Good afternoon to everyone and morning to those of you joining us from the West Coast. I'm Bethany Stevens, the agency press Secretary and we're excited to have you join us this morning for the newly sworn in administrator, Jared Isaacman's first agency wide town hall. With headlines like Space Community Celebrates, Isaacman Confirmation, and day one videos like that, I think it's safe to say we're all very excited he's
here. Before we begin, I want to take this opportunity to talk through the structure of what this time will look like. Today, communication went out internally across the agency announcing this town hall that also included a link to submit questions. As always, we are hoping to get to as many questions as possible, but we do have some time constraints.
I ask that when you submit, whether anonymous or with your name, you include your center as we are aiming to get to as many locations as possible across the workforce. We also have a mic stand here at HQ and the web auditorium right over there where today's Town hall is taking place. If you have a question in the audience here live, please feel free to go up to the microphone if it is open. Otherwise, we ask that you wait in your seat rather than
queuing. Given that the majority of our workforce sits outside of HQ, the majority of questions will be taken online, but please don't let that discourage you from participating here in house. Lastly, I want to take thank everyone here at HQ for taking time out of their day to welcome Administrator Isaacman yesterday and everyone across NASA for taking time the Friday before Christmas to join us for this Town Hall today without further delay, Administrator Jared Isaacman.
Good afternoon. I am really honored to be here today as NASA's 15th administrator, serving under President Trump's leadership and working alongside some of the greatest scientific and engineering minds this nation has to offer. I feel like I am living the dream right now. This is the agency that captivated me as a child, inspiring me to grow up reading every book on the subject I could on all of NASA's amazing accomplishments and all The Pioneers and heroes that showed
up to work here every day. This is the agency that has inspired the world again and again with images from our telescopes, our probes, and our Rovers. This is the agency that sent astronauts to and from the moon at a time when we knew so little but believed we could do the impossible. So honestly, there's nowhere else I would rather be than right here, right now, alongside all of you at the most accomplished space.
Agency in the world? I understand that with any leadership change comes some anxiety and uncertainty, but between two hearings, a few podcasts, a document that circulated a little wider than expected, there should be, there should really be no mysteries as to how I'm thinking about things. But more importantly, the President has released the National Space Policy, and in my view, it's one of the most significant commitments to America's space program by by any administration since the
Kennedy era. It lays out a very clear vision, provides unambiguous priorities, and sets time frames for achievement. And as it's always been, the honour and exceptional responsibility rightfully falls on all of us here at NASA to deliver. So let me outline the direction that we're going to take together. America will lead in the
peaceful exploration of space. We will bring extreme focus to the mission and realise our near term objectives of returning American astronauts to the Moon and establishing an enduring presence to unlock the scientific, economic and national security potential on the lunar surface.
We will look for every opportunity to pull forward the Artemis program to the limits that physics and safety afford, while increasing the flight cadence across the architecture authorised in the one big beautiful bill. The next most significant milestone, of course, is Artemis 2 launching on a historic mission early this coming year.
At the same time, we will prepare for the inevitable return by working with our commercial and our international partners to ensure they're aligned with our programmatic objectives and acting with the urgency needed to deliver the launch services, the vehicles, the suits, the habitat, surface power and Rovers required for frequent, affordable missions to
the lunar environment. And our journey does not end on the Moon. As directed in the National Space Policy, we will accelerate investments in next generation programs that only NASA is capable of leading, including nuclear, surface power and propulsion technologies that will usher in the next giant leap in space exploration and discovery. Now we must ignite the orbital
and eventual lunar economy. For more than 1/2 century, the space economy has been terrestrially anchored in launched communication and observation with world governments as the primary customer. That perpetual taxpayer dependent model won't fund the
future we've all imagined. Alongside industry and academia, we must uncover the long-awaited promise of pharmaceuticals, biotech on orbit, computing anything that can contribute to, and perhaps someday entirely justify the cost of maintaining inhabited orbital outposts and generating value for in excess of what it cost to operate in space. Working with industry and academia, we will do all we can
to maximise the remaining life. The International Space Station prioritising the highest potential science and research with the aim of determining this new orbital economy. So in the future we will transition from one station to many. NASA will become a force multiplier for science with an immense hunger for the data and enthusiasm to deliver the world changing headlines that only
NASA is capable of achieving. We will endeavour to reduce the time to science and maximise the scientific value of every dollar that's available now. I do not believe this is a A1 size fits all approach. We will embrace a full menu of possibilities so that includes bespoke missions to extraordinary destinations and expanded clip style missions that accept more risk for faster discovery.
Partnering with industry to gather Earth observation data more efficiently and affordably without sacrificing continuity, and lending NASA expertise and resources to enable academic institutions to take on bold scientific missions. Some approaches may be a flavour of the way it has always been done, and some will be a new way. But in all cases we will challenge the process in every way, with the goal of arriving at the desired results as expeditiously and affordably as possible.
Because if NASA doesn't do it, no one else will. Now, accomplishing our mission will not be easy, but at NASA it never was and it never should be. Engineering and program management challenges are are just part of the story. We have a great competitor that is moving at absolutely impressive speeds, and it's unsettling to consider the implications if we fail to maintain our technological, scientific or economic edge in
space and the clock is running. These are fiscally challenging times, and I do support the President and his goal to get spending under control and bring down the national debt. Now, this is hardly NASA specific, but we as a nation can't spend our way out of every problem and believe it will lead
to better outcomes. So I don't know where the budgets will land, but I will always advocate passionately for the agency, knowing we will make the most of every dollar entrusted to us. And I'm not arriving with all the answers. I do know this. We cannot achieve our objectives by doing things the way they've been done in recent years. And we know most of the NASAIG reports would echo this sentiment.
So we must do all we can to minimize the bureaucratic drag that can slow us down and slow down the great engineers and scientists and eliminate obstacles that impede progress. Flatten the organizational structure to improve information flow and accelerate sound decision making, and push responsibility down to the talent that is more than capable of getting the job done. And when we do, we must, right? If we recognize and reward the contributors that bring the near
impossible to reality. NASA must be one of the hardest, most demanding places to work in this country because lives depend on our work and the world is counting on our breakthroughs and discoveries. It's why you see the NASA logo anywhere you travel. I mean, people the world over know that we are capable of accomplishing and the expectations are rightfully very high. We're not alone in the need to evolve to meet the moment.
Our international and commercial and commercial partners have made commitments as well, and we must place as much pressure on them to deliver as we do on ourselves. No changes happen in a vacuum. I I plan to speak with many of you, the leadership teams, the engineers, scientists, astronauts, our program managers and the people in the field doing the work. I will visit every centre in the weeks ahead and engage with our international and and commercial
partners. I want to hear directly what is broken so we can work together to fix it and where we are excelling so we can do a lot more of it. It's been a year, but we have real momentum now. NASA has the enthusiastic interest of President Trump, the vice president, the cabinet. We have bipartisan congressional support. We have a national space policy outlining the most righteous and inspiring objectives.
We have the mandate. We have the talent, the partners, and the resources to get the job done and bring billions of people along with along with us on this journey. I don't think there are many NASA employees standing next to you who served during the Apollo era. They have retired. In many cases. They've passed on, leaving their extraordinary accomplishments behind for us to celebrate. But now you will be the ones in the room when we return. You will be part of the next
chapter of this history. And this time, when we make the grand return, we stay. Thank you. OK. And with that, we will get right back into the questions that are coming, but I know that one of the questions that was submitted was asking what your plans are for your first 60 days. So you take it from here. What are my plans for the 1st 60 days? Well, there is an awful lot to learn. There are volumes of materials on my desk right now to to get
through. But I think our, our, our major priorities are overwhelmingly clear. And it's the first part of the nationals, the president's national space policy. We have to return to the moon. We have Artemis 2. That's on deck. I mean, again, just weeks away from potentially launching. So I think making sure we concentrate a lot of our resources rightfully in that direction is is most appropriate. But there's an awful lot to get
done. And and this is the agency that can do it. I mean, this is an agency with a lot of proud history taking on multiple parallel world changing programs. So I think again, we know what our near term responsibilities are, but I'm looking forward to learning as much as I can, getting out, interacting with all of you on that roadshow that I mentioned coming up and getting things going. Awesome. And Elizabeth Hook Rogers from NASA HQ, thank you for that
question. I will kick it to Samantha Youssef from Glenn. She asked, Do you have any insight into when the current hiring freeze may be lifted and whether candidates who are already selected and given start dates will need to recompete for their positions? Well, it's a good question. I think somewhere around 28 hours or so, not even on the job. So there are certain things that I still need to chase down.
But as I said many times through, through 2 hearings, in order to do the near impossible, it's going to take the contributions of the best and brightest from across the nation. I, I have no doubt there are areas within the agency where we're going to have to hire. So I look forward to getting more familiar with where we stand on some of these policies. Great Fernando de la Pena Yaka from Johnson said NASA FOD presented at MCCA state-of-the-art holographic AI tech from IEXA.
