10X IS EASIER THAN 10 PERCENT - Astro Teller

“Because when you’re working to make things 10 percent better, you inevitably focus on the existing tools and assumptions, and on building on top of an existing solution that many people have already spent a lot of time thinking about. Such incremental progress is driven by extra effort, extra money, and extra resources. It’s tempting to feel improving things this way means we’re being good soldiers, with the grit and perseverance to continue where others may have failed — but most of the time we find ourselves stuck in the same old slog.” - Wired Article

Can JSC[X] help get us to Mars: The journey to Mars is a long drawn out slog, but I believe there are ideas too scared to come forward that may yet be key to unlocking that journey if we are willing to take risks. The mantra at NASA has been with technology development to be good stewards of the taxpayers dollars. We focus on the incremental improvements to squeeze performance margin from the system we know instead of fundamentally stepping back and looking if there is a different way to provide dramatic improvement by taking a risk on a system design concept that may not be viable. We are so worried about congressional hearings for wasting money on boondoggles that we stifle innovation by taking the road well worn versus risking spending the money on something that may end up in a dead end but a great learning experience along the path.

Background Videos:

Moonshot Thinking

Emerging Technologies that MatterWatch how Google X employees Deal with Failure

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.

Margaret Mead

Moonshot thinking starts with picking a big problem: something huge, long existing, or on a global scale. Next it involves articulating a radical solution — one that would actually solve the problem if it existed: a product or service that sounds like it’s directly out of a sci-fi story. Finally there needs to be some kind of concrete evidence that the proposed solution is not quite as crazy as it at first seems; something that justifies at least a close look at whether such a solution could be brought into being if enough creativity, passion, and persistence were brought to

bear on it. This evidence could be some breakthrough in science, technology, or engineering that could actually make the solution possible within the next decade or so. - Wired Article

What is JSC[X] - The concept for JSC[X] is to solicit ideas and test concepts that will provide those breakthroughs that will yield solutions critical for Human spaceflight along the path of Mars. By taking the step back and looking at the “crazy ideas that would waste taxpayers money” that might not be just crazy after all we may yet find those 10X solutions. It is a learning process about potential radical new technologies and once concepts have shown viability they can be announced and looking for partnership and other collaborators and long term programmatic funding. JSC[X] is about putting aside money to look at the problems of Human Spaceflight and look for the far reaching answers that are not getting funded or even considered at the larger agency level. It would be a fundamental shift in the center of gravity for research with the Center

taking the reins and controlling the investment versus the typical AES/STMD and other pipelines and agendas beyond JSCs control.

"Engineering isn't about perfect solutions; it's about doing the best you can with limited resources"

Randy Pausch

Risk: The risk is programs like Orion or ISS thinking they are being taxed into paying for these JSC pet projects or HQ seeing it as an undermining their authority to dictate technological investment for the agency. The center leadership would need to decide the funding mechanism that isn’t a raiding of authorized funds but a creative solution to enable [X] to work on some trial balloons of concepts that even if they fail it is okay. Once a project shows promise it can graduate to more inline program/project funding streams or continue to mature in [X] if the concept is still too radical for the agency to comprehend.

Hurdle: The biggest hurdle is not carving out the seed money but overcoming the government bureaucracy to allow folks to work on the projects. While all the civil servants get paid regardless of project/task they work on the FTE/timecard issues will need to be worked out and it would be ideal if there was a mechanism that contractor support could also be provided. Providing the workforce mechanism will be crucial so that [X] funds could be used for procurement and if necessary travel and not get chewed up by WYE costs.

Workforce: If a dedicated skunk works team can be assembled with mix skills and interests to work on the projects then they could be the core [X] team and matrix in expertise from across the center as required to solve problems. This team make up is similar to the iDOT teams that helped Orion solved some of their weight issues over the years by bringing in a diverse but balanced team to take a fresh approach to the avionics and power distribution systems. From the iDOT came the PDU that is the backbone of the Orion APS today.

Death comes to all But great achievements build a monument which shall endure until the sun grows cold. -

George FabriciusProposed tiered concept for JSC[X]

Concept[X] $1M per year● the initial radical concept evaluation phase ( Rapid Evaluation Team that finds

failures )○ Short duration(6 months) to brainstorm and start fleshing out the 10X

solutions○ come at the problem from blank slate and avoid the traps of how things

have been done in the past● 6 Proposals - $80k procurement, $20k travel

○ concepts with no more than 25% success rate○ trying and failing several quick options during this phase is highly

encouraged

Prototype[X] $2M per year● Refining the radical concept evaluation phase (like Google Glass)

○ Medium Duration (1- 2 years) to start building that rough prototype to prove out the concept

○ 6 months in briefing from NASA Reality Rep - goal to make sure that solution takes consideration into how on ramping to test on ISS (Class 1-E) or other NASA regulations/procedures that may need to be considered. allows revectoring before too far down a path that won’t fly.

● 3 Proposals - per year $500K procurement, $50k travel ○ concepts that have made it through the concept[X] phase or other concepts

that still have a low chance of success 35%○ expect several prototypes along the way that fail as the team tries various

solutions

Solve for [X] $2M per year● Taking the prototype to some small scale real world testing (like Project Loon)

○ Long Duration (2-3 years) to take that dirty prototype from the lab and refine the possible solution, learning along the way

○ 8 months in briefing from NASA Reality Rep - goal to make sure that solution takes consideration into how on ramping to test on ISS (Class 1-E) or other NASA regulations/procedures that may need to be considered. allows revectoring before too far down a path that won’t fly.

○ Goal would be to have a working viable concept that can then look to inline programs or external partnerships to graduate the project to JSC

● 1 Proposal - per year $1M, $50k travel○ concepts that are still too controversial/risky (50% chance of success) for

normal funding avenues○ taking the risk for HSF on potential capability that will be that 10x

improvement