Senate Bill S.786 could kill NWS internet weather products

Matt Barrow wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

In the instant
case, it is not feasible for private concerns to operate the
weather
bureau infrastructure, inclusing constellations of weather
satellites
and so on.

Oh, like the constellation of communications satellites?
And the broadcast groups?

How many of those were put into orbit by privately developed and
operated launch vehicles?


There is also a need for consistant (preferably high)
quality and availabllity from the standpoint of public saftey.

So you rely on government bureaucrats to provide that?

Yes and they do.


These are much the same people as run the Postal Disservice and
Amtrak.

Unhappy with the USPS are you? It has already been privatized.
IMHO, service was far more consistant and consistantly good
when there was a Postmaster General in the Cabinet.
Amtrak could not compete with the heavily subsidized airline
industry regardless of who managed it.



The proposal would not significantly reduce the government's costs,
but would significantly reduce the public benefit. Not good.

Yeah..corporations give us all our comforts and prosperity, but they
could
do that.

Get a clue!!

I'm not able to parse that, But riddle me this, is the market
for weather reporting more lucrative in heavily populated areas
or in sparsley populated areas? Which of those two are the
preferred areas for GA?

--

FF

wrote:

Oh, like the constellation of communications satellites?
And the broadcast groups?

How many of those were put into orbit by privately developed and
operated launch vehicles?

A great many of them. Although NASA used their political muscle to stifle
private launch ventures in the States, there are companies elsewhere who will
put up a satellite cheaper than using the shuttle.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:Ofege.1466$rw4.774@trndny03...
wrote:

Oh, like the constellation of communications satellites?
And the broadcast groups?

How many of those were put into orbit by privately developed and
operated launch vehicles?

A great many of them. Although NASA used their political muscle to stifle
private launch ventures in the States, there are companies elsewhere who
will
put up a satellite cheaper than using the shuttle.

Good story is the project that former astronaut Deke Slayton worked on in
the years before his death...the one that NASA stove mightily to stifle.
They spent their entire chest of working capital in chasing
paperwork/bureaucratic BS.

George Patterson wrote:
wrote:

Oh, like the constellation of communications satellites?
And the broadcast groups?

How many of those were put into orbit by privately developed and
operated launch vehicles?

A great many of them. Although NASA used their political muscle to
stifle
private launch ventures in the States, there are companies elsewhere
who will
put up a satellite cheaper than using the shuttle.


Please tell us about some of them.

--

FF

wrote:

Please tell us about some of them.

The big hitter is Ariane in France. They've been launching since 1980 and
currently put up more than half the satellites launched every year. They just
signed a deal with the Russian space agency, which will allow them to use the
Soyuz infrastructure.

Messerschmitt made a stab at it at about the same time, but I'm not sure they
every got operational. They were planning to build launch facilities in Africa.

Then there's International Launch Services, which is a joint venture of Lockheed
Martin and Russian rocket builder Khrunichev State Research and Production Space
Center. They were formed in 1995.

Sea Launch was also formed in 1995 and made their first commercial lift in 1999.
They launch from platforms in the ocean to get around having to deal with NASA
to use land bases in the U.S..

Boeing is also getting into the act with their Delta system.

And if you need to put up something really massive, there are several companies
in Russia who have access to updated military launch facilities, and, of course,
the Russian government will be happy to help you as well.

Launches planned for the next few months may be viewed at
http://spaceflightnow.com/tracking . As you can see, there are 40 scheduled. One
is NASA. A few others are U.S. military.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

George Patterson wrote:
wrote:

Please tell us about some of them.

The big hitter is Ariane in France. They've been launching since 1980
and
currently put up more than half the satellites launched every year.
They just
signed a deal with the Russian space agency, which will allow them to
use the
Soyuz infrastructure.

Ariane ws developed by and is operated by ESA, the European
counterpart to NASA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane

E.g. Ariane is not a private venture.


