Now have nearly 200 members
By the way, I found out why my group had been taking in so many new members. An article that had linked to our website was included on drudgereport.com. wouldn't you know...
Without further adoo. The next set of messages from KerrySpace
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
From: "keithcowing"
2. NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
From: "keithcowing"
3. Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
From: rlsyl...@... 4. Re: Ground Rules for KerrySpace
From: rlsyl...@... 5. Re: Why no one cares
From: rlsyl...@... 6. Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
From: "keithcowing"
7. Re: Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
From: rlsyl...@... 8. Re: Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
From: rlsyl...@... 9. Re: NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
From: rlsyl...@... 10. Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
From: "keithcowing"
11. Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
From: "keithcowing"
12. Re: John Kerry's Election Would Be A Disaster For Space Exploration
From: "crusoe242000"
13. John Edwards on Space
From: "John Keller"
From: "crusoe242000"
15. Re: Gallup Poll Confirms Strong Support For Vision For Space Exploration
From: "Robert Oler"
From: "eyesonspace"
17. Re: Why no one cares
From: "eyesonspace"
18. Re: NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
From: "John Keller"
From: "crusoe242000"
20. Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
From: "keithcowing"
21. Re: NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
From: "keithcowing"
22. Re: NASA Document Verifies Space Agency Support Of Zubrin's Mars Direct Plan
From: "keithcowing"
23. Re: Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
From: Timothy Weaver
24. Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
From: "keithcowing"
25. Re: Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
From: Timothy Weaver
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 14:24:14 -0000
From: "keithcowing"
Subject: Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "crusoe242000"
> On page 1 of the ESA-NASA study of Mars Direct it states that cost
> engineers from ESA & NASA carried out the cost analysis of Mars
> Direct. In other words a lot more that just too people carried out
> the cost analysis. The Mars Direct approach was used by NASA to
> formulate their Mars Reference Mission. In other words, NASA feels
> the concept works.
No, NASA does not.
What many people - most notably the Mars Society zealots like you - seem to forget
amidst all of their armwaving - or chose to ignore - is the every last paragraph in the
paper i.e. "These values are presented only for the purpose of exposing findings in
cost estimating practices. Whether the cost estimates are realistic is directly linked
with the credibility of the baseline Mars Direct assumptions from a technical,
programmatics and safety point of view. A study on this was not part of the exercise
described in this paper."
In other words the costs of what Zubrin proposed were deemed to be credible. No
one analyzed whether the plan would actually work - or make any sense.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 15:50:03 -0000
From: "keithcowing"
Subject: NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=968
"Kerry and his entourage were not the first VIP visitors to visit a Space Shuttle - and
be required to wear the bunny suits. In 1981Vice President George H.W. Bush visited
Kennedy Space Center and toured Space Shuttle Columbia with the two astronauts
who flew it on its first mission - John Young and Bob Crippen. Bush also wore a
bunny suit."
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:14:59 EDT
From: rlsyl...@...m
Subject: Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
Was at Marsblitz Several congressional aides said that the last two years is
the first time that they has seen actual informative lobbying by space
advocacy. And it was welcomed. One said where have you been. Another gave specific
instructions
on how and when to lobby. We have to do so to be heard.
Also SEA has a total membership of just under 1 million and as an advocacy
group is bigger than many of the classic groups like NOW which has abaout half
that number and is far more vocal than we are
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:18:32 EDT
From: rlsyl...@...m
Subject: Re: Ground Rules for KerrySpace
way to go gus
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:27:27 EDT
From: rlsyl...@...m
Subject: Re: Why no one cares
to robert oler,
It is unfortunate that you(and Kerry) do not understand the value of
technological leadership. After the Chinese manned launch, they stated that they
expect an additional 50 billion in technological contracts from the pacific rim
group(which includes them, and about 15 asian and south american countries) due
to loss of american face. Italians give similar reasons for being in space.
It is the "NEW YORK" of tecdhnology, if you can make it there you can make it
anywhere. The world knows that, we have forgotten, or taken our leadership
in technology for grantaed. Yet history shows that you have to work to keep
technological leadership, and to do that you must have orgainized goals.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 16:29:07 -0000
From: "keithcowing"
Subject: Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, rlsyl...@...rote:
> Was at Marsblitz Several congressional aides said that the last two years is
> the first time that they has seen actual informative lobbying by space
> advocacy. And it was welcomed. One said where have you been. Another gave
specific
> instructions
> on how and when to lobby. We have to do so to be heard.