Will NASA incorporate AI and holography in the future? Definitely butchered that word. Well, that I mean, certainly sounds like the right direction. I mean, almost every good space sci-fi movie I've seen incorporated both AI and holographs. So that's good. I, and I mean in all seriousness, we, we absolutely have to. So I am not familiar with where we are at at this present moment.
I am familiar with the pages and pages of policies, regulation, documentary documentation, history this agency possesses. And it would certainly seem to make sense to me. That is a good first step. We could try and incorporate some of that and AI might make it easier to find some of the
materials we need. But look, if we think about where are, where the destinations will eventually take us, we're going to, I mean, we're going to eventually, whether it's Mars and beyond, just transmission delays alone are going to take us, you know, or at least evolve the current, you know, Mission Control concept where we're going to have to rely on more on board decision making where I could see AI playing a role, what AI mean. Fun thing to imagine at some point in the near future.
And also just a reminder, we do have a mic in the room if anybody wants to get up and ask a question. Betty Lynn Mason from Marshall asks, do you see new technology development more by hands on engineering work here at NASA or through NASA consulting with industry and why? I think it's both and I'm, I'm sure many of you, well, I don't know, you probably have a lot of better things to do than hear what I'm saying to Congress all the time.
But I, I mean, this question comes up a lot of like it, it's almost goes to the, the relevancy of the agency. Like why, why do we need a NASA? And we have all these great commercial companies, you know, doing all these things. It's like, wait a second, you know, let's go back to the 1960s here during the space race where we did the near impossible. We worked alongside industry. I mean, we had partners. You have Boeing and McDonnell Douglas and Northrop back in the
1960s. And those names are still US today. And certainly there are some new names out there. I do think it's NASA's job to to focus on on the near impossible. And we figure those things out. We can hand them off to some of our industry partners where we can let you know, innovation take off and the competitive forces drive down costs. And we just recalibrate next.
So look, it's going to be both the national space policy, something was spoken about extensively talks a lot about investments in nuclear programs, nuclear surface power, nuclear propulsion. Now, there is an emerging industry that's capable of supporting that, but I think a lot of that is what NASA should be taking on. And then there's certainly areas where we pioneered technology decades ago where we're very comfortable working alongside our commercial partners to get the job done.
I don't see that balance ever changing. And especially, especially on the science side, back to, you know, my commentary before if NASA isn't out there trying to unlock the secrets of the universe, no one else is going to do it. Rita, Sam Bruna from Goddard said. Welcome Administrator Isaacman. I was gratified to hear you say that one of the goals of your administration is to make NASA a force multiplier for science. I'm wondering what the word science really means.
Is it only the science that serves directly Moon to Mars, space weather, robotics, propulsion science, surface exploration, and more? Or more generally all science we currently do at the agency, even if not directly linked to Moon to Mars? For example, is traditional astrophysics studying the universe included of? Course, I mean I, I mean I think like fundamentally, what are
what are we here to do? We're here to answer the questions that, you know, went through every kids mind when they looked up at the the stars at night and wondered what's out there and why it's the way it is. I mean, so that we play that role across all of our mission
directorates. So of course, human space exploration is a major component to that, but as is our entire science program and our technology development initiatives, I mean, we're focused in all the right places to try and solve the mysteries in Air and Space. Jin Jung Wang Lee from Johnson says if China can air fry BBQ chicken on Tiangong, should we reevaluate rigid and somewhat outdated NASA requirements and use modern tech to turn survival into thriving to attract commercial investment?
This was an air fryer I'd called Pizza in Space. That's cool. That's an upgrade on that. Yeah. I, I look, I as I meant, as I alluded to in some of my remarks before I, I think it's absolutely healthy for any organization to constantly challenge the way they do things knowing that the what we've done in the past is not necessarily the right approach to get to the future. I mean we, we are on the brink of a a massive transformation right now.
You can see all the various commercial providers building their own launch vehicles with rapid reusability. And we, this can be a light switch type moment where you have numerous commercial and NASA missions being operated near simultaneously. We could have multiple space stations. We are certainly going to build a lunar base in line with the president's direction and look
even further out outward. Like we're going to have to challenge some of these things that might have been rigid in the past during, you know, less mature times. So I, I know air fryers is just the example, but I imagine there are many things that we have historically maybe not prioritized or thought were of a greater risk that we should be re evaluating. I think that goes across the entire portfolio of our responsibilities at NASA.
