posted 04-19-2005 04:16 PM               

Mike Griffin's first press conference as Administartor of NASA was held yesterday. Comprehensive coverage is lacking on the web, here is a more full article.

When Discovery will launch, plus shuttle safety closeouts, as commented on by Griffin, form a topic widely covered today. William Harwood of CBS news went a little further in an article today, also available at spaceflightnow.com... "It is widely believed NASA WILL ANNOUNCE A NEW TARGET LAUNCH DATE later this week..," after the review meeting, being attended today at KSC by Griffin. "May 22nd is one possible target, sources say.." (caps above added)

A little better photo of Griffin, taken during the conference by Charles Dharapak, AP. First link is photo, 2nd is the full Washington Post report.....

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/images/I64585-2005Apr18
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64109-2005Apr18.html

The Planetary Society's wonderful Mars report, which Griffin helped author, is linked below. First, through Yahoo in common format -- also helpful during current Planetary Society overloads. 2nd is the pdf file direct from the society. Finally, an article was cited by Griffin fully describing the ban on U.S. use of the Soyuz to take effect next year. It can be searched from the 3rd link below.

http://tinyurl.com/72f8w
http://tinyurl.com/dfuas
www.economist.com.

posted 04-19-2005 08:56 PM               

MORE ABOUT HUNTSVILLE: "I can't imagine returning to the Moon or going to Mars, or developing the capability to explore & utilize the near earth asteroids without Marshall Space Flight Center... Marshall has other skills as well, but their prime directive is [ as ] NASA's launch vehicle center."

A NEAR TERM HUMAN MISSION TO MARS was the subject of an Orlando sentinel reporter's question, who also wondered about the cost feasibility. Griffin said he has been repeatedly on record as saying that going to Mars is affordable. He said this was "summarized in a Planetary Society report that Owen Garriott, an old & good friend, and I chaired... So [ in my ] view, at a few billion dollars a year spaced out over a number of years, voyages to Mars are [ and Griffin punctuated the following word ] imminently doable."

NASA'S TRANSITION PERIODS: "Well, I lived through the period from 1975 through 1981 when we weren't flying Apollo [ or the ] Shuttle.. And the dislocations of that period, there was no one left untouched. The people in this country who know how to fly human rated spacecraft are within NASA & within NASA's contractor family.. [ which is one reason ] not to have a 5 year gap."

A SHUTTLE MISSION TO HUBBLE was asked about by the A.P. reporter, who wondered whether 2 succesful shuttle flights would automatically guarantee that a "Hubble SM4" would proceed, and she mentioned that there's not much time. Griffin repeated that robotic servicing has been ruled out, and said "Immediately after [ 114 ] we are going to undertake an internal review.. We have money from congress this year directing us to work on a Hubble servicing mission. As soon as STS 114 has landed safely we will be studying this..."

WAS GREAT TO SEE VOYAGER MENTIONED right near the beginning of the news conference, as a Washington Post reporter questioned it's proposed cut off. "We've been made aware that many have objected.. We're sympathetic to those concerns.. I would emphasize that we are many months away" from a termination. "But we are going to consider it carefully before we turn anything off."

U.S. USE OF SOYUZ ENDING, AND LANGLEY. Due to passage of a foreign regulation bill, NASA cannot employ the Soyuz after this year. Griffin said flight rules requiring the Soyuz escape craft at the ISS & other alternatives are being examined. But he said that as is, there could be no U.S. astronauts on the station if a shuttle was not docked to it. A question about Langley, the original NACA-NASA center, having it's wind tunnels closed down was raised, along with concerns of aeronautics workers being cut from NASA's workforce. Griffin hinted there would be no immediate closing at Langley, and said he is in touch with congress about creating a new aeronautics policy to go with the new space policy.

