Posted on 01/27/2011 6:30:40 AM PST by SlowBoat407
In this post, I defer to my father, Charles Husson, who spent 30 years at NASA’s Langley Research Center as a systems engineer and program manager. From launching test payloads off Wallops Island, VA, in the late 1950′s to troubleshooting the Viking I Lander in the late 1970′s, and subsequently on loan to the Defense Department from NASA in the 80′s, he has been on the cutting edge of technology and has a unique view of how government and industry worked together to move this country into true “high-tech.”
He was particularly fired up about one comment Obama made during the State of the Union address, and I invited him to write his thoughts. The “Sputnik moment” will probably go down as one of the most unfortunate metaphors a president has chosen in an attempt to spur innovation, and one reason is given below.
A SPUTNIK MOMENT – Charles Husson
Using a “ Sputnik” moment to stimulate Americans and possibly Congress to “gird up their loins” and meet the great challenge ahead was a very bad and grossly incorrect metaphor. It was Washington’s fault that this country was unable to launch a satellite when they had the means – many months ahead of Sputnik.
That embarrassment was due to a United States government edict from President Eisenhower that said “no military vehicle would be used to launch a satellite into orbit”; hence, the government-ordered, failure-plagued program “The Vanguard” to build a “peaceful” launch vehicle was created.
Four months later, after numerous launch vehicle explosions on the pad and in mid-flight, Wehrner Von Braun was finally allowed to use a military launch vehicle to put Explorer I into orbit. The Explorer I satellite built by William Van Allen had been put on hold by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
Had Washington not interfered, there would be no space race, as we were clearly ahead on orbital launch capability when Sputnik was launched. Their ignorance and misdirection of these facts is wordsmithing of highest caliber. They could teach us “How To Cheat at Cards Without Being Caught”.
This is another example of Washington’s misreading of the technical environment and what it takes to be technically successful. You can build high-speed train systems based on foreign technology, build alternate energy platforms based on foreign technology, and green the environment through foreign technology, but it will not solve the basic industrial R & D infrastructure problem instituted by the United States government in the 1970’s and imposed on its own manufacturing system.
I’ll have more to say on that, but for now it’s enough to know that we can get back on track in five years if the government will take a few simple steps.
In response to Sputnik Kennedy put up well defined goal - Send a man to the moon and return him safely to earth by the end of the decade.
That is called a specification.
Obama put up a nebulous smoke cloud - stimulate innovation.
That is called waving your hands around.
I don't know whether it is true or not, or just some rationalization after the first round of the space race.
Parenthetically, anyone my age remembers the another response to Sputnik - a million kids sticking tooth picks into Styrofoam balls and sprinkling them with glitter. Every Christmas tree that year had a Sputnik ornament proudly placed on it.
The point of the article is, our first Sputnik moment was caused by government putting unnecessary restrictions on technology, just as they are today.
I don't know whether it is true or not, or just some rationalization after the first round of the space race.
Sounds like a rationalization of running around with our fingers up our butts to me. I think precedent only applies to action, not inaction. I'm not a lawyer, though.
Obama defines “Sputnik Moment” as opportunity to spend lots of money over a long period for very vague goals.
Our “Sputnik moment” was the (near) collapse of Greece and Ireland.
Obama’s mentality is steeped in exploiting “victimization” to achieve the goal of equal outcome for all... problem is, this mentality is never innovative in anything but resentments and “get-even-with’m-isms”. His mental state (and those he seeks to exploit) never rises to the level of overcoming challenges to the physical universe, never soars to see what lies beyond, but stays steeped in pits of envy and itchings for what others enjoy by rights of their own hard work, innovation and free enterprise.
Our next ‘Sputnik Moment’ will be when a EMP is burst over our continent and it will be called a “WTF Moment”.
I’m stealing this. I HOPE you don’t mind.
Thanks for posting that. Many Americans, and FReepers too, are unaware of the frustrations we endured watching or reading about failure after failure. It was bad enought that adolescents had a joke about it.
Q. How do they count backwards at Cape Canaveral?
A. 5...4...3...2...1...Oh...$#@!, back to the drawing boards.
I heard the same thing. If we launched first, the Russians were going to go to the UN and get a ban on orbits that violated space over other countries, namely Russia.
Tom Wolfe covered this wonderfully in “The Right Stuff”.
That “no science” statement by the Fearless Leader was totally wrong, ignorant and stupid. Whatta Zer0.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.