[RocketsNW] NASA's plans to return to the Moon are dead

[Terry Moore-Read]

His blog is definately worth reading ... he writes books too : http://www.amazon.com/Philip-C.-Plait/e/B001JSCAUK/ref=ntt_athr_dp_pel_1

On Feb 1, 2010, at 5:13 PM, kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com wrote:

> Seems Phil Plait and I would see eye to eye pretty well on this!
> 
> "Lead, follow, or get run the hell over" as the old saying goes.  Looks
> like the space entrepreneurs are getting close to doing some serious
> "running the hell over."  :)
> 
> About time...
> +McG+
> 
> 
>> Looks like we may yet find out what SpaceX can do :
>> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/01/president-obamas-nasa-budget-unveiled/
>> 
>> On Jan 28, 2010, at 11:01 PM, kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com wrote:
>> 
>>> It's the White House/Congress/NASA triad that is dysfunctional.  The
>>> traditional aerospace giants have become addicted to generous quantities
>>> of money from the federal teat and thereby force NASA to overspend.
>>> It's
>>> one big orgy of wasteful spending, flawed plans, and inability to
>>> complete
>>> a plan once adopted.  The start-up companies, not yet having had enough
>>> time to become ossified and largely not directly under the control of
>>> Congress or the White House can do things much more efficiently.  Just
>>> compare the development of Ares 1 and Falcon 5.  No contest.
>>> 
>>> If I had the White House setting the goals for a 1/2A model rocket
>>> project, NASA overseeing it and the big aerospace companies doing the
>>> work
>>> it would cost $10 million, be ten years late, fly once and be proclaimed
>>> a
>>> huge success.
>>> 
>>> NASA can still do unmanned probes pretty well but the White House
>>> /Congress /NASA triad just can't develop a space transportation system
>>> within a reasonable budget.  The startups keep politics out of it and do
>>> more than an order of magnitude better.  May be sad, but true.
>>> +McG+
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> That question is simply, could one nasa contractor do better than
>>>> another
>>>> ?  Blame lockheed-martin and cost+profit contracts rather than Nasa.
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 27, 2010, at 8:58 PM, kmcgoffin at worldaccessnet.com wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> "NASA has already spent more than $3 billion on Ares I and more than
>>>>> $5
>>>>> billion on the rest of Constellation."
>>>>> 
>>>>> $8 billion and so far one measly one-stage test bed launch.  That's
>>>>> EXACTLY why Ares needs to be euthanized.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Now, what kind of results do you suppose SpaceX could get for that
>>>>> kind
>>>>> of
>>>>> money?  Bigelow?  The two together?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm sorry, NASA has become a Brontosaurus in an age of fast, furry
>>>>> mammals.
>>>>> +McG+
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/space/os-no-moon-for-nasa-20100126,0,2770904.story
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Rockets mailing list
>>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com
>>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Rockets mailing list
>>>>> Rockets at rocketsnw.com
>>>>> http://mx1.blastzone.com/mailman/listinfo/rockets
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses
>>>> and dangerous content by Lukins & Annis, P.S.
>>>> 
>>>> NOTICE: This email may contain confidential or
>>>> privileged material, and is intended solely
>>>> for use by the above referenced recipient. Any
>>>> review, copying, printing, disclosure, distri-
>>>> bution, or any other use, is strictly prohibited.
>>>> 
>>>> If you are not the recipient, and believe that
>>>> you have received this in error, please notify
>>>> the sender and delete the copy you received.
>>>> 
>>>> Thank You!
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses
>> and dangerous content by Lukins & Annis, P.S.
>> 
>> NOTICE: This email may contain confidential or
>> privileged material, and is intended solely
>> for use by the above referenced recipient. Any
>> review, copying, printing, disclosure, distri-
>> bution, or any other use, is strictly prohibited.
>> 
>> If you are not the recipient, and believe that
>> you have received this in error, please notify
>> the sender and delete the copy you received.
>> 
>> Thank You!
>> 
>> 
> 
>