Recovery.Gov Project Tracker

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Ivy Matt
Posts: 689
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 6:43 am

Postby Ivy Matt » Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:38 pm

I can't seem to see the link from China, so I'm not sure exactly what the excitement is about, but I don't believe the original contract mentioned "1QFY12". At any rate, I would assume there can only be a new contract number if there is a new contract, not if one is "imminent", as ladajo said.
Temperature, density, confinement time: pick any two.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Thu Feb 09, 2012 1:09 pm

Ivy Matt wrote: I can't seem to see the link from China, so I'm not sure exactly what the excitement is about,
China? Oh, I get it, China, China Lake, Waaa ha ha ha. That was like a joke, only... not funny. :roll: :roll: :roll:
Ivy Matt wrote:but I don't believe the original contract mentioned "1QFY12". At any rate, I would assume there can only be a new contract number if there is a new contract, not if one is "imminent", as ladajo said.
IIRC, the original contract had funding thru the END of 2012, at least as an option. As I said, there is no new info here; not really. One MIGHT take out of this that they have not CLOSED the contract which had said option on it, so this MIGHT be a good thing. But bureaucrats are notorious for not closing things, even after thay have been buried for a decade or more.
One can hope! :D

DeltaV
Posts: 2245
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 5:05 am

Postby DeltaV » Thu Feb 09, 2012 2:57 pm

Ivy Matt wrote:I can't seem to see the link from China

扬基的狗,单击此处。

mvanwink5
Posts: 1808
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Postby mvanwink5 » Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:20 pm

KitemanSA wrote:Just went to double check and yup, this is the same contract as before. The contract already had a J&A for ~10M so this is nothing new.

Spreadsheet . . . N68936-09-C-0125
Recovery Site . . N68936-09-C-0125


From the referenced spreadsheet:
**DISCLAIMER** United States Code Title 15, Section 637(A) (12) (C), requires the Department of the Navy (DoN) to prepare a forecast of expected contract opportunities for the next and succeeding fiscal years and make the forecast available to small businesses. We fulfill this requirement by publishing this Long Range Acquisition Forecast (LRAF) and updating the information on an annual basis. The LRAF contains NAVAIR requirements valued at $150,000 or more that are forecasted for the upcoming and next two fiscal years. The forecast is for informational and marketing purposes only. It does not constitute a specific offer or commitment by the Navy to fund, in whole or in part, the opportunities referenced herein. This listing is not all inclusive and is subject to change.


Only include new contracts/orders for a NAVAIR requirement, that will be awarded by a NAVAIR Contracting Officer.


This spreadsheet is for new contracts/orders projections and is supposed to be updated annually (I did not see an issue date though). It is not supposed to cover money spent. The previous contract numbers are likely just for reference. Perhaps Ladago can shed some light on relevant context.

Also check the contract solicitation and award cells, they are the same, namely 1QFY12
Near term, cheap, dark horse fusion hits the air waves, GF - TED, LM - Announcement. The race is on.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Thu Feb 09, 2012 6:14 pm

None the less it is not a new contract.

It MAY be the option of the old contract being paid from NAVAIR/ONR funds rather than the RecoveryAct funds. It may be a new work order under the old contract. It may just be bureaucratic inertia.

I would like to see the contract with whatever NEW wording there is before I get all het up over this.

mvanwink5
Posts: 1808
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Postby mvanwink5 » Thu Feb 09, 2012 8:34 pm

As far as I can see you are spot on that the spreadsheet is not listing new (or old for that matter) contracts, but is instead purely budgetary forecasts. There could be new contracts behind the figures or perhaps not. It would be worrying if the dollars weren't there. So, the spreadsheet on further scrutiny, on my part at least, says less than I thought. On the other hand, it does outline what the Navy was thinking at the time of the last update. It would be helpful if we knew when that was.
Best regards

PS Should someone have better insight on how to understand the spreadsheet, that would be appreciated.

PSS When we did such budgetary forecasts (where I worked), unless it was a study (which accountants did not like as the money might not end up in capital and could later wind up expensed as O&M), there was always a project for it. The Navy being government, has no such worry, but they may have their own idiosyncrasies.
Near term, cheap, dark horse fusion hits the air waves, GF - TED, LM - Announcement. The race is on.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:40 pm

The spreadsheet was updated for first quarter, fiscal year twelve (Q1FY12). Checking around, the earliest posting I have seen on government public access is from September, 2011, which would makes sense given the Start of FY12 in October, 2011. Search for "NAVAIR Public Release 11-1186"

This document is a placeholder for new contracting. The reference to the standing contract is merely an association note. What this means is that NAVAIR has Place=held a $5-10M spot for a new contract. They have not yet put that contract on the street for "bid" (Single Source) that I have seen.

I would expect that this is a way to either fund FURTHER work on WB8, or fund WB8.1 to higher levels than the initial option as given in the 125 contract.

No matter how you look at it, it is good. It means that ONR is staging itself for further funding. Now, we wait for a contract solicitation posting, or we see they fund the 125 WB8.1 option.

