RE: Reality Check Time
talking about cooperation with china during a discussion titled "reality check time". best laugh i had all day. :) -a.j. --- Robert Crawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Chinese. > > Robert Crawley > Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. > Programming > (936) 449-6823 > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:owner-europa@;klx.com]On Behalf Of Reeve, > Jack W. > Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 8:33 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Reality Check Time > > > CSA? Are we referencing the California Space > Authority, the Canadian Space > Agency or who? > > Jack W. Reeve > Marketing Specialist > INTEQ Drilling Fluids > Houston, TX > Tel: 713 625 5525 > Mob:713 254 9673 > Fax: 713 625 6001 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -Original Message- > From: Robert Crawley > [mailto:programming-epfi@;txucom.net] > Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:08 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Reality Check Time > > > My first choice would be the CSA over NASA. > > Robert Crawley > Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. > Programming > (936) 449-6823 > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:owner-europa@;klx.com]On Behalf Of A.J. > Mackenzie > Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:31 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Reality Check Time > > > --- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want > to > > see concrete evidence > > that their money is going to be well spent and > > administered properly (snide > > remark: Not like NASA!) > > i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant > people > like to pick on nasa for its perceived inability to > spend money wisely, but if you actually talk to the > people who work there, or get their money from nasa, > you'll get a different story. it would be unwise to > make unprofessional and inaccurate comments about an > agency that is one of your most logical choices for > grant money. > > > -a.j. > > > ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the html > option when you post messages? you may think it > makes > your messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :) > > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos > http://launch.yahoo.com/u2 > == > You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing > list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Project information and list (un)subscribe info: > http://klx.com/europa/ > > == > You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing > list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Project information and list (un)subscribe info: > http://klx.com/europa/ > == > You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing > list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Project information and list (un)subscribe info: > http://klx.com/europa/ > > == > You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing > list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Project information and list (un)subscribe info: > http://klx.com/europa/ > __ Do you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos http://launch.yahoo.com/u2 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Reality Check Time
hinese rocket scientists. And no, I am not ignoring that Icepick folks come from many countries, I am only speaking for those from the USA and how I fear the Government might react to the situation. Of course the opposite might occur if the USA wants at least the appearance of better relations with China (note how they stopped being the new "bad guys" after September 11, 2001) by having a group of Americans working with China to explore space, kind of a modern-day Apollo-Soyuz. I am sure that down the road China has plans for exploring beyond Luna and Mars. Working together might have all sorts of financial and political benefits. And heck, it'll be a variation on giving Arthur C. Clarke yet another space prediction come true via 2010: Odyssey Two. :^) In the novel (but not the 1984 film version), the Chinese beat the USA to Europa with a manned landing mission, only to have it sink through the ice right as one of their astronauts discover a life form swimming underneath the ice towards the lander. Larry - Original Message - From: Reeve, Jack W. Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 10:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time I spent 4 of the last 5 years in China. Cool people in the midst of arenaissance. Any pursuit which they can spin to make it appear that theyare actively entering the world community is one they'll look at.Jack You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ Sincerely James McEnanly Do you Yahoo!?U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CDSincerely James McEnanlyDo you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
Re: Reality Check Time
I have found this article on the Chinese Manned Space program (Shenzou) They seem to be going very slowly, as compared to similar stages in the US and Russian programs. LARRY KLAES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: One major hurdle with working with China will be political. I doubt the US Government in its current anti-foreign mode would want American people being funded by and working with Chinese rocket scientists. And no, I am not ignoring that Icepick folks come from many countries, I am only speaking for those from the USA and how I fear the Government might react to the situation. Of course the opposite might occur if the USA wants at least the appearance of better relations with China (note how they stopped being the new "bad guys" after September 11, 2001) by having a group of Americans working with China to explore space, kind of a modern-day Apollo-Soyuz. I am sure that down the road China has plans for exploring beyond Luna and Mars. Working together might have all sorts of financial and political benefits. And heck, it'll be a variation on giving Arthur C. Clarke yet another space prediction come true via 2010: Odyssey Two. :^) In the novel (but not the 1984 film version), the Chinese beat the USA to Europa with a manned landing mission, only to have it sink through the ice right as one of their astronauts discover a life form swimming underneath the ice towards the lander. Larry - Original Message - From: Reeve, Jack W. Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 10:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time I spent 4 of the last 5 years in China. Cool people in the midst of arenaissance. Any pursuit which they can spin to make it appear that theyare actively entering the world community is one they'll look at.Jack -Original Message-From: Robert Crawley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:50 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Reality Check TimeChinese.Robert CrawleyElite Precision Fabricators, Inc.Programming(936) 449-6823-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Reeve,Jack W.Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 8:33 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Reality Check TimeCSA? Are we referencing the California Space Authority, the Canadian SpaceAgency or who?Jack W. ReeveMarketing SpecialistINTEQ Drilling FluidsHouston, TXTel: 713 625 5525Mob: 713 254 9673Fax: 713 625 6001[EMAIL PROTECTED]-Original Message-From: Robert Crawley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:08To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Reality Check TimeMy first choice would be the CSA over NASA.Robert CrawleyElite Precision Fabricators, Inc.Programming(936) 449-6823-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of A.J.MackenzieSent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:31 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Reality Check Time--- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to> see concrete evidence> that their money is going to be well spent and> administered properly (snide> remark: Not ! like NASA!)i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant peoplelike to pick on nasa for its perceived inability tospend money wisely, but if you actually talk to thepeople who work there, or get their money from nasa,you'll get a different story. it would be unwise tomake unprofessional and inaccurate comments about anagency that is one of your most logical choices forgrant money.-a.j.ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the htmloption when you post messages? you may think it makesyour messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :)__Do you Yahoo!?U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videoshttp://launch.yahoo.com/u2==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/==You are subscribed to th! e Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/Sincerely James McEnanlyDo you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
RE: Reality Check Time
Chinese/American relations right now are pretty much at an all time high. President Jiang visited with Bush in Houston the other weekend. First stop, Johnson Space Center. Jiang is about to retire and is naming Hu Jianto (the vice-president) his successor. We’ll have to see how things go under him, but I expect similar to our experiences with Jiang. Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of LARRY KLAES Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 1:16 PM To: europa Subject: Re: Reality Check Time One major hurdle with working with China will be political. I doubt the US Government in its current anti-foreign mode would want American people being funded by and working with Chinese rocket scientists. And no, I am not ignoring that Icepick folks come from many countries, I am only speaking for those from the USA and how I fear the Government might react to the situation. Of course the opposite might occur if the USA wants at least the appearance of better relations with China (note how they stopped being the new "bad guys" after September 11, 2001) by having a group of Americans working with China to explore space, kind of a modern-day Apollo-Soyuz. I am sure that down the road China has plans for exploring beyond Luna and Mars. Working together might have all sorts of financial and political benefits. And heck, it'll be a variation on giving Arthur C. Clarke yet another space prediction come true via 2010: Odyssey Two. :^) In the novel (but not the 1984 film version), the Chinese beat the USA to Europa with a manned landing mission, only to have it sink through the ice right as one of their astronauts discover a life form swimming underneath the ice towards the lander. Larry - Original Message - From: Reeve, Jack W. Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 10:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time I spent 4 of the last 5 years in China. Cool people in the midst of a renaissance. Any pursuit which they can spin to make it appear that they are actively entering the world community is one they'll look at. Jack -Original Message- From: Robert Crawley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:50 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time Chinese. Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Reeve, Jack W. Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 8:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time CSA? Are we referencing the California Space Authority, the Canadian Space Agency or who? Jack W. Reeve Marketing Specialist INTEQ Drilling Fluids Houston, TX Tel: 713 625 5525 Mob: 713 254 9673 Fax: 713 625 6001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Robert Crawley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:08 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time My first choice would be the CSA over NASA. Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of A.J. Mackenzie Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Reality Check Time --- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to > see concrete evidence > that their money is going to be well spent and > administered properly (snide > remark: Not like NASA!) i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant people like to pick on nasa for its perceived inability to spend money wisely, but if you actually talk to the people who work there, or get their money from nasa, you'll get a different story. it would be unwise to make unprofessional and inaccurate comments about an agency that is one of your most logical choices for grant money. -a.j. ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the html option when you post messages? you may think it makes your messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :) __ Do you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos http://launch.yahoo.com/u2 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project inform
Re: Reality Check Time