>
> Also SEA has a total membership of just under 1 million and as an advocacy
> group is bigger than many of the classic groups like NOW which has abaout half
> that number and is far more vocal than we are
The SEA statement is very misleading. Do these 1 million people even KNOW that they
are members?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:52:42 EDT
From: rlsyl...@...m
Subject: Re: Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
In the case of the organization of which I am a member, they tell us. How
does a member of the afl cio know their union is a member.
Also, how do I know how meany members of NOW or NRA or AARP or....are
actuve, you have to assume that their membership has an interest or at least a
certain number do.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:58:20 EDT
From: rlsyl...@...m
Subject: Re: Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
Made estimates of overall cost, using historical and current aerospace
development costs. Overview below.
Need to separate development cost from mission cost
Overall cost over 30 years between 150 and 250 B probably closer to latter.
Half development half missions
If you want detailed discussion of costs and how estimates are made, will be
glad to do so.
This is slightly above 170-190 that can be extracted from NASA's published
graph, but covers longer period
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 13:00:30 EDT
From: rlsyl...@...m
Subject: Re: NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
To be sensitive about wearing a bunny suit when it is required is rediculous,
It would be like being sensitive about the way your face looks when you wear
scuba (or in Boston scubah) gear. It goes with the territory
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 17:03:13 -0000
From: "keithcowing"
Subject: Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, rlsyl...@...rote:
> In the case of the organization of which I am a member, they tell us. How
> does a member of the afl cio know their union is a member.
>
> Also, how do I know how meany members of NOW or NRA or AARP or....are
> actuve, you have to assume that their membership has an interest or at least a
> certain number do.
Can you list the organizations - and what the overlap is between them? If I am a
member of Planetary Society, Mars Society, NSS, and AIAA for example, am I counted
once - or 4 times? The answer is 4 times.
Part of what is claimed as "members" are employees in a bunch of aerospace
companies that the AIA has as coporate members. Have the employees been told
that they are members?
You cannot claim that someone supports your organization if you haven't even
bothered to inform them. That is called misrepresentation.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 17:05:27 -0000
From: "keithcowing"
Subject: Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, rlsyl...@...rote:
> Made estimates of overall cost, using historical and current aerospace
> development costs. Overview below.
> Need to separate development cost from mission cost
>
> Overall cost over 30 years between 150 and 250 B probably closer to latter.
> Half development half missions
>
> If you want detailed discussion of costs and how estimates are made, will be
> glad to do so.
>
> This is slightly above 170-190 that can be extracted from NASA's published
> graph, but covers longer period
You did not address my point: the *cost* analysis was not an *engineering* analysis.
NASA and ESA did not examine the feasibility of the Mars Direct - just how much the
hardware would cost.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:18:48 -0000
From: "crusoe242000"
Subject: Re: John Kerry's Election Would Be A Disaster For Space Exploration
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "Robert Oler"
wrote:
> >
> > I believe space advocates can make a case that a human return to
> the
> > Moon can be affordable. However, they will face two key
obstacles
> with
> > convincing the Kerry campaign of that: skepticism about NASA
budget
> > estimates in general, and creating a compelling case for
returning
> to
> > the Moon regardless of the cost issues.
> >
> >
> > Jeff Foust
>
> Hello Jeff. There are two questions to answer. Why return to the
> Moon? What purpose does it serve? The second is at what cost?
NASA
> has once again vastly underestimated the cost of returning the
> shuttle to flight.
>
> It seems hard to imagine that they would get something of those
cost
> magnitude and effort wrong and not have multiple errors in
something
> much larger.
>
> Robert G. Oler The Moon can be used to test equipment & procedures
for a manned Mars mission. If anything goes wrong, your just 3 days
from Earth. Regarding NASA's previous record on estimating program
cost, please recall that the man who eliminated the cost overruns on
the ISS is now the Administrator of NASA. Bravo Sean O'Keefe!
