Good afternoon to everyone and morning to those of you joining
us from the West Coast. I'm Bethany Stevens, the agency
press Secretary and we're excited to have you join us this
morning for the newly sworn in administrator, Jared Isaacman's
first agency wide town hall. With headlines like Space
Community Celebrates, Isaacman Confirmation, and day one videos
like that, I think it's safe to say we're all very excited he's
here. Before we begin, I want to take
this opportunity to talk through the structure of what this time
will look like. Today, communication went out
internally across the agency announcing this town hall that
also included a link to submit questions.
As always, we are hoping to get to as many questions as
possible, but we do have some time constraints.
I ask that when you submit, whether anonymous or with your
name, you include your center as we are aiming to get to as many
locations as possible across the workforce.
We also have a mic stand here at HQ and the web auditorium right
over there where today's Town hall is taking place.
If you have a question in the audience here live, please feel
free to go up to the microphone if it is open.
Otherwise, we ask that you wait in your seat rather than
queuing. Given that the majority of our
workforce sits outside of HQ, the majority of questions will
be taken online, but please don't let that discourage you
from participating here in house.
Lastly, I want to take thank everyone here at HQ for taking
time out of their day to welcome Administrator Isaacman yesterday
and everyone across NASA for taking time the Friday before
Christmas to join us for this Town Hall today without further
delay, Administrator Jared Isaacman.
Good afternoon. I am really honored to be here
today as NASA's 15th administrator, serving under
President Trump's leadership and working alongside some of the
greatest scientific and engineering minds this nation
has to offer. I feel like I am living the
dream right now. This is the agency that
captivated me as a child, inspiring me to grow up reading
every book on the subject I could on all of NASA's amazing
accomplishments and all The Pioneers and heroes that showed
up to work here every day. This is the agency that has
inspired the world again and again with images from our
telescopes, our probes, and our Rovers.
This is the agency that sent astronauts to and from the moon
at a time when we knew so little but believed we could do the
impossible. So honestly, there's nowhere
else I would rather be than right here, right now, alongside
all of you at the most accomplished space.
Agency in the world? I understand that with any
leadership change comes some anxiety and uncertainty, but
between two hearings, a few podcasts, a document that
circulated a little wider than expected, there should be, there
should really be no mysteries as to how I'm thinking about
things. But more importantly, the
President has released the National Space Policy, and in my
view, it's one of the most significant commitments to
America's space program by by any administration since the
Kennedy era. It lays out a very clear vision,
provides unambiguous priorities, and sets time frames for
achievement. And as it's always been, the
honour and exceptional responsibility rightfully falls
on all of us here at NASA to deliver.
So let me outline the direction that we're going to take
together. America will lead in the
peaceful exploration of space. We will bring extreme focus to
the mission and realise our near term objectives of returning
American astronauts to the Moon and establishing an enduring
presence to unlock the scientific, economic and
national security potential on the lunar surface.
We will look for every opportunity to pull forward the
Artemis program to the limits that physics and safety afford,
while increasing the flight cadence across the architecture
authorised in the one big beautiful bill.
The next most significant milestone, of course, is Artemis
2 launching on a historic mission early this coming year.
At the same time, we will prepare for the inevitable
return by working with our commercial and our international
partners to ensure they're aligned with our programmatic
objectives and acting with the urgency needed to deliver the
launch services, the vehicles, the suits, the habitat, surface
power and Rovers required for frequent, affordable missions to
the lunar environment. And our journey does not end on
the Moon. As directed in the National
Space Policy, we will accelerate investments in next generation
programs that only NASA is capable of leading, including
nuclear, surface power and propulsion technologies that
will usher in the next giant leap in space exploration and
discovery. Now we must ignite the orbital
and eventual lunar economy. For more than 1/2 century, the
space economy has been terrestrially anchored in
launched communication and observation with world
governments as the primary customer.
That perpetual taxpayer dependent model won't fund the
future we've all imagined. Alongside industry and academia,
we must uncover the long-awaited promise of pharmaceuticals,
biotech on orbit, computing anything that can contribute to,
and perhaps someday entirely justify the cost of maintaining
inhabited orbital outposts and generating value for in excess
of what it cost to operate in space.
Working with industry and academia, we will do all we can
to maximise the remaining life. The International Space Station
prioritising the highest potential science and research
with the aim of determining this new orbital economy.
So in the future we will transition from one station to
many. NASA will become a force
multiplier for science with an immense hunger for the data and
enthusiasm to deliver the world changing headlines that only
NASA is capable of achieving. We will endeavour to reduce the
time to science and maximise the scientific value of every dollar
that's available now. I do not believe this is a A1
size fits all approach. We will embrace a full menu of
possibilities so that includes bespoke missions to
extraordinary destinations and expanded clip style missions
that accept more risk for faster discovery.
