"Dan Hanson" wrote:

It's a forward looking, long range plan to get NASA out of its rut, and find
a meaning for the post-shuttle era.

No really. It's mostly fuzzy feel good stuff with goals carefully
worded to allow for broad interpretation. It's not a plan, not a
vision, but a fuzzy (at best) mission statement calculated to look
good without committing to much.

A workable plan can be generated from these strategic goals, but there
is a lot of details between here and there. Those details will
require cash and a schedule, and there NASA and Congress historically
fail, substituting viewgraphs for results.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.