Pro-private sector space video

[yg1968]

Warning: some of you will not like the narration in this Free-Frontier video as it is very much one-sided (i.e, it's very pro-private space). But it has some very cool video:



This video appears to be somewhat related to the competitive-space-task-force press conference of this week:
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2011/02/08/competitive-space-task-force-launches/

[Jason1701]

Very inspirational! Thanks for posting.

[Downix]

It's an interesting video, some of what is claimed is a bit more rough than I like, but I understand the sentiment.

[docmordrid]

Perhaps the tone is rough - but if it's being aimed at policymakers, they sometimes need a 2x4 between the eyes to get the point.

[Nascent Ascent]

Great video.  I agree with all of the sentiments put forth.

[JNobles]

This is a good video.  I liked it.  But when I looked at some of his other videos on YouTube I found some unpleasant things.  I will let those who wish to find out do the YouTube search on his name for themselves.  Me, I'm not sure I would want him being associated with Newspace, Oldspace, or anything else.  YMMV

But the video mentioned in this thread is good.

[telomerase99]

That was a wonderful video... I wonder if Bolden got to see it prior to making the announcement about the exciting new 2012 budget!

[butters]

He left out the part where a great deal of the money (if not the majority) would still come from the massive government bureaucracy that has to perform the consumer function of picking winners and losers in the marketplace.

It's still a public monopsony, like the military, in which suppliers are competing for the business of a single dominant consumer wielding taxpayer money. The suppliers are forced to behave in peculiar ways to win contracts.

The penalty for changing requirements, which seems to be an inordinately frequent situation since the government has a great deal of difficulty establishing objectives and sticking to them, is if anything greater in fixed-price procurement than in cost-plus.

I'm not saying that commercial fixed-price procurement is an inappropriate ideal. What I'm saying is that the space exploration program will still be limited by the often-troubled decision-making process of the government bureaucracy we know and love, with or without commercial fixed-price procurement.

It is my view that NASA is even less adept at figuring out what exactly they wish to accomplish then they are at figuring out how exactly they would execute any objectives they might someday have. They get more excited and competent about setting requirements as they get closer to the nuts and bolts. The top-level requirements is where it all goes wrong, and there is nothing that commercial fixed-price procurement can do about that.

It could all result in an endless stream of recompeting contracts -- or demands therefor -- because NASA and/or Congress has changed their minds.

What to do about it? I don't know. It's probably uneconomical to have competing publicly-funding space programs.

[tigerade]

I thought this was a good video, it puts things in perspective.

[docmordrid]

This is a good video.  I liked it.  But when I looked at some of his other videos on YouTube....

He's quite conservative. Is that bad? According to every survey that puts him in line with likely voters (Gallup = 54%.)

[rickl]

It's an interesting video, some of what is claimed is a bit more rough than I like, but I understand the sentiment.

It's basically intended for a general audience, not space buffs.  I am continually amazed by the number of people who have no idea any of this is going on.  It's under the MSM's radar, too.  As such, the video fills a great need.

Bill Whittle is a pretty accomplished guy.  In addition to his dozens of videos on various topics, he's a notable essayist too, at his old blog Eject!Eject!Eject!  (Check out his archives.)  Heck, I remember him when he was a commenter at Rachel Lucas' old blog.  It seems like ages ago, but it was in the 2002-2003 time frame.

I'm very pleased to see him throw his support behind commercial space.

[QuantumG]

I like this video and I have no problem with Bill's politics.  That said, every woman I've shown this video to has insisted that I turn it off immediately. 

[Seattle Dave]

So what he's saying is if you're a multi-millionaire, you'll get to go to suborbit. Whoopee.  I assume Bill Whittle is a millioaire by fawning over Virgin Galactic and saying "you" can go into "outer space" when he means "millionaires" can go into "suborbit".

And the Shuttle has NOT ended yet.

[Lars_J]

Yeah the video definitely over-emphasizes the suborbital tourism... "OUTER SPACE", as he says, several times. We get it. 

Yet it also seems to under-emphasize the real promising developments in orbital commercial space. And he also mis-characterizes NASA's importance in funding/growing this market in its infancy.

The ORBITAL commercial space market is important. The suborbital is neat, but of very little value beyond very short joyrides. (Not that I would say not to a trip) 

Minor nitpicks, I suppose. The video is well produced, and if it gets through the skull of government-spaceflight-loving conservatives that are not read up on the issue, then it is mission accomplished.

[Jason Davies]

Some good points, such as the money monster of Constellation, and no one is going to say anything negative about SpaceX, facts are facts, they've done well.

The video could have gotten more people on side by looking more at commercial space, not commercial tourism. More SpaceX vs CxP. More Mastern instead of virgin.

What he wants for NASA is fine by me. He said both robotics and human exploration. No arguments there, I only have arguments with stopping NASA from HSF.

Not really aimed at us anyway. It's more aimed at the "who's SpaceX? and "I can't name the three shuttles? Constellation, what was that about" crowd

And yes, three more shuttle missions yet. Don't bury her from history just yet!!

[Diagoras]

Suborbital space has very little value beyond joyrides? I can think of multiple benefits - widespread (at least more than now) access and exposure to space, industrial synergy (Orbital using WK2 for drop tests), and a relatively subsidy-free, healthy market.

Not to mention the incremental plans to get to orbit advocated by Masten and Armadillo.

[Downix]

This is a good video.  I liked it.  But when I looked at some of his other videos on YouTube....

He's quite conservative. Is that bad? According to every survey that puts him in line with likely voters (Gallup = 54%.)

Also puts him against US population, which is quite Left-leaning.  The US voting block has split right for decades, but the fustrations piping up on the left are starting to show up. 

If we thought the Tea Party was a movement, we've not seen anything yet.

And right now, we need some leftist swing to get our space exploration going again.

[docmordrid]

This is a good video.  I liked it.  But when I looked at some of his other videos on YouTube....

He's quite conservative. Is that bad? According to every survey that puts him in line with likely voters (Gallup = 54%.)

Also puts him against US population, which is quite Left-leaning.
>

You're obviously reading the netroot sites and not the non-biased polling sites - that Gallup poll I linked to being an example. Committed liberals only make up ~20% of the populace, and sometimes as low as 17%. As a rule conservatives outnumber liberals by 1.7 - 2:1 or more, and that's been stable for decades.

Uppance is that neutral surveys, and even the better Democrat run surveys like PPP, show the US as a center-right nation. That liberals win national elections is an artifact of swing voters and low conservative turnouts in some elections.