Cernan Calls On Bolden To Resign

Right on Geno!

With all due respect for past accomplishment I think Cernan should resign. Or something...

I think Mr. Cernan should fade out into the past along with all the other dinosaurs without the brainpower to adapt.

There are many parts of this world at risk of sinking into isolation. There are many despots that would take joy in isolating the peoples of this or that Muslim country. NASA has never been about isolation. The words the NASA administrator spoke were about outreach, an openness and desire to work together, one day. It is natural that any NASA administrator make it clear that we are a people of Earth, and we seek to explore, together.

The commentary I've seen has been disappointing, presenting the United States as interested only in working with the friendlies who are already in the club. I believe the future is in extending the list of friendlies.

As we continue with this strife over the new Space policy, realize that it is merely a policy that says that blank checks are a thing of the past. R&D is one way to assure that when programs for Exploration get a go ahead they are more assured of costs and schedule, and as importantly, they are more about affordability and improvement. The new policy is about connecting with American industry as well, rather than fostering the isolated monopolies of the past. The new policy accepts as a given that the Exploration of space will never be sustainable unless access to low Earth orbit is significantly more affordable, reliable (safer) and routine.

We should avoid isolationist tendencies with no long term potential in favor of those policy statements that ring true. And reaching out is a statement that rings true. It may be a very long time before a payload or an astronaut from this Muslim country or other flies with us. But remember 15 or so years passed from the time of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project to the end of the Cold War. At that time we were near a gap in human access to space. Would this link-up have seemed a priority then? One day we would build a Station with Russia. And today Russia continues to link to the rest of the world. One day soon it may be so linked it's one more boring, predictable, political meeting after another, alongside talks with Germany or France.

We should keep things in perspective.

This is really just group-think on network television. Cernan's demand is rooted in premises and conclusions that are all worthy of debate, but not settled. (Shouldn't they get Buzz and the other 6-7 astronauts on their side first?) Therefore his argument is not enough to support the conclusion.

I always said that Obama wants to be viewed as 'not like any other politician'

His NASA outreach to Muslim countries is indicative of how he wants to be viewed.

His 2011 Budget and Policy re NASA is indicative of how he wants to be viewed.

Whatever happened to that "all mankind" in "we came in piece for all mankind"?

The Muslim world is being pulled in to directions. Modernism or fundamentalism. The Muslim world once was the cradle of enlightenment, and there is no reason that Muslims can't live in piece with the rest of mankind.
Much will depend on how much they
feel there contribution will be respected and welcomed in the most progressive activities human culture is engaged in.

That said, Charlie Bolden is the last
person I would send to deliver that
message. What can I say, as a diplomat, Charlie Bolden makes a great Marine Corp. General.

As for Cernan' comments. He is entitled to his opinion.

The polarization in the states is really wild. People really mark themselves as crazy or not with their reactions to this (non-)story.

If I might add another thought on Cernan's written statement. It would be curious to see if he believes he is presenting his views to those who would support an alternative policy (or a return to prior policy?) inclusive of both the money required and the other things such as R&D in balance? I find it beyond odd that at no time do any proponents of a destination or mission/timeline policy ever state total top-line funding numbers, nor do they ever refer to what lies beyond that immediate mission, needing R&D, or about other parts of NASA in balance, nor do they ever talk about access to space needing to be significantly more affordable, reliable (safer) and routine if Exploration is ever to be sustainable.

Both past and current policy could use a dose of such a view, because denying the numbers disconnects either money, time or objectives (or all).

ThatNasaEngineer and GREverett,

You've restored my faith in humanity (at least that small part of it that posts on space-related websites). I agree with your inclusive bent, and I'd add that there's a real national security benefit to these soft-power kinds of things. It's well worth a couple days of Charlie's time, even if it isn't in line with NASA's charter.

I'd also note that, while defending Ares 1, Gene complained about water landing without mentioning that Ares 1's under-performance stripped Orion of its ability to dry-land. He kinda lost technical cerdibility in my eyes there.

This story highlights the depressing fact that this administration cannot articulate its space policy or its foreign policy. A shame, from my point of view, since I see value in both.

