-
What Mike Griffin Really Thinks About NRC's Space Station Report
by
kcowing
on 10 Dec, 2005 04:04
-
-
#1
by
Chris Bergin
on 10 Dec, 2005 08:50
-
Damn, Griffin really doesn't 'sound' like one would assume from press conferences etc.
Brilliant at times, arrogant in places. It's a great read but I believe he's wrong on the assumption about the general reaction of returning to the Moon as the same as support for the ISS. I also don't think these Internationals are "annoyed and impatient" - they come across as cheated and let down (on ISS construction).
I also get the impression he's missing the international alliances being made on exploration - ones that do not include NASA.
Other than that I like style - sounds a bit like a Yorkshireman with the "do it" as opposed to "what do you think?"
Awesome stuff Keith.
-
#2
by
British NASA
on 10 Dec, 2005 09:11
-
He's no lightweight, but seems to be unaware of outside opinion?
-
#3
by
Andy L
on 10 Dec, 2005 16:13
-
You have to like the way he's written this e-mail. He is a very clever man, but comes across pretty unintimadating via the TV. This e-mail shows a different side of him.
-
#4
by
Rob in KC
on 10 Dec, 2005 16:27
-
Well if you're the head of NASA you've got to be able to communicate, that's a given, despite obviously needing to do the job. I think it's deluded to think other agencies will be willing to work with NASA when they have their own plans in effect and NASA has not delievered on their ISS agreements.
-
#5
by
realtime
on 10 Dec, 2005 16:58
-
If NASA builds the "highway" system, I think the Internationals' plans will be left by the wayside. Who wants to tramp through the brambles when they can ride on the road?
-
#6
by
STS Tony
on 10 Dec, 2005 17:08
-
The problem they will have is if they wait and the money isn't forthcoming for the VSE implementation during the timeline, then they are again waiting for NASA. Once bitten twice shy with the ISS experience.
-
#7
by
Orbiter Obvious
on 10 Dec, 2005 18:11
-
How can emails like this get out? I don't understand how private Mike Griffin emails can find there way to a website? NASA should have better protection or do I not understand something here?
-
#8
by
Chris Bergin
on 10 Dec, 2005 18:24
-
Orbiter Obvious - 10/12/2005 7:11 PM
How can emails like this get out? I don't understand how private Mike Griffin emails can find there way to a website? NASA should have better protection or do I not understand something here?
You don't understand something
Keith is former NASA. He obviously knows people at the top. See how that e-mail has a number of high end NASA people on the cc? It just takes one of those on the cc to foward the e-mail....Keith might know any or all of them from Griffin downwards (and that's his business, not ours).
So pretend for a second you used to work with Bill Parsons (thinking of a name you'll recognise from STS-114) and he wanted to pass this on to you...he's on the cc ("Parsons, William W. (SSC-AA00)") thus would be able to. (Totally pretend senario to explain how, if with the right contacts, you could potentially get hold of something like this.)
-
#9
by
realtime
on 10 Dec, 2005 18:28
-
But they aren't moving ahead with any of their own plans either, except for robotic science missions. No heavy lift plans at all. It's hard to explore the planets on hot air alone, though they and the Russians seem to be giving it their best shot.
-
#10
by
kcowing
on 10 Dec, 2005 20:05
-
Orbiter Obvious - 10/12/2005 1:11 PM
How can emails like this get out? I don't understand how private Mike Griffin emails can find there way to a website? NASA should have better protection or do I not understand something here?
Mike Griffin - and all of the individuals on these emails - are NASA civil servants. They are not supposed to use government email systems for 'private' email. These emails are official government communications -i.e. verything he sends via his nasa.gov email account is official government business. If he wishes to send private email he can use non-governmental means to do so - but if the content of those emails sent via private email accounts includes official government business then they also fall in the same category as email sent from his government account.
-
#11
by
Orbiter Obvious
on 10 Dec, 2005 23:33
-
Thanks. Sorry I didn't word my question very well. I didn't mean to suggest it was a private e-mail of his like hotmail or AOL, I was just facinated how you managed to aquire it without someone hacking into NASA email which I also didn't mean to suggest. I didn't realize you would have means to know how to get hold of these sorts of things.
