The annual AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites is taking place this week at Utah State University. I’m not able to attend this year’s conference, but the Salt Lake City newspaper Deseret News has an article about NASA administrator Mike Griffin’s keynote address at the conference Monday afternoon. And while there were apparently some generic questions about NASA budget pressures, the development of the CEV and the like, the biggest interest among attendees was with NASA’s support—or lack thereof—of student smallsat projects and related experiments. Not that they got much sympathy from Griffin:
…a USU student asked about NASA funding for student projects.
“I doubt if there is any,” Griffin said. “It simply is not among the top priorities that I have at NASA to fund student experiments. As students you need to learn science and engineering and those disciplines, and then you need to get out among companies or laboratories and continue to learn your trade.”
That’s how to grow in the space business, he said. “It is nice when we can afford to do student experiments in a context of a university. But right now, as strapped for cash as we are, I’m simply not sure that’s a luxury we can afford.”
When asked about providing flight opportunities for university-built smallsats on NASA missions (a question that caused the room to erupt in applause, according to the article) Griffin had a similar response:
Griffin responded that he has a lot of problems ahead of that one.
“NASA cannot be responsible for everything that needs being done in the space community,” he said.
“NASA is not the galactic overlord of space and shouldn’t be.”
If educators want to negotiate with firms to get students’ experiments into space, he added, “I wish you well. But it is not my job to be the broker for those launches.”
The access to space issue is probably a bigger problem than generic funding for smallsat projects: there are a number of universities that are building or have built one-kilogram “CubeSats” as student projects, but the only affordable launch option is to fly them as secondary payloads on Russian Dnepr boosters (the Dnepr that crashed last month was carrying over a dozen CubeSats.) Those launch opportunities are not frequent, though (and may be more infrequent in the future, depending on how long the Dnepr is grounded), and have some degree of export control overhead to deal with.
A side meeting at the Utah State conference this week is one titled “Session on Re-Establishing Access to Space for Student Payloads”, which has an accompanying white paper calling on the federal government in general (NASA and DOD) to provide more flight opportunities and other support for student smallsat projects. However, Griffin is right when he says that he’s got more pressing problems to worry about than support for student smallsats projects, which is why some external impetus—like Congressional pressure—will likely be needed for any significant change to take place.
Now THATS how you inspire the next generation!
That guy just really does not get it. Where are those next generation of explorers going to come from? These student projects have created hundreds of new engineering students per year with above average competence through their experiences, exactly those who are needed by NASA in the years ahead to get us back to the Moon.
Penny wise and pound foolish he is.
Harry & Chance:
Maybe because its NOT NASA’s JOB to inspire the next generation. That job belongs to parents and teachers.
> Maybe because its NOT NASA’s JOB to inspire the next generation. That
> job belongs to parents and teachers.
Have you read the NASA mission statement? According to NASA, it their their job “to inspire the next generation of explorers… as only NASA can.”
That’s the reason they get $157 million a year in education funding.
While Griffin is saying the right thing, his delivery of the message is abysmal. And I must differ with Mr. Mealling insofar as that NASA has to inspire because they do have a bit of responsibility for cultivating their next generation of employees. In theory that’s why they do things like NASA Academy and Co-Op programs at JSC and KSC – to help cull the herd of bright space wannabes and identify who are the best and brightest so they can be co-opted into NASA before they do any real damage…
Griffin is exactly right in that these types of packages need to be placed in the arms of the smaller launch vehicle providers. The problem is that NASA can effectively give such things as a smallsat hitchhikes away for “free”, while a small, up and coming launch provider like Masten Space Systems really has no margin to be “giving away” free rides for university smallsats. Since NASA has effectively monopolized this role in the past it can’t really just walk away from the problem.
The solution is for Griffin, or someone more telegenic like Tom Hanks, to do a public service announcement wherein he lays out the fact that NASA’s new marching orders (as he’s implementing them) are restricting, if not eliminating NASA’s ability to provide the same level of support for university small sats.
He should then call upon the alumni of USA’s universities to mount a fundraising campaign to ensure that these important projects, which strengthen the US’s competitive capabilities, continue and are funded to fly on the many smaller launchers being created in this nation.
Invest in your alma mater, invest in your nation’s future (…your retirement may depend on it ;-).
At least that’s what I’d do if I were Administrator, but you couldn’t pay me enough to do that job.
“Maybe because its NOT NASA’s JOB to inspire the next generation. That job belongs to parents and teachers.”
Even leaving aside the mission statement Ken mentions, it’s still Nasa’s job to inspire, and for a practical reason: if not enough young people are inspired to enter the field, Nasa won’t have enough people later to accomplish their mission. Why does the military have JROTC, Blue Angels, and parades (ect)? To inspire people in order to recruit them later. It’s no differant for NASA. Yeah, so what the administrator said is true, so what? Such a speech in front of such an audience calls for tact.
Besides, my teachers and parents sucked at inspiration, so somebody’s got to do it.