Partnering with industry to gather Earth observation data
more efficiently and affordably without sacrificing continuity,
and lending NASA expertise and resources to enable academic
institutions to take on bold scientific missions.
Some approaches may be a flavour of the way it has always been
done, and some will be a new way.
But in all cases we will challenge the process in every
way, with the goal of arriving at the desired results as
expeditiously and affordably as possible.
Because if NASA doesn't do it, no one else will.
Now, accomplishing our mission will not be easy, but at NASA it
never was and it never should be.
Engineering and program management challenges are are
just part of the story. We have a great competitor that
is moving at absolutely impressive speeds, and it's
unsettling to consider the implications if we fail to
maintain our technological, scientific or economic edge in
space and the clock is running. These are fiscally challenging
times, and I do support the President and his goal to get
spending under control and bring down the national debt.
Now, this is hardly NASA specific, but we as a nation
can't spend our way out of every problem and believe it will lead
to better outcomes. So I don't know where the
budgets will land, but I will always advocate passionately for
the agency, knowing we will make the most of every dollar
entrusted to us. And I'm not arriving with all
the answers. I do know this.
We cannot achieve our objectives by doing things the way they've
been done in recent years. And we know most of the NASAIG
reports would echo this sentiment.
So we must do all we can to minimize the bureaucratic drag
that can slow us down and slow down the great engineers and
scientists and eliminate obstacles that impede progress.
Flatten the organizational structure to improve information
flow and accelerate sound decision making, and push
responsibility down to the talent that is more than capable
of getting the job done. And when we do, we must, right?
If we recognize and reward the contributors that bring the near
impossible to reality. NASA must be one of the hardest,
most demanding places to work in this country because lives
depend on our work and the world is counting on our breakthroughs
and discoveries. It's why you see the NASA logo
anywhere you travel. I mean, people the world over
know that we are capable of accomplishing and the
expectations are rightfully very high.
We're not alone in the need to evolve to meet the moment.
Our international and commercial and commercial partners have
made commitments as well, and we must place as much pressure on
them to deliver as we do on ourselves.
No changes happen in a vacuum. I I plan to speak with many of
you, the leadership teams, the engineers, scientists,
astronauts, our program managers and the people in the field
doing the work. I will visit every centre in the
weeks ahead and engage with our international and and commercial
partners. I want to hear directly what is
broken so we can work together to fix it and where we are
excelling so we can do a lot more of it.
It's been a year, but we have real momentum now.
NASA has the enthusiastic interest of President Trump, the
vice president, the cabinet. We have bipartisan congressional
support. We have a national space policy
outlining the most righteous and inspiring objectives.
We have the mandate. We have the talent, the
partners, and the resources to get the job done and bring
billions of people along with along with us on this journey.
I don't think there are many NASA employees standing next to
you who served during the Apollo era.
They have retired. In many cases.
They've passed on, leaving their extraordinary accomplishments
behind for us to celebrate. But now you will be the ones in
the room when we return. You will be part of the next
chapter of this history. And this time, when we make the
grand return, we stay. Thank you.
OK. And with that, we will get right
back into the questions that are coming, but I know that one of
the questions that was submitted was asking what your plans are
for your first 60 days. So you take it from here.
What are my plans for the 1st 60 days?
Well, there is an awful lot to learn.
There are volumes of materials on my desk right now to to get
through. But I think our, our, our major
priorities are overwhelmingly clear.
And it's the first part of the nationals, the president's
national space policy. We have to return to the moon.
We have Artemis 2. That's on deck.
I mean, again, just weeks away from potentially launching.
So I think making sure we concentrate a lot of our
resources rightfully in that direction is is most
appropriate. But there's an awful lot to get
done. And and this is the agency that
can do it. I mean, this is an agency with a
lot of proud history taking on multiple parallel world changing
programs. So I think again, we know what
our near term responsibilities are, but I'm looking forward to
learning as much as I can, getting out, interacting with
all of you on that roadshow that I mentioned coming up and
getting things going. Awesome.
And Elizabeth Hook Rogers from NASA HQ, thank you for that
question. I will kick it to Samantha
Youssef from Glenn. She asked, Do you have any
insight into when the current hiring freeze may be lifted and
whether candidates who are already selected and given start
dates will need to recompete for their positions?
Well, it's a good question. I think somewhere around 28
hours or so, not even on the job.
So there are certain things that I still need to chase down.
But as I said many times through, through 2 hearings, in
order to do the near impossible, it's going to take the
contributions of the best and brightest from across the
nation. I, I have no doubt there are
areas within the agency where we're going to have to hire.
So I look forward to getting more familiar with where we
stand on some of these policies. Great Fernando de la Pena Yaka
from Johnson said NASA FOD presented at MCCA
state-of-the-art holographic AI tech from IEXA.
