He's one of the three NASA administrators I've been lucky enough to know personally. I was against his nomination. If given 2 hours, I could have come up with a list off the top of my head of at least 100 people I'd have chosen over him that would have been expertly qualified.
If possible, I'd hand him a 5 year term today over even a year of Isaacman. That's the amount worse this pick could end up being.
I will say that Bridenstine went from someone I was deeply skeptical about to probably one of the best admins NASA has ever had.
My main take is that Isaacman is either going to have the same kind of transformation and wind up being good for NASA (which the crowd cheering him on at the moment is fundamentally opposed to) or he’s going to double down hard, piss off Congress, and become completely ineffectual to the point of getting removed. Not sure which one is more likely, he has guardrails now.
My main take is that Isaacman is either going to have the same kind of transformation and wind up being good for NASA (which the crowd cheering him on at the moment is fundamentally opposed to)
Why? The general consensus here even among the people who support Isaacman was that Bridenstine was a good admin.
Why do you think people cheer for Isaacman? Because they want NASA to fail, or because they want NASA to succeed?
The truth is, NASA isn't doing well, and hasn't been in a long while now. Things like SLS and MSR and Artemis mission statement don't happen in a space agency that has its shit together. If Isaacman can unfuck even a part of this mess, then he's going to be a good NASA administrator.
I'd agree that NASA has issues but in my view, their biggest issue is congress. NASA was required by law to create SLS the way they did and funding for the various programs is also up to congress. Congress keeps dumping more money than NASA requested into SLS, and then they defund programs that NASA really wants or needs. And Boeing is more than happy to take that extra funding so they have something to spend on kickbacks.
I don't think any NASA administrator really has the ability to fix that, but Isaacman is at least competent and might have a shot at tipping the scales in a positive way.
The problem is that NASA is the single most public-facing scientific agency in the United States. Therefore, when an administration wants to make a statement about their commitment to science or American innovation, they start trying to dictate NASA's priorities. When they want to make a statement about government waste or budget overruns, they also use NASA. When they need a convenient middleman to funnel money to civilian aerospace contractors, they use NASA.
When NASA is left alone and allowed to do NASA things, they do good work. They're not without their flaws, but they have a lot of very talented people working there. But the government equivalent of the CEO who thinks nine women can make a baby in one month because one woman makes a baby in nine months always has to get involved, and that's when the problems become serious.
Why? I thought the consensus was that Isaacman would be well-equipped to navigate private-public interaction which is essential right now. I’m asking genuinely, because it seems like public perception has flipped. (Though perhaps this post has simply reached a wider, less-informed audience.)
I guess I’m more focused on the space fanatic crowd, which I’m a part of and of which this subreddit is generally composed of. It seemed like people were-even as of a month ago-excited about the prospect of Isaacman.
Totally agree on the Trump admin’s budget cuts being a travesty, it’s really sad to see.
We're playing under different rules now. While the administrator does still matter, trumps gutting of the federal government and wanton destruction of anything touched by his predecessors will encompass NASA regardless of who leads the agency. It's a pretty awful situation to be in.
You can't seriously believe this. If he changes his ways and suddenly starts doing everything right, why would that not matter to people? Do you think people live purely to spite you? Politics isn't sports teams, it's really important stuff.
Edit: lol, lmao even at all the people who blocked me. Take your chronically online, doomer cynicism and chuck it in the trash.
The vast majority are completely checked out. The majority don't vote regularly in national or local elections, and they couldn't tell you what political parties most prominent politicians belong to. I don't think we've ever hit above 50% voter turnout in a midterm election.
I'm unhappy with a lot of the things he has said he will do but I won't hate him for doing them if he does what he said he would do, I'm not sure I would do anything different if I were NASA administrator (I think his suggestions are probably the bare minimum of kowtowing to Trump's nonsense to avoid getting fired.) And anyone taking the position shouldn't set out to get fired.
NASA no longer owns Discovery. Issacman has absolutely no say in what happens to it. If it gets moved it will be completly on congress, Issacmans support for the idea doesn’t mean much.
Exactly. And Ted Cruz, one of the only three people who want it (somehow) is head of one of the committees he needed to pass for confirmation. There’s a good chance it’s just an empty promise from Isaacman and he won’t actually do it. I mean what would he gain from it?
Crossing my fingers, but unfortunately I wouldn’t be surprised if he truly goes through with moving her.
With a name like Cruz, how do we really know that he’s actually an American citizen?! Maybe ICE should investigate him! All those Cancun trips are soo sus. 🙃
I know and I think "Rook" would have no problem saying he doesn't have the authority. He tool Cruz what he wanted to hear, it is all part of the game. Cruz knows that to so he can say, "See I tried!!".
the smithsonian leadership is completely dominated by trump supporters, no matter what the rank and file say. nasa alone has the power to slow walk this thing until it gets cancelled.
No it doesn’t, if congress or Trump want to move Discovery they will move Discovery regardless of permission or ownership. Issacman’s support or lack of would not mean anything to any administration because the department he runs has absolutely nothing to do with Discovery’s preservation outside of owning it over a decade ago. Issacman is completely irrelevant to if discovery stays or gets moved.
People forget that Congress is the top dog when it comes to our government. We think we have this equal branches thing, but we do not. The people are THE power in the US. We've just grown stupid and elected terrible sycophants. But the minute we elect a sane and awake Congress all this nonsense stops.
Thank you. It drives me crazy when people say that the Executive is supposed to be a check and balance on the Legislature. Like no, its literal purpose is to execute the laws of Congress, and if it refuses to do so, it is supposed to be impeached. Also: I think the real problem is not "electing" a sane Congress, but making the entire system safe enough so that sane people actually want to run for Congress.
Well, there is the veto power, and the VP is the president of the Senate, so Congress is indeed partially checked by the Executive as well as the Judiciary.
Fight isn't over! A new administrator doesn't change much (remember he's replacing Sean Duffy, which is an upgrade) and there are multiple avenues to push back:
NASA and Smithsonian 2026 funding bills haven't been passed, and there is significant resistance to including the $85M that was authorized (but not appropriated) by the Big Beautiful Bill.
Virginia is about to get a governor who will be far more supportive of the fight to keep Discovery.
There are a few more things that KeepTheShuttle.org is working through, and we're expecting a good 2026. Check us out if you want to stay in the loop and get involved!
I doubt they care about PR at all. It’s all a numbers game for them and seeing as how probably 98% of people in the US doesn’t even know what NASA does, or what the letters even stand for, it wouldn’t be a PR nightmare at all.
