Rocket Scientist

So, come Friday, I’ll be fielding questions as the “Rocket Scientist.”  Given the nature of my job, there are some rules and some caveats, more for me than you who will be asking the questions, but I’m going to explain them so there’s no confusion.

I work for a not for profit company that does a lot of independent reviews.  I have a secret clearance and I have some responsibilities to that company and to NASA that can’t be compromised.  Although I have considerable experience and a diverse background in space stuff, I won’t know everything.  So, here’s what you can expect.

1) Although I have a secret clearance, I don’t know anything secret.  However, I also cannot divulge anything that is sensitive but unclassified, which includes a substantial portion of current programs.  This is not meanness on my part; it is required for my job.  As much as I appreciate the notion of openness for taxpayers footing the bill (and I hope they will eventually be able to see the data), I can also see the risks to showing a snapshot of incomplete designs and sending them out into the world.  However, even if I didn’t agree with it, I still am bound to that responsibility.  If I can’t answer, I will say so.

2) I cannot provide any information that is considered national security or propriety in answer to questions.  There is a strict requirement for export control and I can’t compromise it.  Again, though I’m staunchly for international cooperation in space endeavors, this information is not mine to provide and it is illegal for me to provide it on the internet.

3) Because of (1) and (2), I will be looking to public sources (often on the internet) to bolster my answers, both to demonstrate that the information I’m imparting is publicly available and because, hey, I don’t know everything.  One reason I’ve been pretty successful as a rocket scientist/jack-of-all-trades has been because I don’t try to know everything, just where to find it.

4) You can ask my opinion on stuff.  Unless I’m deeply involved with a particular review that would be compromised if I spouted off (unlikely but it can happen), I don’t have a restriction per se on that and I’m plenty opinionated.  However, I will not provide said opinion unless I’m confident I have a reasonable basis for it.  For instance, if you ask me what I think of the Constellation program (the Exploration program in other words), I won’t tell you.  Why?  Although I have several opinions, I have also only been involved in bits and pieces at various levels of development and don’t have a firm grasp of the whole.  Providing an opinion in such a circumstance is premature and irresponsible.  However, if you asked me what I think an exploration program should have, directions they should pursue, aspects of human spaceflight that I think are important, I can talk your ear off.  Again, if there’s something I don’t feel I can tell you, I’ll explain why.

5) I don’t really expect these to make the session untenable.  In fact, in all the times, I’ve given talks and presentations or hosted a Q&A session, I’ve never once had to keep my mouth shut for reasons 1, 2 or 4.  Truth is, there is a great deal of NASA information out there.  Details on Columbia and Challenger accidents are publicly available and very very detailed.  NASA science is well documented and generally openly available and details on human spaceflight are also generally open book.

6) You might very well see Wikipedia come up.  There are three, in my opinion, very good reasons for this.  One, Wikipedia clearly has some extensive NASA contacts keeping the data up to date.  I’m often impressed with the depth and detail.  Two, it almost always provides a good list of references that are linkable, so, if you want to evaluate the validity of the data, you can go to the source.  That reason alone makes it a good stepping stone to learn more.  And, thirdly, it generally does an excellent job of putting even complex topics into layman’s terms.  But, as I mentioned, there are many other excellent sources of data out there, including NASA itself.

7) I am also a professional member of the International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety.  This is, in my opinion, an excellent resource of space and safety related data and I might very well refer to some of their resources before I’m done.  Also, I’ve written five papers for various IAASS conferences that have all been blessed for export control so I can talk about those topics: EVA on other planets, tin whiskers, micrometeroids and orbital debris, SI units, and the limitations of models and analyses.  Just in case you wanted to get the ball rolling.

I am not an astronomer or an astrophysicist.  I will try to find the information you’re asking for, but I make no promises on having it already.

9) I will be out of town from Saturday morning to Sunday evening.  Because of that, I may not answer questions in a timely manner after Saturday.  THEY WILL BE ANSWERED, EACH AND EVERY ONE.  I’m just not sure when.

10) (for flit)  Have fun!  This is your opportunity to ask questions.

Some sample questions for those wondering what to ask and what might be helpful.

How does being in orbit keep objects “up”?
Why can’t the Shuttle stop off at the ISS after servicing the Hubble Space Telescope?
Why is the ISS at such a high inclination?
What does geostationary orbit mean and why it is a popular place for satellites?
What can you tell me about the Apollo missions?
Did we really land on the moon?  (I will try to be patient with such nonsense).
What are the hazards for space travel?
What will we need to worry about for going back to the moon and Mars?
Should we have a manned space program or should we stick to robots?

And, on Friday, it will be your chance to pick my brains.  Got any question yet?

By the way, there were two fine editorials on human spaceflight in the NYT Times today: Earthstruck and Not-So-Lonely Planet .  Fine reading and food for thought.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS