Read on Twitter
This makes no sense, on multiple levels.
https://x.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1735031168867717338?s=20
First, there is no relationship between the learning period and NASA "certification." If private astronauts imagine there is, they will be disabused of the notion as part of informed consent.
Second, no space flight is "safe," whether for NASA or private astronauts. In fact, nothing is "safe"; there are no guarantees of safety this side of the dirt. Someone wrote a book about that.
Third, this statement implies a different level of risk acceptance for NASA astronauts and private ones, which is true, but for NASA astronauts it's driven by Congressional nancy boys, rather than by the astronauts themselves.
Private astronauts have their own individual risk acceptance, and for them, it's not one-size-fits all. Some will be willing to trade off safety for thrills/prestige/whatever, and that should be their prerogative, not that of the FAA, or especially NASA.
Finally, if Pam wants to express her opinion on the matter, she's entitled to one, but she shouldn't be doing so on behalf of NASA. In my opinion, it is inappropriate for the agency to even have a stated position on the subject of the learning period.
And understand that I like Pam a lot, and think she was a great choice for deputy (in fact, I wish that she'd become administrator instead of Nelson), but I strongly disagree with her about this, if she really said that.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