Will NASA incorporate AI and holography in the future?
Definitely butchered that word. Well, that I mean, certainly
sounds like the right direction. I mean, almost every good space
sci-fi movie I've seen incorporated both AI and
holographs. So that's good.
I, and I mean in all seriousness, we, we absolutely
have to. So I am not familiar with where
we are at at this present moment.
I am familiar with the pages and pages of policies, regulation,
documentary documentation, history this agency possesses.
And it would certainly seem to make sense to me.
That is a good first step. We could try and incorporate
some of that and AI might make it easier to find some of the
materials we need. But look, if we think about
where are, where the destinations will eventually
take us, we're going to, I mean, we're going to eventually,
whether it's Mars and beyond, just transmission delays alone
are going to take us, you know, or at least evolve the current,
you know, Mission Control concept where we're going to
have to rely on more on board decision making where I could
see AI playing a role, what AI mean.
Fun thing to imagine at some point in the near future.
And also just a reminder, we do have a mic in the room if
anybody wants to get up and ask a question.
Betty Lynn Mason from Marshall asks, do you see new technology
development more by hands on engineering work here at NASA or
through NASA consulting with industry and why?
I think it's both and I'm, I'm sure many of you, well, I don't
know, you probably have a lot of better things to do than hear
what I'm saying to Congress all the time.
But I, I mean, this question comes up a lot of like it, it's
almost goes to the, the relevancy of the agency.
Like why, why do we need a NASA? And we have all these great
commercial companies, you know, doing all these things.
It's like, wait a second, you know, let's go back to the 1960s
here during the space race where we did the near impossible.
We worked alongside industry. I mean, we had partners.
You have Boeing and McDonnell Douglas and Northrop back in the
1960s. And those names are still US
today. And certainly there are some new
names out there. I do think it's NASA's job to to
focus on on the near impossible. And we figure those things out.
We can hand them off to some of our industry partners where we
can let you know, innovation take off and the competitive
forces drive down costs. And we just recalibrate next.
So look, it's going to be both the national space policy,
something was spoken about extensively talks a lot about
investments in nuclear programs, nuclear surface power, nuclear
propulsion. Now, there is an emerging
industry that's capable of supporting that, but I think a
lot of that is what NASA should be taking on.
And then there's certainly areas where we pioneered technology
decades ago where we're very comfortable working alongside
our commercial partners to get the job done.
I don't see that balance ever changing.
And especially, especially on the science side, back to, you
know, my commentary before if NASA isn't out there trying to
unlock the secrets of the universe, no one else is going
to do it. Rita, Sam Bruna from Goddard
said. Welcome Administrator Isaacman.
I was gratified to hear you say that one of the goals of your
administration is to make NASA a force multiplier for science.
I'm wondering what the word science really means.
Is it only the science that serves directly Moon to Mars,
space weather, robotics, propulsion science, surface
exploration, and more? Or more generally all science we
currently do at the agency, even if not directly linked to Moon
to Mars? For example, is traditional
astrophysics studying the universe included of?
Course, I mean I, I mean I think like fundamentally, what are
what are we here to do? We're here to answer the
questions that, you know, went through every kids mind when
they looked up at the the stars at night and wondered what's out
there and why it's the way it is.
I mean, so that we play that role across all of our mission
directorates. So of course, human space
exploration is a major component to that, but as is our entire
science program and our technology development
initiatives, I mean, we're focused in all the right places
to try and solve the mysteries in Air and Space.
Jin Jung Wang Lee from Johnson says if China can air fry BBQ
chicken on Tiangong, should we reevaluate rigid and somewhat
outdated NASA requirements and use modern tech to turn survival
into thriving to attract commercial investment?
This was an air fryer I'd called Pizza in Space.
That's cool. That's an upgrade on that.
Yeah. I, I look, I as I meant, as I
alluded to in some of my remarks before I, I think it's
absolutely healthy for any organization to constantly
challenge the way they do things knowing that the what we've done
in the past is not necessarily the right approach to get to the
future. I mean we, we are on the brink
of a a massive transformation right now.
You can see all the various commercial providers building
their own launch vehicles with rapid reusability.
And we, this can be a light switch type moment where you
have numerous commercial and NASA missions being operated
near simultaneously. We could have multiple space
stations. We are certainly going to build
a lunar base in line with the president's direction and look
even further out outward. Like we're going to have to
challenge some of these things that might have been rigid in
the past during, you know, less mature times.
So I, I know air fryers is just the example, but I imagine there
are many things that we have historically maybe not
prioritized or thought were of a greater risk that we should be
re evaluating. I think that goes across the
entire portfolio of our responsibilities at NASA.
And I will hand the mic over for the question here in house.
Thank you. Kelly fast acting planet.
Excuse me, Kelly fast acting planetary defense officer.
