DIRECT 2.0 has sure been quiet lately

[JimMcDade]

One thing to consider. The "jobs issue", at least as far as the employment level during the gap, is not considered to be a major issue in any community other than the potentially affected Florida communities. That fact is so obvious that I probably didn't have to state it, but the gap will not have a major impact in Houston, Huntsville and in the other NASA centers scattered around the country outside of the state of Florida.

Florida is a wealthy state, and outsiders are aware that tourism is, by far, the Sunshine State's biggest industry. Candidate Obama did flip his space platform statement during the Presidential campaign when he was courting the voters there, but does President Obama really feel a need to protect Florida's NASA jobs at this point? I don't know the answer to that, but is a troubling question.

Speculation: I don't expect that either the non-Floridian majority in Congress or the White House are losing much sleep over the gap. President Obama and the Democrat leadership promised an emphasis on progressive programs and reforms during the 2008 campaign. Obama usually emphasizes science when he talks about NASA, unless he is asking that, "If we can put a man on the moon, we can figure out how to burn coal (cleaner)", question. (Senator-Astronaut Bill Nelson is either going to have a stroke or switch to the Republican party before all of this is over.)

Does anybody think that Obama feels politically obligated to the large cadre of NASA workers in Florida, Alabama and Texas? Is he more likely to shift funding away from human spaceflight activities and direct NASA to focus on basic science research at the universities, institutes and labs that NASA funds? The history of the progressive movement indicates that is what he might be inclined to do.

In summary, I think it is all up in the air at this point. The Space Shuttle will have to be replaced- out of need.

Continuing the Ares I work has the fewest immediate political liabilities for the Obama administration and the Democrat majority. Staying with Ares I will eliminate immediate exacerbation of those troublesome unemployment numbers, business and personal bankruptcy filings, and the costs of dismantling a large program that is already in progress with ongoing and some completed construction of new hardware and the reconfiguration of major components that were used by the Shuttle program. Staying the course with Ares I also avoids a nasty storm of recriminations, charges and counter-charges.

History Lesson- The Apollo program experienced many more difficulties and potential showstoppers than Ares I has. NASA got very negative attention when Walter Cronkite went on TV and told America that the first crawler transporter was sitting on wooden blocks after chewing up it's bearings during the first crawler way test drive. Broken racer and bearing metal was scattered all over the crawler way and One Washington official said that the CT could not be fixed and that the Apollo Saturn program was in jeopardy because Marion would not be able to fix the problem. The general impression was that the CT was a bad design and that it would never work. It was portrayed as a major setback for Apollo. Fortunately, the engineers were allowed to do what engineers do so well. They fixed the problem by switching to less serviceable sleeve bearings, but that less-than elegant solution still works today.

Similar engineering challenges and schedule delays occurred with the LUT service arms, all three Saturn stages, the Command Module, the LM, the LCC, and on and on and on.

I don't know if it possible to speed up the first Ares I flight by adding shifts, rewriting rules, or shuffling testing and installation procedures the same way that KSC and Apollo Saturn V contractors did in order to keep as close to the PERT timetable as they did. It may be possible, but I am not so sure that Washington has the will to do it.

We can't do much about it, anyway.

[JimMcDade]

Please read the story below. I realize that $8 million is not a lot of money to a federal agency, but I have to wonder if NASA is the appropriate agency to pay for a program that will "educate people about global climate change". It seems to me that there are other federal agencies that are more appropriate for this type of social spending.

People complain about cost inflation of NASA exploration hardware, but nobody points out that NASA is required to spend many millions of dollars on programs that don't seem to be quite appropriate for the National Aeronautics Space and Administration.

Don't get me wrong, I think this education work and activities that support Native American owned businesses are a good thing, but should NASA be required to administer programs that seem more appropriate for other agencies such as the US Department of Education or the National Science Foundation.

These eight, ten, and twenty million dollar programs add up to a significant amount of money out of the NASA budget.

This story came from UPI:

WASHINGTON, June 10 (UPI) --
NASA funds climate change education


The U.S. space agency says it will fund an $8 million program designed to educate people about global climate change.


The National Aeronautics and Space Administration project will offer cooperative agreements to higher education institutions, state and local agencies, federally recognized tribal government agencies, public school districts and non-profit organizations.


The program is expected to leverage NASA's climate and Earth system science to enhance students' academic experiences and improve educators' abilities to engage and stimulate their students, the space agency said, noting it will provide access to its NASA Earth observation data and NASA Earth system models.


