Comments Posted By R Gress
Displaying 1 To 2 Of 2 Comments


John Galt did a great job in describing NASA true role in conducting launch operations. It is already being done by private industry with NASA's role in launch ops not that much different than, say a commercial customer. Although NASA would have you think differently. I guess the question then is who should direct technical advancement? NASA has the power to kill directions by funding alternatives, in effect making it impossible to compete with a subsidized technology. So maybe it would be allowed to do only basic research?

Comment Posted By R Gress On 4.02.2010 @ 10:10

This is a step in the correct direction. NASA has lost the confidence of the industry. Here are just a few reasons why:

Space Station purpose was to give the Shuttle a place to go.

All most all of the NASA's launch vehicles and operations are the responsibility of commercial operations.

Both Challenger and Columbia showed NASA failed to follow its own saftey pollcies. In the case of Columbia, at least, there were several policies that were ignored. On example: concerns rasied in advance of the failure by a senior NASA safety official were put off and not pursued.

HASA, through it contracting initiatives, has done more to stiffle the growth of the industry by controlling the direction new developments (e.g., hybrid rocket technology).

Comment Posted By R Gress On 3.02.2010 @ 09:54



Pages (1) : [1]

«« Back To Stats Page