3 thoughts on “Blogging The Space Access Conference”

  1. I haven’t been around here for a long time, because I decided that I had said plenty of negative things and I wanted to focus on the positive. I have to say, I’m really glad that your colleagues Jeff Greason and Lori Garver have had so much influence on NASA’s new policy for human spaceflight. They’ve done a great job, and I totally agree with you and with them that the right way forward is to nurture a commercial industry. Moreover, without putting too many eggs in one basket — that’s essential.

  2. Thanks Rand for that link.

    I’ve taken the liberty to view the slides from Charles Miller’s presentation yesterday
    and wow. Could I not be more in sync with this! This is *exactly* what I was referring to when I suggested NASA adopt the NACA role years ago as you may remember Rand, from my posting to sci.space.xxx

    http://pmchallenge.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/2010/Presentations/Miller.Charles.pdf

    Thank goodness somebody at NASA is thinking the serious alternatives to a ‘program’ driven approach. This could lead to an explosion of commercial activity like none we’ve seen to date. I can’t help but compare where we are with space development in 2010 to where we were in aviation 100 years ago. The environment seems eerily similar. But instead of the Wright-Curtiss patent fight we have the VSE.
    Instead of the Europeans gaining the aviation high ground we worry about China or India gaining the space high ground. And so it goes…

  3. I especially like this comment from Jeff:

    If your ultimate evolutionary cost is not below $100/lb, you are on the wrong track.

    Something to keep in mind when looking at most any launch vehicle development program.

Comments are closed.