Recently in TrumpSpace Category

Keith's note: NASA has a new Associate Administrator for the headquarters Office of Communications: Bettina Inclán. According to her Twitter profile at @BettinaInclan: "Entrepreneur. Storyteller. Political junky. Tired mom of 2 boys. Wife. Wine enthusiast. Proud Latina. Alum of Capitol Hill @GOP @RNCLatinos @NRCC Romney, McCain".

Here's her Linked In profile: Bettina Inclán Agen. Bettina Inclán reports for duty at NASA next week. A quick Google search turned up these interesting stories that mention her:

Miami politician says aliens took her on a spaceship. Now she's running for Congress, Miami Herald (with video)

"A congressional candidate from Miami can go one better: Bettina Rodriguez Aguilera says she's been aboard a spaceship too. But this one was crewed by aliens. As in extraterrestrials. ... Rodriguez Aguilera, 59, a Republican who is running to replace retiring Miami Republican Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, recounted her experience with the ETs during a 2009 television interview." ... Rodriguez Aguilera's daughter is former Republican National Committee Hispanic outreach director Bettina Inclán Agen. Her son-in-law, Jarrod Agen, is Vice President Mike Pence's deputy chief of staff."

RNC ad has own staffer 'breaking up' with Obama cardboard cut-out, MSNBC (with video)

"The video portrays a woman sitting across a restaurant table from a cardboard cut-out of Obama. "You think I didn't see you with Sarah Jessica Parker and George Clooney?" the woman asks. "It's not me, it's you." But perhaps it is the woman. The actor depicting a disillusioned Obama supporter from 2008 is actually the RNC's Director of Hispanic Outreach Bettina Inclan. "You're just not the person I thought you were," Inclan tells cardboard Obama in the ad, while pretending to be someone she is not."

A Teaching Moment For NASA

NASA Head Jim Bridenstine Claps Back At Curry, TMZ

"Enter Bridenstine ... who says Curry's claim is so outrageous -- the point guard just cannot be serious. "I think it's funny," Jim tells us ... "I can't imagine he really believes that. It's outside the realm of what's possible." In fact ... Jim REALLY set Steph straight, saying, "Here's the thing, we didn't just go to the moon once, we went to the moon six times! And, we did it from 1969 to 1972!!!" Bridenstine also doubled down on NASA's invitation to have Curry come check out all their evidence -- saying he'd LOVE to prove Steph wrong and get him involved in the space program afterward! "My son is a HUGE fan of Steph Curry. So, if we can get him involved in space, I'm for it!"

Warriors' Stephen Curry says he was joking about moon landing, will visit NASA, ESPN

"But in terms of the reaction that I've gotten, I am definitely going to take [NASA] up on their offer. I am going to educate myself firsthand on everything that NASA has done and shine a light on their tremendous work over the years. And hopefully people understand that education is power, informing yourself is power. For kids out there that hang on every word that we say, which is important, understand that you should not believe something just because somebody says it. You should do your homework and understand what you actually believe."

Keith's note: There are a lot of people who did not pay attention in science class when they were growing up. A lot of other people are hit from a hundred different directions by conspiracy theories and fiction portrayed so realistically that they think it is fact. Other people just like to kid around. Some people simply do not care about NASA or space. Its not NASA's fault that people get these ideas in their head - for whatever reason they end up thinking these things.

The easy thing to do is to dismiss instances like this when other people genuinely doubt the Moon landings. But then there's the chance to take a celebrity's incomplete knowledge of the historic achievements of NASA's Apollo program and convert it into a teaching moment. Stephen Curry has quickly admitted that he was kidding but sees the chance to turn a bunch of arm waving by the news media into something far more useful. As former NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe used to say in reference to his Jesuit schooling, "you make converts one at a time".

Suggestion for Jim Bridenstine: your new marketing phrase is to "Go forward to the Moon" Fine. However saying "Go back to the Moon" might help dial back some of the Moon landing hoax stuff. If we are going back it means that we've already been there. Your "forward" thing could leave the question open in some people's minds. Just sayin'

Keith's note: The NASA Advisory Council's Human Exploration and Operations Committee is having problems trying to explain why NASA needs to build the Gateway. If they can't figure out why it is needed, how is NASA going to sell this whole Gateway thing to Congress and the taxpaying public?

Keith's note: This comment was posted in response to this NASAWatch post. I hear this a lot - sadly with increasing frequency.

"This (below) was written on FACEBOOK this week. I know the person who wrote it and it speaks volumes on why NASA should no longer develop rockets.

"Thursday will be my last day to work. I don't retire until 3 January, but I will be on leave. I hate to end on such a low note, but it's that or go bonkers. I dared to speak up on a safety issue on the new launch vehicle a couple of years ago and I got shuffled into a useless and meaningless job. I do little to nothing and when I ask for more work, I get nothing. They won't let me transfer either. I've been fighting to move and no manager in my chain of command will lift a finger. So much for speaking up. Certain managers at NASA made my dream job into a nightmare. You can't buck the system even when they tell you that it's your job to do so. I hope that nothing bad comes of the issue but my conscience is clear. I made a safety concern known. Anybody need a slightly used engineer?"

Want to honor George H.W. Bush? Send astronauts to Mars, Washington Post

"The new president was offering NASA, which at the time lacked a clear mission for its human spaceflight program, a lifeline, guaranteeing his support for an assertive Space Exploration Initiative (SEI). But the fiscal realities of the late 1980s, when budget deficits had exploded, required the organization to think in a new way. NASA, however, wasn't up to the job. Rather than thinking innovatively and offering new ideas for reaching the moon and Mars, the agency simply recycled concepts that had been dominant within the space program since its earliest days. Its plan included the construction of a substantial in-orbit infrastructure, where massive spacecraft for lunar and Mars exploration would be assembled before departing for their final destinations. Each alternative pathway identified by a study team required enormous capital expenditures. Over a 30-year implementation period, this initiative would have cost more than $500 billion. This would have required more than doubling the agency's budget. The tone-deafness of NASA's plan shocked the National Space Council. NSC Executive Secretary Mark Albrecht called it "the biggest 'F' flunk, you could ever get in government. . . . It was just so fabulously unaffordable, it showed no imagination." The report quickly turned Capitol Hill against the space agency, with one key congressional aide stating that SEI was dead on arrival."

Keith's note: NASA is heading down this path again. Uninspiring plans that rely on budgets that simply will not be there. Two Presidents named Bush pushed NASA to send humans back to the Moon and then on to Mars. 30 years after the first and 15 years after the second Bush proclamations, we still have not gone to either location. As the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice ..."

Full SEI report

White House Seeks Alternatives to Independent Space Force, Defense One

"The four options, according to one of the officials, include: 1) an Air Force-owned space corps that includes only Air Force assets, 2) an Air Force-owned space corps that also takes space-related troops and assets from the Army and Navy, 3) an independent service that takes from the Air Force, Army, and Navy, and 4) an independent service that takes from the three services plus parts of the intelligence community."

The creation of a Space Force would cost less than $3 billion, according to a new report, Washington Post

"President Trump's Space Force, a proposed military department dedicated to fighting war in space, would cost the Pentagon $1.5 billion to $2.7 billion in additional money over five years, according to a study released this week by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank. That estimate is far below the $13 billion price tag that Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson recently reported to Pentagon leaders and is certain to fuel the debate over the cost and necessity of what would become the first new military service branch since the Air Force was created in 1947. While the White House has pushed aggressively for the establishment of the Space Force, which Trump has championed in rallies, a new military department would need to be approved by Congress. It is unclear whether there is enough support for it to pass."

Pace Announces Departure of Deputy Executive Secretary Stout, Thanks Stout for Service, White House

"Dr. Scott Pace, Executive Secretary of the National Space Council, today released the following statement upon the departure of Jared Stout, Deputy Executive Secretary and Chief of Staff, from the Council staff."

NASA's Moon Plan Panned by Space Council Advisers

"Stressing that these are his private views, [Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Mike Griffin] said 2028 "is so late to need as to not be worthy to be on the table." From a systems engineering standpoint, building the Gateway before humans are on the surface is a "stupid architecture" because it will be needed only as a depot for propellant once it is being manufactured on the surface."

Former NASA administrator says Lunar Gateway is "a stupid architecture", Ars Technica

"Prefacing his comments by saying that these were his personal beliefs, Griffin said, "I think 2028 is so late-to-need that it doesn't even need to be on the table. Such a date does not demonstrate that the United States is a leader in anything. This is 2018. It took us eight years to get to the Moon the first time, and you're going to tell me it takes 10 to 12 to 14 to do it again when we know how? I just want to drop a flag on the play."

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.



NASA says it can put humans on Mars within 25 years, Atlanta Journal-Constitution

"The cost of solving those means that under current budgets, or slightly expanded budgets, it's going to take about 25 years to solve those," former NASA astronaut Tom Jones told reporters. "We need to get started now on certain key technologies."

NPC Newsmaker: Becoming Martians: NASA's 25-year Plan for Humans to Inhabit the Red Planet

"Humans are on the precipice of becoming an interplanetary species. We earthlings are on our way to becoming Martians. In fact, the future Martians are here on Earth now, training for Mars missions using new technological developments following a strict timeline that will get us there within 25 years."

Keith's note: Blah blah blah. In 2010 NASA started to talk about sending humans to Mars in the early 2030s i.e. approximately 25 years away. 8 years later and its still 25 years away. When I was a boy growing up in the 60s we were going to be on Mars in 1981 when I'd have been 26. Based on this latest 25 year prediction I will be 88. There is something fundamentally wrong with these predictions on the part of NASA. Some astronauts and space pros like participants Tom Jones, James Garvin, and Richard Davis would be perfectly happy if we never went anywhere. They'd rather talk about going somewhere than actually go somewhere. Meetings = action at NASA.

I am a space biologist. When I started working at the NASA Life Science Division at NASA HQ in 1986 we were already working on sending humans to Mars. We never stopped. This has nothing to do with science per se. Yes the risks are real. But they can be dealt with. This has everything to do with using the funding and assets at NASA's disposal for a strategic research plan to methodically reduce risk and flight certify humans for trips to destinations such as Mars. NASA has never had such a strategy and has dabbled in meandering hobby shop science for decades. Now would be a good time to start thinking strategically. Otherwise NASA will never find a way to go to Mars.

Meanwhile SpaceX is building a Mars rocketship and can go to Mars without NASA funding or permission. How will they do it? They'll take the best science at hand, maybe do a little of their own, do informed consent, have their crew sign waivers, and then go to Mars. If NASA won't let their employees take the risk the private sector will. When I lived at Everest Base Camp for a month in 2009 I did so after signing a waiver. People do this risk/benefit calculation all the time. Virtually everyone at Everest signed a waiver. NASA has to WANT to go to Mars and then focus its scattered energies on that end point. In the end someone has to step up and sign off on the increased risk. It will never be zero. Otherwise NASA needs to stand back and let others do it. And they will. Will SpaceX make it? We'll see. Are they trying? Yes. Is NASA trying? No. They just do telecons and Powerpoint.

We're about to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Apollo 11. Yea. Let's have a big feel-good party to celebrate the fact that we dropped the ball on our Apollo achievements and no longer know how to do something that we once did with style and daring half a century ago.

SpaceX's next big BFR spaceship part finished in Port of LA tent facility, Teslarati

"The first 9-meter (29.5-foot) diameter composite propellant tank dome for SpaceX's full-scale BFR spaceship prototype has been spotted more or less complete at the company's temporary Port of Los Angeles facility, unambiguous evidence that SpaceX is continuing to rapidly fabricate major components of its next-generation rocket."

NASA Is Still Kicking The Can Down the Road to Mars, earlier Post

Keith's note: If you search for "Space Entrepreneurship Conference USC Marshall" you get this link but if you go there, it says "404 - Page Not Found". If you go to the events page at USC Marshall there is no mention of this event. Greg Autry, who was fired by the Trump NASA Transition Team, has taught at USC Marshall. Yet another example of choir practice in an echo chamber by the usual suspects out of reach of the people who actually pay for the all the shiny space things. This whole National Space Council thing lacks transparency and simply rubber stamps things done behind the scenes, out of sight of the rest of us. And NASA is complicit in the way that these things are being done.

#SpaceForce Double Header

Transformers: Space

"Vice President Mike Pence is confirmed to speak at The Washington Post on October 23 as part of a "Transformers: Space" event. Pence, who serves as chairman of the National Space Council, will talk one-on-one with National Political Reporter Robert Costa about the Trump administration's plan to establish a Space Force as the sixth branch of the U.S. military and other important space policy matters."

National Space Council Meeting

President Donald J. Trump Is Launching America's Space Force

"The six recommendations presented to the President call for:

-- Forming a United States Space Command to control our space forces and develop the tactics, techniques, and procedures for military space operations.
-- Establishing the Space Force as a separate and distinct branch of the military whose mission will be to organize, train, and equip combat space forces.
-- Calling on Congress to authorize the establishment of a Space Force and provide funding for the United States Space Command.
-- Launching a joint review by the National Space Council and National Security Council of existing space operational authorities for meeting national security objectives, informed by DOD's assessment of the authorities required.
-- Creating a Space Development Agency to ensure Americans in the Space Force have cutting-edge warfighting capabilities.
-- Creating collaborative mechanisms with the Intelligence Community to improve unity of efforts for the development of space capabilities and operations."

NASA's recent woes took root with loss of space shuttle program, Houston Chronicle

"The decision to end the shuttle program came in 2004 as President George W. Bush's administration shifted its focus to frontiers beyond Earth's orbit. But with too few coins to divvy up amongst its many projects and a lack of political direction, the history-making agency instead has been forced to change course virtually every four years as political winds change. "NASA's budget and policy seem to be based on Twitter," said Keith Cowing, editor of NASA Watch, a website devoted to space news. "It's like, 'How can I come up with something in 280 characters?' We can't think long term. We can't think multi-administrations." That leaves space agency leaders wondering what will happen after the 2020 election. President Donald Trump has pushed to bolster human exploration -- with an eye toward the moon and then onto Mars -- but what happens if he isn't re-elected is anyone's guess. Policy fluctuations "can be difficult to weather," Mark Geyer, director of NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston, previously told the Houston Chronicle. "It can cause fluctuations in the space program and that's hard if you're trying to move the country forward. But that's life, so you need to develop strategies to navigate that."

Inspector General Attack On NASA Super-Rocket Marred By Mistakes, Omissions, Loren Thompson, Lexington Institute

"I have read the audit through twice and talked to Boeing executives about its findings. It appears to be a political document engineered by a holdover appointee from the Obama administration -- the same administration that tried to kill all of NASA's human exploration programs. It omits important information, misstates key facts and isn't even internally consistent in its assertions. ... First, the audit fails to provide historical context that might help explain why problems have occurred. This is only the second time in history that any country has tried to develop such a powerful rocket. The first time was the Saturn V program for Apollo missions to the Moon, half a century ago. With the demise of the Space Shuttle program, key skills were lost, infrastructure aged and the supply chain atrophied. NASA understood there were major challenges ahead, but the Inspector General is mum on their impact."

Keith's note: The core thrust of Thompson's paid whining is either Blame Obama or its so hard to build a big rocket (even though companies that Boeing bought did it half a century ago).

"The following is a statement from NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine about the Senate confirmation of James Morhard as the agency's deputy administrator: "Congratulations to Jim Morhard! He was confirmed as the 14th Deputy Administrator of NASA on Thursday, Oct. 11. "He joins our amazing agency at a crucial time in history. NASA is celebrating its 60th anniversary this year, and I look forward to working with him as we look towards NASA's next 60 years. His legislative and managerial talents will serve NASA well as we accomplish stunning achievements."

Keith's note: A hearing by the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology yesterday competed with another hearing being held simultaneously by the Senate Commerce Committee. Not much happened in the House hearing other than the usual routine posturing by both sides. The main topic of discussion was the future of the ISS. Bill Gertsenmaier repeated the same incomplete jingos used concocted by NASA to describe how NASA somehow expects the ISS to be paid for by the private sector in the 2024/2025 time frame. Gertsenmaier referred to the NASA ISS Transition Plan (not really a "Plan") required by law, but was delivered months late to Congress. The three NASA Center directors present to testify said nothing particularly interesting.

Rep. Babin announced that he's introducing H.R.6910 "To specify goals and objectives of the United States with respect to human spaceflight, and for other purposes." This bill includes language that would extend the life of the International Space Station to 2030. Similar language on ISS extension was included in S.3277 - Space Frontier Act of 2018 which was passed out of the Senate Commerce Committee in August. The topic of ISS extensions was a conversation between Jim Bridenstine and Ted Cruz in the other hearing held yesterday.

- Hearing charter
- Video recording of hearing
- [Statement] Full Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)
- [Statement] Space Subcommittee Chairman Brian Babin (R-Texas)
- [Statement] Ranking Member Johnson
- [Statement] Ranking Member Bera
- [Statement] William Gerstenmaier, HEOMD Associate Administrator
- [No prepared statement] Mark Geyer, JSC; Jody Singer, MSFC; Robert Cabana, KSC

In the Senate NASA Administrator Bridenstine Testified before the Senate Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, In reality Bridenstine testified before Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA). Bill Nelson did a flyby appearance and no one else really stayed long enough to say much of anything. Cruz pushed on the issue of not being distracted by the Moon as we head for Mars, not abandoning the ISS, allowing NASA to derive financial benefit from better ISS commercialization and use of its logo, and making sure that the U.S. remains the global leader in space exploration. Bridenstine agreed with Cruz on everything - and was intrigued by Cruz' s comments on space commerce. Sen. Markey was all over NASA's Earth and Space Science plans and the fate of NASA's Education Office and Technology Directorate to which Bridenstine gave the stock NASA answers.

At one point Cruz referred to the NASA report "National Space Exploration Campaign Report - Pursuant to Section 432(b) of the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017 (P.L. 115-10), September 2018," which was required by law and due for delivery in 2017 which NASA delivered late (just like the ISS Transition Report). Cruz asked Bridenstine about the report's stated intent of putting humans back ont he Moon by 2029 and asked why it only took 7 years to go from statement of intent to landing on the Moon in the 1960s and why does it take so much longer now? Bridenstine said that this was the first question he asked when he arrived at NASA. His answer: NASA is going back in a sustainable fashion - to stay - and is doing so with partners in a more constrained fiscal environment. OK. That works for the time being - he's new to the job. But additional digging on his part is going to show that there is more to this than the talking points that he's been given.

- Webcast
- Global Space Race: Ensuring the United States Remains the Leader in Space Bill Nelson Opening Statement
- Prepared statements by Jim Bridenstine, Sen. Cruz, and Sen. Markey were not posted

One thing sticks out of these two hearings: both focused on important topics that NASA was required, by law, to provde reports to Congress about. Both reports, authored by Bill Gerstenmaier's HEOMD, were delivered many months after their due date. The reports provide no meaningulful information as to what NASA plans to do, why it wants to do these things, how it plans to do them, what it will actually cost, and who will pay to make all of this happen. These questions were, of course, what Congress wanted NASA's reports to answer in the first place. This pattern from NASA HEOMD of foot dragging and vague responses to simple questions from Congress has typified the way that NASA has explaining its human exploration plans for the past ten years. These responses are filled with Powerpoint cartoons but are otherwise lacking in real substance. And when the real programs go awry its hard to see why or understand what the consequences are - other than the need for more money and time.

A new Administrator now has to look at his agency's lackluster performance and, as prompted by Sen. Cruz, answer the question as to why it takes NASA longer to do things it once did much faster - and whether this is the way that the agency is going to comply with the current Administration's intent that NASA regain and/or maintain its leadership in space. Quite honestly it seems to be exactly the opposite of what is required.

- Yet Another NASA Space Policy Report That Reveals No Policy, earlier post
- NASA Quietly Submits ISS Transition Plan To Congress (Update) , earlier post

Hearing: Global Space Race: Ensuring the United States Remains the Leader in Space

"U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), chairman of the Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, will convene a hearing titled "Global Space Race: Ensuring the United States Remains the Leader in Space," at 2:15 p.m. on Wednesday, September 26, 2018. Witnesses: The Honorable James Bridenstine, Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration"

Hearing: 60 Years of NASA Leadership in Human Space Exploration: Past, Present, and Future

"2:00 p.m. William Gerstenmaier, HEOMD; Mark Geyer, JSC; Jody Singer, MSFC; Robert Cabana, KSC"

Keith's note: The Senate hearing with Cruz and Bridenstine should be much more interesting given their previous interactions and their recent joint visit to NASA JSC. The House hearing is going to be filled with boring non-answers from NASA HQ and field center representatives reading from talking points that serve to tow the line and make no news.

National Space Exploration Campaign Report - Pursuant to Section 432(b) of the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017 (P.L. 115-10), September 2018, NASA

Keith's note: Once again NASA is trying to tell us that all is well in space and that it is moving ahead with a plan - "The National Space Exploration Campaign aims to revitalize and add direction to NASA's enduring purpose to carry out human and robotic exploration missions, expanding the frontiers of human experience and scientific discovery of the natural phenomena of Earth, other worlds, and the cosmos as a whole."

Despite the lofty words including the addition of the "cosmos" among NASA's ambitions, this plan is actually a withdrawal from earlier, more lofty exploration goals.

Of course, this report from NASA was due quite some time ago (last year) but NASA never bothers to do what Congress directs them to do - even if it is in the form of public law i.e. P.L. 115-10 which was enacted on 21 March 2017.

According to this report: "2024 - Based on results of human-class lunar lander capability demonstration missions, status of other human systems, other possible mission enhancements (e.g., retro-braking stage, launch vehicle availability) make decision on date and method of human lunar surface return and the mission objectives." In other words we still have to wait until 2024 to decide how to land Americans on the Moon a gain. But then it will take how may years before we actually do this?

All the report says is "Post-2024 Decisions - Based on the cost of lunar surface access, viability of higher-power systems and ISRU, as revealed by exploration and science missions and technology investments, and on private-sector and international demand for lunar surface access, determine the nature of a sustainable American human presence on the lunar surface and associated infrastructure development projects."

In other words it will be close to the 2030s before an American lunar lander reaches the Moon. During the Obama Administration we were going to be sending human crews to Mars (if you believed their Powerpoint slides) by the early 2030s. So now NASA is going to take almost as long only to land humans a quarter million miles away. Those are certainly lowered expectations. That sounds like negative progress - again, if you believe NASA's notional Powerpoint slides and white papers.

Meanwhile, in another potential magic act. NASA will wave more Powerpoint charts and make ISS totally commercial:

"2022 - Based on status of commercial module and/or free-flyer space station development and emerging commercial activities on ISS, fine-tune plans to end direct Federal funding of ISS by 2025 to ensure continuous access to a LEO space platform. Post-2024 Decisions - Based on the status of commercial module and/or free-flyer space station development and emerging commercial human spaceflight activities in LEO, decide on appropriate NASA and overall governmental support to ensure ongoing NASA requirements and permanent U.S. presence in LEO."

In other words NASA says that this ISS conversion to private sector operations will happen - unless it doesn't happen.

As For Mars, well, the whole "by the mid-2030s" thing that Obama people made NASA say does not look very plausible now. Not only will NASA just be landing its first people back on the Moon again, but according to this report it won't even have an architecture for going back to Mars for another 6 years (Apollo had one before people even flew on Apollo but who cares). One would assume, at this snail's pace, that vehicle design and construction would drag on like Orion/SLS has for the past decade.

"2024- Based on results of investment in Mars-forward technology R&D investment portfolio, Gateway development and operations, launch vehicle and crew vehicle development and operations, decide on architecture of human Mars orbital mission and begin associated systems development. Post-2024 Decisions - Based on results of robotic roundtrip mission, cislunar operations, and progress of Mars-forward technology R&D investment portfolio, determine set of technology investments and timeline required to achieve human landing on the surface of Mars."

In a nutshell, NASA's words may indicate that it has lofty goals but the murky timeline it presents suggests that its ability to do the things needed to meet these goals decreases in terms of speed with every passing year. Meanwhile, American commercial companies with billions in their own funding are planning to send people back to the Moon.

What's wrong with this picture?

Russia throws doubt on joint lunar space station with U.S.: RIA, Reuters

"Moscow may abandon a project to build a space station in lunar orbit in partnership with U.S. space agency NASA because it does not want a "second fiddle role," a Russian official said on Saturday. Russia agreed last year to work with the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on plans for the moon-orbiting Deep Space Gateway, which will serve as a staging post for future missions. But the head of Russian space agency Roscosmos, Dmitry Rogozin, said Russia might exit the joint programme and instead propose its own lunar orbit space station project. "The Russian Federation cannot afford to play the second fiddle role in it," he was quoted as saying by the RIA news agency, without much further elaboration."

Keith's note: Russia's space program is broke, so its not surprising that they are admitting the obvious - in a way that makes it look like someone else is at fault. As for playing "second fiddle" Roscosmos simply does not have the funds to play first fiddle, so good luck with that Dmitry.

Ivanka Trump sent over the moon by Russian cosmonaut's message from ISS, ABC 13

"Before ending the call, NASA commander Dr. Andrew Feustel said he would be remiss if he didn't give Cosmonaut Oleg Artemyev a chance to say hello. "Ivanka, I think you very kind and nice person," Artemyev said, as the crew looked on. "When I see you on TV and the news, my mood improves and rises." Trump blushed and let out a laugh. "That's very kind of you to say! Thank you!" she responded."

Keith's note: Everyone at NASA and Roscomos breathed a deep sigh of relief today when Oleg Artemyev made an overture to Ivanka Trump. The meeting between Dmitry Rogozin and Jim Bridenstine over possible Soyuz sabotage by U.S. astronauts will go much smoother now. Thanks Ivanka!

Ivanka Trump touring NASA's Johnson Space Center on Thursday, Houston Chronicle

"Ivanka Trump will be in Houston on Thursday for a tour of NASA's Johnson Space Center. President Donald Trump's daughter will be accompanied by NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine."

Ivanka Trump to visit Mesquite on Friday to see how Walmart trains workers for today's economy, Dallas Morning News

"Ivanka Trump isn't the only member of the Trump family who'll be in Texas in the coming weeks. Texas State Rep. James Frank announced on his Facebook page that Sen. Ted Cruz and Donald Trump Jr. would be in Wichita Falls for a rally on Oct. 3. And the president announced on Aug. 31 he would be coming to Texas in October to hold a "major rally" for Cruz."

Keith's note: That's three visits to JSC in Texas in a matter of a few months for Jim Bridenstine. All other NASA centers have had only one visit. Just sayin'. Also, FWIW Ted Cruz has a political rally shortly after his JSC campaign appearance with Ivanka tour just down the street at Franca's Real Italian Restaurant at 1101 East NASA Parkway on Thursday night (that's nice and close to JSC). Let's see who else shows up.

Keith's update: A hearing scheduled for next Wednesday titled "Global Space Race: Ensuring the United States Remains the Leader in Space" chaired by Ted Cruz suddenly appeared on the webpage of the Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness. Its certainly convenient to have these JSC visits, rallys, and hearings all scheduled so close together. If Cruz is re-elected - and the Senate does not flip - then this is probably a good thing for human space flight at NASA. If either of those things do not happen well, who knows.

- VP Pence Visits Texas For A Fund Raiser And A JSC Visit, earlier post (23 August 2018)

Shanahan downplays disagreements over Space Force structure, Defense News

"Days after the Air Force released a Space Force memo that seemed to contradict a plan laid out by Deputy Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan, the number two at the Pentagon downplayed any differences of opinion."

Wilson: $13 billion Space Force cost estimate is 'conservative'", Space News

"Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said her initial $13 billion cost estimate to stand up a Space Force and sustain it for five years is likely to be revised upward as more data is crunched. In a detailed memo submitted on Friday to Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan, Wilson provided the first glimpse into the potential cost, size and makeup of a military branch for space. The $13 billion projected cost over five years is based on a force of 13,000 people, including a headquarters of about 2,400."

New Space Force price tag fuels Capitol Hill skeptics, Military Times

"Colorado Republican Rep. Mike Coffman had already decided to lead opposition in the U.S. House to President Donald Trump's "Space Force" proposal. But a widely leaked Air Force estimate that creating a space force as a new military service would cost $13 billion over the first five years only stiffened Coffman's resolve. Coffman, who chairs the House Armed Services Committee's Military Personnel Subcommittee and sits on its Strategic Forces Subcommittee, was sure other lawmakers agree with him. "A really bad idea is a 'Department of Space,'" Coffman said in an interview Tuesday, adding, "I feel confident we can block this. The president will not have the votes."

Keith's note: Once again we see an exercise in checking the boxes with regard to the making of space policy. A White House-created committee of experts, hand-selected to focus on a desired ad somewhat pre-determiined outcome, goes through the motions of being interested in what people have to say. They only go to friendly locations where dissent or differences in opinion are unlikely - and consensus can be proclaimed by default. They never talk to anyone from the remaining 99.9999% of American electorate who ultimately pays for all of the shiny space toys.

Then, at their next meeting, they can show a Powerpoint chart with a group that they have reached out to with a check next to it. In this case the Users Advisory Group is almost entirely composed of either political favorites or representatives of large aerospace companies looking for more contracts from NASA and DOD. There are no real "users" of space on this panel. Nor are there any members from the next generation who will inherit and conduct America's space activities. All we see are sellers. Yet another choir practice session amongst the usual suspects in an echo chamber.

In this case (see the AIAA photos below) the room is nearly empty and there is no webcast. The echo must be particularly evident this time - but there is no one there to (other than Jeff Foust) to notice.

U.S. - Canada Space Cooperation Remains Strong

Canada and U.S. Space Cooperation Remains Strong but Funding Drives Programs, SpaceQ

"On September 7 the Wilson Center's Canada Institute in Washington organized a one day event titled "Over the Horizon: A New Era for Canada-U.S. Space Cooperation?" As with many events like this, discussions behind the scenes is where a lot of the action was. Though, there was one clear fact that no one could surmount."

Keith's note: Repeating Apollo would be a mistake, But evoking the excitement of that era would not be incorrect.

Keith's note: FYI you may notice that emails from folks at JPL will soon have different addresses: jpl.nasa.gov will be changing to jpl.caltech.edu. Apparently NASA finally realized that people employed by JPL, a FFRDC, actually work for Caltech - not NASA.
Keith's note: In addition to all of the unfinished work from ISS that will somehow be accomplished on the Lunar Gateway NASA also wants to handle samples returned from Mars. Back in the 80s when NASA toyed with this idea they decided that an entire mini-space station was needed. Oddly it was on the same scale as the Gateway. To be certain, technology has advanced since then but the notion that NASA can shove activities with requiring high levels of biocontainment into a small, cramped mini-space station strains the limits of credibility.

Why private space labs should start on the International Space Station, opinion, Politico

"With this in mind, the Trump Administration wisely requested $150 million for this coming year to enable and mature commercial capabilities in low earth orbit (LEO). The Trump Administration was also smart enough not to dictate in any specific detail how this money will be spent. They are welcoming ideas from industry, and it will be the job of new NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine to make the final decision in the coming months."

Keith's note: Wait a minute: while he lauds the potential for possible commercial uses of ISS as a reason to keep it operational NASA Trump appointee Jeff Waksman (who was fired earlier this year) forgot to mention that it is the Trump Administration that wants NASA stop funding ISS after 2024. So they are creating the problem that he seems to be trying to solve. He also omits mention of the fact that the White House wants the entire cost of ISS to be paid for by commercial entities after 2024 but does not explain where that money will come from. Yet he talks about using SLS to launch new ISS components. I am not sure anyone at NASA is talking about $1 billion SLS launch fees to put new modules on the ISS. I think Waksman is trying to say that the ISS has a lot of potential. He's quite right. I'm just not sure he knows how to tap that potential.