I would like to point out some things. I think they are obvious but I shall attempt to point them out anyway.

The problems between the Muslim world and non-Muslim world (with the USA as its symbolic leader) are serious issues. When Obama was elected he was not elected to be President of NASA, he was elected to be President of the United States. And as much as space cadets like myself really don't like to admit it, many of the problems the President is expected to deal with are more important than the space program. International politics being a good example.

Now, in the Muslim world the USA often does not enjoy a good reputation and that has been a real problem. What people think of you matters in the real world. What people think of the USA matters in the real world.

But NASA is a bit of an exception. Even people that despise the USA or some of its policies respect NASA. We went to another planet and announced it as something we did for everybody. We didn't try to claim it for our own country, we didn't try to make anyone feel small because we did it and they didn't. We went there to prove we could do it and to prove our way of doing things was better than the way our biggest competitor was using at the time. So NASA has more respect in some parts of the world than the overall US government does.

So, in my opinion, Charlie Bolden was a good choice to send on a goodwill mission to represent America in that part of the world. Not only did he represent something most people around the world are proud of, the space program, he didn't look like just another old white guy from the west telling everybody what they had to do to shape up enough to meet our standards. I think it was a wise choice to send him.

For those that believe Charlie Bolden should have been kept home to deal with issues involving NASA I would suggest two things: One, the policies the new NASA administrator has put in place and are being implemented at a steady pace. Arguably too fast a pace for some. Two, any civil servant that works for the President may be assigned any duty that the President deems useful to the United States. If the civil servant feels they can't do the assignment, for any reason, they may end up stepping down. But most would do their best. In this case, I suspect Administrator Bolden felt the trip was a good idea. As do I.

I am a space cadet. I have been all my life. But I am smart enough to know that the world does not revolve around the space program. I think it is time that many of us should begin acting like grown-ups about this whole thing.

Pork, bloat and waste are being slowly pushed out with much effort. Enterprise, freedom and opportunity are being slowly drawn in with risk and some fear. But change is coming. And it's long overdue. Space is going free-enterprise and international.

This is just the beginning. Those who can adapt will be part of it. Those who cannot adapt will be left behind. Thus it has always been.

It's kind of sad seeing a hero like Cernan jump the shark like this.

Bolden just inadvertantly gave the opponants of ObamaSpace a great advantage. Regardless of his original meaning or Obama's intent.

This was a PR blunder of a magnitude that ObamaSpace will have trouble recovering from.

Bolden never should have left the country at this incredibly critical time for NASA.

Stupid move.

This is a space policy civil war and every weapon is going to be used. Bolden just handed the other side a Howitzer.

This is another case of the media just not knowing who to talk to besides ex-astronauts, politicians, (and Mike Griffin one more time).

You are a wise man, J Nobles.

This is another case of old astronauts basking in their glory not paying attention for decades to our space program suddenly waking up to fire off a few ill considered comments.

Bolden is doing great work for NASA.

At the very least he keeps his helicopters flying with being a pilot.

This is a space policy civil war and every weapon is going to be used. Bolden just handed the other side a Howitzer.
What a joke above!

At the very least he did not get ask to be removed by his management:
http://www.check-six.com/Crash_Sites/Cernan-Helo-1971.htm
The Helicopter that Fell to Earth

Gene Cernan's Bell 47 Crash

January 23, 1971
"Beep-Beep"

As a part of his Lunar Module training, Cernan flew several helicopter simulations, in order to keep his skills sharp in the event of the primary crew's inability to man the mission.

Shortly after 9 AM, on January 23rd, 1971, Cernan took off from Patrick AFB for a short, one-hour, practice flight in a Bell 47G helicopter. Flying south from the base along the Banana River, he continued offshore over the Atlantic Ocean before turning west toward the Florida town of Malabar. As he overflew the middle of the Indian River, he charged his flight path to the northwest, while cruising at about 300 feet altitude. Cernan continued a gradual descent until the helicopter's left skid caught the water between a small island and the west shore of the Indian River.
Investigating the Cause...

