Ted cruz to oversee nasa?!

[Anomalocaris]

Interestingly, Elon Musk has weighed in on a heavy lifter, stating that he could likely make one better, cheaper, and quicker than the SLS projects proposals. I think that this offer is doomed to failure because if the SLS is the model, cheaper and quicker isn't what we're looking for, and even though we seem perfectly content with allowing an entity like SpaceX to ferry our spacemen to and fro, we seem unwilling to relinquish direct congressional oversight on a project -guaranteed- to produce as much opportunity for career perks as the SLS. Put simply, if there were some folks in government who thought that farming it out to SpaceX would make their buddies more money on grift than the cureent SLS - they'd go with that....and damn the rest of it, but they know better.

It's not what failure averse, politically neutered, and hamstrung-by-contradictory-public-expectation NASA is looking for, but it is what a space agency untethered to political expediency will need. Think about it, if NASA suffers a partial launch failure hot on the heels of a complete launch failure, NASA would be out of business for 18 months. If NASA made the economically sensible decision to use russian engines to save cost, while accepting an economically acceptable trade off, NASA would be politically crucified.

[Thumpalumpacus]

It appears as though the whole program may have been designed to revitalize contract opportunities the Shuttle could not, after having lost it's luster due to being long in the tooth and, of course, the disastrous flights we all remember. The SLS is, at present, less than a reskinned shuttle. In a few years it will actually -be- a reskinned shuttle. In a decade or more, it will be a reskinned Saturn V - if they ever get around to figuring out how to do that again.....but more than anything, during this entire time, it will be a PR vehicle for pork. This isn;t the narrative we hear, is it. We'd be forgiven if we thought that this system had already been realized..because they just "shook the bugs out" with a real flight..... riiiiight? Wrong. PR.

The DoD has had a long history of letting out semi-useless contracts in order to keep a contractor afloat until the golden goose can come in. Thus, you see the B-70 getting dollars shifted to keep Convair/General Dynamics afloat, which worked out in the end because they gave us the F-16. I think we're seeing a similar phenomenon with the F-22 and F-35, both known to be turkeys, but both will keep Lockheed-Martin alive.

I don't doubt that the same strategy may well be in play here, tossing contracts for unremarkable designs to contractors in order to keep them alive until a new surge of enthusiasm can carry the day for space exploration.

Until then, I'm in agreement with both you and Kevin that ROI is pretty low on the list of accomplishments I want from the space program. I want technological advances that may not be immediately monetized, but will be in the medium- and long-term not only valuable, but crucial.

More than Tang, no doubt.