Friday, December 12, 2008

NASA Bristles as Obama Transition Team Asks Tough Questions









An Orlando Sentinel article just released makes it clear that tensions are running high between NASA Director Mike Griffin and Obama transition team leader Lori Garver, with the defensive Griffin going so far as to accuse Garver as being “unqualified” to lead the Obama team.



According to the Sentinel, the issues arose when Garver and her team members began to question the wisdom of the overall Constellation program for returning to the Moon and then going to Mars. More specifically, Griffin got testy when the question of NASA’s new and hopelessly flawed Ares 1 rocket came up. As most readers of our blog know, the Direct 2.0 alternative, proposed by a consortium of industry engineers and ex-NASA managers, is a much cheaper and more proven concept, and pretty much superior in every way to Ares 1. Griffin is portrayed as a staunch advocate of Ares 1, and he’s apparently trying to defend the underpowered and overpriced program from budget cuts in the incoming administration.

While it’s unlikely Constellation will be scrapped in its entirety, the Obama administration can be expected to behave pretty much as all liberal administrations do; they will suppress dissent, slash defense and space budgets, and instigate new social dependencies in an attempt to consolidate power. Looking at the underperforming Ares 1 and the viable alternative of Direct II, it would seem to be an easy target for the incoming Obama team.

But one wonders if there isn’t something more to this than simply the politics of left and right. Griffin’s resistance doesn’t make a whole lot of sense politically. He seems to be overacting to the inquiries of the Obama team at a time when he should be looking to smooth things over and keep the broader Constellation program going. It’s almost as if there is something bigger and potentially much darker that he’s trying to protect. Why would he be so threatened by a simple accounting of the state of NASA’s biggest current space imitative? Unless perhaps he’s worried that the Obama team may find the real, occult agenda behind the Constellation program…

As Garver was overheard to say to Griffin, “Mike, I don’t understand what the problem is. We are just trying to look under the hood.”

Given what we all know is “under the hood,” maybe that in itself is the real problem.


UPDATE: Richard made an interesting observation in a recent phone call. His take is that Griffin is causing all this strife because he needs a direct meeting with Obama in order to tell him privately what he can't let Garver find under the hood.


Hmm...

24 comments:

Dave Bara said...

Direct II makes a lot more sense. One question though, why do we need a moon lander separate from the Orion? Why can't we just design a single vehicle that can go into space and land on the moon, then blast back off into space again?

db

Mike Bara said...

Because we've forgotton how to build big rockets, evidently.

robert said...

We NEED Obama to CRACK the DARPA wall...the secret DOD SPACE programs have the know-how and are already on the Moon n Mars...imho...and in images I see and look for.

Bob...:D

david nineteenpointfive said...

Here is the great irony. NASA is facing the reality of irrelevance, from losing its competition for funding to more immediate bread and butter agencies. The only way out of it in this massive recession to justify any more money is go public with its confirmed findings of alien civilization. The continuation of the 50-year old, misinformation protocols is at a turning point.

soniktemple said...

Perhaps they're afraid they will find all the Nazi symbols inside the vehicle?

marsandro said...

Here's something to consider---

The Russians have been using
Hall thrusters for about twenty years now,
and yet NASA continues to piddle around
with a few small laboratory models, and talk
a bunch of bull about "their future use on
satellites and deep space missions."

They won't even use what THEY THEMSELVES
have, leave alone some deep-hole above-top-
secret defense-related technology.

Spare me....

Are you expecting them to whip out a new
ship based on a Brown drive? Or maybe
full-blown gravitational propulsion?

Trust me, long before that happens, you
will find yourself reading the latest copy of
National Geographic with the front-cover
story about the team of archaeologists who
dug up the frozen corpse of Satan....

:-)

Hathor -- Minding the bridge

;-)

Tarius said...

"Trust me, long before that happens, you
will find yourself reading the latest copy of
National Geographic with the front-cover
story about the team of archaeologists who
dug up the frozen corpse of Satan...."

Oh, thats funny.

Well soon their hand will be forced, they are a huge part of the reason they are at where they are, I would love to say sole reason, but we all know about their budget problems.

They had such innovation at the beginning and then for decades they just creeped along. They have to change or be left behind.

I do agree with what Hoagland says though, they always talk about the past and the future being good, but never the present.

There are so many things they could have pushed for in the last couple decades...except apparently all they have been pushing are pencils. ha(hopefully thats not too much)

Gort said...

In your blog you said:

Why would he be so threatened by a simple accounting of the state of NASA’s biggest current space imitative? [sic, emphasis added]

I'm trying to figure out if that was just a typo for "initiative," or a freudian slip, or an intentional pun.

I like it: the whole public NASA space program seems to be "imitative" of a real, serious,
civilian public exploration of space for the good of humankind, as originally portrayed.

It's time for NASA to get SERIOUS and stop all this SIRIUS magicians-masons-nazis hokus-pokus.

The people and congress have been hoodwinked by NASA for 50 years.
Time to take off the hood.

Hot Rod to Mars!

;)

Gort

Gort said...

Speaking of "the frozen corpse of Satan," Las Vegas ("Sin City") is experiencing 3 inches (~7.5 cm) of snow on the Strip, and I hear their airport has no snowplows.