Astronaut James A. Lovell, the mission commander from Apollo 13, was the chairman of the investigative board, with other members of the investigating team being: Conway H. Roberts, Aviation Safety Officer at the Manned Spacecraft Center; Harold E. Ream, Senior Manned Spacecraft Center Pilot; Dick M. Lucas, Chief of Manned Spacecraft Center's Aircraft Maintenance and Quality Assurance Branch; and Astronaut Alan L. Bean.

On October 18, 1971, a NASA press release stated that “misjudgment in estimating altitude” was the primary cause of the crash. The board listed possible mitigating factors which may have contributed to Cernan's failure to realize that he was flying into the water. These included a lack of familiar objects on the river surface to help him judge altitude, possible visual focusing on a false water surface because of the water's millpond smoothness and a change in sun reflection on the water cause by the change in course just prior to the accident.

The board also conjectured that Cernan's extensive experience with high-speed aircraft may have contributed to his altitude misjudgment. The thought goes: the lower a pilot flies in a jet aircraft, the faster the surface appears to pass by. The effect is not as pronounced in a slower aircraft such as a helicopter.
James McDivitt, an Apollo Manager at the time, demanded that Cernan be removed from flight status and not be given command of Apollo 17, as the master Apollo manning plan called for. However, Cernan was defended by the chief astronaut, Deke Slayton, and given the Apollo 17 command. Upset by the decision, McDivitt resigned as an Apollo Manager shortly after the Apollo 16 mission in June of 1972.

Gene Cernan went to the moon on the final mission of the lunar Apollo program. Cernan became "the last man on the moon" since he was the last to re-enter the Apollo Lunar Module during its third and final extra-vehicular activity (EVA).

Shortly before his final steps, he spoke these immortal words: "As we leave the Moon at Taurus-Littrow, we leave as we came, and God willing, as we shall return, with peace and hope for all mankind. As I take these last steps from the surface for some time to come, I'd just like to record that America's challenge of today has forged man's destiny of tomorrow. Godspeed the crew of Apollo 17."

Regarding his 1971 helicopter accident: in later accounts, one of which was written by Cernan himself in an autobiography, it is revealed that Cernan was flying too low and showing off for nearby boaters. Cernan often describes the experience as "Mr. Toad's Wild Ride."

In 1976, Cernan retired both from the Navy as a Captain, and from NASA, going into private business. His career in aviation remained relatively calm, until a 2001 trip to the Czech Republic... when Cernan was flying, as a passenger, on another helicopter (story coming soon).

Yep Cernan is nothing more then a toad at this point.

Lets take the word "Muslim" out of the equation. If he said that his foremost priority was to do outreach to Canada what would we do? I would say my reaction is the same. That is not NASAs mission. There are 3 possibilities here: 1)Charlie really believes this is NASA's main priority, 2)He does not but is being a loyal soldier, or 3)He is incompetent and was not authorized by the Whitehouse to say what he did.

In 2 of the 3 cases above, he should be fired or resign. If he does not believe what he said, then resign and tell the world why. If he is incompetent he should resign as he would no longer have the backing of Obama. Since he will not resign, I assume he truly believes this BS. In that case, NASA is lost. As I stated on a previous thread, his butt should be in DC working the new plan. Everything else, is a waste of time/money.

In a year from now, when we still have no clear direction in HSF, remember why. Elections have consequences and what we see in this administration from healthcare to the oil spill reaction is amateur hour. It would be funny were not so serious.

Editor's note: excellent point. This issue has nothing to do with Muslims. He could have easily said French-speaking or German-speaking nations; countries with lots of Tibetan buddhists (Nepal, Bhutan, Tibet, and India) or some other non-American group of people. While it is great for NASA to be thinking of things in a global context at the end of the day it is an American space agency first and foremost.

"Whatever happened to that "all mankind" in "we came in piece for all mankind"?"

It was left on a plaque on the moon. It was nothing more than PR fluff that was meant to score a few sound bite points in the cold war.

"for all mankind" appears nowhere in NASA's charter. Per Congressional authorization, NASA (and its predecessor N.A.C.A.) have only the purpose of advancing American aerospace technology in order to make American military and industry more competitive in the world. The American taxpayers fund NASA for this purpose alone - NASA is not an international entity. If NASA is to be diverted to some other purpose of questionable Constitutional propriety, then Congress needs to provide the necessary changes in NASA's charter and offer acceptable Constitutional rationale for whatever that may be.

