Ken Bowersox Leaves SpaceX
SpaceX Safety VP Quit Late Last Year, Space.com
“Ken Bowersox left SpaceX at the end of last year,” SpaceX spokeswoman Kirstin Grantham wrote in a Jan. 17 email to Space News. “His responsibilities were split up among a few different people. Hans Koenigsmann was named SpaceX vice president of mission assurance.”
Interesting. They put out a press announcement when he joins but neglect to put one out when he leaves? Makes ones imagination run wild, especially when there are more delays. Especially since he was VP of Astronaut Safety and Mission Assurance.
It should be noted that companies generally only put out a press release when the person joins the company and rarely when they leave. It only became public yesterday and unless there is a media frenzy, which i doubt, they won’t issue a press release.
True. But with its the U.S. government it’s largest customer (1.6 Billion) for COTS cargo and also getting money for commercial passenger you would think that NASA would have been notified and released the information. Especially since SpaceX is continually missing COTS launch dates. Don’t you think the resignation of Vice President of Astronaut Safety and Mission Assurance significant?
Why not ask Sox yourself? Maybe he found a job that he wants more than the one he had at SpaceX.
Doug you might want to do a simple scan of corporate press releases – doesn’t matter what sector. The only time you generally see anything about a departure is when someone senior retires. Not when they quit or are fired – unless they commit a crime. I can think of dozens of aerospace companies that have had people depart – for various reasons – yet there is never a press release. Check your facts before you toss little rocks like this – at any aerospace company.
It must be boring to be VP of mission assurance when there are only missions every 18 months.
Cynicism aside, the most exciting times are when you’re designing new stuff – new mission profiles in this case. Especially since SpaceX has far reaching plans, and a S/C that is being actively developed – I doubt boredom was one of the reasons he left…
Comments on NSF say it was a family time issue
Where’s the NASAWatch post criticizing SpaceX for yet *another* launch delay? …And now their VP of mission assurance suddenly resigns? I was waiting for a chorus of naysayers giving SpaceX hell…oh yeah, that’s reserved only for *NASA*!
Yawn. We allow anonymous posters to rant here – as you have done – yet I’ll bet you’d be terrified to do so using your real name.
Actually, I wish I could…but,no, that wouldn’t be a wise career decision. But, in fact, you know me and we go back many years; even before RIFWatch existed.
As such your comments need to be taken with a grain of salt and open suspicion. That’s how it goes.
I was actually looking around for stuff when the “earliest possible” launch date (Jan 7) came and went on my calendar, but didn’t see anything. The first thing was on the 16th. I guess it’s not really big news but I sort of expected something mild, maybe like “earliest possible launch date came and went” or something. This is really only a minor criticism and the only reason I expect things like that is how well NASAWatch does to fill its role.
Maybe its because people are starting to realize how important CHEAPER space flight is to us having any space future at all and are hoping so much for Spacex s success that they don’t want criticize.
Picking a president in my state.
This week the republican candidates are in my state. So I am thinking about which one would be best for future human space flight,.
Since I am a flip flopping independent I will not have a say in which candidate is chosen. Why do only the far left or right get to pick the candidate anyway? They are the crazy ones!
I like Newts thoughts on space flight best of all. So he would be my pick if I got to choose.
Here is a What if for you.
What if Ron Paul had managed to become president in 2000 and had been able to do what he says he would have done.
After 911 he would have only spent a few billion in Afghanistan to hunt down Osama with special forces.
Irag war would have never been.
Instead of spending 700 billion plus on war. We could have sold tons of war machines to other nations so that they could defend themselves. Why give others our defense services/machine /money for free when we can’t afford it?
Would the 2008 crash have been as bad if George W hadn’t let wall street run unchecked?
With a few more bucks to spend today we could spend more on space.
Anyway So what will happen in 2012 hummmm
With the new super pack money whoever the right wingers in my state choose will most likely be the candidate that runs against Obama. Three little states and you’re in. You all like my little state having that much power??? I don’t!!!!!
