On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 19:53:32 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
"Jon Berndt" made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

In article , says...
How many billion later the X33 isn't complete and isn't fit to decorate
anything except and now less than a year since he introduced the plane
to
the world Rutan is already putting it through its paces.

To be fair to NASA: Rutan has the luxury of not rolling out SS1 until
its design was complete and assembly was nearly complete. NASA has to
make its designs public from the first viewgraphs.

As well, it is one thing to go mach 1 or 2, aiming at 60,000 feet, and quite
another to go single stage to orbit at 17,500 mph.

That wasn't the X-33's stated goal.

Different goals, different funding sources, different rules of operation,
etc. I'm not saying that Rutan doesn't have something to offer in the way
of an example. But I think NASA is getting an unfair treatment here and
Rutan is being "canonized" prematurely.

I've no interest in canonizing Burt. In many ways, particularly
regulatorily, he's a pain in the ass.

The fact remains that there's a different way to approach launch
vehicle development--one that was abandoned in the rush to get to the
moon, and one in which NASA has never shown any interest for various
institutional reasons, and Burt, and XCOR (and perhaps Blue Origin)
and others are pursuing it.

May the best approach win, but I have to say that NASA's decades and
billions with theirs, with little to show for it.