Uhm… they bulldozed the white house without approval and deported people while ignoring the courts. Which is a lot harder than destroying a national treasure
the Supreme Court could be entirely liberal and this "loophole" still remains. even if they rule against Trump, he can just ignore them (provided he has the support of Congress)
it's only made worse by the fact the SC is majority conservative and has already granted him immunity. it's surely a great thing the guy is fucking regarded
We did that just fine when NASA was publicly funded, btw. Went to the moon and stuff. Invented GPS. Other commie bullshit like that. Contracts went to the lowest bidder. Now they'll go to the biggest bribe.
An example of bribes steering executive decisions?! Trump just pardoned the ex-Honduran president drug kingpin after he wrote him a letter and donated to his campaign (here are more egregious pardons: https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-pardons-clemency-george-santos-ed-martin). This was a drug kingpin who was convicted by a jury and likely would’ve remained in jail the rest of his life for smuggling hundreds of tons of cocaine (much more than any one of those boats he brags about blowing up in the Caribbean). Qatar donated a gaudy 747 specifically for Trump to use and then his stupid museum keep afterwards, and in turn received massive US military aid. I could easily keep going.
For chrissakes, he even signed an executive order suspending the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, thereby allowing US companies and individuals to bribe foreign officials. You can’t get more corrupt than this administration.
For every $1 invested in NASA something like $4 returns to the US economy, largely through spinoff technologies and space assets as an enabler (e.g. GPS providing all kinds of new business opportunities and making existing jobs more efficienr)
You misunderstand- "Run like a business" doesn't mean make profit- tons of businesses don't make profit then explode.
No no, "run like a business" means "change so that it spends as little as possible from the rich and as much as possible from the poor, and also benefits the rich as much as possible."
Think... giving out preferential contracts for missions which then spend decades in limbo thus requiring more contracts.
Just want to make this clear, Trump's War On Science has already devastated NASA.
NASA Goddard has been absolutely gutted. Langley gutted. I know AMES is putting critical enginneers involved on a current project on furlough, for what the fuck reasons. A dear friend has been forced into retirement about 15 years too early.
NASA does science, at the very top level, world class. All of that is being terminated.
Trump/MAGA/All Republicans want science to die.
RIP NSF
RIP NIH
RIP NCAR
RIP NOAA
RIP NASA
And, this is what america voted for, this is what they want, well, they get it.
saw a post on r/self the other day by someone whose neighbour was an aerospace engineer who committed suicide after being laid off. he was almost 60 years old.
while reading it I wondered if this was a direct consequence of the dismantling of these institutions. (the post doesn't mention the country they are in, but the submitter's post history suggests the US)
here's the post, but fair warning, it is morbid and gut-wrenching.
Fuck. This is heartbreaking. To lay off someone like that, you're not just taking away their income or job. You're taking away their purpose and identity.
And for what? Cost cutting? Nah. Pettiness and vengeance. Insecurity. A tax break for people who really don't need it.
It's sickening. Every day I grow older, I get more and more disenchanted and disappointed by our race. We have so much potential to be great, and yet we keep being primitive.
Yeah, it's a sad state of affairs that I was happy this day was pushed off for nearly a year. But this was inevitable, it was what Americans voted for after all.
For people who were here 15 months ago, it'll be interesting to see how all the right wing spam ages. 2024 was sold as the beginning of the golden age of space travel if Trump won, and we're about a year in now. Doesn't feel so golden.
Americans have no clue what they voted for. You can't possibly tell me people voted for trump to do anything specific these clowns are going to do to nasa. Literally not a single policy position about it so how could anyone have voted for this.
There were months of discussions about Project 2025. There are three types of Americans: People who opposed it, people who supported it, and people who failed the very lowest level of citizenship.
Project 2025 spelled out this regime’s plans. Trump lied about any knowledge of it and his followers swallowed it. Hook, line and sinker. We yelled, and the lemmings laughed. So, here we are.
Project 2025 and its Potential Impact on NASA
Project 2025, a blueprint for a potential second Trump administration spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, has several implications for federal science agencies, including NASA. Key proposals and concerns include:
Cuts to Climate and Earth Science Research: The plan does not explicitly detail the future of all of NASA's Earth science capabilities, but it generally calls for a "whole-of-government unwinding" of the Biden administration's climate initiatives. This has led to concerns among scientists that NASA missions focused on Earth-observing satellites and climate data collection could face significant budget cuts or termination.
Staffing and Political Control: A major component of Project 2025 involves reviving an executive order called "Schedule F," which would strip many civil servants of their job protections and reclassify their positions as political appointments. This would allow a new administration to install loyalists across the federal government, including at NASA, potentially compromising the nonpartisan nature of scientific work.
Shift in Focus: The overall tone of the project suggests a push for space exploration that prioritizes national security and commercial partnerships, potentially at the expense of other scientific endeavors.
Budgetary Uncertainty: The proposals have already influenced budget discussions, with internal documents revealing plans for substantial cuts to both NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
The sad day for all humankind was when Trump was elected president. He's the one who's set the largely irrational course for NASA (as well as most parts of the Executive Branch). Jared Isaacman is the best prospect for making some usable lemonade out of the rotten lemons of Trump's approach. I'm sure there are any number of people you'd prefer to be Administrator - but how many could do anything to save or fix things while Trump in the president? Too big or sharp a departure from the course set would result in being fired. IMO Isaacman will be able to talk the talk while walking a different walk in a smart way. I've listened to a number of long format interviews of him and he's a very smart man who loves aviation and space exploration and everything else to do with space. Also, he has a long record of philanthropy and being a decent man. Up to the point he was first nominated you'd have a hard time finding anyone who said anything negative about him.
As far as building and launching anything, pay to play has been a big part of the space program for many years, too many years. It's dominated by a few big contractors who love cost-plus contracts. For profit, for profit, many milk it for the largest profit possible, to the extent of being bad-faith contractors. Building stuff in-house at JPL, etc? They've done some wonderful stuff but became their own worst enemy. The Mars Sample Return debacle laid open the extent of bloat and the stark difference between them and the fast and lean capabilities of the new space companies.
I'm sure there are any number of people you'd prefer to be Administrator - but how many could do anything to save or fix things while Trump in the president?
I have seen countless people complain about Isaacman. I haven't seen a single name for someone better who would still have a chance to get nominated by Trump.
Isaacman is working with the situation he got. I'm sure his plans would look much better with Harris as president.
Sadly, you’re correct. And I’m one of those people. It’s sad that a candidate is chosen merely to satisfy dear leader. Still doesn’t make them the actual best candidate. All administrations nominate candidates that they like and tend to have its views. However, it’s not that simple with this regime. Their candidates are picked to be mouthpieces for the regime. The senate thought little Marco would be super duper as Secretary of State. Sure. Turns out he’s just another puppet repeating whatever Trump says.