Well so now I get to choose between Romney and Obama. GREAT : (
Mr. Romney is likely to get us into more war WHICH WE CAN NOT AFFORD. Plus he is a 1 percenter if I ever saw one. Not likely to help the middle class/ poor much. Can he turn the country around or just feed the bankers and wall street more?
What are his views on SPACE FLIGHT lolol to smart/political to say I think.
I don’t believe that if a president sends money to NASA to waste that that is good for Space flight anyway. (best thing for human space flight cut NASA programs lolol) SLS is a good EXAMPLE
Then we have Mr. Obama. First he made the bold move of cutting the porky constellation program and laid out a long term plan to get our house in order and looked to commercial to take over flight in LEO. Not too bad I thought at the start. But here we are near another election and Obama signs off on the SLS porker lol SHOVEL READY JOBS YOU KNOW LOLOL so much leadership lolol.
SO most likely in November I will feel the need to pull the lever for the man least likely to get us into a big costly WAR which I think would be Obama.
But since we have the Electoral College and I live in a republican state my Obama vote will not count anyway. : ( Should USA change to popular vote now ?? hummm. Bet Al Gore thinks so.
After learning how poorly government programs work after learning about NASA I sure am worried about Obama care.
DTARS
PS the other night I heard Senator Simpson speaking to some in my state. Mr. Simpson said that soon the debt plus medical programs will be a trillion which will be about equal to tax revenue for one year . SO all programs after that will be on money borrowed mostly from ASIAN COUNTRIES. Where does all that debt interest money go??? To CHINA!!!!!!! ARE WE OUR GOVERNMENT JUST FOOLS????? Makes me want to join the Tea party. Support AARP lets take ALL our kids future before we die lolol we have the votes.
With OUR country in this much Debt/ trouble, seems to me spending big bucks on NASA type SPACE is a very poor idea!!!!
NASA/congress stole/miss managed our space future in LEO the past 40 years . Now the new song is send us big bucks for BEO SPACE EXPLORATION. So they can squander that.
But SPACEX should fly soon after February 7 with a little luck and they seem to have a plan in the making, so there is lots of hope for human space flight as I see it. We are at the point we could have been 40 years ago had some way some how commercial human space flight been encouraged way back then.
Lets hope that window of opportunity Elon talks about hasn’t closed yet.
Joe middle class tax payer still I hope
DTARS
Mr. Whitfield I do agree that we should help our fellow man first. But not sure if borrowing money to wage war in their countries is the best way to do that. Has we sit on our hands as people die in Syria I wonder what we should do??? MAN is a very silly beast perhaps he shouldn’t be let lose on the universe.
SC voter poll update HERE COMES Newt LOLOL
X prizes not NASA lol
Sorry for long off topic post but voters are casting votes here today.
Re: Ron Paul vs Dubya
“What if Ron Paul had managed to become president in 2000 and had been able to do what he says he would have done.
After 911 he would have only spent a few billion in Afghanistan to hunt down Osama with special forces.”
Why would he “spend a few billion” to hunt one man? If New Yorkers collectively wanted to prosecute the masterminds of 9/11, they could have hired mercenaries to go arrest them. The owners of American/United Airlines would be responsible for any damage caused by failing to secure their aircraft, and they would probably have a claim against al Qaeda and the financiers of the 19 dead terrorists, so be entitled under libertarian principles to hire mercenaries to extract compensation.
Other than that, why should tax payer money be used to hunt terrorists?
“Would the 2008 crash have been as bad if George W hadn’t let wall street run unchecked?”
And again, why would a libertarian President “check” wall street?
“With a few more bucks to spend today we could spend more on space.”
Why would a libertarian President give that “saved” money to NASA?
[I’m not a libertarian, I don’t actually believe any of this, but I’m not sure how a “Libertarian government” would do anything, other than prevent taxation-by-theft.]
“money borrowed mostly from ASIAN COUNTRIES. Where does all that debt interest money go??? To CHINA!!!!!!!”
More than 70% of US Federal debt is held by Americans and American companies. Less than 30% is held by foreigners, of which about 30% is owned by China (8% of the total). (And China may be selling, Brazil and the UK are buying.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik…
“With the new super pack money”
The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision which effectively allowed unlimited secret money to SuperPACs was carried 5/4 along party lines. All the Democrat appointees, like Obama’s appointee Kagan, voted and argued against it, all the Republican appointees, including the two Bush appointees, voted for it. It’s likely that there’ll be another retirement in the next term, so another appointment. Think about that before you vote.
“But since we have the Electoral College … Should USA change to popular vote now ??”
There’s a middle path, instead of winner-takes-all 51% of the vote gets 100% of the delegates from that State, why not assign delegates from each state proportionally to the vote within a state. (There are advantages to not having a direct popular vote.)
“SPACEX should fly soon after February 7 with a little luck”
A little luck and a time machine. End of March is the current best-guess.
Thanks for the thoughts 🙂
I don’t think we should be giving more money to NASA space. As Spacex is trying to do we should be making space more affordable and then having an inexpensive mission plan. An lv plan what I call a falcon heavy plan. I wish some one here would suggest detail an lv plan! As well as detail a modular reusable spaceship. A short term mission plan must be told to the public for them not to be ripped off by the big budget rip-offs like sls and Orion.
What Joe tax payer would know that we don’t need a heavy lifter????
I’m not a libertarian either but I don’t see how either of last two wars have made us any safer. And when I think of all resources wasted on national security and not productive things it makes me sick.
DTARS,
I’m not an American, but we share a border, so I pay attention to what’s going on. I may certainly be wrong, but it appears to me that there is something very basic that the space advocacy people are not generally taking into account: the fact that the Presidency (not the man, but the office) has become impotent, almost irrelevant when it comes to space issues. In the original NASA charter (as I read it), NASA was under the direction of the President, who reported to Congress (about NASA) in May of each year. But now, the President suggestith and the Congress taketh away, and this has been made possible because Congress controls the money. The Presidential control has been eroded steadily, typically at times of other major national issues, or even riding (unnoticed) on the tails of unrelated legislation. Even the more visible space issues are being blatantly controlled by the people in Congress. Many of us have remarked about NASA being a jobs program (including you and I), but it’s really about the money. So, in my opinion, all of the appeals to and blaming of the President (the office or the man) is pointless, because it/he is powerless to change the situation. You have a handful of people in Congress who are controlling the US future in space, and, as much as I despise them for it, I have to grudgingly give them credit — they have all the power while the President (office and man) and NASA get all the blame and the heat.
All of the many references to John F. Kennedy and space over the years are completely irrelevant to today. Space advocates living in the past contribute as much as anybody else to the lack of coherence in the space issues faced today. The President’s control of space has been eroded over time by associating it with other issues, and ironically, probably the only way that the office can regain power over space (and other “small” issues) is through associating space with another “large” issue. So, pick something non-destructive that both a presidential candidate and “the people” are for and find a way to tie space to its coattails.
The one aspect of all this that nobody knows how to fight is time. Congress people have a name of their own for Presidents; they call them temporary! A president is in the hot seat for 4 or 8 years, then that’s it; their ride is over. For a Congress person (or group) it’s a career. They watch Presidents come and go, while they are still there, in a position to spend as many years as it takes to put their own plans into place, indoctrinate newcomers to their way of thinking, and support their plans for as long as it takes. A President, on the other hand, has only one shot at it. He can’t survive publicly changing his position on an issue, even when circumstances change and the new position is obviously a better choice, while a Congress person can change his mind, or even stand mute, several times over the duration of a career.
Unfortunately, the only way I can see of taking back control of space from Congress is to publicly discredit them on another, larger issue and then ride on the momentum which that provides. As necessary as diplomacy is, politics is ugly.
This is all only my opinion, of course.
Steve
I tried to fix typo changing the word lose to loose and can’t scroll to it on an iPod. Also if there were anyway to show the time of posts that would be a wonderful thing 🙂 All and all the new system works better but since I’m not near the Internet that often knowing who typed what when is easier when on an iPod with limited time to see what’s what 🙂
DTARS
Hmm…this is even more interesting since two high level engineers just quit Tesla; Elon’s other high tech company. Something is up.
