back to article Trump wants SpaceX customer Jared Isaacman as next NASA boss

President-elect Donald Trump has nominated Jared Isaacman, a notable SpaceX customer, as head of NASA. You may remember Isaacman as the billionaire who made the first private spacewalk last September as part of the SpaceX Polaris Dawn mission. That said, he's a professional flier and holds the speed record for the fastest in- …

  1. Gene Cash Silver badge

    He's not a politician though

    As much as I hate him, Bill Nelson (being a former Senator) knew how the sausage was made, and was the ONLY NASA admin I've ever seen to successfully push back on Congress.

    All the other admins just took the budget cuts and said "thank you sir, may I have another"

    Nelson said "alright you're going to remove funds for program X, then I will cancel program X" and all the shocked congresscritters started going "now wait a minute, that's not how it works!!" and he managed to get a lot of stuff reinstated.

    He also canceled VIPER when it turned out it was going to kill 8 other programs with its cost overruns. See https://spacenews.com/nasa-outlines-impacts-of-viper-on-clps-lunar-lander-program/

    I think Congress is going to have Isaacman for lunch. He won't last a minute.

    1. DS999 Silver badge

      Re: He's not a politician though

      All Trump cares about is a moon landing, and he wants it to happen during his term. He wants someone who will push and push, beyond safety measures if necessary, to make that happen.

      Everything else in NASA he could care less about. He knows nothing about nothing when it comes to science. Obviously Elon cares only about NASA funneling public money to SpaceX, and destroying any ability they have to work with others so they are totally reliant on SpaceX would be great for him.

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: He's not a politician though

        "All Trump cares about is a moon landing, and he wants it to happen during his term. "

        Not going to happen. Blue Origin would have to really speed up its lander program to have something qualified and ready to put humans back on the moon. If it was left to them to make all of the decisions, I expect they could do it, but there's lots of decisions that have to be made by committee, so........

        1. Irongut Silver badge

          Re: He's not a politician though

          Jeff's BO is not providing the lander for the first few missions, that's on SpaceX.

          1. MachDiamond Silver badge

            Re: He's not a politician though

            "Jeff's BO is not providing the lander for the first few missions, that's on SpaceX."

            That's the plan, but if SpaceX isn't ready, Blue could have the honor.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: He's not a politician though

        Was JFK wrong to push for the moon landings in the 60s that ultimately lead to the deaths of 3 Americans?

        1. seven of five Silver badge
          Devil

          Re: He's not a politician though

          "Three dead in the US" happens every other day during a shooting in a primary school, so I really can't see the point of your argument.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: He's not a politician though

            That is complete and utter bollocks.

            1. seven of five Silver badge

              Re: He's not a politician though

              Absolutely.

              It is only two dead per day on average:

              https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41488081

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2024#cite_note-:3-616

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: He's not a politician though

                This is not 'primary school' shootings and most of the 'mass shootings' are not even in schools and only result in injuries. So the original 'its complete bollocks' statement still stands.

                1. seven of five Silver badge

                  Re: He's not a politician though

                  Sure, being shot in a supermarket and only getting injured is so much better.

                  Sarcasm is wasted on you, lil coward, eh?

                  Attitude like yours is part of the problem.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: He's not a politician though

                    That's OK. Statistically every visit to a shopping mall is bringing the moment closer when opinion will meet reality.

                    Not that I wish it on anyone, but ignoring the stark reality seems to be a national sport over there. That said, on this side we had Brexit. Din't directly kill anyone, but it was one heck of a reality denial that made that happen..

                    1. Anonymous Coward
                      Anonymous Coward

                      Re: He's not a politician though

                      The stark reality of US life is unless you are in a shopping mall in the depths of Chicago, St Louis, Baltimore or other such big city with a major crime problem you are not going to get shot.

                      The VAST majority of gun murders in the US are with hand guns and carried out by a specific demographic. People are not randomly going on spree killings just for fun.

