My post _was_ about the fact that too many people assume that the NASA administrator has supreme power to do whatever he wants, without understanding that his hands are tied by the White House, Congress, and the OMB. And it is about the fact that too many people assume that they, with limited knowledge, experience, resources, somehow know more about what should be done than the people in the driver's seat.That's not to say that the decisions made by the drivers are all correct. But it is saying that so much of the shouting out in internet land is made without an appreciation for just how complex, and subtle, the whole thing actually is. It's easy to say "the administrator should do X" and a heck of a lot harder when you actually have to spend days poring through Excel spreadsheets to try and figure out how to keep 5000 employees on the payroll and contracts on schedule and toilet paper in the bathrooms.
Understood, and in which case the opportunity is available for such misconceptions to be educated is available, which you've taken (and thankfully allows this thread to get back on topic).QuoteMy post _was_ about the fact that too many people assume that the NASA administrator has supreme power to do whatever he wants, without understanding that his hands are tied by the White House, Congress, and the OMB. And it is about the fact that too many people assume that they, with limited knowledge, experience, resources, somehow know more about what should be done than the people in the driver's seat.That's not to say that the decisions made by the drivers are all correct. But it is saying that so much of the shouting out in internet land is made without an appreciation for just how complex, and subtle, the whole thing actually is. It's easy to say "the administrator should do X" and a heck of a lot harder when you actually have to spend days poring through Excel spreadsheets to try and figure out how to keep 5000 employees on the payroll and contracts on schedule and toilet paper in the bathrooms. Which is great, as I know the issue revolves around some people thinking General Bolden will get into his office at 9am, look at the Constellation path, and keep looking at it until he leaves at the end of the day. Obviously that misconception required addressing. It did not require a prefacing of "well this is the internet" as the reason for some people's misconceptions.So maybe those that know the General can give their opinions on his ability to handle a large organization, and then we're right back on topic.
We don't need "Jobs Programs" to support the Shuttles, EELVs, ISS or any other program. We need a realistic, affordable, sustainable and comprehensive plan to move into space. We don't have any of those. A workable, affordable and successful program would create more jobs than supporting outdated, dangerous and expensive boondoggles. NASA, Congress, Air Force, etc. needs to set their butts down together and come up with a real plan. Want happen though because the system is just too corrupt.
3) What are the important "unrealized opportunities”?Coming into this position, one of the thing most important to me personally, but which I realized I would probably not have sufficient time to address, is the issue of what I call “excess process” at NASA. I’m not going to elaborate extensively on exactly what I mean by “excess process”, as I think it is self-evident. Suffice it to say that, whether we are talking about flight-readiness reviews, resolution of on-orbit nomalies, milestone design reviews, or merely the machinery of bureaucracy, we at NASA spend far too much time generating “buy in” in all directions throughout the organizational hierarchy. Too many people who are minor stakeholders in any given decision believe, and are encouraged by custom to believe, that they particular voice is essential to the process. Almost never are they informed that such is not the case, that a good decision can be made with far less input from many fewer sources. This behavior is almost endemic to government, and is never entirely avoidable to the extent that can be attained in private enterprise, where efficiency in decision making is the lifeblood of an organization. But even in government it can be reduced. If I were to be asked to serve a second term at NASA, this would be my top institutional priority.
On the issue of minor stakeholders in a decision arm waiving or second guessing NASA upper management (i.e. arm chair QBs), I thought Griffin's response to the transition team outlined in the ASAP report was telling (and kind of goes in the direction of what you are saying)Bolden will also have to deal with this "excess process" problem at NASA.
I think it's admirable some people still think Constellation is a happy ship sailing all the way to a 2019 lunar return, but they are now ignoring the reality that has been officially released by Constellation management. The 2019 lunar return has been lost, that's official. I would advise such people to spend more time keeping up to date, and less time quoting three year old releases on spaceref.I would also add that Blackstar's comments about the admin having to worry about excell sheets and bathroom contracts as completely wrong. Most roles are delegated out, already, before he even takes up office.
So what can Bolden and Garver do between their confirmation and the release of the Augustine report?So far as I have been able to determine shuttle extension is not on the table for the Augustine commission but theoretically the Administrator could start the ball rolling for the 2012 shuttle extension plan without any major expenditures. He could possibly look into redirecting the stimulation monies into a more active COTS-D program. Anything else?BTW Blackstar's comment about the Admin. not having much power would seem to be contradicted by Griffin's record to some degree.
There is nothing official.
There is nothing official. The 2020 deadline is unlikely to be met if the ISS is extended. But the decision to extend the ISS has yet to be made officially. It is likely to be made this fall. The budget in the out years (2011-2013) also has an impact on the 2020 deadline.
Quote from: Peter NASA on 05/27/2009 05:02 pmI think it's admirable some people still think Constellation is a happy ship sailing all the way to a 2019 lunar return, but they are now ignoring the reality that has been officially released by Constellation management. The 2019 lunar return has been lost, that's official. I would advise such people to spend more time keeping up to date, and less time quoting three year old releases on spaceref.I would also add that Blackstar's comments about the admin having to worry about excell sheets and bathroom contracts as completely wrong. Most roles are delegated out, already, before he even takes up office.There is nothing official. The 2020 deadline is unlikely to be met if the ISS is extended. But the decision to extend the ISS has yet to be made officially. It is likely to be made this fall. The budget in the out years (2011-2013) also has an impact on the 2020 deadline.
Quote from: Norm Hartnett on 05/27/2009 04:29 pmSo what can Bolden and Garver do between their confirmation and the release of the Augustine report?They can figure out exactly what it is they want to accomplish, which will give them a context to work with the Augustine II conclusions. Bolden has hinted he wants to keep the HSF budget from being cut. Garver has hinted she wants a flight to a NEO before lunar landing. They can put their heads together and figure out how to combine those two things into a coordinate goal. A lot depends on what happens with Ares I-X and Falcon 9 over the summer.
So what can Bolden and Garver do between their confirmation and the release of the Augustine report?
The "decision" about the life-cycle of the ISS is not one that NASA, or even the White House can make alone. It must be ultimately determined by the Congress and what it decides and what it provides the funding for. And right now, if you read the current law, the Congress is pretty clear on its expectation for at least 2020. That, of course, is subject to change, as are all laws, but as for right now--and as of last September when that law was enacted, the betting should be on 2020. The ONLY reason that the continuation of ISS would delay a lunar landing is because of the flatline budget profile in the out-years, which no one--other than OMB--has found to be an acceptable projection, at least that I've heard. Stop drinking the OMB Kool-Aid!!