Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (439934)	12/12/2008 3:36:19 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576180

The problem here is that an objective evaluation of the Constellation program vs. DIRECT could mean that Constellation would get canceled and DIRECT moved into place. It isn't that Constellation is a bad program, in many ways it was planned well and is a solid platform for the future. However, it does require development of a lot of new stuff and there have been problems, delays and cost overruns. The latest problem involves the use of a modified shuttle reusable booster(SRB) as a first stage for Ares I. There is a vibration caused by thrust oscillations that could cause a mission failure. So far, the cost overruns on Constellation have been $5 billion. That ain't chump change. DIRECT is a lower risk project. It reuses a lot of the current shuttle technologies so it should be cheaper, quicker to develop and safer. It isn't quite as flexible as the Ares family of boosters, but sometimes flexibility is a problem and not a solution. Obama is looking to save money wherever he can.......he'll have to nickel and dime everything once the low hanging fruit have been picked.