You're overreacting. NASA administrator doesn't have so much political influence that they could change what NASA fundamentally is in just a few years. He can't even cancel SLS
That's not what I said. Anyway let me know when the ESA wakes up otherwise human spaceflight is in the hands of capitalists and authoritarians. And it might not be our generation but it will affect future generations. Egalitarianism is dying.
Humanity is never going to truly be a space fairing civilization or have people live on other celestial bodies if the only organizations that are capable of doing it are massive government agencies or military forces.
When was the world egalitarian? Last time I checked the western world doesn't have any qualms sponsoring genocides and conflicts all over the world for political and economic gains, and the east, i presume you would call either capitalist or authoritarians.
That’s an over-reaction. His plans go the other direction with more space exploration tho. Many smaller bus missions, maximum science, efficient use of commercial launch providers. Sure it’s different. And maybe it’s better this way?
His vision included dismantling the NASA Earth Observation programs and giving them over to industry to cover. Which is like saying you can close the National Weather Service because AccuWeather is on the job.
He's certainly more qualified than other appointees, so I guess I shouldn't be too upset, but I hate that another billionaire is given a position like this.
Yeah it's nice to have an actual director instead of some interim but-my-dayjob-is... temporary figure, but some of things he's ostensibly said warrant a harsh critical eye in his direction, IMO.
I mean sure… But in reality no one on Reddit writes like that in real life. And the guy already edited the comment to remove the dashes so clearly was AI in this case.
Yes, he’s a billionaire. Yes, people throw around the word “oligarch.” But not all wealthy individuals are the same. Much of the criticism stems from the actions of those who are self-serving. That’s not Jared. He will continue to succeed;he will personally profit with his businesses, because it’s in his nature,but he will also do his best to draw clear ethical lines. I’ve seen it firsthand.
The dude donated $2m to Trump's re-election campaign, and earned his nomination by assuring Trump that he's committed to his far-right "America First" ideology.
When has SpaceX not been held accountable for their contractual obligations?
What we do know is that Boeing and Lockheed and other old space companies have not been held accountable when they couldn't meet their contractual obligations under cost plus contract, in the form of NASA still pays them bonus even if performance is subpar. This has been repeatedly reported by NASA OIG and GAO.
SpaceX is getting held accountable by the fixed price contract structure, if they don‘t deliver they don‘t get paid. It‘s the Artemis contractors (Boeing and Lockheed) that have been wasting tens of billions of dollars with nothing to show for it, they are the ones that need to be held accountable.
Well said. Lot of uninformed people in this sub, sad that people can't see past their own TDS and learn about Jared for who he is because he really does not seem to be the villain they make him out to be. Fuckin wild.
Appreciate the insight and agree. Unfortunately you're posting in a brainrot sub. People can't think critically and see anything beyond their political IDENTITY. Judging an individual on what they have done isn't a thing here, only judge on who they "allegedly" are affiliated with. Most these people/bots can't be bothered to watch a 10 minute interview to realize his passion and belief is the real deal.
Interviews are some of the worst ways to get to know what a person is really like given they're largely rehearsed and if not, they are entirely prepared for and push public relations needs. More accurate is the history of someone and an analysis of that in detail from lobbying, productions, experience, feedback from others anonymously and so on.
He seems qualified at least, unlike some other appointees. Hopefully he doesn’t sellout NASA. I don’t mind the influx of private industry, but please stop gutting NASAs budget, especially its research arm.
I’d say he goes a little above the minimum qualifications as he was a senator for 14 years and chair/vice chair of the senate intelligence committee, and chair of the senate small business committee - which makes him a lot more qualified than the rest of these idiots.
How? Seriously, how is he qualified to be NASA administrator? He's a payment processor entrepreneur who does plane and rocket stuff as a hobby. Downvote away, this guy is a joke as is this sub.
Because by design the standards for this cabinet are the basement so anyone with functioning gray matter looks like a hero. It’s not lost on me or a lot of Americans how barely 12 months ago the same people currently applauding this cartoonish administration were adamant that minorities in positions of power were far too unqualified and didn’t earn it but have given carte blanche to a group of people who couldn’t run a fast food chain just because they like Trump
Unbelievable there are still people like you giving this administration the benefit of the doubt. You think they would appoint anyone that isn’t a total trump lackey willing to do their bidding?
RFK Jr swore he was going to mess with vaccines and guess what? He's been messing with them. Isaacman is going to quickly fall in line and do whatever Trump wants him to do. He's only there to dismantle NASA
Republicans have always stamped out earth observing science, so that megaglobalcorp can pollute away all they want - it is much more profitable to just spew garbage and poison into the environment.
Believe it or not, some of us want publicly-funded space exploration focused on scientific endeavors for the benefit of all mankind, not technocrat-controlled projects exploiting government resources for profit.
Why didn't NASA make a Starlink equivalent so that poor Central Africans can have internet access, and that is critical to Ukraine's defense against Russia?
I'm opposed to SpaceX because I'm opposed in principle to the privatization of Spaceflight and of NASA's spaceflight capabilities. It's not a matter of who's president. Jesus Christ himself could be president and I'd still be against it.
Additionally, don't be a baby about politics. Being politically opposed to a person or organization is a perfectly fine reason to oppose their ideas, policies, and allies. That's what having principles means (something Democrats seem to lack). I wouldn't expect a Tech CEO to agree with me and I wouldn't whine about "politics" if they voiced that to me. Thinking giving a shit and sticking to principles is weird is a bizarre affliction of the 2000s that we thankfully finally seem to be getting over.
Okay let's hear it, why are you opposed in principle to the privatization of space flight and NASA's spaceflight?
Please elaborate about how the past decade of commercial crew has apparently been the worst decade in all of spaceflight's history.
I cannot fathom how someone whose remotely tied into the industry can stand back and claim so confidently that the privatization of space flight is a bad thing - after seeing a decade of how insanely effective it's been for the US to encourage its industry through the use of Commercial Crew.
Well I think you’re being a baby about space travel. If you actually believe humanity’s future lies in space, then you’d want everyone, both public and private entities, to be pushing space technology forward. The government can’t and shouldn’t do all this alone. One of America’s key strengths is its private sector and we should be doing all we can to leverage it in partnership with NASA.