And I was one of those astronomer kids looking at the
skies, but also being an astronomer also here, having to
use infrastructure that perhaps is aging.
It's not as flashy to work on budget software and procurement
software and awards management software.
And I know that often we have to throw people at such situations
because it's certainly flashier to do the next cool thing.
But do you have any thoughts on how we can maybe handle things
that are under the surface on which we rely in order to do the
impossible? Possible that we're trying to do
here. Well, I mean from an
infrastructure perspective and I guess including the, you know, a
lot of the core systems that allow the agency to function.
I do think we we should be applying a lot of the brain
power that is available to us at this agency to try and find ways
to do it better, to free up resources to work on those
exciting things. I mean, I hope everyone kind of
almost regardless of their function, is trying to find a
way to do whatever their current job is better, whether there's
means to automate it or software to alleviate some of their
responsibilities so they can repurpose their time on the more
exciting things to work on. But yeah, I, I have to imagine
that if there's any agency in the in the United States
government that can find a way to do some of those
responsibilities a little bit better to free up resources, we
should be capable of doing it. Thank you, I love your area of
responsibility too. I think that's one we should be
keep a good eye on. We don't want to go the way the
dinosaurs. Lisa Link from Goddard says, can
you speak to the reorganization discussed in the Project Athena
document and what impacts we can expect?
Sure. I mean it look at that as I
think a lot of people probably know was formulated a time
earlier this year where I mean, I was a nominee.
So I can only, you know, see what's being reported.
But there was a lot of various reorganization plans that seemed
to be being considered at the time.
A lot of phase one, phase two. I don't know how much everyone
was tracking that. But from my perspective, having,
you know, worked on a number of large organization reorg type
efforts, it's better to do a single data informed plan rather
than anything that involves, you know, needless pain over a
period of time. Now that's 5-6 months ago.
A lot has happened since then. As I mentioned before in my
remarks, my objective, I mean, is to get up to speed as quickly
as possible. Now, there are some things that
I did just, you know, more or less communicate in my
statement, like I do believe in flat organization structures.
I like to know things as quickly as we possibly can, increase
the, you know, decision velocity the greatest extent possible,
push responsibilities down. I think you.
And you look at that, I mean, we, we had a lot of young
engineers and scientists and researchers that took us to the
moon and back. I like pushing responsibilities
down as great as possible that these don't necessarily involve,
you know, major changes to personnel or, or dramatic
reorganizations, but they're direction, you know, directions
I think we should be looking to move into.
And at the right time, we have the right information, drawing
on hopefully a lot of conversations from people in
this room. You asked earlier about the 1st
60 days, but Mark Serna from Kennedy Space Center says what
organizational or investment decisions will you prioritize in
the next 12 to 18 months to ensure Artemis stays on
schedule? Yeah, well, I think there's,
there's already quite a few bonders up there with some high
priority decisions I think that need to be made.
But this is what I'm, this is really this journey began today.
I mean, we've had a number of meetings.
We're asking to gather as much data as possible.
So we have situational good situational awareness, awareness
to make the right decisions. I mean, you know, conceptually
we should be doing everything we can, as I mentioned, to the
limits of physics and safety of Ford to pull in every Artemis
mission. I mean, we want to have as many
opportunities to achieve our objectives before our great
rival as possible. So I'll be interested in
information that helps us beyond the Artemis 2 time frame.
And as I also said in my remarks, look, I think we should
be feeling a lot of the pressure to deliver.
This is what this agency is, is capable of doing.
It's what we've done throughout, throughout our history.
The pressure also exists on our international partners, our
commercial partners as well to ensure they deliver.
And I'm we'll be for sure having conversations across the board.
Reminder that the microphone in the room is open?
Felicia Stevens from Marshall asks, with NASA's organizational
structure being divided by 10 centers, do you have any
reorganizational plans for how to fully integrate the agency as
one NASA to help us operate more efficiently?
I would say I certainly have some thoughts, but those are,
those are, you know, those are thoughts that you would get
based on information external to the agency.
I think my goal is to use, you know, is to get up to speed as
quickly as I can and talk to a lot of the right folks that are
in this room and across our various centers to ensure that
we have a well informed plan. You know, generally speaking, I
do think every, you know, you want to make sure that all of
the contributors, so whether that's the centers and our our
various partners bubble up to the major mission objectives
that we're trying to accomplish. Like you, we want to find every
opportunity, you know, to ensure information transfers
efficiently so we can make faster decisions.
But yes, everything is just, you know, purely conceptual at this
point. Like my job for, you know, the
the foreseeable future, immediate future is to gather as
much information as I can with from the right people to make
sure we're making the right decisions.