I suggest studying some of the history of how N.A.C.A. and NASA came to be before rushing to Bolden's defense. Cernan, Griffin, etc. have hit the nail on the head in their responses. (And the word your spell checker should have found is 'peace'.)

All that Obama & Bolden are really going to accomplish with this is to further enrage the American electorate to add another log on the coming fire of the November elections.
This will not play well in Peoria.

Hey! How about getting Buzz (or some other astronauts) some state dept. credentials? We can send him over there to pet the Muslims or all the other "isolated" places and people. Charlie has his hands full implementing this ridiculous plan his boss cooked up!

I'll gladly echo spacedout's and Keith's point here, and I'd like to add to it. In addition to what they said, I'd like to add that it was my understanding that the US had a Department of State to take care of that sort of outreach, people who are trained not to put their foot in their mouth while on travel. Why am I spending my taxes on such a department, when we're going to choose to just send Bolden instead, especially when he's got plenty of work here that he should be doing?

And yes, he has plenty of work he should be doing right here, right now! Why should we be worried about space programs in countries halfway across the world when our own is suffering a brain drain right now? By right now, I don't mean that we'll lose some folks in a few months when the shuttles retire, I mean right now as in even as you're reading this. I'm an Orion worker and have somehow managed to survive the cuts so far, but I watched the massive cuts on the Denver side a couple of weeks ago, and I'm watching the Houston side cuts going on right now. Some of these folks will move over to defense space, where they'll learn how to wage war in space instead of sharing it in peace with all mankind (kinda goes against the whole outreach idea, if you think about it). Others will leave the aerospace industry entirely. All are taking their knowledge and experience with them, and most won't come back. There's little on the NASA side right now, since all these great projects that the Obama plan claims to have are still months to years away from actually starting work.

What can Bolden do about this? As we've mentioned, he should be up in DC, pounding on doors and getting Congress, as well as the American public, to listen. If this new space plan is so great, then he should be working on how to communicate it effectively to get the point across, in order to gain support and get things passed so that we can start getting programs up and running to absorb the knowledge that is otherwise evaporating at an alarming rate. If, on the other hand, he can't find a way to effectively sell the plan - if the plan really isn't that great at all - then he needs to work with Congress to reshape the plan into something that both sides can agree on. Either way, he should have enough work on his plate to get US space program in gear (you know, the program belonging to the folks whose taxes pay his salary) that making other countries feel good about themselves shouldn't be anywhere even remotely near the top of his to-do list right now.

Inspiring the world is a consequence of what NASA does, but not the goal.

NASA's goal is to push the envelope of aerospace with bold missions. If it does not do that, it will loose the ability to inspire.

The X-planes, Mercury through Shuttle, and the unmanned probes have inspired me for nearly forty years because of their boldness, their daring, and the knowledge and experiences they provided. We need more of that!

> It would be funny were not so serious.

Melodrama. NASA isn't lost. What do you think this means, they're going to build space mosques? Bolden is trying to be nice to people who hate you, and you can't think past the end of your own nose. Keep blaming Obama for all your problems.

I think the people that are highly disturbed by this are already on the anti-Obama bandwagon.

Bolden's doing a good methodical job, and it's a battle that only requires patience. It is going to be won.

It is just regrettable that it's a battle to begin with.

Do any of you Obamaspace supporters actually work at NASA? No one I know (that's right, zero) at NASA would actually agree that our leadership has a clue, much less a plan. I'd just love to know where all of you guys are coming from.
Attempts to discredit Cernan because he crashed a helicopter...how pathetic.

"Editor's note: excellent point. This issue has nothing to do with Muslims."

Agreed.

"While it is great for NASA to be thinking of things in a global context at the end of the day it is an American space agency first and foremost."

