Goldin Era: Better or Worse Off

Richard:
Hard to say, but I think Goldin was rigid and autocratic. He did a
great deal to build a central authority in the agency and that was bad
when things went wrong. He patted his faithful doggies on the head when
they did things to make a good public impression. What he should have
done was lobby the White House day and night to expand launch technology
and move forward with US launch capability, and then exploit it to
return to the moon and out into the terrestrial planets. Instead,
billions of dollars were wasted in designs that were cancelled after
nearly reaching fruition. The bottom line line is, the US public will
not see NASA as making gains (rightly or wrongly) until a structured
program of incremental mission gains reminiscent of Gemini and Apollo is
once again in place. When the public finally perceives that we are
going somewhere at last, then NASA will win the hearts and minds of
those it serves. Period.

RDG

In article ,
rk wrote:
Is the USA civil space program in better, worse, or the same shape,
when comparing the time periods at the start and end of the Goldin
era?

Incomparably better. The pre-Goldin NASA was still marking time, waiting
for Apollo II, while regularly starting huge projects it couldn't really
afford and then having to cancel most of them when the expected massive
budget increases somehow failed to appear. Goldin managed to convince at
least some parts of NASA to think in terms of smaller, shorter, more
frequent projects that could be done within existing budgets. Compare the
number of unmanned planetary missions flown in the pre-Goldin decade with
the number flown under Goldin.

That said, while some of Goldin's ideas were good, others weren't -- his
elimination of internal competition within the agency was one of those
things that sounds good at first glance but is a really bad idea when
examined more closely -- and he seems to have lacked the management skill
to implement even some of the good ones properly. (The loss of MCO, in
particular, was at least partly the result of trying to do a project for
less money than it really took.)
--
MOST launched 30 June; first light, 29 July; 5arcsec | Henry Spencer
pointing, 10 Sept; first science, early Oct; all well. |

While the Goldin Era was hardly a Golden Age, yes, overall NASA is better
because of him. I think it says a lot about Goldin that he was hired by a
Republican and wasn't fired by the next Democratic administration, or
replaced by the following Republican chief.

A lot of stuff crashed or burned or crashed and burned during the Goldin
Years, but that's much more than was being done in the decade previous.
"Faster, Better, Cheaper" in some respects is the same as "Let's do
*something*!"
--
If you have had problems with Illinois Student Assistance Commission (ISAC),
please contact shredder at bellsouth dot net. There may be a class-action
lawsuit
in the works.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.528 / Virus Database: 324 - Release Date: 10/16/03

Scott Hedrick wrote:

While the Goldin Era was hardly a Golden Age, yes, overall NASA is better
because of him. I think it says a lot about Goldin that he was hired by a
Republican and wasn't fired by the next Democratic administration, or
replaced by the following Republican chief.

A lot of stuff crashed or burned or crashed and burned during the Goldin
Years, but that's much more than was being done in the decade previous.
"Faster, Better, Cheaper" in some respects is the same as "Let's do
*something*!"

Well, we could crash stuff into Mars like nobody's business.
And in line with the "better, faster, cheaper" philosophy, Boston
University has decided that it would be better, faster, and cheaper to
pay Dan Goldin 1.8 million bucks to never darken their door again than
have him take over as the new president of the place:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/01/ed...partner=GOOGLE
Which is somehow fitting- as the action reminds one of all those
super-duper X-rocket projects that got started- and ended while about
1/4 finished- during his tenure at NASA.

Pat

In article ,
Scott Hedrick wrote:
...I think it says a lot about Goldin that he was hired by a
Republican and wasn't fired by the next Democratic administration...

In fairness, said Democratic administration was *interested* in replacing
him, but couldn't find anybody who suited them and was willing to take the
fairly-unattractive job. (E.g., Sally Ride reportedly turned it down.)

or replaced by the following Republican chief.

No, that's how O'Keefe got the job. It took a little while to happen, but
that didn't indicate that Bush Jr. was fond of Goldin -- it was more a
matter of the job being an unimportant one, Bush & co. being a bit slow
about making appointments in general, and Goldin not being in any hurry to
leave. (It is traditional for the previous administration's appointees to
formally resign, with the new administration having the option of rehiring
anyone it wants to keep... but Goldin reportedly declined to resign and
had to be fired.)
--
MOST launched 30 June; first light, 29 July; 5arcsec | Henry Spencer
pointing, 10 Sept; first science, early Oct; all well. |

Henry Spencer wrote:

but Goldin reportedly declined to resign and
had to be fired.)


They just didn't bribe him well enough... I say we take him along on all
future Shuttle flights; then if there is a breach in the RCC, we hog-tie
him, paste him in the hole, and let him ablate during reentry. This may
be the better, faster, cheaper alternative to our reentry woes. (to make
this a quick-response fix, we can leave him hog-tied during the whole
mission.)
On the other hand, this system only works if the crew doesn't become so
****ed at him as to jettison him out the airlock during the flight....
but if we were to put both Dan Goldin....and George Abbey....on board-
now, that's what I call system redundancy! I'll get the rope; somebody
find me a pig that knows how to tie knots.

Pat

On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 03:48:08 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:
I'll get the rope; somebody find me a pig that knows how to tie knots.

Hmmm- I could put you in touch with a plump ex-girlfriend who enjoyed
S&M. Close enough?

Dale

Dale wrote:

Hmmm- I could put you in touch with a plump ex-girlfriend who enjoyed
S&M. Close enough?



I don't know if that would be Kosher...did she have a cloven hoof, and
chew the cud?

Pat

On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 04:43:40 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:

I don't know if that would be Kosher...did she have a cloven hoof, and
chew the cud?

....Now, now, Pat. That's Beady's department. Let him ask that one.


OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

OM wrote:

...Now, now, Pat. That's Beady's department. Let him ask that one.


OM


Udderly disgusting, but I see you felt obliged to horn in, and milk it
for all that it's worth.

Pat