Comments on: A NASA veteran slams SLS.

By: Trent Waddington

Trent Waddington — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 22:28:25 +0000

In reply to mike shupp. Hey, there's a reason why everyone is selectively quoting him.

By: mike shupp

mike shupp — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 21:21:50 +0000

It actually was a very short interview — about five minutes of speech, I’d guess, probably conducted via telephone. So Kraft wasn’t making a detailed presentation of well developed plans for future space exploration and exploitation, but just tossing out a few lines to suggest to non-space buffs that manufacturing and other uses of space resources might prove practical in the future. I wouldn’t kick.

By: Matt in AZ

Matt in AZ — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 16:16:42 +0000

I would not have cited the Russians as an example of reliable launchers, though that certainly was the case for a long while.

By: wade

wade — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 01:12:23 +0000

i have been saying this about the SLS since its introduction. it is a Money Pit to No Where

By: Trent Waddington

Trent Waddington — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 00:06:15 +0000

Unfortunately, he then starts making stuff up.

Most in Congress want to see NASA go back to the moon. So do nearly all of the scientific and technical organizations in the world.

Most in Congress don’t care what NASA does. What scientific organization would that be? Certainly not the United States National Research Council, which has punted on even robotic exploration of the Moon in every decadal survey. It’s hard to even make the case that there was scientific organization support for Apollo.

There’s no reason why you couldn’t set up a factory on the moon to build solar panels. You could provide enough electrical power on the moon from solar cells, and eventually you could supply enough power for half the people on Earth with a solar cell farm on the moon.

My eyes just rolled so hard, they nearly fell out.