National Space Council Meeting (Update)
Keith’s 5 Oct update: The Vice President’s office just called to apologize for me not getting credentialed for today’s National Space Council meeting. They were very nice and, as happens with large events here in DC, my name fell through the cracks. FWIW very, very few people here in DC ever admit making a mistake and even fewer ever apologize.
Keith’s 4 Oct update: I followed all the rules that the White House laid out for media asking to attend and cover this event and cc:ed NASA on the email I set them – yesterday. I never heard back. They are now hand-picking which news media can cover their events and which ones cannot. Not a good sign. At least there’s a webcast for the rest of us who won’t be allowed to attend.
Keith’s 3 Oct note: Last week the White House issued a short press release stating that “the first meeting of the National Space Council is scheduled for October 5, 2017 at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, Virginia. The meeting, titled “Leading the Next Frontier: An Event with the National Space Council,” will include testimonials from expert witnesses who represent the sectors of the space industry: Civil Space, Commercial Space, and National Security Space.”
I had to dig around but there was a White House media advisory issued today. The event will be streamed online on NASA TV and via Whiteouse.gov starting around 10:00 am. The event itself is only 2 to 2.5 hours long (not mentioned on the advisory).
Even though I live 11 miles away I most likely won’t be going since NASA stopped issuing formal laminated press credentials more than a decade ago and I am self-employed i.e. I’d have to make my own press badge at Kinkos or something – and that usually gets you an interview with government security people at events like this in DC. I have followed the process laid out by the White House press office with a cc: to NASA and am waiting for a reply.
There is nothing online anywhere to suggest that the public can attend this event so it looks like it is going to be an expensive photo op with only a select few actually in attendance listening to pre-written statements being read before the cameras. The expense of taking over a large portion of a busy museum seems to be for the purpose of providing impressive backdrops for a meeting that is mostly show and little substance.
Keith’s 4 Oct update: The public is apparently not going to be allowed to attend but 100-150 hand-selected special guests are being invited. There will be three panels for this event:
– National Security: Mike Griffin; Pam Melroy, DARPA; and James Ellis, Space Foundation
– Civilian Space: Marillyn Hewson, Lockheed Martin; Dennis Muilenburg, Boeing; and David Thompson, Orbital ATK
– Commercial Space: Bob Smith, Blue Origin; Gywnne Shotwell, SpaceX; and Fatih Ozmen, Sierra Nevada
NASA needs to start becoming efficient with their money. They need to stop handing out contracts to UlA and other extremely expensive contractors. They should take the SpaceX approach: start building your rockets yourself, vertically integrate everything, develop reusable rocket tech. With a budget of 18.4 billion NASA could do great things if they became efficient with their money.
I see you are late to the party around these parts 🙂
Governmental efficiency is a huge topic in the country. The right is partly motivated by a basic sensibility that inefficiency is simply part and parcel of anything that the government does. The left tends to forget sometimes that a critical eye is not necessarily unpatriotic.
But for NASA to build boosters vertically, like SX, which you favor, would be a sensible direction for the NASA that lives somewhere in Bizzaro-Earth. Not Normal-Earth.
More particularly, the build-vertically train, as far as boosters is concerned, has left the station. Private companies have taken decades of NASA work and research and done what NASA always wanted them to do— use transferred technology in a way that benefits the nation.
NASA simply needn’t develop rockets anymore. NASA can buy computers from Apple or Dell or other vendors. They can buy boosters from SX or Blue Origin, others coming along.
NOW imagine what $18 B a year can do.
And I’d add one more thing: NASA sold its soul to fund Apollo, thereby establishing a modus operandi that has plagued the Agency for more than 50 years. The drive to spread the wealth to as many congressional districts as possible is the biggest part of this sell-out, and it has hobbled NASA ever since.
NASA has rebuilding to do, to be sure. It must rebuild its credibility. It must allow the work to stand on its own merits. It must be the goto Agency.
Thats a good point, not only would NASA start becoming productive in terms of human space flight but it would also help Blue And SX.
Many times I have seen situations where NASA could facilitate valuable research and development. The most recent big one was the chance to leverage returning Dragon capsules to “man-rate” propulsive landing for spacecraft. Others were much less expensive, down to $100K or so for a modest research project, or $50K for a small one. That’s the real value NASA could have for America, in aviation, environmental and medical sciences, and many other fields, not just space. But most of the time it cannot be done because it does not fit into the “NASA Mission”, which may or may not return practical benefits.
That issue of practical benefits is a short-sighted one, as I know you agree. I see that the Nobel in Physiology or Medicine went to basic research – using D. melonagaster! – into circadian rhythms, from which dozens of practical benefits will spring. Just a for instance.
Yea. Happens all the time here in DC.
Exactly. What is the point of asking for something that anyone can forge?
That does seem pointless, but I could imagine some value. What’s on the badge you could print up at Kinko’s? Is it information you would otherwise be asked to fill out on a form? If so, having it all pre-printed on one item might save a little time. (I.e. five minutes to fill out the form versus handing over the badge and being able to say, “Its all on here, just scan it in.”) But that isn’t a big deal, and if they want to know that the information has been officially verified, then the whole thing would be absurd.
Excuse me but who will badge me? What form do I fill out for my company? I have to badge myself. I am self employed. NASA does not badge news media any more. To follow the rules for this event I’d have to make up my own page, take it to Kinkos, print it out, then have them laminate it. Since I am my own boss I’d have to sign it. Here in D.C. people “self-credential” all the time to get into events – for various reasons – and its usually an instant invitation to sit down with security personnel. It is a self-defeating Catch-22. NASA HQ does not require me to show a badge since they know me. But this is a White House event and they required credentials that NASA does not offer and that I would have to self-create.
Well, that’s certainly pointless and idiotic. I was trying to imagine how there could be some point.
If it were a matter of simply showing up but being asked to provide half a dozen or a dozen pieces of information before they let you in, a self-printed badge would save time. Instead of writing down things like name, employer, business address, email addresses, etc. you could just hand over a card and they could scan it in.
Since you say that isn’t how it works, then I can’t see any point it. The whole thing sounds like some parts of the process were changed, others were not, and the result was just a mess.
what is the difference between civilian space and commercial space in this frame of reference. seems more like an Old Space panel and a New Space panel grouping.
They couldn’t even get the spelling of the names of two of the participants right.
Lovely. In a highly technical field where getting the details right can be critical, they aren’t checking their spelling. Typos and errors of this sort aren’t a big deal, but still… When we see this sort of thing in a proposal, reviewers often use words like, “Although this is a minor issue, the lack of attention to it raises concerns that a similar lack of attention to details may affect the overall quality of the proposed work.”
You asked a very logical question!