Keith Cowing: January 2021 Archives

NASA delays moon lander awards as Biden team mulls moonshot program, The Verge

"Last Wednesday, NASA told the three contractors that an extension to their development contracts "will be required," picking a new award date of April 30th. Under the Trump administration's timeline, the agency had planned to pick two of the three bidders in late February, giving a stamp of approval for two systems that would inevitably carry humans to the moon. The delay was all but certain: The spending bill Congress passed in December gives NASA $850 million for the Human Landing System program, far short of the $3.2 billion it needed to stick with the 2024 timeline."

Earlier posts on Artemis

Green Run Update: NASA Proceeds With Plans for Second Hot Fire Test

"NASA plans to conduct a second Green Run hot fire test as early as the fourth week in February with the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket's core stage that will launch the Artemis I mission to the Moon. The Green Run is a comprehensive assessment of the rocket's core stage prior to launching Artemis missions."

SLS Green Run Update, earlier post

Keith's note: FYI this event in Huntsville is coming up on 17 February - a few days before the second SLS Green Run test. The Path to Artemis III: Future of Human Deep Space Exploration. Given that the 2024 landing date is now open to reconsideration it will be interesting to see how much of the old rah rah spin the NASA MSFC, congressional, and industry folks put on this event and its Trump administration accelerated milestone.

Memorandum on Restoring Trust in Government Through Scientific Integrity and Evidence-Based Policymaking

"Because science, facts, and evidence are vital to addressing policy and programmatic issues across the Federal Government, the heads of all agencies (not only those that fund, conduct, or oversee scientific research) shall designate expeditiously a senior career employee as the agency's lead scientific-integrity official ("Scientific Integrity Official") to oversee implementation and iterative improvement of scientific-integrity policies and processes consistent with the provisions of this memorandum, including implementation of the administrative and dispute resolution processes described in section (3)(c)(iii) of this memorandum. For agencies with a Chief Science Officer, the Scientific Integrity Official shall report to the Chief Science Officer on all matters involving scientific-integrity policies."

Executive Order on the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology

"The PCAST shall advise the President on matters involving policy affecting science, technology, and innovation, as well as on matters involving scientific and technological information that is needed to inform public policy relating to the economy, worker empowerment, education, energy, the environment, public health, national and homeland security, racial equity, and other topics."

Keith's note: It will be interesting to see what happens to the National Space Council since OSTP has been elevated to cabinet-level ranking and the PCAST is being established as the nation's focal point for generating scientific advice, policy etc. The National Space Council and its Users Advisory Group would seem to be duplicative and a needless layer of government. These directives will require NASA's Chief Scientist and Chief Information Officer to dramatically dial up their activities. Given that the NASA Chief Scientist's office has traditionally been mostly outreach oriented and out of the loop on many things - and that the NASA CIO's office has dropped the ball in almost every imaginable way for more than a decade - this is going to be a challenge for the agency. And the NASA Advisory Council often exists only as a forum for civil servant powerpoint presentations. Add in a "whole of government" approach to climate change and NASA is going to be drinking from a bunch of new firehoses very soon. Science is back, y'all.

Keith's note: Surprise surprise: the Coalition for Deep Space Exploration (whose executive director departs tomorrow) - an organization made up of all of the Big Aerospace companies who absolutely depend on the continuation of the SLS/Orion program - has put this postion paper out. One of the first absurd statements - about SLS - a rocket that is years behind schedule and billions over budget - and can't even do a engine test right - is to claim that no one else can send humans into deep space. This not only ignores Falcon Heavy but also SpaceX's Starship and Blue Origin's New Glenn:

"As the world's only human exploration systems destined for deep space, SLS and Orion provide the U.S. with an important tool for diplomacy and a means to engage international partners in these historic missions."

And they want to keep the entire Trump space infrastructure in place:

"The new administration should continue the National Space Council, while coordinating its efforts as closely as possible with Congress to ensure continued and timely investments in space and informed deliberations on appropriate regulatory regimes and reform, and legislation."

And they want every possible big ticket item from the Trump Administration - and then some - funded at 100% no matteer what:

"... By making full use of the SLS, including the Exploration Upper Stage, the Orion spacecraft, and the Exploration Ground Systems that support them; as well as the lunar Gateway and Human Landing System currently under development with international and commercial partners ..."

The Advanced Space Architectures Program (ASAP): Championing American Innovation through
Next Generation In-Space Operations
, Day One Project

"The Biden-Harris administration should launch a new Advanced Space Architectures Program (ASAP) to enable a new generation of in-space operations that will renew American leadership in space operations of all kinds. ASAP would improve the cost-effectiveness, productivity, and resiliency of our space systems through a series of inter-related missions. The program would operate through a public-private consortium in order to effectively leverage direct government investment while facilitating the space economy through a healthy space industrial base and a variety of partnerships. On the federal side, ASAP should be jointly led by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Department of Defense (DOD, including the Space Force, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU)). Additional federal support would come from agencies such as the Department of Commerce (DOC, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)) and the Department of Transportation (DOT, including the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA))."

Day One Council Members

"Co-chaired by John Holdren and Susan Eisenhower, the Science & Technology Leadership Council is comprised of leaders from across the science, technology, and innovation community who share deep experience in S&T policymaking. The Council guides and advises the Day One Project in its work to identify and advance key S&T priorities and engage the S&T community ahead of the next presidential term."

Keith's 28 January update: this is the letter (pdf) that the usual suspects sent to the White House. The wording is mostly the same. These organizations signed the letter:

Aerospace Industries Association, Aerospace States Association, American Astronautical Society, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Commercial Spaceflight Federation, CompTIA, Explore Mars, Inc., GPS Innovation Alliance, Intelligence and National Security Alliance, National Security Space Association, Satellite Industry Association, SmallSat Alliance, Space Florida, Space & Satellite Professionals International, The Coalition for Deep Space Exploration, Universities Space Research Association, U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Keith's 27 January update: Mike French at AIA sent this note out to the ususal suspects on 26 January:

"Hello all - I wanted to provide an update and proposed way forward. I have heard from a diverse set of nearly all the groups here as supportive or initially supportive but need to run an internal check. If you know others in the space community that are supportive of the space council framework, I want to make sure we include all of those voices if they are interested in joining. Please feel free to reach out to other groups you think would be interested or let me know and I can do so. I will set up a call for later today or tomorrow morning (depending on response timing) to discuss the way forward with interested groups. Please feel free to reach out to me directly in the meantime."

