A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Doug Loverro resigns as Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 27th 20, 01:02 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,307
Default Doug Loverro resigns as Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations

In article ,
says...

On 2020-05-26 12:18, Jeff Findley wrote:

Yes, reportedly NASA's former chief of human spaceflight, Doug Loverro,
was one such person. We just discussed this less than a week ago:


At this point in time,. seeing SLS as the necessary evil needed to get
to 2024 goal doesn't mean that the guy really admired the SLS
architecture and loved it.


Actually, there is ample evidence to the contrary. The fact is, Doug
Loverro thought that distributed launch was more risky than fewer
launches of SLS. And he's not alone. Despite the crazy number of
launches used to build and maintain ISS, there are still people within
NASA who see every individual launch as a risk, so they want to minimize
that number. It's a false economy that results in an unsustainable,
hideously expensive, program, IMHO, but that's what they think.

On this group, I have not seen any technical love for SLS as a concept
and its flaws have been documented well enough that even *I* can
understand them (so that says a lot :-)

So if your mission is to land in 2024, and of the flawed tools you are
given to work with, you think SLS represents the best odds of working,
does that mean you like SLS and prefer its technilogy/architecture?


Not me personally, but again, lots of people inside NASA think that SLS
will be the greatest launch vehicle since Saturn V. I disagree based on
the facts (lower payload, lower flight rate, and insane cost for a
"modern" launch vehicle).

There are many supporters of "old space" within NASA. The SLS program
gives NASA more control than if they just procured commercial launches.


Does prefering to deal with the older legacy company mean that you
prefer the SLS architecture? Would NASA's engineering people have
designed/selected this, or were they told to work with it and champion
it even if they don't like it?


SLS was mandated by Congress to continue to develop a launch vehicle
with the same Ares contractors when Ares I and Ares V were canceled.
So, it stands to reason that those inside NASA working on and supporting
Ares I and Ares V would also support SLS, because their jobs literally
depended on it.

There is a lot of "not invented here" bias within NASA. They didn't
develop Atlas V, Delta IV, Falcon 9, Antares, Falcon Heavy, Vulcan, New
Glenn, or Omega. They developed SLS, so SLS is automatically "better"
in their minds.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gerstenmaier Out As HEOMD Associate Administrator Jeff Findley[_6_] Policy 2 July 13th 19 08:54 PM
NASA deputy administrator Frederick D. Gregory resigns Jacques van Oene Space Shuttle 0 September 9th 05 05:19 PM
Rex Geveden selected as NASA associate administrator Jacques van Oene News 0 August 17th 05 08:30 PM
NASA ADMINISTRATOR SEAN O'KEEFE RESIGNS Jacques van Oene Space Shuttle 0 December 14th 04 12:07 AM
NASA ADMINISTRATOR SEAN O'KEEFE RESIGNS Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 December 14th 04 12:07 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.