cheap, think about it...
did China build a great Wall in a day ?' ( Y L R newmars forum member )
Offline
Like button can go here
Ther has been a decision to keep the budget increases small and to tighten the belt. NASA's Budget Blunder
All of which has lead to a decrease in the efforts of science and associated missions probes.Lots of commotion on capitol hill on the issue of science being cut as well.
[url=http://www.house.gov/science/press/109/109-199.htm]SCIENCE LEADERS ARGUE FOR DIFFERENT PRIORITIES IN NASA’S SCIENCE BUDGET FOR FY07
NASA Agrees to Reexamine Allocation[/url]
Open letter to NASA Administrator, Michael Griffin
March 10 , 2006
http://www.planetary.org/
It is been a rather heady and intense time at The Planetary Society. The political problems posed by the NASA budget -- with deep cuts in space science -- are curiously juxtaposed with the excitement about the finding of water evidence at Enceladus, the moon of Saturn, and the orbit insertion of Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. (The Japanese success at Hayabusa is also not lost on us, nor is the upcoming orbit insertion of Europe’s Venus Express).
http://www.planetary.org/home/
Gone (delayed indefinitely, in NASA-speak):
* Mission to Europa
* Terrestrial Planet Finder
* Mars Scout missions after 2011
* Mars Sample Return
* Mars Telecommunications Orbiter
* DAWN -- mission to two largest asteroids
Slashed (scaled back):
* Astrobiology research -- down 50%
* Research and analysis -- down 15%
Offline
Like button can go here
I can’t really tell if less science is being done or if just peoples expectations have increased.
Dig into the [url=http://child-civilization.blogspot.com/2006/12/political-grab-bag.html]political grab bag[/url] at [url=http://child-civilization.blogspot.com/]Child Civilization[/url]
Offline
Like button can go here
It sounds like the planatry society is not too keen on funding more shuttle missions:
http://www.planetary.org/programs/proje … udget.html
Society Vice-President Bill Nye stated, "After reaching the Moon, we kept on building big engineering projects for humans in space with the shuttle and space station. We got bogged down in Earth orbit; our exploration got stalled." Nye added that the Society strongly supports human exploration driven by science as defined in the Vision, stating, "To justify the cost and risk of human space flight, we need to be exploring other worlds and searching for extraterrestrial life."
Full funding of the shuttle was the result of political pressure from Congressional representatives from areas with vested interests in shuttle work, as well as international pressure from partners focused on completing the space station.
Friedman questioned the realism of the shuttle's even being able to do 17 more flights in any reasonable time period (before 2010) and said, "Investing in the shuttle is an investment in the past. NASA should be investing in the future."
Dig into the [url=http://child-civilization.blogspot.com/2006/12/political-grab-bag.html]political grab bag[/url] at [url=http://child-civilization.blogspot.com/]Child Civilization[/url]
Offline
Like button can go here