Space Exploration: Why it is Needed

Self | self

[ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton]

Fellow Freepers:

I was recently asked to address a technology group at a State University.

This was my speech.

My speech is about this country, why we need a clear cut goal and what that goal should be.

As a country we seem to be like the wife of an abusive husband waiting for her next beating.

On top of it we have lost our technological edge. It was recently widely reported that the United States lost the title of the fastest computer to Japan.

Financially times are uncertain as well, everyone seems to be scared of losing their jobs. People realize that job security doesn’t exist today as it did, when 30 years of working for a company brought one a gold watch and a healthy retirement check.

Just as at home our rest seems less restful, our enemies seem less clearly defined than they did in the days of the cold war.

What is it that we are lacking?

Well as you should have guessed from my opening, what we lack is a clear cut goal, which harnesses our creative intelligence as a nation.

What should our national goal be?

Well, I don’t think that survival is a worthy goal, as it seems to be what our current goal is and it is not helping us.

And staying the worlds top super power, that involves struggling to stay king of the hill and thus constant turmoil.

In looking for this national goal I am going to suggest a goal that in our past that propelled us forwards.

In the modified words of John Fitzgerald Kennedy: “I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out of landing a man on Mars and returning him to Earth safely.

Before you dismiss this goal, let me explain how this goal would address of the problems I mentioned earlier.

First of all, it is apparent that a strong American space program is the same thing as a strong America.

The military spin offs of space exploration are almost limitless.

Don’t forget that military technology proliferates.

If we rest on our laurels, our enemies will develop nuclear technology and missile delivery systems.

And the lesson of 9-11 is that our enemies are not resting on their laurels.

The driving force of the American economy is technological innovation. Many economists accurately said that the economy of the nineties was flat but the tech sector was so strong that it pulled the rest of the economy with it.

How did America become the world’s leading technical innovator?

I would argue that much of the impetus came as long term spin off from the Apollo space programs and Reagan’s Star Wars initiative.

In addition to technology, many breakthroughs in the fields of engineering, medicine, plastics, aviation, and electronics came from these programs.

The problem currently is that corporations owe it to their shareholders to return profits in the current quarter. This stifles long-term research and investment.

And since winning an election has become so expensive, politicians are more concerned about filling their campaign coffers than the long-term well being of this country.

The investment in high tech research and manufacturing necessary to put a man on Mars would be a tremendous boast to the economy and have spin off effects for decades.

It would also help the increasing unemployment. Not only would it have these advantages, but this new found space agility would benefit the entire world in other ways. How many of you remember the asteroids hitting Jupiter a couple of years ago.

And often times in the news it is noted that an asteroid narrowly missed us. As it currently is, we have absolutely no defense against this.

To develop the capacity to defend against this eventuality would also help us with missile defense. And both of these programs would benefit from a manned mission to Mars.

And although many would decry this as a budget boondoggle, I would say that it would force the government to redefine it’s priorities and make it more efficient. It would have to be more efficient and channel the nations resources more carefully.

In conclusion, fellow Freepers, I ask you to remember the exhilaration of watching Neil Armstrong taking one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind.

And join me in supporting the growing movement onward and upward into space.

[ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton]

Comments welcomed

[Walkingfeather]

Yea why spend money on space when we haven't even rescued those on gilligans island yet. Where are our priorities?

[Steve Van Doorn]

The question should be how is it going to be financed?

Why should tax payers pay this bill? If there is money to be made let business send their people to space. Right now with the laws as they are it is impossible for business to explore space.

[Vidalia]

All you need for "spaced research" is a micro-cam, and a few Socialists.
Actual research on many upper level Democrat Congressional staffers who had recent brain scans revealed they depended upon this type of semi-liquid grey matter to function.

Scientists from world-wide are now flying in to attempt to define what this primordial matter may be, besides the obvious amoebic matter.

All members on the left side of both aisles attempted to block the research project.
Current descriptions concur with an initial description of "MOON JELLIES"...

[jae471]

The best thing for space exploration and technological advances is competition.

We develop, tested, and launched the Apollo program in 8 years because of competition. Now we simply work on ISS.

Maybe China starting a manned space program will help us -- maybe it will generate much-needed competition. The ESA is our lap-dog, and Russia (aside from using capitalism to fund its program) is too. If China says they will put a man on Mars in 2017, we'll get one there in 2015. Otherwise, who knows when we'll get off of our bums and start working towards a clear goal.

We also need to re-investigate things like Project Orion and Project Daedalus -- Resonable interplantary propulsion. Forget 8 months to Mars. Try 8 days.

