NASA and Public Engagement after Apollo

441 Pages·2015·2.39 MB·English

Sharing the Shuttle with America:
NASA and Public Engagement after Apollo

Amy Paige Kaminski

Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy
in
Science and Technology in Society

Sonja D. Schmid, Chair
Barbara L. Allen
Gary L. Downey
Richard F. Hirsh
Roger D. Launius

March 6, 2015
Falls Church, Virginia

Keywords: NASA, Space Shuttle, human space flight, public engagement, sociotechnical imaginaries,
democratization, public participation
Copyright 2015, Amy Paige Kaminski
Sharing the Shuttle with America: NASA and Public Engagement after Apollo

Amy Paige Kaminski

Abstract
Historical accounts depict NASA’s interactions with American citizens beyond government
agencies and aerospace firms since the 1950s and 1960s as efforts to “sell” its human space flight
initiatives and to position external publics as would-be observers, consumers, and supporters of such
activities. Characterizing citizens solely as celebrants of NASA’s successes, however, masks the myriad
publics, engagement modes, and influences that comprised NASA’s efforts to forge connections between
human space flight and citizens after Apollo 11 culminated. While corroborating the premise that NASA
constantly seeks public and political approval for its costly human space programs, I argue that
maintaining legitimacy in light of shifting social attitudes, political priorities, and divided interest in space
flight required NASA to reconsider how to serve and engage external publics vis-à-vis its next major
human space program, the Space Shuttle. Adopting a sociotechnical imaginary featuring the Shuttle as a
versatile technology that promised something for everyone, NASA sought to engage citizens with the
Shuttle in ways appealing to their varied, expressed interests and became dependent on some publics’
direct involvement to render the vehicle viable economically, socially, and politically. NASA’s ability
and willingness to democratize the Shuttle proved difficult to sustain, however, as concerns evolved
following the Challenger accident among NASA personnel, political officials, and external publics about
the Shuttle’s purpose, value, safety, and propriety.
Mapping the publics and engagement modes NASA regarded as crucial to the Shuttle’s
legitimacy, this case study exposes the visions of public accountability and other influences – including
changing perceptions of a technology – that can govern how technoscientific institutions perceive and
engage various external publics. Doing so illuminates the prospects and challenges associated with
democratizing decisions and uses for space and, perhaps, other technologies managed by U.S.
government agencies while suggesting a new pathway for scholarly inquiry regarding interactions
between technoscientific institutions and external publics. Expanding NASA’s historical narrative, this
study demonstrates that entities not typically recognized as space program contributors played significant
roles in shaping the Shuttle program, substantively and culturally. Conceptualizing and valuing external
publics in these ways may prove key for NASA to sustain human space flight going forward.
iii
Dedication
To Steve and Maya
To Mom and Dad
To Grandma and Grandpa B. and to Grandma and Grandpa S.
To Mrs. P.