And I will hand the mic over for the question here in house. Thank you. Kelly fast acting planet. Excuse me, Kelly fast acting planetary defense officer. And I was one of those astronomer kids looking at the skies, but also being an astronomer also here, having to use infrastructure that perhaps is aging. It's not as flashy to work on budget software and procurement software and awards management software.
And I know that often we have to throw people at such situations because it's certainly flashier to do the next cool thing. But do you have any thoughts on how we can maybe handle things that are under the surface on which we rely in order to do the impossible? Possible that we're trying to do here. Well, I mean from an infrastructure perspective and I guess including the, you know, a lot of the core systems that allow the agency to function.
I do think we we should be applying a lot of the brain power that is available to us at this agency to try and find ways to do it better, to free up resources to work on those
exciting things. I mean, I hope everyone kind of almost regardless of their function, is trying to find a way to do whatever their current job is better, whether there's means to automate it or software to alleviate some of their responsibilities so they can repurpose their time on the more exciting things to work on. But yeah, I, I have to imagine that if there's any agency in the in the United States government that can find a way to do some of those
responsibilities a little bit better to free up resources, we should be capable of doing it. Thank you, I love your area of responsibility too. I think that's one we should be keep a good eye on. We don't want to go the way the dinosaurs. Lisa Link from Goddard says, can you speak to the reorganization discussed in the Project Athena document and what impacts we can expect?
Sure. I mean it look at that as I think a lot of people probably know was formulated a time earlier this year where I mean, I was a nominee. So I can only, you know, see what's being reported. But there was a lot of various reorganization plans that seemed to be being considered at the time. A lot of phase one, phase two. I don't know how much everyone
was tracking that. But from my perspective, having, you know, worked on a number of large organization reorg type efforts, it's better to do a single data informed plan rather than anything that involves, you know, needless pain over a period of time. Now that's 5-6 months ago. A lot has happened since then. As I mentioned before in my remarks, my objective, I mean, is to get up to speed as quickly
as possible. Now, there are some things that I did just, you know, more or less communicate in my statement, like I do believe in flat organization structures. I like to know things as quickly as we possibly can, increase the, you know, decision velocity the greatest extent possible, push responsibilities down. I think you. And you look at that, I mean, we, we had a lot of young engineers and scientists and researchers that took us to the
moon and back. I like pushing responsibilities down as great as possible that these don't necessarily involve, you know, major changes to personnel or, or dramatic reorganizations, but they're direction, you know, directions I think we should be looking to move into. And at the right time, we have the right information, drawing on hopefully a lot of conversations from people in
this room. You asked earlier about the 1st 60 days, but Mark Serna from Kennedy Space Center says what organizational or investment decisions will you prioritize in the next 12 to 18 months to ensure Artemis stays on schedule? Yeah, well, I think there's, there's already quite a few bonders up there with some high priority decisions I think that need to be made. But this is what I'm, this is really this journey began today. I mean, we've had a number of meetings.
We're asking to gather as much data as possible. So we have situational good situational awareness, awareness to make the right decisions. I mean, you know, conceptually we should be doing everything we can, as I mentioned, to the limits of physics and safety of Ford to pull in every Artemis mission. I mean, we want to have as many opportunities to achieve our objectives before our great rival as possible. So I'll be interested in information that helps us beyond the Artemis 2 time frame.
And as I also said in my remarks, look, I think we should be feeling a lot of the pressure to deliver. This is what this agency is, is capable of doing. It's what we've done throughout, throughout our history. The pressure also exists on our international partners, our commercial partners as well to ensure they deliver. And I'm we'll be for sure having conversations across the board. Reminder that the microphone in the room is open?
Felicia Stevens from Marshall asks, with NASA's organizational structure being divided by 10 centers, do you have any reorganizational plans for how to fully integrate the agency as one NASA to help us operate more efficiently? I would say I certainly have some thoughts, but those are, those are, you know, those are thoughts that you would get based on information external to the agency.
I think my goal is to use, you know, is to get up to speed as quickly as I can and talk to a lot of the right folks that are in this room and across our various centers to ensure that we have a well informed plan. You know, generally speaking, I do think every, you know, you want to make sure that all of the contributors, so whether that's the centers and our our various partners bubble up to the major mission objectives
that we're trying to accomplish. Like you, we want to find every opportunity, you know, to ensure information transfers efficiently so we can make faster decisions. But yes, everything is just, you know, purely conceptual at this point. Like my job for, you know, the the foreseeable future, immediate future is to gather as much information as I can with from the right people to make sure we're making the right decisions.
