He gets paid to represent NASA and not ULA, BO, Orbital/ATK or SpaceX... So that's where his purview ends...
Quote from: Rocket Science on 05/13/2018 04:22 pmHe gets paid to represent NASA and not ULA, BO, Orbital/ATK or SpaceX... So that's where his purview ends...First, NASA's job is to advance the United States of America in space -- NASA itself is just another USG bureaucracy; it has no 'standing' of its own and cannot be 'represented.'Second, I don't think he believes his job is limited to NASA and its hardware. He is under the impression that he leads USA's civil spaceflight effort, and isn't going to be the slightest bit parochial about it.
Quote from: AncientU on 05/13/2018 07:43 pmQuote from: Rocket Science on 05/13/2018 04:22 pmHe gets paid to represent NASA and not ULA, BO, Orbital/ATK or SpaceX... So that's where his purview ends...First, NASA's job is to advance the United States of America in space -- NASA itself is just another USG bureaucracy; it has no 'standing' of its own and cannot be 'represented.'Second, I don't think he believes his job is limited to NASA and its hardware. He is under the impression that he leads USA's civil spaceflight effort, and isn't going to be the slightest bit parochial about it.He has no authority over the private companies I listed and as far as the use of commercial vehicles, it has been on the books for some time on the books but is "toothless" if not enforced...
Quote from: Rocket Science on 05/13/2018 09:40 pmQuote from: AncientU on 05/13/2018 07:43 pmQuote from: Rocket Science on 05/13/2018 04:22 pmHe gets paid to represent NASA and not ULA, BO, Orbital/ATK or SpaceX... So that's where his purview ends...First, NASA's job is to advance the United States of America in space -- NASA itself is just another USG bureaucracy; it has no 'standing' of its own and cannot be 'represented.'Second, I don't think he believes his job is limited to NASA and its hardware. He is under the impression that he leads USA's civil spaceflight effort, and isn't going to be the slightest bit parochial about it.He has no authority over the private companies I listed and as far as the use of commercial vehicles, it has been on the books for some time on the books but is "toothless" if not enforced...No authority over them is correct... but he can hire them to meet the Nation's spaceflight needs.His job isn't limited to using NASA's capabilities... and looking out for 'NASA's interests.' If the Nation's spaceflight effort could be advanced by cutting NASA's workforce, I believe that it would be his job to do so. (I know it is blasphemy to talk about reducing USG -- especially NASA -- workforce, but that may be the exact thing that is needed.) In the same vein, if it is the Nation's spaceflight interest to double NASA's workforce, he should do it.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Quote from: Rocket Science on 05/13/2018 09:40 pmQuote from: AncientU on 05/13/2018 07:43 pmQuote from: Rocket Science on 05/13/2018 04:22 pmHe gets paid to represent NASA and not ULA, BO, Orbital/ATK or SpaceX... So that's where his purview ends...First, NASA's job is to advance the United States of America in space -- NASA itself is just another USG bureaucracy; it has no 'standing' of its own and cannot be 'represented.'Second, I don't think he believes his job is limited to NASA and its hardware. He is under the impression that he leads USA's civil spaceflight effort, and isn't going to be the slightest bit parochial about it.He has no authority over the private companies I listed and as far as the use of commercial vehicles, it has been on the books for some time on the books but is "toothless" if not enforced...No authority over them is correct... but he can hire them to meet the Nation's spaceflight needs.
...and as far as the use of commercial vehicles, it has been on the books for some time but is "toothless" if not enforced...
Bridenstine won't cancel Orion and SLS.
Quote from: yg1968 on 05/14/2018 02:18 pmBridenstine won't cancel Orion and SLS.Nor could he do so even if he wanted to. NASA is mandated by law to build the system. Only Congress can cancel it.
He'll have a hard time enough just to push for new commercial initiatives.
I am not convinced that future commercial initiatives will remain commercial: lunar landers are currently commercial but NASA said that they may not remain so; NextStep2 is currently a commercial program but NASA wants to transform it into a governmental program. Even commercial LEO habitats may not remain so, Senator Cruz is fighting against ending ISS.
Quote from: yg1968 on 05/14/2018 02:18 pmBridenstine won't cancel Orion and SLS.NASA Administrators works for the President, and with the NSC dotted line reports to the Vice President. Plus no changes to the budget are done without the OMB Director approval.In other words, it's not Bridenstine's call to make whether the SLS and Orion live or die.
The Obama Administration cancelled Constellation without Congress' prior approval. But it was difficult. In the end, only Ares I got cancelled and replaced with commercial crew.
Quote from: yg1968 on 05/15/2018 02:00 amThe Obama Administration cancelled Constellation without Congress' prior approval. But it was difficult. In the end, only Ares I got cancelled and replaced with commercial crew. Seems to me it was the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 that canceled Constellation. That Act passed the Senate on a voice vote and, unusually, the House adopted the Senate's bill.
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 05/15/2018 02:45 amQuote from: yg1968 on 05/14/2018 02:18 pmBridenstine won't cancel Orion and SLS.NASA Administrators works for the President, and with the NSC dotted line reports to the Vice President. Plus no changes to the budget are done without the OMB Director approval.In other words, it's not Bridenstine's call to make whether the SLS and Orion live or die.It's not only top-down. It also goes bottom up.
Remember the arguments about why Commercial Cargo was really "commercial"? The definition that I use for "commercial" is that the capability can be used for non-government customers.
The frustration is real.
THREAD @JimBridenstine @MarkKirasich I have been an avid space fan since 1957. Watched every launch of Mercury, Gemini, & Apollo. Attended the last Saturn V launch (45 years ago TODAY). The sad note is after #ASTP (in '75) we waited six years for the #Shuttle. We're now...
...post-Shuttle plus EIGHT years and counting. Americans look forward to @NASA_SLS and crewed @NASA_Orion but still in the distance. We need these vehicles, but the vision is blurry, the budget is too small and the slips just keep on coming. On the other hand, ...
...@elonmusk's @SpaceX is designing and building #BFR and #BFS with a vision, strategy, and plan for actually taking people to #Mars in a viable vehicle. @NASA_Orion will never go to Mars. It's too small. It will be great for #LEO and perhaps #Lunar travel excursions, ...
...but definitely not Mars. Even though it uses new technology, it is still #Apollo legacy. It has been a victim of too many administrations, too many changes, too small budgets, and program management that accepts slip after slip. It's time to talk to @realDonaldTrump and...
...@VP, and get some real priorities for this country, and some real money. Otherwise, step aside and let companies like @SpaceX take us on the journey for which we've all been waiting.