....Burt Rutan RIPS the "Vision" in recent speech... 05-06-07

Burt is a great designer, (But He has become more of a shoot from the
lip Guy, of late). He reminds Me alot of Chuck Yeager. He has loads of
Moxie, (But His ideas are now more progressive than Apollo II/CEV).
The idea is to get back to having a real spaceport, (The path of least
resistance is what We need to seek).

Carl

Watch the video, its great fun. Rutan is a fun speaker. While one
might not agree with everything he says, he has lots of interesting
points and he expresses them well.

If that's the speech he gave at the ISDC in LA last year, I was in
attendance.


Doesnt look like it, its got much more recent date on it. But i wasnt
in attendance, i wouldnt know. i enjoyed listening for these 20
minutes anyway.

-kert

On 24 May 2007 14:08:11 -0700, in a place far, far away, kert
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

Watch the video, its great fun. Rutan is a fun speaker. While one
might not agree with everything he says, he has lots of interesting
points and he expresses them well.

If that's the speech he gave at the ISDC in LA last year, I was in
attendance.


Doesnt look like it, its got much more recent date on it.

If so, it's nothing new, and was recycled.

"kert" wrote in message
ups.com...
It was a
criticism of ESAS, which I share.

About ESAS, he's called it stupid, of making no sense
likened it to archeology.
http://www.space.com/adastra/adastra...an_060504.html

I agree with that. But that's ESAS, not VSE.

Watch the video, its great fun. Rutan is a fun speaker. While one
might not agree with everything he says, he has lots of interesting
points and he expresses them well.

His critiquie isnt aimed at VSE, he never mentions this specifically,


The only time he referred to the Vision he called it the
Bush 'Doctrine', dripping with contempt, calling
it 50 years spent deliberately learning nothing new.
He then cut himself off while indignantly mentioning
that he was told not to discuss politics. Something
was then edited out that got a loud laugh. No doubt
he crossed some line while criticizing the Vision
further.



basically his views pretty much align with goals of VSE.


Only in the sense he believes in colonizing.

He critizices
lack of progress in space technology, which is tied to ESAS.


He was pretty clear that the business community was
the path to building and breakthroughs in space.
The Vision is the exact anti-thesis of that belief.

Sure, both believe we should be in space, but aside
from that I don't see any agreement at all.




-kert

In sci.space.history surfduke wrote:
(But His ideas are now more progressive than Apollo II/CEV).

Not wanting to imply that any one thing is progressive or any other is
not I will still ask, can one really make comparisons of
"progressiveness" when one work has been sub-orbital and the other is
targetting orbital? The requirements of the two are rather different.

rick jones
--
Wisdom Teeth are impacted, people are affected by the effects of events.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

"Rick Jones" wrote in message
...
In sci.space.history surfduke wrote:
(But His ideas are now more progressive than Apollo II/CEV).

Not wanting to imply that any one thing is progressive or any other is
not I will still ask, can one really make comparisons of
"progressiveness" when one work has been sub-orbital and the other is
targetting orbital? The requirements of the two are rather different.


And the future effects of the two are also quite different.
The sub-orbital start ups are trying to find a market
in space travel. And Rutan is clear in claiming that
only through commericial projects will space become
well-traveled. NASA chose a project that gives all the
big funds to a few large contractors, and nothing
to spur any market activity.

Building the space infrastructure needed to truly
exploit and colonize space will only come
from the private sector, from the ground up.

Another massive safari to the moon leaves
us nothing lasting, nothing is jump-started
as in the US air-mail jump-starting commercial
aviation.

We are doing the exact opposite of what we should
be doing to build a future in space. And we're
doing it backwards just to line Lockheed's pocket.



rick jones
--
Wisdom Teeth are impacted, people are affected by the effects of events.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

On Thu, 24 May 2007 18:51:29 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

Watch the video, its great fun. Rutan is a fun speaker. While one
might not agree with everything he says, he has lots of interesting
points and he expresses them well.

His critiquie isnt aimed at VSE, he never mentions this specifically,


The only time he referred to the Vision he called it the
Bush 'Doctrine', dripping with contempt, calling
it 50 years spent deliberately learning nothing new.

OK, so he's politically naive. Why should we be surprised? He's an
aircraft designer, not a policy analyst.

(FWIW, you are obviously neither.)

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 May 2007 18:51:29 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

Watch the video, its great fun. Rutan is a fun speaker. While one
might not agree with everything he says, he has lots of interesting
points and he expresses them well.

His critiquie isnt aimed at VSE, he never mentions this specifically,


The only time he referred to the Vision he called it the
Bush 'Doctrine', dripping with contempt, calling
it 50 years spent deliberately learning nothing new.


OK, so he's politically naive.


Naive describes those like yourself that believe
the Vision will outlast this administration.



Why should we be surprised? He's an
aircraft designer,



That's like calling Lindbergh a pilot. True but grossly
incomplete. And deliberately so on your part, belittle
him and you can dismiss his views.


not a policy analyst.

(FWIW, you are obviously neither.)


Ok, so you require certain titles and degrees
behind opinions before you'll respect them.
If your heroes, such as Rutan and Hanks turning
their backs on the Vision aren't enough.
What about a NASA researcher like
Dr. Geoffrey A. Landis? Rather well known
in both technical and sci-fi circles.
http://mit.edu/aeroastro/www/people/landis/landis.html

Well it appears he spent last week with those kooks over
in Cambridge talking about Space Solar Power.
http://web.mit.edu/space_solar_power/Participants.html


I know, he's just another rube teacher right?

This policy you dismiss is making a comeback.
BIt by bit, it's gaining steam, I can smell it.
And there's still a year and a half to the next
election.

s

On Thu, 24 May 2007 20:41:28 -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 Thu, 24 May 2007 18:51:29 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

Watch the video, its great fun. Rutan is a fun speaker. While one
might not agree with everything he says, he has lots of interesting
points and he expresses them well.

His critiquie isnt aimed at VSE, he never mentions this specifically,


The only time he referred to the Vision he called it the
Bush 'Doctrine', dripping with contempt, calling
it 50 years spent deliberately learning nothing new.


OK, so he's politically naive.


Naive describes those like yourself that believe
the Vision will outlast this administration.

Why do you think that I believe that? Are you a moron, too?

Learn to read.

In article ,
"Jonathan" wrote:

Another massive safari to the moon leaves
us nothing lasting, nothing is jump-started
as in the US air-mail jump-starting commercial
aviation.

That may or may not be true. Griffin has repeatedly expressed
willingness for commercial space services, including station resupply,
and the same may apply to lunar activities by the time we get there.
Things are different now from when the first Apollo program launched --
back then, only major governments could get even close to space. Now
there are a lot of commercial players who are not far behind (or even
ahead of, in some ways) NASA. This may well result in a different
outcome.

Best,
- Joe