Craig Hunter from Langley asks the loss of telework and remote work flexibility have hurt productivity, work and family life balance and morale. How do you plan to address those issues? I, I, I certainly understand the question. I would just say that at least my experience is that when you're trying to do, you know, kind of big, bold, very challenging endeavors, having all the right minds in the right location is just works better. Now, that doesn't mean that there aren't scenarios where
exceptions make sense. As I've said before, it does take, you know, the contributions of the best and brightest from across the nation in order to achieve the, the near impossible. But generally, I, I do think it's pretty important to bring all the, all the right people together under the same roof in order to work with the, you know, the speed, the urgency that's necessary for what we're trying to accomplish. Roger Weiss from Johnson says huge congratulations on your confirmation.
Might you become the 1st in office Administrator in Oh my goodness Administrator to venture on a space mission. That that is not crossed my mind. I think we have an awful lot that needs to be accomplished, you know, over the next three years. The priority list is near endless. The president has placed enormous importance on it. I mean, my first day on the job and you're in the Oval Office, the president signs a national space policy.
I mean, I think that signifies the, you know, it certainly reinforces the importance this administration is putting on achieving these objectives as quickly as we possibly can. I hardly imagine I'll find time for, you know, any of these other activities. So thank you. Tara Halt from Headquarters says many projects are significantly delayed due to poor contractor performance. The OIG has noted that NASA has limited leverage to incentivize
improved contractor performance. How do you plan to address this? I, I'm, I again, maybe it's just being hours on the job, but I am not aware of any limitations in ensuring that there would be or, or roadblocks in place to prevent us from holding our partners accountable. So look, I, I said this in my first hearing like they work for us, not the other way around. I think that's how it was done in the 1960s.
NASA should be incredibly demanding to our various partners and ensuring they can deliver the capabilities we were promised on time, on budget, so we can deliver on our world changing objectives. And I think there's certainly things we can probably do here as an agency. I'm, I'm very interested in what, you know, what knobs we can turn, you know, in order to get to the, you know, to the correct outcome faster. So we'll, we'll certainly look within when there's opportunities to do so.
But as I said before, we're going to put as much pressure on on our partners, international and commercial, as we do on ourselves. Rich Walls from Langley says we hear next to nothing about aeronautics. What are your thoughts on the future of the first A in NASA? I mean, this is an area that I'm incredibly passionate about. So I mean, look, I love the history of the aeronautics program at NASA. And I think it's, I think it's important that we try and get back to that as quickly as we
can. And what I mean by that is lots of exciting explains. Look, this is an environment for us to learn, but it's also another tool for inspiration. Rocket launches are great for inspiration. Astronauts certainly landing on the moon is great for inspiration. But NASA's portfolio in aeronautics should be out there, too. I mean, it's another opportunity to get people to look up and imagine what's possible. I love aeronautics. I'd love to see an expanded X-plane portfolio.
I'd love to see us collaborating in ways with other agencies as we did in the past. I mean, you know, the, the, the thrust vectoring technology on the F22 can trace it's roots back to NASA fly by wire technology, wing designs. I'd love to see us pushing the boundaries and radical airframe designs and, and propulsion. So it's certainly an area that I'm passionate about. Someone else has braved the mic in the room, so I will toss it over to you.
Wonderful. Hello, Sir, I'm John Truss, NASA Headquarters Mission Support Directorate. I was wondering, I'm sure you're familiar with NASA's footprint across the United States. I was wondering if you have any general ideas of the infrastructure, what you want to do? Any immediate plans for growing, shrinking, or, you know, retiring buildings? Yeah, I mean, it's a great question. This is an area I, I'm eager to receive more information on.
I would like I, I think that the worst outcome right, is the limited resources that we have available to us investing it in infrastructure capabilities that don't have demand and come at the expense of infrastructure that needs to be modernized, maintained so we can increase throughput for it or infrastructure we should be building to better account for the future direction we're seeing in Air and Space. So yeah, this is certainly something I want to get my arms
around. If we have infrastructure that is not required anymore, it's not needed for us. Like it would be a travesty to have money continue to go into that when we we know there are so many exciting areas we need to be prioritizing our resources.
So I'd love to make sure we're taking a good, you know, holistic, you know, agency wide view of this and concentrating our firepower on the on the real needle movers, which is generally a statement I think for everything we're going to try and accomplish at the agency with the resources afford to us by Congress. Charles Wilder from Stennis says how will you help streamline NASA's processes to enable faster, cheaper missions without compromising safety or quality?
It's a good question. Look, I I think generally doing things differently is not a there is no magic wand on this kind of things like this is a lot of littles that happens over time where you can, you know, shift directions. But I will say, look, it's the the in terms of the safety card. We, we have to, we have to, you know, separate out human Space Flight missions where we will never take needless risk.