I sound like I'm prying now so I'll just say that's really cool and rare to see. Don't really understand what its about but I just liked reading how Griffin writes an email.
-
#12
by
lmike
on 11 Dec, 2005 09:00
-
Scotty? Gerst? What sort of tight ship is Mike running there?
-
#13
by
Justin Space
on 11 Dec, 2005 11:01
-
How does Griffin stand up against the likes of O'Keefe and Goldin? I know he's everyones cup of tea with the VSE and O'Keefe wasn't liked for reasons such as cancelling Hubble and I read on another message board that he wasn't one that liked to take a decision.
Looking at this e-mail, how does he come across in comparison?
-
#14
by
Chris Bergin
on 11 Dec, 2005 11:49
-
Never did get that about O'Keefe. He cancelled the HSM after the CAIB went heavy on the need for ISS Safe Haven (not possible with a trip to Hubble). He just had to deal with familes after Columbia, I don't know how much a space telescope would have seemed viable to risk another seven astronauts and an orbiter at that time after having been "on watch" during STS-107.
Sure, I would like to see a HSM-4, but I can understand his decision at the time. I have a feeling he'd of been taken to the cleaners if he had insisted on keeping HSM-4 during the aftermath of 107. I'm also a bit unsure now that HSM-4 doesn't even have a back-up (300 style) plan. No Safe Haven, no back up orbiter rescue mission. Won't happen unless they've had a run of zero ET foam liberation from the danger zones, imho.
He always seems to get a bad rap, mainly because of that decision. I know the guy literally slept four hours a day during a lot of his administration, from a documentary they showed over here. So he hardly could be classed as someone who didn't at least try.
Goldin - only know a bit about him during the X-33.
-
#15
by
UK Shuttle Clan
on 11 Dec, 2005 13:26
-
The HSM has no back up in case of emergancy???
-
#16
by
Chris Bergin
on 11 Dec, 2005 13:38
-
One pad will be out of use for upgrading by the time the HSM-4 is set to launch. While they may have another orbiter ready, they'd never launch again in time. With the ISS, that's not a problem as they are extending how long they can support a Shuttle crew on the outpost for longer periods - as they expand the ISS.
-
#17
by
psloss
on 11 Dec, 2005 13:50
-
Chris Bergin - 11/12/2005 9:38 AM
One pad will be out of use for upgrading by the time the HSM-4 is set to launch. While they may have another orbiter ready, they'd never launch again in time. With the ISS, that's not a problem as they are extending how long they can support a Shuttle crew on the outpost for longer periods - as they expand the ISS.
I probably missed this in an earlier thread, but what's the schedule for taking one of the shuttle pads offline?
Edit: Doh! Read that wrong. OK, revised question: When is Pad A coming back online?
Thanks.
-
#18
by
Flightstar
on 11 Dec, 2005 14:02
-
The way it looks at present is one of the pads will be begining modification mid-2007. Previously it was thought that there would be a mothballing to save money, but last I heard was modification. HSM4 is looking like first quarter 2008, maybe later as the schedule transpires. So even holding two pads open is not an option.
-
#19
by
psloss
on 11 Dec, 2005 14:06
-
Flightstar - 11/12/2005 10:02 AM
The way it looks at present is one of the pads will be begining modification mid-2007. Previously it was thought that there would be a mothballing to save money, but last I heard was modification. HSM4 is looking like first quarter 2008, maybe later as the schedule transpires. So even holding two pads open is not an option.
Hypothetically, would it be feasible to prepare a rescue vehicle as far as possible for launch, roll back and store it in VAB High Bay 2 (for example) and then process the orbiter/stack assigned to the mission for launch? I guess the other question is safety in the VAB...
There was at least one rollback very late in the pad processing flow -- STS-96. In that case, they rolled back out to the pad and launched seven days later; here's the rollback processing report:
http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/status/stsstat/1999/may/5-20-99s.htmThanks,
Philip Sloss
