“NASA – Part I with Carlos Fontanot” Inside NASA: The Foundational Years
- Nicolás Rhoads
- Feb 18
- 5 min read
Season 2, Episode 3 | February 18th , 2026
BLOCK 1 – PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE
Opening Remarks
Over the past months, the growth of Altitude has brought with it increasing commitments and responsibilities. At the same time, Fabricio’s professional obligations have expanded significantly, leading him to step aside from the project.
Altitude will continue with Nico and myself at the helm. We sincerely thank Fabricio for his time, contribution, and professionalism throughout this chapter. We wish him every success in his current and future endeavors.
Introducing Carlos Fontanot
Carlos Fontanot is a Mexican native who has lived in Houston since 1973. He brings more than 50 years of experience in image management — spanning photography, film, television, and communications.
He studied at the German School in Mexico, Universidad Iberoamericana, and the University of Houston. His career includes work as a live television director and producer, audiovisual programming in the oil and medical industries, and, most notably, 34 years at NASA’s Johnson Space Center.
At NASA, Carlos was responsible for imagery related to the International Space Station, helped integrate the television and photographic systems used by astronauts, and managed public affairs relationships across Europe, Japan, Latin America, and Russia. He also spent two years in Moscow supporting public affairs during the first International Space Station missions.
Beyond NASA, Carlos is a lifelong advocate of photography and visual storytelling. He is a father of two and a proud grandfather.
The Personal Beginning
Before we speak about programs, missions, and historic names, we begin with something more personal.
Carlos, in your youth — what was space to you? What did NASA and Houston represent at that time?
For Carlos, Houston was synonymous with NASA. His first visit to the Johnson Space Center in 1966 came while Apollo was still in development. The first moon landing was not yet history — it was anticipation.
He recalls watching the black-and-white images of Neil Armstrong’s first step and Buzz Aldrin descending onto the lunar surface. It felt surreal — humanity stepping into the unknown.
During the 1970s, while studying in Houston, he continued visiting Johnson Space Center. Initially, his technical understanding was limited. Over time, through exposure and immersion, that understanding deepened — eventually shaping a 34-year career.
Inside NASA: First Impressions
When Carlos formally joined NASA, what surprised him most was not only the technology — but the people.
➢ The level of preparation and enthusiasm.
➢ The depth of technical and human resources.
➢ The infrastructure — Mission Control, engineering divisions, simulators.
➢ The extraordinary diversity of professions working toward a single objective.
What stood out most was the culture: discipline, knowledge, professionalism, and camaraderie. NASA was not mythology. It was structured excellence.
Does Extraordinary Ever Become Routine?
Over decades, does one become accustomed to extraordinary events?
Carlos reflects that no two missions were ever “routine.” Each carried its own complexity and uniqueness. Unlike commercial aviation, where repetition builds operational cadence, human spaceflight remains rare. Very few humans have left Earth.
The International Space Station became a symbol of sustained presence in orbit — but even then, every launch remained exceptional. Add to this international partnerships, visiting dignitaries, global media attention — and the sense of singularity never truly faded.
BLOCK 2 – APOLLO THROUGH INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY
When Carlos arrived at NASA, Apollo was history — but very much living history.
➢ Internally, Apollo was spoken of as foundational.
➢ Sputnik in 1957 triggered urgency.
➢ NASA was created in 1958, emerging from NACA.
➢ Apollo became the defining American technological achievement of its era.
There were constant references to “how things were done” during Apollo — a benchmark for commitment and execution.
➢ Wernher von Braun was still a powerful institutional reference point.
➢ Some personnel had directly participated in the program.
➢ Apollo was pride — but it was also a standard.
Pride or Pressure?
Was Apollo simply a permanent source of pride — or also a burden difficult to equal?
It was both. President John F. Kennedy’s challenge to Congress — and later his Rice University speech — framed the Moon landing not merely as exploration, but as national commitment. The achievement was breathtakingly fast. But it also occurred within the Cold War context — following John Glenn’s orbital flights and intense competition with the Soviet Union.
Apollo demonstrated what focused political will, national alignment, and funding could accomplish. At its peak, NASA consumed roughly 5% of the federal budget. Today, it operates at less than 0.5%. That contrast alone illustrates the scale of that moment in history.
The Post-Apollo Gap
There was awareness that Apollo, in those terms, might never be repeated. Apollo 17 marked the end. Skylab repurposed Saturn V hardware to create the first American space station. Three crewed missions followed, before it was eventually abandoned. Apollo-Soyuz in 1975 symbolized cooperation — but it was also the beginning of a significant hiatus in crewed spaceflight. NASA entered a period of transition.
BLOCK 3 – THE SPACE SHUTTLE: ROUTINE AND RISK
The Space Shuttle was conceived to make spaceflight operational — almost routine.
➢ Reusable vehicles.
➢ An integrated system: rocket, orbiter, glider.
➢ Testing atop a modified Boeing 747.
➢ A fleet of orbiters.
➢ Missions ranging from satellite deployment to telescopes, probes, human science experiments.
➢ Shuttle-Mir cooperation.
➢ The pathway toward building the International Space Station.
From inside NASA, there was belief in this operational model. But routine can create comfort — and comfort can mask risk. The Shuttle era carried complexity and vulnerability.
When tragedy occurred, NASA changed.
Without revisiting sensitive details, Carlos reflects that after major accidents, the organization became introspective, analytical, and methodical. Investigations were rigorous. Culture was examined.
From a communications standpoint, the hardest task was explaining risk to a public that saw the Shuttle as increasingly normal. Spaceflight never was.
With time, the Shuttle program came to be seen internally as both necessary and instructive — a program that enabled construction of the ISS and expanded operational capability, while leaving profound lessons in engineering discipline and organizational awareness.
BLOCK 4 – THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION
The International Space Station represents cooperation at scale.
From inside NASA, that cooperation was real — but not frictionless. Working with Russia, Europe, Japan, and Canada required technical integration and cultural navigation. The complexity was both engineering and human.
Maintaining a permanently crewed orbital laboratory is an extraordinary logistical achievement. The public may not fully grasp what it means to sustain life, science, and infrastructure 400 kilometers above Earth — continuously, for decades.
For NASA, the ISS became both:
1. A scientific laboratory of unprecedented scope.
2. And a diplomatic platform — space as a stabilizing bridge among nations.
Closing – Transition to Episode 2
With this, we close the first chapter of Carlos Fontanot’s journey inside NASA.
In our next episode, we will turn to the present and the future: The new operational model:
➢ Artemis.
➢ The return to the Moon.
➢ And what lies ahead for human space exploration.
Comments