One major hurdle with working with China will be political. I doubt the US Government in its current anti-foreign mode would want American people being funded by and working with Chinese rocket scientists. And no, I am not ignoring that Icepick folks come from many countries, I am only speaking for those from the USA and how I fear the Government might react to the situation. Of course the opposite might occur if the USA wants at least the appearance of better relations with China (note how they stopped being the new "bad guys" after September 11, 2001) by having a group of Americans working with China to explore space, kind of a modern-day Apollo-Soyuz. I am sure that down the road China has plans for exploring beyond Luna and Mars. Working together might have all sorts of financial and political benefits. And heck, it'll be a variation on giving Arthur C. Clarke yet another space prediction come true via 2010: Odyssey Two. :^) In the novel (but not the 1984 film version), the Chinese beat the USA to Europa with a manned landing mission, only to have it sink through the ice right as one of their astronauts discover a life form swimming underneath the ice towards the lander. Larry - Original Message - From: Reeve, Jack W. Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 10:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time I spent 4 of the last 5 years in China. Cool people in the midst of arenaissance. Any pursuit which they can spin to make it appear that theyare actively entering the world community is one they'll look at.Jack -Original Message-From: Robert Crawley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:50 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Reality Check TimeChinese.Robert CrawleyElite Precision Fabricators, Inc.Programming(936) 449-6823-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Reeve,Jack W.Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 8:33 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Reality Check TimeCSA? Are we referencing the California Space Authority, the Canadian SpaceAgency or who?Jack W. ReeveMarketing SpecialistINTEQ Drilling FluidsHouston, TXTel: 713 625 5525Mob: 713 254 9673Fax: 713 625 6001[EMAIL PROTECTED]-Original Message-From: Robert Crawley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:08To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Reality Check TimeMy first choice would be the CSA over NASA.Robert CrawleyElite Precision Fabricators, Inc.Programming(936) 449-6823-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of A.J.MackenzieSent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:31 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Reality Check Time--- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to> see concrete evidence> that their money is going to be well spent and> administered properly (snide> remark: Not like NASA!)i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant peoplelike to pick on nasa for its perceived inability tospend money wisely, but if you actually talk to thepeople who work there, or get their money from nasa,you'll get a different story. it would be unwise tomake unprofessional and inaccurate comments about anagency that is one of your most logical choices forgrant money.-a.j.ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the htmloption when you post messages? you may think it makesyour messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :)__Do you Yahoo!?U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videoshttp://launch.yahoo.com/u2==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Reality Check Time
I spent 4 of the last 5 years in China. Cool people in the midst of a renaissance. Any pursuit which they can spin to make it appear that they are actively entering the world community is one they'll look at. Jack -Original Message- From: Robert Crawley [mailto:programming-epfi@;txucom.net] Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:50 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time Chinese. Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-europa@;klx.com]On Behalf Of Reeve, Jack W. Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 8:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time CSA? Are we referencing the California Space Authority, the Canadian Space Agency or who? Jack W. Reeve Marketing Specialist INTEQ Drilling Fluids Houston, TX Tel: 713 625 5525 Mob:713 254 9673 Fax: 713 625 6001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Robert Crawley [mailto:programming-epfi@;txucom.net] Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:08 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time My first choice would be the CSA over NASA. Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-europa@;klx.com]On Behalf Of A.J. Mackenzie Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Reality Check Time --- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to > see concrete evidence > that their money is going to be well spent and > administered properly (snide > remark: Not like NASA!) i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant people like to pick on nasa for its perceived inability to spend money wisely, but if you actually talk to the people who work there, or get their money from nasa, you'll get a different story. it would be unwise to make unprofessional and inaccurate comments about an agency that is one of your most logical choices for grant money. -a.j. ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the html option when you post messages? you may think it makes your messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :) __ Do you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos http://launch.yahoo.com/u2 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Reality Check Time
Chinese. Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-europa@;klx.com]On Behalf Of Reeve, Jack W. Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 8:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time CSA? Are we referencing the California Space Authority, the Canadian Space Agency or who? Jack W. Reeve Marketing Specialist INTEQ Drilling Fluids Houston, TX Tel: 713 625 5525 Mob:713 254 9673 Fax: 713 625 6001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Robert Crawley [mailto:programming-epfi@;txucom.net] Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:08 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time My first choice would be the CSA over NASA. Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-europa@;klx.com]On Behalf Of A.J. Mackenzie Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Reality Check Time --- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to > see concrete evidence > that their money is going to be well spent and > administered properly (snide > remark: Not like NASA!) i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant people like to pick on nasa for its perceived inability to spend money wisely, but if you actually talk to the people who work there, or get their money from nasa, you'll get a different story. it would be unwise to make unprofessional and inaccurate comments about an agency that is one of your most logical choices for grant money. -a.j. ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the html option when you post messages? you may think it makes your messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :) __ Do you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos http://launch.yahoo.com/u2 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Reality Check Time