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 13:59:56 -0000
From: "John Keller"
Subject: John Edwards on Space
Since VPs end up leading NASA, what has been John Edwards record and
stance on NASA?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 15:26:12 -0000
From: "crusoe242000"
Subject: Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "keithcowing"
wrote:
> --- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "crusoe242000"
> > On page 1 of the ESA-NASA study of Mars Direct it states that
cost
> > engineers from ESA & NASA carried out the cost analysis of Mars
> > Direct. In other words a lot more that just too people carried
out
> > the cost analysis. The Mars Direct approach was used by NASA to
> > formulate their Mars Reference Mission. In other words, NASA
feels
> > the concept works.
>
> No, NASA does not.
>
> What many people - most notably the Mars Society zealots like you -
seem to forget
> amidst all of their armwaving - or chose to ignore - is the every
last paragraph in the
> paper i.e. "These values are presented only for the purpose of
exposing findings in
> cost estimating practices. Whether the cost estimates are
realistic is directly linked
> with the credibility of the baseline Mars Direct assumptions from
a technical,
> programmatics and safety point of view. A study on this was not
part of the exercise
> described in this paper."
>
> In other words the costs of what Zubrin proposed were deemed to be
credible. No
> one analyzed whether the plan would actually work - or make any
sense. Dear Keith, In Section 1.1 of NASA's Mars Reference Mission
it states, "The Architecture for the Mars Reference Mission builds
on previous work, principally on the work of The Synthesis Group &
on Zubrin's concepts for the use of propellents derived from the
Martian atmosphere. Section 1.6 of the Mars Reference Mission
includes Zubrin's Mars Direct as one of its referenced documents. P.
S. What is the URL of your publisher? I want to read any additional
chapters of your book you may place on the web site. Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 16:13:17 -0000
From: "Robert Oler"
Subject: Re: Gallup Poll Confirms Strong Support For Vision For Space Exploration
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "osiris23223"
> ....and this is nothing less then a miracle! Our nation is at a
> crossroads concerning space exploration. We are not going to get
> this opportunity in our lifetimes again. We must follow through. We
> cannot let the political mistakes of the past steal our future from
> us again. 60% of Democrats! Mr. Kerry? Are you listening? or are
you
> just lacing your speeches with flowery references to past
> accomplishments? What did the Columbia 7 die for then? They
> believed. They *risked*. They did not complain about that risk. We
> must move forward. And that time is *Now*.
>
> Senator Kerry, What is your policy for our future in space?
> Moon? Mars? Beyond? When? and will human beings explore the lunar
> surface again in the next 10 years?
>
> Respectfully, I ask, please, dont we deserve at least some answer?
Hello:
I am just curious. Why do you think its urgent that the lunar
surface be explored by humans? Will it change the course of the
country, will it create jobs outside of government spending, will it
create wealth? How many Americans do you think will get to go to the
Moon?
Yes the Columbia7 took risk and accepted the risk. But the risk had
no reweard near the cost. There was NOTHING done on that flight that
warranted the risk of losing the crew.
Right now we probably have (at the instant I am typing this) roughly
40,000 troops in direct peril in Iraq. They are on patrol, standing
a post, or in a convoy; as I type this the sun is setting which is a
time of maximium peril there.
If trends continue we will loose more troopers over in Iraq this
comming week then on Columbia. Not to get into a debate on the war
(off topic)...but as a nation we have judged that "risk" to be
acceptable for the "reward".
What reward has the nation gotten for twenty plus years of the
shuttle, 30 years of post Apollo NASA and well 14 years of trying to
go back to the Moon?
I am just curious what you think the reward is?
Robert G. Oler
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 16:14:19 -0000
From: "eyesonspace"
Subject: Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "keithcowing"
wrote:
> --- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, David Rickman
wrote:
> > 1. Bush's plan is a little more than just "hot air". It involves
a lot of smoke and
> mirrors, too! If you go to the archives of "Friends and Partners
in Space" (http://
> www.friends-partners.org/pipermail/fpspace/) you'll see that the
leading space
> experts understand that while it would appear Bush is pro space,
his plan would
> ultimately lead to the end of U. S. manned space exploration. This
is basically the
> same atmosphere Bush created in taking us into an unjustified war.
