Spot on. Griffin's attitude illustrates why NASA is not running a space program. It's a jobs program. It's sustained only because local congresscritters can get re-elected by keeping tens of thousands of jobs in NASA facilities.
The DC-X was an example of a successfull low cost program not requiring a huge ground support crew. SpaceShipOne was another. Neither were orbital craft but the basic approach to the design of the flight vehicle differed markedly from NASA's penchant for complexity. Recycled Shuttle hardware is too expensive to fly because of the inherent costs. We will not be able to afford a return to the moon program whose very foundation is seriously flawed.
I predict a space station redux cancellation of the return to the moon program once the euphoria subsides and the operational costs really come to the fore. We'll return to the moon only when some individual eventually funds a private, low cost mission.
Space/Science » in reply to re: Shuttle shutdown savings?: Griffin or Zubrin
The NASA Jobs Program
The whole thread (48 posts)
- Shuttle shutdown savings?: Griffin or Zubrin
- Rarely works that way
- The Difference
- PS
- "Start with different requirements and you will end with different solutions."
- re: "Start with different requirements and you will end with different solutions."
- "Start with different requirements and you will end with different solutions."
- PS
- neither one has a clue
- re: Shuttle shutdown savings?: Griffin or Zubrin
- re: Shuttle shutdown savings?: Griffin or Zubrin