Henry Spencer on canceled NASA space projects

On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 06:49:59 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote:

The study was done as part of an effort to look
into privatizing Shuttle.

I'd like to see who would buy that program in the absence of any
government reimbursements regarding its launch costs.

The idea was for a commercial entity to launch an extra Shuttle flight
or two per year, along with the 6 or so NASA missions. It wasn't a
wholly unreasonable proposal at the time, but it went nowhere.

Brian

"Brian Thorn" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 06:49:59 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote:

The study was done as part of an effort to look
into privatizing Shuttle.

I'd like to see who would buy that program in the absence of any
government reimbursements regarding its launch costs.

The idea was for a commercial entity to launch an extra Shuttle flight
or two per year, along with the 6 or so NASA missions. It wasn't a
wholly unreasonable proposal at the time, but it went nowhere.

Brian

Sure, if you're paying just marginal costs, the shuttle's not too bad. Who
wouldn't want the government to pick up the first 6 flights. Sweet deal.
Sounds a bit hard to swallow though.



--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

On Aug 24, 4:54*pm, "Jonathan1" wrote:
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message

dakotatelephone...

http://www.newscientist.com/gallery/...-nasa-projects
This is very depressing to read.

Why? To hear Henry cry crocodile tears for these programs is
just plain offensive. Most of the programs he laments were canceled
at virtually the same time Bush announced the Vision. They were
canceled to ....make way...for the Vision. Those that created and
supported the Vision, such as Henry, are mostly responsible for these
cancellations. Henry was one of the biggest supporters of the Vision, he
should look into the mirror, not blame the White House for the current
state of NASA..

What hypocrisy!

x-30 *(swallowed by the military towards the x-43)
x-33 *(canceled in 2001, tech also transferred to the military for x-43
x-34 *(canceled in 2001), tech also transferred to the military for x-43
x-38 *(canceled in 2002)
SLI * *(canceled in 2002)

The rest were either *pipe-dreams or canceled for spiraling costs.

The manned space program has become a monster destroying
everything in it's path. The manned program should be dismantled
as quickly as possible, and not restarted until a reasonable use
for men in space is put forward. This time the reasons better not
involve flowery words like ...destiny, fate or faith as with the Vision.

Space Solar Power, another program canceled in 2001 by the /very same/
'Vision' crowd, is a goal that uses words like ...solving climate change
ending America's dependence on Middle East oil, providing a new
completely clean energy source that becomes cheaper and more plentiful
over time. And SSP is a goal that could not only make America stronger
as this century plays out, but win the technological and economic race
with the Chinese. Laying the groundwork for world wide democracy.
While creating a new industry to jump start commercial space flight
and bringing energy to places in the third world where it's not possible
normally. Just to list a few, the military applications are another post.
As are the applications of SSP for space travel and colonizing.

The entire world would benefit from SSP almost as much as America would.
Which is why it would have the support needed to succeed, as opposed
to the entirely lame goal of a temporary shelter for six on the Moon.

Now that NASA, it seems, doesn't have any goal at all. Maybe someone
out there might see the logic of coming up with a better one.
And let's see if it can deliver even half of the potential above.

NASA'S SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY
RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAMhttp://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1

Jonathan

s

Pat Flannery has always been a very brown-nosed minion to the
mainstream status-quo. Anything less and he'd be replaced.

~ BG