Robert Crawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Consider that like most government agencies,NASA has to make decisions that are politically correct. If an agency fails to put an important operation in the proper congressional district, there will be trouble.-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of A.J.MackenzieSent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:31 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Reality Check Time--- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:> 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to> see concrete evidence> that their money is going to be well spent and> administered properly (snide> remark: Not like NASA!)i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant peoplelike to pick on nasa for its perceived inability tospend money wisely, but if you actually talk to thepeople who work there,! or get their money from nasa,you'll get a different story. it would be unwise tomake unprofessional and inaccurate comments about anagency that is one of your most logical choices forgrant money.-a.j.ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the htmloption when you post messages? you may think it makesyour messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :)__Do you Yahoo!?U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videoshttp://launch.yahoo.com/u2==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/Sincerely James McEnanlyDo you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD
RE: Reality Check Time
CSA? Are we referencing the California Space Authority, the Canadian Space Agency or who? Jack W. Reeve Marketing Specialist INTEQ Drilling Fluids Houston, TX Tel: 713 625 5525 Mob:713 254 9673 Fax: 713 625 6001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Robert Crawley [mailto:programming-epfi@;txucom.net] Sent: Tuesday 12 November 2002 08:08 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time My first choice would be the CSA over NASA. Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-europa@;klx.com]On Behalf Of A.J. Mackenzie Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Reality Check Time --- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to > see concrete evidence > that their money is going to be well spent and > administered properly (snide > remark: Not like NASA!) i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant people like to pick on nasa for its perceived inability to spend money wisely, but if you actually talk to the people who work there, or get their money from nasa, you'll get a different story. it would be unwise to make unprofessional and inaccurate comments about an agency that is one of your most logical choices for grant money. -a.j. ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the html option when you post messages? you may think it makes your messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :) __ Do you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos http://launch.yahoo.com/u2 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Reality Check Time
My first choice would be the CSA over NASA. Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-europa@;klx.com]On Behalf Of A.J. Mackenzie Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Reality Check Time --- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to > see concrete evidence > that their money is going to be well spent and > administered properly (snide > remark: Not like NASA!) i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant people like to pick on nasa for its perceived inability to spend money wisely, but if you actually talk to the people who work there, or get their money from nasa, you'll get a different story. it would be unwise to make unprofessional and inaccurate comments about an agency that is one of your most logical choices for grant money. -a.j. ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the html option when you post messages? you may think it makes your messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :) __ Do you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos http://launch.yahoo.com/u2 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Reality Check Time
OK, I agree. NASA is an easy target. The people who work there are hard working, bright, and dedicated. However, it is not usually the people at the working level who make the whole organization look bad. Let's overlook the publicity and get on with what we are trying to do. I'm not sure what you meant by "...turning off the html..." I use a program called "IncrediMail" and if that's a problem, let me know. Gail ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, November 11, 2002 06:37:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Reality Check Time --- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to> see concrete evidence> that their money is going to be well spent and> administered properly (snide> remark: Not like NASA!)i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant peoplelike to pick on nasa for its perceived inability tospend money wisely, but if you actually talk to thepeople who work there, or get their money from nasa,you'll get a different story. it would be unwise tomake unprofessional and inaccurate comments about anagency that is one of your most logical choices forgrant money.-a.j.ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the htmloption when you post messages? you may think it makesyour messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :)__Do you Yahoo!?U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videoshttp://launch.yahoo.com/u2==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/.