We will do everything we possibly can to protect the lives of our, our crews from other missions. You know, I love, you know, the flagship missions that we have in the science portfolio. Like I, I just want to see more of them as everybody does. Like, you know, it'd be great if we were launching flagship missions with even a greater cadence. And some of those, you know, I mean, if definitionally you're going to spend a billion dollars on them, you want them to work and get them right.
There are other categories that are already, you know, already exist within the the science portfolio or maybe we can challenge some of our approach on these things similar to clips where, you know, we'll have some successes and we'll have some failures and we should do it eyes wide open and accept that, you know, over time, you know, that that curve should improve and we should get better outcomes and we will have helped industry or academia develop capabilities to launch
additional missions. That's how we become that force multiplier. So can't be 1, you know, like again, as I mentioned in my remarks and one-size-fits-all in these things. And we have a question submitted from out in California from Fidel Vasquez at JPL. He says welcome. And how will JPL fit into NASA's plans? I think JPL is, is one of our
great science centers. So from my perspective, I look at it kind of similar to every other center within, you know, within the agency on how can we increase the scientific value of every dollar? How can we increase the output or get to the desired objectives faster. So JPL has built some extraordinary hardware. I think pretty much, you know, I think pretty much every hardware that we've landed on Mars, somebody I know will Fact Check me on this probably originated from JPL.
I'm good. OK, my memory was correct on that. So how do we get more of it? I mean we, we, you know that that would be a question I would ask out there is, is there any, any knobs again that we could be turning to increase the output So we can you know, get after the science that much faster. JPL is going to play a huge role in that. Daniel Hoffbar from Langley says what is the best way to provide suggestions to improve NASA going forward? That's a great, that's a great
question. So something I was, I, I, I had to look into this, but I recalled earlier in the year that we had, you know, there was a inbox established for whether, you know, anonymous suggestions or otherwise on areas for improvement and not really sure what came of it.
And if it, if it no longer exists or it does, we're definitely going to reinvigorate it or bring greater attention to it. Because I would love to have inputs from many on ways we could be doing things better, you know, with the resources available. But in addition, you know, plan to get out in the field. And I, I can tell everybody now and can, you can consider a direction on this, like when I do come and visit anyone, please know, no, no red carpet or dog and pony show.
I am, I am there to, to learn about everything that's going right. So we can increase it and do more of it and where their problems are so we can try and make it better. And that's not going to be those interactions will not be limited to leadership levels. I plan to have as many conversations. I can't recognize. I mean, we do have thousands of people, but I am very interested. I'm not going to formulate my positions on things in a vacuum.
Angela Bartolomino from Goddard asks how will you address the loss of personnel through the DRP? I mean, as I, I've said, you know, many times, I think for us to do what we're supposed to be doing, you know, which is achieving the near impossible, it's going to take the best and brightest from across the nation. So I think it's, you know, a lot has happened this year. So this is something I need to get my arms around and I'm hoping to be able to do that through various leadership
discussions. But I could certainly see a world where in order to achieve our our important objectives, we do need to do some hiring. So that is something that I'll need to get my arms run. Jeff Brubaker from Johnson asks, do you have any examples to share with us of using blockchain technologies to ensure integrity of safety critical data like inspection reports? Do I have any examples? Well, I mean, I I do think there is a lot of utility in blockchain technology.
I don't know of any uses to date inside the agency or any immediate problems we're gonna attempt to solve with it, but I'm open minded. This is just a reminder that we are grabbing these questions live and the link is open if you would like to submit any questions. Peter Zah from Johnson asks, What is your strategy to promote space travel and space exploration interests across America and partnering countries? That's it. That's a great question.
So, and a lot of people have raised it in some form or another, right? I mean, the space race was a real thing in the 1960s and everybody followed it quite closely. It was also at a time when, you know, there were three TV networks and there was no Netflix and such. So there's a lot or Instagram or any of the other reels that capture people's attention, I guess is there's a lot of things to occupy people's time.
And that's unfortunate because we're, we're about to do some, some pretty impressive and cool things. So it, it is an area that I, well, I fully intend to speak with our, our comps team about to try and focus. I mean, one area I've, you know, said it before is I'd love to see us focus a lot on, on our quality of our content.
You know, not I do believe in the past, there's been a a lot of quantity that's been shared, but we want to put out the absolute best stuff that's going to captivate people's interest and then almost back to, you know, what else do we need to
do? We this goes back to looking for every opportunity to pull forward Artemis schedule into the limits possible alongside all of our other missions is that you want to get the the world's interest is going to be there on Artemis 2. There's no question about it.
