Okay, everyone agrees - the cost of solid rocket motors is going up. The question is how much.
Sen. David Vitter, R-La., insisted again March 17 that the cost of solid rocket motors that the U.S. military needs for its intercontinental ballistic missiles will double if President Barack Obama gets his way.
Vitter blames Obama's space strategy, as spelled out in the 2011 budget, which would cancel NASA's Constellation program.
Constellation is developing the next rocket and crew capsule to take humans into space. The current launch vehicle, the space shuttle, is to retire this year.
With Constellation over budget and behind schedule, the Obama administration favors encouraging private space companies to develop the next generation of launch vehicles.
While others praise Obama's plan to invest in commercial space companies, Vitter worries that one of the real losers in all this will be the U.S. military.
His logic: NASA is the nation's biggest customer for solid rocket motors, so if NASA drops out of the market, prices for everyone else will double. The military needs solid rocket motors for Minuteman ballistic missiles, submarine-based Trident ballistic missiles, missile interceptors and all sorts of tactical missiles.
The Navy, which has studied the matter, says prices will probably rise, but they won't double.
During a Senate Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee hearing, Rear Adm. Stephen Johnson, said he expects solid rocket motor prices to rise 10 to 20 percent. He assured Vitter that 100 percent price growth is not likely. Johnson heads Navy strategic systems programs.
Vitter, who has been sounding this alarm since the 2011 budget was unveiled Feb. 1, seemed unconvinced.
NASA provides 70 percent of the business that sustains the solid rocket motor industry, he said. If that vanishes, costs for other customers must increase more than 20 percent.
Not so, said Johnson. NASA's requirements are so different from the military's - think size and weight - that eliminating NASA's demand will not cause military rocket costs to double.
"It's a valid concern," Johnson told Vitter. And costs may rise, possibly 20 percent. But they won't double.
In other testimony, senior Air Force officials said they plan to spend $5.5 billion over the next six years to modernize U.S. bombers. Those are the B-52, the newest of which is 48 years old; the B-1, which has been flying since 1986; and the B-2, which dates to 1993.
While upgrading data links, targeting pods and avionics, the Air Force will also begin designing a new bomber that could be manned or unmanned, supersonic or subsonic. It didn't come up in the subcommittee hearing, but the Air Force has said that the study alone will cost $2 billion to $4 billion a year, with the aim of developing a new bomber by 2020.
Video 
Help
