<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hutchison&#8217;s statement, Shelby&#8217;s award</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award</link>
	<description>Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kelly Starks</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/#comment-313008</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kelly Starks]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jun 2010 23:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3648#comment-313008</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DCSCA wrote @ June 25th, 2010 at 11:47 pm

&gt;= Bear in mind, an assault on the moon to establish a permanent 
&gt; presence there makes Apollo look like kite flying. ==

But that&#039;s not what Constellation and VSE was going to do.  

And lets face it - you could do that for a lot less then the quarter trillion they were talking about for VSE.  Hell for that, you should be building the lunar base in 2001!!

Defiantly you need to building stuff well beyond what we did in Apollo - or Constellation.


&gt; == Otherwise, donâ€™t lose your keys to your Tucker. ;-) 

Can I trade it in on a new Studebaker?

;)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DCSCA wrote @ June 25th, 2010 at 11:47 pm</p>
<p>&gt;= Bear in mind, an assault on the moon to establish a permanent<br />
&gt; presence there makes Apollo look like kite flying. ==</p>
<p>But that&#8217;s not what Constellation and VSE was going to do.  </p>
<p>And lets face it &#8211; you could do that for a lot less then the quarter trillion they were talking about for VSE.  Hell for that, you should be building the lunar base in 2001!!</p>
<p>Defiantly you need to building stuff well beyond what we did in Apollo &#8211; or Constellation.</p>
<p>&gt; == Otherwise, donâ€™t lose your keys to your Tucker. <img src="http://www.spacepolitics.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif" alt=";-)" class="wp-smiley" /> </p>
<p>Can I trade it in on a new Studebaker?</p>
<p><img src="http://www.spacepolitics.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif" alt=";)" class="wp-smiley" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DCSCA</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/#comment-312833</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DCSCA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jun 2010 03:47:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3648#comment-312833</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Kelly- &quot;Guess that makes as much sence as NASA budgeting $100B to develop &quot;Apollo on Steroids&quot; space flight tech â€” a half century after they did it the first time.&quot;  Bear in mind, an assult on the moon to establish a permanent presence there makes Apollo look like kite flying. Revisit the LRO image files on the NASA website and review the Apollo landing sites imaged over the past year. It&#039;s puny stuff. You explored more of your backyard after a snowstorm as a kid. It&#039;s going to take a redirection away from LOE architecture and reawakening the technologies skills and thinking put away-- or lost- when Apollo was ended. Otherwise, don&#039;t lose your keys to your Tucker. ;-)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Kelly- &#8220;Guess that makes as much sence as NASA budgeting $100B to develop &#8220;Apollo on Steroids&#8221; space flight tech â€” a half century after they did it the first time.&#8221;  Bear in mind, an assult on the moon to establish a permanent presence there makes Apollo look like kite flying. Revisit the LRO image files on the NASA website and review the Apollo landing sites imaged over the past year. It&#8217;s puny stuff. You explored more of your backyard after a snowstorm as a kid. It&#8217;s going to take a redirection away from LOE architecture and reawakening the technologies skills and thinking put away&#8211; or lost- when Apollo was ended. Otherwise, don&#8217;t lose your keys to your Tucker. <img src="http://www.spacepolitics.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif" alt=";-)" class="wp-smiley" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kelly Starks</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/#comment-312704</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kelly Starks]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:13:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3648#comment-312704</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&gt; DCSCA wrote @ June 24th, 2010 at 8:34 pm 
&gt;
&gt; Neither SpaceX or ULA are going away. Nor are XCOR, 
&gt; Armadillo, Blue Originâ€¦ &lt;- and you drive a Tucker.

8)

Love it!

Guess that makes as much sence as NASA budgeting $100B to develop &quot;Apollo on Steroids&quot; space flight tech -- a half century after they did it the first time.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; DCSCA wrote @ June 24th, 2010 at 8:34 pm<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt; Neither SpaceX or ULA are going away. Nor are XCOR,<br />
&gt; Armadillo, Blue Originâ€¦ &lt;- and you drive a Tucker.</p>
<p>8)</p>
<p>Love it!</p>
<p>Guess that makes as much sence as NASA budgeting $100B to develop &quot;Apollo on Steroids&quot; space flight tech &#8212; a half century after they did it the first time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kelly Starks</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/#comment-312703</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kelly Starks]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:09:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3648#comment-312703</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&gt;DCSCA wrote @ June 24th, 2010 at 8:18 pm 

&gt; Kelly Starks wrote @ June 24th, 2010 at 11:10 am  The video of news reports from the day of the announcement 
&gt; of the contract being awarded in mid 1996 states NASA woud put
&gt; up to $1 billion into development w/ L/M to carry the rest of the
&gt; load and operate/maintain the program for NASA.

I was refering to earlier then that.  Origionally it was a shared dev program with each puttling ni as much -- I beleave NASA was noly to put in $300M.

