NASA reshuffles dates for Artemis I launch attempt NASA has once again pushed back the launch of the Artemis I mission to send the SLS rocket and Orion capsule beyond the Moon. Last week the agency said it was targeting September 23 at the earliest, and September 27 as a potential backup if the launch has to be scrubbed for the third time. Now NASA has said a cryogenic …
The last time I did some rough calculations, I came to the conclusion that NASA could have paid all of the workers (their own, and the contractors workforce) a decent wage to stay home and do nothing, and still would have saved a lot of money. I think the using up of expensive materials and supplies, is what makes the number work.
Just think of what could have been accomplished with things like open source projects, if all of the engineers and software developers could have spent their time doing useful stuff while getting paid by NASA to "not build spacecraft".
The critics you get are common people. The Senators and Representatives who have people employed in their states and districts keep it going (and legislate to that effect). The contractors make sure the campaign contributions flow to them.
It's worse in the defense industry. For example, the $1.7t (trillion, not billion) F-35 program is being increased rather than canceled because of politics.
"you would have to rely on it blowing itself up"
In he right place and time too. Let's say the thing takes a wrong turn and points itself at Titusville or Orlando and flight control can't resume correct navigation. You'll want to blow it up deliberately well before it gets to an urban centre rather than hope it manages to do it itself on its own before it hits something.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
