William Gerstenmaier may not have been not particularly well-known to the general public, but as the associate administrator for human spaceflight at NASA he carried considerable influence in the space community. So when he was effectively terminated from his position on July 10, it reverberated both throughout the domestic as well as the international spaceflight community.
NASA chief Jim Bridenstine, who moved Gerstenmaier aside because of ongoing delays with the Space Launch System rocket and a concern that the senior official was not moving ahead quickly enough with the Artemis Moon program, has said new leadership will be in place "soon."
This will be a critical hire for Bridenstine, as his new associate administrator for human spaceflight will have a number of important and difficult calls to make upon taking the job—and not just concerning the White House's efforts to return to the Moon by 2024. In particular, in the coming months, Gerstenmaier's replacement will be chairing meetings called "Flight Readiness Reviews" that will give a green light to the first crewed missions from US soil since 2011.
SpaceX has already flown an uncrewed demonstration mission of its Dragon spacecraft. Boeing is likely to follow suit this fall with its own Starliner capsule, possibly as early as September. Then each company will have a critical test of its spacecraft's abort system, and then a chance to work through any final technical issues. But once that's done, one or both of the vehicles could be ready to launch astronauts from Florida by early 2020.
"Here’s where losing Gerstenmaier is going to hurt," said Wayne Hale, former space shuttle program manager and an adviser to NASA. "Bill was recognized by everybody as being technically well grounded and very astute. He was known to listen carefully, and to make his judgments based on good technical reasons."
"Somebody is going to be unhappy," Hale said of the Flight Readiness Reviews for the first crewed flights of the new vehicles. "I guarantee it. If it’s not one thing it will be another. There will be a contentious meeting and somebody is going to have to say, 'Well, I heard the story and I think we ought to go ahead.'"
That somebody will almost certainly be the new associate administrator for human spaceflight. And depending on his or her experience, NASA managers and rank-and-file employees may decide they don't know the new person or don't think he or she has the technical capacity to make such a complex decision. As a result, they may go talk to newspapers or members of Congress to air their concerns.
"It’s potentially going to be ugly, and they wouldn’t have done that with Bill," Hale said. "If Bill were there and said 'I heard you, and I think the risk is acceptable,' the NASA workforce would have gone along. Now, they’ve lost that."
Related Stories
SpaceX brings on NASA's former top spaceflight official as it prepares to launch first astronauts:
SpaceX is only a couple of months away from its first attempt at launching astronauts and the company has brought in one of the foremost experts in human spaceflight to help it do so successfully.
William Gerstenmaier, the former leader of NASA's human spaceflight program, has now begun working at SpaceX headquarters in Hawthorne, California, people familiar with his hiring told CNBC. In his new role Gerstenmaier is reporting to SpaceX vice president of mission assurance Hans Koenigsmann, those people said, as the company prepares to begin launching astronauts.
A SpaceX spokesperson confirmed that Gerstenmaier is a consultant for the company's reliability engineering team.
Previously Gerstenmaier served as the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations for nearly 14 years. In total he had a four decade career with NASA, working on programs ranging from the Space Shuttle to the International Space Station. Gerstenmaier is widely considered one of the world's top specialists in flying humans in space, frequently testifying before Congress on the subject.
SpaceX has hired a key NASA official to help with human spaceflight:
SpaceX has confirmed that NASA's former chief of human spaceflight, William Gerstenmaier, has joined the company as a consultant as it prepares to launch astronauts for the first time.
[...] He immediately brings credibility to the company's safety culture. Former Space Shuttle Program Manager Wayne Hale, who now chairs the human spaceflight committee of NASA's Advisory Council, told Ars last summer, "Bill was recognized by everybody as being technically well-grounded and very astute. He was known to listen carefully and to make his judgments based on good technical reasons."
(Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Friday August 09 2019, @01:20AM (21 children)
Oh, I see... this is how the "Agile spirit" gets into the space flight programme.
I'm getting my popcorn for the "break things" and "release early, release often" moments.
Not sure if they are gonna help the American space-programme, but the bugs have the potential to be spectacular.
I might have a suggestion. How about the executives at Boeing? I mean, look, they showed great reduction in time and budget in their "upgrade of the old 737 designs to the MAX" project.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 09 2019, @01:33AM (4 children)
Boeing is the obvious choice. What's the alternative? Trusting a bunch of musky couch surfers who will never get laid?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday August 09 2019, @02:05AM
Don't dismiss musky so fast, he has some green credentials I hear; weed green to be more precise.
Besides everybody knows what wonderful things the public-private partnerships provide - things like tunnels, for which the groundbreaking ceremony can be initiated at the very spot a failed space mission... ummm... landed hard; a good potential for some serious savings, especially if you repeat them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 09 2019, @02:58AM (2 children)
Musk's SLS competitor the Starship and Heavy Booster are far from complete and already further along than the SLS.
Under budget and ahead of schedule.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday August 09 2019, @03:34AM
That's not a feature, that's a bug!
I mean, look, no election donations, no pork-barelling, no nothing... In what universe are you living that those could actually happen?
(large grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Friday August 09 2019, @03:55AM
Starship may beat SLS with manned flights, and it could fly dozens of times before its first manned flight. Previously, SLS was planned to send up humans on around the second flight. Now it looks like it won't fly anybody:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Space_Launch_System_launches [wikipedia.org]
Most of the pressure is going to be on the Musky One not to kill anyone. Although Boeing will get their chance with Starliner.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 09 2019, @02:17AM (1 child)
Actually, I'm not. He's the associate administrator for human spaceflight at NASA, i.e. human lives are on the line.
