NASA, SpaceX Set First Dragon Launch To ISS

Has anyone asked them? *Is there any record of anyone saying they
_don't_ want Human Space Flight to continue?

almost 100% of all republican presenditial candidates, pledged during
a republican debate

Matt Wiser wrote:

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.

Yes, there is a lot about Congress, doors and ass-kicking I intend to engage
in this year.

;-)

Dave

On Dec 20, 10:54*pm, Alan Erskine wrote:
On 21/12/2011 2:11 PM, Matt Wiser wrote:

Because, Alan, there are NO Congresscritters on record as supporting
total privatization of HSF.

Has anyone asked them? *Is there any record of anyone saying they
_don't_ want Human Space Flight to continue?

Ron Paul is one. Mainly because it's not in the Constitution.

lets rephrase the question

Recent links to anyone supporting MSF, espically presenditial
candidates......

On Dec 23, 7:07*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:

Has anyone asked them? *Is there any record of anyone saying they
_don't_ want Human Space Flight to continue?

almost 100% of all republican presenditial candidates, pledged during
a republican debate

Quote them and list them by name.

Yeah, I thought not...

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

i posted the link awhile ago. its probably still up........

claiming its not fact ignores the fact i posted the link quoting this
here.... it was neaR 100% NO MORE FUNDING FOR HSF

Has anyone asked them? *Is there any record of anyone saying they
_don't_ want Human Space Flight to continue?

almost 100% of all republican presenditial candidates, pledged during
a republican debate

Quote them and list them by name.

Yeah, I thought not...



The Republican presidential field sent a clear message to NASA workers
in America: They don’t see a federal role in funding human space
flight, [video clip at 6:50 to 9:28].

Debate moderator John King of CNN asked the other six candidates in
attendance whether they would continue federal funding for human space
flight. Not a single candidate - Texas Rep. Ron Paul, former
Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty,
Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick
Santorum and former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain — raised their
hand.


The unanimous verdict came during a New Hampshire presidential debate
tonight and following a scathing assessment of NASA management by
former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.


GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich says "NASA has become an
absolute case study in why bureaucracy cannot innovate,” he said.
“What we have is bureaucracy after bureaucracy, failure after
failure.”

On 25/12/2011 1:11 PM, Matt Wiser wrote:


It'll survive. No question. Now, you may now go back to your fantasy
world. You keep wailing about something that is irrevelant to HSF.
There's a few like you over on sci.military.naval and
rec.aviation.military who do the same thing: wail about topics not
relevant to what's being discussed. Or they're living in their fantasy
world and not bothering to take into account the fact that the policy
or procurement suggestions they offer have two chances of being put
forward by either Congress or POTUS: Slim and none. The stuff you keep
pushing has zero chance of being adopted, so why do you keep pressing
for it? Hoping that lightning will strike twice? Said it befo NO
BUCK ROGERS, NO BUCKS. Cut and dry, that is it.

I think Bob's been really quite good lately. It can be said you are
also in a fantasy world of your own - it depends on perspective.

As for HSF being just for NASA, I doubt they will get anywhere with
SLS/Orion. I firmly believe that Dragon and Dreamchaser will be the
transport of choice until Stratolaunch (combined with Dreamchaser?) get
into gear. Then, costs _will_ be less than 10% of current LVs.

I agree that HSF will survive, but will not use NASA/government-specific
systems for much longer. NASA's budget might stay the same, but don't
forget they do research into all sorts of other things; aviation, space
and other areas.

On Dec 25, 3:41*pm, Alan Erskine wrote:
On 25/12/2011 1:11 PM, Matt Wiser wrote:



It'll survive. No question. Now, you may now go back to your fantasy
world. You keep wailing about something that is irrevelant to HSF.
There's a few like you over on sci.military.naval and
rec.aviation.military who do the same thing: wail about topics not
relevant to what's being discussed. Or they're living in their fantasy
world and not bothering to take into account the fact that the policy
or procurement suggestions they offer have two chances of being put
forward by either Congress or POTUS: Slim and none. The stuff you keep
pushing has zero chance of being adopted, so why do you keep pressing
for it? Hoping that lightning will strike twice? Said it befo NO
BUCK ROGERS, NO BUCKS. Cut and dry, that is it.

I think Bob's been really quite good lately. *It can be said you are
also in a fantasy world of your own - it depends on perspective.

As for HSF being just for NASA, I doubt they will get anywhere with
SLS/Orion. *I firmly believe that Dragon and Dreamchaser will be the
transport of choice until Stratolaunch (combined with Dreamchaser?) get
into gear. *Then, costs _will_ be less than 10% of current LVs.

I agree that HSF will survive, but will not use NASA/government-specific
systems for much longer. *NASA's budget might stay the same, but don't
forget they do research into all sorts of other things; aviation, space
and other areas.

Clearly, they do, and have done wonders in those fields. But, and this
is the key he SLS and Orion are for BEO. The other stuff you
mention is for LEO. Alan, in case you haven't heard, there's only ONE
Congresscritter pushing EELV and depot-based strategies for BEO, and
that's Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA). As I've pointed out earlier, his
motives are not completely pu several Commercial Space outfits have
facilities in SoCal, and either have facilities in his district, or
there's employees of those firms who do live there. (Hawthorne is part
of his district). Musk made a lot of enemies back in the Augustine
hearings by daring NASA to buy his stuff exclusively-and some of those
enemies are in Congress. And remember that the key Senators and
Congressmen who make the legislation for NASA are from "space states."
Either you convince them that EELV/depots are the way to go or you
don't. So far, nobody's convinced them. Good luck trying.

On 26/12/2011 5:39 PM, Matt Wiser wrote:


Clearly, they do, and have done wonders in those fields. But, and this
is the key he SLS and Orion are for BEO. The other stuff you
mention is for LEO.

Doesn't have to be just LEO - Dragon is designed for re-entry at Martian
velocities, not just Lunar or LEO. My idea of a 55 tonne LV is right in
the range of Falcon Heavy - Lunar is easy.

Boobert, you're either in a fantasy world or are a Luddite, and/or
pessimist. No use for any of the above. You're clearly upset that
Congress isn't listening to you. Like I said, they'd give you a good
laugh, then kick you in the ass while on the way out the committee
room door

congress doesnt listen to anyone but the wealthy who pay for their re
elections.....

if overspending isnt fixed, we will see hyper inflation and no country
will loan us money. thats already started.

oh well when your government benies get cut, you were warned.

our country is driving a car wth gas pedal floored down a dead end
street.

the smash up is guaranteed, unless overspending is stopped.

with entitlements such a large part of the budget things like medicare
and SS will have to be cut too.

it will be hard to sell anything space as SS is cut.......

feel free to continue living in your dreamland fantasy that
everythings great and will continue as is..

but dont come complaining when things collapse