The problem with appointing billionaires is they have all made the profit motive the core of their souls. The notion of governing for the people will never enter their conscious. Their prime directive is routing the people’s tax money into their bank accounts instead of using it as intended to benefit the commoners. Grift writ large. 😢
It was a sad day for all humankind when Trump was elected president. He set a largely irrational course for NASA (as well as most parts of the Executive Branch). That can't be changed for years. Given that we're stuck with that reality - yes, really, I'm talking about grappling with that reality instead of moaning on and on like most of the Comments here - Jared Isaacman is the best prospect for making some usable lemonade out of the rotten lemons of Trump's approach. I'm sure there are any number of people many would prefer to be Administrator - but how many could do anything to save or fix things while Trump is the president? Too big or sharp a departure from the course set would result in being fired. IMO Isaacman will be able to talk the talk while walking a different walk in a smart way. I've listened to a number of long format interviews of him and he's a very smart man who loves aviation and space exploration and everything else to do with space. Also, he has a long record of philanthropy and being a decent man. Up to the point he was first nominated you'd have a hard time finding anyone who said anything negative about him.
I say the following as someone who's loved and at times idolized NASA since I was a child avidly following every facet of the Gemini program. Re NASA reform - really, it's a government agency, it's hard to deny it has a lot of bloat and duplication of effort. Hell, even the US military has undergone realignments and the shutting down or consolidation of bases over the years. The ax blows it's suffering under Trump are basically criminal - but given that they're happening our only hope for rational realignment and consolidation is to have a guy like Isaacman as Administrator dealing with Congress.
Wow it wasn’t even close - I think he’ll be a great administrator. He has gone through astronaut training and been to space. He has also had a close relationship with SpaceX and other private launch companies, and I believe he will continue the very successful public-private partnership NASA has had over the last decade!
Right. He'll sell off everything that isn't nailed down to Musk for pennies on the dollar. Leaving NASA a shell of it's former self without funding to do the essential research no private company wants to do.
NOAA doesn’t develop GPUs for weather modeling they buy Nvidia. The forest service doesn’t develop handheld radios they buy Motorola. The transportation department doesn’t manufacture bulldozers they rent from CAT.
The age where you had to build bespoke rockets is over and dead and we now have 2 rocket companies developing beyond LEO exploration vehicles.
And who do you think builds the components and instrumentation? NASA isn’t a manufacturer, they pay contractors to build the actual equipment. Even places like JPL are actually government contractors and not NASA employees.
NASA still does a lot of the heavy research themselves. They worked on a new seal for Dragon docking to the ISS and a bunch of stuff for HLS that SpaceX would be struggling to do.
NASA is still the mission owner and responsible for setting requirements and making sure these requirements are met.
Which is a massive advantage since spaceX are by far the leading launch provider worldwide and can offer capability to NASA at a fraction the cost of them doing it themselves.
NASA must stick to what they are good at - like science and revolutionary tech, and steer the private sector where they can benefit.
This administration can’t pick an apple that isn’t rotten. This abomination will do to NASA what DOGE didn’t. All they are capable of is dumping in the punch.
He’s gonna be reviled tomorrow by the same people cheering him on today.
And the people that revile him today will revile him tomorrow regardless of anything he does.
I was unhappy that Bridenstine got confirmed. But he surprised me, and I changed my mind.
He's one of the three NASA administrators I've been lucky enough to know personally. I was against his nomination. If given 2 hours, I could have come up with a list off the top of my head of at least 100 people I'd have chosen over him that would have been expertly qualified.
If possible, I'd hand him a 5 year term today over even a year of Isaacman. That's the amount worse this pick could end up being.
I will say that Bridenstine went from someone I was deeply skeptical about to probably one of the best admins NASA has ever had.
My main take is that Isaacman is either going to have the same kind of transformation and wind up being good for NASA (which the crowd cheering him on at the moment is fundamentally opposed to) or he’s going to double down hard, piss off Congress, and become completely ineffectual to the point of getting removed. Not sure which one is more likely, he has guardrails now.
Why? The general consensus here even among the people who support Isaacman was that Bridenstine was a good admin.
Why do you think people cheer for Isaacman? Because they want NASA to fail, or because they want NASA to succeed?
The truth is, NASA isn't doing well, and hasn't been in a long while now. Things like SLS and MSR and Artemis mission statement don't happen in a space agency that has its shit together. If Isaacman can unfuck even a part of this mess, then he's going to be a good NASA administrator.
I'd agree that NASA has issues but in my view, their biggest issue is congress. NASA was required by law to create SLS the way they did and funding for the various programs is also up to congress. Congress keeps dumping more money than NASA requested into SLS, and then they defund programs that NASA really wants or needs. And Boeing is more than happy to take that extra funding so they have something to spend on kickbacks.
I don't think any NASA administrator really has the ability to fix that, but Isaacman is at least competent and might have a shot at tipping the scales in a positive way.
The problem is that NASA is the single most public-facing scientific agency in the United States. Therefore, when an administration wants to make a statement about their commitment to science or American innovation, they start trying to dictate NASA's priorities. When they want to make a statement about government waste or budget overruns, they also use NASA. When they need a convenient middleman to funnel money to civilian aerospace contractors, they use NASA.
When NASA is left alone and allowed to do NASA things, they do good work. They're not without their flaws, but they have a lot of very talented people working there. But the government equivalent of the CEO who thinks nine women can make a baby in one month because one woman makes a baby in nine months always has to get involved, and that's when the problems become serious.
Why? I thought the consensus was that Isaacman would be well-equipped to navigate private-public interaction which is essential right now. I’m asking genuinely, because it seems like public perception has flipped. (Though perhaps this post has simply reached a wider, less-informed audience.)
There was a lot of backlash to Isaacmans manifesto for NASA.
And a lot of backlash to the trump admins announcements about NASA science programs.
I guess I’m more focused on the space fanatic crowd, which I’m a part of and of which this subreddit is generally composed of. It seemed like people were-even as of a month ago-excited about the prospect of Isaacman.
Totally agree on the Trump admin’s budget cuts being a travesty, it’s really sad to see.
We're playing under different rules now. While the administrator does still matter, trumps gutting of the federal government and wanton destruction of anything touched by his predecessors will encompass NASA regardless of who leads the agency. It's a pretty awful situation to be in.
You can't seriously believe this. If he changes his ways and suddenly starts doing everything right, why would that not matter to people? Do you think people live purely to spite you? Politics isn't sports teams, it's really important stuff.
Edit: lol, lmao even at all the people who blocked me. Take your chronically online, doomer cynicism and chuck it in the trash.
If he ends up being a Bridenstine, I will have no issue with supporting him. However, given his ties to Elon, I do not see that happening.
ha fucking ha, tell that to half of the United States.
Half? I'd say the vast majority.
The vast majority are completely checked out. The majority don't vote regularly in national or local elections, and they couldn't tell you what political parties most prominent politicians belong to. I don't think we've ever hit above 50% voter turnout in a midterm election.
Are you kidding? The vast majority of the country treats politics as sports teams.
You are on Reddit. Is this a real comment?
