Rick Tumlinson has some useful suggestions for NASA, and the government. I doubt if they'll follow them.

In other NASA news, Bush nominates Griffin

Yes, exactly the wrong guy, from the standpoint of implementing Tumlinson's agenda. I don't see that as good news for a program that's inclusive of commercial space.

Rand - Despite his tenure at Space Industries? Seems to me that he brings a certain perspective as a result.

This statement, made by Griffin in October 2003 to Congress, probably annoys Rand:

"On the engineering side, the first order of business is largely to restore capabilities that we once had, and then to make them more reliable and cost effective. It may not be impossible to consider returning to the moon, or going to Mars, without a robust heavy-lift launch capability, but it is certainly silly. Our last Saturn V was launched thirty years ago, and while I do not necessarily advocate resurrecting an outdated design, this is the class of capability which is needed for the human space flight enterprise."

Credit due to SpaceRef:

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=10683

> Rand - Despite his tenure at Space Industries? Seems to me that he brings
> a certain perspective as a result.

Griffin's perspective was shown when he co-authored a report that stated "no human-rated spacecraft has been developed in the last 20 years" -- one month *after* Mike Melvill earned his FAA astronaut wings.

Pete Wordan thinks Griffin will do just fine by the private sector.

How about Shenzhou? That is a human-rated spacecraft too.