Craig Hunter from Langley asks the loss of telework and remote
work flexibility have hurt productivity, work and family
life balance and morale. How do you plan to address those
issues? I, I, I certainly understand the
question. I would just say that at least
my experience is that when you're trying to do, you know,
kind of big, bold, very challenging endeavors, having
all the right minds in the right location is just works better.
Now, that doesn't mean that there aren't scenarios where
exceptions make sense. As I've said before, it does
take, you know, the contributions of the best and
brightest from across the nation in order to achieve the, the
near impossible. But generally, I, I do think
it's pretty important to bring all the, all the right people
together under the same roof in order to work with the, you
know, the speed, the urgency that's necessary for what we're
trying to accomplish. Roger Weiss from Johnson says
huge congratulations on your confirmation.
Might you become the 1st in office Administrator in Oh my
goodness Administrator to venture on a space mission.
That that is not crossed my mind.
I think we have an awful lot that needs to be accomplished,
you know, over the next three years.
The priority list is near endless.
The president has placed enormous importance on it.
I mean, my first day on the job and you're in the Oval Office,
the president signs a national space policy.
I mean, I think that signifies the, you know, it certainly
reinforces the importance this administration is putting on
achieving these objectives as quickly as we possibly can.
I hardly imagine I'll find time for, you know, any of these
other activities. So thank you.
Tara Halt from Headquarters says many projects are significantly
delayed due to poor contractor performance.
The OIG has noted that NASA has limited leverage to incentivize
improved contractor performance. How do you plan to address this?
I, I'm, I again, maybe it's just being hours on the job, but I am
not aware of any limitations in ensuring that there would be or,
or roadblocks in place to prevent us from holding our
partners accountable. So look, I, I said this in my
first hearing like they work for us, not the other way around.
I think that's how it was done in the 1960s.
NASA should be incredibly demanding to our various
partners and ensuring they can deliver the capabilities we were
promised on time, on budget, so we can deliver on our world
changing objectives. And I think there's certainly
things we can probably do here as an agency.
I'm, I'm very interested in what, you know, what knobs we
can turn, you know, in order to get to the, you know, to the
correct outcome faster. So we'll, we'll certainly look
within when there's opportunities to do so.
But as I said before, we're going to put as much pressure on
on our partners, international and commercial, as we do on
ourselves. Rich Walls from Langley says we
hear next to nothing about aeronautics.
What are your thoughts on the future of the first A in NASA?
I mean, this is an area that I'm incredibly passionate about.
So I mean, look, I love the history of the aeronautics
program at NASA. And I think it's, I think it's
important that we try and get back to that as quickly as we
can. And what I mean by that is lots
of exciting explains. Look, this is an environment for
us to learn, but it's also another tool for inspiration.
Rocket launches are great for inspiration.
Astronauts certainly landing on the moon is great for
inspiration. But NASA's portfolio in
aeronautics should be out there, too.
I mean, it's another opportunity to get people to look up and
imagine what's possible. I love aeronautics.
I'd love to see an expanded X-plane portfolio.
I'd love to see us collaborating in ways with other agencies as
we did in the past. I mean, you know, the, the, the
thrust vectoring technology on the F22 can trace it's roots
back to NASA fly by wire technology, wing designs.
I'd love to see us pushing the boundaries and radical airframe
designs and, and propulsion. So it's certainly an area that
I'm passionate about. Someone else has braved the mic
in the room, so I will toss it over to you.
Wonderful. Hello, Sir, I'm John Truss, NASA
Headquarters Mission Support Directorate.
I was wondering, I'm sure you're familiar with NASA's footprint
across the United States. I was wondering if you have any
general ideas of the infrastructure, what you want to
do? Any immediate plans for growing,
shrinking, or, you know, retiring buildings?
Yeah, I mean, it's a great question.
This is an area I, I'm eager to receive more information on.
I would like I, I think that the worst outcome right, is the
limited resources that we have available to us investing it in
infrastructure capabilities that don't have demand and come at
the expense of infrastructure that needs to be modernized,
maintained so we can increase throughput for it or
infrastructure we should be building to better account for
the future direction we're seeing in Air and Space.
So yeah, this is certainly something I want to get my arms
around. If we have infrastructure that
is not required anymore, it's not needed for us.
Like it would be a travesty to have money continue to go into
that when we we know there are so many exciting areas we need
to be prioritizing our resources.
So I'd love to make sure we're taking a good, you know,
holistic, you know, agency wide view of this and concentrating
our firepower on the on the real needle movers, which is
generally a statement I think for everything we're going to
try and accomplish at the agency with the resources afford to us
by Congress. Charles Wilder from Stennis says
how will you help streamline NASA's processes to enable
faster, cheaper missions without compromising safety or quality?
It's a good question. Look, I I think generally doing
things differently is not a there is no magic wand on this
kind of things like this is a lot of littles that happens over
time where you can, you know, shift directions.
But I will say, look, it's the the in terms of the safety card.