Out of thousands of employees….
less than 900
I don’t know what Mr. Bowersox’s reasons are and I won’t speculate, but it’s worth considering that he’s got a military career (including test flights), his NASA tenure (with several flights, including twice to Hubble), and his commercial activities, all under his belt.
He’s 55 years old (born November 1956) and there are no indications that he’s suffering financially, so maybe he’s just plain tired of it all and wants to take in the fun things in life while he and his loved ones are still young enough to do so. That would sure be a nicer choice than having a heart attack at your desk at 67, still worried about paying the bills.
Steve
One thing I’ve noticed in common with long term SpaceX employment – they generally don’t have much of a life outside of the company.
If you are used to a rich life outside of “work”, this could be quite a hard thing for many to adjust to. Also, unlike NASA and “old space”, each employee seems to wear about 5-7 different “hats” at different times. When you are used to relying on others for those things, it can be quite humbling to have to discipline yourself and others with such time varying needs.
So the expense of such employment can be high, and in unpredictable ways.
Is this sensible for the long term? Unclear. But one thing’s certain – it’s getting them into action a lot more than many past attempts at “new space”. Where I question it most is in development and retention of key skills, in a way that can be translated into reproducible, reliable launch services.
Unfortunately you find that out at the end of the game not the beginning.
noocsq:
Yes, Spacex is a busy company and I expect it’s employees put in lots of extra time because they want to, they’re driven, inspired and proud of what they do. Case in point; another high profile person from Spacex recently chose company over ‘family life’ according to news reports. It goes both ways I guess.
tinker
In the long run, I believe that Space X will be successful. But it needs to stop bragging about its future on Mars and start putting some birds into space.
The Pratt & Whitney ad on this site makes a very good point that Space X officials really need to heed.
But right now, the ULA’s continue string of launch successes are looking awfully good for its future.
Marcel F. Williams
I agree.
According to a friend within the company, Bowersox left to go into semi-retirement. He had apparently been commuting from Houston and he was both stressed and missing time with his family. It was said that his leaving had nothing to do with SpaceX, its management, or technology; basically, it was the continual commute that got to him.
Likely.
I had the pleasure of meeting Sox. Sad to see him go.
Respectfully,
Andrew Gasser
TEA Party in Space
It’s interesting…when both Bobby and Kristin are asked about this, they either clam-up or say, “We don’t talk about Bowersox around here”. Whatever his reasons, it is something that SpaceX is intensely unwilling to discuss. And that should lead one to guess that this split wasn’t full of roses and chocolate.
I think your speculation that it wasn’t full of roses and chocolate is more correct than not.
Several news sources have Keith, as I’m sure have you. None have so far received a response other than Kirstlen Grantham, normally a talkative person, slamming shut the media door or Bobby Block saying, “We don’t talk about Bowersox here”. So why wasn’t this split amicable? Maybe Bowersox didn’t like the laughter he illicited with the “oxidized-rich shut-down” excuse of last fall? Who knows. But this sure gives the appearance of something more than your everyday, run-of-the-mill upper management exit.
What did SpaceX tell you regarding Sox’ exit?
Also, Marc, a VP who plays a key role (yes, safety would qualify as very key in the launch business) at a small gov’t subsidized firm, one that has been given nearly $ 1/2 B in funds, that plays a key role in continued operations of a nation’s >$100 B investment don’t just bail in the dark of the night with nobody willing to say anything. At all.
And let’s reflect on this bit of trivia. By the time SpaceX does launch demo mission 2/3, and SpaceX can thank its lucky stars that NASA gave it a waiver to combine those demo missions, not hard when NASA higher-up’s political futures are tied to SpaceX’ success, it will be well over 2 years behind schedule (GAO-09-618, p. 20). This company’s rational for being able to fulfill its fixed-price contract is based on the assumption that SpaceX can do with 1 person what would take NASA 5 or 10. But if it turns-out, as now seems increasingly likely, that SpaceX is not able to be materially faster than NASA with a small staff, and must therefore staff-up…well, that blows the economics of this whole project.