I, too, was hoping for a serious reply... But as for:

>>> I'm not familiar with prizes being offered by the DARPA program.<<<

That's because you would prefer to bawk at:

http://www.spaceprojects.com/prizes

without even reading it beforehand. But anyhow, as for:

>>>If you honestly think informing oon someone's location is as technically challenging as a space mission, that would explain a lot. <<<<

Did you see the movie Hannibal, starring Anthony Hopkins as Dr. Lecter? Touché ;-) But seriously:

>>>Your accuracy is also suspect since the award was not the source of the information on Saddam's location.<<<

I fail to see where you've refuted my somewhat vague reference to the "up-in-the-air" Saddam Hussein reward, even as you nevertheless questioned its accuracy.

>>>The X-prize has not been claimed<<<<

NASA's $15 billion annual budget could help make the recently endowed $10 million dollar X-Prize less tiny and more enduring, but that hasn't happened for reasons that another poster in this forum just helped make clear: parasitic bureaucrats, predatorily monopolistic contractors and their political sycophants. If you're not part of the solution, aren't you a part of the problem?

>>> and it is not even for an Earth orbit mission let alone one to another body. Burt Rutan is a prime example of an outsider with a big mouth IMO.<<<<

That's better than being a NASA sycophant with a small mind, IMO. I'm not directing that quip at YOU, though.

>>> He is a fantastic engineer with a great record of accomplishment, but until he acomplished even one percent as much as NASA has I consider his comments extremely arrogant.<<<<

Has he had even so much as 1% of NASA's spaceflight budget to work with? And yet you think it's fair to make the comparison? Talk about victim-blaming. Is the legal climate not harsh on entrepreneurs while forgiving of those in the NASA clique? Feel free to see another space entrepreneur's account:

http://www.SpaceProjects.com/Beal

>>>> His famous comment "Space isn't hard NASA just makes it so" is obviously wrong based on the huge failure rate of those trying to privatize spaceflight.<<<<<

Hence, I suppose that legal reforms which could make life less unfair for such entrepreneurs should somehow NOT be enacted:

http://www.spaceprojects.com/reforms

>>>Your comments on Musk are hilarious.<<<

As are yours regarding numerous sub-topics in this thread.

>>> Musk appears to represent what will really get us into space for good. A private effort with realistic budgets, financing, and sales plan.<<<<

Sales plan? Don't you mean the pursuit of tax-leeching government contracts? Meanwhile, have any of Elon's other ventures ever made a profit? You nevertheless think that Space X will succeed? I sincerely HOPE that Space X DOES succeed, but to hold him up as a paradigm-definer seems premature, doesn't it?

>>> If you want to harness the power of competitive capitalism this is the way to do it not some prize program unlikely to attract investors.<<<<

I suppose that's why some at SpaceX fervently oppose the emergence of competitive prizes, because they could erode SpaceX's competitive advantage where financing's concerned?

>>> The X-prize people are after a space tourism market. The X-prize is more of a marketing tool than a real incentive for them.<<<<

As small and non-enduring as the X-Prize is, why should this surprise anyone?

>RE: "Actually, that sounds like the current contract bidding scenario."<
>>>Nothing says clueless about business like that comment. Cost plus contracts are the ultimate in low business risk and the exact opposite of working for no pay.<<<

I suppose you've never heard complaints from a bidder whose bid was rejected? And yet somehow it's ME who is "clueless".

>RE: "How is minimizing profit my goal? Maximizing productivity, dollar-for-dollar, is."<

>>>You want to reduce how much the government spends on space. Without some huge increase in efficiency that means reducing profits for the aerospace industry.<<<<

You haven't studied much in the way of economics. Did government expenditures in the computing realm increase even as Microsoft made a fortune putting computers in most households?

>>> That would be fine with me if it worked, but you need to think through the consequences of your goals better.<<<<

And you, the consequences of your sometimes poorly reasoned comments.

>>> For instance, you also want work done for no pay. That is a gauranteed loss for everyone who does not win the prize.<<<<

Not necessarily. There are alternative markets which could rationalize the pursuit of prizes that a team ultimately doesn't win. Lindberg won the prize for crossing the Atlantic, but other teams competed and likely profited somehow in the aftermath.

>>>This applies to all bidding work, but the cost is usually small compared to the final contract.<<<

Even though where NASA's concerned, the end result isn't usually that much different: viewgraphs vs. tangibly progressive results. Look at how the cost of launching Americans into space via NASA has gone nowhere but UP over the decades, even as prices DECREASE with time in other industries. Ah but space is hard, you say. I almost forgot. Yes yes, good show. Sure, I'll cough up more tax dollars now.

>>>>Private planes were flying all over Europe and America when Lindberg made his flight. His triumph was in planning and endurance not a leap in technology.<<<<

No technological progress resulted from Lindy's endeavor?

>>> Again you seem to be confusing spaceflight with far simpler tasks typically or historically associated with prizes. There is a huge difference between offering prizes for something anyone can do (fugitive rewads),<<<<<

re-wads? That almost sounds like restocking paper towels in kitchens or something. But nobody ever accused you of taking a lot of time in offering your "reasoned" and insulting rebuttals. That's hardly your only misspelling in your latest condescending post, or else I'd have overlooked it.

>>>stretching the limits of technology (Lindberg & other explorers), and developing new technology. Regards, Mark<<<<

Gosh, the reform proposal hasn't been proven to work perfectly, even as the status quo is far from perfect. Ergo let's stick with the stagnating status quo.

That kind of thinking DESERVES the following reward, which has already materialized:

http://www.spaceprojects.com/launch

Happy Holidays,
SP