Griffin, Porter to Depart Defense Department
Defense Department Undersecretary for Research and Engineering Mike Griffin and his deputy, Lisa Porter, have resigned from their posts effective June 10 to jointly pursue an unidentified opportunity in the private sector, Breaking Defense reports.
Griffin, who previously served as NASA administrator, was brought on board in February 2019 to overhaul the Pentagon’s costly and time-consuming research, development and procurement systems through the newly established Space Development Agency (SDA) and other measures.
Breaking Defense report that Griffin and Porter might have worn out their welcome after less than 18 months on the job.
According to insiders, there is a whiff of the proverbial ‘leaving to spend time with my family’ about the joint resignation email — in that the duo was under pressure from Deputy Defense Secretary David Norquist to step aside. There have been consistent reports over the past 18 months that a number of R&E staff have complained of toxic leadership during the Griffin-Porter tenure. And, more than one source in the loop said, both Griffin and Porter had recently told staff that they intended to stay in place until after Trump’s renomination as the Republican candidate for president.
In response to a Breaking D inquiry, a spokesperson for DoD’s Office of the Inspector General “could not confirm or deny” that there as been at least one, if not more, official complaints from staffers who felt mistreated.
Further, the resignations follows on the heels of House Armed Service Committee criticism in the draft 2021 National Defense Authorization Act centered on R&E’s handling of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) and the Space Development Agency (SDA). The new HASC language echoed similar criticism in last year’s NDAA, with both bills demanding that Defense Secretary Mark Esper consider moving MDA from R&E to the purview of DoD acquisition head Ellen Lord.
8 responses to “Griffin, Porter to Depart Defense Department”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
With SDA launched and out of his hands, its ultimate fate was no longer his to control. And it’s hard to see anything else comparable Griffin was likely to be able to do by staying on at DoD. So, time to move on before his notorious emery-cloth personal style started to compromise the viability of what he’d already managed to accomplish.
It’s hardly a cinch bet at this point, but perhaps his DoD legacy, long-term, will be more positive than his long-term legacy at NASA has been negative.
It will be interesting to see where he winds up next and what he winds up doing there.
His long term legacy was Space X, Falcon 9, and Dragon 1. Not bad.
And Ares/SLS, criminal.
If Falcon 9 did not work out, and we were still limited to Atlas V, and Delta IV, SLS would be the enabler for flights to the Moon and beyond. When SLS started Falcon 9 was not a sure thing. Once a source of budgeted account numbers is set up it’s hard to turn them off. Should BF(x) development continue to go the way I’ve been saying it will, should we actually come up with some payloads to send to the Moon and we still can’t tank upper stages in orbit, we’ll be happy SLS was seen thru to completion. In spite of its very high cost. Should the BF(x) concept go operational, or someone starts re-tanking upper stages in LEO, it will have been a monumental waste.
Should SLS be a waste, it will be forgotten in the shadow of the systems that succeeded. People are remembered for what worked in their lifetimes. Griffin is going to be remembered as one of the critical people to bring Falcon 9 and Dragon 1 to life.
Eh. People are most certainly also remembered for their failures (see: Scott Norwood).
Personally, I’ll remember Griffin for being the polite, sincere, erudite ideologue who gave us the unworkable Altair lander and just didn’t get what he had created in Commercial Cargo (a program which he later said had expanded far beyond his original intentions).
He’s a guy I’d enjoy having dinner with, but I wouldn’t want him running my space program
Even limited to Atlas V and Delta IV, a serious manned program could have been operational well before Shuttle retirement. The development costs alone to date of Ares/SLS/Orion could paid for dozens of missions and developed orbital refueling. The SLS .cannot and will not enable anything useful.
The Falcon series doesn’t even have to be invoked to show how bad that Ares/SLS direction went. I hope the BF(x) works same as you do. I am not holding my breath as there are many possible obstacles before operations. I simply don’t have the confidence that others here have that it will be an unmitigated disaster, or that it will be the ultimate game changer. I don’t know, and am aware that I don’t know what is going to happen.
You are correct that the flies and dung beetles will eventually have their way with SLS. In the meantime, the smell is most unpleasant.
But that’s the nature of politics. Today we’re are thankful for the transcontinental rail roads. Back then they were the focus of national corruption, boondoggles, and became a synonym for the rich and powerful screwing the common people over by use of economic and armed force. We’ve forgotten all that and treat it as a outlying issue to the history when to the people living in the era the corruption and ‘rail-roading’ was a central issue.
SLS is a conceptually weak system. BF(x) is far more powerful a concept should it be made to work. If Space X pulls it off, BF(x) will be a slow moving bulldozer that will make its own era. …… Should it be made to work ….. It’s proving difficult, and should the present set the pace for how this program plays out, We’re going to need NG and SLS to set the stage for Musk’s new concept once it really comes online.