If you oppose His
> view, you could be in danger of being viewed as "unpatriotic".
> >
> > Lori Garver has realistic views and plans and I'm ready to
support her and John
> Kerry.
> >
> > 2. As Lori Garver is a well educated person of distinction and
worthy of respect, you
> might consider using "spell and grammar check" before posting your
comments. This
> will add a little more credibility to them. Just a thought.
> >
> > David Rickman
>
> I will take bad grammar over unsubstantiated arm waving any day.
Please tell me why
> Bush's space policy "would ultimately lead to the end of U. S.
manned space
> exploration"?
>
> Or is this just a case of saying something often enough hoping
that it will become
> true?
Keith -- I'm puzzled by the slant you have taken over the past
year. It seemed worthwhile to have you around while you were
pestering Dan Goldin to be accountable. Why you turned into a
sycophant of O'Keefe's is puzzling. Do you really think this is a
proper "journalistic" stance to take? Do you have press
credentials, or are you just pretending?
Is it that hard for you to see that the Bush plan is headed toward
dissembling the infrastructure and rationale for space? Hopefully,
you recognize that space is about more than rack science on human
vessels.
Whether Bush or Kerry lead the next phase, one of them will lead --
and then will have to start making real decisions, not platform
speeches. You should expect that we can't really know what they
will decide until we get past November -- expecting a Presidential
compaign to be about a trip to the Moon is kind of silly. To expect
it to be about space at all is silly -- it is an $11 trillion
economy, right? And there are how many people in the US? And how
many of them participate in the space business? Many people may
like their DirecTV and WeatherChannel, but that doesn't mean their
politics are defined by space. Space is important to us, but let's
be realistic.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 16:38:42 -0000
From: "eyesonspace"
Subject: Re: Why no one cares
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, rlsyl...@...rote:
> to robert oler,
>
> It is unfortunate that you(and Kerry) do not understand the value
of
> technological leadership. After the Chinese manned launch, they
stated that they
> expect an additional 50 billion in technological contracts from
the pacific rim
> group(which includes them, and about 15 asian and south american
countries) due
> to loss of american face. Italians give similar reasons for being
in space.
> It is the "NEW YORK" of tecdhnology, if you can make it there you
can make it
> anywhere. The world knows that, we have forgotten, or taken our
leadership
> in technology for grantaed. Yet history shows that you have to
work to keep
> technological leadership, and to do that you must have orgainized
goals.
Don't you think our preeminence in semiconductors, biotech,
supercomputing doesn't satisfy this objective quite nicely? Haven't
you noticed that the US preeminence in basic science is waning, the
area where the Bush Administration should really be paying attention
and is so deficient in focus? Maybe space is a nice demo area for
nation's preparing for the first stages of technological
preeminence, but not a sign of mature development?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 16:59:31 -0000
From: "John Keller"
Subject: Re: NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "keithcowing"
wrote:
> NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
> http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=968
>
> "Kerry and his entourage were not the first VIP visitors to visit a
Space Shuttle - and
> be required to wear the bunny suits. In 1981Vice President George
H.W. Bush visited
> Kennedy Space Center and toured Space Shuttle Columbia with the two
astronauts
> who flew it on its first mission - John Young and Bob Crippen.
Bush also wore a
> bunny suit."
Thanks for that photo. You know that its been posted on this NASA
site since 1/20/2004
Personally, I was glad to see that Kerry wore the bunny suit. Shows
that he's willing to follow the rules and not use his political
influence to break them.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 21:12:19 -0000
From: "crusoe242000"
Subject: NASA Document Verifies Space Agency Support Of Zubrin's Mars Direct Plan
The NASA website Aerospace Scholars verifies the Space Agency's
support for Robert Zubrin's Mars Direct Plan. The document
states, "In 1993, the NASA Exploration Program Office launched the
Mars Exploration Study Project and produced a Mars Design Reference
Mission that owes much to the Mars Direct Mission Plan." The URL for
this NASA article is
http://aerospacescholars.jsc.nasa.gov/HAS/cirr/em/11/25.cfm
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 22:30:44 -0000
From: "keithcowing"
Subject: Re: Yo Lori, Why cant Kerry talk about space???