"This funding opportunity supports NASA's goal to engage students in the critical disciplines of science, technology, engineering and mathematics," NASA said in a statement. "Proposals that offer innovative approaches for using NASA resources in support of elementary, secondary, undergraduate and lifelong teaching and learning are sought."


Preliminary proposals are due by July 2, with full proposals to be submitted by Aug. 3.
More information is available at http://nspires.nasaprs.com/external/...2009_final.pdf.

[Rick]

Climate change activities should not be funded in a SPACE program.

It's ludicrous.

[winkhome]

Climate change activities should not be funded in a SPACE program.

It's ludicrous.

I get back to the jobs issue later tonight or tomorrow - sorry - church board meeting on setting the budget for the upcoming year - happy, happy, joy, joy...

My question is this - why are "we" posting stuff regarding climate change on the Direct discussion???

[Rick]

Hey, no problem at all. Priorities first you know?

I have no idea why we are talking about climate change in this forum. I'll blame it on Jim.

Lets get back on topic please.

[JimMcDade]

I posted this in the wrong forum. Sorry. My bad but.......The story is a tiny bit relevant, at least from the angle that one of the major complaints about Project Constellation is that NASA is "wasting money". NASA is required to spend a lot of money on things that it probably shouldn't be doing.

- Jim

[J.McDonald]

To get firmly back on topic...
DIRECT have their 30 minutes of fame in just a few hours time, presenting to the Augustine panel. Fingers crossed for a fair hearing of every option, and a correct conclusion.

I want to be optimistic about this, but let's see. The review are allowed to rely on NASA's judgement in certain areas, that would allow some options to be thrown out without fair trial. So, for example, NASA could tell the panel that 'no crew and cargo' was a CAIB findings (which it wasn't, really), and that this eliminates anything other than 1.5 launch (which it shouldn't).
Secondly, the recently released ESAS appendices, which have been subject to FOI requests ever since the study concluded, show that Ares-I was given special dispensation compared to other vehicles. What's to stop this sort of bias creeping in again?

To conclude, the title of this thread has never been more innaccurate! (no offense, Rick :P )

[klydemorris]

Although I'm not a Direct worshiper (or an any launch vehicle worshiper for that matter- I like all launch vehicles), I'd like to see Direct come into reality is some manner- my best hope being a phase out of Ares I as a Direct-like launcher is phased in and any gap is reduced. I really hope that the funding can be found for such.

With all of the venomus Ares I hater rants nulled out, what will likely happen is that Ares I will remain, at least that's my guess. Of course, no one who is not seated on the board itself can really know what will come to pass. And no one can really predict what Obama will do. We just have to wait and see.

Still- best of luck to the Direct folks.

[Rick]

To get firmly back on topic...
DIRECT have their 30 minutes of fame in just a few hours time, presenting to the Augustine panel. Fingers crossed for a fair hearing of every option, and a correct conclusion.

I want to be optimistic about this, but let's see. The review are allowed to rely on NASA's judgement in certain areas, that would allow some options to be thrown out without fair trial. So, for example, NASA could tell the panel that 'no crew and cargo' was a CAIB findings (which it wasn't, really), and that this eliminates anything other than 1.5 launch (which it shouldn't).
Secondly, the recently released ESAS appendices, which have been subject to FOI requests ever since the study concluded, show that Ares-I was given special dispensation compared to other vehicles. What's to stop this sort of bias creeping in again?

To conclude, the title of this thread has never been more innaccurate! (no offense, Rick :P )

No offense taken John. Ross better talk fast with the 30 minutes he's got to change minds. NASA has had 5 years.

As for the rest of my response, follow this link:

http://insideksc.com/showthread.php?p=9476#post9476

This is also posted on my Twitter account:

http://twitter.com/RickFischer

[JimMcDade]

I just watched Metshcan go down in flames before the panel. I realize that some will think my critique blow is "mean". It might be a bit mean, but it is also honest and it uses Metschans own words.

The Direct slide show presentation given by Direct leader Steve Metschan was technically unimpressive and the panel members immediately seized on the fruitcake quality of the Direct cult during the Q&A opportunity. Metschan immediately embarrassed himself. His laughably melodramatic "blood in the water" comment and the deranged conspiracy and persecution claims really exposed the lunacy that is the driving force behind this "Direct Team".

Metschan displayed particular fondness for the terms the terms ground truth, and anonymous (in various forms) as he painted a fantasy landscape of grand conspiracy, referring to "pressure" coming from the NASA "chain of command".