iv
Acknowledgements
This study is personally meaningful to me. I grew up with the dream of becoming a Space
Shuttle astronaut. During my undergraduate years, however, I realized that my real passion entailed
exploring not space per se but considering the social, political and cultural imperatives and possibilities
for human ambitions to probe and navigate the cosmos. Why is it that certain nations choose to invest in
sending human or robotic emissaries into space? What determines the destinations they decide to visit?
Will private companies and individuals ever eclipse governments as leaders in using and exploring space?
Although I abandoned my aspiration to fly to the stars, my commitment to making sense of this bold
human endeavor has not ebbed. This study therefore signifies for me the melding of personal dreams past
and present.
Like the pursuit of all dreams, a dissertation is as much a process as it is a product. Although its
shelf life will far exceed the months and years spent creating it, a tremendous quantity of mental and
physical energy and non-trivial amounts of elation, frustration, triumph, and sacrifice punctuate the
experience. Fortunately, in my case, numerous caring and knowledgeable individuals eased my journey
in the completion of this work and are the foundation from which this work could come to fruition. I am
indebted to and forever grateful to all of those who supported me, whether by helping me work through
intellectual complexities, holding out a light as I navigated the depths of various archives and research
materials, providing gifts of time or financial resources, celebrating with me the achievement of
milestones along the way, or commiserating when the going got tough.
My most heartfelt thanks goes to my family. My husband Steve and our daughter Maya tolerated
and encouraged me throughout five years of Ph.D. coursework and dissertation writing. Steve generously
allowed me the time and space I needed for my studies and research, bearing a considerable share of the
effort in taking care of and entertaining Maya. Maya, meanwhile, grew during that time span from a
three-year-old preschooler to a zestful third-grader who became my greatest motivation to complete the
v
journey. I also cannot express enough my appreciation for the support I’ve received from my parents,
James and Cheryl. I am grateful, too, for the love, interest, and encouragement I received from my sisters
Stacey and Randi and their families, Steve’s parents and siblings, as well as my large extended family of
aunts, uncles, and cousins. My grandparents, including my two grandfathers who are no longer living,
provided a constant source of inspiration for me to reach my goal.
Many individuals provided guidance and served as thoughtful and thought-provoking sounding
boards throughout the dissertation development process. I extend infinite thanks to my dissertation
committee chair Sonja Schmid, who patiently and selflessly committed untold numbers of hours for
discussions and reviews concerning this project as she navigated the Virginia Tech Ph.D. advising process
for the first time. My Virginia Tech committee members, Barbara Allen, Gary Downey, and Richard
Hirsh indulged me in several stimulating conversations and provided helpful comments on drafts of this
work. Committee member Roger Launius of the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space
Museum contributed many constructive insights as a subject matter expert. My long-time mentor and
friend Bruce Lewenstein of Cornell University graciously served as an unofficial advisor, reviewing my
dissertation and indulging me in invaluable discussions about my research on multiple occasions. Daniel
Breslau, Michael Dennis, and David Onkst also generously gave of their time to review my dissertation
proposal and provide feedback. Saul Halfon, Matthew Wisnioski, David Tomblin, David Nye, Janet
Vertesi, Matthew Hersch, and the “Albatrosses” of the Society for the History of Technology also helped
me formulate ideas early on for this work. Virginia Tech classmates including Sterling Mullis, David
Winyard, Kelley Boyer, Jen Henderson, Mel Eulau, Phil Egert, Stephanie Mawler, Lee Ann Mawler, and
Claire Cuccio were wonderful sources of ideas and encouragement as well. I will not soon forget the
lunch dates during which Shali Mohleji, Linda Billings, and Ellen McCallie – all of whom were in my
shoes in the not-terribly-distant-past – took the time to talk through my research ideas with me.
Still others made it possible for me to conduct the research that fed into this work. At the NASA
History Office at NASA Headquarters in Washington, D.C., Jane Odom, Liz Suckow, Colin Fries, John
Hargenrader, and Bill Barry facilitated access to the NASA Historical Reference Collection’s rich trove
vi
of primary source documents. I deeply appreciate the staff’s assistance and patience in accommodating
me while simultaneously taking on the herculean task of packing up the entire archive in preparation for a
renovation. At NASA Johnson Space Center’s history office at the University of Houston-Clear Lake,
archivists Regina (Jean) Grant and Lauren Meyers graciously supported my two-day, whirlwind visit to
the facility in June 2013. The NASA Headquarters Library team, including Rich Spencer, Lee Shapiro,
and the late Craig Levin, provided helpful reading suggestions and good cheer on my numerous trips to
collect background materials. At Virginia Tech, librarians Bruce Pencek and Debbie Cash deftly aided
me in navigating the university’s library system and databases to find valuable source information.
I also extend a great deal of thanks to all of the individuals I interviewed for taking the time to
share with me insights about NASA that simply do not exist in published works. It was a privilege to
engage with them all and was especially poignant to speak with Pennsylvania Teacher-in-Space finalist
Pat Palazzolo, who was my own teacher and mentor several decades ago. Interviewees Beth Beck, Jim
Hull, Jonathan Krezel, Alan Ladwig, and June Malone at NASA as well as Marcia Smith also pointed me
to documents that proved useful in my research. I also owe a debt of gratitude to Doug Peterson, who
generously organized and took me on a highly informative tour – my first – of Johnson Space Center.
Several other colleagues also deserve thanks. Maureen Muncy of NASA’s legislative affairs office
helped me figure out where to look to unearth the history of the National Aeronautics and Space Act’s
“dissemination of information” clause. George Washington University professor emeritus John Logsdon
kindly provided me with a draft chapter from his then-forthcoming book on President Richard Nixon’s
role in the space program to help me fill in some details in my writing. Thor Hogan of Earlham College
generously shared some data he collected while writing his own dissertation on the space program.
Jeffrey Philpott of Seattle University graciously supplied a copy of his dissertation on the Challenger
accident.
So many individuals at NASA and elsewhere played other integral roles in allowing me to
complete this project. Successive NASA chief scientists Waleed Abdalati and Ellen Stofan as well as my
colleagues in the Office of the Chief Scientist – Gale Allen, Sarah DeWitt, Cynthia Thomas, Louis
vii
Barbier, Teresa Fryberger, Amber Straughn, and Tara Ruttley – patiently gave me the time and
encouragement I needed to work through the stages of my graduate program, including this dissertation. I
appreciate the help of Adam Greenstone and Katie Spear of NASA’s Office of the General Counsel in
providing government ethics advice on writing about and presenting my research and related works
outside of NASA. NASA colleagues and friends Rebecca Spyke Keiser, Alex MacDonald, Mike Freilich
(and wife Shoshannah), Kathy Nado, Sarah Becky Ramsey, Julie Pollitt, Marc Allen, Cassie Conley,
Shelly Canright, Alotta Taylor, Jens Feeley, Zach Pirtle, Jenn Gustetic, Jason Kessler, Lea Shanley, Steve
Garber, Mike Green, Victoria Friedensen, Jonathan Rall, Michael New, Brian Dewhurst, Garth Henning,
and Rich Leshner (now at Planetary Resources) supplied healthy doses of inspiration, insight, and cheer.
Outside of NASA my dear friend from the space community, Frank Sietzen, helped me to keep it all in
perspective. My heartfelt thanks also goes to Irene Kariampuzha, Michelle Treistman, Holly Degn,
Kirsten Armstrong, Paul Shawcross and my former Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
coworkers, and so many other wonderful friends and colleagues who offered support and made me laugh
along the way. I am lucky to have you all in my life.
Finally, I want to acknowledge some financial support I received to support my research. Thanks
goes to NASA for funding my research trip to Johnson Space Center. I also appreciate the Virginia Tech
Science, Technology, and Society department’s contribution to the same. In addition, the National
Capital Region Chapter of the Virginia Tech Alumni Association generously awarded me a scholarship to
support my doctoral studies.
viii
Table of Contents

