Posted on 03/14/2006 6:12:18 PM PST by NormsRevenge
HOUSTON, Texas - It was billed as an official NASA Headquarters briefing to space scientists—but turned into a powder-keg of emotion.
Frustrated researchers are demanding explanation as to projected NASA budget cuts, mission deferrals, and space agency decision-making that could derail solar system exploration plans.
The collision between scientists and top NASA officials took place March 13, here at the 37th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (LPSC), which began Monday and runs throughout the week.
Surgery, so to speak
On the hot seat was NASA Associate Administrator for Science, Mary Cleave. She advised a standing-room-only crowd of scientists that the NASA fiscal year budget for 2007 has been impacted by "budget liens in the shuttle program. And those liens needed to be covered."
Cleave said that there was no money left in aeronautics. "So we were the only ones left, so to speak." She emphasized that the pace of growth in space science has been reduced to cover the shuttle program.
"We're still going to grow compared to a lot of other agencies in the discretionary budget. We are extremely fortunate to still be growing," Cleave explained. "We're trying to build an executable program," she added, one that be accomplished on a schedule and given tight budget dollars. "We're going to have to do some surgery, so to speak."
Doing with less
Andrew Dantzler, director of NASA's solar system division in Washington, D.C., spotlighted the $1.8 billion budget number for solar system exploration in the newly issued space agency budget. That's a lot of money, he said, but he did note that past budget projections suggested a higher number.
"The fact is, it's sort of like stocks. At some point it doesn't triple every time," Dantzler said. "We had projected growth in the past. But this is more of a correction to that 45-degree-angle growth, if you will. It's a lot of money. If we use it correctly, if we use it smartly, we can do an awful lot."
Dantzler said that space scientists have been very successful in the past "with this amount, and less."
NASA: a 'science vacuum'
The response from space scientists attending the annual NASA briefing at LPSC was highly-charged. Several researchers characterized the budget reductions as the most serious threat to the space science community in a generation.
A concern—given that the NASA cuts are maintained—was the impact on the ability of researchers to "reduce" the science data gleaned from space missions, a process of sorting through data that's tagged as research and analysis. Other scientists told the NASA officials that the budget hits translate into letting go university talent—graduate and post-doctoral students.
One scientist characterized the NASA officials as sitting around a conference table at the top floor of NASA Headquarters in a "science vacuum," a comment that sparked applause from the audience.
"I don't understand why you're so angry," Cleave responded. "We come to work every day and we work hard. We really care about this program," she said.
The fury from the floor of the meeting was not kept within U.S. borders. Scientists from Europe also cautioned that the NASA budget is damaging international cooperation. Several projects, including the now-scuttled Dawn mission to asteroids, involve non-U.S. partners.
Train wrecks
One hot-button topic, for example, is a funding cut for a mission to Europa, a moon of Jupiter, with possible high value in term of exobiology. "The Europa line is gone because we don't have the money to do it now. We didn't say that we're never going to do it. It's just that we don't have it within this budget framework," Cleave responded.
"If you want to do Europa, the money is going to have to come from somewhere," Cleave said.
Cleave said that a new set of advisory subcommittees is being established at NASA. These new groups can help NASA discern what the proper budgetary mix should be, she said. "We may not have gotten this balance right. We're hearing we didn't get it right on R&A [research and analysis]. We will be talking to our science subcommittees," she explained.
Other scientists emphasized that there is no dialog between space researchers and space agency higher-ups to avoid the "train wrecks" apparent within the NASA fiscal year 2007 budget. "Perhaps these new NASA advisory groups may deal with that," William Bottke of the Southwest Research Institute, told SPACE.com.
"We all know they've got budget problems," said Glenn MacPherson, curator at the Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. "But there has been no consultation with the science community. The science cuts hurt everyone in this room."
As the "NASA night" at LPSC closed, one researcher added: "I hope you sense the mood of the audience and reason with us."
"The mood is really very obvious. It's not hard to sense," Cleave said. "We all really care about this program. We all work as hard as we can to maintain it. We really do."
Part of me wish we could fund NASA more. Another part of me realizes that NASA accounting has not been very good in the past and as an agency it needs to realize it must live within a budget. What do others think?
That's because it's already been cast in stone by President Bush.
It doesn't make sense to pump all that money into a dead-end program.
Waaaaa. And in the old days, circa 10 years ago, you would have taken your layoff, pension and career and found another job.....boo effing hoo. Make sure you have a strong case BEFORE you flame......I'm itching for a throwdown.
By all means, we shouldn't listen to the best and brightest, but let all the politicians decide our scientific course. /s
Funding science marker
For starters, here are a couple threads, just click on the keyword NASA, and scroll down a couple months is where I found these.
NASA Budget Cuts Jeopardize Environmental Satellite Missions ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1591031/posts
New Budget Delays or Cancels Much-Promoted NASA Missions ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1588250/posts
Faster?, Better?, Cheaper!
Yes. The curator at the Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. is the star pupil of the scientific community. I'm sure he REALLY knows the insides of NASA./s
Translation - I can't afford enough graduate students to do the work FOR me.
I think that looking for germs on Europa is an interesting idea but not a pressing national priority. Europa's not going anywhere, the germs can wait.
I dunno if the space shuttle is producing much more than something that would find whales under Europas oceans..
The space telescope project that would find earthlike planets around other stars has been cancelled. That is probably the big one in longterm importance if not in dollars.
I have always thought that the search for life in the solar system, while admirable, might not be the best way to spend our dollars.
That's not exactly how it works. These people are getting grants for their grad students so they can do the reasearch they need for their dissertations. The government is not going to award the money to do the research to the students alone, without professorial oversight. And it's in this pool of young fresh minds that a lot of the innovation comes out. And they are cheaper to hire, to boot, so it becomes a win-win.
There are abuses, but these students would never get their projects funded without the system.
For the last THREE full years the shuttle program has burned through how many hundreds of billions of dollars? And you have ONE puny launch to show for it. Continuing to pump money down the rat-hole that is the shuttle program at the expense of actual science is a losing proposition.
As a person who defended the expenditure of tax dollars for NASA for around thirty years, I had to accept reality around ten years ago.
I don't have much to say about this budget mess. I hear a lot of talk about the best and the brightest, but I'll be damned if I can see anything so remarkable about NASA's last 35 years. Oh sure, NASA has had it's flashes in the pan. Along with others I apprediated a number of achievements.
The question is, where are we today, and how in the sam hell did we wind up in this dire mess?
Having failed to answer for their criminal negligence in the past, I don't have much use for NASA any longer. We basicly have a crap shoot of a launch system. After lying to the public for months about improved systems, the last launch suffered from the same problem the ill fated shuttle did.
One thing I will say in NASA's favor that is in the current news, I'm glad it's governor gave the next shuttle crew a two month reprieve. Still it would have been better and a lot more humane if they'd have commuted their sentences to life on earth, or until a safe lauch vehicle was developed.
Throw 25% of the NASA budget at private enterprise groups and we'll have a safe profitable lauch system within five years. Nice knowing you NASA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.