Your nice private space fantasy ignores some basic problems.

1. Liquid rocket engines can be built for one mission or they can be built for
multiple missions. The one High ISP engine built for reuse- the SSME- is
extremely expensive. For upper stages the liquid hydrogen, liquid oxygen
combination is unbeatable. At the other pole is the RS-68, which is much cheaper
(but definitely not cheap) but burns itself into junk and is thrown away. These
two poles in liquid engine design are not going to go away until some wishalloy
comes along.

2. Solid rockets like the SRB have evolved into extremely reliable and powerful
first stage components. Over two hundred flawless firings of the 3 million plus
pound SRB prove this without a doubt. They are expensive, not as safe to handle
on the ground, and not environmentally very clean. They also have low ISP
numbers that make them acceptable first stages but not very efficient at all as
an upper stage. But per pound of thrust there is nothing else as simple,
powerful, reliable, and……reusable. This situation is not going to go away until
some unobtainium (like ALICE aluminum ice propellant) comes along.

3. With half the globe covered with splash down sites, there is no other better
method of returning to earth from space than parachuting into the ocean. Along
with the ablative heat shield, the technique allows for the lightest possible
space craft- the capsule. The escape tower complements the capsule and these
designs from the late 1950′s have not been improved upon in half a century. The
laws of physics and materials being what they are- this is not likely to change
either.

Conclusion: Since mixing cargo and crew is not economical, separate vehicles- a
small human-rated launcher and a large Heavy Launch Vehicle, is the logical
system. Using as few engines and stages as practical make make the following
ideal launch stack; SRB first stage (reusable), and expendable Lox/H2 second
stage, an ocean recovery ablative heat shield capsule (reusable), and an escape
tower.

And this is exactly the vehicle proposed in Constellation. And just as the
shuttle was underfunded, so was Constellation. There is no cheap- space travel
is inherently expensive.

The private space enthusiasts usually melt down when presented with such
concepts- but people who know what will work have been thinking about the best
designs for decades and wishing for cheap does not make it so.

“The external threats to earth are no different than it was 150 years ago.”

Proof that we are too stupid to survive. Again.

Which again goes to the point – its time you put up or shut up.

Proof that we are too stupid to survive. Again.

Controling only one voice in the choir is not as good as controling the whole choir. Money is the grease and ad revenue or membership revenue gives your voice a whole lot more leverage.

If you REALLY gave a shit, you’d RELOCATE in order to have a say. But you don’t.

Another idiotic statement by samms. What changed in the 50 years that makes it so urgent to leave earth? The external threats to earth are no different than it was 150 years ago. There was no urgency to leave then.
As for “We are too stupid to survive”, you must have a mouse in your pocket.

“We are going to go extinct. How’s that for hopeless? We are too stupid to survive. ”

– Yeah let’s all bail out from Earth!!! Let’s build a mega rocket for a crew of 6!!! We are going to be extinct!!!

– When?

– Someday!

Hope you get better Ferris.
I do write letters to my reps. But not being in one of the space districts I usually get replies back of the “thank you but we support programs that help people” nature.

I could start a Mothers against drunk drivers kind of grass roots organization but the problem is after the earth gets run over by a comet there won’t be anyone left to organize. I am thinking of building some kind of a time capsule leaving a message for future alien archeologists. I want them to know that not all of our species were idiots and some of us understood what life is all about- staying alive.

We are going to go extinct. How’s that for hopeless? We are too stupid to survive. Byeman is proof of it.

AIAA has indeed released their Key Issues for 2011, contrary to your above post. The issues are available at http://www.aiaa.org/pdf/public/AIAA_2011_Key_Issues.pdf

Our 2011 issues are:

1. Strategy for Recovering Business and General Aviation

2. Harnessing Aerospace Experience and Capabilities for Achieving Modern Earth and Climate Information Systems and Services

3. Enabling Development of Alternative Fuels and Energy Efficient Aviation Systems

4. Overcoming the Emerging Technology Acquisition “Valley of Death”

5. Establishing and Implementing a Viable National Cybersecurity Strategy

6. Improved Air Cargo Security and Scanning

7. Address the Growing Threat of Orbital Debris

8. Assuring Strategic and Sustainable Direction for Space Policy

9. Increasing Emphasis and Funding for Technology and Engineering in STEM

10. Recruiting, Retaining, and Developing a World-Class Aerospace Workforce

If you would like further information on these issues, or a copy of AIAA’s position papers on these issues, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Duane Hyland
AIAA Communications
Grass Roots Public Policy Coordinator