Priorities in government and space

Forum: Spacesettlers
Thread: Priorities in government and space

# 8686 byspider_boris@... on Aug. 3, 2006, 8:28 p.m.
Member since 2021-10-03

--- Robert wrote:

> --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, Ed Minchau
>
> wrote:
> >
> > I think this argues against your point. A private
> > company isn't going to waste 1200 dollars on a
> claw
> > hammer, or ten thousands dollars for a toilet seat
> -
> > unlike NASA, which does.
> >
> the thing is that the company would not want to lose
> money. One of
> three things would happen.
>
> 1) they would cut corners to make sure they made the
> best profit they
> could. without oversight, no one would know if a
> failure was caused
> by negligence or bad materials.

This is demonstrably false. SpaceX was carrying a DOD
cargo on their failed maiden launch, and the cause was
traced to the use of aluminum nuts, which have since
been replaced with stainless steel. In that case, the
failure was caused by incorrect assumptions (ie that
aluminum corrosion wouldn't be significant). Not only
do we know the cause of failure, they published it on
their website for the world to see.

>
> 2) they would have huge bills which they would
> expect the goverment
> to pay. without oversight no one would know if those
> cost were
> legitimate.

Eliminate the government oversight altogether. If
NASA is paying for, let's say, a 1m resolution map of
the moon at four specific frequencies, then they
should pay for the data, not the development of the
craft sent to collect it, nor the launch of the craft.
Have NASA pay for results rather than an entire
program. Then the costs would only be what NASA is
prepared to pay for the data.

A similar situation takes place no matter what
services NASA can buy from private corporations. If
NASA wants personnel launch services from earth to the
ISS, then they should pay one of the launch providers
(Virgin Galactic, SpaceDev, whoever) on a
per-seat-per-launch basis, not develop the launch
facilities and vehicle and procedures and so forth.

>
> 3) the goverment would have to spend more than it
> does now for
> oversight and cost control.
>

It is the existing system, with cost-plus accounting
and reams of paperwork for oversight that have caused
launch prices to stagnate and even increase over the
last few decades. It is long past time to try
something new.

Ed