Northrop Grumman's Webb Space Telescope Charm Offensive
Keith’s note: Northrop Grumman has a big Webb Space Telescope Charm offense underway. Their ads are everywhere. First they took out that huge $200,000 full page ad in the Washington Post. Now they have a companion website using this code under ad links that pop up all over the place: http://www.northropgrumman.com/MediaResources/MediaKits/JWST/Home.aspx?utm_source=PrintAd&utm_medium=Redirect&utm_campaign=FromOrigJWSTurl+Redirect When you get to the website you are treated to nothing but happy aerospace banter. No mention of launch dates and delays, more than a decade of multi-billion dollar cost overruns, the need for Congressional reauthorization due to cost overruns, anger by NASA managers, dumb engineering mistakes, etc. Instead, NorthropGrumman just pounds out their oxymoronic tag line “Making History Requires Mission SUccess”.
Clueless Webb Telescope Advertisement From Northrop Grumman
“Northrop Grumman just wants you to know that “mission success” is important. Duh. I am not certain they care so long as they get paid. This is not how America is going to do that whole leadership-in-space thing. If this is an example of how we do that leadership thing we won’t be able to afford to lead the way.”
NG is charmed by all of your taxpayer money.
It looks like WP updated the study to mention the corporate funding. The hopeful part about the story is that USAF went to in-house fabrication with 3-D printing. The C5s are maintained by reservists, and some of them have a lot of experience and ingenuity in fabricating complicated one-off components like entire composite wingtips. It’s time the DOD recognized that the solution to a need is not always a contract, sometimes it’s keeping talented people in your organization..
I just finished “Columbus: The Four Voyages” (Bergreen).
What we recall about Columbus is trivial compared to what he and his mates actually DID in the Americas. I’m not referring to the atrocities, though they are indeed shameful, even for the times.
Nope. I’m thinking of the price gouging they experienced in outfitting, or receiving rotten meat, or finding sails of improper size- any number of bone-headed moves and none of which matter a damn in the4 long run.
We don’t remember the Hubble fiasco- some do, but limited to here, mostly- because the mission is astonishingly successful. And I am not forgetting that, like NG, Columbus and his brothers were very well practiced in The Big Suck Up.
Webb probably the same. I suspect there will be some administrative changes (I hope so, anyway). But bottom line? another decade won’t matter when, or if, a scientist observes data leading to a new understanding of the universe.
But adding “another decade” to Webb does matter in terms of what it cost us to get there – discoveries in other fields that have been delayed by multiple decades because congress will not be so eager to fund the next flagship mission.
Perhaps it is time to stop making each mission an order of magnitude more complex and feature-packed than its predecessor, and move towards a more incremental approach. Hopefully, launch prices are coming down to where it’s feasible to actually, with a straight face, say we are launching a prototype and it’s OK if not everything works as intended.
order of magnitude: Yes, and no. I’ve mentioned before (and I am an interested observer, not a scientist) that separating technology development from the project could be one way to reduce expenses and time delays.
Is it just me, or is there something ironic about JWST’s name? Webb was someone who’s widely regarded as one of the best managers NASA every had.
Northrup Grumman is a huge company made up of acquisitions. They either can’t manage their businesses of they are not honest. Difficult to tell the difference. Now they have purchased Orbital ATK. Will they ruin that company too?
“Ruin” might be an overstatement.
Perspective: NG operates in an extremely pro-business atmosphere that we have setup here in America over the past 50+ years. The company is being run to maximize shareholder value. If that is something that’s bothersome, reconsider what party you support.
And this: NG is the repository of a fair amount of American experience, expertise, technical ability, and just f**king smart people. Be careful with the size of the paint brush.
*******************
Added 7.19.2018:
There’s a term used by those who study debate, a term that describes drawing general conclusions from the particular. Does anyone know what this term is?
I ask because the kerfuffle about NG, and the minuscule contract between NG, appears to be an example of making that exact mistake.
An extremely pro-business atmosphere?
The reality of the American aerospace business has been rapid and continuous contraction since the end of the Cold War. That’s the real reason nearly every military/government contractor of the past now falls under the control of just three or four mega corporations.