There was a group call scheduled for today (27 January) at noon to discuss this memo.

Keith's 25 January note: Yet another effort is being undertaken by Big Aerospace to preserve the status quo. This time its an effort to keep the National Space Council and its utterly useless Users Advisory Group in place. As you may recall the UAG was not comprised of actual "users" of space but rather was stocked full of political appointees and representatives from Big Aerospace companies who sell things to the Federal Government. This group never did anything other than to have meetings with powerpoint presentations when in fact the big decisions had already been made by National Space Council staff. After a while many members never bothered to attend - even before COVID. But it was fun for the members to brag about being on it.

This draft statement supporting the UAG was sent out today to all the usual suspects by Mike French at the Aerospace Industries Association. Many of the recipients were in on a Big Aerospace White Paper that was circulating as a drafted right after the election which was a shopping list of things that the community wanted from Congress and the incoming Biden Administration. That white paper seems to have evaporated since it was featured on NASAWatch. As for the National Space Council itself, while it did do some interesting work, from what I have been hearing its future is in doubt since last week's announcement of a revitalized and elevated Office of Science and Technology Policy and PCAST leadership. With the elevation of science as a national priority many think that space should be discussed at the highest level in an "all of government" perspective - and not as a disconnected side discussion. Given the challenges facing our nation right now, space policy needs to have the best possible seat at the big table where these things are discussed - lest it be ignored.

"National Space Council Support Letter
DRAFT FOR ASSOCIATION REVIEW 1/25/21

For over 60 years, U.S. government and private sector investments in space programs have showcased American innovation, ambition, and accomplishment on the worldwide stage. Space is inextricably linked to our economic prosperity, U.S. national security, understanding of our planet, and everyday American life. As our nation becomes increasingly reliant on space for these endeavors and future technological challenges, the interconnectivity of our three space sectors - civil, commercial, and national security - requires public policies and investment rooted in a whole of government approach.

The National Space Council and its Users' Advisory Group provide that approach, coordinating across the entire government to shape our national space program with critical stakeholder input. Maintaining a White House-level focus on space will provide stability and continuity to the United States' space endeavors, enabling historic exploration and scientific achievement, continued U.S. space industry global leadership, and enhanced national security. Harnessing the space sector's capabilities will help fuel our economic recovery, help solve the climate crisis, and build the diverse 21st century education system and workforce that America needs and deserves. We strongly encourage the Biden Administration to continue the National Space Council and Users' Advisory Group."

Stay tuned. The usual suspects in the DC space policy echo chamber are relentless.

- Uh Oh: The Space Community Is Writing A White Paper - Again, earlier post
- Biden Elevates OSTP And Announces Science Team, earlier post
- Biden NASA Transition Team, earlier post
- Space Council Users' Advisory Group Meets Without Any Users, earlier post
- National Space Council UAG Goes Through The Motions Of Being Interested, earlier post

Keith's note: NASA held a Mars Perseverance media briefing today. I asked a question that follows up on my earlier post "NASA's Mars 2020 Websites Are Not Ready For Prime Time" wherein I noted that NASA PAO and the Aeronautics and Technology directorates are not paying all of the attention to this mission as you'd expect them to be. My question:

"My question should be addressed to people who are not present on this panel so I will direct it to Dr. Zurbuchen instead. The Mars 2020 mission involves the flight of the Ingenuity helicopter drone which is a joint effort by the NASA Science Mission Directorate, the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, and the Space Technology Mission Directorate. We just heard a quote from the new Vice President. At a time when this new Administration talks about "whole of government approaches" one would think that the "whole of NASA" would be using their various outreach tools to talk about this helicopter and the overall mission. Yet the Aeronautics and Technology mission directorates have been utterly silent to their respective audiences about Ingenuity or their role in it its development. This is odd since this rover and its helicopter seem to have relevance to virtually everything that NASA does with applicability to things in many people's everyday lives. As such, why isn't the "whole of NASA" doing their best to highlight the diverse capabilities of this mission?"

Zurbuchen agreed with the general premise of my question and said that NASA is always trying to do things better. "I met with the Aeronautics and Technology AAs this morning about this. As we go forward we will be learning from each other. This truly is a whole of government mission like we have never had before.". Full audio of Zurbuchen's response below.

At one point with regard to a question on Mars sample return one of the JPL briefers said "Samples will be returned to Earth some time in the 2030s". In other words, samples will be returned at the same time that humans are heading to Mars if you accept NASA's long-standing timeline for human missions to Mars. NASA has long stated that sample return from Mars was needed in advance of sending humans to Mars so as to understand any potential risks and to plan missions to deal with what may be found. Now (apparently) the samples will come back after mission design is mostly decided. Also, if Mars sample return to Earth and missions with humans from Earth to Mars are roughly simultaneous, then why spend a billions on a robotic sample return when you are sending humans to Mars to do the same type of studies? There is a broken logic path here. Or perhaps the science and human exploration folks are not in perfect synch with one another.

Keith's update: NASA just released this statement. After decades of holding an event at Arlington National Cemetery, NASA will not allow the public or media to attend the event at this large, outdoor public location due to COVID concerns.

NASA Pays Tribute to Fallen Heroes with Day of Remembrance

"Jurczyk will lead an observance at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia, which will begin with a traditional wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, followed by observances for the Apollo 1, Challenger, and Columbia crews. Due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, this year's event will be limited to invited guests and closed to media."

Columbia: Thinking Back - Looking Ahead, Excerpt from "New Moon Rising", by Frank Sietzen, Jr. and Keith Cowing

"At the end of the event, Rona Ramon, Ilan's widow, spoke last. Steeling her emotions with grace and clarity, she spoke elegantly and briefly. She thanked all for coming. And then she talked of her husband, and the flight of the lost shuttle. "Our mission in space is not over" she told the hushed audience. "He was the first Israeli in space -- that means there will be more."

http://images.spaceref.com/news/2011/IMG_1407.s.jpg20 July 2003: Arctic Memorials and Starship Yearnings, SpaceRef

"Our task was a somewhat solemn one. We were here to erect a memorial to Columbia astronaut Michael Anderson. Two memorials have already been erected by members of the HMP Team. The memorials take the form of an inukshuk, a stone sculpture in rough human form used by the Inuit to mark territory. These stone structures serve as reference points for those who traverse this desolate place. As we establish these memorial inukshuks, we do so for the very same reason the Inuit do: to aid in future exploration - in this case, of Devon Island. As such, these memorials will show the way for future explorers."

Scott Parazynski: Still on Cloud 10 (on the summit of Mt. Everest), SpaceRef

"I tied off a pair of flags I'd made to honor astronauts and cosmonauts who had perished in the line of duty (Apollo 1, Challenger, Columbia, Soyuz 1 and Soyuz 11), as I could think of no finer place on Earth to hang them. In the coming days, weeks, months and years, like their Tibetan prayer flag counterparts, they will weather under the wind, sun and snow, and slowly lift back up into the heavens."

Apollo 1 - 27 January 1967
Soyuz 1 - 23 April 1967
Soyuz 11 - 29 June 1971
Challenger - 28 January 1986
Columbia - 1 February 2003

Keith's note: Last week I asked NASA HQ Public Affairs about the annual Remembrance Day event at Arlington National Cemetery. I have been attending this event for more than 20 years as often as I could. They replied that they are not taking guests and that some sort of virtual thing would be posted online. I got the distinct impression that they did not want anyone to attend - mostly for COVID reasons. I asked if they were telling the public that they could not attend this public event in a public place. No one from NASA ever responded back to me - despite saying that they would.

There is no mention whatsoever on the NASA website or on their calendar of upcoming events, no social media, nothing on the NASA TV schedule etc. FWIW I have built memorials to Columbia and Challenger crew on a remote arctic island and supported a memorial effort atop Mt. Everest from base camp - both at some personal risk - because it was important to do these things. I served on the board of the Challenger Center and came to know the families of these crews. So this is an intensely personal thing with me - as it is for many others in the extended NASA family.

But now NASA seems to be uninterested in making any mention of the sacrifices of these crews. I am saddened - and baffled - and angry.

NASA OIG: NASA's Efforts to Mitigate the Risks Posed by Orbital Debris, OIG

"Despite presidential and congressional directives to NASA over the past decade to develop active debris removal technologies, the Agency has made little to no progress on such efforts. Moreover, debris removal technologies from international agencies and commercial entities are in the early stages of development and testing. ... We found that NASA models of the orbital debris environment lack sufficient data, putting the Agency at risk of under- or over-protecting spacecraft from debris."

Letter From Colorado Congressional Delegation To President Biden Regarding Relocation Of The U.S. Space Command

"We write to request you conduct a thorough review of the Trump Administration's last-minute decision to move U.S. Space Command from Colorado Springs, Colorado, to Huntsville, Alabama and suspend any actions to relocate the headquarters until you complete the review. This move undermines our ability to respond to the threats in space and is disruptive to the current mission. Additionally, significant evidence exists that the process was neither fair nor impartial and that President Trump's political considerations influenced the final decision.

Political Influence. The Department of Defense must also review reports of political influence in this two-year process. At the outset, it is unclear why there was a basing process to reestablish a command with an existing and concentrated mission that was rehatted. In addition, it is unclear why the Air Force slowed and eventually stopped its standard strategic basing process in 2019. Certain press reports have suggested this was done due to requests from various Members of Congress who argued their state should have been included in the process. Finally, there is evidence President Trump's political considerations influenced the timing and final decision."

- Full-Blown Space Command Food Fight Underway, earlier post
- earlier military space postings

NASA Administrator joins Acorn Growth Companies

"Acorn Growth Companies ("Acorn"), a private equity firm investing exclusively in aerospace, defense and intelligence, today announced that Jim Bridenstine, former Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), has joined the company as a dedicated full-time Senior Advisor. "Jim's wealth of knowledge in the space, military, aerospace and engineering sectors will be invaluable to Acorn and its portfolio companies as we continue our mission to invest in operating companies that strive to enhance global mobility, protect national interests and develop next-generation intelligence capability," said Rick Nagel, Managing Partner of Acorn. "He will play a key role in our efforts to deploy capital from our newest investment vehicle, Acorn Aerospace & Defense Fund V."

Keith's note: NASA JPL and NASA SMD recently put out a press release "6 Things to Know About NASA's Mars Helicopter on Its Way to Mars". Helicopters. Hmmm .. that's aeronautics. You'd think that the Aeronautics part of NASA would be mentioned. The word "aeronautics" appears nowhere. Nor is anything related to aeronautics on NASA's various websites linked to. If you go to the JPL press kit link for Ingenuity the word "aeronautics" appears nowhere. If you download the actual press kit the word "aeronautics" appears twice. Once in the agency's name (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) and then again on page 31 where it says "The Mars helicopter technology demonstration activity is supported by NASA's Science Mission Directorate, the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, and the NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate". There is a page describing how it flies, but no mention or linkage is made of anything that NASA has been doing in Aeronautics since its inception 3/4 of a century ago.

Moreover, there is no discussion as to how it is possible to fly anything on a world with an atmosphere only 1% the thickness of Earth's. There is a great teaching experience that is being ignored. And of course no mention is made of any educational tools even though the NASA STEM Office has them and the JPL mission site has several - which are buried within the website.

Although NASA's Aeronautics Research and Space Technology Mission Directorates are listed as participants neither the Space Technology Mission Directorate website or the Aeronautics Directory website make any mention of Ingenuity. There is no mention in the Aeronautics programs page. But ... if you click on the "more stories" link at the bottom of the Aeronautics page - 6 times - and go back in time 7 months there is a single story on Ingenuity. The landing is 3 weeks away. Why isn't this sort of stuff being promoted?

And of course, in addition to not bothering to cross-coordinate within NASA's internal participants in this mission, NASA is not content with one official Mars 2020 Perseverance website. So they have two - one at NASA HQ and the other at JPL. As I have noted before, neither of these two official Mars 2020 websites link to one another and yet they duplicate each other's content. That's two web development teams at twice the cost working on the same thing.

And if you go to the JPL site and use the drag down menu for "spacecraft" you only get options for "Overview", "Rover", "Instruments", and "Rocket" none of which mention the Ingenuity helicopter. None of the links under "Timeline" mention Ingenuity either. Under "mission" only "technology" mentions Ingenuity. Its almost as if NASA is not interested in spending more than minimal effort on this helicopter. Oh yes, they have invested around $80 million on Ingenuity.

