The Telescope that Ate Space Science
Note that both Scolese and Weiler still have their jobs. Administrator Bolden, despite the fact that he is a Marine general, seems reluctant to properly manage or discipline underperformers, even though they were not his appointments (the putsch described above occurred under NASA Administrator Mike Griffin). Ideally, the White House would deal with his own underperformance, but the last thing they want to do right now, amidst all their other problems, is a job search and confirmation for a new administrator.
But the agency cannot afford this. As the June editorial pointed out, this is NASA’s Katrina. The Webb telescope is eating up the budget for other space science projects, in an extremely austere fiscal environment. Moreover, NASA’s inability to control costs doesn’t inspire confidence that it will be able to execute future programs, such as the Senate Launch System, properly. And as the Florida Today article pointed out, this is an extremely complex and risky project from a technological standpoint. It is quite possible that, over a decade and several billion dollars from now, the device will be launched, and be an utter failure.
It is time — long past time — to pull the plug on this project, and start over with a clean sheet of paper and new assumptions. If SpaceX really develops their Falcon Heavy launcher, the capability to launch over fifty tons of payload at a cost of a hundred million dollars will revolutionize the way we think about payload design. It would relieve designers of the necessity to remove every last pound from a spacecraft, and allow innovative but less risky means of satisfying mission requirements. Moreover, if NASA is allowed to move forward with the technology development it seeks, and not have the budget for it eaten up by an unaffordable government launch vehicle for which there are no mission requirements or payloads, it will be possible to assemble large telescopes in orbit, and then move them the million or so miles to the planned observing site.
We are on the verge of a revolution in the costs and capabilities of spaceflight, and it is going to cause us to rethink a lot of the ways we currently do things. Putting off the capabilities of the Webb for a few years won’t be the end of the world for astronomy — the beginning of the universe isn’t going anywhere any time soon, and in any event, it looks as though such a delay is going to occur regardless, while wiping out a lot of other good science (some of which may have practical applications, such as prospecting asteroids for platinum group metals, or testing ways of moving one on a collision course for earth). In fact, it is quite likely that a new approach could give us the results of Webb, at lower cost, and sooner, but only if we abandon the current flawed one. But it would start with new management.
Let’s hope that the White House agrees.
Everything the Government does has the first and foremost objective to grow the size of government and at its core the outright theft of the peoples’ monies/assets to meet that core objective. The use of science, mostly fiction today, is a core element in this theft as the AGW fantasy science so aptly exposes.
So the Webb telescope is literally the elephant in the room, evolved from the NASA government specified mouse prototype…
And of course it will help the PRIVATE COMPANY SPACE X succeed using public funds you so skillfully write are NOT required for the success of Space X.
And this is just the beginning:
Florida vows $7 Million expansion budget for Space X.
Another $2.3 million from the economic development agency Space Florida.
another $5 million for “construction” purposes for Space X.
$75 million and counting from NASA contracts.
Funding from the Department of Transportation of $16 million for spaceport infrastructure.
Funding from NASA for at least twenty launches.
“That Musk CEO of SpaceX seems to feel entitled to tax-payer-funded subsidies and even uses free enterprise rhetoric to defend it is bizarre to the point of being surreal.” from SpaceX’s Elon Mush Goes to Washington.associated content.com
I guess it’s not pork if your the pig.
I agree, SpaceX reeks of crony capitalism. Never ever trust a Democrat ran business; Microsoft, Google, GM, GE, Oracle, etc. The farther left, the less to be trusted, and Mush is about as lefty as they come. It aint a free market unless there are more then three players.
Check your math. Do you know how to count to four? Boeing, Sierra Nevada, Blue Origin, SpaceX. Four.
As a person who was formerly involved with the space program, I pay a lot of attention to what is going on. SpaceX is the ONLY company being talked about. BTW, do you have any idea as to the number of private businesses that have always been part of the space program, and the number of republican leaning ones that were driven out of business by far left democrats DURING the Bush I administration? My math is just fine, OTH, your history stinks.
And another thing: The Commercial Resupply Services Agreement of December 18, 2008 contracting SpaceX to fly 12 resupply missions to the International Space Station was authorized during The BUSH Administration.
What does that have to do with anything? You use the logic of a lefty. The company is run by a far left democratic crony capitalist.
Lynn are you even paying attention to the dollar amounts you’re posting? SpaceX is making do with millions what other NASA projects can barely muster with billions. Plus, the way the NASA COTS contracts reimburse SpaceX for deliverables is a far cry from the business as usual, build it late, build it over budget, Cost+plus contracts that the Lockheed and Boeing legacy providers normally get.
