The latest version is out, describing the current hijinks in Congress:
Full-throttle political support for full-funding Commercial Crew at the requested $1.24 billion is a top (if not the top) political priority for this year. Down-selecting to one vendor to save money over the next two years would add multiple unacceptable program risks and lead to long-term monopoly pricing. Successful flight before the end of 2017 already apparently involves optimistic assumptions about not needing the full $300 million in NASA-required-extras contingency funding. NASA says that any shortfall from the $1.24 billion level this year risks further program delays, and our look at the numbers seems to bear that out.
Yes, as Bolden said a few weeks ago, they can’t accelerate it with more money, but they can delay with less, and they seem determined to do so.
[Early evening update]
OK, here‘s an even more recent update.
The link goes to the March update.
That March Update (http://www.space-access.org/updates/sau139.html) is worth going through for background on what’s going on. (Sometimes I hate being right.)
The current one (http://www.space-access.org/updates/sau140.html) was written in great haste, but does give the basics of what’s happening now (an attempted 20% cut of Commercial Crew) and what to do about it – contact your Representative ASAP to support full funding for the program, because the Appropriations bill where this all happens hits the House floor for debate and amendment as soon as Tuesday morning.
Downselecting to one provider? That is ridiculous. Clearly they have no conception of free-market competition.
Hell, I’m still pissed off that they dropped Dream Chaser in the last downselect.
They understand free-market competition perfectly well – that’s what they’re trying to eliminate.
They’d much rather have nothing but government-monopoly rockets, all managed from Huntsville.