“The best part of forums like this. is that many of the people who post are industry insiders. The worst part of forums like this, is that many of the people who post here are industry insiders.”

I did not get involved in the space debate until earlier this year, so I guess I’m rather new in this area in that respect, and I’m a space enthusiast, not an insider. I do agree that insiders have their pro’s and con’s, but I guess that could be said about anyone with a point of view.

I have stated that I see these forums as a place to discuss, debate and learn, and I have certainly done all three. I have even changed my views on a number of key areas during this year, mainly because I was persuaded by facts I did not know about earlier.

So I guess it depends on the insider, and it depends how well the insider wants to persuade. Links and verifiable facts count a lot for me, as you never know who is behind most of the names (like mine) – the old “trust, but verify”.

In the end though, there are points of view that can’t be changed, no matter the current facts, and I have just tried to scroll past those, as I’m sure they do mine. Free speech rocks!

The best part of forums like this. is that many of the people who post are industry insiders. The worst part of forums like this, is that many of the people who post here are industry insiders.

“I realize that but I am afraid DCSCA might reach out to other people using some techno babble.”

Well he tries, but then he starts talking about Conestoga I, sixties type sub-orbital flights and “Destination Moon”, at which point people just get blurry-eyed. Notice how no one joins in to agree or support him.

If you can elicit specific answers to specific questions, more power to you. So far he has avoided them like the plague, since he thinks of himself as “above the fray”, and will “Gaetano-like” copy/paste his non-debatable ideas, with no questions answered.

“He doesn’t care. All he wants to do is mock SpaceX and Musk. He has no interest in debate or discussion, and he would rather copy/paste his arguments than respond.”

I realize that but I am afraid DCSCA might reach out to other people using some techno babble. I would love to see a real sound argument as to why it might be a good idea. You never know. Again, DCSCA seems to associate with others on the various threads, somehow. I am not interested in most what they claim since most of the time it is unsubstantiated but they seem to have reached out to more, say, credulous people that have similar inclination towards space policy. So until DCSCA comes up with a real argument to me it is just noise but some time loud noise prevails. Unfortunately.

“@ DCSCA wrote @ September 8th, 2010 at 4:37 am

It is unfortunate but you really don’t know what you’re talking about.”

He doesn’t care. All he wants to do is mock SpaceX and Musk. He has no interest in debate or discussion, and he would rather copy/paste his arguments than respond.

It is unfortunate but you really don’t know what you’re talking about. And here, look since you are suggesting the suborbital hop, please tell us in what way it validates systems for LEO reentry. Please do. Show us all that you have good knowledge of these systems. Especially a system designed for LEO reentry. It looks to me you only care about stunts. Prove me wrong. You are just throwing words and hoping they will catch. If I were a SpaceX investor and they’d go for a stunt I’d probably take my money back. Stunt is not a good commercial move. Investors and entrepreneurs alike are adults, businessmen.

Oh well…

A successful, suborbital manned test flight by SpaceX would verify their hardware and systems, ‘man-rate’ them on SpaceX’s terms; validate any loan guarantees or subsidy requests from the U.S. Treasury for commercial space and broaden public support for those requests. And the cost of the flight would be well worth these returns at this point in time. It should be easier today than it was for NASA when it lofted Shepard w/a 60% success reliability rate for propelled rockets for missiles 50 years ago.

A suborbital manned test flight(s) would bolster confidence within the general space community as well as the investor class– and go a long way in silencing skeptics in Congress and other critics as well. Musk is a savvy marketer and given the economic pressures of the leading edge of the Age of Austerity, it’s a smart move to make.

Yes, it would. And persistent excuses to avoid manned test flights is oddly disturbing. It only fuels the suspicion that the risk to commerical space of a catastrophic loss of vehicle and crew out weighs the obvious political and economic rewards of a success at this point in time. And, of course, a parachute ‘drop test’ from a chopper at 15,000 of an unmanned boilerplate is hardly a test on par with an integrated systems test from velocities from a ballistic reentry. But you know that. The smart move is to fly some one and validate the systems on your own terms. It would take the wind out of the sails of skeptics in Congress and obstructionists to subsidies and loan guarantees.