That was a clever attempt at the old m/b sleight of hand. The commercial companies so far have gotten maybe $1B total over 7 years of COTS and they’ve collectively demonstrated far more than NASA’s >>$10B worth of in-house vehicle design in that time… this Lynn guy is clearly demagoguing his way around the facts.
The reason Florida state government agencies are willing to subsidize SpaceX is in the belief that they will create new in-state jobs, that will eventually return more in income taxes than initially given to SpaceX. It’s Florida money, not federal money.
The reason Florida state government agencies are willing to subsidize SpaceX is in the belief that they will create new in-state jobs, that will eventually return more in income taxes than initially given to SpaceX.
Writer who’s obviously never been to Florida say WHAT?!?
FYI, Florida has no income tax. (Now you know why Tiger Woods moved to Orlando about 10 minutes after turning pro.) Still, increased sales tax revenue will help the state, and Brevard County (where Cape Canaveral is located) certainly needs the property tax revenue. Without NASA, Patrick AFB and the military contractors, Brevard would be a virtual ghost county. About the only place in America more totally dependent on federal largesse is the District of Corruption itself.
It pains me to admit this, but the US no longer knows how to build anything of substance on time or anywhere near its budget. With a deskilled workforce, an industry that prefers to out-source, and a privileged public sector in love with regulation, our greatness is increasingly just a memory. The country that put up the Empire State Building and Rockefeller Center in record time is still struggling to complete the Ground Zero project TEN YEARS after the 9/11 attacks. Almost every military project is behind schedule and over-budget. Forget high-speed trains, we’re having trouble building a Metro extension out to Dulles airport! Did someone mention Boston’s “Big Dig”? I challenge anyone to name a great public accomplishment of the last 20 years.
Every one of those projects you named has a common thread: excessive, overbearing government interference and over-regulation.
Arguably corruption and fraud among the overly-capitalist contractors was responsible for the Big Dig’s spiraling cost. Again and again the contractors used defective materials or otherwise botched the job, and the taxpayers had to pay to have it fixed.
In your “no government” world, who is responsible for policing the contractors?
Don’t be an idiot. Raymond never mentioned any kind of “no government world”. You can’t understand the difference between “smaller government” and “no government”? Who, in your little world, is advocating no government? And what happens in Boston is their problem. If they want their state government to issue thousands of new regulations, who cares? But no need for the feds to create a new bureaucracy to oversee what goes on in Boston, so my taxes have to pay for it.
Hmmm… the short list:
* The victims’ families would bring lawsuits against the companies, probably bankrupting them
* If that didn’t do it, no prime contractor would ever hire them again
* They would lose their best engineers, who would not want to be associated with poor practice.
Also, I’m not sure how government-bid contracts with very close government oversight, like in the Big Dig, can be seen as overly-capitalist. Unless… those government inspectors… were corrupt? You live in a fantasy world if you think corporations are the only ones beholden to greed. The difference is, with corporations it shows up on the balance sheet, with government it is obfuscated away.
“Now, the telescope problem has gotten even worse. Last week, Aviation Week reported that the latest cost estimates for the new telescope are now up to $8.7B, and it has kicked off an intra-agency fight for funds, pitting space science against human spaceflight:”
I hesitate to break it to you, but there are two things that need to be brought out:
1. It is a longstanding NASA policy (with total complicity of certain members of congress) to sell a program based on minimal estimates, and then to get incremental approvals as the program becomes “too big” to kill. The 45% growth cited for the programs above does not begin to tell the story.
2. The jealousy of the space programs’ unmanned elements and arrogance of the manned elements(with the resulting back-biting and outright opposition to funding for the other element by both NASA and congressional supporters) has done more to kill the space program than even the massive erosion of management and technical skills due to focus on multi-culturism.
“NASA now says the telescope can’t launch until at least 2018, though outside analysts suggest the flight could slip past 2020. The latest estimated price tag: up to $6.8 billion. NASA admits the launch delay will push the bill even higher.”
Guys, this is a telescope we’re talking about. It’s not a matter of life and death, and it certainly isn’t a major matter of national security. Pull the job from NASA (since they obviously can’t manage it), give it to a private corporation at a fixed price and make them accountable for staying within budget. Not only will they be able to do it, they’ll probably save money in the process. But this will only work if government gives the corporation the job and then gets out of the way. If government continues changing the specifications on the job, then it will also go over budget. Like most things in life, if you give a corporation an assignment and leave them alone, it will do it better and for less money than the government.
Libertyship, you are arguing for exactly what they are currently doing! NASA does not actually produce these projects. They award contracts to private industry to produce them. If you pull it from NASA, what government entity are you willing to have manage it – because that is exactly what would happen.
“If government continues changing the specifications on the job, then it will also go over budget.”
– so true, but that will be even more pronounced if you go to a firm fixed price contract.
