This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Artemis

Yet Another NASA Artemis Document: “How” And “What” – But No “WHY”

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
NASAWatch
September 20, 2022
Filed under
Yet Another NASA Artemis Document: “How” And “What” – But No “WHY”
Moon To Mars
NASAWatch

Keith’s note: NASA just released another Artemis document – this one is called Moon to Mars Objectives“. Preview: its a shopping list. They start it out (smartly) with an overall structure as to what this thing should say and how it should say it. Alas, there is one thing missing as a Level Zero requirement: WHY we are going to back to the Moon and then on to Mars. They just presume that everyone gets that.

Oddly this document says that it needs to focus on “the “what” and “why” of what NASA should be doing in terms of deep space exploration before prescribing the “how” (e.g., a specific launch vehicle, technology, or acquisition”. Oddly, there is no “why” and the “what” is filled with a lot of “how”. In other words NASA is hoping that a shopping list will show people that they have through things through.

The document has a glossary at the end which attempts to explain all of the NASAspeak that is used but it is incomplete. The document never explains (again) why NASA is doing this; what this “transformational science” is that they want to do; what “interoperability” means; exactly what does “cislunar” mean? Oh yes “ARCHITECT FROM THE RIGHT / EXECUTE FROM THE LEFT” Since when is “Architect” a verb? More NASAspeak. Remember 99.9% of the people paying for this whole space thing are not space geeks.

It is not clear who the audience is for this document other than NASA itself. NASA usually only writes these things for space geeks – not real people in the real world. And they do so despite proclaiming that they need to “Raise public awareness and support for Moon to Mars activities through robust outreach and engagement efforts”.

Maybe if they wrote things in common language and had a glossary that was written from the perspective of a non-Space geek they might get a little traction in the whole public awareness/suport arena. Just sayin’.

This is how they open the document:

Background

The purpose of NASA’s Moon to Mars Objectives effort is to develop and document an objectives-based approach to its human deep space exploration efforts. In contrast to a capabilities-based approach, an objectives-based approach focuses on the big picture, the “what” and “why” of what NASA should be doing in terms of deep space exploration before prescribing the “how” (e.g., a specific launch vehicle, technology, or acquisition approach).

Senior leaders and staff from each of NASA’s mission directorates worked over the past several months to develop this final set of objectives, which incorporate inputs gathered from U.S. industry and academia, international partner space agencies, NASA Center leadership, and the NASA workforce via written input and two in-person workshops conducted in the summer of 2022. These workshops were held in Houston for U.S. industry and academia and in London for our international partners. This refined set of objectives also addresses gaps from NASA’s internal analysis on its 50 initial objectives carried out in the spring.

The methodology for the Moon to Mars Objectives is guided by five inter-related principles:

OBJECTIVE-BASED APPROACH
• Know your goal up front (the “what”) and create an integrated plan to achieve it

ARCHITECT FROM THE RIGHT / EXECUTE FROM THE LEFT
• Work backwards from the defined goal to establish the complete set of elements that will be required for success
• Execute development of all elements in regular fashion, integrating as you move left according to the established architecture

CONSTANCY OF PURPOSE
• Stick with the Plan: once documented, the goal, top-level objectives, and overall plan should be clear and remain consistent over time

UNITY OF PURPOSE
• Everyone (inside and outside the Agency) should understand and be able to articulate the vision, goals, and objectives

ENHANCED COMMUNICATION & ENGAGEMENT
• The lifeblood that drives the reinforcing cycle of the other principles, and promotes political resilience
• Raise public awareness and support for Moon to Mars activities through robust outreach and engagement efforts
• Collaborate with international partners, industry, and academia to achieve common goals and objectives
• Engage NASA workforce continuously to promote understanding of the plan, sustain awareness of respective roles, and solicit feedback

While retaining our focus on mission success for the Artemis Campaign today, our Moon to Mars Objectives ensure we have a comprehensive framework in place that supports all of our exploration goals in the future. These objectives will guide the success of NASA’s exploration strategy through the return of astronauts to the Moon, continued lunar science and exploration, and all the way to the first crewed landings on Mars, with the associated science and technology development required to achieve them along the way. Additionally, NASA will measure our progress toward achieving our Moon to Mars Objectives and periodically update them as the Artemis Campaign and future efforts evolve. In the end, this will ensure our basic approach remains the same regardless of where the frontier lies: creating an objectives-based blueprint for the sustained human exploration of deep space.

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

7 responses to “Yet Another NASA Artemis Document: “How” And “What” – But No “WHY””

  1. Richard Brezinski says:
    0
    0

    Does NASA do WHY? I’ve seen some re ISS-the marvelous science. Except that I do not see a lot of actual big scientific findings or achievements. The telescope and planetary missions, the answer seems to be in the images and data they return. Artemis is kind of hard to explain they’ve spent a lot of money, so far have not yet achieved anything, and future plans are fully dependent on Space X and their commercial launch and lunar landing systems,

    • robert_law says:
      0
      0

      They are not fully dependent on Space X, NASA has just released a request for proposals for a second Human Landing system and there are other commercial companies involved with Artemis.

      • Richard Brezinski says:
        0
        0

        Maybe in time there will be an alternative to the Space X StarShip but right now the entire program and human landings is dependent on that vehicle. Every thing else could go away as they are unnecessary.

  2. mfwright says:
    0
    0

    My usual gripe… stop putting Mars in the same sentence with the moon. Gotta put a stop to the myth of Percival Lowell.

  3. SpaceBuzz says:
    0
    0

    Does the science objectives not answer the why question?

    • Bob Mahoney says:
      0
      0

      No. Spaceflight & space exploration are about more than scientific discovery.

      Keith summed up the problem neatly: Many at NASA (especially in PAO) operate under the presumption that the rationale for what it is and what it is doing is self-evident and so does not need to be explained or even voiced.

      It is as if they have soaked in the power of the NASA brand without caring to understand from whence it actually derives.

    • Nick K says:
      0
      0

      Its not and has never been about the science. Science has not been the reason for Apollo or any other human space flight program. And it shouldn’t be. There are a lot of better and cheaper ways to do science. It might be about human settlement or colonization, or tourism, or other economic reasons. It might be about technological advancement.

Leave a Reply