Peter Wainwright wrote:
> Apparently NASA has given Mark leave to persue Geode outside the agency,
> which sounds a lot like a slammed door in nicer language. Not, as you
> observe, suprising.
A waste of good talent IMHO. But then again that is nothing new at
> Geode isn't excatly cheap either, mind you, at $8.3bn, but at least it
> tries to open up the debate on alternative station ideas. NASDA's had the
> JEM module for ISS sitting in a warehouse for quite a long time - maybe
> they should have been in charge of the project...
The Japanese are welcome to build a space station on their own (if they
can afford it now that their markets are in turmoil :).
> According to the Geode paper, NASA actually have an obligation to make
> ETs available for commercial use - something I hadn't heard before. What
> exactly are the conditions on this, does anyone know?
That is technically true, but this isn't the first or last situation
where NASA has ignored the law and even their own policy in order to
keep commercial enterprises from showing them up. Even if NASA agreed
to cooperate on ET options, LockMart would still sink the deal by
demanding a huge cut of the action (like they do with Proton launches).
I'm sure that Tom Rogers will mention this in his space tourism speech.
Mark Reiff <mreiff1@xxxxxxxxxx>
Gratuitous political statement, look here ->
"I think we are all trying too hard to push space
versus finding the pulls that attract people and their money."
"The heavens reward great deeds, not excuses."
From: Peter Wainwright <pan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>