|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Rohrabacher calls for emergency commercial funding
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=26560.0
She suggests transferring money from SLS to help fund commercial crew: “We need to get on with the task of building affordable launch systems to meet our nation’s needs for access to low Earth orbit, instead of promoting grandiose concepts which keep us vulnerable in the short and medium terms. The most responsible course of action for the United States is to dramatically accelerate the commercial crew systems already under development. “I am calling on General Bolden, the NASA Administrator, to propose an emergency transfer of funding from unobligated balances in other programs, including the Space Launch System, to NASA’s commercial crew initiative. Funding should be used to speed up the efforts of the four current industry partners to develop their systems and potentially expand the recent awards to include the best applicants for launch vehicle development." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Rohrabacher calls for emergency commercial funding
On 08/30/2011 09:04 AM, Hop wrote:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=26560.0 She suggests transferring money from SLS to help fund commercial crew: Rohrabacher is a "he". |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Rohrabacher calls for emergency commercial funding
On Aug 30, 7:07*am, "Jorge R. Frank" wrote:
On 08/30/2011 09:04 AM, Hop wrote: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=26560.0 She suggests transferring money from SLS to help fund commercial crew: Rohrabacher is a "he". Thanks for the correction. I guess Dana is a name like "Chris", could be male or female. I like his support for commercial crew. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Rohrabacher calls for emergency commercial funding
Le 30/08/11 16:04, Hop a écrit :
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=26560.0 She suggests transferring money from SLS to help fund commercial crew: “We need to get on with the task of building affordable launch systems to meet our nation’s needs for access to low Earth orbit, instead of promoting grandiose concepts which keep us vulnerable in the short and medium terms. The most responsible course of action for the United States is to dramatically accelerate the commercial crew systems already under development. “I am calling on General Bolden, the NASA Administrator, to propose an emergency transfer of funding from unobligated balances in other programs, including the Space Launch System, to NASA’s commercial crew initiative. Funding should be used to speed up the efforts of the four current industry partners to develop their systems and potentially expand the recent awards to include the best applicants for launch vehicle development." I still do not understand the logic behind giving public founds to private entreprises. Either the private entreprise is private and shareholders share the profits and the looses, or it is public and the taxpayers pays for it and reaps the rewards. As you would have it, the profits are private and the risk and investments should be payed by the taxpayers. ?? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Rohrabacher calls for emergency commercial funding
"Hop" wrote in message ...
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=26560.0 She suggests transferring money from SLS to help fund commercial crew: “We need to get on with the task of building affordable launch systems to meet our nation’s needs for access to low Earth orbit, instead of promoting grandiose concepts which keep us vulnerable in the short and medium terms. The most responsible course of action for the United States is to dramatically accelerate the commercial crew systems already under development. What good is this going to do? The commercial firms are already well on their way with delivering cargo to ISS and extra funding won't speed this up. And bsides all spacecraft are vulnerable. Soyuz has a good track record and that it fails now is simply bad luck or bad oversight. There's a good chance the Russians will fix it way before SpaceX or anyone else can haul cargo or crew to ISS. SLS and MCPV aren't so bad since if the Chinese finally reveal their Martian flyby plans you don't want to be in the position of not having a large carrier rocket that could be used to beat them to the finish line. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Rohrabacher calls for emergency commercial funding
On Aug 30, 7:04*am, Hop wrote:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=26560.0 She suggests transferring money from SLS to help fund commercial crew: “We need to get on with the task of building affordable launch systems to meet our nation’s needs for access to low Earth orbit, *instead of promoting grandiose concepts which keep us vulnerable in the short and medium terms. The most responsible course of action for the United States is to dramatically accelerate the commercial crew systems already under development. “I am calling on General Bolden, the NASA Administrator, to propose an emergency transfer of funding from unobligated balances in other programs, including the Space Launch System, to NASA’s commercial crew initiative. *Funding should be used to speed up the efforts of the four current industry partners to develop their systems and potentially expand the recent awards to include the best applicants for launch vehicle development." And Rep. Rohrabcher's plan has ZERO chance of getting out of committee. If he was Chairman, he'd be in a better position. But since Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX) is chair, and fights hard for NASA's own launch vehicle and capsule, forget it. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Rohrabacher calls for emergency commercial funding
In article , says...
Le 30/08/11 16:04, Hop a écrit : http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=26560.0 She suggests transferring money from SLS to help fund commercial crew: ?We need to get on with the task of building affordable launch systems to meet our nation?s needs for access to low Earth orbit, instead of promoting grandiose concepts which keep us vulnerable in the short and medium terms. The most responsible course of action for the United States is to dramatically accelerate the commercial crew systems already under development. ?I am calling on General Bolden, the NASA Administrator, to propose an emergency transfer of funding from unobligated balances in other programs, including the Space Launch System, to NASA?s commercial crew initiative. Funding should be used to speed up the efforts of the four current industry partners to develop their systems and potentially expand the recent awards to include the best applicants for launch vehicle development." I still do not understand the logic behind giving public founds to private entreprises. Either the private entreprise is private and shareholders share the profits and the looses, or it is public and the taxpayers pays for it and reaps the rewards. As you would have it, the profits are private and the risk and investments should be payed by the taxpayers. ?? The alternative, in the US, appears to be Orion, which is an all government owned and operated vehicle. How would that be better? Jeff -- " Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. " - tinker |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Rohrabacher calls for emergency commercial funding
In article ,
says... "Hop" wrote in message ... http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=26560.0 She suggests transferring money from SLS to help fund commercial crew: ?We need to get on with the task of building affordable launch systems to meet our nation?s needs for access to low Earth orbit, instead of promoting grandiose concepts which keep us vulnerable in the short and medium terms. The most responsible course of action for the United States is to dramatically accelerate the commercial crew systems already under development. What good is this going to do? The commercial firms are already well on their way with delivering cargo to ISS and extra funding won't speed this up. And bsides all spacecraft are vulnerable. Soyuz has a good track record and that it fails now is simply bad luck or bad oversight. There's a good chance the Russians will fix it way before SpaceX or anyone else can haul cargo or crew to ISS. Which is why having multiple different types of spacecraft is a good thing. I'd like to see both Orion and CST-100 flying to ISS. A failure in one of them wouldn't "end US manned spaceflight". SLS and MCPV aren't so bad since if the Chinese finally reveal their Martian flyby plans you don't want to be in the position of not having a large carrier rocket that could be used to beat them to the finish line. The Chinese aren't going to beat the US to Mars. They're nowhere near ready for such a mission. They're still catching up to the 1970's technologies that the US and Russia had with Apollo, Skylab, Soyuz, and Salyut. Jeff -- " Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. " - tinker |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Rohrabacher calls for emergency commercial funding
On 31/08/2011 1:26 AM, jacob navia wrote:
I still do not understand the logic behind giving public founds to private entreprises. You mean like the money that's given to Boeing, Lockheed etc? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cat Emergency | Cat Protector | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | December 25th 07 08:26 PM |
What emergency... | Brian Gaff | Space Shuttle | 28 | December 10th 07 03:44 PM |
Legislative Emergency | Rand Simberg | Policy | 8 | October 21st 04 06:18 PM |
Fiscal sanity at risk: Rohrabacher adds Luna to his district | Greg Kuperberg | Policy | 1 | February 26th 04 11:33 AM |
Rohrabacher misses the mark | Greg Kuperberg | Policy | 1 | December 2nd 03 10:01 PM |