Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

White House Was Warned of Shuttle Safety (Media Bias Alert)
Reuters ^ | February 3, 2003 | Randall Mikkelsen

Posted on 02/03/2003 3:11:05 PM PST by Indy Pendance

First, an August 29, 1995 letter to the White House, the next section is the Reuters story.


Garcia Letter on Shuttle Safety

29 August 1995

The Honorable Bill Clinton
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, DC


Dear Mr. President:

The biggest threat to the safety of the Shuttle and its crew since the Challenger disaster is presently under way at NASA. My concerns, as well as those of my colleagues, are falling on deaf ears. In their misguided attempt to economize, they have lost sight of what keeps the Shuttle safe. There are ways to economize and still keep the Shuttle safe, without dismantling the best launch team in the world.

I am a NASA manager with over 30 years at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) working on Manned Spacecraft. Prior to Mr. Goldin's tenure at NASA, I always felt that any concerns I might have had on any subject could be addressed to management and a sincere effort would be made to resolve my concerns. Now I feel I can't even voice my concern. Talented and capable high level managers who I know share these concerns, as a result, are leaving the program. It is very disappointing that for whatever reason these individuals, who would have a much greater impact than my speaking out, haven't had the intestinal fortitude to speak their mind for the good of the program. It is very difficult to have a free exchange of ideas in our present environment. Recently, at a meeting with KSC middle management, Mr. Goldin said, "I have all my people in all the right places and anyone who doesn't line up is gone." An environment for a free exchange of ideas? I don't think so!

As a result of the re-inventing government and budget cutting efforts underway in Washington, all federal agencies (including and especially NASA) are going through reorganization and down-sizing. Mr. Dan Goldin has the difficult task of developing a way to accomplish these goals within NASA. I am writing this letter to elaborate and emphasize my concern about Mr. Goldin's efforts to delete the 'checks and balances' system of processing shuttles as a method toward saving money. Historically NASA has employed two engineering teams at KSC, one contractor and one government, to cross check each other and prevent catastrophic errors. Although this technique is expensive, it is effective, and it is the single most important factor that sets the Shuttle's success above that of any other launch vehicle.

Operational efficiencies within NASA should be accomplished with minimal, if any, effect on the safety of the shuttle and its crew. Anyone who doesn't have a hidden agenda or fear of losing his job would admit that you can't delete NASA's checks and balances system of Shuttle processing without affecting the safety of the Shuttle and its crew.

I know that NASA, like all other federal agencies, needs to become more efficient and economize, but the last place that any sudden or drastic changes within NASA should occur is in the hands-on shuttle processing operations. In our business there is little margin for error and there are no second chances; therefore, any changes should be made judiciously.

The very last place that cuts should be made are in hands-on NASA/contractor shuttle processing efforts from launch preparation through landing. Unfortunately, it has been the first place cuts have been made during the past year, and is now the object of an unconscionable attempt to drastically change the 'checks and balances' system which has been the backbone of safe manned space flight.

Mr. Goldin is trying to be more efficient and do things more economically within NASA; however, because his background lies in unmanned space vehicle operations, he does not understand the additional requirements of manned space vehicle processing. He speaks of safety, but his actions and direction on shuttle processing are anything but safe. I know that there is no one in Congress or the country that wants us to do anything to jeopardize the safety of the shuttle or its crew.

Privatize a national resource?? No, I don't believe it wise nor that it is what the American public wants. The Shuttle is a national resource that belongs to the American public - not a contractor. The Shuttle is also a complex R&D vehicle - you can't privatize its processing like you would the running of a cafeteria. Drastically changing the 'checks and balances' method of processing by taking NASA out of the process and leaving it to a contractor is unwise. It would be better to cancel the manned space flight program than to recklessly endanger a future shuttle and its crew.

All NASA managers, whether located at KSC, JSC, MSFC, or NASA Headquarters would like to think that they are the main reason for the success and safety of the Shuttle. However, the policies and procedures established at KSC and the checks and balances performed by the KSC NASA/contractor team of systems engineers working around the clock are the real reasons for the success and safety of the Shuttle. The flight controllers at JSC and the supporting design centers do a great job, but their performances depend solely on the hardware that KSC delivers.

