Are you saying NSF is useless?

Just about.

You must be a scientist or something?

Has nothing to do with it.

On the other hand NASA HSF is really useful, right?

Didn’t say that either.

I’ll try again about this one. PICA requires tiles, AVCOAT is a honeycomb – no tiles. The problem with PICA is not PICA, it is the gap filler. The problem with the new AVCOAT is that it is not the Apollo AVCOAT since no one know how to make it again. So people please try and educate yourself a little. None of those heat shield is proven for lunar return velocity for different reasons. NASA thought PICA was enough of a liability that they went for AVCOAT. Who’s right? No one knows for sure. This is a non-debate. Then again people need to think or learn before they post…

And NASA will have no, zero, say on what to use for a non-NASA crew. Believe me there is a mile-long line for people to become crew at SpaceX. Including former or current NASA astronauts. What some fail to understand is what makes SpaceX strong: They will do it no matter what. They will send a crew to Space. All they will need is range approval and FAA approval. Not NASA’s.

Get over it.

“Without HSF, NASA is just the directionless trust fund buddy of the NSF–and just as useless.”

Are you saying NSF is useless? You must be a scientist or something? On the other hand NASA HSF is really useful, right?

Just watch NASA revert into something like NACA.

Oh well…

HSF at NASA is killing NASA as a whole.

Without HSF, NASA is just the directionless trust fund buddy of the NSF–and just as useless.

“NASA is dying and no one seems to know how to save it.”

It is a very sad statement but I think you are right. HSF at NASA is killing NASA as a whole. I don’t think though that “no one seems to know how to save it”. I think rather that “no one seems to know NASA is dying, not even NASA”. NASA is dying because of the stupidity of Congress. This WH had just found the beginning of a cure but unfortunately people in Congress do not want NASA to do anything but rather want NASA to “work”. The overall NASA-Industry-Congress complex is a joke run by lunatics.

However I will say this. If CCDev is successful then NASA HSF as we know it is over which means that NASA as we know it is over too. It will hurt, and very much so, because out of a sudden NASA HSF will no longer need $10B/yr. The new $64,000 question will be what will become of those $10B. Will NASA keep them for say BEO or will they be reallocated to more pressing needs?… What’s your guess? A crew to an asteroid or Moon or Mars or a little more for Social Security and our Boomer friends?… Hmmm. I wonder.

Oh well…

Space X has flown NOBODY

How many folk has Orion flown?

“Exactly what definition of “high gear research” applies to a $100 billion bubble hosting all of six people? Not billions upon billions of sunk dollars worth of useful experience, especially when you consider how minuscule the test sample is and what the alternatives are.”

H-m-m-m … interesting points, especially when I think back to how productive Skylab was for a fraction of the cost. Let’s just say that I’m hoping for some lemonade to be squeezed out of the ISS.

Of course, I really view the Moon as a natural ‘space station’ in a somewhat higher orbit — one that also offers natural resources to support it.

“It will almost certainly be done with a Falcon/Dragon…”

Rubbish. It’s almost certainly wont be. As 2010 comes to a close, Space X has flown NOBODY. There is no independent verification as to the veracity or post-flight data analysis independently verified on the performance of Dragon- aka Cheesebox One– as well from its orbital flight. But if you have some, please share w/t class, as investors would like to know. Dragon may be a gem or a deathtrap. There’s no independent verfication if it was survivable for anything other than some cheese. And there’s no independent verfication if Space X even has a viable, reliable, operational ECS. Again, investors would like to know.

“Burt [Rutan] has retired.” Apparently ‘retirement’ means inactivity to you.

“I never said they would. Not if it’s part of a coordinated effort. This whole exchange has become rather pointless, don’t you think?”

Maybe you were debating some sort of finer point, but I don’t think I’m the only one confused by what you’re trying to imply (NASA would/would not like it if Canada uses SpaceX to travel to the ISS).

See you on some other topic…