One panel member asked, "Who are you guys?" The question drew laughter and giggles from the other panel members. The panel member wanted to know if anybody other than Metschan was willing to be identified. Metschan nervously fumbled with his water bottle- screwing the cap back and forth- and literally set himself on fire by answering, "Well, when you find 'em, let me know, 'cause I don't know 'em all either. We're taking advantage of the new communications technology that became available- computers and the internet". Metschan's bumbling response about "new" internet technology was basically an admission that DirectLauncher.com is essentially a viral culture phenomena. Metschan told the panel that he could get them some names if they wanted them, but that the "anonymous part" is critical.

Metschan also made three requests during the public hearing in Washington today. Those requests reveal the paranoia and neuroses that motivate these clowns:

Three Direct requests for the Direct Team:

1- Ask the President to order NASA to stop further destruction of Shuttle infrastructure until Augustine panel makes recommendations.

2- Request that the panel interview engineers at working level about Ares I technical problems and Ares V cost problems. Conduct these interviews as "anonymously as possible" in order to determine the "ground truth" for themselves. We have certain knowledge that this "ground truth is being altered as it ascends the chain of command". There is "a significant amount of pressure being brought to bear to prevent any information brought to this commission that is counter to the current party line"

3- The commission should get a second, independent opinion on all critical issues or disagreements NASA may have with our plan...like the second-stage for example...from sources independent of the NASA chain of command."

The commission members were obviously not impressed by Metschan Direct concept and the closest thing to a compliment came when one member said that he was impressed by Steve's "boldness and enthusiasm".
It was the kind of left-handed compliment that one might offer to a "Big Foot" hunter or a fanatical UFO alien abduction enthusiast.

The value, credibility and appropriateness of his concept comparisons were also challenged. Metshcan also meandered when he was asked to quantify his safety number comparisons. I hope that this was the hurrah from Direct.

[J.McDonald]

Sadly I agree that Metschan didn't do as well as I'd hoped for.
Imagine if John Shannon had made the presentation instead. Many of his points were identical (use of SSMEs, retention of existing processes and infrastructure, increased flight rate allowed by a smaller LV improves safety) to the points that could be made to sell DIRECT- he just made them far better.

Metschan was veering way OT, and handled the questions poorly. IME Ross is a far better spokesman and handles himself better- I wonder why they left it to Metschan to do the presentation?

On the bright side, though, the panel appear open and professional, so perhaps there is still a chance.

[Rick]

I was wishing them luck, as I did the other presenters.

Having said that, I found it hard to believe that they refused to reveal anyone that had anything to do with Directs progression. I had thought for sure that my friend Ross would have at least been revealed.

I found this to be a effort stopping event.

[Rick]

IME Ross is a far better spokesman and handles himself better- I wonder why they left it to Metschan to do the presentation? .

I've been wondering about that too. I don't get it.

[winkhome]

In the end it will be the message, not so much the messenger - it is not like the DIRECTteam will be running NASA if the Commission says - Mr. President, Congress and the American people - Ares I/V are a dead end - here are suggestions for pulling this out of the fire and making the most of what we have and how to honor the work of those who have been doing it.

I thought DIRECT should have stayed WAY more on message.

I thought the EELV came out strong.

I thougt John Shannon was great - and perhaps made the arguements for DIRECT better than Metschan - if he intended to (wondering) or not...

Almost forgot - we scream about privacy - so given the "Griffin culture" that has just passed - perhaps there are good and legitimate reasons for people to act in the manner they have - and if that was the nature of their involvement with DIRECT so be it. All I can say is that I hope that John meant what he said...

[Rick]

In the end it will be the message, not so much the messenger - it is not like the DIRECTteam will be running NASA if the Commission says - Mr. President, Congress and the American people - Ares I/V are a dead end - here are suggestions for pulling this out of the fire and making the most of what we have and how to honor the work of those who have been doing it.

I thought DIRECT should have stayed WAY more on message.

I thought the EELV came out strong.

I thou gt John Shannon was great - and perhaps made the arguments for DIRECT better than Metschan - if he intended to (wondering) or not...

I think part of the problem here is that these was an open public meeting today. The taxpaying public in the US had the chance to consider what's next for HSF.

In that regard, Directs presentation fell flat, even given how hard they tried.

Sure, people can discuss the anonymous folks involved with Direct in private with commission members, but that does nothing for Joe Blow who's a plain ole citizen.

Personally, I am getting tired of the clandestine, top secret doings about Jupiter. Lay the cards out on the table for all to see, especially for the taxpayers who are funding NASA.

[winkhome]

I think part of the problem here is that these was an open public meeting today. The taxpaying public in the US had the chance to consider what's next for HSF.

In that regard, Directs presentation fell flat, even given how hard they tried.