But you know, a lot of time can can transpire between Artemis 2 and Artemis 3. And that's like waiting a very long time for the next season to come out right is we got to make sure we're continuing to put that really engaging content out there to maintain people's interest in what is something extraordinary. It is I've said it many times, this is greatest adventure in human history. People should be following it very closely. We'll do everything we can to make sure they do.
Jade Zeros from Kennedy says. And your time preparing for your new role, Is there anything you've changed your mind about pursuing as administrator? That is a great question. I just I need to think about. It was a long time in between the 1st and 2nd stint here and I tried to find as many entertaining and distracting things to occupy my time in between. Yeah, I, I am sure it is. You know, it is an endless list really, right. You know, you there is a lot that has transpired in the, you
know, over the last six months. But I'd say probably look, this is it's not it's not necessarily what's changed for me, but what has me so energized right now. Is this complete, you know, administrative administration almost whole of government support for what we're trying to accomplish here at NASA. And you know, again, you know, I, the president releases a national space policy on on on day one in the job.
I probably spoke with him at least four or five times about space priorities prior to being renominated for the, the, the job. I've spoken to him several times since and the enthusiasm, the excitement from human Space Flight to we were discussing robotic Mars missions like these are things that are all very exciting.
But it doesn't stop there. The vice president, you know, the leadership across the White House, obviously you've seen how much Congress and got engaged across 2 hearings, both sides of the aisle excited and fighting for the agency. So from my perspective, sure, I'm, I'm sure a lot has evolved in my thinking over that over that time period right now.
But what's I think most encouraging right now is how the entire United States government is getting behind this agency and what we're going to need to, what we're going to need to accomplish in the years ahead. That's pretty, pretty exciting. David Reed from Marshall says Administrator Isaacman welcome. How do you see NASA working with other agencies such as Space Command in IST and others to leverage shared capabilities to develop the space infrastructure needed for ensuring we build the
future in space? It's, you know, that's a really great, it's a great question. It comes back I think to what to the National Space policy yesterday, which was clearly, you know covered more than just NASA's responsibility in space and where to come from an incredibly capable Office of Science, Technology and Policy director Kratzios and the team he's assembled over there, which many came from NASA are really brilliant and they have the the top level picture of what we're
looking to do here at NASA. What DOE is working on what Dow is working on so that we can be efficient with our resources. Again, back to the realities are we, we are in a fiscally constrained environment. So hey, let's, it's not build 4 different, you know, bespoke nuclear reactors across four
different programs. If there's some commonality here, we can be smarter, more efficient and give by the way, the programs a greater chance of success, you know, when we're all aligned around it and sharing some resources towards it. So I think that this is not something that this is not broken, this is actually working and we need to lean into it really well. I think again, Director Kratzios and OSTP has a great vision
here. They're looking at the complete picture across agencies that have some of this overlap so we can be very smart and efficient with our resources. Christian Maseal from Goddard asks if you could send a message to every new mission team just starting their formulation phase today. What is the primary North Star or priority you would want us to emphasize to them right from day one? It's another good question.
I think that we we certainly understand what our mission is and we should be working urgently. Towards solving it. Never let a day go by for something that can be solved today because the world is waiting. I mean, you're here at NASA. We have the most extraordinary mission of any, any government
agency out there. And you know, we have the, the direction from the president, we have the resources, we have the will to accomplish it. Don't let a day go by for something we can accomplish today, because the world is waiting. Paul Goldsmith from JPL says how do you see continuing support for science in NASA given the
pressure to deliver hardware? And I think that goes hand in hand with two other questions we have from Goddard and Johnson about the importance of Earth science and also how we are going to continue to apply science on the International Space Station. So a lot of science. I think there's a lot there. I don't necessarily understand the pressure to deliver hardware part, but I mean, just at least talk on Earth sciences and and prioritizing science and
resources to space station. So, you know, with respect to Earth sciences, look, there is there is bipartisan support for it. Maybe for, you know, different reasons, but every every senator I had a chance spoke to. So we obviously have implications that are, you know, real from a humanitarian perspective, agriculture, fires, flooding. So everybody is interested in the data maybe for slightly different reasons.
We just want to, again, like any aspect of the agency, look to try and get to the science as quickly and as affordably as we can. I think there's going to be areas where you're going to have the historic Landsat mission continuing to play its role. And then look, we should be taking advantage of constellations of satellites that are, that are up there now that are continuing to be produced by a lot of different commercial providers to supplement some of our data needs.
