Scott Has Been Drinking The Koolaid Again

hiya

can I interest you in a solid rocket motor, why all the drama now.

Note: Quotes are from the article.

"He (Mr. Griffin) has changed the whole demeanor in NASA -- the fact that people can openly communicate and voice their views is great"

Hmmmm that does not ring true to me, but I am not a NASA Employee or vendor so what do I know.

"I’ve looked at a list of all the names that people have been floating out there and they’re so far distant second choice to Mike. I can’t think of anyone more qualified to run NASA at this time and I can’t even think of a second choice. Really, I just can’t think of one."

So if something happens to Mr. Griffin, hit gets hit by a bus on his way to the office lets say, then there is no one that can take his place? He is that much of a key man?

I come from a different business school I guess. One of the primary duties of a manager is to train their replacement so that they can take on even bigger roles.

I know I know NASA is not a business, but I do think that the Rocket 'business' is too large for one person and the TEAM must share knowledge, experiance etc. so no one person is Key.

>>> I come from a different business school I guess.
>>> One of the primary duties of a manager is to train
>>> their replacement so that they can take on even bigger
>>> roles.

Well one of the problem is that managers DO train managers. Those people in return promote managers. The said managers make ENGINEERING decisions based on budget and quite often nothing else. Unfortunately. The hope was that someone trained as a scientist/engineer might also be a great manager. It appears that it did not work quite that well. I would argue that the general problem with scientist/engineers is that they tend to not communicate very well to the audience at large. Can we get a scientist/engineer who can also lead/manage the agency? It will be the Transition Team challenge.

It's hard to see why anyone should care what Horowitz thinks about the future of NASA. He did little to distinguish himself as the AA for Exploration and during his tenure the advanced technology budget was gutted, solid requirements for Constellation were never defined, and he was unable to build confidence within the community for his Scottie rocket.

No matter how many books he self-publishes Griffin has not distinguished himself as a great leader. He has become a crank in his public appearances and snaps at people if they dare to ask a question that he has responded to in the past. He has tried to make a virtue out of being an unfeeling nerd -- exactly the opposite of what is needed to attract the best and brightest fresh-outs to NASA. While he wants the nation to invest billions in the Constellation Program he has gone out of his way to diminish and criticize the ISS. This is a huge disservice to those who have dedicated their careers to make ISS a success, not to mention the Senators and Congressmen who voted to support the program over the past 20 years.

He is exactly the wrong guy to be in charge of NASA at a time when global climate change and green aeronautics are a national priorities. His single handed decision to drop Earth science from the NASA vision has not set well with the national environmental community at a time when NASA needs to expand its appeal and relevance. His luke warm support for aeronautics has put American competitiveness in this field at risk.

The fact that Griffin and people like Horowitz think the Transition Team has no right to ask probing questions is absurd. Griffin set up an entire PA&E organization because he didn't trust analysis provided by Mission Directorates, yet he is insulted that the Transition Team dares to "look under the hood." How dare anyone challenge the assumptions of the great Mike Griffin.

And by the way Doc, you ought to log onto to NASA Watch every now and then -- you might learn something about the space community beyond what you hear in your limitied circle of Ares-huggers.