home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.space.shuttle:2786 sci.space:16112
- Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
- Path: sparky!uunet!hela.iti.org!aws
- From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
- Subject: Re: Shuttle replacement
- Message-ID: <1992Nov19.192702.1102@iti.org>
- Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
- References: <v0y1c8d@rpi.edu>
- Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:27:02 GMT
- Lines: 30
-
- In article <v0y1c8d@rpi.edu> kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent) writes:
-
- >I would hope this country could do more with its space program than just keep
- >its contractors profitable. But NASA isn't a contractor -- it's a government
- >agency. Government agencies don't earn profits, nor should they.
-
- 1. The original poster said that Shuttle had the 'highest return on
- investment' of any launcher. I am simply pointing out that isn't correct
- and I am glad that you seem to agree.
-
- 2. No, government shouldn't be making a profit but nither should they
- provide subsidies to lock out private competition. Shuttle has not only
- been a sink into which we dump billions but it also was very nearly
- responsible for killing the private US launch industry. If Chalenger
- had happened just a few years later then Ariane would now have 100%
- of the world launch market.
-
- >They should
- >be doing things in the public interest that can't earn a profit.
-
- Since providing launch services is a profitable buisness then I am glad
- to see we agree.
-
- Allen
-
- --
- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
- | Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves |
- | aws@iti.org | nothing undone" |
- +----------------------156 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
-