“Like most things in life, if you give a corporation an assignment and leave them alone, it will do it better and for less money than the government.”
– as long as the government is involved in any way, including the budget process or political patronage issues, there will be no cost efficiency.
Privatization of government projects is just a buzz-phrase to make the voter conclude that Washington has finally gotten a clue, so we will go back to tweeting or whatever.
Pull it from NASA. If it is viewed by private industry as economically feasible (as opposed to politically expedient), some company will take up the challenge and put together a venture group to pursue the project at their own risk and reward. Of course, as soon as the govenrment minions decide to dictate the uses of the telescope, the project will fall apart.
There was, in the mid-80′s, a venture capital group that proposed to build, on their own dime, the fifth orbiter. The proposal was shot down in short order, because, among other major issues, the potential for private gain was abhorrent to our “leaders.”
NASA is on the same trajectory as the US Postal Service.
Essentially so, jayo, but with a clear difference in the reason, I think.
The Postal Service was at its best when the main ingredient was horses, rather than union members.
NASA was at its best when the main ingredient was dedicated professionals instead of affirmative action upgrades.
You’re seriously stating that the main problem with NASA is all the black people?
Huh?
Do you think affirmative action only applies to blacks?
I think that when our space program is held hostage through jobs and promotions being based on factors other than competence, experience and knowledge and when truth can not be spoken for fear of violating political correctness, the resulting work force, no matter the color or gender, is going to be woefully inadequate and iwll fail miserably.
So it’s not the blacks, it’s the chinese, Indians, and women?
You’re digging yourself a hole. Why don’t you tell us exactly which people/companies you’re talking about?
Do not break your arm patting yourself on the back Scott. Race baiting is neither novel nor clever.
NASA is not immune to Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy.
Does anyone else see the sad… no, make that the disgusting irony of this? Naming a hugely important (or so they say) telescope after an ADMINISTRATOR???
What? We don’t have any astronauts that we might want to honor? No “first man on the moon” types, or even, “last man on the moon”? Nothing?
No important scientists?
Nobody who has actually done something other than push papers around a NASA office?
I think this says a lot about what’s wrong at NASA.
Geez, Mark1 At least they didn’t name it after Sheik Mohammed or one of those cats, which would not be that farfetched since Obama directed Boldin to have hand-holding for muslems as NASA’s top priority.
How much of the $8.7B has already been spent on this?
Pertinent question, there, mivenho, for which only the NASA budgeters are likely to have a good estimate.
But let me give you an educated projection: if the program is killed today, I would bet that the total outlay by the government for work actually completed plus the close out costs for all existing contracts would be at least 95% of that $8.7B.
Why, if one assumes that there are 10,000 contracted personnel working the program, and assuming that the average annual salary is $100,000, the annual payroll is $1.0B. A minimum of 2 weeks severance pay for that group would come to more than $38M. And, of course, there is no way it would be that clean a break.
Really great comments. Every point I thought of making, you all made. Good on ya all.
That Mark v guy keeps beating me to the punch on every thread. “Curse you, Red Baron!”
:-p
When the Apollo fire happened NASA stood down for an investigation. It came out a better, more focused and determined, goal driven agency. After Apollo 13… after Challenger… after Columbia, an investigation was undertaken as to the culture within NASA and technical problems resulting from the NASA and contractor mid-management problems. Problems were identified and rectified. Not all, but what emerged from these investigations was a better NASA.
It is time for NASA to be stood down by congress. It is a time for an investigation of NASA upper management. Do not let NASA investigate itself. Might be time to bring back Craft, Kranz and a few Apollo astronauts and managers to do a top-level investigation of the culture in the NASA ethereal regions. I am talking about NASA Hq. management and field center managers. These guys are not riding herd like they should. A change in the NASA manager culture is needed.
I am a contractor at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center and was once working on JWST. Waste is a culture there. My company is paid about $100/hr for my services, I get about 40% of that in pay and bennies. The average is about 30% higher for about 2500 workers there. The “management” govies as we call them, are a joke to say the least. The waste is enormous in labor and materials. I could live like a king in a third world country just hauling the dumpsters off and sorting to sell on Ebay. The culture must change, the management must be real and not the PHd jokes in charge now.
The Hubble focal embaresement has placed a sense of overwhelming level of paranoia on all high profile projects at NASA, as a result all phases suffer and costs and beaurocracy grow exponentially, including waste!!!!!
After we get rid of NASA we can get rid of the Federal Aviation Administration, in fact all government run administrations, turn everything over to private industry, then private industry can form a new government so that there is some form of regulation governing the comings and goings of rockets, jets, and such. We can then form a more perfect union (sorry for using that word)under the stellar leadership of the captains of industry.