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "eyesonspace"
> --- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "keithcowing"
> wrote:
> > --- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, David Rickman
> wrote:
> > > 1. Bush's plan is a little more than just "hot air". It involves
> a lot of smoke and
> > mirrors, too! If you go to the archives of "Friends and Partners
> in Space" (http://
> > www.friends-partners.org/pipermail/fpspace/) you'll see that the
> leading space
> > experts understand that while it would appear Bush is pro space,
> his plan would
> > ultimately lead to the end of U. S. manned space exploration. This
> is basically the
> > same atmosphere Bush created in taking us into an unjustified war.
> If you oppose His
> > view, you could be in danger of being viewed as "unpatriotic".
> > >
> > > Lori Garver has realistic views and plans and I'm ready to
> support her and John
> > Kerry.
> > >
> > > 2. As Lori Garver is a well educated person of distinction and
> worthy of respect, you
> > might consider using "spell and grammar check" before posting your
> comments. This
> > will add a little more credibility to them. Just a thought.
> > >
> > > David Rickman
> >
> > I will take bad grammar over unsubstantiated arm waving any day.
> Please tell me why
> > Bush's space policy "would ultimately lead to the end of U. S.
> manned space
> > exploration"?
> >
> > Or is this just a case of saying something often enough hoping
> that it will become
> > true?
>
> Keith -- I'm puzzled by the slant you have taken over the past
> year. It seemed worthwhile to have you around while you were
> pestering Dan Goldin to be accountable. Why you turned into a
> sycophant of O'Keefe's is puzzling. Do you really think this is a
> proper "journalistic" stance to take? Do you have press
> credentials, or are you just pretending?
Wait a minute. When I said all those things about Goldin (obviously slanted on my
part) everyone cheered me on. My views have not changed - but Adminstrators have.
Now you suddenly think I am a synchophant?
As for my press credentials - they are authentic as far as NASA security tells me.
They still get me in the building.
> Is it that hard for you to see that the Bush plan is headed toward
> dissembling the infrastructure and rationale for space?
I see nothing all all like that. Quite the contrary. I woudl suggest that your biases are
coloring your remarks.
> Hopefully,
> you recognize that space is about more than rack science on human
> vessels.
Huh?
> Whether Bush or Kerry lead the next phase, one of them will lead --
> and then will have to start making real decisions, not platform
> speeches. You should expect that we can't really know what they
> will decide until we get past November -- expecting a Presidential
> compaign to be about a trip to the Moon is kind of silly.
When did I ever say that I expected that to happen?
> To expect
> it to be about space at all is silly -- it is an $11 trillion
> economy, right? And there are how many people in the US? And how
> many of them participate in the space business? Many people may
> like their DirecTV and WeatherChannel, but that doesn't mean their
> politics are defined by space. Space is important to us, but let's
> be realistic.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 22:34:28 -0000
From: "keithcowing"
Subject: Re: NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "John Keller"
> --- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "keithcowing"
> wrote:
> > NASA Photos Unearthed: George H.W. Bush Wore a Bunny Suit Too
> > http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=968
> >
> > "Kerry and his entourage were not the first VIP visitors to visit a
> Space Shuttle - and
> > be required to wear the bunny suits. In 1981Vice President George
> H.W. Bush visited
> > Kennedy Space Center and toured Space Shuttle Columbia with the two
> astronauts
> > who flew it on its first mission - John Young and Bob Crippen.
> Bush also wore a
> > bunny suit."
>
>
> Thanks for that photo. You know that its been posted on this NASA
> site since 1/20/2004
No I hadn't seen it. I was using the search engine on the NASA NIX website. I was
looking for Quayle photos too (we can always hope 
but none were with him in a
bunny suit.
> Personally, I was glad to see that Kerry wore the bunny suit. Shows
> that he's willing to follow the rules and not use his political
> influence to break them.
