April 15 may reveal future of Constellation, Alliant Techsystems

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Jacob Garn
    April 10, 2010 11:40 p.m.

    So wrong on so many levels. The ignorant all or nothing nonsense of political true believers both conservative and liberal. It's not a question of whether we should have government programs, taxation etc. The distinctions are how much taxation, how much spending and on which programs. How much is enough? Certainly national defense can't be provided, and the nation's transportation infrastructure could not have been built or maintained by the private sector alone.

    NASA, is the same. No private company has the capital or direct profit incentive to send a man to the moon or Mars. It's high tech coupled with exploration and discovery. Dream you say?

    Republicans and Democrats have cut worthy NASA programs previously, and it is always political, pandering to constituents who don't know how much of our economy and the way we live derives from space exploration. It's not just a few thousand ATK jobs in Utah, stupid, it's millions of jobs outside of NASA. For 1/2 of 1% of the federal budget, NASA helps create many times that in jobs and economic growth outside of government. Our future is in doing, not in retrenchment.

  • Marty - Eden Utah
    April 8, 2010 7:30 p.m.

    Go Constellation program. Time magazine = Greatest invention for 2009. ATK rules ... Keep USA #1 in Space.

  • Stupid Comments
    April 8, 2010 12:22 p.m.

    To all of the commentators here who say that Obama's new space plan gutting manned spaceflight is about saving money, it's not. Obama puts over $1 billion additional into NASA's topline budget. He just also kills Constellation (and Ares rockets), and shifts that funding over to hobby science projects, and new politically correct "global warming" satellites. It's bad enough that he's killing manned spaceflight, and putting us behind the Russians, Chienese and Indians, but also spending more money at the same time!!! So quit the misinformed argument that critics of Obama's stupid space program are just all about saving jobs and not wanting to save taxpayer money! He's spending more and getting a worse result at the same time!!! Get a clue before you comment on these forums.

  • JRS1277
    April 7, 2010 8:47 a.m.

    I'm tired of everything being a liberals vs. conservatives argument. This should be something that everyone should get behind. Constellation is not pork-barrel spending. It's not political. It's the future of the human race. We MUST return to the moon and press outwards into the Solar System. We must make use of the resources we find there, defend ourselves from asteroid impacts, and become a true multi-planet species. I cannot see why this is even an argument.

    Ask any Apollo astronaut and they'll tell you that once you've made that journey, it changes the way you look at Earth. Everything that seems so important down here just looks silly from up there. As a species, we need to grow up and stop worshipping money. There are more important things in the universe.

  • Liberals??????
    April 7, 2010 7:49 a.m.

    It is really obvious who the Hypocrites are. I though the iberals where open mined and well informed it's quite obvious that not the case. Just keep the blinders on and receiveing you intitlement checks. Just keep cutting the funding that does not support the welfare and intitlements the only thing that keeps a liberal happy.

  • pork barrel
    April 7, 2010 7:30 a.m.

    We don't want no federal government interference here in Utah.

    Wait a minute, 2000 Jobs!

    We want more federal government interference here in Utah.

    Bi-Partisan use of taxpayer money is fine as long as it isn't for any kind of social program.

  • Adam K
    April 6, 2010 9:57 p.m.

    In terms of politics, the reason government needs to do this is flat out because NASA knows what they are doing and private companies are not ready, it's too risky to have private companies to do this due to the "too valuable to fail" issue. NASA will always have to subsidies these companies b/c there is not market is basically, all you're doing is moving money from one company to another and not lowering costs. Do research and you will find the truth through many similar issues in the last 20 years. EELV is a prime example of this. USAF subsidizes ULA every year because even the non-crew industry can't support it!

  • Adam K
    April 6, 2010 9:56 p.m.

    Sorry CvP, you have your facts WAY wrong.

    First: EELV (Atlas V) is not 69 mil per launch for the vehicle configuration that is needed to launch a capsule. EELV is not man-rated nor has it been designed for crew launches. It would need significant changes, requalification and upgrades to do the job. Delta IV flat out cannot do the job due to it's capabilities.

    In a hearing 2 weeks ago, Doug Cooke the director of exploration told congress the marginal costs were 176 million per launch. It's been very apparent in recent weeks that the costs that were given to the committee were inflated nor were they compared apples to apples (private commercial vs NASA). Augustine himself acknowledged this in a letter in the past couple weeks.

    The RSRMV is the cheapest cost/lb motor out there and cannot be touch in terms of this and reliability.

    You are wrong as well as those that see the slanted side of things.

  • Commercial vs. Pork
    April 6, 2010 6:27 p.m.

    EELV --
    Commercial Space Launches --

    Already designed, built and fully operational

    Delta IV = $69 Million per launch
    Atlas V = $49 Million per launch
    (both of which still have sub-contracts with Utah's ATK)

    Still in development, unproven, and 2017 to 2019 until operational.

    Ares I = $1 BILLION per flight (Augustine Commission - 2009)

    I'm an Aerospace Engineer,
    I'm also a taxpayer.

    I could give a rip about the politics going on,
    as an enginner - I want to go to Space.
    I think the Ares is a killer concept!!!
    BUT -
    as a taxpayer - I'd have to agree with both NASA and the President --- this pork project NEEDS to be cancelled.

    We can do the same job for a lot less money.

    Sorry Utah,
    All politics aside, it's the right thing to do.

  • Pork Barrel Project
    April 6, 2010 5:37 p.m.

    It's always a BIG Government problem,
    cut taxes,
    stop Government funding,
    it's not allowed in the Constitution,
    Socialist state run projects,


    it's in YOUR back-yard....

    Then it's
    Wee Wee Wee all the way home!!!!


  • Paul
    April 6, 2010 5:31 p.m.

    I'm not 100% certain that Constellation is the best way into space. There are a few alternatives out there that might be much more cost-effective while preserving the capabilities we need. The biggest issue in my mind is this big gap between the end of Shuttle and the start of something else. But maybe this gap is meaningless if we really don't commit to a destination that is worth going to.

  • conservative?
    April 6, 2010 5:23 p.m.

    It's fun to watch the "conservative" representative argue that the government should continue to fund jobs that the private sector should be doing. Isn't that what Obama's budget calls for, letting the private sector take over this business. Sounds like a true conservative to me. Mr. Bishop is doing some serious ideological gymnastics to claim that the government should continue to spend money where the private sector can step in. Maybe the label hypocrite is more appropriate that conservative.