Jim - 15/5/2006 9:08 PMGet off the conspiracy stuff and stop painting everything with a broad brush. NASA does follow US procurement laws. "NASA's enabling congressional act in 1958 specifically ordered NASA to ensure the fullest possible commercialization of space" is subjective and can't be a black and white test."Secondly, as someone with years of experience with government contracting, as well as time in the military, I know how easy it is for bureaucrats to stay within the letter of the law while engaging in exactly the opposite activity of what the congress wants it to do."Must have been the Army or some other civilian agency. Looks like you don't have any space experience.NASA aeronautic research mostly directly affects US plane makersNASA created the US commercial launch business and now buys commercial launch services (required by law since '86)NASA helped create the commercial comsats Rutan repeated something that was done 40 years ago and using the same research plus having the benefits of 40 years of technology advances, (especially CFD, which didn't exist 40 years ago). Rutan's achievement was due to happen anyways.Give specific examples.PS. It was B-52B and NASA owned it.
Jim - 16/5/2006 3:00 PMWhy should NASA send civilians into space other than for S&G's. There is no real need other than for political reasons. Christa and the other SFP should have never flow on the shuttle.
There was no money in private spaceflight until the Xprize.
"it has acted to block private launch efforts in the past" Prove it.NASA did not do any wrt Beal. Documented? Andy's rants do not qualify as documentation. I know someone who worked for Andy and he was just paranoid and because he had an unworkable design and needed a scapegoat.Spacex is doing find