More Trump Staff Changes at NASA HQ (Update), earlier post

Early Retirement for Space Shuttles Unlikely, Lawmakers Say, space.com (2005)

"A group of Republican lawmakers led by Mike Pence of Indiana last week said the $104 billion to replace the shuttles with a new spaceship and rockets to carry astronauts back to the moon ought to be canceled to help pay to rebuild the hurricane-wrecked Gulf Coast."

Remarks by Vice President Pence on the Administration's Space Policy Priorities Houston, TX

"The end of the Space Shuttle Program in 2011 left America without a viable human Space launch program. While I was a member of Congress, I actually had the opportunity to attend three different shuttle launches - some of the most inspiring experiences of my little family's lives."

https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.spaceref.com/news/2018/pence.word.23aug.1.jpg

Larger version

Remarks by Vice President Pence on the Administration's Space Policy Priorities Houston, TX

"And finally, to those of you who will guide this mission, on a personal level, I just -- I want to assure you that millions of Americans will carry you in their prayers. And they have faith and hope you have confidence that, as you go, you do not go alone. That millions of Americans will claim that ancient promise that if you "rise on the wings of the dawn", if you "go up to the heavens," "even there His hand will guide you," and "His right hand will hold us fast." Our heroes will go with the prayers of the American people."

Keith's note: Once upon a time everyone lamented that the occupants of the White House (pick one - any one) did not care about space. And if they did, there was no money to back up whatever they wanted NASA to do. Now we have a Vice President who clearly does care about space - and then some. No argument there. Alas, there was no news from Johnson Space Center today. The Vice President was in Texas to do a fundraiser for Rep. John Culberson and stopped by JSC give a space sermon with a short introduction from NASA Administrator Bridenstine. As for the sermon-esque aspects of Pence's presentation - that's how he rolls. I did find one reference Pence made to resonates with things I have ranted about (before) on NASA Watch from the film "Interstellar":

Nomination Hearing: James Morhard for NASA Deputy Administrator

"U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, will convene a hearing at 10: 15 a.m. on Thursday, August 23, 2018, to consider three presidential nominees."

Morhard's response to questions from the committee

Watch Live

Testimony: Mr. James "Jim" Morhard, of Virginia, to be Deputy Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration

"I believe transformational leadership and the empowerment and strength of partnering, will ensure a new era for America's space programs, advance scientific knowledge for the Earth, and inspire a new generation to enter the STEM fields. If confirmed, it would be my highest honor to help NASA in these endeavors. This is the time."

Watch live starting at 1:45 pm EDT

Mike Pence to headline Houston-area fundraiser for U.S. Rep. John Culberson, Texas Tribune (9 August)

"Vice President Mike Pence is coming to Texas later this month to help raise money for U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, amid a tough re-election fight. Pence will headline a fundraiser for Culberson on Aug. 23 in the Houston area, according to an invitation obtained by The Texas Tribune. The invitation for the breakfast event bills Pence as a "very special guest."

Vice President Pence Talks Future Human Space Exploration at NASA's Johnson Space Center, NASA (21 August)

"Vice President Mike Pence, with NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, will visit NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston Thursday, Aug. 23, to discuss the future of human space exploration and the agency's plans to return to the Moon as a forerunner to future human missions to Mars."

Keith's note: So ... did VP Pence decide to visit Texas to do the Culberson fundraiser - and then added the JSC visit - or vice versa? When was the Bridnestine visit to JSC added? This is his second visit to JSC for both Pence and Bridenstine whereas other NASA field centers have not yet been visited once.

Senate emerges as obstacle to Trump's 'Space Force', The Hill

"The Senate has emerged as a major impediment to President Trump's hopes for a new "Space Force." While the House GOP has been largely supportive of the idea of creating a new military branch for space, skeptics in the Senate from both parties have raised concerns about its cost - and the potential for adding to bureaucratic overhead at the Pentagon. There's a recognition that players like China are increasingly turning to space, leaving a risk that the U.S. could be left behind. But there are also fears that it will turn into an expensive boondoggle."

Keith's note: Last week it was Space Force merchandise from the Trump 2020 campaign. Now, it looks like the NRCC (National Republican Congressional Committee) has jumped on the whole space thing. The fact that we no longer fly this particular space vehicle seems to be of minor importance. But hey, we now get to say SPACE FORCE all the time.

- Hey, Its The Trump 2020 Campaign Space Force Logo Contest, earlier post

Is A Space Force Needed?

Security center director: US needs counterspace capabilities as part of Space Force, The Hill

"A security director is backing President Trump's idea of creating a Space Force, citing a troubling development of counterspace technologies by some of the United States' biggest rivals. Todd Harrison, director of the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, says that while the U.S. still has a "great advantage" over countries like China and Russia, the U.S. military is not doing enough to protect itself. "Where other countries are causing concern for us is not that they're developing space capabilities, but they're developing counterspace capabilities," Harrison told Hill.TV during an interview that aired on Friday, referring to weapons and other destructive systems designed for offensive uses."

The Space Force isn't silly. Reshuffling the Pentagon might be, opinion, Washington Post

"For now, it is unclear whether a big, new military reorganization would add anything useful to what the administration is already doing -- setting up a joint space command, putting more emphasis on developing new space military technologies and pushing harder for the cultivation and promotion of space-oriented officers and specialists. The administration should step up these efforts, not inaugurate a massive bureaucratic overhaul that could for years prove a diversion and distraction."

Nomination Hearing: James Morhard for NASA Deputy Administrator

"U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, will convene a hearing at 10: 15 a.m. on Thursday, August 23, 2018, to consider three presidential nominees."

- Nomination questionaire

https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.spaceref.com/news/2018/morhard.quote.jpg

NASA boss Bridenstine '100 percent' behind SLS and Alabama center. AL.com

"NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine said Wednesday that he supports "100 percent" the agency's Space Launch System program and the future of Alabama's Marshall Space Flight Center. Bridenstine spoke to reporters in historic Marshall Building 4619 while taking his first tour of NASA's propulsion center in Huntsville since the Senate confirmed him as administrator in late April."

How can NASA return to the Moon? By making everything reusable, chief says, Ars Technica

"But if we can take advantage of commercial industry that can develop a reusable rocket, we want them to be successful," he said after Geyer was done speaking. "We want to partner with companies that are willing to step up and take that challenge. It is not an 'either/or.' Right now, our best, closest capability is going to be SLS and Orion, but if 10 years from now, 20 years from now, there's a commercial capability that's successful, we're going to use it. And we want them to be successful. In fact, we're partnering with those companies today on commercial crew and other things."

Keith's note: When you are playing a home game you praise the home team. Curiously, when Bridenstine is not attending a home game he is much more willing to talk about other ways to send things into space than SLS - as was the case recently at JSC. According to sources present, Bridenstine all but cut off JSC director Mark Geyer as he gushed about SLS. Instead Bridenstine, as quoted in the article above, made a point of suggesting that SLS is not the only answer.

What is really interesting is his comment "... if 10 years from now, 20 years from now". Take a look at NASA's various notional cartoons about how it wants to do the Moon/Mars thing. Their plans stretch into the 2030s. That certainly falls in the 10-20 year future time frame. So ... that would seem to imply that Bridenstine is willing to consider alternatives to using SLS for Moon/Mars. Up until now to suggest such a thing would have been heresy. Now, it depends on what Zip Code the press briefing is being held in.

Bridenstine may be 100% supportive of SLS - but exactly what that means is open to speculation. One thing is for certain: he may sip the SLS Koolaid but he's not drinking it.

Bridenstine May Not Be Drinking That SLS Koolaid, earlier Post

Pentagon punishes reporters over tough coverage, Politico

"Another example involved the military-news outlet Defense One, which was left out of a media roundtable with the deputy secretary of defense earlier this month to help roll out President Donald Trump's proposed Space Force. The slight came after a Defense One reporter got an early scoop on plans to set up the new branch, breaking the story before the Pentagon was ready for it to go public. Kevin Baron, the executive editor of the site, confirmed that none of his reporters were invited to the briefing and said that [Pentagon chief spokeswoman Dana] White had conceded to him in an email that the snub was due to the initial story."

Keith's note: Looks like Trump boarding party/transition team member Jonathan Dimock has burrowed into the depths of NASA HQ. He's landed at the NASA HQ Space Technology Mission Directorate Communications and Operations Code OD00) with a job title of "Public Outreach/Partnership". It is somewhat odd that NASA would give a job that seemingly requires interacting with the public to a former campaign staffer who sent a job audition email to the White House stating:

"National Aeronautic Space Administration (NASA or Deep Space Exploration Administration or DESA) - Aside from the fact this is based very heavily in science, there is also a large cry to reduce their $105.5b budget and even movements to roll our space program into DSEA. With the help of, and to the credit of, the administration there can be drastic cost cuttings for big wins for the administration. ... Aside from understanding the technical aspect of NASA and the components that goes into it. I can also understand the economics of launching satellites and supplies into space for both private and government entities. We all know that Richard Branson with Virgin Galactic, Elon Musk with Space-X and various investors including Shaun Coleman with Vector Space are racing for more contacts with NASA and others. This is a time when NASA can scale back without huge loss to their operation and we can continue to provide suitable funding for suitable research that benefits the citizens both scientifically and economically. It is not outrageous to believe that a small cut in the $105.5b budget cannot be cut by even a small percentage for a large gain to the taxpayers while providing a big win for the administration."

One would hope that Dimock now has his budget facts straight and that he knows the actual name of the agency where he works - now that his job is to communicate all of that technology stuff to the public.

Oh yes: Although Dimock is not formally a White House Liaison for NASA and is buried multiple levels down in the org charts he regularly does the liaison thing with the White House - directly - just not through the normal channels.

How Jonathan Dimock Auditioned To Be NASA White House Liaison, earlier post

NASA Logo Designer Bashes Trump's Space Force Logo, TMZ

"Richard Danne -- the designer of a NASA logo from 1975 -- went off on Trump's Space Force artwork. Danne ripped into the designs released by the Trump Administration ... telling TMZ, "This logo effort is typical of the present administration: impulsive, ill-advised, superficial, and second-rate." "A random student from the Los Angeles Art Center could put these logos to shame ... They are, in a word: sophomoric!" Richard is peeved some of the Space Force designs were lifts from past NASA logos. "The images are totally derivative from NASA graphics but are -- All flash and no substance, and comical really."

Jim Bridenstine on CSPAN

Final Report on Organizational and Management Structure for the National Security Space Components of the Department of Defense

"Establishing a sixth branch of the Armed Forces requires Congressional action. This report outlines immediate steps by the Department of Defense to protect U.S. vital interests in space, including:

- Accelerate space technology and anchor development initiatives to the modernization priorities outlined in the National Defense Strategy,
- Establish a Space Development Agency, a joint organization charged with rapidly developing and fielding next-generation capabilities,
- Establish a Space Operations Force of career space experts who are trained, promoted and retained as space warfighting professionals and who form a space community of engineers, scientists, intelligence experts, operators, strategists and more,
- Establish an affordable and efficient operating structure with accountable civilian oversight to provide service and support functions for the Space Force,
- Establish a new U.S. Space Command to improve and evolve space warfighting, including integrating innovative force designs, concepts of operation, doctrines, tactics, techniques and procedures."

Keith's note: I did another interview on the whole Space Force thing with CGTN this morning. Yes we talked about the official Space Force logo contest.

NASA package that fell from sky with note mentioning Trump sparks alarm in New Jersey, CBS

"A suspicious package that fell from the sky over New Jersey caused some alarm because it contained a note that mentioned President Donald Trump. South Brunswick police say the package, attached to a parachute, was making a hissing sound and included a note that said: "NASA Atmospheric Research Instrument NOT A BOMB!" If this lands near the President, we at NASA wish him a great round of golf."

Keith's note: Hey gang - it looks like you too can vote on the design of the new logo for The Space Force. Which one do YOU like? (larger image)

According to this official Trump 2020 campaign email from Brad Pascale: "Friend, President Trump wants a SPACE FORCE -- a groundbreaking endeavor for the future of America and the final frontier. As a way to celebrate President Trump's huge announcement, our campaign will be selling a new line of gear. But first we have to make a final decision on the design we will use to commemorate President Trump's new Space Force--and he wants YOU to have a say. Vote for your favorite logo."

https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.spaceref.com/news/2018/trump.spaceforce.jpg
https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.spaceref.com/news/2018/pence.spaceforce.jpg

Remarks by Vice President Pence on the Future of the U.S. Military in Space

"And while these steps have been vital to our national defense, they're really only a beginning. They're only a beginning of meeting the rising security threats our nation faces in space today and in the future. As President Trump has said, in his words, "It is not enough to merely have an American presence in space; we must have American dominance in space." And so we will. (Applause.)"

Larger image

Space Force Update Today

Keith's note: According to the White House Vice President Pence will visit the Department of Defense on Thursday and will be joined by Secretary of Defense Mattis at an honor guard ceremony and a DOD briefing. Following that briefing the Vice President will give formal remarks. Among the topics to be covered with be President Trump's proposed Space Force.

- Watch live starting around 11:15 am EDT
- President Trump Links NASA To The Space Force, earlier post
- Previous posts

Remarks by Vice President Pence on the Future of the U.S. Military in Space

"And while these steps have been vital to our national defense, they're really only a beginning. They're only a beginning of meeting the rising security threats our nation faces in space today and in the future. As President Trump has said, in his words, "It is not enough to merely have an American presence in space; we must have American dominance in space." And so we will. (Applause.)"

President Donald J. Trump is Building the United States Space Force for a 21st Century Military

"I'm hereby directing the Department of Defense and Pentagon to immediately begin the process necessary to establish a space force as the sixth branch of the armed forces. - President Donald J. Trump"

SpaceX organizes inaugural conference to plan landings on Mars, Ars Technica

"This appears to be the first meeting of such magnitude, however, with nearly 60 key scientists and engineers from industry, academia, and government attending the workshop, including a handful of leaders from NASA's Mars exploration program. The invitation for the inaugural Mars meeting encourages participants to contribute to "active discussions regarding what will be needed to make such missions happen." Attendees are being asked to not publicize the workshop or their attendance."

Keith's note: Looks like NASA may be having some second doubts about its own #JourneyToMars thing - or what is left of it - and are seeking out alternatives. Smart. Of course no one is talking about this at SpaceX, NASA, or CU. Kudos to Eric Berger.

Keith's update: I am still waiting for NASA HQ to admit that it's people are at this meeting even though I know that they are. As for the admonition to attendees not to talk about the meeting or their attendance, well, there's always Twitter.

Keith's note: It is rather obvious from prior comments - and especially this tweet from today - that President Trump equates NASA activities and those associated with his whole Space Force thing. Given 60 years of civilian focus, this could represent a significant change for NASA. Let's see how NASA, OSTP, DoD, and the National Space Council try to parse, spin, unpack, and otherwise explain this tweet. Maybe someone will finally explain what Space Force is and what NASA's role is with it. NASA Adminstrator Bridenstine retweeted this tweet and has spent more time talking about Space Force than anyone else. Perhaps he knows what is really going on.

Trump's pick to head White House science office gets good reviews, Science

"[meteorologist Kelvin] Droegemeier, who has served on the faculty of The University of Oklahoma (OU) in Norman for 33 years and been the school's vice president for research since 2009, has long been rumored to be in the running for the OSTP job, which entails advising the president on technical issues and overseeing coordination of federal science policy. He is no stranger to Washington, D.C.; then-President George W. Bush named him to the National Science Board, which oversees NSF, in 2004, and Obama reappointed him in 2011. He served as the board's vice-chair from 2014 to 2017. He has also served as a formal and informal adviser to federal and state politicians. He leads a state science advisory panel named by Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin, and advised former Oklahoma Representative Jim Bridenstine (R), now the administrator of NASA."

Keith's note: The new OSTP Director is a prominent scientist from Oklahoma. The Administrator of NASA used to represent part of Oklahoma in Congress. As such, one would hope that there would be some instant connectivity between NASA HQ and OSTP. But then again there's the National Space Council who also has its own ideas with regard to what NASA should/should not be doing. It will be interesting to see how NASA walks the tight rope between these two science power centers in the White House. Stay tuned.