NASA was in the process of declaring the shuttle operational and turning the pre-launch processing over to a contractor just prior to the Challenger disaster. It was a mistake then and it is a mistake now. Let me re-emphasize what was pointed out by independent post Challenger investigation committees and stated to me personally by Dr. Feynman, a Nobel Prize winning physicist. Dr. Feynman indicated the following to me: "The shuttle is an R&D vehicle and needs to be dealt with as such. The Orbiter is not growing more reliable with time - just the opposite. We are charting new water every day. The environment that the shuttle is exposed to is taking its toll, we don't know the effect it is having on the shuttle. We should be doing more pre-launch checks - not less."

As a current KSC Shuttle Operations Manager, I can attest that over 50% of the turnaround processing work at KSC is unplanned. Our engineers and contractors continually find new areas of concern and develop innovative solutions to keep the Shuttle flying safely. Our current system of 'checks and balances' is an integral part of safely doing this job. It is not an overlap or duplication of effort as suggested by some.

Removing NASA from everyday hands-on Shuttle processing efforts, and instead authorizing NASA to perform only audit functions, would result in NASA processing the Shuttle in the same manner that unmanned launch vehicles are presently processed.

My concerns for this type of Shuttle processing are reflected in the following statistics: Since 1985, the Shuttle success rate has been 97.56% as compared to 95% for U. S. Department of Defense, 87% for U. S. Civil/Commercial and 92% for European Commercial. The Shuttle program has a 98.59% success rate for the life of the program. Please note that if the Shuttle had the same success rate as it competitors, NASA would no longer even have a Shuttle fleet, not to mention the loss of astronaut lives.

Since Shuttle hardware is not only older than that of unmanned launch vehicle hardware, it is also reusable, then why is the success rate of the Shuttle better? Could it be that the processes and procedures and checks and balances used in its pre-launch checkout produce this success?

KSC has made numerous changes to streamline pre-launch processing. Both the contractor and NASA have down-sized (approximately 30%) without significantly jeopardizing Shuttle safety. Until recently, we were continuing our downsizing efforts, but we were doing it prudently. Today, it appears that KSC's management is climbing on Goldin's "BUS TO ABILENE."

The KSC NASA/contractor launch team is in the risk management business. Drastically changing the KSC launch team will unequivocally increase risk to the Shuttle and its crew. If these drastic changes are implemented, the perpetrators should not only be held accountable for their action, they should be held "criminally liable" for the consequences.

The KSC Shuttle launch team (NASA/contractor) is the best in the world. We shouldn't let Mr. Goldin dismantle it. Let's keep KSC a Center of Excellence. We are running out of time. We really need your help. Possibly an independent group, as was formed post-Challenger, is needed to make an independent assessment of the consequence of deleting the 'check and balances' system of shuttle processing. This is the biggest shuttle safety concern since the Challenger accident.

The safety of the shuttle needs your help.

Sincerely yours,




Jose' Garcia


cc:
Honorable Congressman Dave Weldon, House, 15th District
Mr. Dan Goldin, NASA Administrator
Mr. Jay Honeycutt, KSC/NASA Director
Mr. George W. S. Abbey, JSC/NASA Acting Director
Mr. John W. Young, Special Assistant for Engineering, Operations, and Safety
Mr. John Manning, Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel
Mr. Michael J. Coleman, President and Publisher, Florida Today
Mr. Thomas Curley, President and Publisher, USA Today


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-177 next last
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A former NASA safety official wrote to President Bush last year to warn of "another catastrophic space shuttle accident," but Bush did not see the letter and the writer's plea was rejected, the White House said on Monday.

Columbia broke up on Saturday as it began to reenter the atmosphere over Texas, shortly before it was to land.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Bush had not seen the letter written to him on Aug. 25, 2002, by former NASA safety engineer Don Nelson expressing concerns over shuttle safety. "Your intervention is required to prevent another catastrophic space shuttle accident," he said.

He cited specific safety incidents including a 2000 inspection of Columbia which found 3,500 wiring defects, as well as charges such as a July 2002 inspector general's report that the shuttle safety program was not properly managed.

"The lives of our astronauts and the future of our space program must not be ignored," he said. He urged Bush to limit the size of the shuttle's crew to four until an escape pod was built.

Such a pod would not have saved Columbia's astronauts, experts have said.

White House science adviser John Marburger wrote back to Nelson on Dec. 4, saying his office had discussed the concerns with NASA officials. "NASA places a high priority on safety and has instituted a program of developing and implementing safety upgrades to reduce the risk to space shuttle crews," he said.

"Based on these discussions I do not think that it is appropriate for the president to issue a moratorium on space shuttle launches at this time." Fleischer said on Sunday that an escape pod would not have saved Columbia's astronauts.

Bush, who is to attend a memorial for the astronauts at the Johnson Space Flight Center in Houston on Tuesday, received a briefing on Monday from NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe on the investigation into the Columbia disaster and the two spoke of their determination to return to space.

"While we grieve for these astronauts, the cause for which they died will continue. America's journey into space will go on," Bush said in a speech to employees at the National Institutes of Health.

As he briefed the president O'Keefe said he intended "to get back into space as soon as possible with all safety issues having been fully, fully explored," Fleischer said.

Bush, who is to attend a memorial service in Houston on Tuesday for the shuttle crew, asked about the well-being of the astronauts' families and NASA morale, and looked ahead to an eventual resumption of flights, Fleischer said.

"The president talked about the status of the next crews and the morale of the next crew and how they are ready to go as soon as they are able to go back into space." He said, however, Bush did not suggest a timetable for the investigation. Shuttle flights have been grounded following Saturday's accident.

Bush proposed a 22 percent increase on Monday for the space shuttle program in his fiscal 2004 federal budget request to Congress, which was prepared before the Columbia disaster. He requested $3.9 billion for the program, compared with $3.2 billion in 2003.

Administration officials left the door open to further increases if sought by Congress. They said it was too early to consider whether to replace the lost shuttle -- one of four in the program, or to tackle other issues such as developing a successor spacecraft.

Columbia's loss has prompted calls for more spending to upgrade the aging shuttle fleet and develop a new space plane.

In addition to the space shuttle funding increase, the proposed total budget for NASA was slated for a smaller increase, rising $469 million to $15.47 billion, reflecting one-time expenses in 2003 that would not be repeated, Fleischer said.

1 posted on 02/03/2003 3:11:05 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
1995? Why didnt Clinton fix it then?
2 posted on 02/03/2003 3:15:10 PM PST by cardinal4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
Oh hear we go the new DNC mantra... McCoughUp is probably working the phones, scheduling Dems to spin this on CNN, as we speak. How low can they go?
3 posted on 02/03/2003 3:15:38 PM PST by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW; BureaucratusMaximus; Fred Mertz
FYI.
4 posted on 02/03/2003 3:16:34 PM PST by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
Then tomorrow the Dems will be screaming at how much money President Bush promised NASA.
5 posted on 02/03/2003 3:16:46 PM PST by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4
That may not be the best defense of the President. Clinton should have fixed it but so should have this administration.
6 posted on 02/03/2003 3:16:47 PM PST by Theyknow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
That's why I put the 1995 letter first. Get the truth out.
7 posted on 02/03/2003 3:16:57 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Theyknow
The dems are looking to spin this any way possible. They don't care about our country, only about regaining power, and advancing their socialist/marxist agenda. They are trying every trick imaginable. We just have to counter their deceitful tactics.
8 posted on 02/03/2003 3:19:17 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Theyknow
Fixing it requires $$$$$$$$$. This blame game crap is ridiculous. It is all politics, and not popular to constituants on either side of the aisle up to this point.
9 posted on 02/03/2003 3:19:35 PM PST by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
Thats odd, it took the Commie, lib media DNC 3 days to get the spin machine into gear. I could write a memo stating airliners are dangerous and will crash and the odds favor it sooner or later, sheeessshh what a maroon.
10 posted on 02/03/2003 3:22:18 PM PST by Uncle George
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance; Theyknow
The dems are looking to spin this any way possible. They don't care about our country, only about regaining power, and advancing their socialist/marxist agenda. They are trying every trick imaginable. We just have to counter their deceitful tactics.

This is their lowest tactic yet.

11 posted on 02/03/2003 3:22:24 PM PST by cardinal4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
Can Bush Knew be far behind?
12 posted on 02/03/2003 3:25:45 PM PST by Trust but Verify
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: Indy Pendance
It's not just the liberal media spouting such nonsense!

I received a "NEWS ALERT" from NewsMax with the headline "Shuttle Cover-Up".

Shuttle Cover-up?

There was one odd item in the Washington Post story Sunday about the shuttle crash. White House Chief of Staff Andy Card was up at Camp David with the president. They had originally planned to have British Prime Minister Tony Blair up there, but the foggy conditions prevented helicopter flights. So Friday afternoon the two leaders had their meeting in the White House residence instead.

