It doesn't detract from the fact that the government had given NASA a single
mandate: Send a man to the moon and bring him back to earth alive.

The engineers may have designed some flexibility in the Apollo system.
However, had the engineers wanted a feature that was not ncessary for the moon
shots and which would have slowed the development of Apollo, or weighten it
down too much, that feature would have been refused.

What was left in Apollo which gave it some flexibility for other missions
happened to have been stuff needed for the moon shot.

The fact is that NASA has spread its wings and now requires far more
versatility in space than it did in the 1960s.

It may be fart easier for NASA to ask for funding for a single vehicle capable
of accomplishing all its missions. Question is whether NASA will be able to
deliver such a vehicle before funding is cut because of cost overruns as the
result of NASA wanting to build somethin that was more than it could handle.

It would be far better for NASA, in my opinion, to sart small abd built a very
simple escape pod that wouldn't cost much and woudln't take 10 years to build.
Something they could be succesful at. Then they may be able to look at
something bigger, and Congress would be more likely to approve it based on the
fact that NASA was able to actually complet some project on time and on budget
(more or less).

Since the Shuttle, NASA has not been able to bring any manned projects to
completion because each time, they tried to take on too big a task, had
delays, mechanical setbacks and cost overruns which eventually cause Congress
to can the project.

If NASA wants CEV to be all things to all people, chances are that the project
will fail just like all the shuttle replacement projects to date.