(Edward Wright) wrote in
om:

"Jorge R. Frank" wrote in message
...

The "danger" from planning a gap between shuttle and CEV, and
announcing that Soyuz will fill it, is price-gouging by the Russians
once the shuttle is retired and the US has no alternatives.

I'd much prefer to throw some money into Alt Access, and see if a US
commercial provider can beat the price of a Soyuz by 2010. I'd be
surprised if they couldn't.

In that case, why does NASA need to build CEV at all? If a commercial
provider can launch the equivalent of a Soyuz capsule for $40 million,
why not use that?

On the other hand, if Alt Access is nothing but a brief stop-gap
between Shuttle and CEV, how do you expect a commercial provider to
charge $40 million per flight but still recoup its development costs
during the brief period before it is shouldered aside?

Simple, agree not to use CEV for ISS crew rotation/resupply if a US
commercial provider is available, CEV has plenty of non-ISS missions
(lunar/Mars/asteroids) to do.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.