« Thinkpad X40 | Main | Mazda Transformer »
January 15, 2004
Saddle Up, Hoss, We're A-Goin' To Mars
The new plan for NASA announced yesterday calls for the US's space program to focus on designing a new class of human space transport vehicles to facilitate a lunar colony and manned exploration to Mars.
"For the new craft, called the Crew Exploration Vehicle, the plans have been left wide open. They specify only that it should initially ferry crews to the International Space Station, and then evolve into an Apollo-like craft to carry astronauts to the Moon and beyond.The plan also leaves open the question of exactly when astronauts would return to the Moon, any time between 2015 to 2020. And no date at all is specified for the plan's most ambitious goal, the human exploration of Mars." [New Scientist]
Personally, I have very mixed reactions to this announcement. On the positive side, I'm always happy to see US policy emphasizing space research and exploration. The better we understand our solar system and beyond, the better we're able to understand our own planet, which is important.
On the negative side, I have many concerns. First, and most significant, where the hell is the money for this going to come from? As someone on the radio said this morning, Bush will be long out of the White House when this country is stuck, billions in debt, trying to pay for this new space program.
Second, I'm not sure that manned space travel is the best bang for our buck right now. Keeping humans alive and healthy in space is extraordinarily more expensive than sending unmanned vehicles. Humans' ability to gather data does not necessarily compensate for that added expense. Furthermore, the risks are huge -- over half of all missions to the surface of Mars have ended in disaster. Why would we want to spend so much money -- billions and billions -- just to risk a handful of humans' lives when robotic explorers are just now becoming very effective and efficient substitutes? NASA's budget, even with expansions, isn't likely to be adequate to develop such revolutionary technologies, which further reduces the chance that we'll see a significant payoff from this gamble.
Finally, I'm unsure whether this program is the best way to spend the US's diminishing revenue base. With ecological disasters looming (e.g., rising sea levels from melting ice caps) and our need for alternative energy sources becoming harder to ignore, perhaps terrestrial concerns need to take precedence in the next few decades.
I'm all for giving NASA some more money, but putting so much of our financial well-being into a program with unclear benefits just doesn't seem wise to me at this time. Of course, if 2004 wasn't an election year, this whole initiative probably wouldn't have been brought into the picture anyway.
Posted by Craig in Society / Politics
Comments
Obviously, all opinions are from myself, not NASA...I work in unmanned missions for NASA. Some of them are earth-science missions. Maybe I'm in too deep, but some things jump out at me. The same things you mentioned, Craig.
We are working on serious improvements to unmanned spacecraft- one is the size of a medium-sized TV. They will be cheap enough to be disposable; we will launch tens to scores of them at a time, and if some break, there will still be tens more to do the job.
For this reason, there is absolutely no reason to go back to the Moon (other than for headlines of course). The work done on the Moon can be done by robots- if not now, then certainly by 2015. Mars is more difficult; round-trip communications take ten to thirty minutes ("light-time"), so telerobotics is more difficult. Either humans need to be near Mars (note: not actually on Mars), or the robots need to be able to make their own decisions. Mars Pathfinder (1997) and the current Spirit and Opportunity rovers have limited decision-making ability.
I suppose I'd have no real objections if this whole shebang were adequately funded, but it's not. Bush wants an additional $1 billion, but over five years, so that's $200 million a year. About the same as one additional Shuttle flight. That ain't even close to adequate. The rest of the money will be pulled from other NASA missions.
Shortly afterward, a Republican Congressman added a convenient detail...something like, "we will cut superfluous work, like Earth-science." I think that says it all; this is political payback.
Posted by: rene c at January 17, 2004 2:48 PM