Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pioneer.arc.nasa.gov!eugene
From: eugene@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov.arpa (Eugene N. Miya)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: NASA ASRM production and testing sites announced (Forwarded)
Message-ID: <12474@ames.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: 28 Jul 88 17:06:56 GMT
References: <12358@ames.arc.nasa.gov> <3417@cadnetix.COM>
Sender: usenet@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: eugene@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Eugene N. Miya)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Lines: 55

In article <3417@cadnetix.COM> beres@cadnetix.COM (Tim Beres) writes:
>In article yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) writes:
>>
>>NASA ASRM PRODUCTION AND TESTING SITES ANNOUNCED
>>
>How many NASA facilities are there - now, mothballed and planned?
>I am curious to know if there is *perhaps* a proliferation of centers,
>plants, labs, authorities and what not.  Could this be due to pork-barrel
>politics?  Would centralizing some of the facilities make sense from
>an administrative and/or technical aspect?  Congress likes to make lots
>of noise about how much ~space~ costs, but do they get totally apoplectic
>when cutting fat from their district?  

There are, depending on who you talk to, 9 NASA Centers.

Now, this is largely a convenience.  In reality, "our" Dryden facility
at EAFB is 400 miles away [I've driven down there for 1 day and back]
I've also flown down in our shuttle plane.  The people who work there
have a different slant that the "Research" folk at Ames.  Note JPL is
physically closer.  The Stennis facility is just a renaming (still a
part of Marshall SC).  Dryden originally had no name, just part of EAFB.
The sames goes for Wallops Island which is now a part of Goddard's
administration.  Basically, there are no new planned facilities or
significant mopthballed sites.  The Space Station Office was moved to
Virgina because the two HQ office buildings in WDC are full.

Pork-Barrel.  Well, let see, Tim you are in Colorado, no Centers there,
but certainly grants.  You have NCAR on Table Mesa, oh, the Walter Orr
Roberts building by I.M. Pei, I think [Dad was an architect].  Well, I
would say there is probably some ;-).  Dryden was the last renaming.
They were thinking of renaming JPL to some Congressmen (the scientists
went into a roar), it's Just a Plain Laboratory, but I don't know where
we kept the Jets while I was there. ;-)

Anyway, we have this growth problem.  The diversity of applications and
projects for space would probably grow exponentially.  What do you
suggest we throw away? Manned space? unmanned space? microgravity?
Human factors? (not saying this in a snide fashion, it's how we have to
trim fat).  Throw away computer research [I know people who want this]?
Research on fuels?  Materials? Space power systems? 

Speaking about centralization, perhaps we need more centralized
rather than decentralized computer facilities.  Yeah that's the ticket!
Ok, you guys, back to your punch cards.  None of this workstation stuff,
If 1 person on a SUN is good, then 15 is 15x better.  Right?!
More seriously, I was talking to Brad Hagar (Seimsologist and skier from
Caltech) about the newly emerging concept of NSF "Centers without Walls."
We may have to resort to this in NASA as well.

Another gross generalization from

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov
  resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
  "Mailers?! HA!", "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology."
  {uunet,hplabs,ncar,decwrl,allegra,tektronix}!ames!aurora!eugene
  "Send mail, avoid follow-ups.  If enough, I'll summarize."