This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Commercialization

MSFC Director Sees Merit in Push Back on NASA Requirements

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
April 11, 2012
Filed under , ,

Commercial space companies pushing back against NASA certification, Huntsville Times
“[Marshall Space Flight Center acting Director Gene] Goldman said private companies have their own ideas. “We’ve been pushed back on when we try to advocate our requirements for certification, and they say, ‘We don’t need your requirements, this is our venture,'” Goldman said. “There’s absolutely a lot of truth in that.” He predicted again that it could come down to the makeup of the crews and said he is “not exactly sure how that is going to play out.”

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

9 responses to “MSFC Director Sees Merit in Push Back on NASA Requirements”

  1. frosty says:
    0
    0

    Yes, it may be their venture but its NASA’s money paying for it. So if they don’t want NASA meddling with their design, return the money NASA gave them.

    • si39 says:
      0
      0

      The money that NASA spends is public money.  Contractors are part of the public. 

      • blamethemall says:
        0
        0

        So by accepting the “public” money, they are now answerable TO the public.  It is not just a “private” venture any more.

  2. fcircle says:
    0
    0

    That wouldn’t be normal in the commercial world; it’s awfully asymmetric, and it assumes the contractor knows less about its business and products than you do.  I understand it’s sort of NASA standard, but it’s not a smart way to do business.

    You also want to be careful that folks with political agendas aren’t using silly requirements as a backdoor way of sabotaging something they (rightfully or wrongly) see as a competitor.

  3. Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    I would be more ready to accept NASA’s demands if NASA’s record on safety were better, but in that regard, the agency has proven itself all too human. It should be noted that it is possible, even likely, that much of the concern over safety being raised in Congress originates with K-Street lobbyists for traditionally structured aerospace firms, firms who wouldn’t want to work under the SAA/fixed-price contract restrictions accepted by the commercial crew bunch.
    Just sayin’.

    • Paul451 says:
      0
      0

      “it is possible, even likely, that much of the concern over safety being raised in Congress originates with K-Street lobbyists for traditionally structured aerospace firms”

      It does seem to have burst out on multiple fronts, even though the CCDev program managers themselves seems to have no problem placing their requirements within the SAA frame-work. My spidey senses are certainly tingling when Senators who forced SRBs onto SLS suddenly all start wringing their hands over safety at the same time.

  4. chriswilson68 says:
    0
    0

    NASA generally, and Huntsville in particular, is a terrible choice for deciding safety standards for private companies working on human space flight.

    The FAA and NTSB are the logical choice.  They know how to do this kind of thing.  It’s exactly what they’ve done many times before with aircraft.  Some of the details are different with spacecraft, but the methodology still applies.

    Huntsville has been competing, and continues to compete, with private companies for federal dollars to develop launch vehicles and spacecraft.  It’s crazy to let them set the standards for their competition.  Not only that, MSFC has a track record of utter incompetence and organizational failure over the last decade or more.

    The bozos in charge at MSFC actually argued that Ares I was a good choice for launching people into space.  That alone should disqualify them from coming anywhere near any safety standards.  Ever.

  5. James Muncy says:
    0
    0

    Folks,

         Unfortunately, I think this story is based on a misunderstanding between the questioner and the speaker at this Huntsville AIAA event.  

         First and foremost, NASA has published a set of commercial crew requirements which EVERY COMPANY IS PLEDGED TO MEET before they can be certified to provide astronaut transport services to NASA.  And the companies are not going to change their vehicles between flying astronauts and flying private sector researchers or spaceflight participants. 

        That said, it is true that NASA will not be specifying design requirements, i.e. use this specific technical approach versus that one.  They are setting performance requirements: show us that it will do the job. 

          – Jim Muncy

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      I see no evidence that NASA PAO has attempted to comment upon, update, or otherwise dispute the quotes at the Huntsville Times. No one from NASA PAO has contacted me in this regard to dispute the quote or the context. If NASA is unwilling to make such a request or clarification, one has to assume that they do not dispute what was quoted/written.