On the same page

By Jeff Foust on 2009 December 18 at 8:12 pm ET

The White House and NASA reacted Friday to reports, such as the Science blog post late Thursday, that decisions had made about NASA’s future during Wednesday’s meeting between NASA administration Bolden and President Obama. Both organizations were clearly reading from the same script:

“The meeting with Bolden was informational, not decisional,” White House spokesman Nick Shapiro told Spaceflight Now.

“This conversation (between Obama and Bolden) was not decisional at all,” Morrie Goodman, NASA assistant administrator for public affairs, told Florida Today. “It was informational.”

“The meeting was informational, not decisional,” NASA deputy assistant administrator for public affairs Bob Jacobs posted on Twitter, in response to a comment by NASA’s Wayne Hale. “I know that’s a lot of ‘al’s.'”

Yes, that’s a lot of als, but the point’s clear: no decision has been made. Yet.

Robert G. Oler

December 19, 2009 at 1:02 am · Reply

As Pilate said at one point “what is truth?”

He was after all a politician.

I have no doubt that “no decision” is truth, as far as it goes. I doubt however that General Bolden’s visit was “informational” in a sense that only data was being gathered.

I suspect it was “informational” in what General Bolden found out.

This was a meeting at the highest level…They do not do meetings like this on a subject like this…to fill up The White House calender

Charles A. Gardner

December 20, 2009 at 2:52 am · Reply

The White House has made its decision. See the leak on ScienceInsider:
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2009/12/exclusiveobama.html#more

December 17, 2009
Exclusive: Obama Backs New Launcher and Bigger NASA Budget

Jeff Foust

December 20, 2009 at 8:22 am · Reply

Charles: we actually mentioned the Science blog post you refer to back on Thursday night; there’s a link to that post at the beginning of this one. Thanks for visiting!

Ben Russell-Gough

December 20, 2009 at 9:34 am · Reply

My own guess is that this leak was a ‘trial balloon’. As Robert Oler rightly pointed out, we are dealing with politicians here. Politicians like to test the waters before taking a plunge. It is interesting that, for all its specific nature in terms of mission and overall objectives, the leak lacked such firm details of the identity of the HLV and the replacement for the shuttle as LEO crew transport.

The leak was possibly simply to determine what the likely overall response of the community, both professional and grass-roots, would be to the plan when finally announced. As far as I can see, it was generally a qualified ‘good’ response. However, there seems to be a degree of scepticism, both from pro- and anti-Ares parties, about the commercial spaceflight sector’s ability to deliver a CLV, so that might be something the planners will take into consideration (maybe leading to an LEO-only version of the HLV for ISS support instead or as a ‘back-up’?).

My suspicion is that the reason the meeting wasn’t ‘decisional’ was because the decision was already made. Mr. Bolden was just briefing the President about the last bits of data to be plugged into the plan (i.e. reports on various Flex Path destinations vs. ‘Moon First/Next Mars’ and also the different HLV options).

White House watchers – Does the President have any speeches lined up in the next few weeks that could have an aerospace/technology theme? If so, an official announcement could be expected then.

Chuck Lauer

December 20, 2009 at 1:55 pm · Reply

At the JUSTSAP conference in Hawaii last month Charles Miller gave am excellent commercial space policy overview presentation and said “early February” would be when the new space policy would be rolled out. This coincides with the FAA / AST conference dates, FWIW.

Al Fansome

December 20, 2009 at 9:34 pm · Reply

LAUER: said â€œearly Februaryâ€ would be when the new space policy would be rolled out. This coincides with the FAA / AST conference dates, FWIW.

Early February — specifically the first Tuesday of February — is also when the President releases his proposed budget for FY2011. This “first Tuesday” is when we should know, with certainty, what the President has decided about NASA.

FWIW,

– Al

aremisasling

December 21, 2009 at 8:57 am · Reply

“Early February â€” specifically the first Tuesday of February â€” is also when the President releases his proposed budget for FY2011.”

I have my doubts as to how much, if anything at all, it had to do with the timing of the policy announcement, but that’s also shortly after the on or after date for Falcon 9 Flight 1. If everything goes well (and let’s face it, it’s rockets, it probably won’t), Obama will have a first launch of a dummy Dragon and production Falcon 9 to bolster any element of commercial he has in there. I’m curious to see if it comes into play by that point. Rockets do, on occasion, fly on time.

Aremis

Martin Finn

December 21, 2009 at 10:50 am · Reply

Looks like Andrew Lawler screwed up again. Science magazine can do much better than using him.

Freddo

December 21, 2009 at 2:29 pm · Reply

aremisasling: the Eastern Range is booked in early February for Atlas and Shuttle launches. Falcon 9 in NET late February, and probably later. Any policy announcement is going to be made no later than the FY11 budget rollout.

December 21, 2009 at 2:39 pm · Reply

Thanks for the update, Freddo. I try to keep on top of things, but launch scheduling is not something I keep too close of tabs on. I kinda figured it wouldn’t be 2/2/2010.

Dave Cadman

December 21, 2009 at 4:55 pm · Reply

Obama better make a statement before February, if he wants to use the Shuttle Infrastructure and work force to build his HLV; the redundancy rate goes up after January 1st; if he doesn’t make a statement before then it is pretty likely that it won’t be a SDLV, but the Ares V Lite or an EELV compromise;

December 22, 2009 at 9:37 pm · Reply

CADMAN: Obama better make a statement before February, if he wants to use the Shuttle Infrastructure and work force to build his HLV; the redundancy rate goes up after January 1st;

What is the “redundancy rate”?

December 23, 2009 at 6:08 am · Reply

@ Al,

It is the rate that experienced shuttle infrastructure engineers and technicians are laid off. As in the Apollo/Shuttle gap, once they are lost it is going to be difficult verging on the impossible to get them back. So, NASA will once again be in the position where it must learn everything from scratch.