I'm a conservative (vs. being a Republican - there are conservatives in both parties) and find Sen. Shelby's actions ridiculous and anti-private enterprise, but then he has NASA facilities in his state and keeping them humming helps his re-election prospects. Many Democrats fight tooth and nail for their home-town government programs too so....
Quote from: tigerade on 06/05/2010 07:16 pmQuote from: Antares on 06/05/2010 04:18 pmI'm really mad at the allegedly Republican Senators' comments. I agree that most Americans would disagree, but the only ones who matter to them are the ones in their states - who probably agree with them. Such is life in a democratic republic.Yes, anyone find it odd that two Republican senators are placing their bets against private enterprise in favor of big government solutions? About as odd as it is for a President who's so in favor of big government solutions for pretty much everything is so in favor of private enterprise here...My guess they are somewhat worried that the President and his supporters will try to use this successful launch as validation of his non-plan, and thus, NASA HSF will be end for a long time and we'll be stuck in LEO for 3 more decades...Obviously that would be a blow for NASA and their districts. (politicians politik, as DocMordrid said, go figure!)So they are probably basically trying to say is, "Well, this is well and good, and it's what NASA has been working on for the past 4-5 years anyway with the COTS program, but let's not think that this should or can replace NASA HSF altogether."But it probably would have sounded actually better if they'd just said it like that.
Quote from: Antares on 06/05/2010 04:18 pmI'm really mad at the allegedly Republican Senators' comments. I agree that most Americans would disagree, but the only ones who matter to them are the ones in their states - who probably agree with them. Such is life in a democratic republic.Yes, anyone find it odd that two Republican senators are placing their bets against private enterprise in favor of big government solutions?
I'm really mad at the allegedly Republican Senators' comments. I agree that most Americans would disagree, but the only ones who matter to them are the ones in their states - who probably agree with them. Such is life in a democratic republic.
My guess they are somewhat worried that the President and his supporters will try to use this successful launch as validation of his non-plan, and thus, NASA HSF will be end for a long time and we'll be stuck in LEO for 3 more decades...
So they are probably basically trying to say is, "Well, this is well and good, and it's what NASA has been working on for the past 4-5 years anyway with the COTS program, but let's not think that this should or can replace NASA HSF altogether."
Huh?
...The ironic bit is that Shelby has to go back all the way to 1964 to try to find a comparable test launch...
...Yes, anyone find it odd that two Republican senators are placing their bets against private enterprise in favor of big government solutions?
Quote from: ugordan on 06/05/2010 03:55 pmHuh?The pad abort and restart. Isn't that new ground?Plus, the word "belated" is just sour grapes.Quote from: gladiator1332 on 06/05/2010 05:26 pm...The ironic bit is that Shelby has to go back all the way to 1964 to try to find a comparable test launch...More proof that BTDT is a failed argument. The whole point is to do it again, until it becomes more routine.Quote from: tigerade on 06/05/2010 07:16 pm...Yes, anyone find it odd that two Republican senators are placing their bets against private enterprise in favor of big government solutions?What you may not realize is that Democrats don't believe that captialism works within the atmosphere. Republicans don't believe capitalism works outside of the atmosphere.
Quote from: gladiator1332 on 06/05/2010 03:55 pmAnd what does Shelby mean by achieving what NASA already did in 1964? I'm not sure myself, but I suspect that it relates to the Gemini/Titan system in some way.
And what does Shelby mean by achieving what NASA already did in 1964?
Not at all - politics is a dirty and dishonest profession...
... made so by those who vote for them. It is as clean a profession as we collectively wish to make it.
Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.
Quote from: gospacex on 06/06/2010 05:00 amNot at all - politics is a dirty and dishonest profession...... made so by those who vote for them. It is as clean a profession as we collectively wish to make it.
...MAYDAY...MAYDAY...Senator Shelby, do you read me???...we've run into some trouble....need to abort operation ALABAMA REGATTA...repeat...ABORT... ABORT...how do you copy?... over...
QuoteDemocracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve. -- George Bernard Shaw
I've got the official charter boat reaction:Quote...MAYDAY...MAYDAY...Senator Shelby, do you read me???...we've run into some trouble....need to abort operation ALABAMA REGATTA...repeat...ABORT... ABORT...how do you copy?... over...
I think this is rather about control. Shelby has more control over who gets the money down the line, 5-10-15 years from now, under the prevailing NASA contracting structure. While ULA is highly competitive today as a commercial provider, up and coming competitors such as SpaceX may eventually win more contracts.This is about Shelby wanting to keep NASA funding under his thumb.
But are they really thinking like that? And why would anyone think like that? COTS is designed to stop NASA from wasting time with LEO, something that should have been done 20 years ago in my opinion, and that of many other space travel enthusiasts. The medium to long term goal is for NASA HSF to be concentrated on BEO. In the even longer term (50 years?), that should in turn be taken over by private enterprise and NASA HSF should be shifted to "BISS" (Beyond Inner Solar System), and so on.
... But with no definable plane or goals or milestones. ...
SpaceX may someday actually get people into Oribit. I sincerely hope they do...because they are about all we have going or will have going for the next few decades if FY2011 passes in it's current form. We'll be stuck in LEO for another 3 decades, just NASA will be buying rides from SpaceX orBoei-Bigalow rather than having the capability to do it themselves.
And it's all unecesary..that's the herat breaking part.
They probably think that because FY2011 cancels both NASA's current space vehicles, and it's replacement (albiet miguided replacement), and doesn't replace them with anything other than flowery rhetoric about maybe something some time, maybe,that can go to Mars. But with no definable plane or goals or milestones. That non-plan is ripe to make NASA an $18 billion a year slush fund. But even if the next President actually comes in with a plan for NASA HSF exploration, the shuttle infrastructure is totally gone, so it it would need to start new, which means NASA isn't even going into LEO for a few decades, much less BLEO.
SpaceX may someday actually get people into Oribit. I sincerely hope they do...because they are about all we have going or will have going for the next few decades if FY2011 passes in it's current form.
We'll be stuck in LEO for another 3 decades, just NAS will be buying rides from SpaceX orBoei-Bigalow rather than having the capability to do it themselves.