They can use all the public funds given to them during the bail-out as seed money to begin this historical revolution.
We the people in order to form a more perfect union (strike that)(um strike the word strike) umm oh forget about it we won’t need a constitution.
Yeah.
True story… My wife and I just contracted to have a house built. Having no children, we decided on a 3BR/2B ranch, for around $200,000 (all that our budget would allow). The schedule called for completion just as the cold weather set in, at the end of November. (We’ve sold our old house and are living in a 15-ft trailer in an, uh, less than ideal neighborhood, so the quick completion seemed like a plus.)
But then I talked to a good friend who happens to work for the government, and he convinced me that since my HVAC contractor had donated to the opposition political party, it would be far better to go with a four-story, 15BR/6B Colonial mansion with Olympic swimming pool and 5-car garage, at a cost of $8,000,000. My wife and I hesitated at the cost, but my friend (who is a very forceful speaker) convinced us of the necessity. We had to sell the trailer for cash, so I don’t know where the $8M is going to come from, or where we’re going to live between now and Summer 2014 (or Fall 2016, according to one estimate), but my friend insists it’s the only way to go. We’re not exactly happy with the situation, but what’s to be done?
But what’s really weird is this: My friend in the government is, as a consequence of working for the government, extremely rich, and is well-known for his generosity. But when I asked him if he could loan us the $7,800,000 (actually $12,600,000, according to one estimate) we would need to complete our home, he told us in no uncertain terms (actually, he was rather rude) that I must be insane, that it would be absolutely irresponsible of him to waste such a large sum, and that I had been out of line to even suggest it.
What the heck is up with that?
There is no mission being planned in the US or anywhere in the world that can compete with JWST. The telescope will be 100x more powerful than Hubble, and has unprecedented sensitivity, resolution, and multiplexing imaging, spectroscopy, and coronographic modes. JWST will discover the first stars and galaxies, uncover newborn stars and planets in our Galaxy, and is the only facility that can measure water vapor on other worlds. JWST is not the telescope that “ate astronomy”, it is the bright future of astronomy!
The cost of JWST has indeed increased over the $5B NASA estimate. The mismanagement that led to budget overruns has been corrected and the new $8.7B cost estimate includes adequate reservers to ensure 80% confidence, and includes the full science operations and flight operations cost for the lifetime of the mission. Note also that the $8.7B cost includes the science support funding that goes back to astronomers. In fact, JWST will largely carry the $50-$60 million dollar grant funding that is currently provided by Hubble, Spitzer, and Chandra, which directly supports hundreds of PhD graduate students and postdoctoral researchers at US Universities. JWST is not eating astronomy, it is the lunch that astronomers have been waiting for!
Actually, that’s right. If JWST is completed, it won’t eat astronomy. It’ll eat everyone else. If we’re talking a 2% tax across the agency to pay for it, the Planetary Science Division will pay about $160M for JWST. Why? And Earth science a lot more. So are we to understand from the astronomy community that JWST will do better science than our poor space science brothers and sisters can come up with? You going to tell them that to their face?
That 2% tax preserves opportunities in the Astronomy Division for some new missions before 2018 as well.
But Gerst isn’t going to put up with a $200M/yr bill to feed JWST. If that’s the case, the Science Directorate is going to end up paying more.
So, you want to guess what other NASA disciplines will do to the Astronomy Division after JWST is launched in 2018? How about *payback*? So while astronomers are wallowing in JWST science, assuming the thing works, their budgets will be cut even further. The senior JWST scientists will retire happily, while the discipline will crumble.
Adequate reserves, eh? You think that the JWST project didn’t have adequate reserves? Actually, before about 2005, it probably didn’t. So it was replanned, with very generous budget reserves. The project ate those quickly. One needs to hold ones nose when JWST talks about “contingency funding”.
The “bright future” for astronomy that JWST is expected to bring is likely to be somewhat of an delusion. The firewalls that protected NASA science from human spaceflight during the Constellation era will come crashing down.
I have always had serious doubts about the worth of space “exploration” and this article certainly cements them. Knowing what I know about the indescribable vastness of the universe, and the microscopic space the earth occupies within it, I tend to think that most of what science “knows” about the universe and its origins is conjecture. It is easy to say that men to Mars may yield important information about the formation of the universe, perhaps even challenge the Big Bang theory. So what? Are the residents of our world going to live any differently? I am certainly not anti-exploration, and one can never know too much, but learning all there is to know about our world seems, on balance, much more important than increasing our knowledge of creation that will be forever beyond our poor power to visit. Does it really matter that we discover the presence of hydrogen in the spectrum of a nebula a bazillion miles away? (Hubble did produce spectacular, gorgeous photographs, however.)