King Nerd at JSC

[radarredux]

The KSC Townhall meeting with Mike Griffin, who referred to an MSNBC article calling him "King Nerd", is online at:<br /><br />http://www.nasa.gov/audience/formedia/speeches/index.html<br />http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/116056main_Mike_Griffin_Town_Meeting.pdf<br /><br />I thought the following text in the transcripts illustrate the difference between Griffin and O'Keefe:<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>The use of the L-points carries a delta v penalty in the variously several hundred meter per second range to use it effectively and it carries a transit time delay of a couple days on either side, so you have to carry consumables and stuff to make up for that and people are sitting around twiddling their thumbs and so whether or not the L-points are useful in our first stages of lunar return I kind of doubt. In the context of a more fully developed architecture, if you fast forward 20 years in the future and we’ve got a base on the moon and it’s like McMerto in Antarctica, then I can see a role for the L-points in that kind of scenario if, again, and mostly L-1 if that makes sense. But you probably didn’t actually invite me here to discuss orbital mechanics. I mean, I can, but then I need a whiteboard or something. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I can't see O'Keefe responding like that <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[henryhallam]

God damn. I want to work for this guy.

 

[gunsandrockets]

If there is one thing Griffin is doing, it is bringing focus to NASA planning by choosing priorities. From the quoted text it's clear Griffin understands the value of EML-1. But it's also clear he understands the inefficiencies of EML-1 architecture as well. NASA has limited resources, and in a way NASA is starting from scratch while coping with the budget drag of the ISS at the same time. Initial objectives will have to be modest.<br /><br />Now no particular architecture has been chosen yet by NASA under Griffin. If anything EML-1 architecture as favored by the Boeing/Northrop-Grumman team is getting another shot under Griffin. Under the architecture implied by the CEV RFP of 1 March 2005, it looked like NASA was not going with EML-1 waypoints. And if the recent story from Aviation Week & Space Technology is to be believed, NASA may even go with a Moon direct flight architecture.<br /><br />http://uplink.space.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=missions&Number=225846&fpart=1&PHPSESSID=

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">If there is one thing Griffin is doing, it is bringing focus to NASA planning by choosing priorities.</font>/i><br /><br />The text was a response to a question from an employee during a Q&A. My "take away" is that this guy knows his stuff. When someone delivers a presentation to this guy, they had better leave the BS at the door, because this guy will probably be able to call you on it.</i>

 

[drwayne]

"they had better leave the BS at the door, because this guy will probably be able to call you on it."<br /><br />Those are the guys I *like* to brief. I find it interesting to brief someone who will probably teach me something before the briefing is over.<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">The KSC Townhall meeting with Mike Griffin, who referred to an MSNBC article calling him "King Nerd", is online at: </font>/i><br /> /><br /> /> http://www.nasa.gov/audience/formedia/speeches/index.html <br /> /> http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/116056main_Mike_Griffin_Town_Meeting.pdf<br /><br />By the way, went to the "speeches" page above, and the town hall meetings document links have been removed (although, the pdf link still worked). Does anyone know why it was removed? Is it temporary, or is it now policy not to post town hall type notes on the web site?</i>