Abandon prohibitive treaties that prevent space development. Get hotels into orbit -- it will only make spaceflight cheaper. Sure, at first only yuppies with 50M to blow will be able to afford it, but as the launch vehicles become more efficient, the price will drop considerably. You and I will never be able to afford it in our life (well, I won't), but it would be nice to see someone get there in our life.

The biggest problem with the space program is funding. I'm a big fan of private funding (a good little conservative), and private funding can go a long way in space exploration (SETI and The Planetary Society are all good examples). I am not opposed to public-private partnerships (Tito?). I have trouble thinking the space program should be entirely publicly funded, but I rather see NASA receive full funding instead of than entities like the NEA/NEH, which do little to advance anything -- at least the space program gives us nice spin-offs.

Sorry for the rant... These are just my views on the space program.

In case you care, I work for Goddard SFC on MODIS ( http://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov ) and my fiancee is working on her physics/astro degree. We both have strong interests in the space program.

[Steve Van Doorn]

” In case you care, I work for Goddard SFC on MODIS ( http://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov ) and my fiancee is working on her physics/astro degree. We both have strong interests in the space program.”

A conservative at FreeRepublic that works on equipment to learn about change in the environment? Do I have that correct?

If I am correct what is your take on global warming? I looked through some of your old posts to see if you said anything, I can not find anything on it. Thanks.

[tcostell]

Wanna see space exploration explode? Announce that the US government is not only planning a manned missions to Mars, but will be claiming it as exclusive US territory when we get there.

[Willie Green]

First of all, it is apparent that a strong American space program is the same thing as a strong America.
The military spin offs of space exploration are almost limitless.

Although Mars may be as barren as our SouthWestern deserts, I don't think our military will learn much about defending our borders on an uninhabited planet.

The heck with building extravagent space-vehicles that will only ever transport a handful of elite astronauts. We need high-tech mass-transportation such as high-speed rail and maglev. THAT is technology that the average taxpayer will benefit from directly.

[jae471]

Yes, I am a conservative who works on enviromental equipment.

I'm a computer scientist, not an atmospheric scientist, so my opinions on Global Warming don't matter for squat, but since you asked, here are the facts:

The mean global temperature has increased over the last 400 years, and is well off its lows in the 1600s. Although the temperature has increased over the past four centuries, it is still much lower than its peak in the Middle Ages. In 1994 something interesting happened -- the temperature dropped, and has been going down since. Wether this is a burp in the heating cycle, or the start of a cooling cycle, I don't know. (Granted, were talking about changes of a few degrees Celsius.) Although I haven't said so yet, you can probably guess I subscribe to the natural-cycle theories.

That being said, I think it is still important to know which way we're going, because climate change does affect us, even if we're not the cause.

[Brett66]

I don't think going to Mars is all that important in the establishment of a true spacefairing capability. We need to:

1. Get the costs of transport to LEO down to reasonable levels.

2. Establish a LEO space tourism industry.

3. Establish tourism and mining operations on the moon.

When all of this has happened, it will be easy to go to Mars. I don't want more flags and footprints that cannot be sustained long-term, I want real space infrastructure with heavy off-Earth industry. Going to Mars won't do it, but going to Mars will be a natural extension of a burgeoning space industry. NASA isn't interested in space for the common man, they just want their super-elites to go. I think we're on the verge of a revolution in space enterprise, Tito going to the ISS signaled the start. This was in spite of NASA, not because of it. NASA is paralyzed with beauracrat mindthink, they're not the same organization that put men on the moon 33 years ago.

There has been a quiet revolution under way and it consists of private, non-government organizations opening the space frontier. NASA is clueless and will be made irrelevant in short order. Here's some of the players in this revolution:

X-Prize

RETURN TO THE MOON IV

Rick Tumlison's Vision

The Artemis Project

Space Adventures Teams with XCOR Aerospace To Develop Sub-Orbital Vehicle

MIRCORP

The revolution is underway, it just doesn't make headlines, but it is going to shock a lot of people when it starts rolling.

[Brett66]

Anyone care to add their 2 cents?

[LibWhacker]

I don't think going to Mars is all that important in the establishment of a true spacefairing capability.

Me either. Gravity wells are the enemy if you insist on using chemical propulsion. OTOH, the human body does not like long periods of weightlessness. So doing long missions aboard a space station gets you little in return except damaged hearts.

I guess more than anything, I want to see us get over our completely irrational fear of nuclear propulsion. Because with an Orion, say, there is no place in the solar system that we could not economically exploit. We could land and take off at will -- and at little expense relatively speaking -- on any planet or moon we wanted to, deep gravity well or not.

I know that may not fit in well with private efforts, but I'm just talking about what government can and should do, imo.

[Frank_Discussion]

"The question should be how is it going to be financed?"

I should be like the early U.S. frontier, two options:

1. The government builds a fort, you live near it or inside of it. The civilians build a town around the fort.

2. If you can get to the land you want on the frontier on your own nickel, have at it.

(I lean towards option 2, myself.)

"Right now with the laws as they are it is impossible for business to explore space."

Not impossible, but thorny. Once someone blazes the trails through the red tape, it will be even easier.

[RightWhale]

Pretty good.

I would go more for the essence of America, try to stir their souls and spiritual ambitions rather than their pocketbooks.

Let's see if I can distill this a little.

---

America when founded by the Declaration of Independence was a civilization on the edge of a vast frontier. The frontier offered limitless opportunity to any and all. Go West, young man was the call. And they went West and the country grew. In a short time, maybe 150 years, the country had spanned the continent and the frontier was nearly conquered. There were distractions, war and Depression, and war again that made the ending of the frontier pass unnoticed.

But now the frontier is definitely closed. America has no frontier, and America isn't what it was when it was young. It's actually passing into middle age, staid and comfortable, no plans for the future except to put in a garden or pave the driveway.

Soon America will reach retirement age. We all see it. Can America be restored to youth and vigor once more? How?

Look Outward. There's a Limitless Frontier, you can see the start of it from the deck on the back of your house. The children can see it, but they know they won't live to go out there and make their own lives there.

Want to restore America the way it used to be? Open the Frontier. The Limitless Frontier -- Outer Space. We can do it if we want, that was shown 32 years ago.

Which is the future, America retired from the active life and staying home to tend the garden while growing senescent? Or America entering the Limitless Frontier, robust and powerful, hopeful and courageous, with spirit and vigor? We still have the choice; we might not have it much longer. Choose soon.

Kick down the barriers, let's go!

---

Something like that.

[RightWhale]

Right now with the laws as they are it is impossible for business to explore space.

That is a barrier all right. Maybe the toughest barrier of all.

[adx]

Conversely, Earth's gravity well can be your friend too, if you're interested in dropping big rocks on your enemies, in effect giving us a "third-strike" capability.

That alone should be enough reason for us to get some people and hardware into space (at least the Earth-Moon system) before our rivals do.

[RightWhale]

much-needed competition

It might take that to get us moving. And we might not win the race. Continental shelf treaties are very touchy subjects. Some countries, in South America for example, are concerned that American technology and finance is so far ahead that America will pick all the plums before other countries even get a shot at continental shelf development. That could happen to us, China or someone could pick off the easy plums in outer space before we even get launched. It's going to be an uphill fight for a long time if we lose that one.

[RightWhale]

XCOR is making excellent progress. They will have suborbital flights for $98,000 fairly soon at the rate they are going. It's not outer space as we picture it, but it is a step in that direction.

[Brett66]

Also we may not have a comfortable choice on what we do next. China is making bold plans to conquer the moon, we may forced to go back there in short order because of strategic concerns.

Hard to see, the future is. - Yoda.

[Frank_Discussion]

"We develop, tested, and launched the Apollo program in 8 years because of competition. Now we simply work on ISS."

Apollo cost HUNDREDS of billions of dollars in 2002 value. Operational Lifespan of the Apollo program: 6 years (1968-1974)

ISS at Worst Case projections is somewhere around 90 billion dollars. Operational Lifespan of the ISS program: 20 years MINIMUM. ISS wins! It is actually quite inexpensive, and is a safer, more capable system.

Could ISS be better? Absolutely. Matter of fact, if the "I" in ISS had never been added, that would have been great. Talk about killing competition, now we have a program that bickers internally to determine its destiny. Madness!

"If China says they will put a man on Mars in 2017, we'll get one there in 2015."

I hope they mount a serious effort - I'd love to help squash them. You have the right take there.

"We also need to re-investigate things like Project Orion and Project Daedalus -- Resonable interplantary propulsion. Forget 8 months to Mars. Try 8 days."

This means strapping a cluster of nuclear weapons to your butt, and surfing the explosions. No thank you. However, nuclear power is great for plasma fusion thrusters, such as the VASIMR rocket engine in development at JSC. Not 8 days to Mars, but somewhere between 30 and 90, which isn't shabby.

BTW, hello to Goddard from JSC!