Commercial Space: What Role Is It Ready For?, Scott Horowitz, Space News

"For instance, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) has conducted five launches of its simple Falcon 1, four of which failed (three totally, one partially). The company has learned from its failures and is working on upgrades. The more complex Falcon 9, designed to carry cargo to the ISS, is two years behind schedule and has yet to be launched. Moreover, this is the same vehicle they say can carry crew to ISS within three years."

Keith's note: It is rather hilarious for Scott Horowitz to cite one company's developmental woes and yet ignore the immense problems, delays, and cost overruns that his Ares 1 team had. Go look at the Atlas' flight record when they flew John Glenn.

Newsflash, Scott: SpaceX was flying a real rocket from the onset - not a cobbled together one-off rocket (Ares 1-X), half of which was a dummy inert mass that experienced an anomalous post-staging flight profile, damaged its first stage, etc. And Scott, let us not forget, your rocket - one that would still not fly for the first time for another few years (according to your own schedule) - would be flying crew within a similar time frame as Falcon 9 - yet doing so with a spacecaft (Orion) that was constantly reduced in capacity and underpowered due to flaws inherent in your rocket's design.

Even if you were to double the amount of launch/testing problems Falcon 1/Falcon 9 will end up costing a small fraction of the $8-9 billion you wasted and will be working in space sooner - and more cheaply - than Ares 1 would ever have been capable of doing.

Face it Scott - you placed all your (our) money on the wrong rocket.

As for astronauts flying on rockets, I wonder what Ken Bowersox knows that you do not?