I don’t have much info about this, but space.com is reporting that Alan Stern, who for the past year or so has been NASA’s Associate Administrator for Science, has resigned. No reason has been given yet. However, it says that NASA’s chief Mike Griffin "reluctantly accepted" the resignation, so this doesn’t sound like it was just an end-of-tenure sort of thing.
Stern has overseen a lot of reform in the planetary science aspect of NASA, getting missions on track and on budget. There have been lots of problems, of course, because hey– it’s NASA. But from what I’ve heard Stern has been doing a good job at headquarters. As a planetary scientist himself he knows both sides of the business (admin and science) and again from what I hear he’s been well-liked and things were going well. His resignation is a shock to me, and I can’t help thinking this isn’t a good thing for NASA. The timing is funny too, since NASA just had a nasty PR hit over the announcement to shut down the Mars rovers, which drew such an outcry that they changed their minds, and reinstated the rover program.
But was that enough to cause Stern to resign? I wonder if more bad news is coming. There’s no way to know yet, and I won’t speculate. We’ll see for sure soon enough.
In the meantime, Ed Weiler, an old hand at NASA (he was chief scientist for Hubble for many years) will take over for Stern. I assume that will be temporary until someone else can take over permanently. Stay tuned.
Hat tip to BABloggee Kevin Jung for letting me know about this.
March 26th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Word has it that cutting the Rover fund was Stern’s idea and Griffin didn’t like it.
March 26th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
I’m really sorry to hear this. Like you, my overall impression of his performance has been positive, and he seems to be well liked among scientists (although some have complained to me of his inflexibility). I was at Goddard when Weiler came, which was seen among many as a demotion for him and a slap to space science, although of course he put a positive spin on it. We could certainly do worse than having Weiler back at HQ.
March 26th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Now that you’re about done with the book, don’t you need a new job? I’m sure someone on the BABlog can be a reference!
March 26th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Wow. That IS news. When I saw Alan at AAS in January, he seemed a bit more subdued than the rockin’ sockin’ Alan Stern I knew back in grad school. Maybe he’s done what he set out to do and he’s ready to move on.
Ed Weiler is definitely an old hand at this stuff… politically savvy, etc. I like him but I do think that Stern’s leaving is NASA’s (big) loss.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
He probably just can’t stomach lying to the public about those Moon landings anymore. So obviously he has more scruples than you Phil.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
People looked on Stern as some kind of space hero, but he hacked
away at too many programs while letting MSL become a bloated
money pig. Threatening the Mars Rovers was the last straw and
it may have saved us from losing more space missions.
Stern got his Pluto probe, so he didn’t really care about the other
projects after that. Trust me, this comes from the inside.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
The Alan Stern I knew/know was amazingly evenhanded in his dealings, even though he did have much support and sympathy for the Pluto mission. But, that mission was funded and flown before he came into NASA, so it’s unfair to criticize his tenure for that. That kind of accusation sounds like sour grapes, unless you have proof of it IRA.
Is there proof of his backing of cutting Mars funds, or is this another rumor flying around? Let’s get the facts straight folks and leave the rumormongering and backroom backstabbing behind, eh?
A lot of good people go to NASA HQ and then leave; there’s something about the place. I’d hold out for the truth, which may be some time in coming, so I’m not going to rush to judgment about his leaving. It’s not a good sign though.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
IRA, word from inside is just that: word. People inside of NASA have grudges, prejudices and all the like, so I wouldn’t trust it. Plus, to be fair, what evidence do we have except your say-so? I don’t mean to denigrate you, but you’re a guy semi-anonymously posting on a blog comment, so saying “trust me” doesn’t hold a lot of water.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
IRA, I know Alan Stern personally, like cc peterson, and have known him since he finished grad school. He is one of the most principled, hard working, and reasonable people I know. He took the job at NASA in the spirit of public service.
It is unfair and incorrect to say that Stern only took the job to further the New Horizons mission, or that he didn’t care about the other missions and goals of NASA.
Things said on the web have a life of their own, and I wish that people were more responsible about posting damaging rumours about others online. Especially when they are so far off the mark as this one. NASA lost big with this resignation, and I’ll wait for Alan to explain why he left.
