Space Council Users' Advisory Group Meets Without Any Users

National Space Council Users’ Advisory Group Meeting
“In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announces a meeting of the National Space Council Users’ Advisory Group (UAG). This will be the second meeting of the UAG. DATES: Thursday, November 15, 2018, from 9:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m., Eastern Time.”
Keith’s note: Have a look at the National Space Council User’s Advisory Group meeting agenda. Not a single person who is speaking is actually a “user” of space – they are either big Aerospace Reps, politicians, government employees, or reps from other advisory bodies. There is no “user” input in evidence. This is not at all surprising when you look at the UAG subcommittee membership. Yet another pointless example of choir practice in a echo chamber by the usual suspects inside the Beltway.

UAG thinks that going to space meetings to talk to the same space people again & again is somehow "spreading the word" when in fact its just echo practice with the usual suspects in an echo chamber. Do they talk to small town Rotary clubs in flyover country? No. Just each other. — NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) November 15, 2018

Now someone is talking about "Boolean overlap between committees" and that "we need to deconflict and avoid duplication and avoid becoming 6 stovepipes or "cylinders of excellence". Now the UAG will probably form a committee to study this. — NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) November 15, 2018

Oops @TheRealBuzz just went through a description of how Apollo's architecture and then noted that @NASA_SLS cannot put @NASA_Orion into lunar orbit. "We haven't made a lot of progress" he said. — NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) November 15, 2018

Some unidentified UAG member is doing a sanity check on the official B.S. that UAG and @NASA puts forth in terms of dates and costs. Response is that they are having meetings about this. — NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) November 15, 2018

I just joined the UAG question queue. I will ask how many UAG members are actually users and how many are sellers. — NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) November 15, 2018

Answers: "Users are defined in the broadest of sense so we are all users." He said he "appreciates my continued interest" in what they are doing or something. In other words go away with your actual questions. pic.twitter.com/eiNMtFXeCS — NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) November 15, 2018

Keith Cowing

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

5 responses to “Space Council Users' Advisory Group Meets Without Any Users”

1. Homer Hickam says:

   November 15, 2018 at 5:49 am

   0

   0

   It would be nice if they would spell my name correctly, User or not. In a way I guess I’m a User in that when I write a story set in space, I use all the things NASA has discovered as well as some of the things it’s screwed up, not to mention the characteristics of some great characters I’ve met in the agency. NASA was also a great place where I “used” to work.

2. Todd Austin says:

   November 15, 2018 at 3:43 pm

   0

   0

   Homer and Keith (and others), I know what comes to my mind when I think of NASA users, but I’m curious to hear from the rest of you as to who and what you consider to be NASA users whose interests should be considered and represented by this advisory group.

   • fcrary says:

     November 16, 2018 at 2:02 am

     0

     0

     It’s actually the Space Council Users’ Advisory Group , not the NASA Users’ Advisory Group. NASA is not synonymous with everything the United States does in space.

     But I’d say a good definition of a user is someone involved with the satellites and the services they provide, as opposed to people selling the rockets which get satellites into orbit.

3. ThomasLMatula says:

   November 16, 2018 at 4:04 pm

   0

   0

   It is really a very bad name. They should have called it a stakeholders advisory group to better reflect those involved. But then they would have the Acronym SAG and that wouldn’t be good in Acronym crazy Washington. And National Advisory Group (NAG) would be even worst. ?

   So be grateful for what you have.

   • fcrary says:

     November 16, 2018 at 8:21 pm

     0

     0

     I’m not sure. I sort of like NAG. I might suggest it as an alternative to the current ”*AGs” people use for things like OPAG and MEXAG. Although it would be “NASA Advisory Groups” in that context. And yes, for the acronym crazed, embedded (or even better, recursive) acronyms are really great.

     But I think you’re going in circles (or at least someone is.) You’re suggesting “Users’ Group” is a bad name and something about stakeholders would be better. But that’s based on the membership. It would be nice if they had defined the purpose of the group, and then let the name and the membership flow from that. Nice, but probably unrealistic. My guess is that they defined a undisclosed purpose, selected the members accordingly and then announced a ostensible purpose and name which were designed to sound good.