NASA Receives $19.3 Billion in Final 2016 Spending Bill

[Skroe]

I'm gonna channel Skroe here and say that the money needs to come with caveats.

hi there! Yeah I'll chime in.

On the balance: a really good bill! I'll go over what is great. I want to go over what is terrible first though.

This bill has one stinker in it, and it's a doozy. The Senate Appropriations Committee inserted language that lifted the US-imposed ban on ULA (a Lockheed Martin / Boeing joint venture) buying more Russian RD-180 engines for use in National Security Launches (they could still buy them for civilian launches, like probes to Mars, but not things like GPS).

To say this is bullshit is the understatement of the century. And it has absolutely nothing to do with my usual position on Russia foreign policy, sanctions and all that.

To understand why this is bullshit, you have to understand how the Senate (and similarly the house) divvies up responsibilities. The Senate Armed Services Committee, chaired by John McCain, has been leading the charge for the ban, and other punitive counter-Russia proposals. The Armed Services Committee's purpose is to turn policy into law. But they can put no money behind it. That's what the appropriations committee does. That's why bills are commonly divided up in two: a "National Security Authorization Bill" and a "National Security Budget" bill, as we saw a month back. IT's because of the two different sources.

For the Appropriations Committee to affect a dramatic policy change like this, regardless of the specificity of WHAT it is, is huge. John McCain ranted on the floor of the senate today over just this. The Armed Services Committee had the rug pulled out from under them.

Now, removing the ban is bad Policy, and it has nothing to do with Russia. it has everything to do with ULA being one of the worst, most manipulative and corrupt contractors in Government. I don't care they're going to give Russia money. Or even the principle of ending a sanction (which were never going to last forever anyway, as I've said many times). I care only because ULA will now have good reason to do absolutely nothing to develop new, better rockets, or at the very least replace the RD-180. It will do, as it has done for 15 years, sit back and watch the government put money in it's account, while it invests in nothing.

Let's review briefly how we got to this spot. The EELV program was begun int he 1980s, through the late 1990s, to give the Air Force and NRO alternatives to the Space Shuttle to put cargo into space. They launch up to or largfer than Space Shuttle cargo-sized payloads, at a far lower cost than the $600 million per flight space shuttle and at lower risk (no people) and more often. It's development was spurred by the decision by the Reagan Administration to retire all pre-SHuttle Space Launch vehicles (of which there were a tremendously diverse veriety) and make the Shuttle the only US Government Launch vehicle in order to subsidize it's costs through regular launches. Challengers put a crimp in that, hence the seeds of the EELV program.

After a fashion Boeing had it's rocket: the Atlas V. Lockheed had it's rocket, the Delta IV. Both planned for their rockets to thrive in a commercial market place and ALSO do Government launches, but in the early 2000s when the EELVs debuted, the market didn't nearly exist to the extent they expected. So in an act of industrial policy, the government allowed Boeing and Lockheed to merge their EELV programs - hence ULA - and bought from both in sole source contracts to keep both in the rockets building industry. Delta IV was more powerful and uses legacy Delta technology. IT is also much more expensive than Atlas. It is used for the really big satellites and space probes... the can't lose ones and in it's "Heavy" version (launched 2007) is the largest rocket in the world until the SLS debuts in a couple of years. The Atlas V was configured to exist at the lighter end of the EELV spectrum and became the government workhorse, launching everything from space probes to GPS satellites to spy sats. Then Boeing was developing the Atlas V, in a bit of clinton-era foreign policy to make Russia a "responsible partner", and to ensure that rocket factories in Russia didn't shut down and force their experienced to seek employment in rogue states liek Iran and North Korea, Boeing decided to use the RD-180. But this had a caveat: in five years Boeing would have to build a US-based factory for RD-180s. The RD-180 in itself is nothing special, but it's family of rockets have been built for decades as the product of institutional knowledge in Russia, and things like the metalurgy of parts are known only to workers who have made them and their family for 30 years, and not in the written spec.

Boeing basically lied about RD-180 domestic production from the start. They never had any intention. Starting from the early 2000s they kept getting government exemptions from the 5 year deadline... until pretty much everyone forgot about it. Boeing stopped asking. THe Government stopped caring. And to this day, even the Air Force doesn't really care how it's payloads get into space... it just wants to do it cheaply, and to this day isn't really interested in spending a billion dollars on a replacement for something their vendor (ULA) already has.

Let's keep in mind what happened though while ULA soaked up government soul source contracts for Atlas Vs and the occasional Delta IV. SpaceX started up and started investing in revolutionary new technologies. By contrast ULA, content in it's massive government-sponsored monpoly, invested its money in basically nothing. For Lockheed and Boeing, ULA was a reliable source of income. The government would buy 20-30 launches every 3-4 years, and they'd just count the money. Essentially no work went into anything relating to new rocket development by ULA after the Delta IV heavy was first launched in 2007 (that was very early SpaceX).

