Author Topic: Frustrated NASA chief vents in internal e-mail over fate of agency  (Read 34124 times)

Offline marsavian

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3216
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 3
Statement of NASA Administrator Michael Griffin on Aug. 18 Email :
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008/sep/HQ_08220_griffin_statement_email.html

A little late to try closing the barn door.


I prefer what he wrote first time. It's good he is standing up for NASA, for VSE, for ISS in his actions behind closed doors. Congress and the future President will not be as myopic as Bush has been in the manned spaceflight gap, in VSE funding and in early ISS demise.
« Last Edit: 09/07/2008 07:00 pm by marsavian »

Offline Jeff Bingham

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1592
  • aka "51-D Mascot"
  • Liked: 38
  • Likes Given: 56
What 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!

Got it in PM...thanks...
Offering only my own views and experience as a long-time "Space Cadet."

Offline marsavian

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3216
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 3
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.

Maybe just maybe he truly believes Ares I is the safest possible manned launcher to replace Shuttle and that it is a price worth paying in terms of schedule and cost. His constant desire to retire Shuttle asap are not inconsistent with this idea.
« Last Edit: 09/07/2008 06:58 pm by marsavian »

Offline khallow

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1954
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 4
There are several things of interest here.  First, he seems to be saying that the "pay as you go" plan was imposed from above and he had predicted such problems with the "Gap" as the current friction with the Russians. Maybe I haven't been paying attention or maybe things didn't happen as he said, but this seems to be a new glimpse into the decision process behind the VSE and Constellation programs.

Second, I see again the rationalization that because the US has spent $100 billion on the ISS, that it will be worth $4 billion or more a year to maintain the ISS (cost includes Space Shuttle launches and ISS maintenance, Antares' numbers seem a bit high). I just don't buy that.

Finally, Griffin is claiming that for the ISS, NASA needs Russia, but the opposite isn't true. I find that dubious, though it is clear that Russia has a stronger bargaining position with a monopoly over transportation after the final years of the Shuttle. This seems to be an extension of the China hysteria he has promoted over the years. Some foreign power is going to do mean things to us because we aren't aggressively expanding space activity. 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.
Karl Hallowell

Offline tankmodeler

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 643
  • Brampton, ON, Canada
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 0
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.
Sr. Mech. Engineer
MDA

Offline bobthemonkey

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1056
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 26
I suspect this leak was planned, and the statement on nasa.gov wasn't exactly that damning of the leak.

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
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.

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.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8566
  • Likes Given: 1356
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.

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
« Last Edit: 09/07/2008 08:43 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline EE Scott

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 356
That would set up a "being able to leave with honor, sticking to my principles" situation, as least superficially and for the moment.
Scott

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
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

Sounds likely to me, how is Shana Dale as an administrator anyhow?

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6404
  • Liked: 529
  • Likes Given: 67
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

Sounds likely to me, how is Shana Dale as an administrator anyhow?

Most likely she would only be acting until the next president names a permanent administrator.
JRF

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
1) My $4B comes from escalating the $3.8B FY04 Shuttle budget while we were in the middle of return to flight.  I don't think that's out of bounds because it was largely the usual suspects who were engaged in RTF activities.

2) The date stamp on the email is August 18.  That's three weeks worth of rattling around before it got out.  It's an easy way to deflect attention: hold onto something for a while to let it have more time to be viral.  One question is who was the third chimpanzee so to speak, which of the folks on the email forwarded it to whom.

3) Shana Dale is an attorney by training.  Her career has been in federal technology policy jobs.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline pierre

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 108
  • Turin, EU
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 21
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.

AFAIK Russia is not trying to "steal" the ISS. The (very unlikely, I hope) scenario with no US astronauts on the ISS that Griffin is referring to, would be caused by two US decisions: retire the Shuttle before an alternative is available and refuse to buy Soyuz flights (mostly the latter, really: the Shuttle is neither necessary nor sufficient for permanent human presence on the station).

So, while the Russian government can be blamed for a number of things, I don't think that they are trying to prevent anyone from accessing the ISS. As a matter of fact, they will probably be very happy to sell Soyuz seats for a very-high-but-still-much-lower-than-STS price.

siatwork

  • Guest
Well, at the very least, respect to Griffin for saying that on his watch NASA won't play around with cutting off power/gyros/TDRSS/etc.. etc.. on the ISS just "to get even"[with Russia], if the Washington politicians don't let him buy the Soyuz seats.

[edit] come to think of it, that the suggestion of crippling the ISS on purpose out of spite, because of a hissy fit in DC, would even enter someone's mind is depressing
« Last Edit: 09/07/2008 10:45 pm by siatwork »

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
Ed,
There was a rumor earlier in the year that Griffin had sorted out a new job for himself, ready to leave at the end of September. The rumor did the rounds and we've been watching for an announcement - but nothing has happened yet.

You might be right, but I don't think he would want to damage his own reputation by leaking something like this deliberately. This isn't really doing him any favors. And if he wanted out, I have no doubts he could get out a lot easier than doing this.


I think this was leaked by someone else. There are plenty of people around him who aren't happy at present. He sure hasn't been playing well with others during his tenure at the helm. This looks to me like the 'general dissatisfaction' is creeping higher and higher within the agency's management structure.

Ross.
« Last Edit: 09/07/2008 10:29 pm by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2995
  • Florida
  • Liked: 1548
  • Likes Given: 1385
I read some of the comments on it, was shocked. They have no idea that the space program costs <1% of the governments budget, and they of course Ridicule Bush. They want to close down the Space Program. Ive been alright about Direct and somewhat of a critic to the Ares I and V,  but you can't cancel the Space Program.
KSC Engineer, astronomer, rocket photographer.

Offline GeorgeFun

  • Member
  • Posts: 3
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
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.

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.

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.
« Last Edit: 09/08/2008 12:14 am by GeorgeFun »

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
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.

Congress is the one that directed NASA to use Shuttle derived architecture, so EELV is a non starter at this point.  Griffin is at fault for mandating the specific architecture rather than listening to those under him.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8566
  • Likes Given: 1356
.... you can't cancel the Space Program.

Oh boy.  A very interesting thought.  Perhaps this belongs in another thread, but my mind filled with questions when I read this statement. 

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   

Offline kfsorensen

  • aerospace and nuclear engineer
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1568
  • Huntsville, AL
    • Flibe Energy
  • Liked: 150
  • Likes Given: 0
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

The US can and probably will (through neglect of long-term actions) kill the human spaceflight program.  I say so what.  If we really needed men in space the military would be doing it.  They looked into doing it a few decades ago (MOL) and decided against it.  That was a wise move.

All of the things that need to get done in space don't require people.  The only mission that needs people is space tourism, and that's not NASA's responsibility.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0