Skeptical view on 'Blackstar'

In sci.space.shuttle Katipo wrote:

However I do think the claim that workers on the project, were told to bill
their expenses to other projects, to help conceal the true nature of their
work, is interesting.

Yes, it is interesting. You don't often see someone admitting to criminal
misconduct in a national publication like that. What they said they did
is highly illegal.

Why scuttle those other projects unless they are
working on something even better?

Bureaucratic politics is the usual reason.

Is this also what really caused the cost overruns which led to demise of the
X-33 which seemed to show so much promise as a shuttle replacement?

No, that seems to be sheer incompetence.

Mike

-----
Michael Kent Apple II Forever!!
St. Peters, MO

Michael Kent wrote:

In sci.space.shuttle Katipo wrote:

However I do think the claim that workers on the project, were told to
bill their expenses to other projects, to help conceal the true nature of
their work, is interesting.

Yes, it is interesting. You don't often see someone admitting to criminal
misconduct in a national publication like that. What they said they did
is highly illegal.

You mean what they were told to do was highly illegal. It amounts to
corporate fraud, but, hey, with "black" projects by definition outside
Congressional oversight what do you expect? Obviously the people involved
were speaking off the record.

Is this also what really caused the cost overruns which led to demise of
the X-33 which seemed to show so much promise as a shuttle replacement?

No, that seems to be sheer incompetence.

Indeed. Stuffed if I can see what "promise" the X-33 project ever showed.
Testing aerospike engines was about the only positive thing to come out of
it.

--
Malcolm Street
Canberra, Australia
The nation's capital

Malcolm Street wrote:

:Michael Kent wrote:
:
: In sci.space.shuttle Katipo wrote:
:
: However I do think the claim that workers on the project, were told to
: bill their expenses to other projects, to help conceal the true nature of
: their work, is interesting.
:
: Yes, it is interesting. You don't often see someone admitting to criminal
: misconduct in a national publication like that. What they said they did
: is highly illegal.
:
:You mean what they were told to do was highly illegal. It amounts to
:corporate fraud, but, hey, with "black" projects by definition outside
:Congressional oversight what do you expect? Obviously the people involved
:were speaking off the record.

Obviously the people involved were making **** up and claiming it was
said. They don't even appear to understand how contracting works.

Hint: There's no need to tell workers to bill to other projects to
"help conceal the true nature of their work". It's a ridiculous
statement on its face.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

Michael Kent wrote:
In sci.space.shuttle Katipo wrote:


However I do think the claim that workers on the project, were told to bill
their expenses to other projects, to help conceal the true nature of their
work, is interesting.


Yes, it is interesting. You don't often see someone admitting to criminal
misconduct in a national publication like that. What they said they did
is highly illegal.

Unless of course the contracts are actually written to allow this. A
simple clause like "The contractor shall perform other tasks as directed
by the government," possibly in a classified annex, would be sufficient.

--
Tom Schoene lid
To email me, replace "invalid" with "net"

Michael Kent wrote:



However I do think the claim that workers on the project, were told to bill
their expenses to other projects, to help conceal the true nature of their
work, is interesting.



Yes, it is interesting. You don't often see someone admitting to criminal
misconduct in a national publication like that. What they said they did
is highly illegal.



Back when "Project Aurora" was on everybody's lips I remember reading a
story somewhere that people on the NASA Shuttle program were worried
that money allocated for the Shuttle program was being surreptitiously
siphoned off for Aurora, and that his was impacting Shuttle flight
safety. Does this ring a bell with anyone?

Pat

[note follow-ups]

In sci.space.shuttle Malcolm Street wrote:

Michael Kent wrote:

Yes, it is interesting. You don't often see someone admitting to criminal
misconduct in a national publication like that. What they said they did
is highly illegal.

You mean what they were told to do was highly illegal. It amounts to
corporate fraud, but, hey, with "black" projects by definition outside
Congressional oversight [...]

No, they're not. And defense fraud isn't prosecuted by Congress. It's
investigated and prosecuted by the same branch of government that let
the contract in the first place. This is serious stuff if the article
has any resemblence to reality. But I doubt it does.

Mike

-----
Michael Kent Apple II Forever!!
St. Peters, MO