A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 20th 07, 11:14 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!

On Sun, 20 May 2007 17:17:48 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 May 2007 14:16:29 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" [email protected]

the conversions; and making design

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
There were only two bidders for Orion--Lockheed Martin and Northrop
Grumman.


So your statement of fact means what?


It means that the notion that Northrop Grumman would have been a
better selection, based on your "evidence," is hilariously dumb.

What was your point, if not that?

I see you snipped this part, because it was what I was responding to:

Was Lockheed the better choice, or were they just better connected?



Get your facts straight please.


I did.

There were initially eleven bidders, three finally submitted
bids and Grumman was partnered with Boeing. t-space, that
included Rutan, was the third bidder. Although Nasa seems
to be rather secretive about whether t-space submitted a bid or not.
http://www.comspacewatch.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=14924


None of that obviates the hilarious fact that you used this to beat up
on LM alone, when it was clearly a joint LM/NG fiasco. But you'll
continue to flounder and defend it, because you incapable of admitting
error.

Face it, NASA is saddled with an ignorant goal created by and for
a corrupt conglomerate. Your beloved NASA is being raped
and you don't even know it.


My "beloved NASA"?

You're even more of an idiot than you've previously played.
Ads
  #12  
Old May 21st 07, 12:10 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
Jonathan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 705
Default ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 May 2007 17:17:48 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:


"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 May 2007 14:16:29 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" [email protected]

the conversions; and making design

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
There were only two bidders for Orion--Lockheed Martin and Northrop
Grumman.


So your statement of fact means what?

It means that the notion that Northrop Grumman would have been a
better selection, based on your "evidence," is hilariously dumb.

What was your point, if not that?

I see you snipped this part, because it was what I was responding to:

Was Lockheed the better choice, or were they just better connected?



Get your facts straight please.


I did.

There were initially eleven bidders, three finally submitted
bids and Grumman was partnered with Boeing. t-space, that
included Rutan, was the third bidder. Although Nasa seems
to be rather secretive about whether t-space submitted a bid or not.
http://www.comspacewatch.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=14924


None of that obviates the hilarious fact that you used this to beat up
on LM alone,



Their name is first. It's their baby. And yes I was bashing
Lockheed since they deserve it. Even you, an unabashed
NASA apologist, admitted their actions are hard to defend.
Yet attempt to defend Lockheed by diverting the debate to a
rigged bidding process. That I find rather amusing, and I'm
happy to start a new debate over that particular process
if you like.

As I'm certain that debate will uncover all sorts of new
material with which to highlight the emptiness
and corruption behind the "Vision".



when it was clearly a joint LM/NG fiasco. But you'll
continue to flounder and defend it, because you incapable of admitting
error.



And you got that fact, a joint LM/NG project, from my original post.



Face it, NASA is saddled with an ignorant goal created by and for
a corrupt conglomerate. Your beloved NASA is being raped
and you don't even know it.


My "beloved NASA"?



Say something negative about NASA, come on, I dare you~


You're even more of an idiot than you've previously played.



And you argue with me just for the sake of it, not on
merit. Which is why you always lose these debates.
Hint: the loser is the one that ends up shouting personal
insults.


Jonathan

s









  #13  
Old May 21st 07, 02:59 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
Borderline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 426
Default ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!

On May 20, 11:42 am, (Andre Lieven) wrote:


It shows up their knee jerk anti gov't ideology as being simple lunacy.

Andre


I am sure that you are aware since you post some really good stuff
"elsewhere" Naval wise that USNI PRoceedings has had some very very
good information on this...including for full members some interviews
with some of the USCG officers who were a part of the "fiasco".

It truly is a fiasco. There are problems from the government end, but
LM just really shafted the USCG...the Commandant is just about beside
himself on this.

Robert


  #14  
Old May 21st 07, 05:42 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,466
Default ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!



Borderline wrote:
I am sure that you are aware since you post some really good stuff
"elsewhere" Naval wise that USNI PRoceedings has had some very very
good information on this...including for full members some interviews
with some of the USCG officers who were a part of the "fiasco".

It truly is a fiasco. There are problems from the government end, but
LM just really shafted the USCG...the Commandant is just about beside
himself on this.


It hit "60 Minutes" tonight, BTW.

Pat
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! Jonathan History 14 May 21st 07 05:42 AM
On Coast-to-Coast radio show tonight -- Aldrin and Hoagland Jim Oberg Policy 3 August 5th 06 09:20 PM
Nancy Lieder (Planet_X Lady) On Coast To Coast AM on Tuesday! Rudolph_X Astronomy Misc 89 September 6th 05 08:32 PM
WALTER CRONKITE SLAMS C-CRANE CRANK RADIO ON COAST TO COAST! Lon 742212 Astronomy Misc 1 April 28th 05 03:26 AM
ANYONE CATCH Richard Hoagland on Coast to Coast on Wednesday Night Gordon Gekko IDCC on the Nasdaq Amateur Astronomy 3 September 1st 03 09:16 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.