CASIS Now Has An Official Fictitious Name
FYI @ISS_CASIS asked @NASA if they could change their name from "CASIS" to "ISS National Laboratory". #NASA said no – but Joe Vockley at CASIS did so anyway. Now his staff is scrambling to explain this unauthorized name change in time for the #CASIS annual meeting in DC next week pic.twitter.com/ccpb3cthKG
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) January 31, 2019
|
|
|
|
This sounds like Delaware North levels of b.s.
I am not sure that the name matters. What’s more important is how effective we are are actually performing research in space. Regardless of who manages the program, this requires meaningful and coherent strategy and adequate funding for researchers. There has been a tendency for ISS research to be focussed on the effects of gravity on organisms and materials, a somewhat limited scope. Hopefully the considerable utility of the ISS for Earth and space observation will be better recognized in the future.
The name is actually a part of making sure we are effectively performing research on ISS. The ISS United States National Laboratory is a NASA-owned facility. CASIS is an non-profit organization NASA contracts to, to manage the National Laboratory. That’s not too different from how NASA contracts to Cal Tech to operate JPL, of the Department of Energy contracts to Triad National Security (a company led by the Universities of California.)
CASIS’ contract runs out in 2024, and in principle, NASA could decide to contract to someone else, instead of renewing the contract. Assuming they don’t shut ISS down in 2024, that is… The risk of losing the contract is one thing which ought to motivate CASIS to do a good job. That makes the name important. It distinguishes the contractor from the contracted facilities. Imagine the ISS National Laboratory bidding for a contract to operate the ISS United States National Laboratory.
I agree of course, but I am less certain that the designation of the ISS as a “national laboratory” was realistic, as the traditional national laboratories seem to have a broader scope and more resources for both internal and external researchers. I wonder if the national laboratory designation was an attempt to persuade other agencies to fund ISS-based research, and this seems to be the strategy CASIS is trying to follow, not an easy path but what choice do they have? I’m at a loss to see how another contractor is going to do much better unless they can persuade NASA to modify its approach and allocate a reasonable fraction of the total ISS budget to funding investigators for experiment and payload development.