FY 2020 Administration Research and Development Budget Priorities, OSTP

"American Space Exploration & Commercialization - Research and innovation in space have a direct impact on Earth, generating advancements in our basic understanding of the universe and our own planet, and inspiring the next generation of scientists and engineers. Research investments should be focused on ensuring American leadership in space for long-duration spaceflight, in-space manufacturing, in-situ resource utilization, longterm cryogenic fuel storage and management, and advanced space-related power and propulsion capabilities. Agencies should prioritize demonstrations and flight tests to ensure an industrial base for commercial activity in space and on celestial bodies. One area of potential scientific and commercial importance is microgravity-related research that has the potential for near-term breakthroughs in biopharmaceuticals and materials science. Finally, agencies should seek opportunities to work with advanced materials, additive manufacturing, optical communications, and machine learning-capabilities that have broad potential applications in space and on Earth."

Pentagon not waiting for Congress to create space force: report, The Hill

"The Department of Defense is reportedly planning to create a new Space Operations Force in upcoming months at the direction of President Trump, despite lacking congressional approval for the new military service branch. Defense One reports that the Pentagon has laid out its plan to create the new Space Force in a 14-page report that will be given to lawmakers later this week. Defense One reports that it has reviewed a draft copy of the report dated July 30. The plan as it is currently laid out in the draft includes creating a Space Force with four parts, three of which will be established over the next few months. A combatant command for space, a joint agency that will purchase military satellites and a new warfighting community are among the three parts to be established in the near future."

Earlier posts

https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.spaceref.com/news/2018/capsule.wh.jpg

Orion Spacecraft at the White House for the Made in America Showcase

"NASA's Orion spacecraft that flew Exploration Flight Test-1 on Dec. 5, 2014 is seen on the South Lawn of the White House, Sunday, July 22, 2018 in Washington, DC. Lockheed Martin, NASA's prime contractor for Orion, began manufacturing the Orion crew module in 2011 and delivered it in July 2012 to NASA's Kennedy Space Center where final assembly, integration and testing was completed. More than 1,000 companies across the country manufactured or contributed elements to the spacecraft."

Coalition for Deep Space Exploration Participates in White House "Made in America" Showcase

"NASA's Orion spacecraft is built by Lockheed Martin; the SLS rocket is built by Boeing, Aerojet Rocketdyne and Northrop Grumman; and the rocket's Launch Platform/ Exploration Ground Systems is supported by Jacobs."

Keith's note: And the eager #MadeInAmerica fans left out a paragraph "The Service Module is being built by Airbus Defence and Space." which is, of course, a European company using lots of European subcontractors. The European Service Module (ESM) is a rather crucial part of the overall system. How odd that the Coalition - and NASA - seem to forget to mention this fact in the furry of trying to hop on the latest White House slogan bandwagon.

Its also odd, that in the rush to tow piece of space hardware inside the White House gate that no one mentions the wholly American spacecraft being built by the private sector by Boeing, SpaceX, Sierra Nevada, Virgin Galactic, and Blue Origin. That is the real #MadeInAmerica story. And why wasn't the Commercial Spaceflight Federation invited to participate? Their members have more spacecraft and launch systems #MadeInAmerica than NASA does.

Chinese space official seems unimpressed with NASA's lunar gateway, Ars Technica

"Another slide from [CNSA's Pei Zhaoyu] offered some thoughts on the gateway concept, which NASA intends to build out during the 2020s, delaying a human landing on the Moon until the end of the decade at the earliest. Pei does not appear to be certain about the scientific objectives of such a station, and the deputy director concludes that, from a cost-benefit standpoint, the gateway would have "lost cost-effectiveness."

Mike Pence will visit Cape Canaveral next month for a big space update, Orlando Weekly

"Vice President Mike Pence will visit NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral next month to announce the first astronaut crews under NASA's Commercial Crew Program, according to sources familiar with the matter. Pence, who chairs the National Space Council, will confirm a new launch date for the first private crew missions and announce which crew capsules each of the four selected astronauts will ride in to the International Space Station."

From NASA PAO: "The following is a statement from NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine on Thursday's announcement of the intended nomination by President Donald Trump of James Morhard to serve as the agency's deputy administrator: "Today the President announced his intent to nominate James Morhard as Deputy Administrator of NASA. "Morhard is the United States Senate Deputy Sergeant at Arms. Prior to this, he was the Staff Director of the Senate Appropriations Committee. During his tenure there, he ran the Senate Commerce, Justice, State subcommittee that included all NOAA programs, and the Military Construction subcommittee where public/private partnerships were first used for military housing. "This administration is committed to American leadership in space, and I look forward to working with Mr. Morhard upon his confirmation."

Keith's note: The following full page color advertisement by Northrop Grumman appears on page A5 of today's Washington Post (larger image).

"MAKING HISTORY REQUIRES MISSION SUCCESS.

Northrop Grumman is proud to lead the industry team of NASA's James Webb Space Telescope - the largest, most complex and powerful space telescope ever built. Webb will fundamentally alter our understanding of the universe, and we are focused on ensuring that this once-unthinkable achievement becomes a reality. Webb pushes the limits of technology. We only get one chance to get it right - and we take that responsibility seriously. From putting men on the moon to seeing he first images from Hubble, there are many great firsts in space. When Webb travels one million miles from Earth and peers back over 13.5 billion years to see the first stars and galaxies forming out of the darkness of the early universe, we will marvel at its discoveries and write the next chapter of great firsts in space. Making history requires mission success and we are all in."

Yea, Northrop Grumman is "all in" on this. Non-stop cost increases and schedule delays for 16 years have turned this project into a cash cow for the company. You bet they're "all in" - even if they can't seem to attach fasteners properly and don't read the instructions on what solvents to use to clean hardware. But that's OK since NASA will just keep paying those invoices.

Advertisements like this in the Washington Post like this can easily cost between $100,000 to $200,000. At a minimum you'd hope that the money for ads (which should be spent on fixing Northrop Grumman's dumb mistakes) would at least be used for public commentary that is a little more honest about the situation. Instead, you see no mention of any of these screw ups or obscene cost increases - problems that are so bad that Congress now has to reauthorize this project.

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.

More Cost Increases And Delays For Webb Space Telescope

"As a result of the delay, Webb's total lifecycle cost to support the March 202l launch date is estimated at $9.66 billion. The development cost estimate to support the new launch date is $8.8B (up from the $8B development cost estimate established in 2011)."

NASA Announces Contract for Next-Generation Space Telescope Named after Space Pioneer (2002)

"The James Webb Space Telescope is scheduled for launch in 2010 aboard an expendable launch vehicle. NASA today selected TRW, Redondo Beach, Calif. [Bought by Northrop Grumman 2 months earlier], to build a next-generation successor to the Hubble Space Telescope in honor of the man who led NASA in the early days of the fledgling aerospace agency. Under the terms of the contract valued at $824.8 million, TRW will design and fabricate the observatory's primary mirror and spacecraft. TRW also will be responsible for integrating the science instrument module into the spacecraft as well as performing the pre-flight testing and on-orbit checkout of the observatory."

GAO: NASA Commercial Crew Program: Plan Needed to Ensure Uninterrupted Access to the International Space Station, GAO

"Further delays are likely as the Commercial Crew Program's schedule risk analysis shows that the certification milestone is likely to slip. The analysis identifies a range for each contractor, with an earliest and latest possible completion date, as well as an average. The average certification date was December 2019 for Boeing and January 2020 for SpaceX, according to the program's April 2018 analysis. Since the Space Shuttle was retired in 2011, the United States has been relying on Russia to carry astronauts to and from the International Space Station (ISS). Additional delays could result in a gap in U.S. access to the space station as NASA has contracted for seats on the Russian Soyuz spacecraft only through November 2019.

NASA is considering potential options, but it does not have a contingency plan for ensuring uninterrupted U.S. access. NASA's certification process addresses the safety of the contractors' crew transportation systems through several mechanisms, but there are factors that complicate the process. One of these factors is the loss of crew metric that was put in place to capture the probability of death or permanent disability to an astronaut. NASA has not identified a consistent approach for how to assess loss of crew. As a result, officials across NASA have multiple ways of assessing the metric that may yield different results.

Consequently, the risk tolerance level that NASA is accepting with loss of crew varies based upon which entity is presenting the results of its assessment. Federal internal controls state that management should define risk tolerances so they are clear and measurable. Without a consistent approach for assessing the metric, the agency as a whole may not clearly capture or document its risk tolerance with respect to loss of crew."

Keith's note: On 13 June 2018 NASA civil servant John Guidi, Deputy Director of the HEOMD Advanced Exploration Systems Division, participated in a FISO (Future In-Space Operations (FISO) Working Group) telecon. The title of his presentation was "NASA's Changing Human Spaceflight Exploration plans". That's certainly a topic of interest these days, yes?

FISO telecons are run by NASA GSFC civil servant Harley Thronson and Dan Lester at the University of Texas. The PDF of the presentation is here https://fiso.spiritastro.net/telecon/Guidi_6-13-18/Guidi_6-13-18.pdf unless the link does not work. Then maybe you can try this link http://fiso.spiritastro.net/telecon/Guidi_6-13-18/ unless it does not work either. Or maybe you can cut and paste the URL directly into your browser. Or maybe you can use another Internet access method. Tweeting links is a waste of time since they block that too. This is the sort of games that Harley Thronson and Dan Lester play.

The NASA civil servants who regular participate in these telecons do so as part of their official duties. Often times they release information at these FISO telecons that NASA has not officially released elsewhere. NASA PAO never announces these civil servant presentations as they regularly do for other conferences and workshops. So this all happens in semi-stealth mode - if Thronson and Lester let you know in advance or give you access to materials after the fact. If they do not like you then they block your IP address.

So here we are with NASA pivoting back to the Moon again and a presentation by a senior NASA Headquarters representative about NASA's current plans for returning to the Moon is available to some taxpayers on a private website but not others on an official NASA website. Why isn't this stuff posted on NASA.gov? Yea, NASA has this whole messaging thing down, doesn't it?

- Stealth Future In-Space Operations (FISO) Working Group Telecons, earlier post
- Yet Another Stealth NASA Briefing On Mars Mission Concepts, earlier post

Keith's note: There has been a meeting (actually an "unconference") called "Decolonize Mars" at the Library of Congress in Washington, DC this attended by people who do not want to colonize Mars.

According to the unconference website "The term decolonization refers to undoing the legacy of colonialism. Many people are used to hearing about "colonizing Mars" to talk about humanity living in space; here, we examine how using a colonialist framework in space reproduces past harm from humanity's history on Earth. This event is about envisioning fresh pathways for thinking about space exploration by stepping away from the ways we usually talk about space, which by definition is "decolonizing" the topic. Hence, "Decolonizing Mars"."

In other words they only seem to want like-minded attendees. Not that I don't agree with part of what I think they are getting at since we have certainly screwed up this planet - but there's a clear bias on one side of the argument in the mission statement. They are tweeting with the hashtag #decolonizemars but the invitation-only attendee list is password-protected. No media seem to have been allowed. No webcast. Nothing. This is rather odd for a meeting in a government facility convened by government employees.

This meeting was organized by the current Baruch S. Blumberg/NASA Chair of Astrobiology at the Kluge Center of the Library of Congress. I knew Barry Blumberg rather well. Barry wanted to tell everyone about everything. I am not certain he'd like this closed door approach. This is just more DC choir practice in an echo chamber by a subset of the usual suspects. The remaining 99.9% of the people who pay for this party get left out. Just sayin'

Keith's note: I tuned into the Politico Space thing last night. I missed a lot of it since it was supposed to start at 6:15 but after 30 minutes of waiting for it to start I gave up and did something else. I checked back in later and listened for 15 minutes or so. I just happened to tune in just as Jim Bridenstine was asked about the whole Space Force thing. Being an actual warfighter who defended our country, a former Congressman who grappled with legislation, and a guy who thinks about space a lot, he knows his stuff.

Bridenstine answered the Space Force question cogently for 10 minutes or more, jumping back to the topic again and again later. Bridenstine clearly supports the idea of a Space Force and makes his viewpoint clearly without notes or stumbling. Indeed, now and then, he almost sounded like he was auditioning to be Secretary of the Space Force (SecSF).

What's odd about this is that no one at the Department of Defense really wants to talk about Space Force - just Bridenstine. Indeed, the impression one gets is that they are not too thrilled about turning the Pentagon into a Hexagon with a sixth service called Space Force (yes I stole that joke). You can't get the National Space Council to talk about this either. In Washington parlance Bridenstine probably got a little over his skis or was outside his swim lane a bit.

I do not think this signals any sort of military role for NASA. But this space agency does not operate in a vacuum (pun intended) when it comes to other space activities. If Bridenstine is the only one who is willing to talk about space in a larger context that includes things outside of NASA's purview such as Space Force - when no one else will - perhaps we should listen. Maybe he knows what is actually going on.

Now is the time for the Space Force. Trump just needs to get it right, op ed, Washington Post

"The Pentagon helped shoot down the "corps" idea a year ago. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis wrote congressional leaders last October: "I oppose the creation of a new military service and additional organizational layers at a time when we are focused on reducing overhead and integrating joint warfighting functions." But Trump continued to push his pet space project. One advocate was Vice President Pence, chairman of the National Space Council and a rocket enthusiast who's said to have brought his family to Florida to watch NASA launches. Another was Newt Gingrich, the peripatetic former House speaker who, like Trump, enjoys promoting flashy, controversial ideas. "If Trump can break through the bureaucracy, all this will happen within a decade," even by 2020, Gingrich predicted in a phone interview Tuesday. Gingrich, who informally attends Space Council meetings, says he has talked with Trump about the idea but that the passion for it is the president's. The Air Force had been hoping this proposal would go away."

The Air Force is "as serious as a heart attack" about opposing the Space Corps, MuckRock

"While President Donald Trump's announcement earlier this year regarding the possible establishment of a "Space Force," FOIA shows that not everyone in his own administration is so keen on the idea. In a series of recently released emails from last year, Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson made clear her opposition to the establishment of a semi-autonomous "Space Corps," insisting that it be the USAF in charge of militarizing the cosmos."

The New Arms Race Threatening to Explode In Space, Wired

Since he took office, President Trump has dropped numerous hints of the warnings he's evidently getting from military and intelligence leaders. During a spring livestream with astronauts aboard the International Space Station, he alluded, obliquely and without context, to the "tremendous military applications in space." And he has repeatedly floated the idea of creating a new branch of the armed forces specifically for celestial combat--culminating last week with a speech out-and-out ordering the Joint Chiefs of Staff to begin developing plans for a new "Space Force."

NASA Assessment of Mission Flexibility and Agility, NASA

"As you know, the President's National Space Strategy and Space Policy Directives have set NASA on an ambitious path of discovery and exploration that will require us to be more agile and flexible than ever. To that end, as NASA's part of an Administration plan for reorganizing the Executive Branch, the agency has been asked to assess over the next few months whether expanding the Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) model beyond JPL is the best approach for increasing agility and flexibility in support of the mission."

Delivering Government Solutions in the 21st Century (NASA Excerpt)

Delivering Government Solutions in the 21st Century

Page 17: "Establish an accelerated process for determining whether one or more of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Centers should be converted to, or host, a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC). FFRDCs can potentially allow the agency to be more agile in rapidly responding to changing needs and in recruiting and retaining scientific and technical expertise."

Page 83: "Process to Determine Best Role for FFRDCs

This proposal lays a process to determine if one or more of NASA's other Centers should be converted to, or host, an FFRDC. NASA would oversee this process and provide an analysis, including recommendations, to the White House by the end of August 2018 so that the outcome can be reflected in future budget and policy plans and proposals. NASA's analysis would draw from prior studies of this topic and evaluate the potential of an FFRDC to further the Administration's policy goals more effectively. In addition to studying whether one or more Centers could potentially be converted to an FFRDC in whole or in part, NASA would also establish whether it may be effective to perform new programs and projects using an FFRDC structure."

