Sexton 1

Doug Sexton
Mrs. Wolf
Grade 11 English, Period 2
March 14, 2011
NASA: A Reckless Organization
"Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed." These
famous words, uttered by Neil Armstrong during the moon landing, are
cemented in the minds of many Americans. On July 29, 1958 the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration was founded by President
Eisenhower. The program was a replacement of the former National
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics or NACA. The NACA was used to
promote aeronautic research and the role was handed on to NASA. NASA
in one of its mission statements claims the programs goal is to use
science to better understand the earth and to explore other bodies in the
solar system. NASAs original focus though was a space race with the
Soviet Union in going to space and then the moon. NASA did not get to
space before the Soviet Union because of Sputnik reaching space first.
NASA however, landed on the moon on July 20, 1969, beating the Soviet
Union in the first manned mission to the moon (Dewarrd 1-6).
Jumping to the present, NASA is developing a new Space Launch
System, the James Webb Space Telescope, and sending a rover to explore
Mars. In order to build the new Space Launch System NASA is working
with SpaceX because SpaceX won a NASA competition to design the
newest Space Launch System for NASA (Reliability). ). The James

Sexton 2
Webb Space telescope will be built for the purpose of exploring the
furthest reaches of space with a more powerful scope and other more
advanced tools than its predecessor the Hubble Space Telescope (Tenner).
The goal of NASAs rover, Curiosity, is to determine how humans can
explore Mars and if the planet is able to support life (Where is Curiosity).
NASA, the government agency famous for putting men on the moon,
needs to be reformed because of the agencys unwillingness to further
explore space, ineffective use of budget, and the agencys failures.
In the entirety of NASAs existence it has been criticized for how the
operation has been ran. NASA has been observed to have a weak chain of
command that is very inefficient and creates a lot of confusion in the
process (Expert). The same criticisms of NASA from the past are still
criticized in the present. Such criticisms are generally about if the cost of
the missions is worth the knowledge gained and the dangerous risks of
exploring space. It is also observed that NASA is able to bring a group of
its employees together to get a one-shot project but is not very good at
maintaining projects (Expert). Since NASA is a federal program,
congress constantly must debate how large NASAs budget should be, and
some argue the budget is too large.
NASA is in need of reform because of the organizations
unwillingness to further explore space. According to Reason magazine,
NASA is unwilling to explore space following the Challenger and Columbia
disasters. The organization is now safety-obsessed, and even though it is
so concerned with safety, has yet to figure out how to reenter the

Sexton 3
atmosphere of Earth. Also NASA is not adventuring into large bold
projects and using more than enough money on research which
sometimes appears to be a waste of funds. Most people would agree that
the next step in Space is sending humans to mars but NASA seems
unwilling to take the bold challenge (Zubrin). A space program that
doesnt venture into space is certainly a program to be looked at and
changed for the better.
Third Party organizations, although working with NASA, seem to be
more interested in furthering space exploration than NASA. NASA is
working with 6 American private companies such as Boeing and SpaceX.
The advantage of working with the third party companies is that they are
more efficient and cut the cost of space travel (Reagan). The company,
SpaceX, is very enthusiastic about Space. Founded by the entrepreneur
Elon Musk, SpaceX was created on the idea the government made space
travel more expensive than necessary. SpaceX has been successful as a
private space program and the company has grown since the founding in
2002 (Reliability). SpaceX has clearly shown the founding philosophy
that government made space travel over expensive to be true while
advancing more than NASA. NASA can be learn a lot from SpaceX when
looking at how the program can be changed for the better.
A mission to the big red planet near us seems to be the next logical
step in a space organization that has made it to the moon. The big bold
project NASA is expected to take is a manned mission to Mars, but NASA
puts other plans ahead and continuously pushes the project back. Due to

Sexton 4
the construction of the James Webb Space Telescope which NASA is
dedicating a large part of its budget to, NASA does not have the budget to
explore Mars in a mission that goes to Mars and back (Mars Lost). The
face that one project can stop another project from making progress is
very disappointing because the projects will take longer to complete. In a
reformed NASA, the James Webb Space Telescope could be built and a
manned mission to mars could be planned at the same time.
In the development of the new Space Launch System NASA appears to
be stalling as well. Congress has asked for NASAs plans for a new Space
Launch System but NASA refuses to release the plans. NASA plans on
being finished the Space Launch System by 2016 but refuses to comment
on the delay, and will not produce a timeline (Whyte). The administrator
of NASA, Charles Bolden, refuses to reveal the problems in his projects. In
a speech to congress for keeping NASAs budget Bolden tried to appeal to
congress with emotions rather than the business of NASA. Among his
speech he said Nobody wakes up in the morning saying I want to see
how Im going to screw NASA today, every single one of you loves this
country. According to the former Lockheed Martin Chief, the Bolden
projects are unsustainable, but Bolden tries to hide that fact with his
appeals to congress nationalism. (Klamper). Perhaps NASA would be run
better by a different administration that had been reformed from the old
NASA administration. If NASA wants to further explore space though, it
must have an effective budget that can be used to fund space
exploration.