Sure, people can discuss the anonymous folks involved with Direct in private with commission members, but that does nothing for Joe Blow who's a plain ole citizen.

Personally, I am getting tired of the clandestine, top secret doings about Jupiter. Lay the cards out on the table for all to see, especially for the taxpayers who are funding NASA.

Are you the boss?

Have you ever had a "great idea" and kept your mouth shut because you knew that no matter how great it was - it was never going to fly - no pun intended...

They are not whistleblowers - they simply have no protection - now, if they had protection and still stayed in the shadows - I would agree with you 100% - but that is not the reality, and at least based on what I know - and yes I am 100% certain that is not the whole story - but personally all things being equal - in a public forum I take them at face value - if behind closed doors DIRECT and the Commission work something out - fine - but I am not certain if the Commission does anything behind closed doors - I guess unless it is considered confidential information... yes??

[Rick]

Have you ever had a "great idea" and kept your mouth shut because you knew that no matter how great it was - it was never going to fly - no pun intended...

Dale, actually no. Nearly every major company, private or otherwise has ethics departments that are in place for just want you say above.

I've never bought the 'keep you mouth shut' thing, because its a copout.

Sorry, I just do not agree. If those anonymous engineers or whatever are afraid of retribution, then they are not following company policy, and should be fired for imposing such ridiculous, unethical standards on their subordinates.

[winkhome]

Dale, actually no. Nearly every major company, private or otherwise has ethics departments that are in place for just want you say above.

I've never bought the 'keep you mouth shut' thing, because its a copout.

Sorry, I just do not agree. If those anonymous engineers or whatever are afraid of retribution, then they are not following company policy, and should be fired for imposing such ridiculous, unethical standards on their subordinates.

Well, lucky you - honestly. Now, I am hoping to go to work for a company like that "soon" - interviewed last week and I am waiting...

However, I have seen it in action - you work in a place that "breaks your spirit or you soul" it does happen. It can happen in an organization in various ways - system wide down to a single office. In a perfect world we could all contribute in a positive way - but many of us are often not allowed.

[JimMcDade]

Wait a minute! This is the Direct leader we are talking about! He is their leader by consent. If he can't make a decent presentation of their proposal, why should anybody listen to the underlings?

Ross' British fascinating accent would not be an advantage in front of that esteemed panel. Ross or John or whoever would have had to answer the same questions and they would have struggled just as hard for the answers. This was not a lame collection of Presidential transition team hacks. These panel members are experienced experts.

Ross tried very hard to sell me on Direct and he was equally unable to provide satisfactory answer to some of the same questions when I asked him. I don't see how Ross or Shannon could have given any better answers, although I agree that they both might have looked and sounded smoother than Steve. Metshcan just happened to be the one to be placed in a very uncomfortable situation.

It did not matter who represented Direct. The panel members saw through this sham and they cut matters to the bone when Chiao asked. "Who are you guys?" Dr. Augustine also knew exactly what he was doing when he asked Steve to explain why the NLS/Direct class proposal did not fly when originally reviewed.

I wondered if Metschan was even aware that Augustine examined NLS and other Shuttle alternatives long ago, particularly when he chaired the Advisory Committee On the Future of The U.S. Space Program during the George H.W. Bush administration. He was not addressing a bunch of ignorant goobers from the internet. Steve was not used to being challenged by competent inquisitors and he could not just call on a web discussion moderator to ban these questioners.

Metschan was very nervous. When he was dismissed, he exited the wrong way and actually walked between Augustine and the TV camera while the chairman was speaking. His body language indicated a strong desire to be anywhere other than he was.

Other than fondling the water bottle when challenged, he picked up his copy and smartly plopped it down on the podium top as if he were straightening out the stack. That is an action that say, "I'm ready to go folks. Let me outta here now!"

Metschan reminded me of a typical high school football coach who struggles to teach an algebra class. Steve read from his script verbatim, with almost no color or improvisation. The stumbling and bumbling replies revealed either a lack of preparation or, more likely, an indefensible set of theories and propositions. Based on all of the bizarre arguments and claims put forth by Metschan & company, Direct is actually indefensible as an alternative, so what we saw today was exactly what many of us expected to see.

What we witnessed was not the failure of a frail individual. What we witnessed was the failure of an idea- a very faulty idea.

PS: Don't be surprised when you hear some very interesting things coming from Boeing down the road.

[JimMcDade]

The Reuters story on the public hearing did not even mention Direct or Metshcan. That has to be a cruel blow to some egos. I am sure that the Direct guys will claim that Reuters is another victim of "pressure brought to bear by NASA".

see http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSB274656