http://scienceprogress.org/2007/10/the-state-of-the-scientific-estate/ Tue, 13 Sep 2011 13:59:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://scienceprogress.org/2007/10/the-state-of-the-scientific-estate/comment-page-1/#comment-5826 Michael F. Sarabia Tue, 04 Aug 2009 04:32:09 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/the-state-of-the-scientific-estate/#comment-5826 This is a gross distortion of the History of Science. Both the Atomic Bomb and the Space programs were done by expert Civil Servants working for the government. It was propaganda by private industry that convinced many that money could be saved if the government defined the task and private industry did the work. Some even had Case Studies to prove this view. They ignored that if the leaders of technical efforts are not experts of the best quality, decisions are the top will fail. NASA proved it with the Space Race to the Moon. What has private industry done that is equally notable? 1. A Presidential helicopter that is more costly than the Air Force One Boeing 747. 2. An attack fighter that costs about $350 Million each! Yet, nobody actually approved the F-35 at that price and nobody knows, yet, if it can fly the proposed mission, the critical Vertical take off is yet to be done. Hint: They insist a second "Back UP" Engine must be developed for contingency. Why? In case more thrust or less weight is required? They never mention the problems of the V-22 Why? The subject too complex for our leaders? A real technical experts would know all the historical problems of vertical flight and would have insisted in greater testing prior to the decision to produce the plane. But, you and I know the contractor use friends to convince them that the quick approach would save 100s of Millions and now we must pay Billions to get anything out of this work. What would I do? Ask McDonald Douglas (now Boeing) to upgrade the Harrier to carry a heavier long range hypersonic air-to-air missile and a big modern radar. The big secret is that it is the most maneuverable plane in the world, still. Ask a contractor and NASA for a briefing on the technology and problems of vertical flight, don't believe the one that omits the V-22 fiasco. Note the great variety in designs, not two are alike, this may give you an idea of the complexity of the problems. By far, most experts believe the future is just like the past "Plus a few percent growth". This is a gross distortion of the History of Science.
Both the Atomic Bomb and the Space programs were done by expert Civil Servants working for the government.
It was propaganda by private industry that convinced many that money could be saved if the government defined the task and private industry did the work. Some even had Case Studies to prove this view.
They ignored that if the leaders of technical efforts are not experts of the best quality, decisions are the top will fail. NASA proved it with the Space Race to the Moon.
What has private industry done that is equally notable?
1. A Presidential helicopter that is more costly than the Air Force One Boeing 747.
2. An attack fighter that costs about $350 Million each! Yet, nobody actually approved the F-35 at that price and nobody knows, yet, if it can fly the proposed mission, the critical Vertical take off is yet to be done.
Hint: They insist a second “Back UP” Engine must be developed for contingency. Why? In case more thrust or less weight is required? They never mention the problems of the V-22 Why? The subject too complex for our leaders?
A real technical experts would know all the historical problems of vertical flight and would have insisted in greater testing prior to the decision to produce the plane. But, you and I know the contractor use friends to convince them that the quick approach would save 100s of Millions and now we must pay Billions to get anything out of this work. What would I do?
Ask McDonald Douglas (now Boeing) to upgrade the Harrier to carry a heavier long range hypersonic air-to-air missile and a big modern radar. The big secret is that it is the most maneuverable plane in the world, still.
Ask a contractor and NASA for a briefing on the technology and problems of vertical flight, don’t believe the one that omits the V-22 fiasco.
Note the great variety in designs, not two are alike, this may give you an idea of the complexity of the problems.
By far, most experts believe the future is just like the past “Plus a few percent growth”.

]]> http://scienceprogress.org/2007/10/the-state-of-the-scientific-estate/comment-page-1/#comment-3014 Oyunlar1 Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:24:49 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/the-state-of-the-scientific-estate/#comment-3014 great info thanks for article. great info thanks for article.

]]>