On Sat, 8 Feb 2003, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > They are neither in the regulatory path nor in the legislative path; they
> > simply have no power to do such things.
>
> I said try. I didn't say suceed. The attempt itself would be painful
> to us.
They're not even in a position to try, much less succeed. I still say
you're inventing bogeymen under the bed, without any foundation in fact.
> > ...Nothing of the sort was happening
> > five years ago, when innovative launch looked like *much* more of a
> > threat to NASA than it does now.
>
> Comparing what I knew of the situation then to what I know now, I'd say
> it's much more of a threat now than back then.
What on Earth are you talking about? Five years ago, the LEO comsat
market was looking strong, Kistler, Rotary Rocket, and Microcosm were
building hardware, Pioneer and USL were looking like they would start
soon, and even VentureStar looked like a going concern for LockMart.
Today, the situation is much grimmer: most of those efforts are dead or
effectively so, and near-term innovator interest is mostly in suborbital
flight, which is no threat to NASA.
> Besides, you're referring to
> what NASA's own contractors were doing on NASA contracts, right?
Wrong; I said "innovative".
Henry Spencer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
ERPS-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