SHUTTLE TILE REPAIR, CLOSEOUTS FOR RTF: "I've been made aware through other press coverage.. that there is some discrepancy of opinion on [ tile repair ]. By inserting material, or other changes that would trip the boundary layer [ and result ] in an early transition to turbulence, much higher heating, much further forward on the wing than would be desired [ which ] could result, if there's enough drag differential, in a loss of control.. It could be very easy to make the problem worse rather than better. The whole idea of tile repair is a very good idea. The implementation of it could well be beyond that which we know how to do.. But the clearance for RTF cannot be simply a go or no-go situation based on whether you can repair a tile. There is not a certain way of knowing whether that repair will have worsened the situation or improved it...

"TOM STAFFORD & DICK COVEY are old friends of mine, for well more than a decade, as are other members of the team. I know many of the folks in the shuttle team from ' earlier lives ' and will be seeking their counsel. In the end I think collectively we will make the right decision."

THE PARIS AIR SHOW will be attended by Griffin and might be a place he could meet some of America's space partners, he said in response to a question about meeting the head of the CIS space program. He said perhaps in the fall he could watch a Progress or Soyuz launch. "Going forward, international co-operation is an important part of our efforts, as everyone here well knows."

THE CHALLENGE. When a Reuters reporter asked Griffin about his thoughts that its an exciting time, yet actually there will be very heavy loads involved in this mobilization & transition, Griffin replied, "In change there's opportunity. If everything were going along and we were doing...what we've been doing for the past 3 decades, frankly, I don't think I'd want the job... We've arrived at..a watershed moment in the strategic direction of the.. space program.. I believe that the American space program is among the very most important things that this nation executes on behalf of its people -- and on behalf of the people of the world, to be honest with you."

posted 04-20-2005 01:34 AM               

sounds and looks like really postive first steps thru a open door in the right direction...lets look what the further path will show us .....

posted 04-21-2005 05:08 PM               

THE LAUNCH DECISION.

It was pointed out that Bill Parsons & Wayne Hale have indicated the possibility of launching without the okay of the Stafford/Covey group. Griffin was asked if he'd go along with that. "In concept, yes I would. If Wayne Hale --whom I highly respect-- and others recommend.. launching despite not having filled all the squares on Stafford/Covey then that is something I would consider. ...I cannot begin at this time, I repeat, I cannot begin at this time to say under what specific conditions that NASA might elect to go ahead with the launch given a disparity of opinion... We study [ the ] issues and we resolve them.. and then we make our decision..." A sum-up statement from Griffin........ "Advisory groups advise, the NASA line mgrs. have the responsibility for executing the program... [ At ] the end of the day, the people wearing government & contractor badges charged with launching the vehicle will be the ones" to whom the responsibility belongs.

NASA CULTURE / LAUNCH DECISION PROCESS.

"We need to take our advise very carefully and we need never to be defensive about taking advise from outside... [ My ] focus will be on learning everything about the process that has gone into fixing the problems that led to the loss of STS 107, and moving forward to really a new process, a new vehicle and new launch criteria... understanding not only what was done but what was the rationale behind doing it. How was it done, who implemented it, who agreed, who disagreed, where there was concern, where there was dissent, and exploring all of that. [ The CAIB report showed ] the necessity to make sure that there are paths from both bottom to top and from side to side within the NASA community so that all information needing to be communicated is communicated and that its all listened to & weighed appropriately." ( Above parags. from rspns. to Knight Ridder & Houston Chron. questions. )

DELAYING THE LAUNCH

...until Dr. Griffin can gain a better understanding of the issues, was postulated by
a USA Today reporter. "I can delay until 2010 and I won't know as much.. as the people who are charged with launching it... I'm not trying to be the sole point of encyclopedic technical knowledge on whether or not it would be okay to launch. Its a team effort. Last week I got instated as the captain of the team. That means if we've got a close call or a tie vote, I decide. But I'm hoping that our team has done their work so thoroughly that its not a close call, its not a tie, its an obvious decision." Griffin also said........... "The confidence that I derive will be from.. the mgmt. team & the engineering team.. From their responses to my questions.. By looking at their process.. and their attitude as they seek to prove to not just me [ but external reviews as well ] that it is safe to launch."