                      The claims of guns being the number one cause of child death in the US is only true if you include late teens in the stats and by a margin of about 10:1 the shooter and victim will be a minority.

                      https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

                      https://publichealth.jhu.edu/sites/default/files/2024-09/2022-cgvs-gun-violence-in-the-united-states.pdf

                      1. Anonymous Coward
                        Anonymous Coward

                        Re: He's not a politician though

                        People are not randomly going on spree killings just for fun.

                        But people are randomly going on spree killings.

                        The individual motives for mass murder vary greatly. A common motivation is retaliation or revenge; others include grandiosity and the desire for attention or fame. On rare occasion, a mass murder occurs when the perpetrator, who may be deeply troubled, suffers a psychotic break from reality and strikes out at his perceived tormentors.

                        1. Anonymous Coward
                          Anonymous Coward

                          Re: He's not a politician though

                          Very rare, and they also do this all over the world. And it is not a US special thing. We even get shootings in the UK (usually gang related) where guns are really extra special double illegal, but criminals don't seem to be too fussed about the legality of things.

                          1. Anonymous Coward
                            Anonymous Coward

                            Re: He's not a politician though

                            I'd say the numbers differ just a tad, though, and those people rarely go into schools just to find easier targets.

                            I'm guessing the whole abortion ban idea is more to ensure the nutters won't run out of targets anytime soon?

                            1. Anonymous Coward
                              Anonymous Coward

                              Re: He's not a politician though

                              What abortion ban?

                              1. Anonymous Coward
                                Anonymous Coward

                                Re: He's not a politician though

                                Wow, where have you been living for the past 8 or 10 years or so?

                                Must have been under a rock with a pretty large overhang.

                                You have to do better than that if you want to troll people when you grow up :).

                                1. Anonymous Coward
                                  Anonymous Coward

                                  Re: He's not a politician though

                                  Seriously, WHAT abortion ban?

                                  Trump has stated over and over that it is a state issue. Even RBG said roe was bad law.

          2. 'bluey

            Re: He's not a politician though

            They love their Fentanyl too

        2. Geoff Campbell Silver badge
          Holmes

          Re: JFK wrong

          Yes, I have long said that he was. Turning the Moon into some macho bullshit headbanging contest put human spaceflight back decades.

          They should have established a good permanently-manned presence in orbit, first, and used that as a platform for a more considered set of moon missions.

          GJC

        3. DS999 Silver badge

          Re: He's not a politician though

          JFK started the Apollo program, but it landed on the Moon almost six years after he died, and even if he lived and had a second term he would have been out of office. Those deaths (which happened years after his death) didn't happen because of him, any more than I would be responsible if I pay to have a house and one of the construction workers falls off the roof and dies.

          Spaceflight is inherently risky. In the 1960s when we were figuring out everything for the first time, doubly so.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: He's not a politician though

            "Those deaths (which happened years after his death) didn't happen because of him"

            "JFK started the Apollo program"

            Those deaths happened because of the rushed and poorly managed Apollo program. They happened because they'd been set a deadline. That was set by JFK and supported by LBJ and Nixon to 'get one over the rooskies'.

            The decision to go with 100% oxygen was made back in 1960 before even mercury had flown. It was a disaster waiting to happen. The push for apollo was all that it took.

            NASA missed the first object in orbit, the first man and woman in space, missed the first space walk (which admittedly nearly killed the Alexi Leonov) and were left chasing the moon.

            The same poor management ultimately killed the challenger crew too.

      3. Gene Cash Silver badge

        Re: He's not a politician though

        > He wants someone who will push and push, beyond safety measures if necessary, to make that happen.

        Well, then he found the wrong person. He works with military jets. You dick around with safety there, you don't last long.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: He's not a politician though

        I think we ought to support Trump in this - as long as he and his mate Musk are in it.

        I suspect they would not have left orbit before they discovered they hated each other so badly they'd rather climb out of the craft. By the time they get back (if allowed) they would never want to be in the same square mile again.

        What? Oh, no, sorry, I was daydreaming. Carry on.

