posted on Aug, 30 2003 @ 08:05 AM
OK, my views on NASA,
1. Sean O’Keefe is not the person who should be in charge of NASA, but should be in charge of its financial affairs.
2. No direction on where we are heading, example “we can put a man on the moon – but we can’t put a man on the moon”. Why did we go, to perfect the
perfect ICBM to blast our enemies.
3. Public interaction is a lip service, having spent 23 years trying to get a topic started about Shuttle safety only to be completely ignored.
4. NASA for its own sake needs a second agency to compete against, like Intel has AMD, or Chevy with Ford. Having no competition has taken the edge
out of this once awesome agency and what’s the phrase “ absolute power brings with it absolute corruption”. So it wastes money on programs that in my
mind belong to other agencies.
5. Congress has got to get this agency back on track of doing what it was suppose to do, explore space, In 2001 I believe Dan Goldin was called before
the committee to go over its budget, long over due in Dan’s view. During that meeting a congressman was asking Dan Goldin why it took 45 min to land
at an airport. The FAA is the correct agency that should own that responsibility and NASA should be doing things that are in space. Spending time and
money doing those pet projects of members of this board spell disaster in under mining the true purpose of NASA, to explore space.
6. Defense budget , each branch ( Army, Navy, etc ) of the Gov. must try and grab as much as they can to keep projects alive and start new ones. NASA
needs a second agency so just as those of defending our Nation must justify the need for their projects NASA would have to keep its book balanced.
Something that is always in the RED when it comes to cost of projects. This would help them keep watch on projects and the cost of each, perhaps even
helping to slap those that are heading to run over cost, again something Nasa has a reputation for doing
7. Public review board, on launch and in orbit projects. This would be similar to police internal affairs, setup to watch over NASA and to make
recommendations on say tile hitting a shuttle on lift off. Leaving NASA to make the call on what is or isn’t needed has brought down the reality of
being blind to its own faults. A second set of eye’s being not part of Nasa and made up common people who’s interest in space are joined with Nasa to
preserve it’s integrity of workmanship.
8. Automate building of those components such as the External Tank, taking from the car manufacturing industry on how to automate the process of
assembly thus reducing the over all cost of 30 million dollars on something we intend to throw away. Nasa the job shop is one of it’s nick name’s,
seen with the cost of building the E.T. at such a high cost it would appear to be correct.
9. Access to the blueprints so people can explore improving the operation of vehicles by assisting NASA thru a mechanism of a relationship with the
Public. Our tax money paid for these machines yet denied access to them. Having them open for internal use within our country, we don’t want N. Korea
getting their hands on an ICBM now do we. Thus review boards that can assist people wanting to contribute to helping NASA reach its goal.
Just a few views,