*A correction from the 2nd post on this board. Griffin's answer to the question about Langley actually did not lean either way about the matter of the wind tunnels. Griffin's answer, including the words "near term . . . of course not," was misinterpreted.

posted 04-22-2005 11:53 AM               

MICHAEL GRIFFIN'S STATEMENT ON THE SPACE
VISION FOR THE SENATE CONFIRMATION HEARINGS.
A TALK THAT MIGHT BE CALLED "PURPOSES OF EXPLORATION."

I think it may be said that, while differences of opinion exist, the President's proposal has attained broad strategic acceptance. It is now understood that the International Space Station, supported by the Space Shuttle, cannot be the centerpiece of the nation's human spacflight program..

It is a daring move at any time for a national leader to call for the bold exploration of unknown worlds, a major effort at the very limit of the technical state of the art. And it was the same way back in 1492, when Queen Isabella overrode King Ferdinand's reluctance and backed Columbus' voyage to "the New World," the first step in the creation of Spain's colonial empire... With the Spanish treasury depleted, many – including King Ferdinand – believed that it was not the time for the nation to be embarking on what was, in that era, an effort right at the edge of what was technologically possible. One way or another.. settlement of the New World was inevitable; however, it was Isabella's bold action that secured Spain's role in that future. If Columbus failed, she would be discredited, but if he succeeded, Spain..would become preeminent among the nations.. [ which is ] the way it happened. And that is the way it is today. In the twenty-first century and beyond, for America to continue to be preeminent among nations, it is necessary for us also to be the preeminent spacefaring nation.

[ This is ] not restricted to human spaceflight.. ..NASA's outstanding science programs [ have ] been among the crown jewels of the nation's achievements... NASA in the Apollo Era was hardly the "single mission agency" in the simplified view that is often heard today. NASA executed.. a dozen Pioneer missions (including Pioneer 10 and 11 to Jupiter and Saturn), Ranger 1-9, Surveyor 1-7, Mariner 1-10.. and paid for most of.. Viking.. to Mars.. NASA also executed 199 X-15 flights.. [ Hardly ] a "single mission agency." I believe that, if money is to be spent on space, there is little doubt that the huge majority of Americans would prefer to spend it on an exciting, outward-focused, destination-oriented program.. that is what the President's vision.. is about.

posted 04-23-2005 01:00 AM            

So, at end of year US can have NO astronauts onboard ISS unless a shuttle docked to it at all times for their 'emergency' exit !!!!!!!

So,US stay times very limited to one maybe two weeks - just when a shuttle docked ?

and a complete gap between end Shuttle flights and beginning CEV?

What utter insanity !

US may as well handover their ISS parts to Europe and Russia now and save all the silliness .

So,at end year,provided Russia can get Soyuz taxi missions they can inhabit ISS for 6 months at a time .

In effect,ISS becomes MIR II :-))

And the Chinese ?

If they could get a Shenzhou ready with a suitable docking collar,why not join in and dock - there'll be no one aboard except the Russian's. And they helped design Shenzhou - so a docking collar design should be no problem !

And if Europe can get its CEV ready, fly Euronauts to ISS as well.

Let's all join in - the Americans can come later when the party is over - if there is room left !

Griffin should be hot-footing to US Capitol Hill as an a" priori" ,thumping on the doors and getting this over riden ASAP.

I'm sure he is - isn't he?

But ,if not, someone take him there to get it sorted out NOW :-)

Don't bother launching the Discovery RTF until this is sorted - otherwise it would be just a complete waste of NASA time and US tax payer money as the shuttle is only being used to launch additional ISS modules .

Phill
UK

posted 04-23-2005 01:32 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by spaceuk:
So, at end of year US can have NO astronauts onboard ISS unless a shuttle docked to it at all times for their 'emergency' exit !!!!!!!

---

quote:

---

Q: Brian Berger with Space News. Mike, how big an issue for you is dealing with the Iran Nonproliferation Act and the restrictions it imposes on NASA buying Soyuz from Russia after the end of this year?

A: Well, I think it's obvious what the restriction is. It would mean that under our present flight rules we would only have U.S. astronauts on board the station at a time when the shuttle was visiting because when we're no longer being furnished Soyuz capsules by Russia, we would not have a clear escape mechanism. That fact has eluded no one.

