A reader writes and asks why I don't write about NASA that much in my blog, especially with NASA announcing last week how they're going to go back to the moon and then on to Mars. In short, the premise of the reader's question is correct. I'm not covering NASA and don't believe that I ever will, even if NASA spends $104 billion on a project and succeeds in going to the moon.
To my mind, the manned spaceflight portion of NASA is a parasite on the American people. It's now a jobs program for rocketeers. I look at it rather benignly, though. It's a waste of money, but no more than that. NASA doesn't stop anybody from doing what they want to do. No small, innovative companies -- those who will form the backbone of future space activity -- are going broke because of NASA. On the other hand, I discount heavily the potential good that NASA can do for the industry. If any of these entrepeneurial companies are relying in large part on NASA decisionmaking to help them with contracts, I think they are deluding themselves. At most, they should view NASA business as a small potential bonus.
Because of this view, the best thing to do is to ignore NASA's manned spaceflight activities. It would be boring to follow it anyway. It's more fun to follow SpaceX and Bigelow Aerospace, and potentially Scaled Composites and Armadillo Aerospace once their orbital programs come into sharper focus.
Comments