I think it is important that the White House and OMB hear what you just said.
to eliminate the gap or significantly reduce it would have a significant negative impact on the long-term exploration program.
Yes, what staff is pointing out, it would be the best of all worlds.
Well, that would be then more like Option 5C, flexible path Shuttle derived?
From your lips to the President's ears.
we believe that is true. We, of course, assume good management of that additional money.
So that would still get you out on things like asteroids or one of the Martian moons utilizing an EELV?
Did your committee discuss an Atlas or a Delta on the EELVs?
It is the additional science and technology that you get under that.
We spent over two decades constructing the ISS, and we now are talking about using it for only 5 years.
Since we have a consensus of opinion that we need to get NASA out of LEO, do you have a preference on the architecture?