10 thoughts on “On The Misreporting By The Houston Chronicle”

  1. The comment section on the National Review is a wasteland of intellectual honesty isn’t it? People who start sentences with “as far as I know” and then get uppity when you inform them of their ignorance? Perhaps they meant to type “as far as I’m willing to learn..”

  2. The comment section on the National Review is a wasteland of intellectual honesty isn’t it?

    Does that distinguish it in some useful way from the comment section at other web sites? Like Space Politics?

  3. From the first article: “It is true that “Only NASA” has designed and built rockets for HSF.”

    Not exactly. NASA didn’t design and build either the Atlas used for Mercury or the Titan II used for Gemini HSF missions.

  4. “It is true that “Only NASA” has designed and built rockets for HSF”

    SpaceShipOne was human spaceflight ( albeit brief )

  5. Is 7% an unusually large percentage to spend on cancelled projects? Most of my time at General Dynamics was spent on projects that never made it to production, everything from F-16/79 to F-16XL to High-Mach (i.e. Mach 6-8) to Ejector STOVL (E-7) to NASP to many projects I’m still not allowed to discuss. I’m glad ATF (F-22) made it to production, but Obama cancelled that, too. When I was at Pratt & Whitney I was lucky to work on F119, but my counterparts at General Electric were s.o.l….

  6. I agree that seven percent isn’t an unreasonable number. They should have pointed out that it’s a larger percentage of the NASA space budget, and almost all of the budget devoted to developing new launch systems. Have you noticed that NASA hasn’t actually successfully developed one in over three decades?

  7. I should have wrote this earlier: Please Rand, don’t drive any traffic over to the Houston Chronicle. It’s rarely read by the locals. You don’t need to give it attention.

Comments are closed.