Comments on: House approves NASA authorization bill http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/09/27/house-approves-nasa-authorization-bill/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=house-approves-nasa-authorization-bill Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: Cosmic Wonderer http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/09/27/house-approves-nasa-authorization-bill/#comment-127780 Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:29:45 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=1746#comment-127780 Musk is going to get 250 million from NASA

Elon Musk won an AWARD, in the form of a SPACE ACT AGREEMENT.

Did you write a COTS proposal? Are you building a rocket? You know what would be great? It would be great if you quit bitching across multiple space forums about Elon Musk winning an award for services that the United States government and NASA demonstrably cannot provide, and start offering something constructive to the dialogue. Anything. Even reading up on what a space act agreement is, and why the United States goverment is offering them would be a constructive start, I suppose we can’t expect to actually get any kind of position paper or a real rocket design out of you.

]]> By: anon http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/09/27/house-approves-nasa-authorization-bill/#comment-127766 Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:49:28 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=1746#comment-127766 LM and Boeing only got 500 million apiece for EELV development. Anyways, Musk is going to get 250 million from NASA

]]> By: Vladislaw http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/09/27/house-approves-nasa-authorization-bill/#comment-127745 Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:48:07 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=1746#comment-127745 I think the arguement will be that he did it on his own dime rather then the 3 billion the government contractors got to develop theirs?

]]> By: anon http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/09/27/house-approves-nasa-authorization-bill/#comment-127341 Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:27:22 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=1746#comment-127341 One launch success launch out of 4 is not enough to base a policy on. Anyways, Boeing, OSC and LM have been doing it for years, why was that enough impetus for changes?

]]> By: sc220 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/09/27/house-approves-nasa-authorization-bill/#comment-127031 Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:41:54 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=1746#comment-127031 Time to seriously reassess NASA’s mission. With the successful launch into orbit of Falcon I, the COTS approach may be the best course to emphasize. Certainly, it is high time to terminate the Ares boondoggle and adopt a more doable approach.

]]> By: joe http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/09/27/house-approves-nasa-authorization-bill/#comment-126969 Mon, 29 Sep 2008 07:43:32 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=1746#comment-126969 It’s nothing without a corresponding appropriation a half year away. Also, I wouldn’t trust NASA with more money after the Ares mess. I actually wish they’d take away some and spend it on something more useful.

]]> By: Valdis http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/09/27/house-approves-nasa-authorization-bill/#comment-126907 Mon, 29 Sep 2008 05:58:17 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=1746#comment-126907 Good move. Very smart. NASA have to minimized gap in manned space programm and must be maximal independent from any “international partner” in such nationally important field of activities as manned space flight. Two factors accelerated this absolutely nescessary, imho, decission: first, Russia’s aggression in Caucasus, with consequenties as for internatonal behaviour of the evil empire; second, last success of taikonauts.
Goodspeed, NASA!

]]>