So that brings us to the events of the past year with the RD-180 ban. We've talked about that at length. ULA was allowed, when the ban was instituted, to use the 18 engines it had on hand for future national security launches as a bridge to a "new engine". Boeing said this would not be enough. The Obama Administration was not happy at the ban. Congress, led by McCain, said too bad, and started throwing money at the development of at least two engines to replace the RD-180. Boeing on it's own, reluctantly announced it would develop the new "Vulcan" rocket, which would use the Blue Origin BE-4 on a new first stage, while retaining a Atlas V upper stage. In an illustration of how a decade of underinvestment in development has set them back, the Vulcan cannot land. Rather it will jettison it's engines which will re-enter in an inflatable aeroshell for reuse. The entire stack will still be on the order of 50%-80% more expensive than a comparable Falcon 9, which can land. It's a pretty pathetic proposal all things considered.

But ULA said it would only fund Vulcan development Quarterly. Which is absurd, because it takes as long as 3-4 years to manufacture rockets and space notoriously requires long lead in times. A quaterly development plan basically means that ULA is doing nothing... again.

Recently, ULA decided to take hostages. The hostage was the GPS system and it's self. They "arranged" to use several of the RD-180s that were reserved for National Security launches for non-national security missions, driving down the stockpile. They then refused to bid on the first block of Air Force GPS-III contracts, saying they didn't have the engines and the Air Force's criteria made their much more expensive Atlas V and Delta IV (in comparison to the Falcon 9, which won it) completely uncompetitive. And then they said that if the RD-180 ban isn't lifted, they may have to exit the space launch industry in the next few years.

Is this not like the worst shit you ever heard?

The Appropriations committee buckled because they're protecting money in congressional districts first and foremost, which is understandable. But let's be clear: there will be no Vulcan, no BE-4 on a ULA rocket (there will be a BE-4 on a Blue Origin rocket, which is why they're working on it... they're not counting on ULA either). The budget bill this year gives the Air Force three times the amount they asked for for RD-180 replacement development, but don't bet on that ever happening: even if it gets built, ULA will find a way to avoid systems integration.

This is what is going to happen. Vulcan will be forgotten about. ULA will convince the Appropriations committee to split the next blocks of GPS-III between ULA and SpaceX in a new industrial arrangement. SpaceX, which has a very small geographic footprint and is not politically protected (that footprint is one reason why they're so inexpensive comparatively), will cry foul but nothing will happen. And we'll be in 2024 where SpaceX lands it's Falcon 9s and Falcon Heavys, ULA disposes of it's twice to three times as expensive EELVs, and both Boeing and LM are getting independently fat off their massive Space Launch System contracts (Boeing is building the core of the SLS outside of ULA, LM is building the Capsule). ULA will retire the more expensive Delta IV and will still be buying Russian RD-180s because it's cheap and they don't want to spend the money to make their own.

This should illustrate the bullshit of blindly giving more money to NASA and Spaceflight without looking at who is actually doing it. For all the protestations of folks that we should live in an ideal world where we cut defense spending and explore space together by increasing NASA funding, the same defense industry rotten apples population the space launch industry as well. Boeing doesn't care if it's a billion dollar bomber of a billion dollar rocket. It's a billion dollars to them. ULA was ready to leave space flight, like a failed gas station closing up shop.

If you care about putting things into space, then this bill has a really odious side into it, because the arrangement now will be the government will waste billions per year (because the Air Force space flight budget is different than NASA) keeping ULA alive in a world where SpaceX and Blue Origin undercut it. And ULA will do little or nothing to be competitive in a market that is designed to be noncompetitive.

So in other words, thank god for Elon Musk. Because without him in SpaceX, ULA is American Spaceflight. And for the record, the rest of the world isn't any better. The Arianne 5 is a dinosaur and expensive. Russia's rockets have started routinely blowing up now that the work force who made them for decades has begun retiring, and it's "new" (not really) rocket is plauged with troubles and delays. China's space program for all the hype is years behind schedule.

Fact is, for all our wonder about space, the companies and groups actually doing it generally aren't really interested in doing anything new with it. The point we're at now is like if jet fighter and jet airplane development stopped in 1952 because everyone figured "these are good enough and we make sufficient money off of them".

Good budget over all (next post will go into whats new)... but man... ULA learned today that if they threaten to shoot themselves, a section of Congress will do whatever they want. ULA is the poster-child of why defense industry consolidation is a bad thing.

[Hiricine]

Another case of money stolen from private individuals to pay for something that people should donate to if they really want it.

That being said, its a lot better than many of the other things that get money.