L/M aws pushing for most of the year to go past X-33 to a full shuttle usnig all inhouse, NASA responded with just X-33 - but they&#039;ld pay another billion.  Most of the industry took that as conclusive proof the customers had no interest in CATS, and NASA in perticular was VERY hostile to it (I was in the office of space access tech at NASA HQ around then, adn someong fieldibng a CATS was their nightmare scenario for obvious reasons.).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;DCSCA wrote @ June 24th, 2010 at 8:18 pm </p>
<p>&gt; Kelly Starks wrote @ June 24th, 2010 at 11:10 am  The video of news reports from the day of the announcement<br />
&gt; of the contract being awarded in mid 1996 states NASA woud put<br />
&gt; up to $1 billion into development w/ L/M to carry the rest of the<br />
&gt; load and operate/maintain the program for NASA.</p>
<p>I was refering to earlier then that.  Origionally it was a shared dev program with each puttling ni as much &#8212; I beleave NASA was noly to put in $300M.</p>
<p>L/M aws pushing for most of the year to go past X-33 to a full shuttle usnig all inhouse, NASA responded with just X-33 &#8211; but they&#8217;ld pay another billion.  Most of the industry took that as conclusive proof the customers had no interest in CATS, and NASA in perticular was VERY hostile to it (I was in the office of space access tech at NASA HQ around then, adn someong fieldibng a CATS was their nightmare scenario for obvious reasons.).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Church</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/#comment-312601</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gary Church]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 03:34:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3648#comment-312601</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;We strongly urge you to drop this misguided proposal that forces NASA out of human space operations for the foreseeable futureâ€¦&quot;

Go Sidemount!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;We strongly urge you to drop this misguided proposal that forces NASA out of human space operations for the foreseeable futureâ€¦&#8221;</p>
<p>Go Sidemount!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DCSCA</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/#comment-312574</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DCSCA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3648#comment-312574</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Neither SpaceX or ULA are going away. Nor are XCOR, Armadillo, Blue Originâ€¦  &lt;- and you drive a Tucker.  Meanwhile, we wait, wait, wait for private rocketeers with amusement. SpaceX boosters take note... Earth to Conestoga 1...

&quot;The first launch of the new Conestoga I design took place on 9 Sep 1982, consisting of the core missile stage and a 500 kg dummy payload which included 40 gallons of water. The payload was successfully ejected at 313 km, and the Conestoga I became the first privately funded rocket to reach space.&quot;  That was 28 years ago.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Neither SpaceX or ULA are going away. Nor are XCOR, Armadillo, Blue Originâ€¦  &lt;- and you drive a Tucker.  Meanwhile, we wait, wait, wait for private rocketeers with amusement. SpaceX boosters take note&#8230; Earth to Conestoga 1&#8230;</p>
<p>&quot;The first launch of the new Conestoga I design took place on 9 Sep 1982, consisting of the core missile stage and a 500 kg dummy payload which included 40 gallons of water. The payload was successfully ejected at 313 km, and the Conestoga I became the first privately funded rocket to reach space.&quot;  That was 28 years ago.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DCSCA</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/#comment-312572</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DCSCA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:25:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3648#comment-312572</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@RobertGOler- &quot;this letter is typical. SAve our pork save our jobs.&quot; LOLOLOL Utter nonsense, but it would be amusing to see Kraft/Kranz/Lunney managing again-- or Bean trading his paint brush in for another lunar dust brush. The signatories of that letter are mostly retired. Who&#039;s up for another gig on it- Griffin, maybe. That&#039;s all.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@RobertGOler- &#8220;this letter is typical. SAve our pork save our jobs.&#8221; LOLOLOL Utter nonsense, but it would be amusing to see Kraft/Kranz/Lunney managing again&#8211; or Bean trading his paint brush in for another lunar dust brush. The signatories of that letter are mostly retired. Who&#8217;s up for another gig on it- Griffin, maybe. That&#8217;s all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DCSCA</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/#comment-312571</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DCSCA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:18:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3648#comment-312571</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Kelly Starks wrote @ June 24th, 2010 at 11:10 am &lt;- inaccurate. The video of news reports from the day of the announcement of the contract being awarded in mid 1996 states NASA woud put up to $1 billion into development w/ L/M to carry the rest of the load and operate/maintain the program for NASA.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kelly Starks wrote @ June 24th, 2010 at 11:10 am &lt;- inaccurate. The video of news reports from the day of the announcement of the contract being awarded in mid 1996 states NASA woud put up to $1 billion into development w/ L/M to carry the rest of the load and operate/maintain the program for NASA.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DCSCA</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/#comment-312570</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DCSCA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:14:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3648#comment-312570</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Who cares? Theyâ€™re living in the past.&lt;- past is prologue. =sigh=]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who cares? Theyâ€™re living in the past.&lt;- past is prologue. =sigh=</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Church</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/23/hutchisons-statement-shelbys-award/#comment-312475</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gary Church]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:47:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3648#comment-312475</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Typical save our pork letter? 
But the eight astronauts supporting private space are true champions of space exploration in your view. 