    2. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

      Re: He's not a politician though

      I had low expectations for Bill Nelson but he met them almost exactly. A significant number of NASA employees work for Boeing. Bill Nelson did nothing to change that. I do not remember him even trying. I will accept the possibility that he did not start a fight he was near certain to lose.

      I had low expectations for Jim Bridenstein but he thoroughly exceeded them. He got progress on SLS by threatening to find alternatives.

      Jared Isaacman may have an opportunity to do something useful. Bridenstein was able to threaten SLS with Falcon Heavy. If there is strong publicly visible progress on Starship that will give Jared leverage against SLS that Bill did not have. It is even possible New Glenn will launch this decade.

      I do not see a strong advantage of a politically skilled NASA administrator if he is just going to use those skills to fund SLS and Gateway. I waited to see actions before forming opinions on Jim and Bill. I will give Jared the same opportunity.

      Redundant human launch (and Earth landing) systems would be excellent if that does not come at the expense of robotic missions. If the two choices are Starship and New Glenn that would free up SLS funds - if congress does not frequire a replacement boondoggle in exchange (see Shuttle->Constellation->SLS).

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: He's not a politician though

        "I had low expectations for Jim Bridenstein but he thoroughly exceeded them."

        I had a chance to meet Charlie Bolden and would love to have him back as director.

        I don't see Isaacman as having a good skill set for the post. To call him an astronaut is a stretch and I'm sure Buzz Aldrin and Charlie Duke would scoff at the title for somebody who just bought a ticket and took some evening classes.

        1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

          Re: He's not a politician though

          Many people interested in human spaceflight have their own definition of astronaut. The definition from the Cambridge dictionary is so inclusive that both of us would take issue with it. My first draft definition of astronaut is someone who goes into orbit at someone else's expense to do something useful. That second half is to catch out Bill Nelson who went into orbit at tax payer's expense as ballast. In my book that is worse than buying your own ride. You are welcome to your own definition but I think Cambridge could argue we are both wrong for _the_ definition based on popular usage.

          Polaris Dawn cost $69.75M which is the base price for a bring-your-own-payload Falcon 9 launch. A pure tourist price for a Dragon capsule seat is around $50-55M so Isaacman got about $130M discount because the mission did something of value to SpaceX. There is plenty of room for argument for how much useful work Isaacman contributed but I think there was enough to put him clearly on the boundary between tourist and astronaut.

          Buzz Aldrin and Charlie Duke required an enormous amount of skill to handle Apollo. Virgin Galactic have demonstrated that it is still possible to build a modern spacecraft critically dependent on skilled human interaction but I am not convinced they have proved the value of such a requirement when automation technology has become so good. The skill requirement for being an astronaut has dropped with time just like being a train driver has got easier since the days of steam.

          I thought senator for Boeing was a lousy qualification for director of NASA so I can understand your assessment of Isaacman. Neither of us get to choose. You can gripe about Isaacman before he starts the job as much as you like. I will wait to see what he actually achieves.

          1. MachDiamond Silver badge

            Re: He's not a politician though

            "Virgin Galactic have demonstrated that it is still possible to build a modern spacecraft critically dependent on skilled human interaction but I am not convinced they have proved the value of such a requirement when automation technology has become so good."

            Much of that was Burt Rutan's aversion to anything beyond cables and pulleys. Now that Burt and Scaled Composites are no longer part of the program, VG is welcome to do whatever they like. Finding a lead designer for such a project and the budget would be tough.

            I'm not griping, I'm just not happy with the pick with so many much better candidates out there. I still think that a pilot and copilot need to understand how their craft works on some level while a payload specialist and ballast don't need to. The only managers I've ever worked under that were worth the cost of the oxygen they consumed were engineers themselves. The ones that didn't know much about engineering and just went through B-school were the worst. A few swam in the middle with a couple knowing just enough to be dangerous while thinking they were clever. NASA has the facilities to do great things, but it takes excellent people and very good management (plus the money, of course).

