Rumours are that a new Administrator for NASA may be named this week
h/t NASAwatch (comments are interesting)
Annapolis grad. 100+ sorties in an A6 Intruder in Vietnam.
Test pilot; shuttle pilot and commander - 4 trips including HST launch.
Assitant Deputy Administrator of NASA under Goldin.
Annapolis deputy; 1 MEF general in Kuwait during Desert Thunder ('98 air campaign);
wing commander.
He testified to the Senate subcommittee on Science and Space in 2006
He reportedly will meet with Obama today.
Could be nominated as early as this week, if all goes well.
Direction for NASA will be a big puzzle - it must be somewhat contingent on the report of the new Augustine panel, which has not yet been assembled, but hopefully will also include some White House guidance and backing
Obama has made reassuring noises about role of science in general and space in particular. Some direction and funding to carry things out would be helpful.
Major decisons to be made on what to do about shuttle replacement, whether to carry on the current expendable launch architecture developed under Griffin.
Also would be good to have a decision on whether and where to go...
Also need to decide what the balance between exploration and science should be, and what the balance within the science directorate should be - in particular Earth Science within NASA vs Planetary/Solar Science vs Astrophysics.
From the Senate subcommittee testimony:
"...I do wish to remind all of us that exploration of any sort is risky, expensive, and unpredictable. While we may be able to continue many of the science and exploration programs on which we have been embarked over the past forty plus years, we cannot do them on the cheap and we cannot do them in series. Human exploration and science experimentation and research are necessarily parallel endeavors that are mutually supportive if we are to realize success in either. While the NASA Administrator, Dr. Mike Griffin, is making a very commendable effort to fit it all into today's NASA budget, it's like trying to fit fifteen pounds of stuff into a five pound sack. From my perspective, you in the Congress and the President must see your way to expanding the funding for the NASA by some marginal amount that will enable Dr. Griffin to retain emphasis on many of the science and aeronautics programs that are being reduced or cut. As an example, building a vehicle or set of vehicles to take humans to the Moon and on to Mars without continued emphasis on the life science research to understand more fully the environmental and human factors challenges that must be overcome to successfully allow humans to survive these journeys is a certain recipe for disaster and ultimate failure. Similarly, funding increased science exploration and experimentation through employment of robotic vehicles and remote sensing and satellite data gathering without continued improvement in our ability to safely send humans beyond Earth's bounds and on to other heavenly bodies literally defeats our innate human drive and curiosity to explore the unknown and venture from this planet in search of ways to improve our lives here at home. "
...
"Perhaps the greatest casualty of NASA's failure to adequately fund a balanced program of human exploration and science and aeronautics research will be the continued deterioration in interest in science and math among our elementary and secondary school students, not to mention the college and post graduate students who see no value in pursuing the fields of science and engineering where each year brings less and less funding for research to the university campuses."
Encouraging.
- Log in to post comments