Completely disagree. NASA is a US govt administration. As such they are trying to apply the US govt policy on what they are supposed to. Diplomacy is one such charter that serves the USA. So as an american space agency they are doing their work. They are not the agency of the NASA fans but of the american people. And the american people most assuredly think it is more important to have peace in the mid East rather than pretty much anything else. I am sure you know why.

It's a shame that nothing else is being talked about from this rather good interview. I especially liked this part, so I cut it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq5O6LtTHGg

Perhaps people will listen once their hate-buttons are not being pressed.

Irrespective of your view of President Obama's space vision, I really think that Administrator Bolden should be kept away from live microphones from now on. He has made several major slips that have hardened opposition to the President's policies. He generally comes across as rather insincere with his tears-on-tap. Worse still, he always strikes me as being generally ill-preparared and badly briefed.

Just tell the media that he is 'busy running the agency' and get someone from PAO who can be relied to keep on message and deploy spin more effectively for public statements.

It's about time someone in NASA has spoken of reaching out to nations other than those in Europe and Japan. Remember, this Agency and our Federal government has spent billions of dollars trying to 'save' the Russian Space Agency and maintain a 'non-hostile' relation. This is certainly money that could have been used to develop transport technology and assure our lead in the 'space race'. We've done a lot to sustain the European Space Agency and we're embarking on an education outreach campaign with these countries. Why must we continue to cater to the same countries? Further, it baffles me that all of these engineers and congressional folks want to cry about not having a space transport vehicle for several years. Duh!!!! This has been the plan for some time - remember the cancellation of the shuttle???? Numerous scenarios using transport vehicles supplied by other countries and/or spacecraft developers have been discussed and planned for transporting supplies and astronauts to the Space Station and for retrieving biological samples from the Station. Were these engineers not involved??

True, the Agency does have its problems. Folks seem to forget that in 2005 when the 'vision for space exploration' was announced, three NASA Centers = ARC, Langley, and Glenn - were faced with closing. There was an outcry and much opposition from those most affected. Centers like JSC had so much work that some of their work was off loaded to these Centers 'to make them whole', keep them from closing, and to avoid massive layoffs. Efforts like this are also a possibility for the new direction.

Also, when the VSE was announced 2005, a team of folks went to work on ESAS and on the plans to shift dollars from other programs to make VSE work. Most of the ESAS content was resurrected from old plans to return to the moon and to conduct Martian exploration. There are ways to fold some of those plans into the 'new' vision for space exploration....and now we have some money.

So, I say quit your crying. Just as we came together to develop and implement the ESAS plan (with no money), let's see how we can make our new direction work so that the US can remain a leader in space exploration, create challenging and rewarding career opportunities, and continue to inspire the world.

I think he just did it to bring some attention to the situation.

Fact is that NASA is straying from its mission of exploring air and space technology to become another diplomatic shoehorn for the Whitehouse.
It might be a forgivable if it had a chance for success, but I doubt that.

The Russians tried using their own space program as a means for outreach to other nations, but as it turns out few people at home were paying attention to space and even fewer people abroad were tempted to give a damn.

In the end the Apollo moon landings will be remembered for generations to come, while this chapter in NASA's life will probably be forgotten by the next presidential election.

I think Bolden and Obama are squandering their opportunity to make history.

I have to agree with this totally rationale and forward thinking response. While I don't agree that is the primary goal of NASA I certainly think it is very good for NASA to work with all countries and faiths as the good will generated from that will spill over to other things that can be done as a united effort with the resulting rewards. And I agree that the huge amount of zealous "Americans" who berate this are backward and phobic. This America first and gung ho USA attitude is not the American way. There is nothing wrong with being first, and much good, but how you got there is more important. And to do it with other countries is not only diplomatically beneficial, it should also be financially beneficial. And we need to finance NASA more along the lines of a profit making business, it will never be that granted, than a government funded jobs program. That would also make the people working for NASA or its' contractors feel more worthwhile as well as becoming more productive.