Indeed. As in, Shuttle Challenger-type "spectacular".
I have a better suggestion. Why not Jim Bridenstine? After all, if he wants the associate administrator for human spaceflight at NASA to move faster on Flight Readiness Reviews then he should be willing to put his own life on the line. After all, he wouldn't dream of putting the lives of others at risk to satisfy the White House and Congress that there are no slippages in the schedule, would he?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday August 09 2019, @02:37AM
Since:
- I have no control over the thing, and...
- ... at my age, I'm not in the mood to prepare for mourning (the next one may well be mine)...
... I'm doing what I can, human lives on the line or not. But good for you if you are able to do something else.
Oh, don't table suggestions so highly common-sensical.
Trust me, they'll never be approved and/or happen (for the very reason they do make sense) and the only thing you'll face is the disappointment.
(large grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 09 2019, @02:31AM (4 children)
Quick, what does NASA stand for?
The whole popcorn thing makes you sound like somebody watching NASCAR for the crashes :) Except in this case, the spectacular involves many more human lives at even higher speeds and harsher conditions.....
I hope instead NASA keeps leading the super-anal-retentive-department about human safety and system redundancy so there are no spectacles.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday August 09 2019, @02:39AM
Now, that's an idea. I'll see if I can indulge in it once I finish paying my mortgage.
(large grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 09 2019, @05:00AM
As long as you're aren't referring to the guys who ignored the engineers and said go for launch on 51L. Those folks should have to ride the fire along with the astronauts.
(Score: 1) by barbara hudson on Friday August 09 2019, @03:39PM (1 child)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 09 2019, @05:41PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 09 2019, @02:41AM (1 child)
Any supporters of SLS need to be purged from NASA
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday August 09 2019, @04:30AM
Supporters of SLS within NASA, to the extent that they actually exist and aren't just toeing the line, probably don't matter. It's Congress that matters. Bridenstine being supportive of SpaceX and commercial partners helps a bit, but it's on SpaceX to deal the damage.
Starship is the only vehicle that can truly destroy SLS. Falcon Heavy won't cut it. Starship could go orbital during 2020, or 2021. We could see a dramatic gesture such as SpaceX landing a Starship on the Moon [teslarati.com]. These will supposedly be cheaper to produce [teslarati.com] than the Falcon 9 (not just cheaper to fly).
It looks like SLS's first flight will happen no earlier than 2021. The Artemis project and 2024 target could easily be pushed back if there are more big delays or a change in President. Falcon Heavy could be used in place of SLS for at least some flights, including Europa Clipper.
Make sure to check out the Starship event on August 24.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Coward, Anonymous on Friday August 09 2019, @05:05AM (1 child)
Trump is maybe getting on NASA's case for spending billions and having nothing to show for it. If they have another blow-up with fatalities, shut down the human spaceflight work. What's the point if they can't do anything interesting?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday August 09 2019, @03:06PM
NASA Gets Money it Didn't Ask for to Fund Second SLS Mobile Launcher; WFIRST Mission Receives Funds [soylentnews.org]
House Spending Bill Offers NASA More Money Than the Agency or Administration Wanted [soylentnews.org]
Trump has to contend with Congress when it comes to the pork rocket.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by khallow on Friday August 09 2019, @12:06PM (4 children)
NASA has always talked big about how reliable their stuff is. But in practice, a launch system that launches once every year or two will never be reliable no matter what sort of development paradigm one claims to follow.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 09 2019, @01:13PM (3 children)
"Somebody is going to be unhappy," Hale said of the Flight Readiness Reviews for the first crewed flights of the new vehicles. "I guarantee it. If it’s not one thing it will be another. There will be a contentious meeting and somebody is going to have to say, 'Well, I heard the story and I think we ought to go ahead.'"
"NASA has always talked big about how reliable their stuff is. But in practice, a launch system that launches once every year or two will never be reliable no matter what sort of development paradigm one claims to follow."
So far, designing and building a rocket that can support a perfect flight record without some trial and error is mostly just a goal. Saturn came close, shuttle not so much, falcon is pretty but good had some losses. To build a reliable rocket, you have to accept that the design process is never going to be perfect and at some point you are going to have to launch something and hopefully find out what you missed. Some warts take many flights to show up, so a system with a good, long track record is to be treasured.
The Apollo launch plan of a single stack to the moon was a drastic compromise of quick versus good. It met the primary mission goal of getting us there ahead of the Russions at the cost of our ability to do much once we were there. We haven't been back in 50 years. Fickle funding and NASA's loss of 'can do' are part of the cause, but Apollo was kind of a dead end which prevented incremental refinement to grow what we could do on the moon.
Given all this, NASA putting all their mission planning eggs in a new booster with a limited flight history is less than ideal. Having the 'right guy' in the FRR is not going to fix that.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 09 2019, @09:45PM (1 child)
Well, they can always figure that out and then do something else. It's a solved problem.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 09 2019, @09:57PM
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 09 2019, @10:03PM
Well, SpaceX is pretty close to having already launched more than SLS's planned total lifetime launches (IIRC, something like 60-100 launches over the lifetime of the SLS theoretically). Launch frequency is how you build reliable rockets.
Saturn didn't launch enough. It still could have have (and probably did!) a failure rate an order of magnitude greater than the Space Shuttle, and just got lucky.
(Score: 3, Touché) by KritonK on Friday August 09 2019, @08:37AM
In other words, he was particularly well-known.