🚀 go-pugleaf

Cathy Mancus <cathy@zorac.cary.nc.us> wrote:
>
>  As important and fascinating as I think Voyager was, I would agree
>with the public that Apollo 11 was more important.  That's isn't the
>question, though, as these programs never competed.  A better
>question is which the public think is more important,
>Viking/Voyager/etc or the Shuttle.  I have never been convinced that
>the public is so all-fired pro-Shuttle.  I see a good deal of
>interest in the unmanned missions -- not interest at a level that
>would fund these programs at manned-space levels, but those programs
>don't NEED manned-space levels.

I'll agree with you to a point.  I think the shuttle is not worth
what's been spent on it, but it is still quite valuable.  The ability
to run hands-on experiments from orbit is very important.  The shuttles
allow us to have this ability one week out of every month (when
they're not being repaired.)

I see the shuttle as a stepping stone to the space station - a project
that I am strongly in favor of.  We need to establish a permenant
presence in space, and a space station (a real one, not a dinky little
thing like skylab was) is the best way to do that.  (Either that or a
colony on Mars.  I think an orbiting station is more useful in the
short run.)

>> Don't dismiss the life science benefits that manned missions have
>>discovered.  I can't think of any right now, I don't follow these
>>achievements.  There must be something that has come directly from
>>the research in orbit (I hope).

How about the experiments that the shuttle crew run every time they go
up.  For instance, they're examining things like how crystals grow in
0-G environments, which will directly impact future semiconductor
research.  There are a great many other experiments involving how
various species of animal get along without gravity.

A lot of pure research data comes from this.

>   If you can't think of any, I guarantee Joe Taxpayer can't either.

Joe taxpayer can't think of any because by the time the data becomes a
product, almost everybody has forgotten where the data came from.

How many people today know that microwave ovens were developed as a
result of military microwave research?

Same thing here.

>I don't know of any, and don't believe any have occured.  Corrections
>welcome if you can name a *specific* instance.  Note that I am
>talking about life science benefits that benefit Joe Taxpayer
>directly today, not knowledge that advances future long-duration
>zero-gee missions.

I think these long-duration zero-gee missions are important.  As I
said before, I think it's very important that we establish a permenant
presence in space.  If we're to do that, it's going to involve people
spending a long time up there, and we're going to need to know how
people and animals behave in that environment.

You want something that's useful now, and you aren't going to find it.
No basic research produces useful products from the beginning.  But if
you don't do the research, you'll never get the eventual products.

---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------
David Charlap        | The contents of this message are not the opinions of
david@visix.com      | Visix Software, or of anyone besides myself.
Visix Software, Inc. +------------------------------------------------+-------
Member of Team-OS/2  | Quantum mechanics: The dream stuff is made of. |
---------------------+------------------------------------------------+