We, we have to, we have to, you know, separate out human Space
Flight missions where we will never take needless risk.
We will do everything we possibly can to protect the
lives of our, our crews from other missions.
You know, I love, you know, the flagship missions that we have
in the science portfolio. Like I, I just want to see more
of them as everybody does. Like, you know, it'd be great if
we were launching flagship missions with even a greater
cadence. And some of those, you know, I
mean, if definitionally you're going to spend a billion dollars
on them, you want them to work and get them right.
There are other categories that are already, you know, already
exist within the the science portfolio or maybe we can
challenge some of our approach on these things similar to clips
where, you know, we'll have some successes and we'll have some
failures and we should do it eyes wide open and accept that,
you know, over time, you know, that that curve should improve
and we should get better outcomes and we will have helped
industry or academia develop capabilities to launch
additional missions. That's how we become that force
multiplier. So can't be 1, you know, like
again, as I mentioned in my remarks and one-size-fits-all in
these things. And we have a question submitted
from out in California from Fidel Vasquez at JPL.
He says welcome. And how will JPL fit into NASA's
plans? I think JPL is, is one of our
great science centers. So from my perspective, I look
at it kind of similar to every other center within, you know,
within the agency on how can we increase the scientific value of
every dollar? How can we increase the output
or get to the desired objectives faster.
So JPL has built some extraordinary hardware.
I think pretty much, you know, I think pretty much every hardware
that we've landed on Mars, somebody I know will Fact Check
me on this probably originated from JPL.
I'm good. OK, my memory was correct on
that. So how do we get more of it?
I mean we, we, you know that that would be a question I would
ask out there is, is there any, any knobs again that we could be
turning to increase the output So we can you know, get after
the science that much faster. JPL is going to play a huge role
in that. Daniel Hoffbar from Langley says
what is the best way to provide suggestions to improve NASA
going forward? That's a great, that's a great
question. So something I was, I, I, I had
to look into this, but I recalled earlier in the year
that we had, you know, there was a inbox established for whether,
you know, anonymous suggestions or otherwise on areas for
improvement and not really sure what came of it.
And if it, if it no longer exists or it does, we're
definitely going to reinvigorate it or bring greater attention to
it. Because I would love to have
inputs from many on ways we could be doing things better,
you know, with the resources available.
But in addition, you know, plan to get out in the field.
And I, I can tell everybody now and can, you can consider a
direction on this, like when I do come and visit anyone, please
know, no, no red carpet or dog and pony show.
I am, I am there to, to learn about everything that's going
right. So we can increase it and do
more of it and where their problems are so we can try and
make it better. And that's not going to be those
interactions will not be limited to leadership levels.
I plan to have as many conversations.
I can't recognize. I mean, we do have thousands of
people, but I am very interested.
I'm not going to formulate my positions on things in a vacuum.
Angela Bartolomino from Goddard asks how will you address the
loss of personnel through the DRP?
I mean, as I, I've said, you know, many times, I think for us
to do what we're supposed to be doing, you know, which is
achieving the near impossible, it's going to take the best and
brightest from across the nation.
So I think it's, you know, a lot has happened this year.
So this is something I need to get my arms around and I'm
hoping to be able to do that through various leadership
discussions. But I could certainly see a
world where in order to achieve our our important objectives, we
do need to do some hiring. So that is something that I'll
need to get my arms run. Jeff Brubaker from Johnson asks,
do you have any examples to share with us of using
blockchain technologies to ensure integrity of safety
critical data like inspection reports?
Do I have any examples? Well, I mean, I I do think there
is a lot of utility in blockchain technology.
I don't know of any uses to date inside the agency or any
immediate problems we're gonna attempt to solve with it, but
I'm open minded. This is just a reminder that we
are grabbing these questions live and the link is open if you
would like to submit any questions.
Peter Zah from Johnson asks, What is your strategy to promote
space travel and space exploration interests across
America and partnering countries?
That's it. That's a great question.
So, and a lot of people have raised it in some form or
another, right? I mean, the space race was a
real thing in the 1960s and everybody followed it quite
closely. It was also at a time when, you
know, there were three TV networks and there was no
Netflix and such. So there's a lot or Instagram or
any of the other reels that capture people's attention, I
guess is there's a lot of things to occupy people's time.
And that's unfortunate because we're, we're about to do some,
some pretty impressive and cool things.
So it, it is an area that I, well, I fully intend to speak
with our, our comps team about to try and focus.
I mean, one area I've, you know, said it before is I'd love to
see us focus a lot on, on our quality of our content.
You know, not I do believe in the past, there's been a a lot
of quantity that's been shared, but we want to put out the
absolute best stuff that's going to captivate people's interest
and then almost back to, you know, what else do we need to
do? We this goes back to looking for
every opportunity to pull forward Artemis schedule into
the limits possible alongside all of our other missions is
that you want to get the the world's interest is going to be
there on Artemis 2. There's no question about it.