Introduction 1

Chapter 1: Bringing Human Space Flight Closer to Earth 32

Chapter 2: Making Ground Connections 102

Chapter 3: Using the Space Truck 184

Chapter 4: Creating Space for New Flyers 250

Chapter 5: Democratizing the Space Shuttle: A Sustainable Proposition? 313

Conclusion 380

Bibliography 405
ix
Introduction
It was a most unusual sight, surreal and sublime all at once. Two Space Shuttle orbiters faced one
another, nose to nose, on a tarmac at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum’s Steven F. Udvar-
Hazy Center, adjacent to Dulles International Airport in Chantilly, Virginia. The vehicle on the viewer’s
left, Enterprise, was bright white against the nearby green foliage and the cloud-dotted, endless blue sky
of that warm April day in 2012. After the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had
used the orbiter for atmospheric drop tests in the late 1970s, it had led a sheltered existence of being taken
on tours for throngs to see and then found its way into its own wing at the Smithsonian facility. The
spacecraft on the right, Discovery, looked much grayer and worn. Bearing the markings of having been
NASA’s most flown orbiter, it had completed its final of 39 missions to space just a year earlier as NASA
closed down the Shuttle program to free up funds for new human space flight initiatives. For just a few
hours, they stood in this unique configuration. Enterprise had been pulled from its place in the Udvar-
Hazy Center and would soon journey, first strapped to the topside of a Boeing-747 and then by barge, to a
new home in New York City’s Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum. Discovery had been carried aboard
the same 747 from Kennedy Space Center in Florida two days earlier and would retire by the day’s end
into the hangar Enterprise had occupied.
NASA and Smithsonian personnel, members of Congress, White House officials, astronauts,
aerospace industry representatives, and interested individuals from the general public had flocked to
witness this rare changing of the guard that was part of NASA’s plan to allocate its four decommissioned
Shuttle orbiters. A military band played patriotic tunes and bystanders waved American flags passed out
for the occasion as Discovery rolled into its position facing Enterprise; a soprano led the crowd in a
moving rendition of “The Star-Spangled Banner” before the ceremony began. Against this backdrop,
dignitaries offered fond words about the Shuttle’s accomplishments. NASA administrator Charlie
Bolden, a former Shuttle commander, expressed that “the Space Shuttle program gave this country many
1