Nonstopdrivel
15 years ago

Op-Ed Contributor

Faster, NASA, Faster 

By EDWARD LU

Published: December 20, 2009

Saratoga, Calif.

IN Silicon Valley we have a saying: launch early, launch often. Its an acknowledgment that successful, innovative companies are the ones that rapidly try new ideas, see what works, improve their products and repeat. Businesses that launch frequently are also able to take advantage of economies of scale to make launchings faster and easier. In many ways, the key to innovation is speed of execution.

NASA, an agency that depends on innovation, could benefit from the same mindset. To meet its new goals for human spaceflight, NASA must be able to be creative and take risks, or else it will be unable to adapt to new technology and changing political realities. Grand plans stretching over decades will become irrelevant and eventually collapse.

In the 12 years before I left NASA in 2007, we averaged about four space shuttle launchings per year. We had periods when the rate was even lower: in the late 90s, during the early construction phase of the International Space Station, and in 2003, in the wake of the space shuttle Columbia disaster. I saw firsthand the harm that low launching rates do to innovation.

With precious few flights, every available opportunity to test new equipment or run scientific investigations was filled for years into the future, and this discouraged engineers from trying out new ideas. Without actual flight test data on, for example, prototypes for new life-support equipment, management was forced to substitute analysis for real engineering experience.

As operations slowed, morale dropped and proficiency in mission control, hardware handling and other operations all declined. The space shuttle is a magnificent machine, but it is so expensive and difficult to maintain that most of NASAs effort was aimed at simply getting things up, so there were few resources left for actually exploring space. Imagine how different it would have been if we had had regular weekly launchings!

There is an important distinction to be made between the launching system (the rocket), and the spacecraft and payload (scientific instruments, experiments, people and so on) that it carries. In planning for spaceflight, the goal should be to make the launching system as robust as possible, and then launch rockets frequently so you can experiment and improve on the spacecraft and payloads that carry out missions.

I recognize that NASA cannot push a system to launch more frequently than it is capable of, because this could mean overrunning the budget or, worse, cutting corners on safety. Instead, future systems should be designed so that they can be rapidly prepared for launching by small teams.

This would not only increase NASAs ability to send up innovative payloads but also make launching systems more reliable. After all, the more a rocket is flown, the better it can be understood and the safer it becomes. Frequent launchings would also reduce costs per flight in the long run.

This strategy does have a downside: Given the reality of fixed budgets, a requirement to launch frequently would push designers to create smaller rockets. So any large spacecraft would need to be assembled and fueled in space, rather than on the ground. But if the flight rate is high and the launching system is robust, then such complications could be overcome. If, on the other hand, NASA is able to launch rockets only a few times a year, it will be difficult to maintain the innovation needed to sustain any long-term program.

The Russian Soyuz rocket demonstrates the value of frequent launching. Variants of this rocket have flown more than 1,700 times, averaging more than 30 launchings a year. As a result, the Soyuz is among the most reliable of all existing rockets. In fact, I flew into space aboard a Soyuz rocket in 2003 when NASA space shuttles had been grounded after the Columbia disaster.

There is no reason American companies could not build a similar, but modernized, medium-sized, economical workhorse of a rocket that is simple enough to sustain frequent launching. If NASA were to promise to buy one such rocket a week, the manufacturers could also profitably sell copies for launching commercial spacecraft and satellites at much lower than current prices and this would spur the development of space-based industries in fields like telecommunications, earth imaging and even space tourism.

To maintain a vibrant, innovative program, NASA needs to step up the rate of rocket launchings. It should set a requirement that any new launching system fly once a week, then put out contracts for private companies to design and build rockets that can operate this frequently. By launching early and launching often, NASA could get back in the business of exploring space.

Edward Lu, a former astronaut, is the program manager for advanced projects at Google.



Or privatize space travel and let industry come up with innovations and cheaper solutions.
UserPostedImage
Porforis
15 years ago
Silence! Government > Free market! Bureaucracy > Profit!
Formo
15 years ago

Silence! Government > Free market! Bureaucracy > Profit!

