On Sunday, May 7, 2017 at 9:08:52 PM UTC-4, Fred J. McCall wrote:
JF Mezei wrote:

On 2017-05-06 04:11, Fred J. McCall wrote:

You really don't know how this works, do you? Congress doesn't
micromanage this stuff. They allocate X dollars for SLS and the
option language in the contract is called out.

So you are saying the option to actially build the 6 engines is already
funded and approved and NASA wouldn't need to justify that cost to Congress?


I'm saying what I said. Learn to read.


I was ubder the impression that CPngress couldn't alloacte funds so far
in advance and that it expects NASA to come back to it to get that $340
million approved if/when it is ready to convert the option for 6 engines
into firm orders.


You seem to frequently be under the wrong impression.


Jesus, but you're stupid. Do you know what 'virtual' means? It seems
not. Doing designs, setting up production lines, and planning and
equipping test programs is not 'virtual'.

I know they have redesigned the electronics for the engine. But that is
work already done and tested. Would they re-open pandora's box and
modify the actual design of the engine?

I woudl have expected them to re-use the current engine designs with no
internal modifications since that is a proven design and starting to
change the design would mean major testing before the "new design" could
be used.


What you expect and what reality delivers seem to frequently be at
odds.


--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

fred at his best.......

which is really bad.

in the past congressb dicates things they shouldnt........

like ordering nasa to not spend money m on transhab, the inflatable modules