But you know, a lot of time can can transpire between Artemis 2
and Artemis 3. And that's like waiting a very
long time for the next season to come out right is we got to make
sure we're continuing to put that really engaging content out
there to maintain people's interest in what is something
extraordinary. It is I've said it many times,
this is greatest adventure in human history.
People should be following it very closely.
We'll do everything we can to make sure they do.
Jade Zeros from Kennedy says. And your time preparing for your
new role, Is there anything you've changed your mind about
pursuing as administrator? That is a great question.
I just I need to think about. It was a long time in between
the 1st and 2nd stint here and I tried to find as many
entertaining and distracting things to occupy my time in
between. Yeah, I, I am sure it is.
You know, it is an endless list really, right.
You know, you there is a lot that has transpired in the, you
know, over the last six months. But I'd say probably look, this
is it's not it's not necessarily what's changed for me, but what
has me so energized right now. Is this complete, you know,
administrative administration almost whole of government
support for what we're trying to accomplish here at NASA.
And you know, again, you know, I, the president releases a
national space policy on on on day one in the job.
I probably spoke with him at least four or five times about
space priorities prior to being renominated for the, the, the
job. I've spoken to him several times
since and the enthusiasm, the excitement from human Space
Flight to we were discussing robotic Mars missions like these
are things that are all very exciting.
But it doesn't stop there. The vice president, you know,
the leadership across the White House, obviously you've seen how
much Congress and got engaged across 2 hearings, both sides of
the aisle excited and fighting for the agency.
So from my perspective, sure, I'm, I'm sure a lot has evolved
in my thinking over that over that time period right now.
But what's I think most encouraging right now is how the
entire United States government is getting behind this agency
and what we're going to need to, what we're going to need to
accomplish in the years ahead. That's pretty, pretty exciting.
David Reed from Marshall says Administrator Isaacman welcome.
How do you see NASA working with other agencies such as Space
Command in IST and others to leverage shared capabilities to
develop the space infrastructure needed for ensuring we build the
future in space? It's, you know, that's a really
great, it's a great question. It comes back I think to what to
the National Space policy yesterday, which was clearly,
you know covered more than just NASA's responsibility in space
and where to come from an incredibly capable Office of
Science, Technology and Policy director Kratzios and the team
he's assembled over there, which many came from NASA are really
brilliant and they have the the top level picture of what we're
looking to do here at NASA. What DOE is working on what Dow
is working on so that we can be efficient with our resources.
Again, back to the realities are we, we are in a fiscally
constrained environment. So hey, let's, it's not build 4
different, you know, bespoke nuclear reactors across four
different programs. If there's some commonality
here, we can be smarter, more efficient and give by the way,
the programs a greater chance of success, you know, when we're
all aligned around it and sharing some resources towards
it. So I think that this is not
something that this is not broken, this is actually working
and we need to lean into it really well.
I think again, Director Kratzios and OSTP has a great vision
here. They're looking at the complete
picture across agencies that have some of this overlap so we
can be very smart and efficient with our resources.
Christian Maseal from Goddard asks if you could send a message
to every new mission team just starting their formulation phase
today. What is the primary North Star
or priority you would want us to emphasize to them right from day
one? It's another good question.
I think that we we certainly understand what our mission is
and we should be working urgently.
Towards solving it. Never let a day go by for
something that can be solved today because the world is
waiting. I mean, you're here at NASA.
We have the most extraordinary mission of any, any government
agency out there. And you know, we have the, the
direction from the president, we have the resources, we have the
will to accomplish it. Don't let a day go by for
something we can accomplish today, because the world is
waiting. Paul Goldsmith from JPL says how
do you see continuing support for science in NASA given the
pressure to deliver hardware? And I think that goes hand in
hand with two other questions we have from Goddard and Johnson
about the importance of Earth science and also how we are
going to continue to apply science on the International
Space Station. So a lot of science.
I think there's a lot there. I don't necessarily understand
the pressure to deliver hardware part, but I mean, just at least
talk on Earth sciences and and prioritizing science and
resources to space station. So, you know, with respect to
Earth sciences, look, there is there is bipartisan support for
it. Maybe for, you know, different
reasons, but every every senator I had a chance spoke to.
So we obviously have implications that are, you know,
real from a humanitarian perspective, agriculture, fires,
flooding. So everybody is interested in
the data maybe for slightly different reasons.
We just want to, again, like any aspect of the agency, look to
try and get to the science as quickly and as affordably as we
can. I think there's going to be
areas where you're going to have the historic Landsat mission
continuing to play its role. And then look, we should be
taking advantage of constellations of satellites
that are, that are up there now that are continuing to be
produced by a lot of different commercial providers to
supplement some of our data needs.
