Paul F. Dietz ) wrote:
: Scott Lowther wrote:

: Same thing that happened to Rand, I think. After decades of nothing much
: out of NASA, *finally* something is going forward... but instead of
: their Chosen Direction Of Obvious Wisdom, NASA is doing something
: slightly different. And nothing so enrages a zealot as a heretic.
:
:
: I've seen rather a lot of this. The fact that NASA is doing things
: Apollo Style, coupled with not using EELV, has driven a number of
: alt.spacers over the edge.

: It's easy to explain, Scott. When things were still up in the air,
: still just hopes, we could still think they'd come up with something
: that actually made sense, or at least had significant components that
: made sense.

: They didn't. The concrete plan is devoid of the things that would
: make it worthwhile.

: What I don't understand is why anyone who is not feeding at this
: trough (do you resemble that remark, Scott?) would support this plan.
: It accomplishes very little at enormous cost. It doesn't solve the
: important problem preventing exploitation of space.

: The reason we don't support this is that we've thought it through,
: and concluded there's little here worthy of support. It's as simple
: as that.

Translation: Since NASA doesn't plan on allowing space tourism, the travel
agents are ****ed off.

Eric

: Paul