I can hardly believe this: NASA has restarted and re-funded NuSTAR.

That’s the Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope ARray, a small X-ray observatory. Back in my old job in California I was on the Education and Public Outreach (E/PO) team for NuSTAR, so I am very, very pleased it got the go-ahead — considering, after all, that it was canceled over a year ago! Obviously, there’s a story here.

What follows is my opinion based on events as I remember them. The Sonoma State E/PO group, NuSTAR team, and everyone else have nothing at all to do with my opinion… except that my opinion is right. Let me also add that while I am saying things about one specific person at NASA below, I do not hold all of NASA accountable for her actions. Nor should you.

In 2003, NASA put out a call for proposals for SMEXs, Small Explorer missions (meaning the cost had to be kept under $120 million, minus launch). My group was tapped to do E/PO for five proposals, out of 36 submitted. NASA then went through the proposals, culled them, and picked five for further study. We were on two of those five. One was NuSTAR.

We worked very, very hard on those proposals, and I can only imagine what it was like for the folks actually creating the scientific and engineering justification for the missions. I wrote like a madman, trying to shine up and gloss the ideas batted around by our team (I suppose you could say I was the main writer, but everyone contributed substantially to the writing, and the ideas and such were a team effort). We worked it and reworked it, honing down the essays to fit in the frustratingly small space requirements for submission. But we were excited.

For one thing, the head guy for NuSTAR was (is!) Caltech astrophysicist Fiona Harrison, and if NuSTAR got picked she would become the first ever female Principal Investigator for a NASA mission. There were more women than men in our E/PO group, and I’m a bit of a feminist myself, so we were very sensitive to the idea of encouraging girls and women to learn about math and science. Plus, the mission is pretty cool: it would look for black holes across the Universe, which is always fun. As an added bonus, the spacecraft itself is cool, with a long, extending mast that will accordion out to a length of 10 meters after launch. All of this opens up lots of possibilities for educational efforts.

We submitted the proposal, and waited. Finally, NASA culled again, from five proposals to two. IBEX was one (and we were happy; a good friend of ours was running the education effort for it), and it was given the go-ahead to start cutting metal, as they say. NuSTAR was the other, but it wasn’t quite ready to go all the way, according to NASA. There were some issues that needed to be fixed, so they gave us more time to streamline the proposal.

Well, that’s better than being told "no", right? So we worked on fixing things up.

Then the bomb dropped. We were literally days away from submitting the re-worked proposal to NASA when we were told the project was canceled. That was bad enough… but then I found out that Fiona wasn’t called and told the mission she had spent years putting together was axed. She wasn’t even sent a letter. She found out when NASA had a press conference. Mary Cleave, then the Associate Administrator at NASA for the Science Mission Directorate, was chairing it. A question was asked about NuSTAR, and that’s when Cleave announced the mission was canceled.

This was an unimaginably shameful thing to do.

You can guess how we all felt. I cannot imagine how Dr. Harrison felt. Mary Cleave: not my favorite person in the world. I haven’t been shy about saying that, either (my favorite thing she did, in a dark humor way, was when she canceled the Dawn mission after testifying to Congress about science at NASA… but we get the last laugh; Dawn was also reinstated and is due for launch this week).

Well, after learning in such an awful manner that NuSTAR was canceled, we went on our way, and started in on the usual scrambling for more funding. We got some, we lost others; the usual story. I eventually left the group to pursue my writing career (which I suppose I am postponing writing such a long entry here!), and there you have it.

And then, out of the blue, NuSTAR is back! W00t!

I should have guessed. Mary Cleave left NASA (and there was much rejoicing), and Alan Stern took over. Alan is a scientist and I knew he would do what he could to make sure good missions got what they needed to proceed.

Looking at Alan’s record so far, I am very pleased. I wouldn’t take his job for a million bucks (really), but he is doing pretty well with balancing missions science with NASA’s tight budget (you can peruse the NASA category of my blog for more on how I feel about all that).

And now, NuSTAR is back! Even though I’m no longer on the team, it’s nice to see it. I worked hard on the E/PO proposal — I even wrote quite a bit for the website(s), which will no doubt have to be updated now — so of course I’m glad to see it going ahead. But I’m also really thrilled for Fiona, who deserves this… and maybe I’m happiest for NASA itself, because this shows that even when it makes bad decisions, wiser heads can figure out how to fix things.

The Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy, or SOFIA, is an infrared telescope that flies - no joke — aboard a 747 airplane that has a big hole cut out of the fuselage. It’s the follow-up mission of Kuiper, a very successful but smaller telescope that took lots of great data from the cargo class section of a modified C-141.

SOFIA is a much bigger ’scope (2.5 meters), and so will do much better work. It almost didn’t though. During the notorious reign of NASA’s Associate Administrator of the Science Mission Directorate Mary Cleave (who is gone now), SOFIA was moments away from being axed. But pressure from scientists and others got SOFIA a reprieve, and things got better from there.

Yesterday, it flew for the first time on a test run from Waco, Texas:

See the bulge in the back of the fuselage? That’s where SOFIA sits. A door will open to expose the telescope to the sky (it didn’t on this test run). The plane flies pretty high up for observations, above most of the water vapor in our atmosphere that blocks infrared light from space. The plane, surprisingly, is pretty stable, and gives a great platform for observing. NASA has more info.

This is very exciting. One great thing Kuiper did, and SOFIA will continue to do, is allow teachers to go up with the plane and make observations. And when they land, they go back to the classroom and tell their students how totally cool it is fly on a NASA jet with a honking big telescope. And this way, one by one if we have to, we infect teachers — and their students — with the joy of science and astronomy.

Yay!

I am really pleased to hear that John Mather will be the head of the new NASA Office of the Chief Scientist. He was chosen by incoming NASA Associate Administrator of Science Alan Stern.

As Stern says,

John Mather is a scientist of legendary reputation, technical ability and space science mission experience. His office will provide independent scientific advice to me to guide decision making regarding all aspects of the NASA science program.

Yeah, no kidding. John was the Project Scientist for COBE, a satellite that pretty much nailed it that the Big Bang is right (deal with it, creationists). He’s also the Senior Project Scientist for the James Webb Space Telescope, the observatory that will be NASA’s next great thing (it doesn’t replace Hubble, as many say, but will augment and carry on the work Hubble has done).

And wasn’t there something else? What was it… let me think… oh yeah! He won the 2006 Nobel Prize for physics.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I know John somewhat tangentially. I worked on COBE briefly, and I’ve talked to him now and again about Big Bang stuff. He worked down the hall from me at Goddard Space Flight Center, and I remember one day getting this bright idea about neutrinos and the Big Bang. I stopped by his office to ask him about it, and he patiently explained to me that while my idea was clever and technically correct, it was useless in reality with no real practical applications. And yet I felt better after talking to him! That’s how nice he is.

With Mary Cleave gone (hurray) and Alan Stern in (hurray!), and now John stepping up (w00t!), I’m hoping that the recent turn of events we’ve seen at NASA — the gutting of science — will finally stop, or at least be stemmed. I know these are difficult times, and difficult decisions must be made, but with this kind of firepower this high up in NASA’s hierarchy I see some light on the horizon. The AA and Chief Scientist will probably wind up talking to Congress on occasion, so maybe they can beat some sense into our politicians, and get the money NASA needs to feed all its programs… and maybe wean the programs that need it, too.

I’m a little late on this one, which came out this morning: the New Mexico legislature has declared that Pluto is a planet. Kindof.

Here is the text of House Joint memorial 54:

HOUSE JOINT MEMORIAL 54
48TH LEGISLATURE - STATE OF NEW MEXICO - FIRST SESSION, 2007
INTRODUCED BY
Joni Marie Gutierrez
A JOINT MEMORIAL
DECLARING PLUTO A PLANET AND DECLARING MARCH 13, 2007, “PLUTO PLANET
DAY” AT THE LEGISLATURE.

WHEREAS, the state of New Mexico is a global center for astronomy, astrophysics and planetary science; and

WHEREAS, New Mexico is home to world class astronomical observing facilities, such as the Apache Point observatory, the very large array, the Magdalena Ridge observatory and the national solar observatory; and

WHEREAS, Apache Point observatory, operated by New Mexico state university, houses the astrophysical research consortium’s three-and one-half meter telescope, as well as the unique two-and-one-half meter diameter Sloan digital sky survey telescope; and

WHEREAS, New Mexico state university has the state’s only independent, doctorate-granting astronomy department; and

WHEREAS, New Mexico state university and Dona Ana county were thelongtime home of Clyde Tombaugh, discoverer of Pluto; and

