Quote from: Stephan on 09/07/2008 06:16 pmStatement of NASA Administrator Michael Griffin on Aug. 18 Email :http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008/sep/HQ_08220_griffin_statement_email.htmlA little late to try closing the barn door.
Statement of NASA Administrator Michael Griffin on Aug. 18 Email :http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008/sep/HQ_08220_griffin_statement_email.html
Quote from: Antares on 09/07/2008 06:15 pmWhat a morning. This email, the press release response from HQ, the response on RandS. I'm glad I've got some vacation coming.Can you provide a link to the "response on RandS?" Thanks!
What a morning. This email, the press release response from HQ, the response on RandS. I'm glad I've got some vacation coming.
Yeah, I've heard the phrase "Its' only money" used a number of times referring to choices in the new program, yet that *is* and always has been the key problem.A part of me wants to believe Griffin was saying it somewhat sarcastically here in this missive, but virtually every other choice he has made so far seems to indicate that is not the case. From where I sit, I think he has picked just about the most costly of options at almost every critical decision point to date.Ross.
Ya know, I gotta wonder who let that email loose to the media and in such short order. I would imagine that Dr. Griffin would only send it to people he trusted. It seems that someone close to him doesn't hold the same opinions he does.
Quote from: tankmodeler on 09/07/2008 07:22 pmYa know, I gotta wonder who let that email loose to the media and in such short order. I would imagine that Dr. Griffin would only send it to people he trusted. It seems that someone close to him doesn't hold the same opinions he does.Or it was someone who had the same feelings, and thought that the media should hear what was said. Therefore congress can shift the "blame game" to the administration rather than Griffin.
Some are speculating that Griffin himself leaked the memo - or at least set up a situation that he knew would lead to a leaked memo. Perhaps Mr. Griffin is ready to move on. It appears that he is ready to leave if he is forced to extend Shuttle at the expense of Ares/Orion. - Ed Kyle
Quote from: edkyle99 on 09/07/2008 08:36 pmSome are speculating that Griffin himself leaked the memo - or at least set up a situation that he knew would lead to a leaked memo. Perhaps Mr. Griffin is ready to move on. It appears that he is ready to leave if he is forced to extend Shuttle at the expense of Ares/Orion. - Ed KyleSounds likely to me, how is Shana Dale as an administrator anyhow?
If we let Russia steal the ISS, a supposedly $100 billion value item, without a fight (say shutting down the power supply, for example), then I guess it wasn't worth $100 billion to us.
Quote from: madscientist197 on 09/07/2008 01:54 pmI feel really sorry for Griffin. As much as he has been vilified on this forum, the lack of funding is the administration's fault - DIRECT wouldn't have been properly funded either.No, this is 100% Griffin's fault. He was the one that picked an extraordinarily expensive architecture that couldn't be funded. He picked the path of minimum political resistance (in 2005). Tell all the shuttle contractors that their fat contracts would continue into Constellation in order to buy their support, pushing the real problems off into the future (which is where we are now).Griffin is the beginning, middle, but not the end of this problem and he needs to wake up to that.
I feel really sorry for Griffin. As much as he has been vilified on this forum, the lack of funding is the administration's fault - DIRECT wouldn't have been properly funded either.
Absolutely, Griffin is 100% accountable. He is the one that directed NASA’s irresponsible smear attacks on the use of EELV’s. Spending $10B on a shiny new rocket was completely Griffin’s detour. If NASA had focused the limited budget on Orion with minimal expenditure to do the bare minimum to human rate an EELV we would not be debating about a gap, we would be moving toward a 2011 launch date per Orion’s original contract without requiring huge budget increases. Any additional funding that might have come per the Presidents promise could have been directed at early development of the moon rockets in parallel to development of the human space access, but this extra hoped for funding should never have been on the mandatory path.
.... you can't cancel the Space Program.
Assuming that "Space Program" means "human spaceflight program", why couldn't it end? Would the United States really be worse off if it did not send astronauts into space on its own launch system, or operate a human space station, or run a deep space human exploration program? Aren't many, many other nations doing just fine without a human space program of this type? - Ed Kyle