NASA and Technology

Claudiu Bora
We have five areas of debate:
People
Organization
Market
Technology
Capital
We where part of the technology where we had.
1) Change
2) Operation
3) Strategic
Well first NASA didn’t make to much updates in the program which could affected the Columbia mission. They where aware about the updates and having some equipment since the 60 and 70s doesn’t really help to accomplish a mission.
Second the operation of the program didn’t run as well as they thought it will in a very critical situation. Mistake where made but the problem wasn’t totally there because the entire operation stumble aver more than one problem at the time. Took to much time to see the problem to consider the problem to resolve the problem and to get feedback and analyzed the problem.
Third as a strategy I think NASA didn’t had one they expected that things will be ok and that lead to a lot of panic when things didn’t go well. Having a back up plan will help a lot because they will be able to have a team ready to be able to report, react and act faster by having totally access to all the Channels of communication in NASA.

As a technology team in the class we all agreed that technology was a big part of the failure of Columbia but also of some other missions.
In the survey that we did out of the 20 question we evaluate NASA and we came up with 1been as a very poor job eight times with 2 one time with 3 nine times with 4 two times and with 5 one time. I think NASA is doing something good too is not a totally a disaster but there are a lot of area of concerns when is coming to the technology.
So we came up with some question:
1) What is the strategy to change NASA?
2) How is NASA going to deal with the future missions?
3) How we get people to trust the NASA program?
4) How will you plan to make people in the NASA to be heard from each level in the organization?
5) What will be the other ways too justifies the funding?
6) How will you organize better communications channels?
7) How often should NASA do upgrades?
8) Who decided that the technology is too old?
9) How much level of responsibility should be given to the staff?
10) How you will make people to communicate?
As a group we conclude it that the program itself is not very efficient because some of the founds are not very well manage and they end up no be invested in the areas where they should like technology. Without the advance technology is hard to be successful and have safe missions. I think NASA is gambling each time when they live technology not been a priority in the program. So I think that NASA should look to the program and as themselves where is NASA going to be ten years from now fifty years from now one hundred years from now.

http://claudiubora.blogspot.com/