Re: Reality Check Time
--- Gail Leatherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to > see concrete evidence > that their money is going to be well spent and > administered properly (snide > remark: Not like NASA!) i hope that comment was made in jest. ignorant people like to pick on nasa for its perceived inability to spend money wisely, but if you actually talk to the people who work there, or get their money from nasa, you'll get a different story. it would be unwise to make unprofessional and inaccurate comments about an agency that is one of your most logical choices for grant money. -a.j. ps: would you (and others) mind turning off the html option when you post messages? you may think it makes your messages look nicer, but you're wrong. :) __ Do you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos http://launch.yahoo.com/u2 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Reality Check Time
Right. You and Crowley work on the models; I'll work on the paperwork. Hey, having a trained bureaucrat on the staff may help! Gail ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, November 11, 2002 03:46:26 PM To: Europa IcePIC mailing list Subject: RE: Reality Check Time Would one working model do or should we have 2 or 3 working concepts fora grant? I've worked on several business plans and have some experiencethere, including the legal stuffs (IANAL).At this point it sounds like getting a few working 'toys' and some goodpaperwork seems the right thing to do.Joe LatrellOn Mon, 2002-11-11 at 16:10, Gail Leatherwood wrote:> Yes! I'm told that a working model is a giant step forward toward a grant.> Even the money mavens want to see something they can hold in their hot> little hands; better yet if they can play with it while sitting around the> conference table--dunk it in a tank of water, watch it bore its way through> a block of ice, that kind of thing.> Go, go, go!> Gail> > ---Original Message---> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, November 11, 2002 02:55:25 PM> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Reality Check Time> > > Ill let you know when I need money. Probably wont be real soon though. The> model I have in mind, I can do on my own for the most part. What I cant> afford to make with stainless steel, I can fabricate from fiberglass and> resin from Wal-Mart. Looking for a grant is a ways off just now. Got to at> least have a working model first. Ooh, I just remembered I have those wooden> rocket nose cone molds > > Robert Crawley> Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc.> Programming> (936) 449-6823> > -Original Message-> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Gail> Leatherwood> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 4:29 PM> To: Europa> Subject: Reality Check Time> > OK, gang, here it comes--reality check time again.> 1. It just so happens that I work for a grant writing expert, work down the> hall from another, and am acquainted with yet a third. Grant writing experts> are easy to find, so that's not a problem. I've even written a successful> one myself, but that was a while back, so I don't consider myself a pro. As> I often say, "I know just enough to be dangerous!"> 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to see concrete evidence> that their money is going to be well spent and administered properly (snide> remark: Not like NASA!)> 3. So-o-o:> a. Who is going to speak officially for this group?> b. Do we have an organization with enough credibility to convince the> grantee that we can do what we say we're going to and account for their> funds accurately and honestly?> c. Hate to say this, but do we need to do something legal to establish> ourselves? John, you're the lawyer, what do you think?> d. If we are successful in getting a grant, paperwork will be required.> We will need to make periodic reports on progress and expenditures. This> will be necessary whether we go for a couple thousand $$ or several millions> Who's going to do this? > e. Grantees want to see a business plan. More paperwork, but without it> we don't stand a chance.> f. Grantees, or commercial lenders, want to see what the organization or> individuals is/are putting in themselves. What collateral can we show?> Anyone willing to mortgage their house, wife/husband/significant other,> their dog? We have to put something in the pot; like the business plan,> without it we don't stand a chance.> We need to develop answers just like journalists: Who, what, why, where,> when, and how.> Bottom line: Is the Europa discussion group (a) a collection of armchair> theorists, or (b) are we willing to coalesce into a real organization> working toward a real working prototype of a machine that may discover the> secrets under the ice of Europa?> If the consensus is (a) then we need not expend any more time on doing what> is needed to secure funding. If it is (b), then we need to develop real> answers to my questions--and probably some I haven't asked.> What shall it be, group?> Gail (the guy) Leatherwood> > > > > You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/.