Gort

Mike Bara said...

Typo...

marsandro said...

Hello Tarius,

I believe I have commented on
their budget issues previously.

Let us not forget that the definition of an
elephant is "a mouse built to Government specifications."

This applies not only to the Space Shuttle,
but also to the entire series of robotic probes.
Much more could have been done for far less
money. I state this without reservation, and
absolutely unequivocally.

And yet---

Even when more has been done, what do we
get?

Blurs, equivocations, and the usual snow job.

Denials, denials, denials....

So, where are we now?

Square One, if you ask me. At least from
the "outside" point of view.

And now---

You will notice that I mentioned the "Brown
Drive." You may have heard that NASA has
tested this device in vaccuo, which they
have indeed.

And what did they report? One hears that
"it didn't work."

That's funny, as here is a link to the test
video showing clearly that it *DID* work:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYMUv1VJ3VQ

Like I said...Square One....

:-)

Hathor -- Recounting the beans

;-)

Tarius said...

Ah yes the Brown drive, I remember reading about him and his tech. interesting stuff. Well regardless, they still havent done anything right, and if Hoagland is right, religion is one of the sole things to blame. and also I agree with a comment, they spend all that money to do a test and use the worst camera availible.

JimO said...

questions:

Dave Bara December 12, 2008 2:56 PM said...
Direct II makes a lot more sense. One question though, why do we need a moon lander separate from the Orion? Why can't we just design a single vehicle that can go into space and land on the moon, then blast back off into space again?

Mike Bara December 12, 2008 3:37 PM said...
Because we've forgotton how to build big rockets, evidently.

Answers:

The rationale behind building a Lunar Module for the specific landing was worked out and justified in about 1962-3. If you both have forgotten, or never understood it, I'd be happy to provide some links.

Mike Bara said...

My comment has nothing to do with LOR. I believe the reader was asking why we can't build a rocket big enough to put both Altair and Orion on instead of launching them seperately.

JimO said...

Fair enough -- and a good question. The way I understand it, since the manned spacecraft Orion will first operate in low earth orbit for ISS missions, a booster for it alone must be designed and proved out. Because the lunar lander is supposed to be a lot bigger than the one for Apollo, using modifications to existing components could carry IT to the moon, but not the weight of the Orion (also a lot bigger than Apollo's CSM). Since there would already exist tested ways to get the Orion into LEO, by the time lunar missions re-start, major innovations on the second, 'big' booster, weren't justified.

The dilemma now facing NASA is whether the Moon will remain the primary target beyond LEO, or whether alternate targets -- the most often proposed one is visits to nearby asteroids (Obama's space experts favor this choice) -- move to the fore. Frankly, I'd prefer the asteroid mission as a quicker stepping stone to Mars.

Gort said...

A letter to the Wall Street Journal from Neil Armstrong, former astronaut

Future Space Opportunities Are the President's Call
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123033959209636593.html

Gort

Marc said...

Steven Bassett, on CTC with George Knapp the other night, said he thinks Obama set up his administration with a goal towards disclosure!




With respect to your book,folks may wish to take a look at numerology as part of NASA's methodologies as well. I caught it in thr chapter about the guys from F.A.C.E.T.S. Numerologically, NASA equates to 5111. The FACET guys received correspondence from NASA on 5/11/01. Furthermore, the digits in 5111 add up to 8 which is all about money, or the lack of it. Applying numerology can seem to have positive outcomes though.

david nineteenpointfive said...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081231/ap_on_re_us/nasa_chief

Griffin appears to show some desperation in keeping his job.

Mike Bara said...

Steve always thinks that.

Gort said...

Interesting take on the debate beween Ares/Constellation
and using the "heavy lifters" Delta and Atlas.

Obama Moves to Counter China With Pentagon-NASA Link

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090102/pl_bloomberg/aovrno0oj41g;_ylt=AmJ56Oi9EgzliSRTjOsHLBis0NUE

If you read the article, it looks like either way Boeing, headquartered in O'bama's homey town, Chicago, still gets a cut of the action.

Gort

robert said...

As I said Gort...break down the walls between DARPA, "TOP" n "SWORD" and get Griffen out of NASA asap.

Micah said...

Direct II is the way to go and your assessment of the fear the Mr. Steamy Griffith has of 'looking under the hood' is most true to point. But why do you have this ongoing anti-Obabma theme in your threads? Especially after eight years of anthropoid insanity? It seems your calling to degrade the 'liberal' is pure ignorant bias...coming from a pure ancient familial prejudice. Hard to fathom when it comes from someone so correct in other observations.

I would assume the grain of the wood can never be regrown with the.... least of an.. 'open mind'.

Mike Bara said...

It's really not that hard to fathom. It can be summed up in three words: The Carter Administration.

Throw in a dash of Bill Clinton, who spent 8 years focusing on getting his knob polished in the oval office while Kalid Sheik Mohammed was planning and executing 9\11 right under his nose, and it should be pretty easy to figure out.

Micah said...

Saying he got 'his knob polished' and that's ALL your focused on....like many others of your ilk.
Again, after 8 years of Anthropoid insanity, I would take any day of the week a president who's 'knob' gets polished, once and awhile.

Your inane response only proved my point.