NY Times: Navy Limits Nominations to Space Program

The New York Times
April 27, 2008
Navy Limits Nominations to Space Program
By JOHN SCHWARTZ

For what may be the first time since the inception of the American
space program, the Navy is restricting nominations to the astronaut
corps. The move comes nearly 50 years after Alan B. Shepard, a naval
aviator, became the first American in space.

The cutback, Navy officials say, comes as the service tries to retain
the expertise it needs to fulfill its wartime obligations while
experiencing an overall decline in its numbers. A message from Vice
Admiral J. C. Harvey Jr. last month stated that applications for Navy
nominations to the space program from 10 specialties would not be
accepted “due to critical inventory shortfalls and/or priority global
war on terrorism skill set requirements.”

Those groups include the special warfare forces known as Seals,
certain engineering groups and experts in explosive ordnance disposal,
as well as permanent military professors and public affairs officers.

George W. S. Abbey, a former NASA official who wielded control over
the astronaut office during much of his long tenure at the agency,
which lasted from 1964 to 2002, said “the Navy is taking a position
that adversely affects the country’s ability to have a vital and
ongoing space program.”

Lt. Cmdr. William Marks, a Navy spokesman, said he could find no
previous restriction on naval applications to the astronaut corps, but
insisted that the move in no way diminished the service’s commitment
to NASA.

“Officially, we are a very enthusiastic supporter of the NASA
program,” Commander Marks said. “We always have been and still are.”

But, he said, the Navy has been trying to hold on to its service
communities in wartime, and it would be hypocritical to tell those
communities that they are desperately needed, “but we can still let
you go.”

“We don’t want to lose credibility with our own people,” he said.

One applicant who was affected by the decision, Lt. Cmdr. Michael
Runkle, executive officer of the Navy Experimental Diving Unit in
Panama City Beach, Fla., said he was “a little bitter” about the new
rules. Commander Runkle said he joined the Navy in part because he had
hoped it would lead to a career in space, even though he knew the
chances of acceptance were slim.

“It’s kind of like winning the lottery,” he said. “You live your life
as you do, but you buy a ticket every once in a while.”

He applied unsuccessfully twice before, and “I’m under no great
illusion that I would have been chosen this time,” though he said his
application was stronger. With his expertise in ordnance disposal,
however, he cannot apply again under the new rules.

“I’m told I’m not allowed to buy a lottery ticket,” he said, “just on
the off chance that I win.”

In the past 15 years, the Navy has nominated as many as 211 and as few
as 105 candidates for consideration by NASA, though groups from
earlier years numbered as low as 34.

The Navy Times first reported the news of the restrictions. Duane
Ross, the manager for astronaut candidate selection and training at
the Johnson Space Center in Houston, said the space agency heard about
the squeeze earlier this year when word came down through their usual
“points of contact ” that only five people would be nominated by the
Navy.

“The five was kind of a shocker to us,” he said. The letter from
Admiral Harvey increased the number of nominees to 50. Still, Mr. Ross
said, the restrictions were “a little bit disturbing for us.”

The Navy “has always been a good provider of folks” for NASA, he said,
and the service has been represented in every astronaut class — they
are chosen every couple of years — that the agency has selected.

“Just about every mission, you can pick out some top-notch Navy
folks,” Mr. Ross said, from Shepard’s historic flight to the most
recent mission of the space shuttle, commanded by Dominic L. Gorie, a
retired captain.

Although NASA is a civilian agency, service members have long been
highly prized as astronaut candidates because of the skills they bring
to the program, including discipline and the ability to work in teams
and under difficult conditions.

William M. Shepherd, a retired astronaut and a retired captain in the
Navy who served as the first commander aboard the International Space
Station, said Navy experience provided long-term expedition training,
with the kind of independent, flexible style of operation that
prepared astronauts for long-duration missions aboard the station and
in future planned voyages to the Moon and Mars.

“The era that we’re in now in space activities is becoming more like
voyaging at sea than flying in the air,” Captain Shepherd said.

While he expressed great admiration for the Navy, he said he was
chagrined by the new restrictions. “In the past, the Navy has taken a
longer view,” he said.

Commander Marks noted that other large Navy communities, including
aviators, were not prohibited from applying. But Mr. Ross of NASA said
the agency was not in the market for new pilots at the moment, since
the space shuttle program would be wound down by 2010 and the
next-generation spacecraft was not likely to be ready before 2015.

In the interim, astronauts will reach the station as passengers aboard
Russian spacecraft, he said. Pilots have skills that would be valuable
to the program, he said, but “they’re not going to be flying the
spaceships” for many years to come.

Representatives of the Air Force, the Army and the Marine Corps said
their services were not restricting astronaut applications.

To Captain Shepherd, the former astronaut and a former Seal, the Navy
decision could well be a “bellwether” of a broader shift in society
and its attitude about space travel — and, in fact, the fundamental
human need to explore the universe around us.

“This is the first tick of the needle,” he said. “Our commitment to
doing this might be changing. This is important beyond the Navy,
beyond NASA.”

Dale Carlson wrote:

The cutback, Navy officials say, comes as the service tries to retain
the expertise it needs to fulfill its wartime obligations while
experiencing an overall decline in its numbers. A message from Vice
Admiral J. C. Harvey Jr. last month stated that applications for Navy
nominations to the space program from 10 specialties would not be
accepted “due to critical inventory shortfalls and/or priority global
war on terrorism skill set requirements.”

Those groups include the special warfare forces known as Seals,
certain engineering groups and experts in explosive ordnance disposal,
as well as permanent military professors and public affairs officers.

[... ...]

The Navy Times first reported the news of the restrictions. Duane
Ross, the manager for astronaut candidate selection and training at
the Johnson Space Center in Houston, said the space agency heard about
the squeeze earlier this year when word came down through their usual
“points of contact ” that only five people would be nominated by the
Navy.

“The five was kind of a shocker to us,” he said. The letter from
Admiral Harvey increased the number of nominees to 50. Still, Mr. Ross
said, the restrictions were “a little bit disturbing for us.”

What none of these folks are telling you, either because they don't
know, or they don't unpleasant truths to disturb their rants... Is
this kind of restriction is very common in the Navy.

For me for example; Even though my field was generally manned at
about 110% of nominal, I was forbidden to to apply for a variety of
'extracurricular' posts because my rate was defined as permanently
being 'Criticality A' - that is, treated as if it were manned at 50%
of nominal. Part of this was because my field was so small* that even
a handful of people unexpectedly departing the Navy or kids failing
the school could badly screw up rotation schedules etc..., another
part was the great expense involved in providing and maintaining our
security clearance.

*At it's peak, during my time in, around 800 - which includes the
75-100 kids in training at any given time.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
What none of these folks are telling you, either because they don't
know, or they don't unpleasant truths to disturb their rants... Is
this kind of restriction is very common in the Navy.

The NYT isn't known for letting an inconvenient truth get in the way of a
good story.



** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Also, from talking with friends in aviation community, there is concern,
with the schuttle going away, and CONSTELLATION looking to be delayed
(regardless of who wins in NOV), of Naval Aviatators who go over to NASA
will be doing a lot of waiting and non-flying work (read non-mission NASA
work). Note Navy and Air Force leadership had issues with this same problem
in the 70s after the Apollo explanation of the Astronaut Corps.



v/r

Ward





"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message
...

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
What none of these folks are telling you, either because they don't
know, or they don't unpleasant truths to disturb their rants... Is
this kind of restriction is very common in the Navy.

The NYT isn't known for letting an inconvenient truth get in the way of a
good story.



** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **