Recovery.Gov Project Tracker

TallDave · Post by **TallDave** » Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:48 pm

When I was very little I peed on electrical outlets, because it was fun to see them spark. Was never shocked, thank God. Amazing I survived sexually functional.

Shocked myself on countless occasions, usually fingers in light bulb sockets, and a vacuum cord with exposed wire (due to having the vacuum run over it repeatedly). I think dares with other boys were probably involved in some of them.

Around 11 or 12 I discovered you could mix various household cleaning fluids, put the bare ends of wires in them, plug the other ends into the wall, and entertaining bubbling/flashing things would happen in the bottle. Good times.

Also melted many, many things on top of light bulbs, just to see what would happen. Sometimes the light bulb cracked.

In middle school, we shocked each other with little devices made by disassembling auto-light lighters. You could really zap someone pretty good with them.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 8:57 pm

Well this is useful:

https://www.fpds.gov/dbsight/search.do? ... =939528956

Shows recorded contracts for EMC2.

Even more interesting is that on the current contract, the Navy (ONR via NAWC) has paid out a total of $7,855,504.14 to date on the WB-8 contract, with the latest payment being in 22 June, 2011 of $2,022,678.33

The evenmore interesting thing is a projected project completion date of 30 June, 2012. This does not include the WB-8.1 option, which would nominally complete 31 December, 2013. None of the WB 8.1 funds have been paided yet according to this data. It would also appear that they have been paid all of the funds for WB-8 at this point.

https://www.fpds.gov/common/jsp/LaunchW ... ersion=1.4

Here is the entire series for the current contract (WB-8):

https://www.fpds.gov/dbsight/search.do? ... 09C0125%22

I like transparent government

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:10 pm

Second link gives blank page. Literally blank page source.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:32 pm

Betruger wrote:Second link gives blank page. Literally blank page source.

Hmm.

Just use this one:

https://www.fpds.gov/dbsight/search.do? ... 09C0125%22

And click on "view" for the 22 June, 2011 entry. (Update# 7)

All of the contract entries will show the total amount, and if you hunt through them you can even see which posting updated the completion date.

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:47 pm

Thanks Ladajo.

Gotta wonder if the guys at EMC2 knew this could be found and thus had a clear mind in denying us mostly well-meaning enthusiasts a peek at what's going on with the FOIA request.

For anyone else curious, the direct link syntax looks like
this

ScottL · Post by **ScottL** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:41 pm

Why does the .gov use a theme from Apple's OS 9.2? This quite literally looks like something from way back. Are they that hard up for application developers? It'll be curious to see what if any news comes out in the new year from EMC2. I don't think they can sit on the last set of funds all that long before we know whether it works or not.

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:43 pm

Would we really know that it works before a BFR delivers electricity to the grid or some meaningful application?

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:57 pm

ScottL wrote:Why does the .gov use a theme from Apple's OS 9.2? This quite literally looks like something from way back. Are they that hard up for application developers? It'll be curious to see what if any news comes out in the new year from EMC2. I don't think they can sit on the last set of funds all that long before we know whether it works or not.

You know how retro government is. It has taken them some 70 years to correct an error made in the 30s.

http://www.ecnmag.com/Blogs/2011/12/Good-Politics/

I have started a thread on the issue for discussion:

viewtopic.php?t=3447

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:30 pm

Betruger wrote:Thanks Ladajo.

Gotta wonder if the guys at EMC2 knew this could be found and thus had a clear mind in denying us mostly well-meaning enthusiasts a peek at what's going on with the FOIA request.

For anyone else curious, the direct link syntax looks like
this

I do not think they have even a clue that FPDS exists. Well, now maybe they will...
There are other monthly federal spending reports that can be found that have shown the same expenditures. However, this one is the best format I have seen so far.

TallDave · Post by **TallDave** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 6:39 pm

R&D concept exploration on Plasma Wiffleball 8.0

Very concise. I would guess we'll hear something by April.

I suppose we could ask Deborah, but I'm not sure it would help.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:27 pm

I went back and read through the sequence again.

The initial contract had:

Effort required for the concept exploration and technology demonstration of the Advanced Gaseous Electrostatic Energy (AGEE) concept (Wiffleball .

With a completion target of August, 2010. Funding was also the initial $4 mil (ish).

The next big shift iteration:

The Contractor shall construct and test a small-scale MG Insulated, Wiffleball Polyhedral Device, WB8.

Changed the Target date to September, 2010, and upped funding to the $12 mil (ish) that we now track on.

They then moved the Target again to December, 2011 and then immediately to June, 2012 on the same day (10Sep10).

Then in January, 2011, they changed the write up to:

Plasma Wiffleball 8 Research Effort

But did not change any target dates.

The next update (20Jan11) said:

Research and development of the AGEE Plasma Wiffleball.

Which in June, 2011 changed to:

R&D concept exploration on Plasma Wiffleball 8.0

And then later in the month on 22Jun11 to:

Plasma Wiffleball 8.0 concept exploration.

Which is where we are now.

I also noted that the initial funds have all been paid, which you can see when you add all the individual amounts up. The interesting thing will be the further payment above the $7,855,504.14 obligation. That would argue that they are moving into WB-8.1 land given the original contract.

They may trash this contract, and move forward on a new one, but we should be able to find and see that as well.

I would also offer that this info does not contradict anything else we have seen. It in fact adds confirmation and clarity. I point to the project date shifts, and ask everyone to recall the many debates we had about delays.

So we now have a hard target of 30 June, 2012. We also know that they are fully funded per the contract. I will be interesting. Especially to see what happens in regard to the contract options (8.1) still on the table.

I maintain that progress to 8.1 means that 8.0 worked for D-D well enough to justify taking a crack at PB&J. So at that point, the minimum success point is met, D-D is viable.

mvanwink5 · Post by **mvanwink5** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:09 pm

Those dates mean we should not see results reported until after November 2012.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:11 pm

We will not proabably see any results published. But we will see money move. And that will be the indicator.

Who knows, maybe once they prove out D-D, they will go public. We shall see.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 11:34 pm

Re: Tall Dave's back up thread. I used to like to stick my all metal diaper pins in the electric sockets to see the flash. One handed IIRC. Which is why I'm still here to tell the tale.

Giorgio · Post by **Giorgio** » Wed Dec 14, 2011 12:29 am

This is a great find, thanks Ladajo!