Comments on: Scientists and advocates once again seek restoration of NASA planetary funding http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: Andrew http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/#comment-397082 Sun, 03 Feb 2013 01:58:22 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6185#comment-397082 Spare me, please. I’m not gonna read all of that blather. Just be specific. What other agency funding did Ed Weiler spend to “free up money for his own obsession, which is and was cosmology.” The word “spend” means that he signed a check. The OMB is going to look askance at an NSF check signed by Ed. If you’re going to make an accusation, then just make it. Don’t hide behind a ten thousand word meandering essay that resembles a bad trip report, of which almost nothing has to do with Ed, and most of it doesn’t have to do with anything.

I’ve seen the curious, largely paranoid, and vaguely libelous stuff you’ve written about Ed over the years. Ed has honors up the kazoo, and enormous respect from the movers and shakers in space policy. What do you have to show for yourself, aside from a vanity-press book?

By the way, that “co-ordination between NASA and the NSF has been moved to a formal level by Congressional mandate” is something that I am intimately familiar with. Be careful.

I have to wonder if some rogue NEO did in fact, knock some sense out of you. Very little is ever evident here.

]]> By: E. P. Grondine http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/#comment-397022 Sat, 02 Feb 2013 18:30:48 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6185#comment-397022 Hi Andrew –

Read all about it-

http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/ccc/ce091702.html

Earlier, I’d gotten calls from the NSF about his actions.

It didn’t start off like this…

]]> By: Andrew http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/#comment-397014 Sat, 02 Feb 2013 17:46:07 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6185#comment-397014 Spending other agencies funding? That’s a cute trick. How do you suppose he managed that?

]]> By: DCSCA http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/#comment-396940 Sat, 02 Feb 2013 06:21:02 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6185#comment-396940 A quick space-related word on the passing of former NYC mayor, “‘how’my doin’?” Ed Koch. Before he was ‘hizzonor’ of the greatest city on Earth, “Steady Eddie” Koch was a NY congressman who- if memory serves- back in the day, said he could not vote for funds to look for microbes on Mars as long as he knew there were cockroaches in the slums of Harlem.

The Vikings were funded and did not find microbes, Harlem remains infested and Ed has ascended into the heavens.

]]> By: E. P. Grondine http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/#comment-396824 Fri, 01 Feb 2013 18:11:46 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6185#comment-396824 Hi Jeff –

http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/grunsfel.html

I’d have to say he has a stronger engineering background than any recent AA for SMD.

He appears to be aware of the impact hazard; if not, his fellow space explorers in B612 can bring him up to speed, if he is not there already, though I suspect that he is.

You will excuse me, but I have to deal with Boslough’s load.

]]> By: James http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/#comment-396748 Fri, 01 Feb 2013 12:05:56 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6185#comment-396748 My impression of Weiler is that while he was a smart scientist, he was horrible at leading people, or managing things. He knew how to play the dysfunctional game that is NASA HQ/OMB/White House/Congress politics, but he was not visionary in how get mission costs down, live within budgets, work with the Centers on altering their expensive ways etc While at Goddard he often complained of not having any power (i.e. money)I don’t have a sense that Astro Dr. Grunsfeld will be any different, indeed maybe worse; what qualifies him to lead SMD given the present circumstances SMD faces?

]]> By: E. P. Grondine http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/#comment-396692 Fri, 01 Feb 2013 01:51:32 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6185#comment-396692 Ed Weiler was very bad. He had a penchant for spending other agencies’ funding to free up money for his own obsession, which is and was cosmology.

He significantly mis-estimated the costs for the Next Gen and Curiousity rover.

In my opinion, Space Science is suffering now from his leadership then in the same way that Exploration is suffering now from Griffin’s tenure then.

]]> By: Aberwys http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/#comment-396673 Fri, 01 Feb 2013 00:00:46 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6185#comment-396673 Interesting question, James. Historically, what do people think of the prior SMD AAs? Weiler seemed to gave a good head on his shoulders.

]]> By: James http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/#comment-396653 Thu, 31 Jan 2013 22:27:18 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6185#comment-396653 Is Grunsfeld the right guy, the right leader, the right manager, to advocate on behalf of these organizations, assuming he agrees with them, to OMB and the White House?

]]> By: DCSCA http://www.spacepolitics.com/2013/01/31/scientists-and-advocates-once-again-seek-restoration-of-nasa-planetary-funding/#comment-396611 Thu, 31 Jan 2013 19:31:26 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6185#comment-396611 “We find the shift in budgetary priority deeply troubling,” its version states, after rueing the implications of the proposed cuts.”

In faxt, the budget overruns for Curiosity is even more troubling.throw-away planetary probes like — and unaway projects like the JWST are much more troubling in the Age of Austerity.

]]>