Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senator Hutchison cool to SpaceX's Falcon 9 launch; concerns remain about Obama NASA policy
Examiner.com ^ | June 5, 8:25 AM | Mark Whittington

Posted on 06/05/2010 5:40:57 PM PDT by tricky_k_1972

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last
To: tricky_k_1972

It’s a good start!

Privatize NASA, then education, and the Postal Service and probably a hundred other departments and agencies. Thousands more could probably just be eliminated.

I always thought the ungainly and asymmetrical shuttle looked like a space vehicle designed by a committee of hacks. The problematic and fragile craft always seemed threatening to blow up...and in fact did.

Maybe now we’ll see various space related companies spring up and go into competition with each other.

If the govt wants to launch a special exploration mission, there will be plenty of R&D suppliers vying for the contracts.


21 posted on 06/05/2010 8:27:41 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves Month")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

Look, the reason I support NASA as a public institution is that it is not really a choice between public or private when it comes to government space projects, it’s a choice between public and military, between white and black budgets and between government science programs done by NASA or done by DARPA. The government will have a space program of some type , it already has other space projects under several different “hats”, military, CIA, DOD, and DARPA.

Realistically if the guys that worked at NASA were just interested in funding they would be more than happy to join up with one of the branches of the military or belong to some DOD black budget line item, but what would that mean for the actual science and technology that is developed out of those projects, how long would it take for that science to make it out of a black program and end up in a better toaster, medical equipment and improvements in materials science?

You look at these private space companies developing all this great stuff and a lot of it stated out life in NASA, and even the stuff at NASA didn’t start there, NASA doesn’t build anything, some company builds the stuff per their order, NASA doesn’t have a manufacturing plant, but Boeing and McDonald Douglas do.

I’ll give you another example an old NASA project and now a DARPA project is the Boeing X-37, now a black project, how much did it really cost, nobody will really know except some generals and DOD guys because it’s DARPA and how long till the really extraordinary science if there is any, comes out to the civilian market, it is secret after all.

I grant you some stuff that NASA is doing can be done better and cheaper by private companies, by contracting out what they want done then necessarily telling a company how they want it done and what the rocket that gets it there should look like and controlling how its all done, let the private companies handle all that, you just get pound A to point B let them worry how, and you get the bill.


22 posted on 06/05/2010 11:39:03 PM PDT by tricky_k_1972 (Putting on Tinfoil hat and heading for the bomb shelter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy

“has offered to provide this service at the same price as SpaceX, with a 30 year old system or a new one for that matter?”

None have offered to do it with 30 year old technology, they are using modern technology and the price is the same.

“Which one do you work for?”

none of the above


23 posted on 06/06/2010 3:04:05 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: tricky_k_1972

I actually wasn’t criticizing your position, but the US had kind of a monopoly on commercial launches and space tourism.

I can see why they would need to act as kind of an orbital “air space controller” agency and perhaps a space junk monitor (maybe even farming out space junk cleanup)

And also they would need to preserve their role in military space applications maybe even retaining launch vehicles for that very purpose.

But I still think the shuttle looked like an ill conceived, poorly modified, problematic, dangerous, overpriced, obsolete albatross. (other than that it was fine)

I think a smaller and usable cargo capable orbiter launched from a supersonic launch “platform” which would then land, refuel and be ready to carry up the next orbiter would be far superior.

This would eliminate the months of rehab, and the massive effort now needed to get the shaky shuttle ready for its next launch.


24 posted on 06/06/2010 5:24:51 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves Month")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: tricky_k_1972

Senator Kay Bailey represents Houston?

Then who do Ted Cruz and John Cornyn represent?


25 posted on 08/24/2015 6:28:57 AM PDT by Redbob (Keep your hands off my great-great-grandfather's flag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson