REPORT: new NASA head -- Dan Crippen, economist and public health systems expert

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:25:34 -0600, in a place far, far away, Herb
: Schaltegger made the phosphor on
: my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: Update: White House sources now say that there are no current plans to
: make an announcement about the NASA Administrator nominee tomorrow.
: Moreover, the traditional pre-announcement briefings on the Hill have
: not happened yet.
: More media-induced stray voltage? Sure sounds like it. Stay tuned.
:
: Stuff like this is rarely "media-induced" despite the tendency to
: blame "the media" for everything. Sounds MUCH more like classic trial
: balloon to me.

: That would presume that most of the media (and its consumers) actually
: care about who the NASA administrator is...

Well in the space industry and in government around DC they care.

Paul F. Dietz ) wrote:
: wrote:

: Be afraid. Be very afraid.

: Oh good god... don't tell me you successfully reproduced?!

Now that's funny!

: Paul

February 15, 2005

Henry Spencer wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:
When I first heard the name I thought they meant
Bob Crippen, and I thought HOORAY! A brave man
to direct and lead NASA!

The last time an astronaut directed and led NASA was an utter
disaster --
including the total ruin of Bush Sr.'s attempt at resuming manned
space
exploration

That thing needed to be trashed, just like the
VSE - Visiting Space Expensively needs to be trashed.
That takes bravery. What we need is a leader and a
director smart enough and brave enough to see that,
someone who can override the presidential directive
and take it back to the beginning, propulsion and
launch, energy conversion and life support, the
four pillars of space colonization.

-- and gained him the unenviable distinction of being the
first NASA Administrator to be fired.

He got the shuttle flying again, that was his only
job description at the time. We all know what the
ISS and faster better cheaper morphed into.

Managerial skill is more important
than bravery for that job.

Yes, we need administrators to administrate the
administration, old man. Nothing ever changes.

What we need is a rocket scientist.

Combining rocketry and space science.

After we get that sorted out, the
rest will follow. VSE is crap.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

Rand Simberg wrote:
Herb Schaltegger glowed:
Update: White House sources now say that there are no current plans to
make an announcement about the NASA Administrator nominee tomorrow.
Moreover, the traditional pre-announcement briefings on the Hill have
not happened yet.
More media-induced stray voltage? Sure sounds like it. Stay tuned.

Stuff like this is rarely "media-induced" despite the tendency to
blame "the media" for everything. Sounds MUCH more like classic trial
balloon to me.

That would presume that most of the media (and its consumers) actually
care about who the NASA administrator is...

There is a space (and greater aerospace) centric media, which does
a lot of NASA watching.

Stuff can be "media-induced" by a single reporter on the beat,
sometimes...

For example, NASA Watch. Keith does a decent job of introspective
criticism, but he also puts some stuff up which wouldn't pass
fact checking for "normal" publication. Some of which is
rumors and some of which is just single source info which is
basically good. He makes an attempt to have info indicate how
well sourced it is.


-george william herbert

On 2005-02-16, wrote:

-- and gained him the unenviable distinction of being the
first NASA Administrator to be fired.

He got the shuttle flying again, that was his only
job description at the time. We all know what the
ISS and faster better cheaper morphed into.

Yes, thank God that ever-successful Dick Truly managed to get the
Shuttle flying again when he took office on... um... July 1, 1989. Why,
there was a Shuttle flight only five weeks later!

Unfortunately for your thesis, this was STS-28. There had already been
four Shuttle flights since Challenger when he started the job...

--
-Andrew Gray

February 16, 2005

Andrew Gray wrote:

On 2005-02-16, wrote:

-- and gained him the unenviable distinction of being the
first NASA Administrator to be fired.

He got the shuttle flying again, that was his only
job description at the time. We all know what the
ISS and faster better cheaper morphed into.

Yes, thank God that ever-successful Dick Truly managed to get the
Shuttle flying again when he took office on... um... July 1, 1989.
Why,
there was a Shuttle flight only five weeks later!

Let's start the discussion our right,
here is the 'official' data on the subject :

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/prsnnl.htm

Unfortunately for your thesis, this was STS-28. There had already
been
four Shuttle flights since Challenger when he started the job...

I stand corrected, I meant 'keep' the shuttle flying.

What exactly so bad happened on his tenure, besides the
fact that he wasn't a rocket scientist or an administrator,
no shuttles were exploded, NASA was a bloated beauracracy
when he came on, NASA was a bloated beauracracy when he left.

Compared to O'Keefe, Truly was a genius and a great success.

Look at what O'Keefe did, he trashed Propulsion, Launch,
SLI, and essentially killed the Hubble, crashed a shuttle,
and now is making excuses so that we can kill STS and ISS.

He was responsible for the OSP debacle, and he will be held
responsible for the certain to occur CEV and VSE debacles.

According to the documents, we need another 'Fletcher'.
In other words, a rocket scientist, and a physicist.
Someone who can create and execute entirely new
programs, while salvaging the broken programs
we have on the books. We need SSTO RLV
cryogenic large scale launch capacity,
so that we can colonize space and
go to Phobos and Deimos is a really
big way, and investigate all those
fossils on Mars. The moon and the
asteroids would follow in short order.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

big way, and investigate all those
fossils on Mars. The moon and the
asteroids would follow in short order.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

There are no credible or peer-reviewed reports in fossils on Mars,
though recent news is that some scientists are claiming that Mars methane
is of current biological origin. Let's not confuse Weekly World News for
JPL investigators.. please.

February 17, 2005

Revision wrote:

big way, and investigate all those
fossils on Mars. The moon and the
asteroids would follow in short order.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

There are no credible or peer-reviewed reports in fossils on
Mars,
though recent news is that some scientists are claiming that Mars
methane
is of current biological origin. Let's not confuse Weekly World News
for
JPL investigators.. please.

Go **** yourself.

Peer review literature is simply one of many reservoirs
of knowledge at our disposal from which we build models.

Fossils will exist or not exist independent of the
peer review literature, asshole.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

wrote:

Go **** yourself.

Ah, so *that*'s how you did it!

Paul

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 05:50:22 -0600, in a place far, far away, "Paul F.
Dietz" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

wrote:

Go **** yourself.

Ah, so *that*'s how you did it!

Perhaps, but let's hope that we don't get any details.