He says, after blocking me. What weird hypocrisy.
What kind of magical fairy land thinking is this nonsense?
Why? He is probably the most same person in the whole Trump administration. I know that isn't a high bar, but still.
I'm unhappy with a lot of the things he has said he will do but I won't hate him for doing them if he does what he said he would do, I'm not sure I would do anything different if I were NASA administrator (I think his suggestions are probably the bare minimum of kowtowing to Trump's nonsense to avoid getting fired.) And anyone taking the position shouldn't set out to get fired.
RIP shuttle Discovery. Glad I got to see you intact when I had the chance.
NASA no longer owns Discovery. Issacman has absolutely no say in what happens to it. If it gets moved it will be completly on congress, Issacmans support for the idea doesn’t mean much.
Exactly. And Ted Cruz, one of the only three people who want it (somehow) is head of one of the committees he needed to pass for confirmation. There’s a good chance it’s just an empty promise from Isaacman and he won’t actually do it. I mean what would he gain from it?
Crossing my fingers, but unfortunately I wouldn’t be surprised if he truly goes through with moving her.
Why would Ted Cruz care about American history, anyway? He seems to be a bigger fan of Cancun.
With a name like Cruz, how do we really know that he’s actually an American citizen?! Maybe ICE should investigate him! All those Cancun trips are soo sus. 🙃
Raphael Cruz? Why that’s gotta be the most grass fed American sounding name I’ve ever heard in my whole life! ( /s just in case it’s necessary)
I mean he WAS born in Canada…
It wasn't Isaacmans idea to move the shuttle. However if Congress passes a bill to move the Shuttle then he has to follow the language in the bill.
The question is whether NASA has the authority to do what the bill is telling it to do.
I know and I think "Rook" would have no problem saying he doesn't have the authority. He tool Cruz what he wanted to hear, it is all part of the game. Cruz knows that to so he can say, "See I tried!!".
the smithsonian leadership is completely dominated by trump supporters, no matter what the rank and file say. nasa alone has the power to slow walk this thing until it gets cancelled.
Luckily the language in the bill doesn't specify a shuttle, there are plenty of other craft that fit the bill.
This presumes we live in normal times where people ask for permission.
No it doesn’t, if congress or Trump want to move Discovery they will move Discovery regardless of permission or ownership. Issacman’s support or lack of would not mean anything to any administration because the department he runs has absolutely nothing to do with Discovery’s preservation outside of owning it over a decade ago. Issacman is completely irrelevant to if discovery stays or gets moved.
I doubt Trump is even aware of the plan. This is all on the idiots from Texas.
If Congress wants it, it's going to happen, regardless of who the administrator is, or whether NASA even has an administrator.
People forget that Congress is the top dog when it comes to our government. We think we have this equal branches thing, but we do not. The people are THE power in the US. We've just grown stupid and elected terrible sycophants. But the minute we elect a sane and awake Congress all this nonsense stops.
Sure except congress isn’t representative of the people by design
Thank you. It drives me crazy when people say that the Executive is supposed to be a check and balance on the Legislature. Like no, its literal purpose is to execute the laws of Congress, and if it refuses to do so, it is supposed to be impeached. Also: I think the real problem is not "electing" a sane Congress, but making the entire system safe enough so that sane people actually want to run for Congress.
Well, there is the veto power, and the VP is the president of the Senate, so Congress is indeed partially checked by the Executive as well as the Judiciary.
Fight isn't over! A new administrator doesn't change much (remember he's replacing Sean Duffy, which is an upgrade) and there are multiple avenues to push back:
NASA and Smithsonian 2026 funding bills haven't been passed, and there is significant resistance to including the $85M that was authorized (but not appropriated) by the Big Beautiful Bill.
Virginia is about to get a governor who will be far more supportive of the fight to keep Discovery.
There are a few more things that KeepTheShuttle.org is working through, and we're expecting a good 2026. Check us out if you want to stay in the loop and get involved!
Oh, it's not appropriated yet. Huh. That's a pretty big deal.
Who would seriously want the PR nightmare of breaking a Space Shuttle?
I doubt they care about PR at all. It’s all a numbers game for them and seeing as how probably 98% of people in the US doesn’t even know what NASA does, or what the letters even stand for, it wouldn’t be a PR nightmare at all.
Pretty sure "Trump cuts space shuttle in half" would vibe with a good chunk of the nation though
Americans really liked the shuttles. We didn't always know what they did or who built them. But they were cool and made fire and stuff!
Maybe when they were first introduced. Again, I would even say if you asked 100 people, 2 people could maybe name 2 of them.
it's not actually a PR nightmare. Most people dont care that it's been taken apart and put back together.
Don't you know it was formed whole from a Volcano, not assembled from a bunch of parts?
That's what the whole Mt Saint Helens thing was about, right?
Im not giving up hope yet
Lawsuits can hold off maga idiots until the next term
Uhm… they bulldozed the white house without approval and deported people while ignoring the courts. Which is a lot harder than destroying a national treasure
Turns out it’s not
Trump took a page out of mayor daley’s playbook with meigs field
lawsuit? court order? ignored lmfao
with no one else to enforce them, how did our founding fathers miss such an obvious way to exploit power in the executive branch? kinda hilarious
I don't think they expected the Supreme Court to get as politicized as it has been
the Supreme Court could be entirely liberal and this "loophole" still remains. even if they rule against Trump, he can just ignore them (provided he has the support of Congress)
it's only made worse by the fact the SC is majority conservative and has already granted him immunity. it's surely a great thing the guy is fucking regarded
He might’ve just been saying that to get the Texas senator’s approval. His nomination was already cancelled once.
I bet his term will end with zero new flagship science missions annouced.
He will turn NASA into a business, and business relies on the governments of the world to push scientific boundaries.
We did that just fine when NASA was publicly funded, btw. Went to the moon and stuff. Invented GPS. Other commie bullshit like that. Contracts went to the lowest bidder. Now they'll go to the biggest bribe.
NASA never stopped being publicly funded. Where do you think NASA gets its money from?
Not a NASA invention.
Do you have an example?
An example of bribes steering executive decisions?! Trump just pardoned the ex-Honduran president drug kingpin after he wrote him a letter and donated to his campaign (here are more egregious pardons: https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-pardons-clemency-george-santos-ed-martin). This was a drug kingpin who was convicted by a jury and likely would’ve remained in jail the rest of his life for smuggling hundreds of tons of cocaine (much more than any one of those boats he brags about blowing up in the Caribbean). Qatar donated a gaudy 747 specifically for Trump to use and then his stupid museum keep afterwards, and in turn received massive US military aid. I could easily keep going.
