|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Cronkite Has Lost It
James Oberg wrote: The theme I was asking about was whether NASA in the 1960s was MANAGED like a military organization, not what the military applications of its technology might have been. Sorry I wasn't clear. Frankly, I'm highly skeptical of the alleged analogy, because military groups accomplish goals with methods that are well defined and they apply known technologies. Apollo had to invent it as it went along, requiring much more 'loose' leadership style and flexibility. Well, the Marshall Space Flight Center under Werner Von Braun was certainly managed like a military organization. Not only had Von Braun and his German scientists come over the U.S. after World War II from the V2 program, a very military program. The NASA Marshall Space Flight Center was a transfer from the Redstone Arsenal. It was located physically on the Redstone Arsenal and when I was working there during the 1960-62 era there was a distinctly military aura. Walter Cronkite has lost it? Perhaps his analogies weren't quite correct, but Mr. Oberg you have fallen into the same intellectual trap that you are accusing Cronkite of. You are assuming that military R&D always accomplishes goals with methods that are well defined and apply known technologies. You are falling into the "anti-military" trap that seems to assume that the military is incapable of flexibility. There are a lot of examples that disprove that kind of thinking. ARPA, in particular, has been quite creative over the years. The Air Force was quite creative at many times back in the days when it was directed by Gen. Bernard Schreiver. As far as capabilities go, I believe there were some experienced miltary personnel called in to get things back in order after the Apollo I fire. (Somehow that sounds currently familiar). Mike Walsh |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Cronkite Has Lost It
Michael Walsh wrote:
James Oberg wrote: Frankly, I'm highly skeptical of the alleged analogy, because military groups accomplish goals with methods that are well defined and they apply known technologies. Apollo had to invent it as it went along, requiring much more 'loose' leadership style and flexibility. Well, the Marshall Space Flight Center under Werner Von Braun was certainly managed like a military organization. Not only had Von Braun and his German scientists come over the U.S. after World War II from the V2 program, a very military program. The NASA Marshall Space Flight Center was a transfer from the Redstone Arsenal. It was located physically on the Redstone Arsenal and when I was working there during the 1960-62 era there was a distinctly military aura. The problem Jim suffers under, and you seemingly as well; Is not understanding that the military R&D labs are *not* 'military organizations' in the normal sense. D. -- The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found at the following URLs: Text-Only Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html Enhanced HTML Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html Corrections, comments, and additions should be e-mailed to , as well as posted to sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for discussion. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Cronkite Has Lost It
James Oberg wrote:
"stmx3" wrote in message ... Other than that, I found nothing wrong with it. Do you think the 'military culture' analogy for the Apollo Project is accurate? I think it's bizarre at best, totally raving at worst. But it's 'original', that's for sure! Yes, I do. At least I believe there was more of a "military" frame of mind then than there is now. By that, I mean the discipline and integrity of the workforce. Today, there's more conniving, backstabbing, blaming and political maneuvering. And it's taking away from the task at hand. Note...this is just my opinion. I wasn't part of NASA back then. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Cronkite Has Lost It
Derek Lyons wrote: Michael Walsh wrote: James Oberg wrote: Frankly, I'm highly skeptical of the alleged analogy, because military groups accomplish goals with methods that are well defined and they apply known technologies. Apollo had to invent it as it went along, requiring much more 'loose' leadership style and flexibility. Well, the Marshall Space Flight Center under Werner Von Braun was certainly managed like a military organization. Not only had Von Braun and his German scientists come over the U.S. after World War II from the V2 program, a very military program. The NASA Marshall Space Flight Center was a transfer from the Redstone Arsenal. It was located physically on the Redstone Arsenal and when I was working there during the 1960-62 era there was a distinctly military aura. The problem Jim suffers under, and you seemingly as well; Is not understanding that the military R&D labs are *not* 'military organizations' in the normal sense. D. The normal sense of what? The military R&D labs are certainly part of the military. They obviously are not either operational fighting units or even part of the supply train. However, just because the military R&D labs don't meet the criteria of being the lock-step, rigid organizations associated in peoples minds with the military doesn't suddenly make them civilian organizations. I guess what I am asking is, "What's your point?" Mike Walsh |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Spirit and Opportunity Lost | Thomas Lee Elifritz | Policy | 55 | March 10th 04 09:30 PM |
Pedro Duque's diary from space: Lost in space | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | October 27th 03 02:36 PM |
Asteroid Hermes, Lost For 66 Years, Is Found To Be Two Objects Orbiting Each Other | Ron Baalke | Science | 0 | October 23rd 03 04:39 PM |
Cronkite Has Lost It | James Oberg | Space Shuttle | 46 | September 20th 03 04:33 AM |
Availability of NOVA show "Lost Moon" | Dave Bartolini | History | 2 | August 8th 03 03:47 PM |