I agree. What mystifies me is why Kerry did not say "damn straight. I was crawling
around a space shuttle with an american hero John Glenn" and then go on to say
something positive about space, etc. Instead his campaign acted like a bunch of little
babies and complained about a botched photo op.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 22:36:12 -0000
From: "keithcowing"
Subject: Re: NASA Document Verifies Space Agency Support Of Zubrin's Mars Direct Plan
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, "crusoe242000"
> The NASA website Aerospace Scholars verifies the Space Agency's
> support for Robert Zubrin's Mars Direct Plan. The document
> states, "In 1993, the NASA Exploration Program Office launched the
> Mars Exploration Study Project and produced a Mars Design Reference
> Mission that owes much to the Mars Direct Mission Plan." The URL for
> this NASA article is
> http://aerospacescholars.jsc.nasa.gov/HAS/cirr/em/11/25.cfm
The JSC plan is not Mars Direct. It incorporate sideas from many scenarios and
mission plans. If they were so supportive of Zurbin's plan as he had developed it then
why did they make substantial changes to its core premise?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 17:46:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Timothy Weaver
Subject: Re: Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
--- keithcowing wrote:
> --- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, rlsyl...@... wrote:
> > Made estimates of overall cost, using historical
> and current aerospace
> > development costs. Overview below.
> > Need to separate development cost from mission
> cost
> >
> > Overall cost over 30 years between 150 and 250 B
> probably closer to latter.
> > Half development half missions
> >
> > If you want detailed discussion of costs and how
> estimates are made, will be
> > glad to do so.
> >
> > This is slightly above 170-190 that can be
> extracted from NASA's published
> > graph, but covers longer period
>
> You did not address my point: the *cost* analysis
> was not an *engineering* analysis.
> NASA and ESA did not examine the feasibility of the
> Mars Direct - just how much the
> hardware would cost.
So I take it you have your doubts on the feasibility
of Mars Direct.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 00:51:33 -0000
From: "keithcowing"
Subject: Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
--- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, Timothy Weaver
>
> --- keithcowing
>
> > --- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, rlsyl...@... > wrote:
> > > Made estimates of overall cost, using historical
> > and current aerospace
> > > development costs. Overview below.
> > > Need to separate development cost from mission
> > cost
> > >
> > > Overall cost over 30 years between 150 and 250 B
> > probably closer to latter.
> > > Half development half missions
> > >
> > > If you want detailed discussion of costs and how
> > estimates are made, will be
> > > glad to do so.
> > >
> > > This is slightly above 170-190 that can be
> > extracted from NASA's published
> > > graph, but covers longer period
> >
> > You did not address my point: the *cost* analysis
> > was not an *engineering* analysis.
> > NASA and ESA did not examine the feasibility of the
> > Mars Direct - just how much the
> > hardware would cost.
>
> So I take it you have your doubts on the feasibility
> of Mars Direct.
Yes. For one thing Zubrin is too dismissive of human factors issues such as radiation
in the way he designs things.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 18:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Timothy Weaver
Subject: Re: Re: A Comment On The ESA & NASA Study Of Mars Direct
--- keithcowing wrote:
> --- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, Timothy Weaver
>
> >
> > --- keithcowing
> >
> > > --- In kerrysp...@...roups.com, rlsyl...@... > > wrote:
> > > > Made estimates of overall cost, using
> historical
> > > and current aerospace
> > > > development costs. Overview below.
> > > > Need to separate development cost from mission
> > > cost
> > > >
> > > > Overall cost over 30 years between 150 and 250
> B
> > > probably closer to latter.
> > > > Half development half missions
> > > >
> > > > If you want detailed discussion of costs and
> how
> > > estimates are made, will be
> > > > glad to do so.
> > > >
> > > > This is slightly above 170-190 that can be
> > > extracted from NASA's published
> > > > graph, but covers longer period
> > >
> > > You did not address my point: the *cost*
> analysis
> > > was not an *engineering* analysis.
> > > NASA and ESA did not examine the feasibility of
> the
> > > Mars Direct - just how much the
> > > hardware would cost.
> >
> > So I take it you have your doubts on the
> feasibility
> > of Mars Direct.
>
> Yes. For one thing Zubrin is too dismissive of human
> factors issues such as radiation
> in the way he designs things.
Maybe, but I do like the idea of living off the land
approach. It's something that future space travelers
will have to do as in the future when mankind has a
more permanent presence in the solar system. BTW: you
have any links concerning the cons to Mars Direct? I
have been a supporter of Mars Direct, but I would like
to here from the other side.
"