Letter from several former astronauts and NASA administrators:

â€œWe are very concerned about America ceding its hard earned global leadership in space technology to other nations. We are stunned that, in a time of economic crisis, this move will force as many as 30,000 irreplaceable engineers and managers out of the space industry. We see our human exploration program, one of the most inspirational tools to promote science, technology, engineering and math to our young people, being reduced to mediocrity. NASAâ€™s human space program has inspired awe and wonder in all ages by pursuing the American tradition of exploring the unknown. We strongly urge you to drop this misguided proposal that forces NASA out of human space operations for the foreseeable futureâ€¦

â€œToo many men and women have worked too hard and sacrificed too much to achieve Americaâ€™s preeminence in space, only to see that effort needlessly thrown away. We urge you to demonstrate the vision and determination necessary to keep our nation at the forefront of human space exploration with ambitious goals and the proper resources to see them through. This is not the time to abandon the promise of the space frontier for a lack of will or an unwillingness to pay the price.â€

This statement was signed by Walter Cunningham, Apollo 7 astronaut; Chris Kraft former director of Johnson Space Center; Jack Lousma, Skylab 3 astronaut; Vance Brand, Apollo-Soyuz astronaut; Bob Crippen, former director of Kennedy Space Center; Michael D. Griffin, former NASA administrator; Ed Gibson, Skylab 4 astronaut; Jim Kennedy, former director of KSC; Alan Bean, Apollo 12 astronaut; Alfred M. Worden, Apollo 15 astronaut; Scott Carpenter, Mercury astronaut; Glynn Lunney, Gemini-Apollo flight director; Jim McDivitt, Apollo 9 astronaut; Gene Kranz, former director of NASA mission operations; Joe Kerwin, Skylab 2 astronaut; Fred Haise, Apollo 13 astronaut; Gerald Carr, Skylab 4 astronaut; Jim Lovell, Apollo 13 astronaut; Jake Garn, STS-51D astronaut; Charlie Duke, Apollo 16 astronaut; Bruce McCandless, STS-31 astronaut; Frank Borman, Apollo 8 astronaut; Paul Weitz, STS-6 astronaut; George Mueller, former associate administrator for manned space flight; Harrison Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut; Gene Cernan, Apollo 17 astronaut; Dick Gordon, Apollo 12 astronaut.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Typical save our pork letter?<br />
But the eight astronauts supporting private space are true champions of space exploration in your view. </p>
<p>Letter from several former astronauts and NASA administrators:</p>
<p>â€œWe are very concerned about America ceding its hard earned global leadership in space technology to other nations. We are stunned that, in a time of economic crisis, this move will force as many as 30,000 irreplaceable engineers and managers out of the space industry. We see our human exploration program, one of the most inspirational tools to promote science, technology, engineering and math to our young people, being reduced to mediocrity. NASAâ€™s human space program has inspired awe and wonder in all ages by pursuing the American tradition of exploring the unknown. We strongly urge you to drop this misguided proposal that forces NASA out of human space operations for the foreseeable futureâ€¦</p>
<p>â€œToo many men and women have worked too hard and sacrificed too much to achieve Americaâ€™s preeminence in space, only to see that effort needlessly thrown away. We urge you to demonstrate the vision and determination necessary to keep our nation at the forefront of human space exploration with ambitious goals and the proper resources to see them through. This is not the time to abandon the promise of the space frontier for a lack of will or an unwillingness to pay the price.â€</p>
<p>This statement was signed by Walter Cunningham, Apollo 7 astronaut; Chris Kraft former director of Johnson Space Center; Jack Lousma, Skylab 3 astronaut; Vance Brand, Apollo-Soyuz astronaut; Bob Crippen, former director of Kennedy Space Center; Michael D. Griffin, former NASA administrator; Ed Gibson, Skylab 4 astronaut; Jim Kennedy, former director of KSC; Alan Bean, Apollo 12 astronaut; Alfred M. Worden, Apollo 15 astronaut; Scott Carpenter, Mercury astronaut; Glynn Lunney, Gemini-Apollo flight director; Jim McDivitt, Apollo 9 astronaut; Gene Kranz, former director of NASA mission operations; Joe Kerwin, Skylab 2 astronaut; Fred Haise, Apollo 13 astronaut; Gerald Carr, Skylab 4 astronaut; Jim Lovell, Apollo 13 astronaut; Jake Garn, STS-51D astronaut; Charlie Duke, Apollo 16 astronaut; Bruce McCandless, STS-31 astronaut; Frank Borman, Apollo 8 astronaut; Paul Weitz, STS-6 astronaut; George Mueller, former associate administrator for manned space flight; Harrison Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut; Gene Cernan, Apollo 17 astronaut; Dick Gordon, Apollo 12 astronaut.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
