View Single Post
  #9  
Old August 2nd 10, 03:35 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history
Alan Erskine[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,026
Default SpaceX has plans--BIG plans

On 2/08/2010 11:44 AM, Matt Wiser wrote:


The proof is in flying- and not just the single Falcon 9 test flight.
They need to fly repeatedly to silence the skeptics, and I'm one of
them. There's some folks out there who think Musk is some sort of god,
but they need to realize that right now, there just isn't enough
support in either the House or Senate to get what they want. The
Senate bill is the best option that preserves a government launch
vehicle to LEO and BEO, along with Orion, JIC these commercial
providers fail to deliver on their promises-and that is the main
concern of Congress that I got from watching the hearings on C-Span.
They kept pressing Bolden and the Presidential Science Advisor about
what Plan B is in case the commercial side can't deliver, and weren't
getting any satisfactory answer. I've seen commercial advocates asking
why there's so much opposition, and it boils down to Tip O'Neil's
adage that "All Politics is Local." Meaning that Senators and
Congresscritters who have contractors in their districts doing
Constellation work want those companies and people still doing
business with NASA, even if it's a "Son of Constellation" program.
Promises of more jobs in 5-7 years if commercial works is fine, but it
doesn't put food on the table or pay the mortgage. They want to keep
working. Maybe if the economy was in better shape, there wouldn't be
as much opposition, or maybe not.


You obviously haven't heard that Constellation has been cancelled. It's
in NASA's budget proposal for 2011. Also, why would the government want
a program like Constellation when the privateers are doing just as well
without any government funding and for a lot less money?

It's called "Commercialisation" and it works. Why would the government
want to preserve a launch vehicle when private company's can provide the
same, if not better, service for less money and with no government funding?

Where does the taxpayer benefit from having a "government launch
vehicle"? Also, what opposition is there? It's been noticably quiet in
that area since the announcement of Constellation's cancellation.