The problem with this policy is that they have left it to late with scraping the shuttle and orion NASA is efectivly grounded it could be a decade or more before they have a capability to put an American in space let a lone a Muslim , had this policy been thought about a couple of years ago it could have enabled an astronaut from a Muslim country to fly on the shuttle , the soviet union had a simmiler program in the 1970s which enabled smaller country's who could not afford a space program to fly in space

Editor's note: Er, a Muslim DID fly on the Space Shuttle - Sultan bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud - STS-51-G in 1985 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sultan_bin_Salman_bin_Abdulaziz_Al_Saud

I'd just love to know where all of you guys are coming from.
Attempts to discredit Cernan because he crashed a helicopter...how pathetic.

Can you read and think for yourself?

James McDivitt, an Apollo Manager at the time, demanded that Cernan be removed from flight status and not be given command of Apollo 17, as the master Apollo manning plan called for. However, Cernan was defended by the chief astronaut, Deke Slayton, and given the Apollo 17 command. Upset by the decision, McDivitt resigned as an Apollo Manager shortly after the Apollo 16 mission in June of 1972.

You wanted an Astronaut as NASA administrator, you got one! It is not Cernan this is for sure!

absolutely correct... excellent post, I agree completely...

NASA is supposed to be a SPACE agency, not a diplomatic arm of ANY administration...

NASA's involvement in diplomacy and "feel-good" is a result of its accomplishments IN SPACE...

Given Bolden's failure to convince congress to sign on to ObamaSpace so far and mis-steps while traveling abroad now, this is a PR disaster.

Bolden may be one of the most powerful allies in preventing ObamaSpace from taking full root.
(one may even wonder if it is intentional?) Nah.

Keep Bolden right where he is. A more effectual administrator for ObamaSpace is not what I want.

"NASA (and its predecessor N.A.C.A.) have only the purpose of advancing American aerospace technology in order to make American military and industry more competitive in the world."

And that is exactly what this administration is trying to do. SpaceX IS American Industry and stands to take tons of business from other countries' launch systems.

The new budget is trying to invest in more technology and research, just like NASA is supposed to do, at American Labs and Universities along with great planetary science.

This debate about this interview is nothing more than melodrama about the real debate over this budget, the canceling of Constellation, and the scheduled layoffs of Shuttle employees. Frankly, I thought the interview was a good one, once you get past the first few minutes of "I'm on Muslim TV so let me say something nice to Muslims" This interview hubbub will blow over and well get back to questions like, how long (and how much) will it take for SpaceX to do HSF.

And as a reply to Cernan, I think this budget has lots of smaller challenges and individual goals. It is focused on many things. It is a blueprint for a blueprint, a mission for a mission. Not an underfunded de-scoped flag plant.

"Can you read and think for yourself?"

Yes. I would still value Cernan's opinion, even though he had a moment of poor judgement. And, I didn't ask to have an astronaut as an administrator. (Not sure where that came from.) I would prefer to have an engineer. Oh yeah, we had one before this disastrous administration took office! And THAT previous administrator often attended technical meetings and could ask the tough questions. That made me "feel good" about our SPACE agency.

"I think this budget has lots of smaller challenges and individual goals. It is focused on many things. It is a blueprint for a blueprint, a mission for a mission. Not an underfunded de-scoped flag plant."

Focus? There is no "there" there. More like a license to stuff around. Apparently NASA now has nothing better to do than test soccer balls.

http://g.sports.yahoo.com/soccer/world-cup/blog/dirty-tackle/post/NASA-piles-on-the-Jabulani-hate?urn=sow,254182

Captain Gene Cernan comes from a different era. An era where we worshiped hot-shot military jet pilots/astronauts. That era is long gone but the memory isn't. If Geno wants to show off his hot shot flying skills and crash a U.S. Government heli into the drink then I worship him even more. You know he was trying to put on the best show possible!

Also, if Captain Cernan wants to call out the current NASA Administrator we ought to listen. His voice may be a little diminished over time but he wouldn't be doing this if it wasn't VERY important.

Amen and well said!

At it's root, Cernan's comments to congress (the pdf above), seem to be the latest in the long debate of HSF vs. everything else that NASA does.

"We came from Alan Shepard’s flight in 1961 to the Space Station and Shuttle today with a side trip or two to the moon along the way."

He sums up the history of NASA as if all the accomplishments are those of human flight, with no mention of Hubble (future telescopes will not be launched on manned craft) and Mars Rovers that have also inspired many.

