Same old DoD contractor Congressional testimony. I’ve been reading it all on Facebook for weeks. We can’t get to the moon because of lack of funding. Just can’t do it.
Oh I don’t know, when you get genuine laughter from the first paragraph I’m inclined to find value in the article:
It should drive NASA to form a lean, skilled management approach that provides focus to design and integration detail and achieving milestones on schedule.
The thing really does read like a twelve year old wrote it. Wouldn’t Boeing have seen fit to assign a competent individual or team to at least edit it?
Some other howlers:
Bridenstine revealed concern recently in advance of SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s private enterprise Starship announcement, saying, “NASA expects to see the same level of enthusiasm focused on the investments of the American taxpayer. It’s time to deliver.”
NASA: We recognize the importance of enthusiasm. It’s embodied in our very motto: “We Deliver.”
It is overly complex and likely not possible by 2024. If just one of these numerous new developments fails to deliver on time, the house of cards falls apart.
NASA: We recognize the importance of delivering on time. No one likes to see a carefully constructed card house collapse.
Well, that’s depressing. It’s nuts that the guys making the decisions about funding don’t know anything about space and don’t really care. Thankfully Bridenstine seems like a pretty sensible guy.
And I’ve learned not to count Elon Musk out, even if it’s later than he hopes. One of the best “space moments” in my life was that Falcon Heavy launch and watching those boosters fly home in unison. Maybe NASA just spins wheels while SpaceX (and Blue Origin) actually land. I’m OK with that too.
Yes. Rockets landing in formation. And they weren’t aliens.
No matter how much anyone knocks Elon Musk for making promises on “Elon time,” he delivers. With enthusiasm. And it’s inspirational, in a way that NASA hasn’t understood in decades. Another thing that Musk does is make decisions. There are no study groups, advisory panels, sunk cost fallacies, or ego-driven in-fighting. Some of those decisions may cause whiplash injuries, like the switch from carbon fiber to stainless steel. He gets things done.
As for Blue Origin, I have to take a wait-and-see position. They’ve underperformed with New Shepard. New Glenn has slipped dates. They need to deliver something.
The Gateway is more complex than a direct SLS-EUS-BigLander. But it is hardly relevant when one takes into account:
– The cost of the SLS
– The lack of sustainability due to #1
– Starship
I am convinced that, within 1-2 years, Starship will likely to exceed both capability and cost of the SLS and make the Gateway and any of NASA’s Mars concepts irrelevant. It will also make all other commercial launchers & landers irrelevant. Faster please!
The TL; DR version: “Give Boeing all the money.”
You’re right. The comments *were* the only thing worth reading.
Same old DoD contractor Congressional testimony. I’ve been reading it all on Facebook for weeks. We can’t get to the moon because of lack of funding. Just can’t do it.
Oh I don’t know, when you get genuine laughter from the first paragraph I’m inclined to find value in the article:
It should drive NASA to form a lean, skilled management approach that provides focus to design and integration detail and achieving milestones on schedule.
The thing really does read like a twelve year old wrote it. Wouldn’t Boeing have seen fit to assign a competent individual or team to at least edit it?
Some other howlers:
Bridenstine revealed concern recently in advance of SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s private enterprise Starship announcement, saying, “NASA expects to see the same level of enthusiasm focused on the investments of the American taxpayer. It’s time to deliver.”
NASA: We recognize the importance of enthusiasm. It’s embodied in our very motto: “We Deliver.”
It is overly complex and likely not possible by 2024. If just one of these numerous new developments fails to deliver on time, the house of cards falls apart.
NASA: We recognize the importance of delivering on time. No one likes to see a carefully constructed card house collapse.
Well, that’s depressing. It’s nuts that the guys making the decisions about funding don’t know anything about space and don’t really care. Thankfully Bridenstine seems like a pretty sensible guy.
And I’ve learned not to count Elon Musk out, even if it’s later than he hopes. One of the best “space moments” in my life was that Falcon Heavy launch and watching those boosters fly home in unison. Maybe NASA just spins wheels while SpaceX (and Blue Origin) actually land. I’m OK with that too.
Yes. Rockets landing in formation. And they weren’t aliens.
No matter how much anyone knocks Elon Musk for making promises on “Elon time,” he delivers. With enthusiasm. And it’s inspirational, in a way that NASA hasn’t understood in decades. Another thing that Musk does is make decisions. There are no study groups, advisory panels, sunk cost fallacies, or ego-driven in-fighting. Some of those decisions may cause whiplash injuries, like the switch from carbon fiber to stainless steel. He gets things done.
As for Blue Origin, I have to take a wait-and-see position. They’ve underperformed with New Shepard. New Glenn has slipped dates. They need to deliver something.
The Gateway is more complex than a direct SLS-EUS-BigLander. But it is hardly relevant when one takes into account:
– The cost of the SLS
– The lack of sustainability due to #1
– Starship
I am convinced that, within 1-2 years, Starship will likely to exceed both capability and cost of the SLS and make the Gateway and any of NASA’s Mars concepts irrelevant. It will also make all other commercial launchers & landers irrelevant. Faster please!
The TL; DR version: “Give Boeing all the money.”
You’re right. The comments *were* the only thing worth reading.