Sexton 5
In order for NASAs budget to be used more effectively, the
government bureaucracy must be changed. NASAs budget seems to
continuously grow without much to show for the budget increase. In 1999
NASAs budget was 14 billion dollars which is a sharp contrast from the 90
million dollar budget of NASA in 1958. That means NASAs budget is
nearly 150 times greater than the original budget. When adjusted for
inflation the budget still has increased by 33 times the original amount.
NASAs budget is greater than the budgets for many states such as South
Carolina, Tennessee, and Missouri. The significance of NASAs budget is
that in NASAs prime it operated on a smaller budget and was able to
accomplish great tasks such as the moon landing (Braastad). If NASA is
as efficient as possible, than greater leaps in advancement should be
expected as the budget increases which is why NASA needs to be
changed.
Other inefficiencies in costs can be seen in NASA against SpaceX.
The Webb Space Telescope was originally set to cost 2.4 billion dollars has
been raised to 8.7 billion dollars along with a delay to 2018 (Tenner). The
Curiosity Rover was originally set at 1.6 billion dollars but rose to 2.5
billion dollars (NASA's Next Mars Mission Over Budget). Hubble was
delayed a year and went from 5 billion to 6.8 billion dollars (Chang).
SpaceX on the other hand is a very efficient space company that manages
its budget extremely well. Since the founding of SpaceX in 2002 to 2010
the company only spent 800 million dollars and in that time developed the
Falcon 1, Flacon 9, and Dragon spacecraft. SpaceX has made over 40

Sexton 6
flights and 3 billion dollars in revenue. SpaceX is efficient because it
eliminates traditional management, does in-house manufacturing, keeps
tight control of projects, and makes sure engineers and manufacturers are
communicating (Reliability). If a space industry has the ability to even
be profitable, it is a wonder how NASA can use its given budget so
inefficiently.
In a study of the efficiency of NASA by the Government Accountability
Office it was found that NASA flying employees with their own passenger
aircraft service is 5 times more expensive than if NASA were to fly on
commercial airlines. A ticket on a NASA passenger aircraft is 20 million
dollars more costly than a commercial coach ticket. NASA still was
continuously expanding their aircraft fleet used for transportation at the
time of the study which was raising costs as well. Spending the private
flight money on public flights would save NASA a lot of money and allow
the program to complete projects quicker (Kutz). Fixing NASA would mean
finding wastes of money spent like the private flight problem and using
the money for research and projects. Not only has NASA used budget
ineffectively, sometimes the budget is completely wasted when a project
goes wrong.

NASA Major Failures

NASA has a far from perfect record when it comes to projects
because of previous failures and so must be reformed to better its record.
A famous failure of NASA is when Columbia exploded during re-entry on

Sexton 7
Saturday February 1, 2003. There were seven crew members on board
during the explosion over Texas. Americans were forced to relive the
Challenger explosion which occurred seven years earlier. The shuttle
exploded due to a faulty foam insulator which was probably preventable.
NASA was criticized for treating the shuttle as operational and not
actively making repairs after flights. If NASA continuous maintained the
spacecraft effectively the insulator would have been identified as faulty
and the shuttle would have never exploded (Ferraris and Carveth).
The event that Americans were forced to relive during the
Columbia explosion was when Challenger was destroyed on January 28,
1986. 73 seconds into the flight the ship exploded and then plummeted
into the ocean killing the seven passengers. The cause of the explosion
was the o-ring disintegration around the solid rocket booster. The o-ring
failure could have been a result of the cold weather, NASAs failure to
inspect the spacecraft, or both. NASA has been criticized greatly for
launching when the weather conditions did not suit the launch (Dewarrd
67-71). Both the Challenger and Columbia explosion were a great amount
of cost in lives and money. NASA has proven from its mistakes that it
needs to be changed to become sharper so it will never make such costly
mistakes.
NASA has also has had failures which do not include deaths but a
waste of a lot of money. Perhaps with more care the problems could have
been avoided and NASA could be considered successful. The Mars Polar
Lander (MPL) was designed to land on Mars and gather climate data. The

