Michael Griffin to leave NASA.

Kyle

Armchair Astronaut
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
3,908
Reaction score
315
Points
123
Website
orbithangar.com
More here from NASAspaceflight.com
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15481.0

Apparently, he might be replaced with an old friend of mine who I've met many times and emailed several. Charles Bolden, NASA Astronaut.
Great guy, great personality, the people who also know him agree.
Former USMC Major General as well.
 

Arrowstar

Probenaut
Addon Developer
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
1,785
Reaction score
0
Points
36
So what does this do the existing Constellation program? Anyone know anything about this new fellow's leaning in that regard?
 

Missioncmdr

New member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
538
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Here's something, have ANY of the past NASA administrators been astronauts?

Richard Truly served for almost three years and Frederick Gregory served for about two months as acting administrator.
 

Andy44

owner: Oil Creek Astronautix
Addon Developer
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Messages
7,620
Reaction score
6
Points
113
Location
In the Mid-Atlantic states
That looks like a discussion board and the OP has no link. Rumor until I see a press release. (Although it wouldn't surprise me.)
 

Moonwalker

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,199
Reaction score
0
Points
0
So far it's just rumors going on. But a replacement of Michael Griffin by Charles Bolden already is part of Bolden's biography (but as specualtions). Charles Bolden is an original Space Shuttle astronaut. If he is going to make it, it might have an impact on the Shuttle retirement. In any case, the gap between the Shuttle and Orion is not preventable, no matter who replaces Griffin. A Shuttle program extension just moves the gap forward and does not make NASA's situation any better. The same is still valid in case NASA would leave Ares and move on a conversion of existing unmanned launch vehicles. Replacing Griffin doesn't make anything better. I believe that either nothing changes, or that it gets even worse. By the way: is Bolden going to be the first black NASA administrator?
 

garyw

O-F Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
10,480
Reaction score
199
Points
138
Location
Kent
Website
blog.gdwnet.com
So far it's just rumors going on. But a replacement of Michael Griffin by Charles Bolden already is part of Bolden's biography (but as specualtions). Charles Bolden is an original Space Shuttle astronaut. If he is going to make it, it might have an impact on the Shuttle retirement. In any case, the gap between the Shuttle and Orion is not preventable, no matter who replaces Griffin. A Shuttle program extension just moves the gap forward and does not make NASA's situation any better. The same is still valid in case NASA would leave Ares and move on a conversion of existing unmanned launch vehicles. Replacing Griffin doesn't make anything better. I believe that either nothing changes, or that it gets even worse. By the way: is Bolden going to be the first black NASA administrator?

If Bolden IS selected then I hope his previous experience as a shuttle astronaunt in no way clouds his judgement on Shuttle retirement. as administrator he will have a lot more responsibilities and should follow what the President and congress require be that retirement or extension.
 

Zachstar

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
654
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Shreveport, Louisiana
Website
www.ibiblio.org
As long as he trashes Ares 1 (Either for Delta IV Heavy or another launcher) And keeps shuttle going to 2015. I say he will be far better than Griffin.
 

Moonwalker

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,199
Reaction score
0
Points
0
As long as he trashes Ares 1 (Either for Delta IV Heavy or another launcher) And keeps shuttle going to 2015. I say he will be far better than Griffin.

As long as NASA doesn't get more money (which is rather likely), it doesn't make any difference who is administrator and how long the Shuttle will stay in service. The gap would still exist after STS. There is no way to do both at the same time, operating the Shuttle and get Orion into orbit (be it Ares or Delta).

STS is a budget eating program.
 

SlyCoopersButt

New member
Joined
Jun 11, 2008
Messages
425
Reaction score
0
Points
0
That's very fortunate for you, Sounds like a nice man to know! I just read of him a bit and I'm sure he'll do very good (Article link). Very exceptional record and looks like He's got plenty of experience. I think NASA would be fine under Bolden.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,994
Reaction score
1,675
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
STS is a budget eating program.

Ares is the same. It suffers from the same illness as STS.

The second was that it failed, by most definitions, to reduce the cost of putting payloads into orbit. The shuttle program inherited from Apollo huge fixed costs - the Manned Spaceflight Center in Houston, the cadres of government and contractor workers at the Kennedy Space Center, and so on. The result was that there is a fixed base cost of around $ 2.8 billion per year, just to keep all those people and facilities in place, even if you don’t conduct any flights at all (as occurred after the shuttle disaster).


http://www.astronautix.com/project/sts.htm

Lean and mean looks different, but that is never the goal. Also for the Constellation program, you had again no serious bidding, just like for the STS.

Following the usual charade of competitive bidding, NASA picked the same contractors as for X-15 and Apollo, who would build precisely the vehicle it had in mind. North American Rockwell was selected to build the orbiter, with its Rocketdyne Division making the main engines, Thiokol for the solid rocket boosters, and Martin Marietta for the External Tank, to be built at the government Saturn IC factory at Michoud.

 

Moonwalker

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,199
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I did not say that Ares is not budget eating (and I know who built the STS components). Each program is budget eating in a way. There won't be a fluent passage anyway. No matter how the STS replacement looks like and works like, unless NASA gets extra budget to put the STS replacement into Orbit while STS still is in service.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,994
Reaction score
1,675
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
I actually more meant this as small comment at the decision that Constellation is the only way to go.

Well, the USA can't afford both at the current architecture. They can't launch Shuttle and Ares. But that is a NASA problem... there are alternatives, which NASA does not have anymore, or is not willed to use.
 

Moonwalker

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,199
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Well, you may want to put your application in to NASA to become an adviser :p

;)
 

Orbinaut Pete

ISSU Project Manager
News Reporter
Joined
Aug 5, 2008
Messages
4,264
Reaction score
0
Points
0
My opinion for the future of NASA:

Keep 2 Shuttle's going until 2015 to add more parts to the ISS.

Proceed with the design of 1 rocket that can carry both crew & cargo to the moon, & between 2015 & 2017 (when the ISS budget runs out) use the Soyuz or SpaceX Dragon.

Then start moon landings ASAP.
 

BHawthorne

Simpit Builder
Donator
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Messages
324
Reaction score
3
Points
18
I'd just as soon see NASA take on a more regulatory role and transition more to commercial like with COTS. Let external companies bear the risks and many of the costs associated with manned spaceflight. I'm really interested to see how the Falcon 9 works out. Make NASA the FAA of spaceflight. If we can't get past the deathgrip NASA has on US manned spaceflight, it'll never grow commercially.
 
Top