In article 5067fb16-7956-4d13-a0cd-593b905cd369
@h11g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Dec 20, 8:13*am, Robert Clark wrote:
*The author Robert Zimmerman is a strong proponent of privatizing
spaceflight. He will be interviewed on The Space Show, Wednesday, Dec.
21st, 7-9 PST. See the latest newsletter for this week for the show
he

http://www.thespaceshow.com/newsletterfinal.htm

*Links to hear the show live are he

http://thespaceshow.com/live.htm

*It will also be archived a few days after broadcast on The Space Show
web site:

http://www.thespaceshow.com/

* Bob Clark

Total privatization is not politically possible. Like the Bobbert, if
this guy tried selling it to Congress, they'd slam the door in his
face. And if he was in a Committee room testifying, they'd laugh him
out, hold the door open for him, and he'd get a kick in the ass on the
way out.

True, there are many shades of gray. This is not a black and white
issue. That said, I still think SLS is a huge waste of money.

Military transport via aircraft isn't 100% private or 100% military. I
have no idea what the mix is, because it depends on how you define the
rules. Outside of combat zones, it's not unusual to see commercial
aircraft being used to transport troops. Also, it's not unusual for the
military to buy slightly modified versions of commercial aircraft and
operate them. Neither of these examples are of military aircraft
developed, owned, and operated solely by the military.

SLS is an example of a purely NASA specific launch vehicle. It will be
developed, owned, and operated solely by NASA. At least NASA isn't
trying to sell SLS to the politicians like it did STS. The shuttle
failed to meet commercial and military launch needs. Both of those
external (to NASA) customers returned to expendable launch vehicles to
meet their requirements.

Jeff
--
" Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it
up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. "
- tinker