Sexton 8
problem was either the craft plummeted into the surface of mars and was
destroyed or simply failed to transmit data back to NASA. The Lander has
not been found in pictures of Mars and seems to have disappeared (Fox).
Another failure was The Mars Climate Orbiter (MCO) burnt up in Mars
atmosphere due to a problem in units. The contractor to build the orbiter,
Lockheed Martin, used imperial units instead of the metric units used by
NASA so the craft entered Mars at the wrong angle and burnt up (Fox).
Lastly, the Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) was designed to be an
earth satellite to find where Carbon Dioxide was emitted into the
atmosphere. A minute after takeoff from California, the craft did not
separate and plummeted into the Pacific Ocean near Antarctica. The
project cost 170 million dollars (Fox). All the minor failures of NASA add
up in costs and were avoidable mistakes which a sharper NASA would
hopefully catch and get right.
NASAs problems are treatable and should be fixed if the
government program wishes to stay a useful program. Inefficiencies
inside of NASA can be fixed by a better administration and chain of
command in NASA. Cost problems can be fixed by in-house
manufacturing like SpaceX has been able to use for the companys
success. By saving money internally NASA would be able take bold
projects and further explore space which they have been unable to do
currently. Third-Party programs are much more efficient at Space travel
than NASA so by learning from those third-party companies with NASAs
budget it could be an even greater program. NASA is expected to boldly

Sexton 9
venture into space but projects such as the James Webb telescope and
Curiosity Rover, although helpful, are not as bold as a manned mission to
Mars. A reformed NASA would have the funds to boldly venture to Mars
while more efficiently completing current projects.
NASA is not an efficacious program because it has been clouded
with project failure and for that reason the organization should be
adjusted to be as successful as possible. Unfortunately, NASA has been
responsible for the major Challenger and Columbia space shuttle disasters
which killed a total of 14 astronauts. The tragedy of those disasters is
that they could have been prevented by waiting for better weather or
inspecting the space shuttle more carefully. Minor failures of NASA also
attributed to a waste of money in the program and could have been
prevented. A more efficient NASA program would hopefully save lives and
money while being an even greater program.
NASA is unwilling to further explore space, uses budget
ineffectively, and does not have an auspicious reputation so the program
must be reformed. NASA does not take bold projects and seems to be
stalling while Third-Party companies are better managed and more excited
about space exploration. NASA uses budget inefficiently on projects such
as the James Webb Space Telescope and the Mars Curiosity Rover paying
billions more than originally planned. Third-Party companies are much
more efficient and NASA can learn from those companies to be a better
organization. NASA has failed on multiple projects in the costs of lives

Sexton 10
and money which is why NASA is in need of reform. A better NASA would
be more successful and safer.
Paying attention to NASA is important as an American because the
program is funded by the wealth of Americans and it is important to the
future of all of mankind. The budget of NASA is controlled by congress
and the Administrator, Charles Bolden, makes appeals to congress for
money (Klamper). If an American is having some of their wealth
redistributed it is important to know what the wealth is being taken to
fund. NASA has shown it has not used its budget as efficiently as possible
and has cost all taxpayers when the budget is wasted. A taxpaying
American should demand efficiency in government programs not only to
get the best use of their money and the money NASA wastes could have
stayed with the taxpayer and used for better purposes.
Also NASA is important to Americas future along with mankinds
future. If NASA is the greatest it can be than Americans will demonstrate
to the world advancement in science, technology, and progress. It is
common to hear that the United States is falling behind in science
compared to other countries and it is important for NASA to demonstrate
being more advanced in science than other nations. Mankind dreams of
advancing from generation to generation and many consider part of that
advancement expanding further into the depths of space. NASA can be
the organization which advances the furthest in space progress due to its
funds and willingness to advance. NASA is so important to the
advancement of all of mankind that all peoples should pay attention to

Sexton 11
the organization and try to make the program the best it can possibly be.
A reformed NASA would be able to be the leader in space exploration but
the current NASA is falling behind. That is why it is so important for NASA
to be reformed and for people to care how NASA behaves. Neil Armstrong
may have been the leading man on the moon, but what will be the leading
organization on the future of mankind?