It’s a pity that we are wasting trillions of dollars on the invasion of Iraq. That kind of cuts into the available resources for line items like space science and education.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
I know here on the BAB y’all focus on astronomy and space science, and that’s fine. But Earth Science at NASA has suffered terribly in recent years, in particular from the NPP/NPOESS debacle. Another NASA reorganization at the top will be disastrous. We are literally running out of time.
March 26th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
I trust my sources, and far as I know you are all just friends
of Stern who would say whatever needs to be said to defend
him, so I guess we’re even.
I know one fact no one can dispute - Stern went against his
boss, Michael Griffin. Love or hate Griffin, the man is in charge
and when you publicly make him look like a villian regarding the
beloved Mars Rovers, you get canned no matter how good you
are presumed to be.
If Stern was so wonderful for NASA/JPL. etc, why did he
allow someting like MSL to get so big and out of hand?
My sources have some other news on Stern, but the atmosphere
here is clearly on Stern’s side, so whatever I say will probably
just be shot down.
March 27th, 2008 at 1:23 am
The Diogensian in me thinkthat Mr Stern was forced to resign for daring to suggest that JPL’s Mars programme keep to its budget; but of course that can’t possibly be truth. When has the Mars programme ever had cost overruns?
March 27th, 2008 at 6:41 am
Before Stern I would blame the ISS - something of a cold-war relic that has consumed not just a hundred billion dollars but shuttle time and resources and public goodwill. I think more people are fond of the anthropomorphized Mars rovers than the perceived as rather droll act of moving at thousands of miles per hour in low Earth orbit, regardless of what a technical achievement it might be. It’s not permanent, it doesn’t do much except expand on Skylab and Mir, it’s constantly having problems, and it’s understaffed anyway because of the loss of the “liferaft” projects designed to make it safe for seven or so residents at once.
All the talk of pioneering man’s presence in space really would go farther if it was pioneering and not just, by public perception, revisiting the same thing over and over.
March 27th, 2008 at 8:53 am
I don’t understand why NASA keeps getting the shaft when it comes to funding. OK, I realise that the war and its’ gajillion dollars a day spending limits money for NASA, but c’mon! It’s going to cost money to put people into space etc. I sure hope that the next President is space/NASA friendly.
March 27th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
IRA, for all I know you can make it up on fly. “My sources”, haha. How I can know how credible you are? “Trust me” is standard lie in shady rumours.
“My sources have some other news on Stern”
Don’t hesistate. We all wait - drooling and wetting our pants for more rumors, speculations and unsubstantiated claims.
March 27th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
MaDeR, I really couldn’t care less whether you believe me or not, or if
you jump off a cliff (hint, hint).
In addition to putting New Horizons over all other space missions,
Stern was also typically a rather nieve and idealistic scientist thinking
he could waltz into a government bureaucracy like NASA and think he
could change things around in short order.
Stern and others in his circle gambled with the Mars Rovers by crying
out loud in public that mean ol’ NASA was going to shut them down
to save a few bucks in an attempt to save JPL from the axe and of
course get more money for his pet space projects.
The truth is, the rovers were never really in trouble financially, Spirit
was going to be shut down for the Martian winter anyway (it’s getting
old and worn out, folks - it won’t last much longer despite all your
wishes and prayers.
Stern and others used them as chess pieces against NASA’s big
boss, Mike Griffin. Guess who was going to lose, especially after
publicly embarassing their boss? Hasd he pulled this crap a few
regimes ago, he would have been fired on the spot after being
publicly reemed out.
Stern also left out of spite, as in he is taking his ball home since
he didn’t get to play the way he wanted to. Sorry Alan, but this
is NASA, not your personal space agency/playground. Not exactly
the sterling kind of democratic leader one wants now, is it?
NASA and JPL will survive without Stern, despite and the crying
and whining I see all over the net. He was going to turn JPL into
his own private kingdom anyway, and clearly had help with a lot
of fawning serfs. Too bad for Stern he didn’t know how to play
real ball with the big boys.
Believe me or not, I don’t care. I know nobody likes seeing their
cherished delusions shattered by someone showing that Stern
was no saint nor a savior of the space program. Maybe if you
folks had a little more reality in your breakfast cereals, we would
actually accomplish some real space exploration for a change.