"However, when one examines the FY2011 budget proposal, nowhere is there to be found one penny allocated to support space exploration. Yes, there has been much rhetoric on transformative technology, heavy lift propulsion research, robotic precursor missions, significant investment in commercial crew and cargo capabilities, pursuit of cross-cutting space technology capabilities, climate change research, aeronautics R&D, and education initiatives. Yet nowhere do we find any mention of the Human Exploration of Space
and nowhere do we find a commitment in dollars to support this national endeavor. We (Armstrong, Lovell and myself) have come to the unanimous conclusion that this budget proposal presents no challenges, has no focus, and in fact is a blueprint for a mission to “nowhere.”

It's not just rhetoric, it's in the budget. And those are all good things. With NASA on the verge of discovering a habitable zone, earth sized planet (or soccer ball if it pleases you), I would hate to see many of these other great missions sacrificed.

But, keep in mind that even Steve Squyres (of the Mars Rovers) and guys like Elon Musk have Human Space Explorations dreams as well. They just want it to be part of a sustainable program.

Oh yeah, we had one before this disastrous administration took office! And THAT previous administrator often attended technical meetings and could ask the tough questions.

Really, how did the steroid injections work out?

Should we show off for the Fisherman more?

The infection at the injection site is healing now. Go Holland!

Forget the Muslim comment, forget whether Constellation should be canceled, the fact is that this administration, through every action it has taken, has sent a clear message that is doesn't support human space exploration. The President may give a 20 minute speech at KSC and say a lot or pretty words about asteroids and going to Mars (even invoking the Kennedy phrase "return them safely to Earth") but the fact is his Feb. budget is still the principle governing document for the direction the Agency has to follow. Until the Administration, through the budget process or direction from OMB, tells NASA to develop a strategic plan and road map to conduct a unified human space exploration program (whatever the target, whatever architecture is appropriate), and then supports that plan with budget and Presidential direction to make sure it is carried out, the Agency remains on a path to nowhere regarding human space flight beyond low Earth orbit. The emphases stated by Bolden just shows what Obama's true priorities are for NASA. Having NASA conduct educational programs is fine, it always has, but is NASA the Dept of Education? Promoting international relations is good when it advances the space goals of the US, but is NASA the State Department? The reality is this Administration doesn't want to conduct a human space exploration program beyond low Earth orbit, but like everything else it does, it will blow as much smoke and tell whatever lies it has to try and placate its detractors, while really advancing their true agenda.

"Gene complained about water landing without mentioning that Ares 1's under-performance stripped Orion of its ability to dry-land. He kinda lost technical cerdibility in my eyes there."

An you have lost technical 'cerdibility' in my eyes. As I've stated MANY times, Ares I has plenty of performance to lift Orion. Orion's crew module is too heavy to land under chutes that can be packed into the vehicle. That wouldn't be solved with more Ares I performance.

As far as the old land/water debate, most people forget that Orion MUST be able to land safley in water (launch aborts), So the question is do you make it capable of BOTH land or water or not? The engineering solution reached was "not".

ok, I've had enough fun for one week. Keith, we're ready for another thread...

How's SpaceX's next launch coming along?

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/7098305.html

NASA's crucial missions hijacked by liberal agenda.

An excellent editorial on NASA's new role in the liberal agenda.

A couple key statements:

"Under Obama, liberals are determined to reinvigorate the reputation of government, to prove that only the state can get important things done."

Obviously does not square well with Constellation, that did not seem to be able to get anything right.

"When every institution is yoked to an overarching philosophy or mission, its actual purpose can become an afterthought."

"President Obama likes to say "if we could put a man on the moon" we can do anything, from socializing medicine to abandoning fossil fuels. That's nonsense on stilts for a host of reasons. But it's also ironic, given that we can't even put a man on the moon anymore. Not when NASA's foremost priority is boosting the self-esteem of children and Muslims."