WHEREAS, Pluto has been recognized as a planet for seventy-five years; and

WHEREAS, Pluto’s average orbit is three billion six hundred ninety-five million nine hundred fifty thousand miles from the sun, and its diameter is approximately one thousand four hundred twenty-one
miles; and

WHEREAS, Pluto has three moons known as Charon, Nix and Hydra; and

WHEREAS, a spacecraft called new horizons was launched in January 2006 to explore Pluto in the year 2015;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO that, as Pluto passes overhead through New Mexico’s excellent night skies, it be declared a planet and that March 13, 2007 be declared “Pluto Planet Day” at the legislature.

It sounds like it’s only a planet when it’s over New Mexico according to that last line, but I think they mean that when that happens, as of that moment, they will declare Pluto a planet. I guess they can do that if they want (their government must have solved all other problems in the state), but that leaves me wondering: just what does the size of the orbit have to do with anything?

Tip o’ the dew shield to Alan Stern (yes, the Alan Stern) for sending me the copy of the memorial.

My feelings are on record about Mary Cleave, Associate Administrator at NASA for the Science Mission Directorate. She announced her retirement recently, and let’s just say I won’t be terribly sad to see her go. A lot of science missions were cut during her term.

What I am thrilled about is her replacement: Alan Stern (NASA just released this news, though I haven’t found it on their website yet.) Alan is a planetary astronomer and a fighter for unmanned science: as the Principal Investigator of the New Horizons mission to Pluto he better be! Having an actual planetary scientist in charge of Science at NASA is very, very promising. His career has depended on unmanned science packages, so that’s a plus in his favor as far as I am concerned (manned flight has enough political clout already).

I don’t know Alan personally, but I know many folks who work with him, and they speak very highly of him. He’s a go-to guy, and one of the hardest working people in the business. He’s also big on education and public outreach, which is something NASA sorely, sorely needs right now. Do we have someone in this role who will fight for unmanned science? Do I dare hope?

The news from NASA lately has been going from bad to worse (even with a potential increase in science funding in the budget, which I haven’t written about yet), but maybe, just maybe, the gradient may be heading to the plus side.

NASA’s Associate Administrator Mary Cleave, who famously canceled the Dawn mission minutes after a meeting with Congress about science cutbacks, is leaving NASA. This means a job position is opening up, as well as a few others.

I wonder if I should apply…? Nah. They can’t afford me; it would take a substantial fraction of NASA’s budget to get me to move back east. Plus, I doubt they’d like my position on science subjects. But it’s fun to dream.

… and scientists are firing back.

The huge cuts to NASA science were a hot topic at the Lunar and Planetary Science meeting I just attended. Mary Cleave, Associate Administrator for Science at NASA, gave a talk at the meeting. Unfortunately, I had to leave ten minutes in to catch my flight, but others are talking about it:

• Emily Lakdawalla
• Oliver Morton at Nature magazine
• Astronomy magazine
• Space.com
• Space Politics
• Stein Sigurdsson at Dynamics of Cats

Basically, the scientists were good and truly ticked off, as well they might be. Two quick quotes:

Europeans are very upset that NASA missions with European partners were canceled without consultation with those partners. From the Astronomy magazine article:

Cleave said NASA would begin a series of talks with international partners, to which [European scientist] Neukum [an American scientist who works with Europeans]^* replied, “One would hope there’s going to be some listening in there, too.”

But my favorite is

“I don’t understand why you’re so angry,” said Cleave.

… which I think is a major part of the problem.

I have quite a few thoughts about this as well, as you might imagine. I find myself agreeing for the most part with the scientists quoted in those many articles. I am still gathering my thoughts for the moment, but I’ll be writing them soon. In the meantime, I still have to think that asking NASA to go to the Moon, finish the space station, and still do world class science, all without substantially raising the budget, is a grossly unreasonable request by the Bush Administration.

The solution is obvious: give NASA more money. It is the smallest government agency, with the smallest budget, and even though the missions sound expensive, they are a drop in the bucket of the government’s spending. But things are generally not this simple, and that’s why my thoughts are still being gathered.

^* Emily Lakdawalla, who attended the talk, notes in the comments that Astronomy magazine had the quotation attribution wrong. Tip o’ the space helmet to Ms. Lakdawalla for that.