Hey, Chairman Palazzo. It was George Bush, not Barack Obama, who made us dependent on Russia for access to ISS. And it’s your unwillingness to properly fund the “costly and complex distraction” of commercial crew that keeps us that way. But don’t let reality get in the way of your pork.
10 thoughts on ““Costly And Complex Distractions” From NASA’s Budget”
Comments are closed.
Pallazo may well have meant commercial crew, but, in fairness, he didn’t actually say that. What he actually said was carefully crafted to be vague and opaque – and for that alone, no matter what he meant, he deserves ridicule.
We don’t actually know what he was talking about. And, almost certainly, neither does he.
He’s one Republican that I hope is defeated this year. Preferably in a primary, but if not, in November. He’s disqualified himself from office via his love of the trough.
Not on topic, but this is the most awesome article I’ve read in a while:
http://guardianlv.com/2014/04/spacex-could-be-the-next-space-station/
“SpaceX could be the next space station”
Read the whole thing.
I do not think english was the author’s primary language… it was pretty bad, from facts to grammer, clearly out of the author’s depth.
I’m wondering if it’s the end result of a Google Translate (could Google discover what language it was initially?). It’s kind of a puzzle: for each nonsensical phrase, can I figure out what actual fact is being referenced?
Oh the irony. SLS and Orion is pumping billions a year into a black hole that probably won’t see results until 2020, and even then won’t be terribly useful except for a small number of missions. Meanwhile, a relative pittance is being spent on commercial crew development, and in the process realizing not one but three different crew transportation systems.
But… we could use SLS/Orion to replace Russian rides to ISS. Two flights a year would do it, and the little detail that we’d be building at most one SLS every two years shouldn’t stand in the way of launching it twice a year is just one of those complex distractions we don’t need to worry about. 🙂
The head of the Michoud plant remarked last year that he thought they could turn out two SLSes a year if the money were available. The fact that SLS is grossly oversized and overpriced for Orion-to-ISS missions is, I’m sure, something that Mr. Pallazo considers strongly in its favor.
Alarmingly, the Russians are said to have developed a flight vehicle whose cost per seat is much lower than the SLS/Orion, and rumor has it they developed it in the 1960’s.
Irony indeed….yet another example that when private businesses are using their money as well as others, there’s colossal pressure to be efficient with the money.
As opposed to government where there’s actually pressure to be inefficient with the use of other people’s money.
Taxed Enough Already. The ability to waste money is bounded by the ability to borrow and tax… and the morons that vote them in.