Comments on: A spectrum of opinions

By: common sense

common sense — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:59:19 +0000

@Loki:

Just to make sure: SpaceX did not win CCDev.

@danwithaplan:

Nope I won’t give you anything. You go and look for yourself what the commercials are saying not what I or you or anyone say about their plans and customers.

“The thing just works (including Progresses), and who gives a fâ€™k if itâ€™s not â€˜Americanâ€™?”

Obviously you don”t. Nice language though. Are you a US citizen? Paying taxes in the US? Just curious. How much money has the US contributed to ISS? How much did the other nations? Hardware allocation should give you an idea, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station In the mean time keep reading.

By: danwithaplan

danwithaplan — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 07:33:12 +0000

And sorry, that’s Soyuz, not ‘Souyz’

The thing just works (including Progresses), and who gives a f’k if it’s not ‘American’?

By: danwithaplan

danwithaplan — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 07:30:55 +0000

‘common sense’, give me other than the ISS demand for HSF.

The Souyz, ATV, HTV services the ISS and that’s fine by the American taxpayer.

By: Loki

Loki — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:49:13 +0000

“OSC likes the new program”

Duh, of course they do. I’m sure SpaceX and the 5 companies that got some of the 50 million stimulus dollars for CCDev like it too…

By: commander keen

commander keen — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 05:48:23 +0000

Well, I’m never for cancellation but the plan is the plan. I didnt like the many Bush era cancellations either but the new plan looks good to me, assuming it pays off in time. THere have been many potential HSF technologies that NASA has simply had no money to investigate as the Augustine folks pointed out.

It looks like Constellation bet the farm on a very expensive system, and lost.

By: Major Tom

Major Tom — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:28:22 +0000

OSC likes the new program:

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30148

FWIW…

By: Major Tom

Major Tom — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:04:36 +0000

Good article by the Economist:

http://www.economist.com/sciencetechnology/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15449787

FWIW…

By: common sense

common sense — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:51:38 +0000

BTW Some people will most likely be on their way out soon at CxP high level…

http://nasawatch.com/archives/2010/02/cxp-fights-back.html

By: common sense

common sense — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:53:03 +0000

“And there is nothing commercial about SpaceX or other companies struggling to deliver to the ISS, they are just contractors to the US government. Weâ€™ve had them for years (USA, ULA)”

Sorry but you don’t know what you’re talking about. It is not specifically about the delivery process to ISS which iss under government contract but also with how those firms were created in the first place and how they actually operate. Learn the difference bewteen cost-plus and COTS and then you may understand why they are called “commercial” even when contracted by the US government.

By: common sense

common sense — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:50:46 +0000

@danwithaplan:

You said “the ISS paid for by the taxpayers.â€ Again what is your point? What contest are you talking about? Who said the delivery “has to be” american. Now I am a taxpayer and as such I would rather see an international facility paid in part for by US tax dollars to be serviced by US vehicles. It does not mean there should ONLY be US vehicles. BUT until the ISS partners come up with an intrenational vehicle to service ISS we need to have other vehicles including US vehicles. BTW the ISS is NOT equal to HSF in the US it only is part of HSF. As to what SpaceX and other commercial firms do I would suggest you get better informed. ISS is NOT their only customer by their own statements.