I take this as a good sign. The 'how good?' is debatible, until we see the next funding step. I will admit, this remains a (now somewhat smaller IMO) chance the funding stream will end.

Maybe I am being optimistic, but, IMO if things were not tracking flat or positive, I would not expect them to be staging for further funding.

We shall see, and I submit, it will be by June. If you do the numbers, you will see that operating costs alone(brain $$), can probably not take them beyond that. Remember, we know what Nebel earned, Park earns, and can assume Dolly is in the healthy mix, not to mention the 10(ish) or more employees. Add in rent(2 sites now) and hardware estimations, and you run out of funds sooner than later. Something will give on money flow soon enough. And that, will be a BIG CLUE.

Be patient.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Postby icarus » Fri Feb 10, 2012 12:35 am

ladajo says:

Be patient.


After showing up here with your shock 'n awe FOI campaign, is that all you got left? Be patient?

That sounds like exactly what the Navy might pay you to be saying .... for the next 10 years.

ScottL
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:26 pm

Postby ScottL » Fri Feb 10, 2012 12:50 am

icarus wrote:ladajo says:

Be patient.


After showing up here with your shock 'n awe FOI campaign, is that all you got left? Be patient?

That sounds like exactly what the Navy might pay you to be saying .... for the next 10 years.


Polywell is at a stage where either the Navy funded work is essentially done and will get a new/renewed contract or it won't. Being patient for that info for a few months is fine. Mind you there are no claims at this point of anything, just research on plasma confinement and so far that has met or exceeded expectations by definition of "excellent confinement." If you're going to critique something, that would be the only claim available currently as we don't have the numbers/data.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Fri Feb 10, 2012 1:09 am

icarus wrote:ladajo says:

Be patient.


After showing up here with your shock 'n awe FOI campaign, is that all you got left? Be patient?

That sounds like exactly what the Navy might pay you to be saying .... for the next 10 years.


I've been saying 'be patient' for a while.

I maintain that we have seen ZERO negative news for quite a while, and further that to say what we have seen indicates progress and positive activity. Given the magnitude of meaning if they succeed, I think patience is warranted.

I think the FOIA did stir the pot. I do not think that the "event timings" and information releases were purely coincidental, but, that is just MHO. At the end of the day, I have been on the "give them space and time" plan since FOIAgate, and do so for my own reasons.

Icarus, if you want, I can stop sharing. But that would not really be fair to others would it? Unless, maybe you are right, I am a subversive navy secret agent here to mislead the forum. I kind of like that idea. I should buy new Spy Shades 8), my Revo's are a little beat up. Now, for my next ten years budget...hmmm...
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

mvanwink5
Posts: 1808
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Postby mvanwink5 » Fri Feb 10, 2012 1:21 am

If they move the work location to China lake as indicated, EMC2 will be able to leave the garage door open and not worry about nosey Parkers. It would also be more appropriate for future large scale programs.

If there was only stellar success, I doubt we would see any different news than we have seen. Further, IMO, despite some whinging I am surprised we have gotten as much news as we have. Again, thanks Ladago.
Best regards
Near term, cheap, dark horse fusion hits the air waves, GF - TED, LM - Announcement. The race is on.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:11 am

mvanwink5 wrote: If they move the work location to China lake as indicated, EMC2 will be able to leave the garage door open and not worry about nosey Parkers. It would also be more appropriate for future large scale programs.
I wouldn't get too spun up abput the "China Lake" statement. That is what the last contract plan said too.
mvanwink5 wrote: If there was only stellar success, I doubt we would see any different news than we have seen. Further, IMO, despite some whinging I am surprised we have gotten as much news as we have. Again, thanks Ladago.
What I just noticed was the "Full and Open Competition" statement. The last was Sole Sourse with a J&A.

Maybe this IS something new.

mvanwink5
Posts: 1808
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Postby mvanwink5 » Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:39 am

KitemanSa, I remember that too, but there was a stab at humor I couldn't pass up with that interpretation, just weakness on my part. I believe though at some point they will need a different location, but perhaps not with WB-8.1. Referring to open competition, that is not new too and justification for going with EMC2 has been straightforward in the past.
Best regards,
Mike
Near term, cheap, dark horse fusion hits the air waves, GF - TED, LM - Announcement. The race is on.

Enginerd
Posts: 178
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:29 am

Postby Enginerd » Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:46 am

KitemanSA wrote:What I just noticed was the "Full and Open Competition" statement. The last was Sole Sourse with a J&A.

Maybe this IS something new.


Sure. Anybody with a WB-6, a WB-7.1, all prior reports, and all previously discovered testing data, etc, which is all just sitting around taking up space in their garage, is more than welcome to compete for the new contract... :-)
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
--Philip K. Dick

billh
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:14 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Postby billh » Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:46 am

China Lake and Point Mugu are the locations of the sponsoring organization: Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD). I don't think that implies anything about EMC2 moving to one of those locations.

http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcwd/


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest