Re: Update on Zero-G's progress
- From: Joe Strout <joe@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 08:24:50 -0700
In article <JEGuwJ.Ens@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
henry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Henry Spencer) wrote:
They're not supposed to buy (and operate, and maintain) their own assets
if there's a good prospect of buying the same services from industry --
that's called "wasting the taxpayers' money".
This really seems worth pursuing. Can anyone tell me more about the
laws or regulations involved here? Or give me some tips on how I can
turn these up myself?
I've found the Commercial Space Act of 1998 [1], which discusses
commercialization and privatization of Space Station and Shuttle. But
it doesn't discuss other services.
Indeed, maybe that's NASA's excuse here -- maybe all the language
directing them to purchase commercial services where available covers
only operations to, from, and in space. The vomit comet wouldn't be
covered since that operates solely within the atmosphere.
[1]
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/ogc/commercial/CommercialSpaceActof1998.html
.
- References:
- Update on Zero-G's progress
- From: Joe Strout
- Re: Update on Zero-G's progress
- From: Jeff Findley
- Re: Update on Zero-G's progress
- From: Joe Strout
- Re: Update on Zero-G's progress
- From: Fred J . McCall
- Re: Update on Zero-G's progress
- From: Henry Spencer
- Update on Zero-G's progress
- Prev by Date: Re: Fixed costs dominate launch costs
- Next by Date: Re: Lunar tourism doesn't have to be profitable
- Previous by thread: Re: Update on Zero-G's progress
- Next by thread: Re: Update on Zero-G's progress
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|