General Discussion > Space Policy Discussion
Reopening the American Frontier: Partnerships Between Commercial Space and Govt
yg1968:
Reopening the American Frontier: Promoting Partnerships Between Commercial Space and the U.S. Government to Advance Exploration and Settlement:
https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2017/7/reopening-the-american-frontier-promoting-partnerships-between-commercial-space-and-the-u-s-government-to-advance-exploration-and-settlement
FutureSpaceTourist:
Eric Berger picked up on one aspect of SpaceX's evidence:
--- Quote ---SpaceX goes there—seeks government funds for deep space
Ideas: Vertical takeoff of rockets on the Moon. Cargo to Mars. Deep space comms.
by Eric Berger - Jul 13, 2017 6:30pm BST
--- End quote ---
https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/07/spacex-urges-lawmakers-to-commercialize-deep-space-exploration/
AncientU:
The 'walled-off' BEO theme that NASA has been pushing has always ringed hollow. NASA lost its capability to go to LEO, so 'conceded' it to commercial as if they had a choice (other than continuing to buy rides from Russia). BEO exploration cannot be their sole domiane because they don't have the technology needed in hand or any reasonable prospect of getting the budget to develop it -- per their own admission this week.
Either NASA taps the commercial world for the rides and other hardware they need, or they'll lose BEO and human exploration, too. SpaceX 'Going there' was the flip side of Gerstenmaier 'Going there.'
Jim:
Nonsense. NASA has had technology for decades. It has only been a matter of direction and money.
Your tribades are getting tiresome
woods170:
--- Quote from: Jim on 07/16/2017 10:25 pm ---Nonsense. NASA has had technology for decades. It has only been a matter of direction and money.
Your tribades are getting tiresome
--- End quote ---
With all due respect Jim but your continued uttering of nonsense is getting tiresome as well. I'll give a few examples with regards to your latest back-and-forth with AncientU:
Example:
Despite you claiming the opposite NASA does not have the technology to go beyond BEO. If NASA in fact had the technology there would be no need for Orion. However, Orion is there to re-learn and re-develop the beyond-LEO technology because the beyond-LEO technology for manned missions was thrown out the window in the 1972 - 1975 timeframe without properly securing, archiving and retaining the then-existing BLEO knowledge-base.
Also, as you point out ever so often: almost none of the people working back then are available anymore. So, that know-how is gone, and with it a substantial part of the knowledge about the technology.
Another example:
Despite you claiming otherwise is it not "only a matter of direction and money". Multiple presidents beyond Nixon have directed NASA towards BLEO destinations such as the Moon, Mars or asteroids. Heck, some of them even threw money after it. What was lacking everytime was will (as in willpower) to turn those directions into national goals in stead of jobs programs.
NASA needs a helluva lot more than just direction and money. For NASA to be succesful in any BLEO undertaking it needs major re-structuring. It also needs to be freed from the influence of folks like senator Shelby et al. Getting rid of a substantial part of overhead as well as getting rid of a dozen competing field centers are absolute necessities as well.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version