NASA is less than 3 weeks away from landing Perseverance and Ingenuity on Mars. The agency has had years to get the PR and outreach stuff into place. And yet their websites are not at all synched up with one another, are badly designed in terms of navigation, and often needlessly duplicate on another by creating parallel stove pipes. This is not a new problem. If you read NASAWatch then you have had to endure my rants about this. Last week I did an exit Interview with Jim Bridenstine and I brought this up:

"NASAWATCH: This reminds me of something. When I look at the Mars 2020 mission it is going to be flying a little drone - the Ingenuity helicopter. Right off the bat you just look at this thing and you think OK, this is aeronautics. Reynolds numbers and all of that. People can't imagine that you can fly on Mars but it is actually quite easy to do. And then you think about it a bit further and ask where are drones being used on Earth? You just mentioned agriculture. People are using them in agriculture and are combining GPS and geolocation and satellite imagery from smallsats. You would think that you should be going over to the NASA Aeronautics or Technology websites to see how they are helping with the Mars 2020 mission. But they do not talk about it. And if you go to NASA's Earth Science website - which is run by the very same Science Mission Directorate that runs Earth Sciences they do not talk about it either. There is an obvious analog there. And what is the most popular gift under many Christmas trees? Drones. You would think that this would be such a no brainer sort of thing to be highlighting and yet you do not see it being done.

So - my question (there is one here) NASA buys its stove pipes by the truckload when it comes to outreach. You put a memo out a in May 2019 that says 'OK we are going to cut down on the number of websites and make them more interactive'. From what I am told, and I regularly highlight this on NASAWatch, zero progress has been made. Why is it that NASA doesn't seem to want to tell a single, coordinated story about what it is doing. The various parts of NASA all seem to want to go off in their own little direction."

Think of all of the students and farmers in agricultural communities who are missing out on a no-brainer link between things that are important in their world and something that NASA is doing on Mars. What a colossal missed opportunity.

Yes, there will be crazy web traffic for one day for the landing. One day. That's it. NASA seems ill-prepared for the months and years to follow. How many people know or care that Curiosity has been there for years? Show of hands please. And that Moon rock in the Oval Office? It is last week's news.

NASA is forever whining and complaining about the way that the news media covers things and what the public does or does not think about what NASA does. The same goes for what Congress thinks. Now a new Administration seeks to renew a strong focus upon the role of science in government decision making. You would think that NASA would have taken this task to repair and upgrade its website seriously - perhaps not for the previous Administration, but certainly for the new one. Bridenstine's memo and direction was issued nearly 2 years ago. Nothing has been fixed - as noted above. There are urban myths within NASA about some sort of website upgrade but it will likely be equally out of date when it finally manages to crawl online.

But who cares? If NASA cannot get its team together to provide a coordinated, easy to understand story about what it does the whole space exploration thing, why it does it, and how it does it, then how can they expect people to support billions of dollars being spent on it - especially during a time of pandemic, economic desperation, and political unrest? Trillions of dollars are being devoted to keeping our nation afloat and all spending priorities - big and small - are under the relevancy microscope.

But wait - there's more: in that very same constrained budgetary environment NASA wants to spend billions more to bring samples that Perseverance will be collecting back to Earth. You would think that there would be some strategic thought given as to how to excite and engage - and then retain and build upon - the public's attention for complex, expensive science missions like this so as to generate support for these future missions. But no.

NASA has a chance to be a bright shining light in this time of darkness. Its big rocket choked last week during its big engine test. Let's hope that NASA steps up to the plate and sticks the Mars Perseverance landing both on Mars - and within the hearts and minds of people back on Earth.

Schedule F Update

Biden reverses Trump orders seen as hostile to federal workers, Washington Post

"Biden's order says the Schedule F policy "undermined the foundations of the civil service and its merit system principles" and that "it is the policy of the United States to protect, empower, and rebuild the career Federal workforce. It is also the policy of the United States to encourage union organizing and collective bargaining." It told agencies to cancel any steps they had taken for carrying out the orders."

Keith's note: I did a 30 minute exit interview with Jim Bridenstine on Tuesday. Here is a verbatim transcript (there may still be a few typos).

NASAWATCH: Most people who become NASA Administrator tend to do so at the apex of their career and then dial things back, jump on a few boards, and then retire. Yet you have decades ahead of you. This is unusual. Normally I am talking to people who are in their 60s you know "yea, my wife wants me to take 6months off and do nothing ...". Where do you go from up - when you have done something like this at such a young age?

BRIDENSTINE: 'll tell you - this is going to be hard. There is nothing that is going to match the experience that I have had at NASA. The future out there of course is unknown. I know here at least initially I am going to be coming back to Oklahoma. I have some prospects for employment but I don't want to disclose those or make any announcements at this time - but I am going to be back in Oklahoma. ... I have a very strong direction that I am heading but I am not going to make any announcements until next week.

NASAWATCH: So ... you're not filled with a case of Potomac Fever?

BRIDENSTINE: No (laughs) I am very happily coming back to Oklahoma and am excited about participating in my kids' basketball games, and swim meets, and Boy Scouts, and all kinds of other activities that I have missed over the last 8 years.

NASAWATCH: I recall talking to you before you were confirmed. You looked forward to the challenge - you sought it out - but sounded a little overwhelmed at the sheer magnitude of what NASA does. Looking back - what things initially struck you as being devilishly hard that ended up being easy - and what things did you expect to be easy only to find that they were hard?

BRIDENSTINE: The workforce at NASA was overwhelmingly accepting and encouraging and supporting. I had talked to Sean O'Keefe before taking the job and he said 'look, there's going to be lots of support - there's great people there. And when you show they are going to be anxious to help. I will tell you that I found that to be true. NASA is an exceptional group of people. This should not be surprising given the legacy of NASA and how many people want to work at NASA. We really do have bright people but also people that are deeply caring for each other. That was a great thing to walk into and experience.

Message from NASA Acting Administrator Steve Jurczyk and Senior White House Appointee Bhavya Lal

"We have some initial appointments from the new administration: Alicia Brown has been named NASA's Associate Administrator for Legislative Affairs and Intergovernmental Affairs (OLIA), and Marc Etkind will be the Associate Administrator for Communications. Please join us in giving them a warm welcome to the NASA family. There will be other new faces arriving at Headquarters, and we will communicate these developments with you."

- Bhavya Lal, LinkedIn Twitter
- Alicia Brown, LinkedIn Twitter
- Marc Etkind, IMDb - Twitter

NASA's Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel Releases 2020 Annual Report

"... We believe that NASA must make some strategically critical decisions, based on deliberate and thorough consideration, that are necessary because of their momentous consequences for the future of human space exploration and, in particular, for the management of the attendant risks. These decisions involve:

• What role NASA intends to perform going forward and why.
• How the Agency will interact with both commercial and international partners.
• How the Agency will address shared risks.
• What management practices will be employed.
• How the expectations will be communicated to their partners and to their workforce.
• How effective Systems Engineering and Integration will be accomplished.
• What the NASA workforce of the future should look like and how it will be achieved.