With three words, President Trump fortifies a flawed perception about NASA, Ars Technica

"Fresh off an appearance at a National Space Council meeting Monday, space was evidently on his mind when President Trump spoke at a campaign rally in Duluth, Minnesota, on Wednesday night. "Our beautiful ancestors won two world wars, defeated fascism and communism, and put a man on the face of the Moon," he told his adulatory crowd. "And I think you saw the other day, we're reopening NASA. We're going to be going to space." President Trump makes news at Space Council meeting by going off script. The crowd responded by chanting, "Space Force! Space Force!"

Mattis: Legislation needed to create 'space force', The Hill

"Defense Secretary James Mattis on Wednesday said President's Trump's recent direction to establish a "space force" will require work with Congress that has not yet started. "This as you know is going to require legislation and a lot of detailed planning and we've not yet begun," Mattis told reporters outside the Pentagon prior to meeting with his German counterpart. "We've clearly got to start the process," Mattis added, noting that it is among the issues Pentagon leaders will bring up bring up on Friday morning when they meet with National Security Advisor John Bolton."

Air Force says planning for Space Force will be 'thorough' and 'deliberate', LA Times

"A letter to airmen signed by Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein and Chief Master Sgt. of the Air Force Kaleth Wright said the Air Force looked forward to working with the Defense Department, Congress and other national security partners to "move forward on this planning effort." However, it said the work to create what could be the sixth branch of the U.S. armed forces would be a "thorough, deliberate and inclusive process." "As such, we should not expect any immediate moves or changes," the letter stated. "Our focus must remain on the mission as we continue to accelerate the space warfighting capabilities required to support the National Defense Strategy."

Keith's note: This is the question I asked at the User Advisory Council meeting today. "I have a question about the actual composition of the User's Advisory Group: With one exception only one person seems to be under 50 years of age and the panel is rather heavily loaded with Big Aerospace management. There is no apparent representation of the next generation of people who will actually live and work in space - you know, young people. Is this lack of representation by the next generation deliberate or an oversight?"

The National Space Council's User Advisory Group will meet on Tuesday at NASA Headquarters. The event will be webcast on Webex and audio will be available via dial-up.

Today the President will sign Space Policy Directive 3 (SPD-3) at the National Space Council meeting being held at the White House. SPD-3 deals principally with space traffic management. This morning in a media call National Space Council Executive Director Scott Pace said the U.S. needs to ave unfettered access and the ability to operate space - but space is becoming congested. The new policy (SPD-3) addresses these challenges.

SPD-3 establishes principles, goals, and guidance on how to achieve these goals. It also establishes responsibility within the U.S, government for taking on the task of implementing these goals: the Department of Defense will take the lead on developing an authoritative catalog of space objects; the Department of Commerce will be responsible for the releasable portions of the catalog for collision avoidance purposes; the Department of Commerce and the Department of Transportation will lead the development of standards and practices, and the State Department will lead U.S. efforts to conduct these activities internationally with transparency.

Pace says that this is going to be a "bottom-up process" using best practices from industry. As such no treaty-level document is envisioned. Pace said that the U.S. wants to avoid creating an international treaty since that would be complicated and take time to do Instead, Pace says that they will be working to make this happen faster by having recommendations incorporated into various countries' laws and regulations.

Pace concluded by saying that a next step for the space council will be space debris and proximity operations as it relates to on-orbit servicing.


Update: President Donald J. Trump is Achieving a Safe and Secure Future in Space - Fact Sheet, White House

"FURTHER SPACE DEVELOPMENT: President Donald J. Trump signed Space Policy Directive - 3 directing the United States to lead the management of traffic and mitigate the effects of debris in space."

Keith's note: Newt Gingrich and Pete Worden have been removed from the National Space Council User Advisory Group (UAG) for reasons that sources say have to do with issues that arose while vetting Gingrich and Worden to serve on the UAG. That's the official excuse. Vetting is good thing to do especially for advisory groups. Oddly this "User" Advisory Group is more like a "Customer" Advisory Group with a majority of its members representing companies who already receive (and seek) huge amounts of money from NASA, DOD, DOC, etc. and have a vested interest in maintaining one or another aspect of the status quo. Actual potential users of space from the perspective of the U.S. government are virtually absent from this panel. This panel is all about serving the interests of Big Aerospace.

Many of the UAG members come from the top of Big Aerospace and serve as CEOs/Chairs/Presidents: Marillyn Hewson (Lockheed Martin), Dennis Muilenburg (Boeing), Wes Bush (Northrop Grumman), Fatih Ozmen (Sierra Nevada), David Thompson (Orbital ATK), Gwynne Shotwell (SpaceX), Bob Smith (Blue Origin), and Tory Bruno (ULA). Add in members representing the two major commercial space trade groups for Big Aerospace such as Eric Stallmer (Commercial Spaceflight Federation) and Mary Lynne Dittmar (Coalition for Deep Space Exploration) and you have the majority of Big Aerospace Advising the National Space Council on how America should do things in space. Not exactly a recipe for change and innovation.

To be certain SpaceX and Blue Origin and other new companies seek to upset the status quo - but right now they are, for the most part, still regular government customers just like the older companies. By a strange coincidence, pushing for change and innovation in space are two traits that Gingrich and Worden are best known for. It would seem that these things are of lesser important to the National Space Council these days. Not a good sign.

Keith's note: Inevitably when someone takes over the helm of a government agency they run into the status quo. Some of us cynical space policy wonks are calling this slow motion impact process as being "consumed by The Blob." Stay tuned. Bridenstine has only had 2 months on the job.

Subcommittee Approves FY2019 Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Bill (NASA Excerpt)

"$110 million is provided for the NASA's education programs, which were proposed to be eliminated in the budget request, under a newly named Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Opportunities activity. Within STEM Opportunities, Space Grant is funded at $44 million, NASA's Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) is funded at $21 million, the Minority University Research and Education Project is funded at $33 million, and STEM Education and Accountability projects is funded at $12 million."

Keith's note: On one hand it is great that Senate appropriators halted the White House attempt to slash education funding at NASA (BTW the Obama White House tried to do the same thing). But then there's this goofy renaming of the NASA Office of Education to the NASA Office of "Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Opportunities". "STEM" is almost always used in a sentence with "education". So why not just leave it as the NASA Office of Education? The organization will seemingly do the exact same things that it has always done with the same budget albeit with this wordy title.

This would be like renaming NASA's Aeronautics Directorate as the "Wings, Engines, Aerodynamics and Development (WEAD)" Directorate. I remain baffled as to the rationale for this. Maybe they do not want to offend the Department of Education (which is doing such a wonderful job of undermining education on its own). But I digress. Again, the good news is that NASA education is being saved. But we're also telling students that its better to use wordy phrases and acronyms when the proper word choice is a single, illustrative word. But then again, that is what NASA is famous for: its acronyms. So I guess we call this organization STEMOPS now.

Larger image

Back To The Moon 3.0

America's Return to the Moon: A Foothold, Not Just Footprints. Air & Space

"Our return to the Moon will not be like the Apollo-style sorties of the old Constellation project. This new approach calls for true lunar habitation - our first foothold on another world. The sooner we understand what is needed to get started, the better. The Trump administration's national policy directive (via its Space Council) calls for the return of humans to the lunar surface to use its resources. Since NASA has previously been tasked with this near-term space goal - lunar return - understanding the significance of the goal will go a long way toward completing a vital mission that has faltered and failed twice before."

'We Choose to Go to the Moon' Again--But When?, The Atlantic

"The lack of a bumper sticker-worthy target may be disappointing, particularly for lunar scientists and advocates who have been craving a renewed emphasis on the moon. Public deadlines for the space program can be beneficial in a number of ways; they can impose some sense of internal discipline, unite multiple corners of the scientific community, and rally excitement and inspiration from the public that's paying for it. But deadlines in space exploration are also notoriously fickle. They stall, they shift, they get tossed out by one president and reinstalled by another. And in the meantime, little actually gets done to reach them."

Keith's note: It has gotten to the point that nearly every picture of NASA Administrator Bridenstine has NASA CFO Jeff DeWit sitting next to him. This photobombing will - and now has - led to confusion as to who is actually running NASA. In 22 years of watching NASA I have never seen such a camera-seeking NASA CFO. People are just getting to know what Jim Bridenstine looks like and Jeff DeWit is just making that harder for NASA to do. "Jim" and "Jeff" are often in the same picture. Its understandable that some people would be easily confused. Just sayin'.

Just in case the original tweet gets deleted, this is what the story looked like. And this is what the tweet looked like.

NASA's Bridenstine signals reprieve for endangered climate missions, Science

"Bridenstine's embrace of these missions goes hand-in-hand with his evolution on climate change, turning from an occasional critic of the scientific consensus to a supporter of the realities of human-driven global warming. "I want to be clear," he said, "I do believe that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas - over 400 parts per million at this point, which is greater volumes than we've seen before. And that's because of human activity."

NASA administrator promises not to abandon International Space Station without alternative plan, The Verge

"There are companies that are interested in managing the ISS from a commercial perspective. That exists right now," said Bridenstine. "And that existed before I got to NASA. Companies were talking to me about this as a member of Congress long before I got here."

Bridenstine emphasizes partnerships with industry to achieve NASA goals, Space News

"The SLS, he argued, offered "a capability right now that no one else has, and so we want to deliver it." However, he said he'd be open to revisiting that should commercial vehicles with similar capabilities enter service in the future. "If there comes a day when someone else can deliver that, then we need to think differently. It's always evolving."

Keith's note: I was unable to attend this briefing at NASA HQ due to a death in my immediate family. There was no remote dial-in for this briefing so news media around the country who cover NASA were unable to participate. Apparently there is no speakerphone in the Administrator's office. That has to be the reason, right? That said, Bridenstine is already more available to the media than his predecessor so ...

After rancorous confirmation fight, NASA's Bridenstine mends fences with the Democrats who opposed him, USA Today

"In a statement Wednesday to USA TODAY by the agency, Bridenstine made clear his desire to build the congressional relationships he'll need to propel the Trump administration's ambitious space agenda including returning astronauts to the moon. "NASA is one of America's most storied agencies and has long had bipartisan support," he said. "Just as all previous administrators, I intend to build and maintain great relationships on both sides of the aisle so NASA can continue it's history-making science, exploration, and discovery missions. Phone calls and meetings on the Hill and at NASA headquarters facilitate these relationships."

Keith's note: This is somewhat baffling. The AGU is not some fly by night organization but rather one with an impressive history. That said, I cannot understand why they can't take a moment to inform their membership that Jim Bridenstine has made several clear statements about climate science - statements that directly concern issues raised by the AGU and its membership.

Keith's note: Big space policy news from the White House. But not a word about it from the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, the Aerospace Industries Association, the Coalition for Deep Space Exploration, the National Space Society, the Space Foundation, the Planetary Society or the Space Frontier Foundation. Only the Commercial Spaceflight Federation and the Aerospace Industries Association have issued a statement. You have to wonder about the depth of commitment to commercial space from these space organizations when they cannot even bother to lift a finger to say thank you when the White House does them a big favor.

Commercial Partners Key to Sustainable Moon Presence, NASA

"As NASA shifts human exploration back to the Moon, U.S. commercial partnerships will be a key to expediting missions and building a sustainable presence on the lunar surface. The agency is orchestrating a robotic lunar campaign with a focus on growing commercial base of partnerships and activity that can support U.S. science, technology, and exploration objectives. NASA is planning a series of robotic commercial delivery missions as early as 2019 ahead of a human return to the Moon. These missions will deliver NASA instruments and technology to the surface of the Moon to conduct science and prepare for human exploration. Among the instruments to be flown are the instrumentation suite from the former Resource Prospector mission concept."

Keith's further update: The President has signed SPD-2. Larger image.

- Space Policy Directive-2 (Full Text)

Keith's update: The signing of SPD-2 by the President has been delayed until later today. Stay tuned.

Keith's 9:55 am note: Notes from 9:30 am EDT press event with National Space Council Executive Director Scott Pace:

At 11:00 am EDT today President Trump will sign Space Policy Directive 2 (SPD-2). SPD-2 will include 4 space policy directives based on recommendations made at the National Space Council meeting at KSC in February 2018 and is based on SPD-1. SPD-2 directs the Department of Transportation to revise the regulatory process for transportation to space and the Department of Commerce to revise regulations for remote sensing. SPD-2 will also create a "one stop shop" for commercial space at the Department of Commerce. SPD-2 will ask the Department of Commerce and OSTP to work with the FCC report to the President global competitiveness on radio frequency policy at ITU and other fora. SPD-2 also requires a report on export licensing of space technology. President Trump recognizes that space is important to U.S. global competitiveness and leadership.

President Donald J. Trump is Reforming and Modernizing American Commercial Space Policy

"REFORMING SPACE POLICY: President Trump's Space Policy Directive - 2 reforms America's commercial space regulatory framework, ensuring our place as a leader in space commerce.

UPDATING AND REFOCUSING: President Trump is committed to reforming our out-of-date space policies and has already taken significant steps to refocus United States space strategy."

Statement from Vice President Mike Pence on the President's Signing of Space Policy Directive-2

"This directive will encourage American leadership in space commerce by creating more certainty for investors and private industry, while focusing on protecting our national security and public-safety. As President Trump says, "We're a nation of pioneers, and the next great American frontier is space."

NASA Administrator Statement on Space Policy Directive-2

"SPD-2 provides yet another way for the members of the National Space Council to provide much-needed direction for the many different aspects of our nation's activity in space, providing communication and coordination on these complex enterprises for the benefit of our nation and the world."

Trump's new NASA head: Humans contributing in 'major way' to climate change, The Hill

"President Trump's newly minted head of NASA said Thursday that climate change is happening and humans are contributing to it in a "major way." Jim Bridenstine, a GOP congressman who was confirmed as the new administrator of NASA last month, made the comments while speaking to employees at his first town hall at NASA headquarters in Washington. "I don't deny the consensus that the climate is changing, in fact I fully believe and know that the climate is changing. I also know that we human beings are contributing to it in a major way," Bridenstine said."

That NASA climate science program Trump axed? House lawmakers just moved to restore it, Science

"The House appropriations panel that oversees NASA unanimously approved an amendment to a 2019 spending bill that orders the space agency to set aside $10 million within its earth science budget for a "climate monitoring system" that studies "biogeochemical processes to better understand the major factors driving short and long term climate change." That sounds almost identical to the work that NASA's Carbon Monitoring System (CMS) was doing before the Trump administration targeted the program, which was getting about $10 million annually, for elimination this year."

Keith's note: NASA has developed a bunch of pre-prepared questions to be asked of NASA Administrator Bridenstine. NASA Employees were allowed to submit questions at http://nasa.gov/townhall. Then everyone had a chance to see them all and upvote their favorites. Oddly, a lot of these questions would certainly put Bridenstine on the spot if they were asked.

Tune in to the NASA Town Hall With Jim Bridenstine at 11:00 am EDT on NASA TV to see which of these questions get asked - and which ones are actually spontaneous. You have your user guide to see which is which. I am told that the top questions will be asked.

Reader note: "The top two questions (one about full-cost accounting, and one angling "diversity" toward accommodations for disabilities) have 70 more votes than the next top question, which is strange because neither of those questions were even ON the list at 4:25pm EDT yesterday. See attached ... the sudden viral nature of those two new "top questions" seems very strange indeed."

Examining the Future of the International Space Station: Administration Perspectives, Archived webcast

Statement by William Gerstenmaier - Hearing Examining the Future of the International Space Station: Administration Perspectives, NASA

Examining The Future of the International Space Station, Statement of NASA IG Paul Martin, NASA OIG

"While all of these actions are positive steps, NASA's current plan to privatize the ISS remains a controversial and highly debatable proposition, particularly with regard to the feasibility of fostering increased commercial activity in low Earth orbit. Specifically, it is questionable whether a sufficient business case exists under which private companies can create a self-sustaining and profit-making business independent of significant Government funding. In particular, it is unlikely that a private entity or entities would assume the Station's annual operating costs, currently projected at $1.2 billion in 2024. Such a business case requires robust demand for commercial market activities such as space tourism, satellite servicing, manufacturing of goods, and research and development, all of which have yet to materialize.

Candidly, the scant commercial interest shown in the Station over its nearly 20 years of operation gives us pause about the Agency's current plan. This concern is illustrated by NASA's limited success in stimulating non-NASA activity aboard the Station through the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space, Inc. (CASIS). Established in 2011 to facilitate use of the ISS by commercial companies, academia, and other Government and non-Government actors for their research or commercial purposes, CASIS's efforts have fallen short of expectations. Apart from these privatization challenges, the amount of cost savings NASA may realize through commercialization of the ISS may be less than expected given that significant expenditures - particularly in crew and cargo transportation and civil servant costs - will likely continue even if many low Earth orbit activities transition to a privatized ISS or another commercial platform."

"Even if the Agency ends direct funding of the ISS in 2025 as envisioned in the President's FY 2019 budget request, it is unlikely that the bulk of the funding currently devoted to the ISS Program could be immediately diverted to these and other exploration activities. Even with termination of most Station activities, NASA expects to retain a presence in low Earth orbit and therefore would need to fund related crew and cargo transportation costs. Furthermore, significant funding would be required to maintain offices and infrastructure currently funded by the ISS Program such as the Mission Operations office, which is expected to be needed by future exploration programs."

"In January 2017, NASA completed a draft plan to address various deorbit scenarios; however, the plan has not been finalized and is pending review by the Russia Space Agency. And, while NASA engineers continue to work on the technical details of deorbit scenarios, the Agency presently does not have the capability to ensure a controlled deorbit of the ISS in the event of an emergency."




Back To The Moon 3.0

Back to the Moon, Again: Will the Third Time Be the Charm?, Air & Space

"By coincidence, on the same day the White House formally announced that goal in December, a group of space historians and policy experts convened at the National Air and Space Museum to try to put the new lunar initiative into historical context. Overall, the mood was skeptical. Mark Albrecht, who had been President George H.W. Bush's space advisor during the days of the (aborted) Space Exploration Initiative in the early 1990s, and who watched George W. Bush's Vision for Space Exploration collapse more than a decade later, put it bluntly: "We are currently 0 for 2. The question before us now is, will we go 0 for 3?" Bridenstine meant to reassure contract hopefuls at NASA's Moon meeting that the answer is no. Appearing unwounded by the protracted battle over his Senate confirmation, he strode into the NASA Auditorium, delivered a few pointed remarks, then left the group to its work. "This will not be Lucy and the football again," he promised. "We are going to the Moon." Thomas Zurbuchen, who heads NASA's science office, reinforced the message that there will be no reversals, or even dawdling, this time. The agency intends to "go to the Moon fast," he said."

Report to Accompany House Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2019 (PDF)

"Lunar Discovery and Exploration.-- The Committee supports the requested level of $218,000,000 for the Lunar Discovery and Exploration program, including $18,000,000 for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and $200,000,000 for the new Lunar Future initiative. The Committee directs that the new Lunar Future initiative follow the lunar science priorities established by decadal surveys and the National Research Council's Scientific Context for the Exploration of the Moon and collect data to address the strategic knowledge gaps important for human exploration of the Moon. The Committee anticipates additional reports from the Academies regarding NASA's plans for lunar science and exploration. The funds provided for moon exploration are intended to support a mix of commercial lunar payload services; science instrument development; small satellite development; and long-duration lunar rover development. These funds will support science payloads and instruments for Lunar lander missions such as those developed in partnership with the private sector as part of NASA's Lunar CATALYST program. These robotic missions will provide NASA with access to the lunar surface and allow for an affordable procurement of a variety of science and exploration payloads to prepare for future science and crewed Exploration Missions."

Keith's note: Yet another post for which I had to shut off comments because everyone started to attack the host and not what questions were asked and what Bridenstine actually said. Knock it off.

Trump White House quietly cancels NASA research verifying greenhouse gas cuts, Science

"You can't manage what you don't measure. The adage is especially relevant for climate-warming greenhouse gases, which are crucial to manage - and challenging to measure. In recent years, though, satellite and aircraft instruments have begun monitoring carbon dioxide and methane remotely, and NASA's Carbon Monitoring System (CMS), a $10-million-a-year research line, has helped stitch together observations of sources and sinks into high-resolution models of the planet's flows of carbon. Now, President Donald Trump's administration has quietly killed the CMS, Science has learned."

Jen Rae Wang Resigns As NASA Associate Administrator of the Office of Communications

"I just wanted to let you know that Jen Rae Wang has resigned her position as associate administrator of the Office of Communications. I want to thank Jen Rae for the hard work she put into leading the office during this extended transition time. In the interim, I've asked Bob Jacobs to pick up duties as acting associate administrator as our search for a successor begins. Bob is no stranger to this role, and I'm confident we will be able to advance the important work underway in Communications as we look for a new associate administrator. Please give Bob your full support."

Keith's note: Jen Rae Wang was a Trump Administration political appointee. She resigned and left the building barely 2 weeks after a new NASA Administrator showed up for work. Clearly there was a difference in opinion as to how NASA public affairs was going to operate. I do not know her and had no interaction with her whatsoever during her time at NASA - but I certainly wish her well.

Changes At NASA HQ

http://images.spaceref.com/news/2018/bridenstine.banner.jpg

Keith's 29 April update: Looking back at my original posting I realized something that I had totally overlooked - something that someone like me should have paid much more attention to. In looking at @JimBridenstine tweets I saw speech patterns that I did not associate with the way that Jim Bridenstine talks. Of course, I did not stop to think that @NASAWatch - and NASAwatch.com - have a voice that is mine - but different than the way I actually speak. I have been doing this for so long I make the switch without thinking. Jim Bridenstine has surprised a number of people by diving directly into the use of social media. On one hand you want a NASA PAO strategy and filter on what the agency says and how it says it. On the other hand, these layers of filters can stiffle spontaneity and make it harder for NASA's new leader to chart his own course. Just take a look at how @ElonMusk does things. From all accounts I've heard thus far, NASA HQ was initially taken aback by this - and it is going to have to adapt to this new way of engaging with social media by its Administrator - not the other way around. This should prove to be interesting.

Keith's 28 April update: OK, so I guess this answers my question. Bridenstine's first public interaction with snarky NASAWatch and he made me eat my words. He learns fast.

Former NASA Administrator Weighs in on New Space Agency Head, EOS

"Eos: Why wouldn't Jim Bridenstine have been your first choice?

Bolden: He would not have been my first choice because he's a politician. And he is the first person, to my knowledge, ever selected from political office to become the NASA administrator. I don't think it's healthy for the agency to have someone who's a partisan in that position. The position calls for somebody who can carry out the president's agenda to the best of his ability but do it in a nonpartisan way and be able to work across the aisle. And I think his history is such that he may find some difficulty in working across the aisle."

Keith's note: It is amusing to hear Bolden say this. He was not President Obama's first choice to head NASA. He got the job in great part due to overt political lobbying by Sen. Nelson. The bulk of Bolden's job was politics - internal and external. Indeed, his position was "political" in that President Obama nominated him to enact his Administration's policies. If Bolden had gained some political experience prior to heading NASA he might have made more headway on some of the ongoing political issues that he had with the White House and Congress. Just sayin', Charlie.

Newt Gingrich: A glimpse of America's future in space in 2024, Fox

"If the Trump-Pence team pushes it, Falcon Heavy rockets could have more than 100 launches through 2024. The New Glenn, which will lift almost as much as the Falcon Heavy and will be rated to carry humans from Day One, could add another 20 flights between 2020 and 2024. Together, these approximately 120 heavy commercial flights would lift as much payload as 60 of NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) flights. However, there will be at most four SLS flights by end of 2024, according to current plans. Each reusable commercial flight will also cost less than $100 million, while SLS flights will cost $700 million to $1 billion per launch."

- Trump Transition Team Wants Old Space Vs New Space Smackdown, earlier post
- Newt Gingrich Thinks SLS May Become a Museum Piece - Soon, earlier post

NASA Strategic Plan 2018

"NASA inspires the world with our exploration of new frontiers, our discovery of new knowledge, and our development of new technology. Our work benefits Americans and all humanity. Since NASA's inception in 1958 to present day, the Agency's history is written with each unique scientific and technological achievement. We have landed people on the Moon, visited every planet in the solar system, touched the Sun, and solved some of the core mysteries of our home planet. Today, our Nation's economic prosperity, National security, and cultural identity depend on our leadership in aeronautics, space exploration, and science. NASA accepts the challenge to continue our legacy of achievement and greatly expand the benefits we provide to mankind. Our success will be determined largely by the planning and investments we undertake today. This commitment is what drives our Vision, Mission, and overarching approach that form the core of our 2018 Strategic Plan."

Keith's note: In case you missed it, NASA issued yet another "strategic plan" in February. As is the case with previous iterations this is neither "strategic" nor is it a "plan". Rather, this is just the annual NASA justification - done in reverse - of what NASA has already decided to do for one reason or another. And again, this document is written as if all of these things sprang forth logically from the stated strategic goals - goals that are constantly in flux - and were developed after all of these programs were already undertaken.

One thing to note: the whole "Journey To Mars" thing is more or less gone. Mars, while mentioned, is no longer the agency's prime destination for human spaceflight. The Moon is now that prime focus for human spaceflight. How long before NASA tosses everything up in the air again?

Remarks by Vice President Pence at Swearing-In Ceremony of NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine and Call to the International Space Station

"MS. WANG: ISS, this is headquarters. How do you hear us? (Laughter.) ISS, this is headquarters. How do you hear us? It is 220 million miles away. ISS? This is headquarters. How do you hear us? I'm being told in my ear that we're connecting through Johnson Space Center right now.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Did you pay the bill? (Laughter.)
MS. WANG: ISS, this is headquarters. How do you hear us?"

Vice President Pence Swears in New NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine (with video)

"It is a great privilege for me to be here today, to be able to usher in on behalf of the President of the United States what we believe is a new chapter of renewed American leadership in space with the swearing-in of the newest Administrator of NASA, Jim Bridenstine," said Vice President Pence."

Message from the Administrator: Greetings From Jim Bridenstine

"Greetings! It is my great pleasure to join the NASA team today. In the last few days, I have heard numerous times, "welcome to the NASA family." It truly feels like a family, and I am humbled to be a part of it. I want to thank the President and Vice President for the confidence they have placed in me and the entire NASA family as we continue NASA's critical missions. I also want to thank Robert Lightfoot for his strong leadership as the Acting Administrator during a time of transition and for his decades of service to NASA and our nation. His legacy is one of commitment to our mission and leadership in all capacities. NASA has a history of great leaders from the early days of Hugh Dryden and James Webb to our most recent leaders, Sean O'Keefe, Michael Griffin, and Charlie Bolden. I will do my best to serve our storied agency to the utmost of my abilities as we reach for new heights and reveal the unknown for the benefit of humankind. NASA represents the best of our country. We lead, we discover, we pioneer, and we inspire. I look forward to our journey together. Ad astra, Jim Bridenstine"

Keith's note: I took this picture in the "press spray" today at NASA HQ of the all hands senior staff meeting with newly sworn-in NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine and Vice President Pence. This all happened at the last second. We did not expect this kind of access and then suddenly one of the VP's press people was escorting us past lots of security check points. FWIW everyone in the room seemed to be happy that the leadership issue had been settled and that Bridenstine is on board. At the meeting Pence said that President Trump wanted Bridenstine "in the Oval Office before the day is out".

NASA Invites Media to Swearing-In of New Administrator James Bridenstine

"Media are invited to see Vice President Mike Pence swear in Jim Bridenstine as NASA's new administrator at 2:30 p.m. EDT Monday, April 23, at the agency's headquarters in Washington. The ceremony will air live on NASA Television and the agency's website. Following the swearing-in, Vice President Pence and newly sworn-in NASA Administrator Bridenstine will speak live with three NASA astronauts currently living and working aboard the International Space Station."

Keith's 19 April update: The vote tally today is 50 to 49. Jim Bridenstine is the next administrator of NASA. Vice President Pence was present in case there was a 50/50 tie. Sen. Flake waited until the last minute to vote yes and then Sen. Duckworth cast the final vote (No) for the day. Sen. McCain was not present for voting today. When/where Bridenstine will be sworn in is not known. But there is extreme interest in having Acting NASA Administrator Robert Lightfoot to hand over the Keys to NASA to Bridenstine before Lightfoot leaves NASA on Friday.

http://images.spaceref.com/news/2018/pence.wordcloud.jpg

Remarks by Vice President Pence at the 34th Space Symposium Colorado Springs, CO

"You know, since day one of our administration, President Trump has been working to keep his promise to restore America's proud legacy of leadership in space, because the President knows that space exploration is essential to our national security, it's essential to our nation's prosperity. But the President and I also understand it is essential to the very character of America. The work each of you do in the skies and in space supports our armed forces, spurs scientific discovery, drives innovation, helps America's farmers feed the world, creates the jobs of the future, and fills the rising generation with wonder and pride. The companies represented here today, and the thousands of American companies that form your supply chains, employ men and women in all 50 states - men and women who helped build the most advanced rockets, spaceships, and satellites in the world."

Keith's earlier note: Sources report that the nomination of Rep. Jim Bridenstine to be NASA Administrator is now moving forward in the Senate along with other nominees. A vote could happen soon.

Keith's update: The floor debate and vote on Bridenstine's nomination could come as early as this Thursday thus allowing Robert Lightfoot to handover the reigns of NASA to Jim Bridenstine before Lightfoot departs on Friday.

President Trump still pushing NASA pick Bridenstine despite slim path to Senate confirmation, USA Today

"The White House is standing by their NASA man. President Trump remains firmly behind his choice of Oklahoma GOP Rep. Jim Bridenstine to be the next administrator of the space agency, even though he does not appear to have the votes for Senate confirmation. "Senate Democrats should stop their pointless obstruction, and confirm our eminently qualified nominee immediately," said Lindsay Walters, deputy White House press secretary, said in a statement to USA TODAY. "The President looks forward to Rep. Bridenstine's swift confirmation by the Senate, and is confident he will ensure America is a leader in space exploration once again."

McConnell sends warning over nomination votes, The Hill

"Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) hinted Monday that he's willing to keep the Senate in town through Friday, or even into the weekend, as Republicans work to confirm a slate of President Trump's nominees. "We have a number of nominees to consider in the next several days. ... The Senate's workweek will not end until all of these amply qualified nominees are confirmed," McConnell said from the Senate floor."

Keith's note: Sources report that NASA is hopeful that NASA Administrator nominee Jim Bridenstine's nomination will be part of a batch of nominations being pushed forward through the Senate. Right now the math for Bridenstine is still precarious. Sen. Rubio is still seen as being in the "no" column and Sen. McCain is in Arizona. If the vote was taken today it would likely be 50 against, 49 for Bridenstine. Either McCain or Rubio needs to support the nomination or (unlikely at this point) a Democrat needs to break ranks and support the nomination. In case of a 50/50 spli, Vice President Pence could break the time in favor of Bridenstine. Stay tuned.

Letter From Lunar Research Community To Congress Regarding NASA Lunar Exploration and Discovery Program Budget

"We write today to express our enthusiastic support for the FY 2019 Budget Request for NASA's Lunar Exploration and Discovery Program. America's forward steps to the Moon are long overdue, and the proposed Lunar Exploration and Discovery Program in the FY 2019 Budget Request represents a credible plan to re-engage in lunar surface exploration as part of an innovative attempt to do so in an expedient and cost-effective way. We urge establishment of the Lunar Exploration and Discovery Program, as requested in the FY2019 budget, to fully fund the ongoing and highly successful Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter mission, and restore to the United States' a technical capability to access the lunar surface and to once again lead lunar exploration once again."

Chamber of Commerce after Trump's Amazon attacks: 'Inappropriate' for officials to attack an American company, The Hill

"Neil Bradley, the executive vice president and chief policy officer of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, says it is "inappropriate" for government officials to use their offices to criticize American companies. "It's inappropriate for government officials to use their position to attack an American company," Bradley told The New York Times in an article published Tuesday. Bradley's comments came after President Trump launched a series of tweets over several days in which he accused tech giant Amazon of scamming the U.S. Postal Service and failing to collect taxes on some sales."

The Pentagon is close to awarding a $10 billion deal to Amazon despite Trump's tweets attacking the company, business Insider

"But behind the scenes, some Department of Defense agencies are so sure that Amazon will be awarded the contract that they are preparing for a transition to GovCloud, which is Amazon's cloud infrastructure designed specifically for government use, according to this source. And Safra Catz, the CEO of another Amazon cloud competitor, Oracle, dined Tuesday with Trump. Oracle is competing against Amazon for the JEDI contract. Catz complained to Trump during the dinner that the Pentagon's intent to award the contract to a single company made it difficult for anyone but Amazon to win the bidding process, according to Bloomberg."

Keith's note: We've already seen this sort of behavior from the White House intrude upon procurement for several large aerospace projects - Air Force One and F-35. It is inevitable that a space project will find itself similarly perturbed. This is not the sort of environment that should be created to encourage and support a growing space industry.





Keith's 29 March update: NASA HQ sources report that Jeff Waksman was escorted out of the building by NASA security. Greg Autry was similarly escorted out of the building last year. Erik Noble did not get a golden watch either. But at least they were not fired by Twitter. FWIW no one who has devoted their time to NASA really deserves this sort of treatment. The Trump politicals at NASA are not a friendly bunch. Its like Game of Thrones. Tick tock.

Keith's 28 March note: Sources report that Trump political employee Jeff Waksman, Special Assistant to the Administrator, has been fired. There has been a certain amount of in-fighting amongst the Trump political appointees on the 9th floor at NASA HQ. Waksman is the third one to be fired in the past year. There will probably be at least one more departure in the near future.

- How Jonathan Dimock Auditioned To Be NASA White House Liaison, earlier post
- Chief of Staff Erik Noble Has Left NASA, earlier post
- Palace Intrigue On The 9th Floor At NASA HQ, earlier post
- Beachhead Team Members At NASA HQ, earlier post
- NASA Headquarters Transition Update - New 9th Floor Faces, earlier post

- Jeff Waksman, LinkedIn

"Member of President's "Beachhead" team at NASA, with a focus on policy/strategy/budget. Tasks include:

• Work with NASA's Strategy & Policy team, as well as both internal and external stakeholders, to develop policy and budget options for the incoming Administrator.
• Coordinate with the Executive Office of the President to ensure consistency of purpose, and to make sure that the White House's vision of space exploration and science/technology development is fulfilled.
• Assist NASA leadership with development of the President's FY2018 budget request and NASA's updated Strategic Plan.
• Work to increase efficiency within NASA, including both government reform and also helping the various NASA centers and NASA mission directorates to work more closely together.

As part of this role, served as a member of the President-elect's transition team on the NASA Landing Team from December 2016-January 2017, working with a highly skilled and experienced team to craft an agency policy plan for NASA."

President Trump went to Ohio today to talk about infrastructure. At one point he talked about space.

"We must recapture the excitement of creation, the spirit of innovation, and the spark of invention. And we're starting. You saw the rocket the other day, what's going on with cars, what's going on with so much. You see what's going on ... NASA space agency. All of a sudden it's back. Did you notice? It was dormant for many, many years. Now, it's back. And we're trying to have the private sector to invest the money. Why the hell should we do it, right? Let them invest. If they want to send rocket ships up, they're rich, let them do it. When I looked at the rocket that went up three weeks ago, where the tanks came back. Nobody's ever seen that. It looks like, like Star Wars. But I looked at it and I heard the cost. I think they said 85 million dollars. If the government did, you're talking about billions of dollars and maybe it wouldn't work so well. But I thought it was a fantastic thing. But we're working with the private sector and NASA, and we're, we're doing a great job. We've made so much progress in the last year. Don't forget. It's just been a little bit more than a year. But we've made so much progress. And other people are putting up a lot of money. And, they're using our facilities. I feel like a landlord, again. We're leasing them facilities. Not so bad. Not a bad idea. And they're doing a great job."

Keith's note: NASA has hardly been "dormant". Everything NASA is doing now was underway before Donald Trump took office. He has started nothing new. Yet. Indeed he has tried to cancel things. Plans by commercial space companies were also already in place and continue with no apparent impact by the Trump Administration. Yet. Just sayin'

http://images.spaceref.com/news/2018/america.first.jpg

President Donald J. Trump is Unveiling an America First National Space Strategy

"AMERICA FIRST AMONG THE STARS: President Trump's National Space Strategy works within his broader national security policy by putting America's interests first."

Keith's note: At the USRA/SPI Moon exploration event yesterday in Washington D.C, I asked NASA HEOMD's Jason Crusan about the apparent mismatch between NASA policy and the recently-released White House Policy titled "America First National Space Strategy". I noted that HEOMD AA Bill Gerstenmaier told a NASA Advisory Council committee the other day said the whole Lunar Outpost Gateway thing can be done on a flat budget with no adjustment for inflation. Of course, NASA never does big projects on time or within budget - Space Station, Webb, SLS being prominent examples. But NASA sells the Gateway concept with a significant role for international partners and the private sector with lots of cooperation i.e. NASA does not call all the shots. This global approach does have some positive aspects for many people.

Yet the White House's "America First" space policy is rather blunt in its intention that it wants a space policy that "prioritizes American interests first and foremost, ensuring a strategy that will make America strong, competitive, and great" and "ensures that international agreements put the interests of American people, workers, and businesses first." This does not sound too much like cooperation. I asked Crusan how he reconciled these two different approaches. Crusan tossed lots of pop management phrases out (he was clearly unprepared to talk about this White House policy document). Then he made one cogent observation: "it's a balancing act".

Oh yes: There is no mention of this official White House space policy document at NASA.gov. Nor has NASA released anything about it to the media. Stay tuned for more "balancing".

NASA Leadership Update

President Donald J. Trump is Unveiling an America First National Space Strategy

"AMERICA FIRST AMONG THE STARS: President Trump's National Space Strategy works within his broader national security policy by putting America's interests first.

- The Trump administration's National Space Strategy prioritizes American interests first and foremost, ensuring a strategy that will make America strong, competitive, and great.
- The new strategy emphasizes dynamic and cooperative interplay between the national security, commercial, and civil space sectors.
-- The United States will partner with the commercial sector to ensure that American companies remain world leaders in space technology.
- The new strategy ensures that international agreements put the interests of American people, workers, and businesses first.
- The National Space Strategy prioritizes regulatory reforms that will unshackle American industry and ensure we remain the leading global provider of space services and technology."

What NASA loses without a permanent leader, The Verge

"Despite the backlash to Bridenstine's politician status, being the NASA administrator means mostly working with politicians, says Garver. "I do think it is more a political job than an engineering job. Neither Charlie [Bolden] nor I did any engineering," she says. "You can't be an astrophysicist and a propulsion engineer; you got to trust your people to do that. Being able to advocate for your agency on the hill is a big part of it." .. "Because [Lightfoot] isn't the president's person, there is a loss of accountability," Jim Muncy, founder of PoliSpace, a space policy consulting agency, tells The Verge. "Having the president's own representative to guide the day-to-day implementation of the policy is part of that accountability."

- Shh! Bill Nelson Openly Champions Space Legislation Co-authored By Jim Bridenstine, earlier post
- This Is What Happens When People Try To Work Together in DC, earlier post
- Sen. Nelson's Effort To Undermine NASA, earlier post
- Why Should One Senator Boss NASA Around?, earlier post

Letter From House Members to Senate Leadership Regarding NASA Administrator Nominee Bridenstine

Keith's note: This letter was circulated by Rep. Babin and was signed by 61 members of the House - 12 of whom are Democrats. This would certainly seem to undermine Sen. Nelson's contention that Jim Bridenstine would be too political.

"We are keenly aware of how valuable NASA is, not only to our nation, but also the entire world. It would be a travesty to America's space program for it to remain leaderless at this critical time when America's space industry is making rapid advances that will set the course of space leadership for decades to come. This is why it is vitally important that the Senate take up and approve Jim Bridenstine's nomination. Jim Bridenstine has spent the bulk of his adult life in service to his country. His background is in naval aviation, flying the E2- C Hawkeye in Afghanistan and Iraq, and later the F-18 while also serving as an instructor at the Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center. He has been responsible for coordinating command and control of the battlefield from an airborne platform, with thousands of lives and billions of dollars affected by his decisions. In this service to his nation he has demonstrated both the technical capacity and leadership experience necessary to lead NASA."

Keith's note: NASA CFO nominee Jeff Dewitt has been confirmed by the Senate.

NASA Statement on Nomination for Agency Chief Financial Officer, earlier post

"The following is a statement from acting NASA Administrator Robert Lightfoot on Wednesday's announcement of the intended nomination by President Donald Trump of Jeffrey DeWit to serve as the agency's Chief Financial Officer: "It is encouraging to see more members of the agency's leadership team being named. Jeff's solid financial background will be a tremendous addition as we continue to advance our nation's aeronautic and exploration initiatives."

Keith's note: President Trump spoke to military personnel at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in San Diego and starting talking about a new "Space Force". [Video] [Larger image]

"My new national strategy for space recognizes that space is a war fighting domain. Just like the land, air, and sea. We may have a Space Force. Develop another one. Space Force. We have the Air Force - we'll have a Space Force. We have the Army, the Navy. You know I was saying it the other day because we are doing a tremendous amount of work in space. I said 'maybe we need a new force - we'll call it the Space Force - and I was not really serious - and then I said what a great idea - maybe we'll have to do it. That could happen. That could be the breaking shore. Look at all those people back there. Look at that. Ahhh - that fake news. Ugh. They know - they understand. So think of that: Space Force. Because we're spending a lot - and we have a lot of private money coming in - tremendous. You saw what happened the other day - tremendous success. From the very beginning many of our astronauts have been soldiers and sailors, airmen, coast guardsmen, and marines. And our service members will be vital to ensuring that America continues to lead the way into the stars. It will lead the way in space. We're way, way behind - and we're catching up fast - so fast that nobody even believes it."

http://images.spaceref.com/news/2018/spaceforce.jpg

Judge wants Trump to mute Twitter users who bug him, not block them, Mashable

"The Trump administration contends that his Twitter account is a personal platform and not a public one. "

Keith's note: The following comments were made this morning by President Trump:

"Before me are some rocket ships [there were rocket models in front of him on the table]. You haven't seen that for this country in a long time...Many of the jobs we're doing are privately financed. We're letting them use the Kennedy Space Center for a fee and, you know, rich guys, you know, they love rocket ships. That's good. That's better than us paying for them. And I noticed the prices of the last one they say cost $80 million. If the government did it, the same thing would have cost probably 40- or 50-times that amount of money...I'm so used to hearing different numbers with NASA."

"But NASA is making tremendous strides and we're using a lot of private money, a lot of people that love rockets and they're rich. So they're going to be a little less rich probably, but a lot of rockets are going up. And we're really at the forefront -- nobody's doing what we're doing. And I don't know if you saw last -- with Elon -- with the rocket booster where they're coming back down. To me, that was more amazing than watching the rocket go up, because I've never seen that before. Nobody's seen that before, where they're saving the boosters, and they came back without wings, without anything. They landed so beautifully. So we're really at the forefront and we're doing it in a very private manner."

"At the same time NASA is very much involved and doing their own projects, but we're bringing that whole space flight back. We'll be sending something very beautiful to Mars in the very near future, and we're going to areas that nobody thought possible, certainly not this quickly. So we're very proud."

http://images.spaceref.com/news/2018/trump.wordcloud.jpg

Scientists Share Ideas for Gateway Activities Near the Moon, NASA

"In late 2017, the agency asked the global science community to submit ideas leveraging the gateway in lunar orbit to advance scientific discoveries in a wide range of fields. NASA received more than 190 abstracts covering topics human health and performance, Earth observation, astrophysics, heliophysics, and lunar and planetary sciences, as well as infrastructure suggestions to support breakthrough science. Although it is too early to select specific research for the gateway, the workshop marks the first time in more than a decade the agency's human spaceflight program brought scientists from a variety of disciplines together to discuss future exploration."

Keith's note: This short blog posting is apparently all that the public will ever see as a result of the Deep Space Gateway workshop that NASA and LPI held in Denver last week - the one where media participation was hidden from the media and no one cared enough to even bother to webcast for others to hear.

- Deep Space Gateway Event Ends But No One Knows It Ever Happened, earlier post
- Stealthy NASA Deep Space Gateway Meeting Underway, earlier post

Peters, Colleagues Introduce Bipartisan Bill Supporting U.S.-Israel Space Cooperation

"U.S. Senators Gary Peters (MI), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Cory Gardner (R-CO) today introduced bipartisan legislation to support the longstanding partnership between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Israel Space Agency (ISA). Cooperation between the two agencies has resulted in a host of beneficial achievements, including work on global positioning systems (GPS) and the Mars Curiosity Rover. ... The U.S.-Israel Space Cooperation Act directs the NASA Administrator to continue working in cooperation with the ISA to further peaceful space exploration and scientific discovery while taking appropriate measures to protect U.S. intellectual property and other sensitive information. The U.S. House of Representatives unanimously approved companion legislation in December 2017."

Lawmakers Introduce Bill to Encourage U.S. and Israeli Collaborations on Space Exploration Breakthroughs (9 Sep 2016)

"Representatives Derek Kilmer (D-WA-06) and Jim Bridenstine (R-OK-01) introduced bipartisan legislation to encourage U.S. and Israeli scientists to continue collaborating on breakthroughs in space exploration. The United States and Israel Space Cooperation Act would direct the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to work with the Israel Space Agency to identify and together pursue new potential scientific discoveries in space."

Keith's note: The "United States and Israel Space Cooperation Act" was originally introduced in the House as H.R. 5989 by Rep. Derek Kilmer (D-WA) with co-author Rep. James Bridenstine (R-OK) as the first cosponsor in 2016. It was reintroduced in 2017 by Kilmer (with Bridenstine as the first co-sponsor) as H.R.1159 - United States and Israel Space Cooperation Act. HR 1159 was passed by the house on 21 December 2017 and sent to the Senate. The Senate bill is not yet online but given the bipartisan support it is likely to be identical to the House version.

Sen. Bill Nelson has been quick to criticize Rep. Bridenstine's choice to be NASA Administrator because Bridenstine would somehow inject politics into the way that NASA operates and that would be truly awful or something. Yet Sen. Nelson is now openly crowing about space legislation that he is co-sponsoring - legislation originally co-authored by Rep. Bridenstine. So one would conclude that Nelson likes Bridenstine's space politics (at least in some instances). Who knows. Maybe they agree on other things too.

Gerstenmaier: U.S. Leadership in Space is "Ours to Lose" If Direction Changes Too Many Times, Space Policy Online

"Bill Gerstenmaier, the head of NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate, said today that the United States is the "partner of choice" for countries wanting to engage in international space cooperation, but that leadership is "ours to lose" if too many changes in direction drive partners away."

Keith's note: Sage advice. And of course Gerst is totally faultless when it comes to all of the changes in direction. right? Lets dial back a decade or so. First Gerst was behind the Ares I/V/Orion Constellation thing. Then he was behind the SLS/Orion thing when the Constellation thing was turned upside down. Then he pushed the Journey to Mars thing. Then he jumped in behind the Asteroid Retrieval thing which eventually became the grab the small boulder thing. When no one liked the asteroid thing any more, he picked up the pieces and jumped behind the Deep Space Gateway thing. Then, to pay for the Deep Space gateway thing he jumped behind the commercialize ISS thing (with no one lined up to pay the bills). Then when the Mars thing was fading he pivoted to the Back to the Moon thing but he still wants to walk away from ISS in LEO to build a mini-ISS with no as-yet determined purpose out near the Moon.

Gerst is certainly flexible and adaptable. And he has kept a lot of important things alive that others sought to kill. But consistent in his direction? No. Not surprisingly, year after year he'll tell you that the Ares V/SLS is the perfect rocket for all of these ever-changing missions and destinations - even if he can never give a consistent cost of what an SLS costs to launch as the schedules continue to slip to the right. Of course he'll tell you that all of these pivots were all due to White House and/or Congressional direction and re-direction. He's correct. But behind the scenes in all of those scenarios, Gerst and HEOMD were constantly pitching their ideas to impressionable staffers - always trying to pivot to stay in synch with the space flavor of the month and stay one step ahead of the budget axe to keep the marching army employed. And of course no one has money for any of the payloads that SLS will fly. But its all notional anyway, so why bother with the actual budget thing.

Now, NASA can buy Falcon Heavy launches at 1/5 (or cheaper) the cost of an SLS with roughly 70% of a SLS launch capability online. And more cheap heavy lift is on the way from other suppliers coupled with nimble, small launchers from another suite of suppliers. Gerst is quite correct to warn that constant changes in direction can sour current and potential partners on future projects. But he seems to not see that this very problem he cites has been happening under his watch. Possible partners are now looking to China because China offers them what they want - while NASA offers potential parters what they can have. These two things are not the same.

The old way of exploring space no longer works. If NASA doesn't everyone else will. In fact, they already are. The agency is stuck in outdated subroutines that run in circles that result in increasingly inefficient output. Its time to hit the reset button.

Trump threatens to slap retaliatory tariff on European cars as trade war talk heats up, CNBC

"Trump's hasty decision to impose tariffs on steel imports has stoked talk of a brewing trade war, roiling both the political establishment and the global economic order. The move also prompted E.U. trade chiefs to weigh hitting a broad array of U.S. imports with a 25 percent tax, Reuters reported this week."

New Tariffs Could Harm Industry Critical to American Economic Security, Aerospace Industries Association

"Friday morning on CNBC, AIA President and CEO Eric Fanning was featured immediately following Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, emphasizing: "This is going to impact companies big and small in the aerospace and defense world. More importantly, we're concerned about retaliation. The aerospace and defense industry generates the largest net surplus in the manufacturing sector - over $86 billion a year. These companies thrive on the exports of their products."

Why Europe and Canada may retaliate against bourbon, Harleys and Levi jeans, Washington Post

"Another alternative would be to ban U.S. companies from bidding on Canadian defense and infrastructure contracts, Mendes, the economist, said. The advantage to that approach would be that Canadian consumers wouldn't feel the impact in their wallets. When Boeing launched a complaint against Bombardier, claiming the Canadian company had benefited from unfair government subsidies in the production of its C Series jet, the Canadian government retaliated by saying it wouldn't consider buying fighter jets from Boeing. That dispute was effectively settled in January, when the U.S. International Trade Commission voted that Boeing was not harmed by Bombardier."

Keith's note: I am waiting to see how the trade war that the White House has started will affect willingness of affected nations to cooperate with U.S. on future human spaceflight and on U.S. commercial space sector - and example of both being the Deep Space Gateway. Protectionism and isolationism do not seem to be synonymous with such an expansive endeavor as the exploration and utilization of space.

NASA Heads Back to Space Leaderless, Bloomberg

"NASA observers, including some Democrats with ties to the agency, contend that Bridenstine's political background would be beneficial to a NASA administrator, who must navigate the shoals between the White House and Congress, which appropriates the agency's budget. "I'm still fairly bullish on what Jim Bridenstine would do for the agency," said Phil Larson, a former senior adviser in President Barack Obama's Office of Science and Technology Policy. "The main point now is NASA needs a leader as soon as possible, and leaving a nominee in question--I don't care what side of the aisle you're on--leaving a nomination open as these types of policies and questions and meetings are being hashed out helps no one."

Keith's note: NASA is holding a Deep Space Gateway meeting in Denver right now. A hundred or so people are there. It is invitation-only. No webcast. No Webex. So U.S taxpayers and media cannot see what is going on but foreign nationals were invited - so they can. NASA and LPI never said media could attend, never provided any way to register, and never released any other information to that effect. They ignored an email I sent several months back inquiring. Now, half way through the event I find out they have hand-picked news media in attendance.

They claim that they cannot webcast this event since there are multiple sessions - yet it is so easy to do this with a cellphone and Facebook if need be. They also claim that since this is not a "decisional" meeting they do not see the need to webcast it yet they webcast things like this all the time.

Public and media concerns aside, no one at NASA who is working on the Deep Space Gateway or people working at companies and universities supporting this research can watch it either. All we get are short abstracts and a summary that someone at NASA PAO without a technical background will write in a few months about what they think is important from what other people said.

Scott Parazynski and I did live webcasts - daily - from 17,600 feet at Everest Base Camp 9 years ago using a small BGAN unit I carried on my back. NASA sent back live video of a Soyuz landing in Kazakhstan this morning and posting pictures shortly thereafter on Flickr yet they cannot webcast a simple meeting from a hotel in Denver about a project that will last several decades?

Cruz, Nelson: Future of ISS Should be Determined by Emergence of a Viable and Proven Commercial Alternative and Needs of Our National Space Program

"While we have been strong proponents of the U.S. commercial space sector, prematurely ending direct U.S. Government funding of ISS could have disastrous consequences. The future of ISS should be determined by the emergence of a viable and proven commercial alternative and the needs of our national space program." The Senators continued, "In fact, Congress specifically required that the transition plan include cost estimates for extending operations of the ISS to 2024, 2028, and 2030, and an evaluation of the feasible and preferred service life of the ISS through at least 2028 as a unique scientific, commercial, and space exploration related facility. P.L. 115-10 specifically required the NASA Administrator to deliver a report to Congress no later than December 1, 2017. As of today, that report has not been delivered to Congress as required by federal statute."

Did NASA Deliver The ISS Transition Plan To Congress Required By Law? Update: No, earlier post

Astronaut: Trump's plan for the space station a huge mistake, op ed, Leroy Chiao, CNN

"What about privatizing the ISS? That idea is barely worth mentioning. The ISS was designed to operate with two big mission control centers, in Houston and Moscow. They each need standing armies of onsite engineers and technicians around the clock to monitor and send commands to the station. Estimates of the cost of launching spacecraft to the ISS vary, but they are certainly in the range of $100 million or more. Let's not even consider maintenance costs. Tell me with a straight face how a commercial entity is going to make money operating ISS? The Trump administration's thoughts to cancel ISS and send the savings to the moon is déjà vu. The actual savings will likely be again around 50% of the ISS program cost, and all we are likely to end up with is an inadequately funded moon program, as we have had for the last nine years. And no ISS, either. This path would likely leave us with nothing but a bare-bones spacecraft and rocket and no funding to go anywhere. Unless, of course, we decide to fly American astronauts on Chinese spacecraft to the coming Chinese space station. This would be a national travesty. What we need is a real commitment to maintain US leadership in human spaceflight."

http://images.spaceref.com/news/2018/pence.cloud.jpg

Remarks by Vice President Pence at Second Meeting of the National Space Council, White House

"We've seen the increasing number of American businesses sending experiments to the International Space Station. We've witnessed the power of commercial satellites to reconnect isolated communities in the wake of natural disasters. And of course, just a couple of weeks ago, the world watched with wonder as the Falcon Heavy blasted off from this very shoreline, and then moments later sent two of its boosters sailing back down to Earth, where they landed side-by-side, intact, less than a mile from where they'd lifted off. Very impressive indeed. The evidence is clear: While the government can blaze new trails into exploring the outer expanse of space, like all frontiers, ultimately that will be settled by the dreams of our people, by the brilliance of our innovators, the energy of entrepreneurs, and the daring of our explorers together. This truth echoes through the history of the Kennedy Space Center, named for a President who challenged the American people to marshal the best of our, in his words, "energies and skills" to "become the world's leading space-faring nation."

Larger word cloud

Vice President Pence Announces National Space Council Users Advisory Group

"Vice President Mike Pence, Chairman of the National Space Council, today announced the candidates selected to serve on the National Space Council's Users Advisory Group. Pending official appointment by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the selected members of the Users Advisory Group will serve to fulfill President Trump's mandate to "foster close coordination, cooperation, and technology and information exchange" across our nation's space enterprise. The announcement as made on the eve of the second meeting of the National Space Council. "Moon, Mars, and World Beyond: Winning the next Frontier" includes testimonials from leaders in the civil, commercial, and national security sectors about the importance of the United States' space enterprise."

Keith's note: I find this comment posted by Mark Uhran to be most apt: "These are almost exclusively "sellers" of space services. This is supposed to be a "Users Advisory Group"-- users are potential "buyers". This is a fundamental distinction. The failure to recognize the difference between the supply side and demand side is troubling, and persistent in the civil space culture. There is far more space infrastructure available than ever previously in history, yet few non-government buyers (COMSATS are the notable exception). The "build it and they will come" approach has not succeeded. Good luck to Dave Wolf and Pete Worden in trying to bring any user (buyer) perspective to this group."

Of the 29 names, 12 (listed below) are from big aerospace, new/old space, and/or its trade organizations. Only a few of the people listed are currently in the business of developing payloads. Back when I worked at NASA on the space station - with Mark Uhran - we called those people who were going to utilize the space station "users". This Users Advisory Group is sadly lacking users.

Tory Bruno, President and CEO of United Launch Alliance
Wes Bush, CEO of Northrop Grumman
Mary Lynne Dittmar, President and CEO of The Coalition for Deep Space Exploration
Adm. Jim Ellis, member of the Space Foundation Board of Directors
Marillyn Hewson, CEO of Lockheed Martin Corporation
Dennis Muilenberg, CEO of the Boeing Company
Faith Ozmen, CEO of the Sierra Nevada Corporation
Gwynne Shotwell, President and COO of SpaceX
Bob Smith, CEO of Blue Origin
David Thompson, Founder and CEO of Orbital ATK
Eric Stallmer, President of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation
Mandy Vaughn, President of VOX Launch Company

Moon, Mars, and Worlds Beyond: Winning the Next Frontier - National Space Council Recommendations

"RECOMMENDATION 1: The Secretary of Transportation should work to transform the launch and re-entry licensing regime.

RECOMMENDATION 2: The Secretary of Commerce should consolidate its space commerce responsibilities, other than launch and reentry, in the Office of the Secretary of Commerce.

RECOMMENDATION 3: The National Telecommunication and Information Administration should coordinate with the Federal Communications Commission to ensure the protection and stewardship of radio frequency spectrum necessary for commercial space activities.

RECOMMENDATION 4: The Executive Secretary of the National Space Council, in coordination with members of the National Space Council, should initiate a policy review of the current export licensing regulations affecting commercial space activity."

Partying Vs Policy Making

Lockheed Martin got $35.2 billion from taxpayers last year. That's more than many federal agencies., Washington Post

"Of Lockheed Martin's $51 billion in sales last year, nearly 70 percent, or $35.2 billion, came from sales to the U.S. government. It's a colossal figure, hard to comprehend. So think of it this way: Lockheed's government sales are nearly what the Trump administration proposed for the State Department next year in its recently released spending plan. Or $15 billion more than all of NASA. Or about the gross domestic product of Bolivia. With a White House proposal to spend a massive amount on defense next year in what one consultant called an "eye-watering" budget for the defense industry, Lockheed, the world's largest defense contractor, could get even more. ... Boeing is in second place with annual sales of $26.5 billion in 2016, a year in which the top five defense contractors -- including General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman -- had total sales of nearly $110 billion to the U.S. government, according to federal procurement data. The five biggest defense contractors took in more money from the U.S. government than the next 30 companies combined."

President's Commission on Moon, Mars and Beyond (11 February 2004)

"The President's Commission on Implementation of United States Space Exploration Policy is charged with making recommendations to the President on implementation of his vision outlined in the policy statement "A Renewed Spirit of Discovery" and in the President's Budget Submission for Fiscal Year 2005. The commission will also advise NASA on the long-term implementation of the President's vision."

Vice President Pence to Lead National Space Council Meeting at Kennedy Space Center, White House

"Vice President Pence will lead the second meeting of the National Space Council at NASA's Kennedy Space Center. "Moon, Mars, and Worlds Beyond: Winning the Next Frontier" will include testimonials from leaders in the civil, commercial, and national security sectors about the importance of the United States' space enterprise. The Vice President will conclude his visit with a tour of Kennedy Space Center."

Moon, Mars, and Beyond 2.0, earlier post

Keith's note: Sources report that the membership of the National Space Council's User's Advisory Group (UAG) may be announced on Tuesday - or possibly Wednesday at the NSPC meeting. The UAG is larger than a lot of people wanted - partially as the result of many factions wanting to have their person representing their interests. I have been able to confirm a subset of the UAG membership thus far from multiple sources: Homer Hickam, Jeff Manber, Pam Melroy, Gwynne Shotwell, and Pete Worden. Note: 2 sources confirm Manber, another says he's not a member. I will add more names as I confirm them and correct any errors as they arise.

- National Space Council Users' Advisory Group Established, earlier post
- Apply Now To Be On The National Space Council Users' Advisory Group, earlier post

Vice President Pence to Lead National Space Council Meeting at Kennedy Space Center, White House

"Vice President Pence will lead the second meeting of the National Space Council at NASA's Kennedy Space Center. "Moon, Mars, and Worlds Beyond: Winning the Next Frontier" will include testimonials from leaders in the civil, commercial, and national security sectors about the importance of the United States' space enterprise. The Vice President will conclude his visit with a tour of Kennedy Space Center."

NASA to Host National Space Council Meeting at Kennedy Space Center

"All media applications for credentialing must be received by 8 p.m. today, Feb. 19. ... NASA Television and the agency's website will provide live coverage of the meeting beginning at 10 a.m. EST."

Keith's note: Gee, a whole 8 Hours advance notice for media to make travel plans after total silence with regard to media access. Obviously the NSpC wanted to limit media attendance as much as possible. Announcing media accreditation on a Federal holiday is one of the best ways to do that. At least we can watch people talking on TV. The way this is being rolled out is 100% White House. NASA has to do exactly what the White House tells them to do - or not do - even if it means sitting on things - and then foot the bill afterward.

Keith's note: NASA and other agencies have issued zero media advisories. Multiple people have been confirmed as being members of the NSpC's Users' Advisory Group - yet none have been named publicly. A large reception sponsored and paid for by the major aerospace organizations and all of the major aerospace companies is planned during the meeting - yet no official public mention has been made of this event (you are not invited, BTW).

Meanwhile, no mention is made on any NASA website or by other sponsoring agencies including the White House about NSpC activities in Florida. No word yet as to whether the NSpC meeting itself will even be televised for taxpayers to observe or if news media will be allowed to attend. Monday is a Federal holiday so don't expect a lot of updates.

The National Space Council Is Operating in Stealth Mode (Update), earlier post

Reception 20 February
- Parking Lot 4 Opens 5:30 p.m.
- 6:30 p.m. Front Entrance Opens (Guests will walk through the Explore Sign though security screening, proceed to Atlantis Facility for check-in)
- 7:00 p.m. Reception
- 9:30 p.m. Depart Event

National Space Council Meeting 21 February
- 7:00 a.m. Parking Lot 4 Opens, Front Entrance Opens, Go to Debus Conference Facility (Check-in will be inside with a light continental breakfast for guests.)
- 8:15 - 8:45 a.m. Bus Boarding - Lot 1 (Guests will exit Debus Conference Facility and be directed around the building and board KSCVC tour buses to the Space Station Processing Facility (SSPF))
- NOON Depart Event - SSPF (Guests will board KCSVC tour buses back to Parking Lot 4)


Loading

 



Commercialization: Monthly Archives

Monthly Archives

About this Archive

This page is an archive of recent entries in the TrumpSpace category.

Transition is the previous category.

Videos is the next category.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.