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Urban spaceman

    Is Trump saving “Women’s Affairs” for himself?

  3. Mitoo Bobsworth

    "We choose to send Trump & Musk to Mars,

    not because it's easy - but because we're desperate."

    (with apologies to the late JFK for butchering his prose)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "We choose to send Trump & Musk to Mars,

      I was only thinking about the livestreamed reality tv from inside the Starship for the 6 months it takes (one of) them to arrive.

    2. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

      Re: "We choose to send Trump & Musk to Mars,

      One problem - no fillet 'o fish in space.

      What's Der Trump going to eat?

  4. IGotOut Silver badge

    Of course

    ...he's a fan of Putin, may as well follow his Cronyism.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    $44 billion was a lot for Twitter, but it's a good price for the US government.

    I didn't realise that Twitter came with the option to purchase a pet Trump for only $200 million extra.

    1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
      Alert

      Re: $44 billion was a lot for Twitter, but it's a good price for the US government.

      You mean Musk's got himself a "/bĭch/"?

      With apologies to the fairer sex - term is meant in the alternative slang directed at a male.

    2. DS999 Silver badge

      Re: $44 billion was a lot for Twitter, but it's a good price for the US government.

      He could have bought Trump without buying Twitter.

  6. zimzam
    Mushroom

    ...pledges Americans will get to Mars

    Dead or Alive!

    1. frankvw

      Re: ...pledges Americans will get to Mars

      Or (more likely) not at all. To get to Mars, we still have to work out how to:

      1. Keep a crew alive in a 100% closed artificial ecosystem for at least two years (so far we're nowhere near being able to do that);

      2. Keep a crew sane while locked up with each other in an environment the size of a dumpster (all experiments in that direction so far indicate disaster);

      3. Remedy the disastrous effects of prolonged low gravity and high radiation on the human body (without a clue as to how to do that);

      4. Launch, brake. land and take off in a space craft big and heavy enough to meet the above criteria but not too big and heavy to actually work on a planet that is known for difficult landings;

      5. Find a way to survive on Mars for an appreciable amount of time dealing with 60% less gravity, 50% less light and toxic soil;

      6. And resolve a shedload of other blocking issues.

      Going to Mars is like going to the bottom of the Mariana Trough. There's a reason why we're using ROVs for that now that we have them and no longer send people down there in a bathyscaph or bathysphere. It makes no sense. Remote vehicles and robots do it so much better.

      So yes, we might and probably will get to Mars eventually. But not in the foreseeable future.

      1. Zolko Silver badge

        Re: ...pledges Americans will get to Mars

        7. And all this for nothing since there is nothing to do on Mars. As opposed to the Moon, where it is – theoretically – possible to mount some astronomy observatory, or some large vacuum experiment, or a testbed for some revolutionary space-ship-engine ....

      2. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: ...pledges Americans will get to Mars

        "So yes, we might and probably will get to Mars eventually. But not in the foreseeable future."

        Time is the big factor so it won't be until there are nuclear rocket engines that can accelerate/decelerate a rocket to and from much higher speeds. A few weeks crammed in a tight space with others might be tolerable given the right set of people and mission. That would also mean that it would be much easier to pre-position supplies and verify they are where they should be and intact AND fly the crewed mission within the same orbital cycle. Trying to do all of that with chemical rockets is a problem. Supplies would need to go first and they have a best-by date that's ticking so if the crew can't leave on the next transfer window, many of the food supplies would be suspect and require another supply mission which pushes everything another 2-5 years. Anything that needs to be kept pressurized might have a slow leak that exposes the supplies it holds to vacuum in the course of a couple of years. I was just going through some stuff and a literature bag I got from a trade show completely disintegrated when I picked it up and couldn't have been more than a few years old. No idea what it was made from, but I'm guessing it was very "eco". I'm glad I wasn't using it to hold anything. I use a bunch to hold photographic light modifiers (pieces of cloth) and backdrops that didn't come supplied with a storage bag and ones I've made myself. No telling how things might last in vacuum.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like