Gene Cernan holds Engineering Degrees from Perdue and the Naval Postgraduate School. He has made 3 water landings in space craft. He flew a Gemini mission and survived an overheated space walk in a damaged suit. He has been to the moon twice, has lived 3 days on the moon, drove a car on the moon. He has observed the earth from a 240,000 miles away. I would say he has a unigue perspective and knowledge of human space flight. He is entitled to his opinion and I value it.

Yes also:
BUSINESS: Cernan joined Coral Petroleum, Inc., of Houston, Texas, as Executive Vice President-International. His responsibilities were to enhance Coral's energy related programs on a worldwide basis.

So I guess he must have a business interest not to have business with anyone outside of Texas Oil.

also the lame talks at Purdue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IXQJwGOPJ8
Cernan appears to think the Earth's Moon is a planet for some reason.
also :
Neil Armstrong
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxoouBHtyk4
you can see Mike Griffin looking bored.
Then a non-scientific discussion about engineering in Hell.

It's laughable reading those here who would harshly criticize a great man like Cernan, simply because they disagree with his position on an issue. Makes ME wonder what their credentials are. It's the equivalent of a cubicle-sitting clerical worker calling the President of the United States an idiot.

Oh wait....

It's the equivalent of a cubicle-sitting clerical worker calling the President of the United States an idiot.

Yes I know, It is likely from the CxP offices in the O&C building that are empty built before the program was "REAL". Maybe good ole Capt Cernan will purchase some swamp land in the sunshine state!

Laughable is correct!

I would offer my opinion on what may seem like a minor point to most.
But I feel it is important regarding what is expected of Mr. Bolden or any
other administration official. I think there may be some confusion on this
issue in the general public.

Mr. Bolden is not like "any other civil servant". He is a "political appointee".
This implies that he "serves at the pleasure of the President"; so, if he
doesn't "please the president", the president can ask for his resignation
and he, like any other appointee, is expected to have the resignation
letter on the president's desk pretty much within a business day. As
such, Mr. Bolden and all other appointees (I think the number is
around 5000-10K for all of government) are considered to make up
"the Obama administration". All these people are expected to submit a resignation letter when the person in the Oval office changes.

SIDEBAR
Now, on occasion a political appointee will be reappointed by the next administration (for example Secretary of Defense Gates), but these are
the exception rather than the rule. However I do think that more lower
level appointees are carried over than are Cabinet level appointees.
For example, Goldin was carried over from Bush 41 to Clinton. And he
tried real hard to stay on in Bush 43 staying in the job the better part
of the first year of Bush 43. By the way NASA, has 3 political appointees
out of about 20000 civil servants.
END SIDE BAR

So, as a political appointee, Mr. Bolden is expected to, in public, tow the
company line. He certainly cannot get on NASA watch during his off duty
hours and criticize the Obama administration as do other non-political
appointee civil servants. Well, I guess he could, we do have free speech in
this country. However, if a political appointee does on his free time publicly
and often express personal opinions which are contrary to the current
administration, he very likely will be asked to resign his job. They can't
do that to other civil servants in government. Although at the highest
executive levels of government one can get reassigned to such
an undesirable job if one becomes publicly objectionable that one may end
up resigning anyway. That does happen on occasion at NASA (as well as
throughout the Executive Branch) to executives at the level of center
director, associate administrators, and managers of major programs.

My main point is that political appointees are NOT like other civil servants.
They are considered part of the current president's "administration". If an
an ordinary CS gets asked to travel to the middle east and he refuses for any
reason (let's say he doesn't like the food), he can't be asked to resign like a political appointee. When a political appointee is given such an assignment
by the president, his choices are only really to go (he may try and negotiate
details like timing, etc.) or to resign. Political appointees know all this going
into the job. In this sense there is more"public service" to their jobs than
there is for the typical civil servant. They are being asked to serve their
country and to adhere to the expectations that have evolved for
presidential administration officials. They know it may lead to political criticism where they can't attempt a defense by saying something like "I
just went because the President told me to go. I didn't really want to go".
They also know (or should) going in that if they can't accept such
expectations that they should probably decline the President's job offer.

I think we should keep all this in mind when commenting on Mr. Bolden's
performance with respect to this trip to Cairo.

Great idea! Dr. Rendezvous can export the foxtrot to the Muslim world!