posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 07:18 PM
reply to post by fieryjaguarpaw
Anytime we can say that a commercial entity can innovate quicker than our federally funded space exploration association - there is a flaw. In fact,
I think you brush on the flaw in your second point - NASA's partnerships. A federal association has no partnerships, it has closed-bid contractors
and that is precisely where the system is most flawed.
I strongly believe that NASA's over-apparent lack of innovation (or least lack of practical use of innovation) over the past 2 decades is due to
closed bid contracts by the likes of such companies as Boeing and Lockheed.
In fact, some time back, I worked at a federal organization called SPAWAR. The San Diego SPAWAR facility was collocated with a Lockheed facility that
built shuttle fuel pods - The facility was open door and could be toured at anytime by any personnel cleared to the SPAWAR campus. In fact, because I
took the train to work, it was a much shorter distance to my building by actually walking through the Lockheed hangar. In 5 years at that position, I
never once witnessed ANY activity within the facility (although it was continually stocked) and semi-built fuel capsules were on floor - seemingly
with zero additions made during said 5 years.
Any any rate, as with almost every other federal agency/association/institution, the problem lies with lobbying and the "good ole boy" network,