For chrissakes, he even signed an executive order suspending the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, thereby allowing US companies and individuals to bribe foreign officials. You can’t get more corrupt than this administration.
How is any of that related to NASA? None of these are NASA contracts.
Trump accepting bribes isn't a secret, but that's not the topic here.
NASA makes negative money, he couldn’t turn it into a business.
For every $1 invested in NASA something like $4 returns to the US economy, largely through spinoff technologies and space assets as an enabler (e.g. GPS providing all kinds of new business opportunities and making existing jobs more efficienr)
The Air Force built GPS.
You misunderstand- "Run like a business" doesn't mean make profit- tons of businesses don't make profit then explode.
No no, "run like a business" means "change so that it spends as little as possible from the rich and as much as possible from the poor, and also benefits the rich as much as possible."
Think... giving out preferential contracts for missions which then spend decades in limbo thus requiring more contracts.
Well, thank God that's never happened in NASA's past.
glances at SLS
Jim face towards Orion
Even the iconic Space Shuttle was a glorified jobs program.
How does NASA “spend money from the poor”? You know their money comes from taxes right, they can’t control whose money they spend?
Lots of smaller scale low risk missions is the way. We got rookie numbers right now. Gotta pump them up.
I'm more interested in how many missions he can see completed.
Any idiot can announce new missions.
Just want to make this clear, Trump's War On Science has already devastated NASA.
NASA Goddard has been absolutely gutted. Langley gutted. I know AMES is putting critical enginneers involved on a current project on furlough, for what the fuck reasons. A dear friend has been forced into retirement about 15 years too early.
NASA does science, at the very top level, world class. All of that is being terminated.
Trump/MAGA/All Republicans want science to die.
RIP NSF
RIP NIH
RIP NCAR
RIP NOAA
RIP NASA
And, this is what america voted for, this is what they want, well, they get it.
saw a post on r/self the other day by someone whose neighbour was an aerospace engineer who committed suicide after being laid off. he was almost 60 years old.
while reading it I wondered if this was a direct consequence of the dismantling of these institutions. (the post doesn't mention the country they are in, but the submitter's post history suggests the US)
here's the post, but fair warning, it is morbid and gut-wrenching.
Fuck. This is heartbreaking. To lay off someone like that, you're not just taking away their income or job. You're taking away their purpose and identity.
And for what? Cost cutting? Nah. Pettiness and vengeance. Insecurity. A tax break for people who really don't need it.
It's sickening. Every day I grow older, I get more and more disenchanted and disappointed by our race. We have so much potential to be great, and yet we keep being primitive.
A really sad day for all mankind. The end of public space exploration and science and the beginning of pay to play and for profit nonsense.
Yeah, it's a sad state of affairs that I was happy this day was pushed off for nearly a year. But this was inevitable, it was what Americans voted for after all.
For people who were here 15 months ago, it'll be interesting to see how all the right wing spam ages. 2024 was sold as the beginning of the golden age of space travel if Trump won, and we're about a year in now. Doesn't feel so golden.
Americans have no clue what they voted for. You can't possibly tell me people voted for trump to do anything specific these clowns are going to do to nasa. Literally not a single policy position about it so how could anyone have voted for this.
There were months of discussions about Project 2025. There are three types of Americans: People who opposed it, people who supported it, and people who failed the very lowest level of citizenship.
That's it.
That third group has grown exponentially over the years. American, btw.
Yes. They. Did. Vote. For. This. Absolutely.
Project 2025 spelled out this regime’s plans. Trump lied about any knowledge of it and his followers swallowed it. Hook, line and sinker. We yelled, and the lemmings laughed. So, here we are.
Project 2025 and its Potential Impact on NASA
Project 2025, a blueprint for a potential second Trump administration spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, has several implications for federal science agencies, including NASA. Key proposals and concerns include:
Cuts to Climate and Earth Science Research: The plan does not explicitly detail the future of all of NASA's Earth science capabilities, but it generally calls for a "whole-of-government unwinding" of the Biden administration's climate initiatives. This has led to concerns among scientists that NASA missions focused on Earth-observing satellites and climate data collection could face significant budget cuts or termination.
Staffing and Political Control: A major component of Project 2025 involves reviving an executive order called "Schedule F," which would strip many civil servants of their job protections and reclassify their positions as political appointments. This would allow a new administration to install loyalists across the federal government, including at NASA, potentially compromising the nonpartisan nature of scientific work.
Shift in Focus: The overall tone of the project suggests a push for space exploration that prioritizes national security and commercial partnerships, potentially at the expense of other scientific endeavors.
Budgetary Uncertainty: The proposals have already influenced budget discussions, with internal documents revealing plans for substantial cuts to both NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Yes, too bad there was no one to point out to the American public where all of this was spelled out.
They voted for concepts of a plan...
The sad day for all humankind was when Trump was elected president. He's the one who's set the largely irrational course for NASA (as well as most parts of the Executive Branch). Jared Isaacman is the best prospect for making some usable lemonade out of the rotten lemons of Trump's approach. I'm sure there are any number of people you'd prefer to be Administrator - but how many could do anything to save or fix things while Trump in the president? Too big or sharp a departure from the course set would result in being fired. IMO Isaacman will be able to talk the talk while walking a different walk in a smart way. I've listened to a number of long format interviews of him and he's a very smart man who loves aviation and space exploration and everything else to do with space. Also, he has a long record of philanthropy and being a decent man. Up to the point he was first nominated you'd have a hard time finding anyone who said anything negative about him.
As far as building and launching anything, pay to play has been a big part of the space program for many years, too many years. It's dominated by a few big contractors who love cost-plus contracts. For profit, for profit, many milk it for the largest profit possible, to the extent of being bad-faith contractors. Building stuff in-house at JPL, etc? They've done some wonderful stuff but became their own worst enemy. The Mars Sample Return debacle laid open the extent of bloat and the stark difference between them and the fast and lean capabilities of the new space companies.
I have seen countless people complain about Isaacman. I haven't seen a single name for someone better who would still have a chance to get nominated by Trump.
Isaacman is working with the situation he got. I'm sure his plans would look much better with Harris as president.
Sadly, you’re correct. And I’m one of those people. It’s sad that a candidate is chosen merely to satisfy dear leader. Still doesn’t make them the actual best candidate. All administrations nominate candidates that they like and tend to have its views. However, it’s not that simple with this regime. Their candidates are picked to be mouthpieces for the regime. The senate thought little Marco would be super duper as Secretary of State. Sure. Turns out he’s just another puppet repeating whatever Trump says.
some of the takes on here are deranged
Are they shutting down the NASA manufacturing plants? Dang, guess Boeing & the rest will have no competition in aerospace now.
You're overreacting. NASA administrator doesn't have so much political influence that they could change what NASA fundamentally is in just a few years. He can't even cancel SLS
I love the idea that somehow mankind exists or doesn't solely based on American politics. Truly amazing!
That's not what I said. Anyway let me know when the ESA wakes up otherwise human spaceflight is in the hands of capitalists and authoritarians. And it might not be our generation but it will affect future generations. Egalitarianism is dying.
Humanity is never going to truly be a space fairing civilization or have people live on other celestial bodies if the only organizations that are capable of doing it are massive government agencies or military forces.
When was the world egalitarian? Last time I checked the western world doesn't have any qualms sponsoring genocides and conflicts all over the world for political and economic gains, and the east, i presume you would call either capitalist or authoritarians.
That’s an over-reaction. His plans go the other direction with more space exploration tho. Many smaller bus missions, maximum science, efficient use of commercial launch providers. Sure it’s different. And maybe it’s better this way?
So, what's wrong with him?
His vision included dismantling the NASA Earth Observation programs and giving them over to industry to cover. Which is like saying you can close the National Weather Service because AccuWeather is on the job.
He's certainly more qualified than other appointees, so I guess I shouldn't be too upset, but I hate that another billionaire is given a position like this.
Yeah it's nice to have an actual director instead of some interim but-my-dayjob-is... temporary figure, but some of things he's ostensibly said warrant a harsh critical eye in his direction, IMO.
[deleted]
What was the prompt you used to get this?
The multiple em dashes alone are a dead giveaway this is ai.
Em dashes are not a smoking gun that proves AI use. Stop thinking of it as a “dead giveaway,” because it simply isn’t.
I mean sure… But in reality no one on Reddit writes like that in real life. And the guy already edited the comment to remove the dashes so clearly was AI in this case.
The dude donated $2m to Trump's re-election campaign, and earned his nomination by assuring Trump that he's committed to his far-right "America First" ideology.
Is he willing and able to hold SpaceX (or other private providers) accountable if they can’t meet contractual obligations?
When has SpaceX not been held accountable for their contractual obligations?
What we do know is that Boeing and Lockheed and other old space companies have not been held accountable when they couldn't meet their contractual obligations under cost plus contract, in the form of NASA still pays them bonus even if performance is subpar. This has been repeatedly reported by NASA OIG and GAO.
SpaceX is getting held accountable by the fixed price contract structure, if they don‘t deliver they don‘t get paid. It‘s the Artemis contractors (Boeing and Lockheed) that have been wasting tens of billions of dollars with nothing to show for it, they are the ones that need to be held accountable.
Well said. Lot of uninformed people in this sub, sad that people can't see past their own TDS and learn about Jared for who he is because he really does not seem to be the villain they make him out to be. Fuckin wild.
Appreciate the insight and agree. Unfortunately you're posting in a brainrot sub. People can't think critically and see anything beyond their political IDENTITY. Judging an individual on what they have done isn't a thing here, only judge on who they "allegedly" are affiliated with. Most these people/bots can't be bothered to watch a 10 minute interview to realize his passion and belief is the real deal.
He didn't "allegedly" donate $2m to Trump's re-election campaign. He didn't "allegedly" say he wants to run for office as a Republican.
Reminder that Trump only re-nominated him after receiving assurances that Jared was committed to Trump's far-right "America First" ideology.
Interviews are some of the worst ways to get to know what a person is really like given they're largely rehearsed and if not, they are entirely prepared for and push public relations needs. More accurate is the history of someone and an analysis of that in detail from lobbying, productions, experience, feedback from others anonymously and so on.
[deleted]
Please give some context, don't just comment a link.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
He cares about human space flight and I'm for it. I think we have a better chance of getting to Mars with him in charge.
He seems qualified at least, unlike some other appointees. Hopefully he doesn’t sellout NASA. I don’t mind the influx of private industry, but please stop gutting NASAs budget, especially its research arm.
The $400m White House ballroom needs to get funded somehow
$400m won't even cover the lawsuits surrounding it.
Of all the things to choose, you choose the thing that's privately funded?
I'm gonna need a source on even one qualified trump appointee 😂
Marco Rubio was definitely qualified. Just turns out he doesn't really mind intentionally sucking at his job and doing whatever Trump says.
the one guy whose only job is to be a politician, and having been a politician does make him qualified
I’d say he goes a little above the minimum qualifications as he was a senator for 14 years and chair/vice chair of the senate intelligence committee, and chair of the senate small business committee - which makes him a lot more qualified than the rest of these idiots.
But he sucks in other ways
Little Marco is qualified, whether you like him or not. All Senate Democrats voted to confirm him.
The knew the alternatives were much, much worse.
I think a chronic lack of spine is disqualifying, but we can agree to disagree ;)
I'm mostly just memeing though lol
How? Seriously, how is he qualified to be NASA administrator? He's a payment processor entrepreneur who does plane and rocket stuff as a hobby. Downvote away, this guy is a joke as is this sub.
It's a very low bar, but this is probably the most qualified appointment by Trump this term.......
Because by design the standards for this cabinet are the basement so anyone with functioning gray matter looks like a hero. It’s not lost on me or a lot of Americans how barely 12 months ago the same people currently applauding this cartoonish administration were adamant that minorities in positions of power were far too unqualified and didn’t earn it but have given carte blanche to a group of people who couldn’t run a fast food chain just because they like Trump
A little under 2% of all billionaires in America currently hold a position in cabinet.
It's unbelievable that anyone who has a genuine love of space exploration and read his manifesto could possibly be happy.
I mean I’m happy I don’t have to see Duffy again at a NASA press conference, but that’s obviously different.
Head of NASA isnt head of science. It shouldn't be a scientist it needs to be a resource manager that independently assesses what should move forward.
Unbelievable there are still people like you giving this administration the benefit of the doubt. You think they would appoint anyone that isn’t a total trump lackey willing to do their bidding?
I mean Jared straight up declined some of trumps requests
RFK Jr swore he was going to mess with vaccines and guess what? He's been messing with them. Isaacman is going to quickly fall in line and do whatever Trump wants him to do. He's only there to dismantle NASA
Trump wants Artemis. They literally just guaranteed the funding recently in that giant bill
CO2 what now? Levels set by God, who cares...right?
Now just increase NASA’s budget and we will talk.
The beginning of the end of NASA doing real science.
Republicans have always stamped out earth observing science, so that megaglobalcorp can pollute away all they want - it is much more profitable to just spew garbage and poison into the environment.
Why are Democrats supporting any of Trump's nominees?
If they don't vote someone in, Trump gets to use a loophole where he can choose the acting director indefinitely
Issacman seems like a decent enough fellow... definitely better than most.
I am a teacher. The highest educator in the country who leads my profession is the wife of the head of WWE, like what the fuck is happening right now.
Isaacman is better than all, he's the only Trump nominee that seems worth supporting.
That's a pretty low bar though. I'm not thrilled with his close ties to Musk, and I'd happy with a few less billionaires in government.
You're surprised an aerospace CEO has ties to SpaceX?
This thread is mind-boggling. People in a space subreddit are literally opposed to SpaceX now because politics has fried their brains.
Believe it or not, some of us want publicly-funded space exploration focused on scientific endeavors for the benefit of all mankind, not technocrat-controlled projects exploiting government resources for profit.
Why didn't NASA make a Starlink equivalent so that poor Central Africans can have internet access, and that is critical to Ukraine's defense against Russia?
I'm opposed to SpaceX because I'm opposed in principle to the privatization of Spaceflight and of NASA's spaceflight capabilities. It's not a matter of who's president. Jesus Christ himself could be president and I'd still be against it.
Additionally, don't be a baby about politics. Being politically opposed to a person or organization is a perfectly fine reason to oppose their ideas, policies, and allies. That's what having principles means (something Democrats seem to lack). I wouldn't expect a Tech CEO to agree with me and I wouldn't whine about "politics" if they voiced that to me. Thinking giving a shit and sticking to principles is weird is a bizarre affliction of the 2000s that we thankfully finally seem to be getting over.
Dude NASA‘s access to space has always been private. The only difference between Apollo and commercial crew is the payment structure
Okay let's hear it, why are you opposed in principle to the privatization of space flight and NASA's spaceflight?
Please elaborate about how the past decade of commercial crew has apparently been the worst decade in all of spaceflight's history.
I cannot fathom how someone whose remotely tied into the industry can stand back and claim so confidently that the privatization of space flight is a bad thing - after seeing a decade of how insanely effective it's been for the US to encourage its industry through the use of Commercial Crew.
Well I think you’re being a baby about space travel. If you actually believe humanity’s future lies in space, then you’d want everyone, both public and private entities, to be pushing space technology forward. The government can’t and shouldn’t do all this alone. One of America’s key strengths is its private sector and we should be doing all we can to leverage it in partnership with NASA.
“Why does anyone do anything other than act maximally partisan??”
What type of question is this? Support is based on the nominee, not on the person who did the nominating.
Be sure and remind Republican senators of that in the future.
Why would they listen to me?
For the people in the thread saying he’s qualified, you’re referring to those satellite dishes he’s got for ears?
the most important qualification for being in charge of a government agency is that you are rich.
The problem with appointing billionaires is they have all made the profit motive the core of their souls. The notion of governing for the people will never enter their conscious. Their prime directive is routing the people’s tax money into their bank accounts instead of using it as intended to benefit the commoners. Grift writ large. 😢
It was a sad day for all humankind when Trump was elected president. He set a largely irrational course for NASA (as well as most parts of the Executive Branch). That can't be changed for years. Given that we're stuck with that reality - yes, really, I'm talking about grappling with that reality instead of moaning on and on like most of the Comments here - Jared Isaacman is the best prospect for making some usable lemonade out of the rotten lemons of Trump's approach. I'm sure there are any number of people many would prefer to be Administrator - but how many could do anything to save or fix things while Trump is the president? Too big or sharp a departure from the course set would result in being fired. IMO Isaacman will be able to talk the talk while walking a different walk in a smart way. I've listened to a number of long format interviews of him and he's a very smart man who loves aviation and space exploration and everything else to do with space. Also, he has a long record of philanthropy and being a decent man. Up to the point he was first nominated you'd have a hard time finding anyone who said anything negative about him.
I say the following as someone who's loved and at times idolized NASA since I was a child avidly following every facet of the Gemini program. Re NASA reform - really, it's a government agency, it's hard to deny it has a lot of bloat and duplication of effort. Hell, even the US military has undergone realignments and the shutting down or consolidation of bases over the years. The ax blows it's suffering under Trump are basically criminal - but given that they're happening our only hope for rational realignment and consolidation is to have a guy like Isaacman as Administrator dealing with Congress.
RIP America how the mighty have fallen
Probably the best man capable of getting confirmed but I am afraid of what he will do to placate the dementia riddled orange demon.
Wow it wasn’t even close - I think he’ll be a great administrator. He has gone through astronaut training and been to space. He has also had a close relationship with SpaceX and other private launch companies, and I believe he will continue the very successful public-private partnership NASA has had over the last decade!
Right. He'll sell off everything that isn't nailed down to Musk for pennies on the dollar. Leaving NASA a shell of it's former self without funding to do the essential research no private company wants to do.
NOAA doesn’t develop GPUs for weather modeling they buy Nvidia. The forest service doesn’t develop handheld radios they buy Motorola. The transportation department doesn’t manufacture bulldozers they rent from CAT.
The age where you had to build bespoke rockets is over and dead and we now have 2 rocket companies developing beyond LEO exploration vehicles.
NASA isn’t just rockets. They do space exploration via probes or experimentation and heavy R&D private companies aren’t interested in doing.
Sure and when they aren’t spending 30% of their budget on a rocket they can maybe do more of that instead of reinventing the wheel at 3x the price.
https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/586023main_8-3-11_NAFCOM.pdf
You think NASA wants this? Congress mandated them to do SLS in a specific way to be a political pork project.
It still doesn’t negate that what NASA truly is about is at risk at privatization in the name of profit
[removed]
Your comment has been removed, please no incivility to other users or low-effort/meme/joke/troll comments.
And who do you think builds the components and instrumentation? NASA isn’t a manufacturer, they pay contractors to build the actual equipment. Even places like JPL are actually government contractors and not NASA employees.
NASA still does a lot of the heavy research themselves. They worked on a new seal for Dragon docking to the ISS and a bunch of stuff for HLS that SpaceX would be struggling to do.
NASA is still the mission owner and responsible for setting requirements and making sure these requirements are met.
What in his record makes you think any of that?
Probably the 62 page book he wrote where he said he wanted to do that.
Book? We don’t do that here. Send us a highly stimulating 7 second YouTube short with Subway Surfers in the background and then we will talk.
He has also had a close relationship with SpaceX and other private launch companies.........
Which is a massive advantage since spaceX are by far the leading launch provider worldwide and can offer capability to NASA at a fraction the cost of them doing it themselves.
NASA must stick to what they are good at - like science and revolutionary tech, and steer the private sector where they can benefit.
Nothing wrong with this?
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/10/shift4-stock-surges-after-spacex-starlink-payments-deal.html
This administration can’t pick an apple that isn’t rotten. This abomination will do to NASA what DOGE didn’t. All they are capable of is dumping in the punch.