“It depends I guess if you mean in the “awesome” amazing department or in the “consternation” amazing department.”

That would be telling.

Well I don’t go for the low-cost, cheap version of anything. Especially by those proponents of the private sector. I think that such a program of scale as a time-machine, even the close-your-eyes kind, is the appanage of the, I mean THE, government. It’s been claimed for years now that even someone, some private investor, might build one in his garage (see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Time_Machine) yet they have to be able to take someone forth in time and bring them safely back to our time. I mean now. Today. Not that time that is going to be there in a minute or so – that is cheating and will not get you any street cred. If only they could build a sub-time machine.

“Sure. But Congress writes laws that say how much of that printed money each government agency can use, and NASA has been given limits to how much it can spend on the SLS. That was my point, budgets.”

Not only does Congress do that indeed, and then they write laws to sequester. What Congress gives, Congress takes. Guess they are all confused on who they are. Must be what they read, especially thousand years old books to which they refer to this day in all they do. Or something like that. But I digress again. Need to change my meds I am afraid.

“You have to click you heals and believe…”

Just did and nothing happened. Can’t trust those private sector people. All hat, no cattle.

“You would be amazed by how many things amaze me.”

It depends I guess if you mean in the “awesome” amazing department or in the “consternation” amazing department.

“I beg to differ but there are still open questions whether we can actually build a time machine”

I can build one that will send you into the future – close your eyes, and when you open them, you’ll be in the future. I’m still working on the version that sends you back in time, but, given enough time and money…

“As has been demonstrated we can always print money.”

Sure. But Congress writes laws that say how much of that printed money each government agency can use, and NASA has been given limits to how much it can spend on the SLS. That was my point, budgets.

“Nope, not even for SLS.”

I was being generous, hence the qualification “maybe”.

“I for one am still waiting for a link to his proposal.”

You have to click you heals and believe…

“Is it?”

You would be amazed by how many things amaze me.

Like what? What “fundamental concepts of design” or “engineering science” do you think you’ve put on display?

I beg to differ but there are still open questions whether we can actually build a time machine

“With that in mind, what you propose ignores time and money, specifically the political and fiscal realities that are present today.”

As DB9 would say (for some reason I suspect it is DB9 and not DBN) you are picking nits. As has been demonstrated we can always print money. And if you print it quickly enough, by the time the inflation sets in you have a lot of cash to do stuff. As for time. Well. Back to the time machine I guess. Dunno though.

“For instance, the SLS budget of today is maybe enough to do what Congress has asked for,”

Nope, not even for SLS. Congress is putting money for jobs not to design/build/utilize the SLS. Err. Maybe you meant to produce ppts? In that case I am wrong.

“but certainly not enough to do the significant changes you envision.”

I for one am still waiting for a link to his proposal. Or something. Hopefully not drafted on a napkin just like some other engineer used to do. I believe Picasso used to draft stuff on napkins too. But lucky him he made a living selling his drawings. Sorry I digress.

“And the political side of the equation is that NASA cannot deviate from the law specifying what the SLS will do, regardless how wonderful those capabilities may be.”

Surprisingly those who can only deviate from the law is Congress. Easy of course since they can always write the laws that they need.

“It’s amazing you don’t understand that.”

Is it? My friend you should get acquainted with self anointed rocket scientists or even those with degrees, e.g. (wink-wink – don’t ask I just like the sound of it) Mike Griffin who oddly enough also holds an MBA – hope it’s not an honorary MBA, does that exist?

Heyyyy!! You’re back, welcome back! However I have to say that I am actually pretty openminded and that my brain surgeon recently told me that more than that and my brain would spill on my shoulders.

“Thank you for your greeat contributions to rocket science.”

Again. You are w.e.l.co.m.e. even though “common sense” hasn’t contributed much to rocket science for quite some time now. Actually no. “Common sense” hasn’t contributed to rocket design for some time now. Because you know design is not quite like science, nor quite like politics either or physics for that matter. All this semantics thingy gives me a headache.

“I am in awe of the level of closed mindedness you display towards fundamental concepts of design and engineering science…”

From an engineering standpoint, I like to believe that there are no limits to what we can accomplish, given enough time and money.

With that in mind, what you propose ignores time and money, specifically the political and fiscal realities that are present today.

For instance, the SLS budget of today is maybe enough to do what Congress has asked for, but certainly not enough to do the significant changes you envision. And the political side of the equation is that NASA cannot deviate from the law specifying what the SLS will do, regardless how wonderful those capabilities may be.

It’s amazing you don’t understand that.

Thank you for your greeat contributions to rocket science.