NASA Forgets To Ask Aeronautics AA About The Budget
NASA Associate Administrator Statements on the Asteroid Initiative in the FY 2014 Budget Request
“The following are statements from the associate administrators of NASA’s Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate, Science Mission Directorate, and Space Technology Mission Directorate on the administration’s budget request for the 2014 fiscal year.”
Keith’s note: Apparently the observations of Jaiwon Shin, the Associate Administrator for the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (about the budget), weren’t deemed to be important enough to include. Oddly, NASA CFO Robinson and NASA Adminstrator Bolden made frequent mention of the Boeing 787 today during a budget media telecon.
This is a great topic. Aeronautics has always been the forgotten stepchild of NASA, even though it is the industry that actually creates high-paying jobs and exports value-added products, even to China. NASA provided very little help when Boeing needed to make so many major advances with the 787, that’s part of the reason it was delayed by years. I’ve asked people at two struggling aircraft manufacturers, both doing intensive R&D within spitting distance of a NASA center, what benefits they have gotten from NASA, and they both said the same thing. Nothing. There are smart people in NASA aeronautics who are certainly working on new ideas, but they seem to have few direct links to the industry they are supporting. NASA should be asking industry what industry priorities are, not telling industry what NASA priorities are. I’ve actually heard NASA people say they can’t help one company because it would be unfair to others. That’s what the Space Act is for, to allow NASA to help American industry advance its technology and stay competitive with the world when there is an obstacle it cannot tackle without help.
NASA’s “little a” needs to be spun off in NACA again. (Or ARPA-A in modern parlance.)
“but they seem to have few direct links to the industry they are supporting.”
That’s NASA all over.
Considering the subject was the Asteroid initiative, I think it is appropriate that Shin’s “observations” “weren’t deemed to be important.” The asteroid initiative is totally irrelevant to Aeronautics, and what Shim might think of the initiative is equally irrelevant.
Actually, the subject was the “budget request for the 2014 fiscal year”, so Shin’s observations are as relevant as those of any other NASA AA, and the fact that they clearly had nothing available indicates either poor planning on their part or a failure on Shin’s part to provide input.
The title of the article is “NASA Associate Administrator Statements on the Asteroid Initiative …” All of the comments quoted are about the Asteroid Initiative. Seems pretty clear that the subject was the Asteroid Initiative.