Ok, let me rephrase that a little. It shouldn’t be NASA’s job to ‘inspire’ the next generation of aerospace engineers anymore than it was the railroad’s job to inspire people to migrate west or its IBM’s job to inspire the next generation of computer engineers. IBM may have to recruit at times as a workforce issue since parents and teachers aren’t doing their jobs, but IBM’s job is to increase shareholder value by selling IT products and services.
NASA’s job should be to explore the other planets and beyond. Leave the inspiration/educational aspects to people like NADC, AIAA, etc. You want inspiration? Help get a space company to IPO and offer really good stock options. Nothing inspires a kid to go into a profession more than seeing someone in that profession driving a hot sports car.
What happened to us that we now look to a government program for our inspiration?
Sorry, just one of my personal pet peeves…
Can someone please explain to me why sending small projects into space is now requisite to inspire students?
Seeing student projects waste money does nothing for me. I think NASA will continue to recruit the top engineers so long as they spend their money on the projects that only NASA can carry out.
Those are just my two cents, and I am a student. I am not trying to defend Griffin. Honestly he sounds kind of rude.
If someone called this nudnik penny wise, I think Grif needs to give them 15/16th of a cent in change.
This wind-up toy “Vulcan” Administrator is worse than the moron in cowboy boots, and that goes a long way.
I read today on Spaceflight Now that the new manned spacecraft is supposed to be “safer and cheaper” to operate. It’s clear to me that not only has all this time been wasted, but so has been the far greater price NASA has paid for this sort of attitude from the top down for over 20 years.
Without the space program, the future of the nation and the world is somewhat limited. Well, at least the “vision” of those running the mental ward at NASA matches the future they would see us have.
Now, the question becomes Will we as a people and a Nation have the chutzpah to do something about it, or just go back to watching “Reality TV” shows?
You may have hit upon something. Why not have a reality show where the contestants face a grueling set of mental and physical challenges in order to secure a spot on a commercial space flight? Call it “Who wants to go to space?”. The contestant, the network, the company, everybody wins. Well, except the loser.
” Leave the inspiration/educational aspects to people like NADC, AIAA, etc. You want inspiration? Help get a space company to IPO and offer really good stock options………………………..
What happened to us that we now look to a government program for our inspiration?”
Mike –
Attitude’s such as yours have existed throughout American history. In my own native Ohio, for example, creation of a public school system was delayed for decades by kindred spirits who wondered why anyone else was needed to inspire and educate their children; worst of all, the dad ‘burn gov’mint. The most famous opponent, at his direction, was buried with a tombstone that read (still reads!): “Here lies an opponent of public schools”.
I personally consider it NASA”s job to do this much more than it is NASA’s job to keep ’10 healthy centers’ in place – without reforms, no less – exactly as they are, burning through a hell of a lot more money than they need to.
Are you running for the position of Head of Evolution Theology in this Administration, or something?
dave
As someone who has actually ran a small sat program at a University I can tell you that it is hugely valueable. When we were designing SEDSAT-1 the then Colonel (later General, now NASA Center Director) Pete Worden dropped by to visit our lab. I showed him some of the flight hardware, including a machined piece of the outer shell of the spacecraft. There were some mistakes in the design that a mechanical engineering student made that cost us about $3000. In the next revision this was fixed and the part was lighter and stronger.
I showed this to Pete and his response was, “It is much better that he made this $3000 mistake now and learned from it. This way he won’t make a $3 million dollar mistake when he comes to work for me.”
The small sat program, and especially stuff like the cubsats are incredible multidisciplinary learning tools for student engineers. A cubesat is small enough to where just a few students, working together, learn about thermal, structural, power, communications, and computer systems and how they interact with each other. It makes them better students and better engineers when they leave the university.
An almost universal lament about fresh out engineering grads at most universities is that they don’t really know anything practical when they graduate. These cubesat programs and other small sat efforts are hugely important in providing real world training for students and this makes them much more valuable to NASA, DoD, and the contractor world when they graduate.
I daresay that NASA would be much better off in the VSE right now if there was more practicality in the CEV, CLV, and Ares flight development program.
We graduated five masters degree level students and provided several hundred hours of undergraduate engineering credits for these student efforts at UAH and we LAUNCHED our bird because NASA paid for the secondary payload opportunity back in a more enlightened time.
Dennis
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that small sats not be done. I’m working as closely as possible with all of the various groups in that community (soda cans up to CubeSats). We expect to be flying their payloads soon.
I’m just suggesting that NASA isn’t the agency to be doing that kind of thing. Its kind of like expecting the Department of Transportation to buy and in some cases build all of the cars and trucks that the government uses. Just because DOT has the word “transportation” doesn’t mean they actually provide it. Just because NASA has the word ‘space’ in its title doesn’t mean they should be the ones providing rides for free to everyone.
Michael
I really don’t see it that way. What other agency, if any would do it? Government agencies are very myopic and if it is space, then it is assumed that it is NASA (or DoD). I do look forward to the day when commercial entities can take up payloads inexpensively or free for university students. My point is that students who do these projects are much more likely to be useful to their employers afteward, whether that employer is NASA or Masten.
Dennis