March 27th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Wow, it’s amazing how snippy y’all can get. The bottom line is, whether you apply a positive or negative spin to this development, you are all just guessing. I think IRA’s comments border on abusive, though (e.g., suggesting his/her detractors need to commit suicide). IRA, you need to lighten up, or else why not go all out and follow the example of IRONMANAustralia’s darling foray into conspiracy theory? You don’t know anything for sure, do you, pal, so stop pretending to have the inside scoop, and don’t expect people to treat your cynical guesses as facts.
March 27th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Well, I guess if another stranger tells me I’m full of it and to just
lighten up and stop, I better, huh?
What really amazes me, but it shouldn’t, is how ignorant so
many people on this forum and elsewhere are when it comes
to space and politics.
“Oh, we should stop spending money on the Iraq War and
give it to Mars!” Space is NOT a priority to the politicians of
the USA and the world. They only use it when something
happens in space that makes them look good, such as a
manned Moon landing (why do you think Apollo stopped
just a few years after Number 11?) or cute little robots
strolling across Mars.
This won’t change until space becomes of real use to them,
which won’t happen through government funded space
agencies. Private space industry is the key, assuming they
can ever literally get off the ground. Until then, whine all
you want, but billions will continue to be funnelled to Iraq
and the DoD and every other military in the world and
NASA will get the table scraps, which can also be taken
away on the whim of some general or politician.
Stern went into a machine he was not ready to deal with
and got chewed up and spit out. I’m sure you folks will
make him a martyr and hero, but just because he had
the appearance of good intentions didn’t mean he was
right or he was going to succeed - and he didn’t.
What I said above should be obvious to anyone with even
a hint of political savvy, no inside information required.
When you guys start growing up and understanding how
Washington really works, then maybe, just maybe, you’ll
get your flags on Mars.
March 27th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
IRA, as was pointed out earlier, New Horizons was set up long long before Stern got to NASA HQ.
Also, he was hired specifically because he understood the balance between management (which he did for NH) and science (which he has done for many missions, including NH).
So your story doesn’t quite add up. Your inside info sounds biased to me, but even if (s)he isn’t, there is clearly more here than we will probably ever know. I doubt it was any single thing that led to this, though certainly there was a proximate cause.
March 27th, 2008 at 11:48 pm
Alan’s gone rogue. He’s off to search for Planet X and ironically couldn’t do it from his desk at NASA.
The seeds of his enthusiasm were planted in his writing ‘Pluto and Charon’ and were watered by the Japanese report earlier this year.
March 28th, 2008 at 9:37 am
IRA, you’re priceless. You mistake disagreement with you for ignorance, and seem so, so angry. (”Why won’t you just agree with me that the world sucks!!? Why doesn’t anyone listen to me? Everyone needs to share my world view!”) IRA, I think everyone on this forum understands the influence of politics upon NASA’s prioritization. Your mistake is assuming that politics is the *only* influence. As a space scientist myself, I know that there are others. You may not know this, but some great science does manage to get done in the NASA system you criticize so harshly. Politics will always be a factor, but it will never be the only factor. So I repeat cheerfully… lighten up, friend. Get some fresh air and sunshine. Enjoy life. The world is neither perfectly good, nor perfectly evil. The first NASA administrator said, “We live in the best of all possible worlds. On this, both optimists and pessimists agree.”
March 28th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Ah, for a good ol’ hypernova to wipe away the bugs on the third
rock from the Sun that think they are so important to the scheme
of things….
Have to go get my sunshine and happy feet now, space doctors orders.
March 28th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Some things to remember: the robotic Mars Exploration Program is not “JPL’s program”, it is NASA’s program. Decisions about budgets for Mars occur at NASA HQ, not JPL. NASA sets the direction, strategy, and budget, and JPL implements it.
Also, the Mars Exploration Program consists of several mission projects, of which MSL is only one. As a Program of Projects, the Mars program budget normally deals with overruns with puts and takes from its other missions or tech development. Hence, the proposal to reduce spending on the MER rover operations. Proposing to shut down a rover is certainly not outside the realm of reasonable “what if’s”; but telling JPL to do so to such a highly visible and popular mission without clearing it with your boss (Griffin) is just outright lunacy or naivete. Plus, shutting down a rover would not have saved MSL, and it clearly was going to cause political headaches for NASA. He made both a technical management and political mangagement blunder. And I don’t buy the view that he was principled or “noble” in refusing to be micromanaged, especially when Stern himself was viewed to be micromanaging his own people.
But back to the discussion of cost control and realism of which Stern is being lauded; it makes it MUCH more difficult for the Mars program as a whole to stay within its budget when the budget gets slashed:
Stern had one budget year (FY09) to make his imprint before a change in Administration, and he did it in spectacular fashion: in the Planetary division alone he cut the Mars program budget in half in order to buy a new Outer Planets flagship mission, and pay “taxes” to fund more Earth science (heliophysics and astrophysics also reportedly paid taxes too). Stern also funded a new lunar orbiter mission (non-competed) to study the Moon’s tenuous atmosphere. (?!?)
[To quote from Alan’s personal webpage at http://www.boulder.swri.edu/pkb/alan/index.html: “Dr. Stern’s research has focused on studies of our solar system’s Kuiper belt and Oort cloud, comets, the satellites of the outer planets, Pluto… He has also worked on …studies of tenuous satellite atmospheres, including the atmosphere of the moon.”]
Stern also told the Mars program to do a Mars Sample Return mission by 2018/2020. So how to pay for this multi-billion dollar sample return mission after cutting the program in half? Stern’s answer is, new money will magically appear in 2014/2016 and all will be right with the world. Oh, and this would be an international mission with significant European contributions, and will require European commitments within the next year. I’m sure the Europeans are confident in the US promise that money will appear in 5-10 years that they will commit to such a mission now.
Was there a scientific community call/priority for an Outer Planets mission/program? Sure. But there was also a caveat: not at the expense of other high priority science programs. Was there a community priority to do Mars Sample Return? Sure. But with a caveat: bring back the right kinds of samples, and be sure to have enough funds to do it properly. Stern’s budget proposal did neither of these. So I find it hard to accept the portrayal of him as the martyr for cost control against big, bad NASA and the aerospace establishment.
While I have no reason to doubt others’ comments on how nice a guy Stern might be, or smart and talented, his actions with regard to management (budgets being his most powerful tool) and political realities do not demonstrate tremendous aptitude for the role of Associate Administrator for Science. He seems to have made some good changes in SMD with R&A, and his personality brought a breath of “fresh air” and optimism to the community. He was hardly a saint or hero.
March 29th, 2008 at 8:38 am
Wrote MaDeR on 27 Mar 2008 at 12:09 pm
“IRA, … Don’t hesistate. We all wait - drooling and wetting our pants for more rumors, speculations and unsubstantiated claims.”
Speak for yourself! My pants are dry & my chin unslimed by drool!
Mind you, it would be nice to have the full story on this from reliable ( & citable) sources ..
March 29th, 2008 at 10:22 am
I’m just relieved that he escaped before he was fully assimilated.
March 30th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Well done, IRA. See? You can do it. Hope you got a nice tan.
March 31st, 2008 at 1:22 pm
When does the book come out?
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:24 am
Thank you, observer, for saying what I was saying all along, only I
got crucified for it by this crowd of ignorants because I didn’t
sugarcoat the serving of fiber they so desperately need.
Stern was NOT the hero you amateurs made him out to be. I am
glad he screwed up and got sent back to the minor leagues, and
anyone who really cares about planetary exploration should be too.
Go play with your Pluto probe, Stern, and stay out of politics.
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:15 am
http://science.hq.nasa.gov/research/sara_AA_farewell.html
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:17 pm
IRA, are you still rearing up on your hind legs and name-calling? Anyone who disagrees with you is an “amateur” or an “ignorant”? Tell us, what are your credentials that make you such an expert and so knowledgeable? You sound like a garden-variety conspiracy theorist to me.
Average American, thanks for posting Stern’s official letter.
Thanks to observer to presenting the counter-argument without personal abuse, which IRA seems unable to do.
IRA, maybe it’s not the horse people have a problem with… maybe it’s the jockey. If you can avoid being abusive, people might have an easier time listening to you.