"Porforis" wrote:



+1
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Golden with two TDs in red zone drills today
Mucky Tundra (1h) : @JacobMorley Shoutout to Quinn Ewers for allowing Matthew Golden to be available when Green Bay picked.
Zero2Cool (5h) : The menu you expanded to log in, it's the first icon under "PackersHome" .. maybe i should add text to it
dfosterf (5h) : Feelin' pfowish can't find the sun. No big deal, will drag a laptop out when the time comes
Zero2Cool (5h) : if you're on mobile, open the menu and its the "sun" icon
dfosterf (5h) : Can't find the toggle, lol
dfosterf (5h) : I can find that the Microsoft lady rep for Titletown Tech is the philanthropy boss for the entire Microsoft corporation, but. .
Zero2Cool (5h) : There's a toggle for light/dark theme. Super easy.
dfosterf (6h) : The white background beta was hard to read, especially the quotes
dfosterf (6h) : Hopefully the color scheme remains the same
dfosterf (6h) : *Friday*
dfosterf (6h) : 100 million would be 539 million as of Fridsy
dfosterf (6h) : Heck, they could have taken a hundred milliion and invested in DAVE inc. last year (semi random, humor, but real)
dfosterf (6h) : Beer brat and ticket is where the money comes from
dfosterf (7h) : The 40th is Titletown Tech itself. This is a pet project of both Ed Policy and Mark Murphy
Zero2Cool (7h) : New site coming along nicely. The editor is better than what we have here. Oh yeah!
dfosterf (7h) : No profit that I know of. 0 for 40
dfosterf (7h) : The woke reference has to do with the makeup and oftentimes objectives of the companies they invested in
packerfanoutwest (7h) : beer and brats woke? say whom?
beast (7h) : I don't want to get into politics, but how is, beers and brats considered to be "woke"? Food is food...
beast (7h) : That being said, I'm not saying all 100% should be that way, but not surprised if majority are Wisconsin based
beast (7h) : And if everyone has heard of them, then it it probably has less growth potential and less community based
beast (7h) : Well isn't the investing person supposed to invest the money?
dfosterf (7h) : I swear if I were to discover that one of them has invented a virtue signalling transmitter I will not be surprised, lol
dfosterf (7h) : 39 companies so far that I bet no one has ever heard of.
dfosterf (7h) : -Not saying woke, but should- borderline philanthopist venture capital excercise
dfosterf (7h) : Well for one, they are pouring resources into Title Town Tech. Investing beer, brat, hot dog, ticket money into what is pretty much...
beast (14h) : Wow, 95% drop in investment revenue? Would be interesting to hear the details of why...
dfosterf (25-Jul) : It's my one day deal complaint dept. on shareholder meeting day
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Probably a homer access credential intimidation kinda thing
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Meathead "journalists" skip this, concentrating on operational revenue when convenient. They switch when net revenue is more favorable.
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Resulting in an actual drop of net revenue of 12.5%. She is from Minnesota. Just sayin'
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Any plans to hold Maureen Smith (CFO) accountable for a 95% drop in investment revenue?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : In your face, HBO!
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @ByRyanWood Mark Murphy: “A great source of pride of mine is that we were never on Hard Knocks.”
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : *years
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @mattschneidman Mark Murphy says he anticipates “many Packers games” being played in Germany, Ireland and/or the U.K. over the next 5-10 yea
dfosterf (25-Jul) : *cafeteria* I have hit my head also, so I sympathize
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Possibly hit his head leaning into the glass protecting the food in the cafateria
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Maybe a low flying drone
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Did Savion Williams run into a goalpost or something?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : also, no bueno when a guy starts getting concussions right off the bat in his career
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Concussion is worse. Banks probably vet off day via back booboo claim
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @AndyHermanNFL Jordy Nelson out at camp today. No word if he’s in play for one of the two open roster spots ; )
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Is that better or worse than Banks bad back?
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Savion concussion ... not good.
packerfanoutwest (24-Jul) : Aaron Rodgers’s first pass of first team period was picked off
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : tbh I didn't hear of his passing
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Cosby Show. Malcom Jamal Warner I think is real name
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : I was thinking of Ozzy and Hulk
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
5h / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jul / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

25-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

24-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

22-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.