And if we can do that in a more affordable way and that frees
up, you know, more missions like future Dragonfly programs,
that's like who wouldn't want to lean in and embrace that The in
terms of high priority science and research to the space
station. This is maybe goes back to the
air fryer question of challenging some of our historic
approach. We need to make the most of the
space station while we got it. There's no question.
I mean, you have multiple companies right now, you know,
that have set out on business model of making and operating
space stations. That's pretty cool, but we want
to help create some of the demand for it.
We want all the pharmaceutical companies lining up and saying
I'll take one. We're very far from that right
now. All the biotech companies, I
need my space station. That's the exciting future we
all want to see someday. So I think we absolutely have to
kind of challenge the current approach.
We need an outreach effort to all of the industries and
academia that think they have the potential for an orbital
economy breakthrough and do everything we can to prioritize
getting that science and research to the space station,
figure it out, and give the commercial space station
companies a fighting chance. We're gonna need to depend on
them, so we gotta do all we can in the years ahead on that.
And we have time for a few more questions.
Sorry for lumping so many in, but I did promise to get to as
many as possible. We have a great one from Vandana
JA from Ames. Welcome.
What advice would you give to early and mid career scientists
and engineers and NASA who want to take risks and innovate but
also operate within a highly risk averse environment?
What leadership principles from your commercial space experiment
experience do you think are most important for empowering NASA's
workforce while maintaining mission assurance and scientific
rigor? I I mean, look, there's a lot
there to it, but I think the general question is, you know,
do we do many of us do we believe that there are areas
where we can take, you know, smarter risks to get to the
outcome, you know, faster. And that's absolutely the
direction we need to be going in.
What I'd say again, it's like this is not very few things in
an organization, you know, the size of NASA can be solved with
waving the magic wand. Please take more risk and that
be the right statement to make. It's not it's, it's got to be a
lot of littles. And I think, you know, if we do
have young engineers, scientists, researchers out
there that believe there is a better approach to get to the
right outcome faster and lower cost, you got to present it in
that in the right way to your leadership team.
Make the case of why this is, why this is the right approach.
And I encourage the leaders out there, supervisors, managers
that are mentoring this young talent to be receptive and open
minded to it. You know, think through what are
the real risks? Is this, is this still, I mean,
is this still relevant today? And have we learned, have we
gathered more data that will allow us to rethink this?
What is the consequence of this? Is it something that's worth
taking to advance the ball forward?
It's gonna be a lot of littles. I'm gonna certainly be looking
for opportunities to push down some of these philosophies from
the the top of the agency. But it's gonna it's, it's
obviously gonna rely on a lot of the managers and leaders in the
field too, to be open minded and receptive and to to the young
talent to make the good case about why we should think, look
at doing things in a, a slightly different way.
We have a question from Diego out of Jonathan asking how you
will ensure a whole of government focus on human space
exploration and gain support. Well, I think there I mean there
it's a good question. I think there is a lot of
support. I mean, you know the, the
additional funds that were authorized in the one big
beautiful bill, a lot of it does concentrate on on human space
exploration. So I, I would say that that is
of great interest across across the government.
I know that a lot of the commercial launch providers that
we're working with have various human Space Flight ambitions.
That's not one company. It's not too good.
I mean, I, I might not even be 3 companies anymore.
I mean, I think several have actually announced, you know,
plans for crude vehicles. This is exciting.
This is what we want now this we are the pioneer in this field.
We've done an awful lot to help, you know, educate and enable the
companies that have been successful doing this today, the
commercial providers. We need to continue to do that.
And we probably will arrive at that, that light switch moment
in the not too distant future where we do go from the few
being able to see the world from such a such an amazing
perspective, not entirely like that, but to the many, which is
pretty, which is pretty exciting.
I think that's always kind of one of the, I don't know,
underlining goals that we all have here at this agency.
And one more from Ryan Scott from Goddard.
Do you have any lessons or science outlook from Inspiration
4 or Polaris Don which you plan to bring to your role?
Well, I, I mean, it's, I'm sure I can give a lot of thought to
it, but I'll just go on that when we, when we were lucky
enough to be in that environment, we tried to
maximize every second that was available for scientific
purposes, knowing how lucky we were to be there.
And it's really the same message back here to the agency with the
resources that are provided to us.
We need to maximize the scientific value of every dollar
that's afforded to us, which means probably many cases
challenging the approach or at least our historic approach to
get to a better outcome faster and and at lower cost.
So yeah, I guess that would be. And with that last question, we
are at time. So thank you all for joining us
today and thank you to Administrator Isaac Men for your
time in this thoughtful conversation.
We are looking forward to many more of these in the months and
years ahead as the agency accelerates the golden age of
innovation and exploration. Happy holidays everyone.