SLS Green Run Update

Green Run Update: Data and Inspections Indicate Core Stage in Good Condition

"The Space Launch System (SLS) rocket Green Run team has reviewed extensive data and completed preliminary inspections that show the rocket's hardware is in excellent condition after the Green Run test that ignited all the engines at 5:27 p.m. EST at NASA's Stennis Space Center near Bay St. Louis, Mississippi. After analyzing initial data, the team determined that the shutdown after firing the engines for 67.2-seconds on Jan.16 was triggered by test parameters that were intentionally conservative to ensure the safety of the core stage during the test."

Keith's note: I am hearing that within NASA that many people think that it is almost a given that they need to try the Green Run test again. Its that whole 2024 deadline thing that is pushing them right now. Well, the impetus for that deadline - widely seen as impossible to meet - will evaporate at noon on Wednesday. There is broad consensus that a landing date along the lines of 2028 is considered to be more likely - as noted below. The reasons are simple - the whole Artemis program is woefully behind schedule and Congress did not give NASA the budget needed to try and make it happen. Yet if you read this tweet or heard the NASA PAO announcer during the test the agency and Congress are still holding to the 2024 date in spite of admitting the obvious.

I asked about this at the SLS -post test press event - rather, I tried to ask about this. Despite sending an emailed question to NASA PAO during the SLS post-test press event - exactly like all other media did - PAO decided not to let my question be asked. But they allowed every other question through. So I complained. I had originally asked "Sen. Wicker tweeted today that NASA is going to land on the Moon in 2024 and on Mars in 2029. Can you explain how this is possible given the budget NASA has been given?". This was in response to a tweet that Wicker issued right after the test:

This is the reply NASA PAO just sent me:

"We're grateful for the strong bipartisan support for the Artemis program as reflected in the FY 2021 Omnibus Appropriation passed and signed last month. Congress continues to recognize the value in America's Moon to Mars plans, providing funding for human landing system (HLS) development. As you've heard me say before, funding is one of the challenges we have to navigate as we continue our work toward a sustainable exploration program that lasts a generation. Landing the first woman and next man on the Moon in 2024 remains our goal, but NASA will work with the incoming Biden Administration to do it smartly and get it done right."

In other words yet another non-answer answer.

Keith's note: Jim Bridenstine has announced that he is leaving NASA. His last day will be 20 January 2021.

I really did not know much about Jim Bridenstine when his name started to bubble up as a possible NASA Administrator choice in 2017. Given the chaos and amateurish way the Trump Landing Team (more like a "boarding party") conducted itself I was predisposed to think that they'd pick a loyalist with a high loser quotient. So I did some digging. He was actually interesting and had given some serious thought to space policy. Over the following months I'd show up at events in DC (with Jeff Foust et al) and we'd try every trick we knew to squeeze out an answer to variants on the "will you be the NASA Administrator?" question that we'd throw at him. Jim did the whole non-answer answer thing like a true pro. When his nomination was official I gave him a much closer look.

Important note: while I try to annoy everyone equally, I am a Democrat and make no secret of that. Jim is not a Democrat. Indeed he was elected from a rather conservative place with a voting record that makes me, with my leftie leanings, cringe quite a bit. But this is a company town and we try to work together despite the whole "Swamp" thing we have been hearing about. Alas, the rank and file Democrats - with Bill Nelson in the lead - went after him as being undesirable for the job etc. etc. I thought he was a breath of fresh air. So I decided to highlight his credentials - and put them in the context of other NASA Administrators. He got the job. The first day on the job he made an emphatic statement on diversity and climate change to allay concerns and he was off and running. And in an effort to broaden input and support Jim also put none other than Bill Nelson on the NASA Advisory Council.

I have been doing NASAWatch for a quarter of a century. After he was nominated people suggested that Jim might want to ping me for some ideas. So did a certain former NASA Administrator who I know rather well. I don't want to kiss and tell, but let's just say that Jim and I had some conversations. Quite a few - and most of them very long. He drank up everything I could offer about previous exploration initiatives and how NASA engages with the public. If you have read NASAWatch then you know about my rants in this regard. What I saw was someone with a genuine passion for space exploration and its value to the public. He did not have to learn that from me or anyone else. It had always been there.

Shortly after he showed up for work a Twitter account became active. Very active. Someone from NASA PAO actually called me and asked me if I was doing it. I laughed and said that I was flattered, but no, I was not tweeting for Jim. But I tweeted an inquiry to @JimBridenstine and got a response. It was Jim himself. NASA was not exactly ready for this. I loved it. Finally - an Administrator who took the issue of communicating personally.

Jim was presented with a human exploration program of record that had problems. Big problems. It still does. The White House threw the whole 2024 thing at him and he ran with it. But there were other things that he managed to pull off that people have not really noticed. While the Trump Administration did its level best to deny the impact of human influence on climate change at other agencies such as NOAA, somehow, NASA continued to do its science - and talk about it - with no censoring. Yes, some attempts were made to cancel some Earth science missions, but other than that, NASA seemed to have a Teflon coating when it came to openly talking about climate change. This most certainly required some deft thinking on Jim's part.

Jim also had to suddenly transform a sprawling agency and its workforce from one that worked in offices to one that worked from spare bedrooms as the Coronavirus pandemic descended upon our world. Like everyone else, Jim had to deal with his kids eating up the bandwidth for home schooling while he was running NASA on his cellphone in his living room. While this called for a lot unprecedented changes in the way people worked - it seems to have worked far better than anyone had a right to expect. And you can only get that when the person at the top is fully invested in its success.

To me, however, the thing that I hope that Jim will be remembered for is his embracing of education and diversity. Some people like to go back to his voting record. It is what it is - and to be fair, his job was to vote the way his constituents wanted him to vote. But as he arrived at NASA he listened to wiser minds and adjusted his world view accordingly at NASA. Although the "first woman and next man" line appears in everything the agency says, he ran with the notion that when Americans go back to the Moon they need to do so representing our nation as a whole. The "Artemis Generation" phrase also became popular - echoing the "Apollo generation" phrase commonly used to refer to people (like me) who grew up as we first reached out to the Moon half a century ago. After all, while we work here in the present on these programs, the next generation will truly inherit and expand upon the benefits that will result.

As Administrations change there is always a temptation to change the name of things to erase the previous Administration from people's minds and put a new mark on things representative of the incoming team. The "Apollo" program managed to keep its name under the Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Ford administrations. The Orion spacecraft got its name under the Bush II Administration and will bear it under the Biden Administration. I certainly hope that the Biden folks have better things to do and let the Artemis program keep its name - and with it, Jim's contribution to keeping it alive.

Oh yes, Jim brought back the worm logo. And y'all know how I feel about that. ;-)

A lot of people (including me) would have liked to see Jim stay on. But Jim took himself out of possible consideration to stay on at NASA. Odds are that the Biden folks would not have given thought to this given the global house cleaning that they are implementing. That said, Jim's rationale was honorable. When the NASA Administrator sits in front of OMB at budget time, everyone needs to have no doubt of the Administrator's support of the current Administration's interest without having any concern of lingering prior policies. He simply shut down pointless speculation by saying that he was moving on. He wanted NASA to have the best Administrator that the Biden Administration could find.

Jim now has the distinction (I think) of being the youngest former NASA Administrator. We have certainly not heard the last of him. I wish him well.

Ad Astra Jim. You done good.

Keith's note: In summary NASA is not sure how long the engines fired. Seriously - they said that they do not know. They saw a flash near engine 4 and moments later the rocket commanded itself to shut down. They do not know the cause of the shutdown, nor whether the test needs to be run again nor whether they can ship the rocket to KSC. They do not know if a flight in 2021 is possible.

Columbia

Keith's note: The 4 engines lit up and ran for 2 minutes or so before there was a MCF (major component failure call) and then they continued to fire for a few more seconds before they shut down. This was supposed to be an 8 minute test and various sources have suggested that more firing time than 2 minutes was needed - even if the full 8 minutes was not achieved - so as to get all the required data. There will be a press conference in several hours. What is somewhat baffling is how NASA PAO only had a prewritten script for a successful test (and presumably one for a total failure) but not one for something in between. This was not the success that PAO claims it was. Yet their on-air host went on and on as if everything was fine. Stay tuned.

Bill Thornton

NASA Remembers Astronaut William Thornton

"NASA is saddened to learn of the loss of former physician-astronaut, Dr. William Thornton, who died last week at his home in Boerne, Texas, at the age of 91. Thornton was selected as an astronaut in 1967, and launched twice on the space shuttle Challenger on STS-8 and STS-51B, the Spacelab 3 mission."

Cliff Feldman

Keith's note: Cliff Feldman was a Production Supervisor at NASA Television at NASA HQ. More to follow.

Ad Astra, Cliff.

Cliff Feldman, LinkedIn

President-elect Biden Announces Key Members of his White House Science Team

"Today, President-elect Joe Biden announced his White House science team -- a deeply respected group of diverse and eminently qualified scientists who will marshal the force of science to drive meaningful progress in the lives of people. They will help the Biden-Harris administration confront some of the biggest crises and challenges of our time, from climate change and the impact of technology on society to pandemics, racial inequity and the current historic economic downturn."

Keith's note: Science is back!

National Space Council Releases Report on Space Policy Accomplishments

"Over the past four years, it has been my great privilege to serve as chair of the National Space Council, and I am proud of the tremendous progress our Administration has made to advance U.S. national space power," said Vice President Mike Pence. "With a revived National Space Council at the helm of a whole-of-government approach, the Trump Administration has successfully aligned American space policies, programs, and budgets with enduring national interests. The U.S. Government has fostered close coordination, cooperation, and technology and information exchange to give the American space enterprise a new vision, direction, and confidence."

Keith's update: But wait - there's more. The White House just dropped a bonus SPD.

White House Issues Space Policy Directive 7 on Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Systems

"SPD-7 directs an increase of cybersecurity for the Global Positioning System (GPS) and GPS-enabled devices, and acknowledges the potential for GPS to contribute to in-space applications. This is the first update to the United States policy on space-based PNT in more than 16 years."

Environmental Liabilities: NASA's Reported Financial Liabilities Have Grown, and Several Factors Contribute to Future Uncertainties, GAO

"NASA's reported fiscal year 2019 environmental liabilities estimate for restoration projects does not include certain costs, and some factors may affect NASA's future environmental liabilities, potentially increasing or decreasing the federal government's fiscal exposure. Certain costs are not included in the fiscal year 2019 estimate because some projects are in a developing stage where NASA needs to gather more information to fully estimate cleanup costs. Further, NASA limits its restoration project estimates to 30 years, as the agency views anything beyond 30 years as not reasonably estimable. Sixty of NASA's 115 open restoration projects in fiscal year 2019 are expected to last longer than 30 years."

Kathy Lueders "Gets It"

NASA OCOMM Leadership Updates

"Over the last two years, NASA Communications has undergone a transformation focused on providing the agency a united and strategic direction for communications. Since March 2019, we have taken bold steps to integrate functions and strengthen capabilities, and, in the process, have better coordinated our strategic efforts across the agency. Now that we have launched the communications enterprise, it's time to go into full implementation. To do that, we must expand our leadership team to reflect the needs and goals of the enterprise model and provide additional focus on developing the business unit of Communications to help convey the significant value we bring to the agency, while maintaining focus on the content development and creative direction we do so well."

NASA Town Hall (Update)

Keith's 11 January note: There is a agency wide Town Hall coming up soon. Nothing is online yet and NASA PAO has not responded to my inquiry. Usually when Administrators depart and the White House changes hands there is an agency-wide event with farewell messages, awards given out etc. Stay tuned.

Keith's 12 January update: PAO says that no "public" event is scheduled at this time.

Keith's 14 January update: When I asked HQ PAO if there was a Town Hall they said there would not be a "public event". When I asked if there was a non-public event planned they did not respond. Well as many of you know, there is an internal NASA agency wide Town Hall - albeit a recorded one - regarding COVID-19 Issues on Friday, 15 January. As for a farewell event for Jim Bridenstine et al - there apparently is nothing planned. Then again, watching the SLS core stage fire ought to be a nice send off ;-)

Agency Town Hall: COVID-19 Vaccine

"On Friday, Jan. 15, NASA leaders will record a town hall to answer employee questions about coronavirus vaccinations. Participating in the event are: Associate Administrator Steve Jurczyk, Deputy Associate Administrator Melanie Saunders, Chief Health and Medical Officer Dr. J.D. Polk, Deputy Chief Health and Medical Officer Dr. Vince Michaud, and Chief Human Capital Officer Jane Datta. Submit your question below and/or vote up questions already posted."

Keith's 14 January update: NASA has taken down these employee comments.

Below are the questions as of 14 January (the numbers on the left are up-votes):

SecAF selects Huntsville, Alabama, as preferred location to host USSPACECOM, US Space Command

"The Secretary of the Air Force, on behalf of the Office of Secretary of Defense, selected Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, Alabama, as the preferred location for the U.S. Space Command Headquarters. ... Albuquerque, New Mexico; Bellevue, Nebraska; Cape Canaveral, Florida; Colorado Springs, Colorado; and San Antonio, Texas, will remain reasonable alternative locations for the U.S. Space Command Headquarters."

Trump administration decides on Alabama as new home for Space Command, Washington Post

"According to individuals familiar with the process, Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) was a major player in the decision-making. Cliff Sims, a senior adviser to Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe and an Alabama native, also advocated for the move with both the White House and the Pentagon, the individuals said."

Nebraska to Continue U.S. Space Command Headquarters Bid, Greater Omaha Chamber

"Following today's announcement of Redstone Arsenal as the preferred location of U.S. Space Command (USSPACECOM), community leaders in Nebraska re-emphasized their initial position: Based on objective criteria outlined by the Department of the Air Force, Nebraska's Offutt Air Force Base remains the optimum location for U.S. Space Command. The Nebraska team expects full transparency of the final review to support this assertion."

Trump orders Space Command to leave Colorado

"It's a decision that Colorado lawmakers say they will ask incoming President-elect Joe Biden to overturn and has caused Colorado Springs Republican U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn, a Trump loyalist, to break with the administration. The move also will likely kick off a congressional probe into how the decision was reached."

Keith's note: In addition to the push by Sen. Shelby and Cliff Sims there is another Alabaman - newly-elected Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) and Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) who did Trump a huge favor by opposing the whole electoral college vote thing. Just saying. The incoming Biden Administration can easily revisit this decision. Stay tuned.

NASA Announces Senior Leadership Changes, NASA

"NASA has announced four senior leadership changes: Mike Gold as associate administrator for Space Policy and Partnerships; Karen Feldstein as associate administrator for International and Interagency Relations; Karla Smith Jackson as assistant administrator for Procurement; and Jeff Seaton as chief information officer."

Four defense contractors among firms halting political donations after Capitol riots, The Hill

"Defense contractors Northrop Grumman, Leidos, BAE Systems and Raytheon are among a growing number of companies that announced a pause on political donations to members of Congress following violent riots at the U.S. Capitol last week. Northrop - which last year contributed $4.8 million roughly equally to Democrats and Republicans - on Monday became the first major defense firm to halt its donations."

Walmart halts political donations to lawmakers who voted against Biden win, Washington Post

"An analysis by the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics found four defense firms among the top 20 contributors to the campaigns of Republicans who objected to Biden's win. Northrop Grumman was 10th among them with $687,500 donated to lawmakers who objected to the election. ... The defense industry has in many ways walked in lockstep with Trump since he took office. The industry has benefited significantly from increased military spending under Trump, as well as the president's support for international arms sales. Lockheed Martin became a centerpiece of a White House-sponsored advertising campaign highlighting the administration's job creation credentials. When Trump blamed "both sides" for violence at a Charlottesville white supremacist rally in 2017, defense firms were among the few companies that supported the president's business councils. Other corporations left the councils in protest, leading to their dissolution."

- Sierra Nevada Prefers Republicans Over Democrats, earlier post
- Lopsided Political Support By Big Aerospace, earlier post
- How Big Aerospace Supported Efforts To Undermine Democracy, earlier post

There's A New "Make Space Great Again" Campaign Video From Team Trump, Earlier post

"At 4:10 the live chat begins. It is hosted by Donald Trump Jr.'s girlfriend Kimberly Guilfoyle who works on the Trump campaign. Her guests are former NASA Chief Financial Officer Jeff DeWit and former astronaut and NASA GRC Center Director Janet Kavandi who is now a Senior Vice President at Sierra Nevada Corp. Apparently the Trump family is really into space - Eric Trump's brother-in-law Kyle Yunaska is the new Deputy Chief of Staff at NASA."

NASA Accelerates SLS Rocket Hot Fire Test, Invites Media to Pretest Briefing, NASA

"Following a test readiness review on Monday, NASA is now targeting Saturday, Jan. 16, for the final test in the Green Run testing series for the core stage of the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket that will launch the agency's Artemis I mission."

Space Launch System Green Run Hot Fire Scheduled, NASA

"NASA is targeting the final test in the Green Run series, the hot fire, for as early as Jan.17. The hot fire is the culmination of the Green Run test series, an eight-part test campaign that gradually brings the core stage of the Space Launch System (SLS) -- the deep space rocket that will power the agency's next-generation Moon missions -- to life for the first time."

Earlier SLS posts

Keith's note: Some research from a noted space policy expert: Open Secrets has a lot of data that lets you do a deep dive into who gave what to whom. Check out this chart (larger image). Looking at Big Aerospace - specifically the top 12 NASA contractors and their PAC contributions by party during the recent election cycle - all but SpaceX and Bechtel favor the congressional republicans. Republican-leaning donors are shown in red, Democrat-leaning contributors are shown in blue.

Traditionally PACs focus on incumbents, which makes these numbers even more skewed. Every contractor gave significantly to Sen. Cruz (R-TX) and virtually ignored Sen. Sinema (D-AZ) for example. Oh yes, Sen. Sinema is about to become the Chair of the prime Senate space subcommittee (subcommittee on Aviation and Space, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation). Big Aerospace gave candidate (and now Senator) Mark Kelly (D-AZ) next to nothing yet many aerospace contributors maxed out when donating to his opponent, incumbent Sen. McSally (R-AZ).

With such a lopsided approach to contributions toward their opponents why should Democrats feel a need to advance the Big Aerospace agenda? Out of ~$12 million in contributions, over $1 million more was given to Republicans than Democrats. Boeing, SAIC and Aerojet Rocketdyne gave 60% (or more) to Republicans. Aerojet Rocketdyne gave 73% more. Other than ULA, only company PAC contributions are included in chis chart - not contributions from employees. ULA doesn't have a PAC, so employee contributions (73% Republican) were used.

How Big Aerospace Supported Efforts To Undermine Democracy, earlier post

Donors to Electoral College Objectors, OpenSecrets

"OpenSecrets compiled a list of the top donors to GOP lawmakers who objected to the Electoral College results on Jan. 6, 2021. The dataset includes the top PAC donors, top individual donors and top industry donors to the campaigns and leadership PACs of lawmakers who objected to at least one state's election results."

Keith's note: This is what big aerospace thinks about American democracy - they were massive donors to efforts to undermine the election:

10. Northrop Grumman $687,500
15. Lockheed Martin $651,000
18. Raytheon $570,000
19. Boeing $567,000

It is one thing for big aerospace companies to play both sides. It is quite another to even consider supporting someone who'd have undemocratic leanings - regardless of their party affiliation.

FAA And NASA Sign MOU

FAA and NASA Sign MOU to Strengthen Partnership in Commercial Space Activities, FAA

"The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) signed a new memorandum of understanding (MOU) (PDF) to support commercial space activities related to the transport of government and non-government passengers, cargo, and payloads for both orbital and suborbital missions. "This FAA-NASA collaboration at the Administrator level will advance America's commercial space sector, aid science and technology, and help coordinate U.S. national space policies," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Elaine L. Chao."

Boeing Charged with 737 Max Fraud Conspiracy and Agrees to Pay over $2.5 Billion, Department of Justice

"The Boeing Company (Boeing) has entered into an agreement with the Department of Justice to resolve a criminal charge related to a conspiracy to defraud the Federal Aviation Administration's Aircraft Evaluation Group (FAA AEG) in connection with the FAA AEG's evaluation of Boeing's 737 MAX airplane. Boeing, a U.S.-based multinational corporation that designs, manufactures, and sells commercial airplanes to airlines worldwide, entered into a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) in connection with a criminal information filed today in the Northern District of Texas. The criminal information charges the company with one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States. Under the terms of the DPA, Boeing will pay a total criminal monetary amount of over $2.5 billion, composed of a criminal monetary penalty of $243.6 million, compensation payments to Boeing's 737 MAX airline customers of $1.77 billion, and the establishment of a $500 million crash-victim beneficiaries fund to compensate the heirs, relatives, and legal beneficiaries of the 346 passengers who died in the Boeing 737 MAX crashes of Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302."

NASA Is Better Than This

Keith's note: FYI earlier today I sent an email asking for comment on Blackwell's political tweeting to the NASA NASA Office of General Counsel, the Inspector General, NASA HQ Public Affairs - and Blackwell - citing the most recent NASA memo on the Hatch Act. No one responded. Moments after I posted this tweet this evening regarding these tweets Blackwell suddenly scrubbed her Twitter account and then made it private. There must be a reason why the account was suddenly edited and hidden.

Luckily the NASA family is better than these tweets - and the horrible events today that they served to endorse.

Keith's update: I got this response from NASA PAO just before midnight last night: "Thank you for forwarding this matter to NASA. As this is a personnel matter we will not be able to comment further."

https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.spaceref.com/news/2019/Star-Trek1.jpg

Keith's note: I originally posted this on 7 August 2019. Give today's political events I thought it was worth reposting.

---

In light of the naked racism and politics of division coming from the White House - and the impact that it has had on societal events of late - I need to say something. We are stronger as a result of our diversity - not weakened by it. Humanity evolved elsewhere - not in America. As such we are all immigrants. Full stop.

We have had a space station in orbit for decades that is the collaborative effort of many nations. When political strife fractures relationships on Earth, space keeps them intact. Small wonder that the ISS has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize (recently endorsed by NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine).

Back in the 1960s when the original "Star Trek" first aired, we had a black and white TV. My first exposure to the future was a multi-ethnic/multi-racial/multi-species/gender-balanced crew exploring the universe. I fell for it. It never left me and resonates in my mind to this day half a century later. Alas, back in the 60s, with near simultaneity 20 feet away in my back yard, I was playing catch with a friend of mine. He was black. His name was Wesley. My bigoted neighbors shouted a racial slur at him. We played catch at his house after that. These two things clashed in my young mind. Yet the Star Trek ethos prevailed.

Indeed, in 2009, I had a resonant Star Trek epiphany of sorts in Nepal as I supported Scott Parazynski's ascent of Everest: "My Star Trek Episode at Everest".

Over the past 25 years that I have edited NASAWatch I have tried to avoid mention of partisan politics - and, when my personal views showed through, I openly admitted them - but sought contrary views.

NASA is being pushed to reassert, speed up, reinvigorate America's efforts in space. Hurray. Let's have more. Let's race back to the Moon and then to other places and try to out-compete one another with all manner of cool stuff such that we all benefit in the end.

But in so doing, America needs to assert itself in space in a way that advances the interests and the dreams of all Americans - and do so in a way that encourages all other nations to engage in space exploration in a fashion that advances the interests of all of humanity.

We've all seen those Star Trek episodes where worlds fall into chaos, tear themselves apart, and play only a negative role in the overall legacy of the universe. Let's not do that. We need to do the right thing.

Just sayin'

Note: my comments do not reflect on anyone at NASA. If anything the interest in diversity practiced by the folks behind the glass doors on the 9th floor embodies what I am talking about. As for NASAWatch readers who do not like what I have said and/or respond with profanity or threaten to never visit this site again: bye bye.

Robert Matthew Winglee

Robert Matthew Winglee

"One of his proudest recent achievements was founding the Northwest Earth and Space Sciences Pipeline (NESSP) in order to bring STEM to underrepresented and minority students. Through his Directorships of Washington NASA Space Grant and NESSP, he has touched the lives of many middle and high school students throughout the country. When students saw him coming they would yell out, "Here comes the rocket man!"

George Carruthers

George R. Carruthers, scientist who designed telescope that went to the moon, dies at 81, Washington Post

"George R. Carruthers, an astrophysicist and engineer who was the principal designer of a telescope that went to the moon as part of NASA's Apollo 16 mission in 1972 in an effort to examine the earth's atmosphere and the composition of interstellar space, died Dec. 26 at a Washington hospital. He was 81. Dr. Carruthers, who built his first telescope when he was 10, had a singular focus on space science from an early age and spent virtually his entire career at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington. He was one of the country's leading African American astrophysicists and among the few working in the space program."

Image: President Barack Obama awards the National Medal of Technology and Innovation to Dr. Carruthers at the White House in 2013.


Loading

 



Monthly Archives

About this Archive

This page is an archive of recent entries written by Keith Cowing in January 2021.

Keith Cowing: December 2020 is the previous archive.

Keith Cowing: February 2021 is the next archive.

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