PDA

View Full Version : NASA’s $349 million monument to its drift




Suzanimal
12-16-2014, 07:08 PM
GULFPORT, Miss. — In June, NASA finished work on a huge construction project here in Mississippi: a $349 million laboratory tower, designed to test a new rocket engine in a chamber that mimicked the vacuum of space.

Then, NASA did something odd.

As soon as the work was done, it shut the tower down. The project was officially “mothballed” — closed up and left empty — without ever being used.

“You lock the door, so nobody gets in and hurts themselves,” said Daniel Dumbacher, a former NASA official who oversaw the project.

The reason for the shutdown: The new tower — called the A-3 test stand — was useless. Just as expected. The rocket program it was designed for had been canceled in 2010.

But, at first, cautious NASA bureaucrats didn’t want to stop the construction on their own authority. And then Congress — at the urging of a senator from Mississippi — swooped in and ordered the agency to finish the tower, no matter what.

The result was that NASA spent four more years building something it didn’t need. Now, the agency will spend about $700,000 a year to maintain it in disuse.

The empty tower in Mississippi is evidence of a breakdown at NASA, which used to be a glorious symbol of what an American bureaucracy could achieve. In the Space Race days of the 1960s, the agency was given a clear, galvanizing mission: reach the moon within the decade. In less than seven, NASA got it done.

Now, NASA has become a symbol of something else: what happens to a big bureaucracy after its sense of mission starts to fade.

In the past few years, presidents have repeatedly scrubbed and rewritten NASA’s goals. The moon was in. The moon was out. Mars was in. Now, Mars looks like a stretch. Today, the first goal is to visit an asteroid.

Jerked from one mission to another, NASA lost its sense that any mission was truly urgent. It began to absorb the vices of less-glamorous bureaucracies: Officials tended to let projects run over time and budget. Its congressional overseers tended to view NASA first as a means to deliver pork back home, and second as a means to deliver Americans into space.

In Mississippi, NASA built a monument to its own institutional drift.

The useless tower was repeatedly approved by people who, in essence, argued that the American space program had nothing better to do.

“What the hell are they doing? I mean, that’s a lot of people’s hard-earned money,” said David Forshee, who spent 18 months as the general foreman for the pipefitters who helped build the tower. Like other workmen, he had taken pride in this massive, complicated project — only to learn that it was in mothballs.

“It’s heartbreaking to know that, you know, you thought you’d done something good,” Forshee said. “And all you’ve done is go around in a damn circle, like a dog chasing his tail.”

....



http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2014/12/15/nasas-349-million-monument-to-its-drift/

FindLiberty
12-16-2014, 07:34 PM
The 2nd place prize goes to NASA for spending all that money on an empty structure,
but the Ryugyong Hotel is sill clearly the world's WINNER! (North Korea)

http://ryugyonghotel.com/ryugyong-hotel-interior-1.jpg

KCIndy
12-16-2014, 07:54 PM
But, at first, cautious NASA bureaucrats didn’t want to stop the construction on their own authority. And then Congress — at the urging of a senator from Mississippi — swooped in and ordered the agency to finish the tower, no matter what.

The result was that NASA spent four more years building something it didn’t need. Now, the agency will spend about $700,000 a year to maintain it in disuse.

The empty tower in Mississippi is evidence of a breakdown at NASA, which used to be a glorious symbol of what an American bureaucracy could achieve. In the Space Race days of the 1960s, the agency was given a clear, galvanizing mission: reach the moon within the decade. In less than seven, NASA got it done.


This is the reason government should not be in the business of space exploration. Ultimately, it all comes down to political infighting. Every Senator and Congressman has to have their bite of the pie, and the costs go up tenfold or more.

And before the author of this article waxes too eloquently about the "efficiency" of the 1960s, he needs to remember the reason the U.S. ended up with a space testing center in New Mexico, a control center in Texas and a launch center in Florida when it would have made as much sense or more to keep everything in one area. Yep. More politicians wanting political goodies to hand out at home.

Houston, we have a problem.

Yeah. And we always have, ever since the beginning. :(

Natural Citizen
12-16-2014, 07:56 PM
This is the reason government should not be in the business of space exploration. Ultimately, it all comes down to political infighting.

Actually, this is the one area where you have complete bipartisanship. These are the people that are going to back Jeb too. NASA funds quite a bit of common core. Of course there are other things happening. Big technology news coming in the next year or so. Civilization changing stuff.

idiom
12-17-2014, 01:21 AM
For that amount of money Space X built, tested and launched entire space vehicles including building all the infrastructure to test the engines.

NASA's manned space program is completely unjustifiable at the moment.

seapilot
12-17-2014, 12:13 PM
For that amount of money Space X built, tested and launched entire space vehicles including building all the infrastructure to test the engines.

NASA's manned space program is completely unjustifiable at the moment.

SpaceX is actually trying to save costs by landing one of the empty first stage rockets on a barge in the Atlantic. They have a 50% chance of pulling it off, if they do space travel will get a lot less expensive. NASA is actually contracting with spaceX for cargo flights to the space station split with boeing (who has more political clout) getting a bigger cut.

http://www.spacex.com/news/2014/12/16/x-marks-spot-falcon-9-attempts-ocean-platform-landing

http://www.spacex.com/news/2014/12/16/x-marks-spot-falcon-9-attempts-ocean-platform-landing