RE: Reality Check Time
Would one working model do or should we have 2 or 3 working concepts for a grant? I've worked on several business plans and have some experience there, including the legal stuffs (IANAL). At this point it sounds like getting a few working 'toys' and some good paperwork seems the right thing to do. Joe Latrell On Mon, 2002-11-11 at 16:10, Gail Leatherwood wrote: > Yes! I'm told that a working model is a giant step forward toward a grant. > Even the money mavens want to see something they can hold in their hot > little hands; better yet if they can play with it while sitting around the > conference table--dunk it in a tank of water, watch it bore its way through > a block of ice, that kind of thing. > Go, go, go! > Gail > > ---Original Message--- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Monday, November 11, 2002 02:55:25 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Reality Check Time > > > Ill let you know when I need money. Probably wont be real soon though. The > model I have in mind, I can do on my own for the most part. What I cant > afford to make with stainless steel, I can fabricate from fiberglass and > resin from Wal-Mart. Looking for a grant is a ways off just now. Got to at > least have a working model first. Ooh, I just remembered I have those wooden > rocket nose cone molds > > Robert Crawley > Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. > Programming > (936) 449-6823 > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-europa@;klx.com]On Behalf Of Gail > Leatherwood > Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 4:29 PM > To: Europa > Subject: Reality Check Time > > OK, gang, here it comes--reality check time again. > 1. It just so happens that I work for a grant writing expert, work down the > hall from another, and am acquainted with yet a third. Grant writing experts > are easy to find, so that's not a problem. I've even written a successful > one myself, but that was a while back, so I don't consider myself a pro. As > I often say, "I know just enough to be dangerous!" > 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to see concrete evidence > that their money is going to be well spent and administered properly (snide > remark: Not like NASA!) > 3. So-o-o: > a. Who is going to speak officially for this group? > b. Do we have an organization with enough credibility to convince the > grantee that we can do what we say we're going to and account for their > funds accurately and honestly? > c. Hate to say this, but do we need to do something legal to establish > ourselves? John, you're the lawyer, what do you think? > d. If we are successful in getting a grant, paperwork will be required. > We will need to make periodic reports on progress and expenditures. This > will be necessary whether we go for a couple thousand $$ or several millions > Who's going to do this? > e. Grantees want to see a business plan. More paperwork, but without it > we don't stand a chance. > f. Grantees, or commercial lenders, want to see what the organization or > individuals is/are putting in themselves. What collateral can we show? > Anyone willing to mortgage their house, wife/husband/significant other, > their dog? We have to put something in the pot; like the business plan, > without it we don't stand a chance. > We need to develop answers just like journalists: Who, what, why, where, > when, and how. > Bottom line: Is the Europa discussion group (a) a collection of armchair > theorists, or (b) are we willing to coalesce into a real organization > working toward a real working prototype of a machine that may discover the > secrets under the ice of Europa? > If the consensus is (a) then we need not expend any more time on doing what > is needed to secure funding. If it is (b), then we need to develop real > answers to my questions--and probably some I haven't asked. > What shall it be, group? > Gail (the guy) Leatherwood > > > > > =You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Reality Check Time
Yes! I'm told that a working model is a giant step forward toward a grant. Even the money mavens want to see something they can hold in their hot little hands; better yet if they can play with it while sitting around the conference table--dunk it in a tank of water, watch it bore its way through a block of ice, that kind of thing. Go, go, go! Gail ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, November 11, 2002 02:55:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Reality Check Time Ill let you know when I need money. Probably wont be real soon though. The model I have in mind, I can do on my own for the most part. What I cant afford to make with stainless steel, I can fabricate from fiberglass and resin from Wal-Mart. Looking for a grant is a ways off just now. Got to at least have a working model first. Ooh, I just remembered I have those wooden rocket nose cone molds Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Gail LeatherwoodSent: Monday, November 11, 2002 4:29 PMTo: EuropaSubject: Reality Check Time OK, gang, here it comes--reality check time again. 