🚀 go-pugleaf

>>   That was those despicable fools at NASA doing this.
>
>here you lost me. You seem to live in a very black and white world. You
>assume that since I don't support everything NASA does (even its mistakes)
>that I must oppose everything NASA does.

     I went off the deep end on that one and hereby apologize, Allen.
     Maybe it's because I don't recall you ever saying a kind word about
     NASA or one of its programs.     

>This is not the case. There is lots of great stuff going on at NASA. I
>criticize the unproductive things NASA does so that we can have more of
>the good stuff. Why does that bother you so much?

     Because very seldom does anyone ever mention the great stuff
     going on at NASA.

>>   Just because NASA isn't deep in development of a new space booster
>>   (why bother when SDIO already is)
>
>NASA shouldn't be developing OR operating any operational space transport
>system. That is outside its charter and is ultimately wasteful and harmful
>to lower cost solutions.

     Agreed but with one exception. Presently there is no means other
     than Shuttle to send people into space. When MacDac or someone
     else develops a system to send people into space, and a new firm
     or organization gets going to do the dirty work of launching, then
     and only then will I be in favor of kicking NASA out of the manned
     space transportation arena.

>The problem is that you seem to think asking the question: "is
>there a cheaper way to do this" is treason.

     No, I think that urging the elimination of our only manned space
     transport system before a proven replacement is available is
     contrary to the cause of space exploration and development. When
     someone shows me that they have a workable, cheaper manned space
     system, then I'll go along with them. But remember, Space Shuttle
     looked cheaper and faster than the alternatives early in its
     design phase, too. The transition from paper to flight article
     seems to have a serious negative effect on launch systems. Asking
     if there is a cheaper way to do this is a good idea. Saying, "this
     system which we plan to fly in five or six years definitely will
     be cheaper than Shuttle" must be carefully considered.

>As an engineer I ask myself that same question every single day. Why do you
>think NASA shouldn't worry about the costs?
>
>>   It's not fair to denounce NASA for
>>   laying the foundation while praising OSC and McDAC for erecting the
>>   skyscrapers.

>As to denouncing NASA, I praise NASA when they lay the foundation. I
>condemn them when they prevent the skyscraper from being built.

     But didn't you just say that NASA should not be operating a space
     transport system? If this is so, then how is NASA preventing private
     industry from building said skyscraper?

     -Brian
     
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian S. Thorn                                    "If ignorance is bliss,
BrianT@cup.portal.com                               this must be heaven."
                                                -Diane Chambers, "Cheers"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------