Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mordor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!bellcore!decvax!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ut-sally!mordor!@S1-A.ARPA,@MIT-MC:bang!crash!bnw@Nosc
From: bnw%Nosc@crash.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Funding wars
Message-ID: <1662@mordor.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 3-May-85 23:18:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: mordor.1662
Posted: Fri May  3 23:18:50 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 6-May-85 01:34:40 EDT
Sender: daemon@mordor.UUCP
Lines: 30

From: <bang!crash!bnw@Nosc>

     Dale Amon states:
 
>Regardless of what Sagan may have said in print, he and others are lobbying
>hard at this moment to make sure the space station and not their pet
>projects get the knife.
 
                         and then adds:
 
>The combined efforts of nearly ALL the other space organizations is lobbying
>AGAINST his Carl's efforts.
 
     This is all new to me, so I'd appreciate a clearer idea as to whom the
principal players referred to are, and what projects are pushed by Dr. Sagan
and company in preference to the space station project.  Do these other
projects lack validity?
     In the same vein, if the funding for the space station is cut back so far
that nothing meaningful can be done, is there any sense in tying up the money
in futile semi-work instead of using it on a smaller project that can make
meaningful use of the money?
     What I am suggesting is that space station project supporters are as
prone to tunnel vision about their pet project as everyone else.  This does
not, however, mean that they are more right or more wrong than those with whom
they disagree.  Let us remember that there is more than one Important Project.
 
                                                         /Bruce N. Wheelock/
 
                                  arpanet:           bang!crash!bnw at nosc
                                     uucp: {ihnp4 | sdcsvax!bang}!crash!bnw