It's none of my business but...

I think it's a shame that the politicians in the US are starting up the
moon landing missions in the way they are. I think the problem is one of
tenure.

The present administration is wrapping things up asap in order to get
the show on the road before they are levered out of office. The first
casualty is the Hubble it would seem.

Actually it all began a long time ago when the architects for the
original shuttle had their noses ringed by committees for degeneracy.
Too many cooks spoiled the broth with that thing -rather like the what
the Russians did with the MIR.

Rather than hold off until a concensus has offered a wish list for the
Shuttle's replacement (Dream machine choice number one: give overall
control to someone who knows what he's doing. Not bloody likely I know;
but I can dream can't I?) Mr Bush and etc., are scrambling all their
eggs in that one basket called "Let's go to the moon, boys."

I wonder what the "boys" at NASA really think. Another shambles in the
making?


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Michael McNeil" wrote in message
news:1dd78848feb06285c090e237dfc17fe8.45219@mygate .mailgate.org...
I think it's a shame that the politicians in the US are starting up the
moon landing missions in the way they are. I think the problem is one of
tenure.

Huh? This hardly makes sense. Virtually no major
space initiative was proposed and completed under
the same President. These things take a long time.

The present administration is wrapping things up asap in order to get
the show on the road before they are levered out of office. The first
casualty is the Hubble it would seem.

You're very confused. Firstly, a common criticism
of many here is that the administration is NOT getting
the show on the road ASAP. While a lot of funding
is shifted around now, actual results won't be seen
until 2008 at the earliest. The administration will be
out of office then.

Secondly, the Hubble casualty is 99% unrelated to
the administration's outlined goals.

Actually it all began a long time ago when the architects for the
original shuttle had their noses ringed by committees for degeneracy.
Too many cooks spoiled the broth with that thing -rather like the what
the Russians did with the MIR.

That's true about the shuttle, but I don't see what that
has to do with the current proposal.

Rather than hold off until a concensus has offered a wish list for the
Shuttle's replacement (Dream machine choice number one: give overall
control to someone who knows what he's doing. Not bloody likely I know;
but I can dream can't I?) Mr Bush and etc., are scrambling all their
eggs in that one basket called "Let's go to the moon, boys."

Consensus will never be reached. Leaders are about
taking input, and then making the decision. That's their
job. If you just sit around taking input until everyone
else agrees, you'll be sitting a long time.

I wonder what the "boys" at NASA really think. Another shambles in the
making?

It's the "boys" at NASA that are behind this initiative.
The President asked what they could do to further
manned spaceflight and re-ignite human exploration
with a few constraints - complete the ISS first, get
rid of the Shuttle, and you'll have a little additional
funding. It was NASA who decided what they
could do with that -- Moon, Mars, or NEO --
and on what schedule.

The President saw the plan and agreed with it.

Bruce