Science and Society
The Latest Developments in Science and Technology
Ned Potter is the science correspondent for ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson." He has reported on such topics as space exploration, the human genome and climate change.
RECENT POSTS
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
The Vision
November 18, 2008 3:23 PM
President Bush and his staff thought they were reinvigorating the American spirit of exploration when they proposed the "Vision for Space Exploration." They wanted NASA retiring the space shuttles by 2010, returning to the moon by 2020, and eventually sending astronauts to Mars.
"The Vision," as some NASA managers labeled it, is far from being realized. The shuttles are still puttering along; the Orion spacecraft to replace them are falling behind schedule, and as for Mars -- well, not in our lifetimes.
Now, with Mr. Bush's successor assembling a staff, the Planetary Society, an advocacy group co-founded by Carl Sagan, suggests a new "Road Map" -- skip the lunar base Bush suggested, and go beyond.
"Exploration of Mars should be the ultimate goal of human space flight in the foreseeable future," it says. The moon-base idea "has driven a series of programmatic decisions that may instead lead to multi-decade delays in the expansion of human activity beyond the Earth-Moon system." Find the full proposal HERE.
All well and good (and no saying Barack Obama or any other decision-makers would be much swayed) -- except that it provoked a quick, detailed rebuttal from retired astronaut Harrison "Jack" Schmitt, the twelfth man to walk on the moon.
"I am sorry, but I can no longer support the society in its goals as they seem to have gone back to being more political than rational. I want humankind on Mars more than most, but I, at least, feel obligated to look at this goal rationally."
He goes on at some length: "We need generations of engineers to relearn how to operate in deep space at and for long durations on a location that is more accessible than a trajectory to Mars or on Mars itself."
He adds, "Returning to the Moon has a far better chance of sustained political support than does a far, far more costly, start from scratch Mars program."
Is he right? Would any of this be exciting to the American people? Would it be to you? Right now there are seven shuttle astronauts, at great expense and some risk, visiting the space station to install...plumbing.
November 18, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (11)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Even astronauts have to go, so plumbing is a necessity. And when Joe the Plumber isn't available, well -- somebody has to do it. I really think we need to establish a base on the moon, not just for pure research, but to stockpile materials for the eventual Mars mission. It would make more sense to leave from there, than from Earth. We can also hone our skills on living in the wild, as it were. There are many techniques we need to know before living on Mars becomes a reality, and the moon is a good place to start.
Posted by: andyr | Nov 18, 2008 3:42:09 PM
First, I think Mr. Schmitt has the right idea. Its better to prepare for a Mars trip close to earth rather than risking lives on a big jump. Its about time we implemented a rational approach to manned space flight. By the way Mr. Potter, the 7 astronauts are doing a great deal more than just installing plumbing!
Posted by: MikeD | Nov 18, 2008 4:03:19 PM
Note from Ned--
Hello to Andy and Mike. You're, of course, right. The Endeavour crew is certainly doing a lot more than plumbing. But even NASA agrees it's had an image problem. A few years ago the agency did some market research that I've seen, and found that those most interested in space were men over 45--those who remembered the Apollo days. Younger adults thought of Challenger and Columbia--when you said "space" to them, they said "danger." As for kids, there were only pockets of interest.
Posted by: Ned Potter | Nov 18, 2008 4:24:42 PM
NASA needs to refocus on maintaining control over our investment in the Space Station, by extending the Shuttle program. Russia is far too volatile to have a 4-6 year 'reliance gap' with. Part of that re-investment should go towards retrofitting ISS to stage EITHER an eventual Mars mission OR a moon mission, whichever is deemed most necessary. A major feature should include a "2001" like artificial-gravity module, magnetic-levitation based, rather than physical gears (note current ISS solar-panel gear issues), to minimize bone depletion of astronauts. Another ISS focus should be staging deployment of an Earth-threatening space-debris detection, and light-beam deflection system. It is proven that sunlight deflects asteroids, and no other system, missile, etc., can beat the reaction time of a light beam at the great distances needed to change the angle of incidence to deflect the object.
Posted by: Ross | Nov 18, 2008 6:54:45 PM
It ###### me off to think the U.S. has turned into such a bunch of pansies that we won't pursue a mission to Mars in my lifetime.
Posted by: mrbubbleintrouble | Nov 19, 2008 1:07:44 AM
While I would love to see a manned mission to Mars in my lifetime, it makes far more sense to establish a moonbase as an exercise both in improving space travel and a way to experiment with living on a foreign planetary body, especially when it comes to harvesting resources and then using them to expand the colony. Jumping to Mars without testing/proving the technologies needed is a disaster waiting to happen that could jeopardize public support of future endeavors.
Posted by: Cat ^..^ | Nov 19, 2008 5:21:22 AM
If you're talking about what 'excites' the American public - Mars excites me. Another trip to the moon? Been there, done that.
Posted by: I don't like it either | Nov 19, 2008 9:03:08 AM
The debate is not Moon or Mars...it's the launch issue...buy foreign or fly shuttle...my advice for president elect Obama is on my webpage.
Posted by: Don Nelson | Nov 19, 2008 10:17:59 AM
We should be engineering ways to tap natural resources in our solar system: There are large amounts of water, metals and hydrocarbons on other plants moons. But how can we extract and transport these back? We'll need an army of extraction robots and a fleet of large tanker transports.
Posted by: Bill | Nov 19, 2008 12:45:02 PM
I don't understand some people. Were JUST learning how to live in space. To jump from there to living on another planet is a HUGE jump... It would make far more common sense to take a smaller step, to live on the moon (which has an amazing repository of metals!) before jumping to Mars. A moon take off is far easier to achieve than an earth based take off and takes far less resources, once setup. Think People...
Posted by: -=Fox=- | Nov 21, 2008 3:07:48 PM
Sub: CHANDRAMA MANASO JATAH- MIND REFLECTOR
Search Science in Philosophy. SPACE COSMOLOGY is a borderland between SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. India has a Millenniums records through Vedas.
If Sun-Planetary System is like BALLERINA DANCE-according to Nobel. Laureate-Late ALFVEN- Where is Indian Cosmology - Myth or Science (Quest 1984)
Carl Sagan also looks towards in-depth study of Eastern Philosophy
Obviously one needs to search Concepts through LORD GANESA and CHANDRA SEKHARA !!
Is the Moon Mission -streamlined in the Wrong direction according to Philosophy ?
Search COSMOLOGY VEDAS INTERLINKS
Vidyardhi N
Posted by: Vidyardhi Nanduri | Nov 28, 2008 11:01:45 AM
Post a comment
