Splitting NASA

That actually proves my points very well--and you see a lot of that kind of thing.

One of my contacts is an individual at Av Week. He noted in his travels that the Chinese engineers are a young and hungry bunch.

But when he goes to conventions and such here--he sees a bunch of old faces.

This is a dangerous precident, people,...nd brought on by the lack of vison we have suffered under.

The folks in X-Prizes would be better off abandoning Ayn Rands mythology and supporting NASA. They were the hungry young movers-and-shakers of America's past--and have been abandoned by penny-pinchers and frauds.

Rand's character of the architect Rourke was a wonderful piece of fiction--and his charachter had a few points.

But when the movie starring Gary Cooper was made--The Russians were well on their way to the R-7 and UR-500 Protons.

And unlike Rourke's fictional skyscraper--Russian rockets were all too real.

And rose much higher.

publiusr,

you wrote

.

This quote clearly proves that you completely miss the point(s).

I didn't mean that - I meant that YOU don't want private people on your playground. I am "bashing" YOU but not NASA.

And the XPRIZE Foundation is not privatizing everything but assisting private access to space.

I and most of the others don't have anything against Griffin nor against his vision - YOU are the one who is annoying me and some others too obviously: look to the last previous posts of SawSS1June21 and spacecowboy in this thread.

Nothing has been said at this board against NASA's engineering work - but the same work could have been done chepaer without reducing quality. And NASA never has done anything to enable access to space of the general public - that's a point too. Nothing against NASA's engineering work - but alternatves are thinkable, possible and realistic

Because of this it is justified to critizise NASA. To do so is the constitutional right of all free citizens of the western world - but YOU seem to be a person to wants to remove this constitutional right, this freedom.

NASA is criticised constructively mostly if not totally at this board by designing alternative approaches for projects and so on. A lot of engineers are discussing here - a lot of students who want to be creative. This creativity would be reduced, prevented and condemned to death if criticism wouldn't be allowed and impossible.

What Andy Hill said is no way any proof for your points. There have been management errors it seems and the reasons of management errors nearly never are money-making reasons but failed "insight", lack of experiences, insufficient overview and unpreventable errors of beginning (as private company in this case here - all this happens to persons too who are experienced as CEOs and top managers of private companies.

And - by the way - money-making is different from profit-making. In the US companies whose stocks are dealt at the stock exchanges publish business reports quarterly. The reports include balances. Comparisons of two balances of one and the same company will reveil that the quarterly profits differ from the quarterly differences between the amount of money at the bank accounts.

YOUR talk about Andy Hill's company is complete nonsense.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

Score for Ekke!

I should probably apologize about the whole supersized-rocket-as-phallus thing, but that was waaaaaaaaay too easy for me to pass up. I mean, you go and pick on our toys (hell yes, they're toys: that's why we go into engineering in the first place!), and you expect us to leave yours alone..... Hrm, let me think about that for a second.....


.....




.....




Nah.

***

Oh, and nobody asked if you were currently a NASA employee; we simply doubt that you could have ever been a NASA employee. Hell, man, with your level of 'tude, you'd never even make it through the first interview.

You have truly nailed the engineering mind. For the stereotypical example look at the orbital mechanics thread.

Danger! Danger Will Robinson! Imminent threat of re-initiating orbital mechanics thread.

Dont go there the risks are to high and may spiral out of control.

Oh yes. Please. Give me just one more chance convince you.




When in danger, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!

Hello, Peter,

it has turned out that we are using different approaches to consider and to analyse situations and topics.

One day I started a thread to handle and to clarify what reactions or kinds of reactions likes here and which he doesn't like. That thread can and should be used to handle and clarify differences in approaches of consideration and analysis too. The link to the thread is www.xprizenews.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1084 .

The thread with the link www.xprizenews.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1072 too can be used for clarification because I am using a special imagination - at least sometimes - when I am discussing vehicles and/or their use or application.

I already invited you to post there and I still would like if you would post there - this would be a good way to forget about the thread Orbital Mechanics.

May be I provide links to posts of mine about my approaches and backround(s) etc. here and in that thread to avpid the requirement of any repetitions.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

Hi Ekkehard,

When I click on www.xprizenews.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1084 and www.xprizenews.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1072 I get a "topic does not exist" message.

When I do it they work.

The topics are titled

"Image behind your posts" and
"What kinds of answers etc. do you like and what kinds not?".

I tested the links just before writing this post.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

Hmmm ... they're not working for me, Ekke?

DKH

I still have no problems. I am using IE 5.5 under Windows 2000 Professional this moment.

Clicking on one of the links I get a new IE-Window and see the threads as if I had gone to them via the menu.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

I am using IE 6.0 and Windows 2000. When logged in, I can see the Senior Members forum, but it only has one topic, Complaints.

I can only see the "complaints" heading in the senior members section also and I am using Windows 2000 and IE 5.5. so I dont understand how ekkehard can see these other forums and I cant.

Hello, Andy Hill, hello, Peter, hello, Dr_Keith_H,

I informed Sigurd about the problem via PM.

The only cause I can imagine currently is use of insufficient resolution for the screen - but I can't imagine that one of you is using a wrong one.

...



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

"I didn't mean that - I meant that YOU don't want private people on your playground. I am "bashing" YOU but not NASA."

You obviously haven't listened to a thing I've said. I never said that I didn't want private spaceflight up there--my point is that it isn't happening--and is not living up to your hype.And i can 'bash' back just fine.

"Nothing has been said at this board against NASA's engineering work"

All I have heard comeing from the free-traitors is NASA Bashing, sir.

"Because of this it is justified to critizise NASA. To do so is the constitutional right of all free citizens of the western world - but YOU seem to be a person to wants to remove this constitutional right, this freedom."

You describe your own position rather well. It is you who believe that ONLY Gov't should be questioned and it is my right to be a critic of laughable private attempts done by people with your bad attitude. I choose to criticize private attepts with pathetic funds to match their big talk and it is well within my right to due so--even if it chaps you.

"What Andy Hill said is no way any proof for your points."

It most certainly is proof-- only a retard doesn't believe how bean-counters have done damage to research and engineering.

"YOUR talk about Andy Hill's company is complete nonsense."

Tell that to people who have lost jobs due to YOUR kind of thinking.


How about this---I'll make a deal with you--I won't talk to you about economics if you won't talk about space flight--because you obviously haven't a clue as to the nature and scale of resources needed for it.

Peace.