New Chief Technologist at NASA
NASA Names David W. Miller as Agency’s New Chief Technologist
“NASA Administrator Charles Bolden announced Thursday that David W. Miller, professor of aeronautics and astronautics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, Mass., has been named the agency’s new Chief Technologist. As chief technologist, he will be Bolden’s principal advisor and advocate on matters concerning agency-wide technology policy and programs.”
NASA has a technology policy. What it needs is a policy that says it will actually provide its researchers with the opportunity to develop technology. If Dr. Miller can persuade _all_ the Center Directors of this, even at centers without the “R”, more power to him.
Prior Chief Technologist Braun: “I would like to believe now that we are making progress in Washington towards the 2011 plan that the engineers…will weigh in and that we will move towards the technically correct choice”
Here is the response from Congress: “the FY 2011 ‘plan’ regarding follow-on launch vehicles and human spaceflight direction beyond LEO was, and now certifiably is, DOA. Braun was brought in to oversee the HUGE redirection of formerly
Constellation program funds in advanced r and d; the directionless ‘honey-pots’ of open-ended research that were a major point of criticism for many in the Congress when the FY 2011 Budget Request was released. The majority of those funds were redirected–in both House and Senate bills–back to vehicle development. So he’s precisely the person NOT to
ask about NASA’s intent or approach to development of launch vehicles under the terms soon to be established as the law of the land. He’s correct in saying that engineers, and not politicians, will design the follow-on vehicles. But engineers have to obey not only the laws of physics, but the law of the land, as well, if they are working on government-funded programs.”
CT at NASA can only inform. SLS and Orion 2.5B, oops 2.9B/yr..the gifts that keep on giving.
Godspeed.
it isn’t all about SLS/Orion. He can encourage the Centers to use what discretionary funds they can still scrounge to do R&D of practical value, encourage the Centers to work together instead of undermining collaboration in order to make themselves look better, and he can inform the public and Congress that what little NASA does that improves their lives derives not from the Senate-ordered Apollo redux but from individual scientists and engineers struggling with inadequate funds to accomplish things that are, as often as not, discouraged and opposed by management. We should not be naive, but neither should we allow our cynicism to discourage us from trying. NSF and NIH, and with them most of academia, have, for the most part, evaded the micromismanagement of Congress. We need to learn from them.
Looks like a well qualified, good choice with an emphasis on experience in relevant technologies. I wish him well.