Over the Moon: NASA needs a mission beyond the shuttle and space station

Wall Street Journal ^ | Thursday, August 28, 2003

[presidio9]

The proximal culprit in February's Columbia space-shuttle accident (the foam did it) was already well known before this week's report of the investigation board, led by retired Admiral Harold Gehman.

So was the general charge that NASA kept the shuttle flying with hairpins and twine, metaphorically speaking. It knew that insulating foam had a habit of breaking off the external fuel tanks during launch, but the agency never rigorously examined the problem before concluding it was a nuisance, not a threat. Why? Because of a mindset, we're told, that didn't go out of its way to look for reasons to throw shuttle launches off schedule.

[camle]

one word: Colonization.

[1Old Pro]

I support the concept of NASA and space exploration and research. I think we should defund public education and redistribute the funds to NASA, we'll all learn more.

[presidio9]

I'm with you. Before we worry about Mars can we get back to the moon more often than once every 30 years? Most of the people involved with the Apollo program are now retired.

[camle]

did I say MARs? I meant colonization wherever we would benefit either by the locale, or the technology developed in so doing.

[Freedom4US]

History Channel had a web based chat session with Gene Kranz, former Flight Director during the Apollo days (11 and 13 for example) after their "Failure is Not an Option" program.

He's a real national treasure and inspiration; he said much the same thing - we know how to go to the moon, what's the point. Manned mission to Mars is where it's at.

[Cincinatus]

Worse, it suggests the agency's real problem, hinted at but not stated clearly in the Gehman report: Like any public bureaucracy, NASA won't say "no" to unrealistic priorities set by the political class. If our political leaders really want to change NASA, they are going to have to change its mission.

This is not a NASA "problem" -- it's their duty to be an executive agency, not a policy entity. NASA is simply another part of the Executive branch. They do not set policy or long-term national goals. Leadership in those areas must come from the President and the Congress.

Fundamentally, we have lousy space program because there is no political consensus on what our space goals ought to be. And I think that's because there's no political rationale to drive such a goal. Apollo worked because a critical mass of politicians believed that beating the Soviets to the Moon was an important national goal. After we won that battle, no obvious new challenge was evident. Thus, the past 30 years of space mediocrity.

A new political rationale for space must somehow involve national security. I suggest using the Moon as a supply depot for projecting American power in near-Earth space would be a good choice of goals. In that sense, the sooner the Chinese launch their Moon program, the better for us -- it may be the kick in the pants everybody seems to need.

[steve50]

Roads, bridges, power grid, and everything else falling apart in this nation, we're going to add somewhere in the neighborhood of a trillion to the debt in two years, and we think we have billions to throw into space programs. Insanity

[Brett66]

We need an entire ground-to-LEO infrastructure to get materials to LEO inexpensively, we need an orbital transfer vehicle to carry cargo from the LEO station to an L1 depot assembly station. We need a reusable lander for a return to the moon at the L1 station, we'll need far more for a mission to Mars. We could've had all of this in place already, but NASA doesn't know where it wants to go, congress doesn't know where it wants to send NASA,several presidential administrations had no clue what do with NASA and the American people don't seem to care enough to demand more from our space program or our elected officials.
So in summary: NASA is stuck in LEO studying flatworms having sex in zero-g for the forseeable future.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

A new political rationale for space must somehow involve national security. I suggest using the Moon as a supply depot for projecting American power in near-Earth space would be a good choice of goals. In that sense, the sooner the Chinese launch their Moon program, the better for us -- it may be the kick in the pants everybody seems to need.

Bump!

[Hunble]

There is a grain of truth in your statement. Sputnik did more to advance the American education system than anything else in history.

For a generation, it taught students the basics of science and critical thinking, which could be applied to almost every aspect of life.

As someone who grew up during the first years of the space age, NASA and the people involved were my heroes.

Today, their mission has been lost and NASA should no longer be allowed to control our space efforts. It is time for robots and private corporations to take over space exploration.

During the 1960's, just like space exploration, we dreamed of human exploration of the oceans. There were visions of underwater colonies where people would live under the sea for years.

Today, robots do the job of underwater exploration much better than humans, simply because it is safer and cheaper. The old argument that a human must be right there, has been demonstrated to be wrong.

The human has never been able to directly manipulate objects in a harsh environment and must be separated from the elements. With the advancement of computers and remote manipulations, people work much more efficiently from another location and still complete the tasks.

NASA can and should provide technical guidance, but it eventually must be eliminated as a government agency.

Today, there is no excuse as to why I can not watch a live web-cam from multiple robots exploring Mars. We should have hundreds of little robots running around that planet today, and via the internet, be able to share what they are seeing.

For the cost of a Hollywood movie, a robot can be placed upon Mars. NASA no longer has any valid excuse for their failure.

[cartoonistx]

[Salgak]

What does the Billions investigated in the space program provide ? Let's see, more technology spinoffs than any other program Uncle Sam has ever done. . .one HECK of a lot more than Tang.

You like accurate weather forecasts ? Thank NASA: they developed and launched the weather birds. You watch TV ? Thank NASA for Comsat technology, and for launching all the US Comsat birds, and a lot of the rest, world-wide.

Gotten sick or hurt lately ? NASA technology is ALL OVER Medicine. Ever have an old-fashioned EKG ? With leather straps, suction-ball-sensors, and globs of conductive jelly ? OR did they use the peel-and-stick variety developed by NASA. . .

I could go on, but I suspect you get the point by now. . .

[biblewonk]

Nasa's mission should be changed to building windmills.

[Hunble]

Understood, but today, we can not even get into Earth orbit.

[steve50]

We needed a way to write in space. Spent millions to develope a pen that would write weightless/upside down. The Russians gave their cosmonauts a pencil.

Nothing wrong with these programs when they can be afforded, right now they can't be.jmho

[newgeezer]

Many self-anointed "conservatives" go all LIBERAL when their special interest is the subject. One man's pork is another man's "national priority."

NASA, schmasa. It's long past time to quit financing the joyride for all the armchair Captain Kirks in our midst.

[Mamzelle]

re: Today, robots do the job of underwater exploration much better than humans, simply because it is safer and cheaper. The old argument that a human must be right there, has been demonstrated to be wrong. )))

The anguish and debriefings after one of these catastrophes is another cost unaddressed. Five people died in a helicopter crash just looking for Columbia debris in Texas. If there had been no human casualties from the Columbia, those five people would not have died, either. Died looking for junk, when the big shots already knew why it happened...sheesh...

If it had been unmanned, all we'd have been out was the money, and not as much of that, either. No agony, no extended hiatus...

Robotics have emerged by leaps and bounds in the last ten years. Think of the spinoffs if we focused energies on a jaw-dropping robotics tour of Mars! Why settle for a couple of probes when we could send up an armada for what one shuttle would cost? We could set down a grid of probes. The trouble is, NASA has been a Miss America contest since Donald Slayton took over the astronauts' program in the early seventies. Rides for brides--it was all about providing a few celebrities with tickertape parades. We lost a lot of ground playing movie star.

Put the emphasis back on technology--not the aviators.

[biblewonk]

NASA, schmasa. It's long past time to quit financing the joyride for all the armchair Captain Kirks in our midst.

I love that line, keep using it.

[KevinDavis]

The wimpy way of doing things. You must be a wimp.