🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <v0y1c8d@rpi.edu> kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent) writes:

>I would hope this country could do more with its space program than just keep
>its contractors profitable.  But NASA isn't a contractor -- it's a government
>agency.  Government agencies don't earn profits, nor should they.  

1. The original poster said that Shuttle had the 'highest return on
investment' of any launcher. I am simply pointing out that isn't correct
and I am glad that you seem to agree.

2. No, government shouldn't be making a profit but nither should they
provide subsidies to lock out private competition. Shuttle has not only
been a sink into which we dump billions but it also was very nearly
responsible for killing the private US launch industry. If Chalenger
had happened just a few years later then Ariane would now have 100%
of the world launch market.

>They should
>be doing things in the public interest that can't earn a profit.  

Since providing launch services is a profitable buisness then I am glad
to see we agree.

    Allen

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------156 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+