And if we can do that in a more affordable way and that frees up, you know, more missions like future Dragonfly programs, that's like who wouldn't want to lean in and embrace that The in terms of high priority science and research to the space station. This is maybe goes back to the air fryer question of challenging some of our historic approach. We need to make the most of the space station while we got it. There's no question.
I mean, you have multiple companies right now, you know, that have set out on business model of making and operating space stations. That's pretty cool, but we want to help create some of the demand for it. We want all the pharmaceutical companies lining up and saying I'll take one. We're very far from that right now. All the biotech companies, I need my space station. That's the exciting future we
all want to see someday. So I think we absolutely have to kind of challenge the current approach. We need an outreach effort to all of the industries and academia that think they have the potential for an orbital economy breakthrough and do everything we can to prioritize getting that science and research to the space station, figure it out, and give the commercial space station
companies a fighting chance. We're gonna need to depend on them, so we gotta do all we can in the years ahead on that. And we have time for a few more questions. Sorry for lumping so many in, but I did promise to get to as many as possible. We have a great one from Vandana JA from Ames. Welcome. What advice would you give to early and mid career scientists and engineers and NASA who want to take risks and innovate but also operate within a highly risk averse environment?
What leadership principles from your commercial space experiment experience do you think are most important for empowering NASA's workforce while maintaining mission assurance and scientific rigor? I I mean, look, there's a lot there to it, but I think the general question is, you know, do we do many of us do we believe that there are areas where we can take, you know, smarter risks to get to the outcome, you know, faster. And that's absolutely the direction we need to be going in.
What I'd say again, it's like this is not very few things in an organization, you know, the size of NASA can be solved with waving the magic wand. Please take more risk and that be the right statement to make. It's not it's, it's got to be a
lot of littles. And I think, you know, if we do have young engineers, scientists, researchers out there that believe there is a better approach to get to the right outcome faster and lower cost, you got to present it in that in the right way to your leadership team. Make the case of why this is, why this is the right approach.
And I encourage the leaders out there, supervisors, managers that are mentoring this young talent to be receptive and open minded to it. You know, think through what are the real risks? Is this, is this still, I mean, is this still relevant today? And have we learned, have we gathered more data that will allow us to rethink this? What is the consequence of this? Is it something that's worth taking to advance the ball forward?
It's gonna be a lot of littles. I'm gonna certainly be looking for opportunities to push down some of these philosophies from the the top of the agency. But it's gonna it's, it's obviously gonna rely on a lot of the managers and leaders in the field too, to be open minded and receptive and to to the young talent to make the good case about why we should think, look at doing things in a, a slightly different way.
We have a question from Diego out of Jonathan asking how you will ensure a whole of government focus on human space exploration and gain support. Well, I think there I mean there it's a good question. I think there is a lot of support. I mean, you know the, the additional funds that were authorized in the one big beautiful bill, a lot of it does concentrate on on human space exploration. So I, I would say that that is of great interest across across the government.
I know that a lot of the commercial launch providers that we're working with have various human Space Flight ambitions. That's not one company. It's not too good. I mean, I, I might not even be 3 companies anymore. I mean, I think several have actually announced, you know, plans for crude vehicles. This is exciting. This is what we want now this we are the pioneer in this field.
We've done an awful lot to help, you know, educate and enable the companies that have been successful doing this today, the commercial providers. We need to continue to do that. And we probably will arrive at that, that light switch moment in the not too distant future where we do go from the few being able to see the world from such a such an amazing perspective, not entirely like that, but to the many, which is pretty, which is pretty exciting.
I think that's always kind of one of the, I don't know, underlining goals that we all have here at this agency. And one more from Ryan Scott from Goddard. Do you have any lessons or science outlook from Inspiration 4 or Polaris Don which you plan to bring to your role?
Well, I, I mean, it's, I'm sure I can give a lot of thought to it, but I'll just go on that when we, when we were lucky enough to be in that environment, we tried to maximize every second that was available for scientific purposes, knowing how lucky we were to be there. And it's really the same message back here to the agency with the resources that are provided to us.
We need to maximize the scientific value of every dollar that's afforded to us, which means probably many cases challenging the approach or at least our historic approach to get to a better outcome faster and and at lower cost. So yeah, I guess that would be. And with that last question, we are at time. So thank you all for joining us today and thank you to Administrator Isaac Men for your time in this thoughtful conversation.
We are looking forward to many more of these in the months and years ahead as the agency accelerates the golden age of innovation and exploration. Happy holidays everyone.