There is an interagency group that is examining that issue and putting together alternatives to be considered at the policy level in the Executive branch and to be considered on the Hill. The process isn't done, it's not finished. I, by virtue of my recently acquired position, will be joining it at some point, but, obviously, have not yet. So, honestly, Brian, you're asking me something that I just haven't had time to get involved in. You can probably read in The Economist a few weeks ago as succinct an analysis of the issue as you can get anywhere. It's--it's a tough problem.

---

posted 04-23-2005 08:45 AM               

i hope i will not say any confusing or disturbing now :-)

first of all ..thank you for this board...it are showing all of us what a smart and intelligent man arrived at the top of the agency ...

and how i already said in your former board about Mike Griffin...it looks like a sign , that just in the moment when shuttle return to flight activities are almost at their point of culmination...the first launch after more than two years....a new man stepped in ,who really seems to be the best guy for the job in this moment...

bill i believe your posts above are showing.. that he is really a man of clear intentions and also a man who is able to look behind the things and requognize their actual worth

so its time to welcome him and give him our best wishes for the future in this hard and responsible job...we are curious how the things will go ahead and will see whether the most important goals of the future of space exploration will developing in the next years !

WELCOME MIKE GRIFFIN...despite i am not american ;-)

posted 04-23-2005 11:45 AM               

i believe there is one key sentence :

"This is a guy who thinks like a scientist and an engineer and has had a lot of experience managing large, intractable organizations," said Robert Kirshner, a Harvard University professor and president of the American Astronomical Society. "It’s really a good combination."

posted 04-24-2005 02:31 PM            

But he did say - in his answer to the reporter question about the effects of the Iranian Nonproliferation Act - that:-

"...I think it's obvious what the restriction is. It would mean that under our present flight rules we would only have U.S. astronauts on board the station at a time when the shuttle was visiting....." [Dr Griffin].

Also, "...There is an interagency group that is examining that issue and putting together alternatives to be considered at the policy level in the Executive branch and to be considered on the Hill." [Dr Griffin]

I think the interesting part there is the "..alternatives..to be considered on the Hill...". It makes it sound as if they have already accepted that only US astronauts aboard ISS when shuttle present and that they look for an alternative.

What if Capitol Hill refuse the 'alternative idea' ?

Maybe it is this which is trying to drive forward the earlier availability of a CEV - if only to be used only as a crew lifeboat at ISS in its early version ?

Maybe the early CEV would be carried to ISS inside shuttle cargo bay?

Its now near end April with just 8 months to end of year when the Iranian Non Proliferation Act terms kick-in. That's not a lot of time - especially if 'alternatives' are to be considered,developed then used.

It will be very , very interesting over these next 8 months to see what develops :-)

Phill
UK

posted 04-24-2005 02:45 PM            

Perhaps one of the museum Apollo CM's could be 'made' available and refurbished as a crew escape vehicle :-)

It will fit inside a shuttle bay!

Would need a small instrument 'collar'and a solid propellant (for orbital lifetime longevity and ease) retro rocket pack strapped on at base.

A docking adapter will be needed for use at ISS. Perhaps an ASTP-type? Or,simpler, an Apollo type docking adapter on the ISS ?Or,maybe a short inflatable Vostok-2 type tunnel linking the ISS with Apollo CM?

posted 04-24-2005 03:20 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by spaceuk:
Perhaps one of the museum Apollo CM's could be 'made' available and refurbished as a crew escape vehicle :-)

---

That aside, this is a far from a new issue and its one that Russians try to play every year for every penny they can get. They need the Soyuz on station just as much as the U.S. does to support their own cosmonauts. They want U.S. astronauts to assist on their planned EVAs and want use of the U.S. modules and resupply missions that the shuttle will deliver.

posted 04-24-2005 05:17 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ben:
What they looked into, as I understand it, is not resuing one of the actual museum pieces, but using the same design; that is, building an Apollo CSM today.

---