[Rennadrel]

Oh hey, money that could be better spent, wasted. No wonder America is several trillions of dollars in debt....

[Belize]

Lash me harder

Kinky .

[Fugus]

I'm gonna channel Skroe here and say that the money needs to come with caveats.

Money invested in NASA has traditionally been a very good long term investment and actually makes us money as a nation. I believe for dollar invested into NASA, it generally generates somewhere between 8 to 14 dollars in return.

It is just long term investments versus short term ones. Cutting their funding is actually a long term loss for us.

[Teebone]

Lash me harder

I need popcorn. [I'm] Too sick for anything beyond that, but popcorn will work.

And that's germ sick not mental sick. We already knew that mental ship sailed ages ago.

Edited for clarification and possible fever reasons.

[Elegiac]

Oh hey, money that could be better spent, wasted. No wonder America is several trillions of dollars in debt....

It's not like our long term survival as a species depends on space exploration or anything.

- - - Updated - - -

Money invested in NASA has traditionally been a very good long term investment and actually makes us money as a nation. I believe for dollar invested into NASA, it generally generates somewhere between 8 to 14 dollars in return.

It is just long term investments versus short term ones. Cutting their funding is actually a long term loss for us.

I'm not proposing cutting their funding. I'm proposing lashing them if they try their usual MO and build everything from scratch on a per project basis rather than developing generalized technologies and patterns that can benefit from economy of scale.

[Nakotsu]

how else will they maintain there space battleships?

[May90]

I need popcorn. [I'm] Too sick for anything beyond that, but popcorn will work.

How do we manage to turn every single thread in a kinky entertainment? I'm puzzled... Must be some hidden law of nature we aren't aware of.

[Theinquisition]

Im glad NASA is getting more funding, I just hope there is accountability involved, I don't like the idea of writing blank chcks up anyone

[TrumpIsPresident]

I love NASA but its a government institution susceptible to things like agenda bias and most importantly: WASTE.

They'll do with $19.3 billion what private sector could do with less than half that and they'll do it the pandering agenda elements.

^and what Tony just said: ACCOUNTABILITY is a must.

[Moxal]

So new cars for everyone and their janitors at NASA?

Maybe less layoffs this year.

[gamingmuscle]

I love NASA but its a government institution susceptible to things like agenda bias and most importantly: WASTE.

They'll do with $19.3 billion what private sector could do with less than half that and they'll do it the pandering agenda elements.

^and what Tony just said: ACCOUNTABILITY is a must.

The private sector will only do it after Nasa has done all the ground work. Do something new, Nasa has to.

[Pterodactylus]

They'll do with $19.3 billion what private sector could do with less than half that and they'll do it the pandering agenda elements

Just think of everything that came from NASA that the private sector used and expanded one. Your hatred of government is clouding your objectivity.

[TrumpIsPresident]

The private sector will only do it after Nasa has done all the ground work. Do something new, Nasa has to.

Ha, yea, I can see Obama addressing SpaceX:

"if you have a rocket program, you didn't build that, somebody else made that happen"


Well there is truth in the sentiment that we all build on the efforts of those who came before us.

There is also truth in the reality that NASA isn't now what it was then, nor is the government now what is was then.

Waste, lack of accountability, extremists agendas, and extremest agendas have become the new norm such to the point that no government agency can escape them.

NASA isn't immune to this therefore it will fall to the wayside as private industries come in and do the job better, faster and cheaper.

[artemishunter1]

Ha, yea, I can see Obama addressing SpaceX:

"if you have a rocket program, you didn't build that, somebody else made that happen"


Well there is truth in the sentiment that we all build on the efforts of those who came before us.

There is also truth in the reality that NASA isn't now what it was then, nor is the government now what is was then.

Waste, lack of accountability, extremists agendas, and extremest agendas have become the new norm such to the point that no government agency can escape them.

NASA isn't immune to this therefore it will fall to the wayside as private industries come in and do the job better, faster and cheaper.

But when is the last time PRIVATE sector came up with something new? Private sector refines an already established idea or method, like say space vehicle from virgin.

[Goondicker]

I'm still pissed. Should be much more.

[Bathory]

The kid in me thinks this is great, but for any program there should be adequate benefit/compensation. What'll this give the US in material/political terms aside from the scientific/exploration aspect?

Plenty of technology that is invented to go all the exploration

[Goondicker]

Oh hey, money that could be better spent, wasted. No wonder America is several trillions of dollars in debt....

Please tell me how it could be better spent, genious.

These are some of the most brilliant people on the planet who are advancing technology. You probably wouldn't even have the opportunity to make a comment on this forum without NASA.

This sort of simple minded thinking is why we are thousands of years behind our scientific potential. Don't reproduce.

[PACOX]

I like how people just assume NASA isn't going to blow this cash like they've done in the past.