1. It just so happens that I work for a grant writing expert, work down the hall from another, and am acquainted with yet a third. Grant writing experts are easy to find, so that's not a problem. I've even written a successful one myself, but that was a while back, so I don't consider myself a pro. As I often say, "I know just enough to be dangerous!" 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to see concrete evidence that their money is going to be well spent and administered properly (snide remark: Not like NASA!) 3. So-o-o: a. Who is going to speak officially for this group? b. Do we have an organization with enough credibility to convince the grantee that we can do what we say we're going to and account for their funds accurately and honestly? c. Hate to say this, but do we need to do something legal to establish ourselves? John, you're the lawyer, what do you think? d. If we are successful in getting a grant, paperwork will be required. We will need to make periodic reports on progress and expenditures. This will be necessary whether we go for a couple thousand $$ or several millions. Who's going to do this? e. Grantees want to see a business plan. More paperwork, but without it we don't stand a chance. f. Grantees, or commercial lenders, want to see what the organization or individuals is/are putting in themselves. What collateral can we show? Anyone willing to mortgage their house, wife/husband/significant other, their dog? We have to put something in the pot; like the business plan, without it we don't stand a chance. We need to develop answers just like journalists: Who, what, why, where, when, and how. Bottom line: Is the Europa discussion group (a) a collection of armchair theorists, or (b) are we willing to coalesce into a real organization working toward a real working prototype of a machine that may discover the secrets under the ice of Europa? If the consensus is (a) then we need not expend any more time on doing what is needed to secure funding. If it is (b), then we need to develop real answers to my questions--and probably some I haven't asked. What shall it be, group? Gail (the guy) Leatherwood
RE: Reality Check Time
I’ll let you know when I need money. Probably won’t be real soon though. The model I have in mind, I can do on my own for the most part. What I can’t afford to make with stainless steel, I can fabricate from fiberglass and resin from Wal-Mart. Looking for a grant is a ways off just now. Got to at least have a working model first. Ooh, I just remembered I have those wooden rocket nose cone molds… Robert Crawley Elite Precision Fabricators, Inc. Programming (936) 449-6823 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Gail Leatherwood Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 4:29 PM To: Europa Subject: Reality Check Time OK, gang, here it comes--reality check time again. 1. It just so happens that I work for a grant writing expert, work down the hall from another, and am acquainted with yet a third. Grant writing experts are easy to find, so that's not a problem. I've even written a successful one myself, but that was a while back, so I don't consider myself a pro. As I often say, "I know just enough to be dangerous!" 2. Grantees don't just give away money. They want to see concrete evidence that their money is going to be well spent and administered properly (snide remark: Not like NASA!) 3. So-o-o: a. Who is going to speak officially for this group? b. Do we have an organization with enough credibility to convince the grantee that we can do what we say we're going to and account for their funds accurately and honestly? c. Hate to say this, but do we need to do something legal to establish ourselves? John, you're the lawyer, what do you think? d. If we are successful in getting a grant, paperwork will be required. We will need to make periodic reports on progress and expenditures. This will be necessary whether we go for a couple thousand $$ or several millions. Who's going to do this? e. Grantees want to see a business plan. More paperwork, but without it we don't stand a chance. f. Grantees, or commercial lenders, want to see what the organization or individuals is/are putting in themselves. What collateral can we show? Anyone willing to mortgage their house, wife/husband/significant other, their dog? We have to put something in the pot; like the business plan, without it we don't stand a chance. We need to develop answers just like journalists: Who, what, why, where, when, and how. Bottom line: Is the Europa discussion group (a) a collection of armchair theorists, or (b) are we willing to coalesce into a real organization working toward a real working prototype of a machine that may discover the secrets under the ice of Europa? If the consensus is (a) then we need not expend any more time on doing what is needed to secure funding. If it is (b), then we need to develop real answers to my questions--and probably some I haven't asked. What shall it be, group? Gail (the guy) Leatherwood