Then the Bush party went up to Camp David for the weekend.

Saturday morning, according to this story, Card was "watching NASA TV at Camp David when the accident occurred." He then immediately went over to Bush's cabin, Aspen, and told the president what happened.

The fact that the White House chief of staff is even watching the landing of a space shuttle on a Saturday morning - while at Camp David in the middle of the Iraq crisis - raises a big red flag.

Was he previously informed that NASA was worried about tile damage from the launch?

How much internal chatter about a risky landing was there?

Did NASA expect trouble on an otherwise routine landing?

How many other officials suspected trouble Saturday morning?

Did NASA tell the astronauts and their families of the extra risk with this landing?

These and many other questions are hanging in the air as NASA tries to figure out what happened.

It seems possible that right after the launch NASA officials grew worried that there may have been serious damage. Perhaps they then had high-level meetings about their worries and, as a potential CYA measure, informed Andy Card.

It is odd that the White House chief of staff would watch a shuttle landing. Such a routine event - early on a Saturday morning, in the midst of Blair, U.N. inspections, Colin Powell's upcoming intelligence revelations to the Security Council - seems to be something that a White House big shot would pay no attention to.

If he had a heads-up that something might have been amiss, then we need to be told. And it will come out - eventually.

Haven't we all learned that cover-ups are huge mistakes? It is always better just to square with the people.

NASA has a wonderful safety record over 40 years of manned space flight. They now need to also have a wonderful candor record.

I emailed Newsmax back with an UNSUBSCRIBE request. Who needs to waste time on this garbage. I expected more from Newsmax.
14 posted on 02/03/2003 3:28:18 PM PST by Republican Red
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
What did Bush know and when did he know it?
15 posted on 02/03/2003 3:30:19 PM PST by The Vast Right Wing (Some drink from the fountain of knowledge, the French and Germans only gargle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican Red
I received that same crap from Newsmax! I deleted without reading!
16 posted on 02/03/2003 3:31:45 PM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
Here we go...WHAT DID BUSH, WHEN DID HE KNOW IT? My wife said this would be the RATS plan of attack as early as Saturday morning. She seems to have been right on. Is NOTHING sacred with this group?
17 posted on 02/03/2003 3:31:51 PM PST by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I will defend to your death my right to say it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
I'm tired of the media rhetoric that makes the huge leap from the highly general "the administration knew" to "the President knew." He has to trust his decision-makers and the advice of his experts. If the Columbia tragedy was a failure, then it's necessary to reevaluate the credentials of everyone who has been vested with authority in this area of the space program. But to suggest that any sound probable arguement of warning might have reached, much less persuaded "the President" beforehand is unrealistic at least and dishonest at most. We have to remember how many accolades and achievements were weighing the other side of the scale.

When does a voice in the wilderness become a chorus? Usually after the fact. Beforehand I'm sure the preponderance of evidence and opinion available to "the administration" (pick whichever one you like) was in support of the shuttle's safety. Unfortunate but true.

18 posted on 02/03/2003 3:32:40 PM PST by Puddleglum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican Red
Apparently, Newsmax writer was misinformed - or the report I heard on the tv last night was wrong. I heard it reported that Card was at the White House and was looking up on the web for a weather report and saw the news flash about NASA losing communication with the space shuttle. It was at that time that he called the President and informed him that NASA had lost communications.
19 posted on 02/03/2003 3:32:58 PM PST by Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Republican Red
I wanted to get this 1995 letter out. Clearly, there was underfunding. From the letter:

I am writing this letter to elaborate and emphasize my concern about Mr. Goldin's efforts to delete the 'checks and balances' system of processing shuttles as a method toward saving money. Historically NASA has employed two engineering teams at KSC, one contractor and one government, to cross check each other and prevent catastrophic errors. Although this technique is expensive, it is effective, and it is the single most important factor that sets the Shuttle's success above that of any other launch vehicle.

[snip]

In our business there is little margin for error and there are no second chances; therefore, any changes should be made judiciously.

[snip]

The very last place that cuts should be made are in hands-on NASA/contractor shuttle processing efforts from launch preparation through landing. Unfortunately, it has been the first place cuts have been made during the past year, and is now the object of an unconscionable attempt to drastically change the 'checks and balances' system which has been the backbone of safe manned space flight.

20 posted on 02/03/2003 3:36:23 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-177 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson