And it makes me wonder:
Was Apollo-era NASA morphed into something relatively useless by the political culture of the day?
IOW, was NASA capable of being the boldly going frontier trail blazer but became instead the moribund, over-fearful pork spending muscle bound caricature of our hopes?
The Bush plan is far too timid and slow, where the clinton era NASA was deluding itself with FBC. Both plans get too little done and cost too much for what they do get done, if for nothing else the opportunity costs involved.
A ballistic type 'cheap' and dependable crew transport system could be built in a very few years and be fully operational.
A tug to move around in orbit and even up to geosynchronus could be developed nearly as fast and parked at the ISS.
A lunar orbital vehicle could be built and stay in space permanantly.
A lander is doable. A prefab lunar habitat is very attainable.
We should be building the inflatable orbitable hantitat.
I think a plan with many achievable milestones is much better than one big multigenerational push.
If Pres. Bush is hoping to be remembered as the leader who got us back into space, something incremental will have to be developed.
Ed
Ed