Messerschmitt made a stab at it at about the same time, but I'm not
sure they
every got operational. They were planning to build launch facilities
in Africa.

Then there's International Launch Services, which is a joint venture
of Lockheed
Martin and Russian rocket builder Khrunichev State Research and
Production Space
Center. They were formed in 1995.

Checking out their site http://www.ilslaunch.com/whoweare/ it is not
clear how many launches they have made. It is clear that they rely
on launch vehicles that were developed and proven by the US and
Soviet Governments.


Sea Launch was also formed in 1995 and made their first commercial
lift in 1999.
They launch from platforms in the ocean to get around having to deal
with NASA
to use land bases in the U.S..


Their home page is here http://www.sea-launch.com/ where they report
sixteen launches to date. Excellent! However their launch vehicles
are modifications to vehicles developed by the Soviets.

Boeing is also getting into the act with their Delta system.

And if you need to put up something really massive, there are several
companies
in Russia who have access to updated military launch facilities, and,
of course,
the Russian government will be happy to help you as well.

Which obviously are using vehicles and infrastructure deleloped
by the old Soviet Union.

IOW none of those are examples of launch vehicles developed by
private industry. I think those programs area good thing. However
they do not show industry doind something better than government,
they show something industry could not have done at all if
governments had not done the precursor work.

The Chinese will also launch commercial satellites with the Long
March.


Launches planned for the next few months may be viewed at
http://spaceflightnow.com/tracking . As you can see, there are 40
scheduled. One
is NASA. A few others are U.S. military.

I see two NASA launches, one joint NASA/NOAA, and one NOAA launch
scheduled as well as a number of USAF GPS lauches. Several launches
are for support of the ISS.

wrote:

E.g. Ariane is not a private venture.

Yes, they are. They are incorporated and their stock is traded publicly.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

On Fri, 13 May 2005 01:11:15 GMT, George Patterson
wrote:

wrote:

E.g. Ariane is not a private venture.

Yes, they are. They are incorporated and their stock is traded publicly.

Might as well give up George. We aren't going to convince them with
facts.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

George Patterson wrote:
wrote:

E.g. Ariane is not a private venture.

Yes, they are. They are incorporated and their stock is traded
publicly.


Thanks for the correction. I'm looking for something to invest in.
It would be nice to get some dividends paid for by European tax
money!

--

FF

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:InAge.1551$1f5.1545@trndny01...
wrote:

Please tell us about some of them.

The big hitter is Ariane in France. They've been launching since 1980 and
currently put up more than half the satellites launched every year. They
just signed a deal with the Russian space agency, which will allow them to
use the Soyuz infrastructure.

Messerschmitt made a stab at it at about the same time, but I'm not sure
they every got operational. They were planning to build launch facilities
in Africa.

Then there's International Launch Services, which is a joint venture of
Lockheed Martin and Russian rocket builder Khrunichev State Research and
Production Space Center. They were formed in 1995.

Sea Launch was also formed in 1995 and made their first commercial lift in
1999. They launch from platforms in the ocean to get around having to deal
with NASA to use land bases in the U.S..

Boeing is also getting into the act with their Delta system.

And if you need to put up something really massive, there are several
companies in Russia who have access to updated military launch facilities,
and, of course, the Russian government will be happy to help you as well.

Launches planned for the next few months may be viewed at
http://spaceflightnow.com/tracking . As you can see, there are 40
scheduled. One is NASA. A few others are U.S. military.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

George,

Thanks for all the good info. Do you happen to know what level of
investment the private weather companies have made in there own satellites?
Would you make a guess about whether, if the NWS ceased to exist, these guys
be able to make enough money to the NWS data?

This seems to be the crux of the issue to me. If the NWS budget a few years
from now could be slashed and/or replaced with less expensive and better
private sources, then I would think this bill is a good idea. No one seems
to be promoting it this way though.

BTW who thinks that the french Ariane company is not HUGELY subsidized?
Raise your hands.

PS I have a picture of your Sig on a resturaunt billboard if you want it.