Article View: sci.space
Article #6615Re: Justification for the Space Program
From: Mark Benson
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 16:06
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 16:06
74 lines
4775 bytes
4775 bytes
Barbara Trumpinski (trumpins@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu) writes:
>i am NOT a scientist...or a researcher...or even anyone important. i
>am a simple library tech. however, i deal with the real world in ways
>you gentlemen probably can't imagine...my life has been directly
>affected by the economy...and by the lousy education system...and by
>the overwhelming lack of spirit in the u.s.
>i STILL have dreams...i know that i am never going to the stars...but
>someday, maybe, my children will...or maybe even the college students
>i know/work with will be able to have the adventures or do the
>exploring that i can only dream about in between chapters of my
>latest science fiction novel...
Barbara,
Library techs are important. I spent my college years as a lowly student
assistant (UIUC Biology Library, in fact). Between that, summer jobs,
and loans I managed to put myself through school. Since then I've been
through several different industries, staying one step ahead of the axe.
Many of my friends have not been so lucky. The very talent we need to
go to Mars and beyond is being "transitioned" into other "worthwhile"
industries, like telecommunications, or PC things like electric cars.
Or worse yet, joining the growing "service sector" of the economy. This
is a tragedy of near biblical proportions, and the results of this lack of
foresight will be felt for decades to come.
The space program in America is stuck in neutral because all the classes
of victims created by liberal American politics are busy fighting over
their piece of the pie rather than focusing on how to bake more pies.
Unless this attitude changes, we will never make significant progress in
the space arena. Even the discussion in this group mimics politics as a
whole - fund SSTO, dump the shuttle, screw manned space efforts in favor of
more probes, etc. IT IS POINTLESS TO ARGUE OVER THE MEANS WHEN WHAT IS
NEEDED IS A COHERENT VISION!
So back to the initial topic - how does one justify the space program(s)?
What are the basic reasons to go into space now? A deceptively simple
question with decidedly complex answers:
1. Exploration (To boldly go where no man has gone before...)
This has always been a legitimate function - to seek new lands,
resources, facts. This part of it also requires dreams and vision,
which apeals to young people, and may help motiviate the to study
math, science, enigneering, and other skills which are most useful to
society. The best reason to explore, however, is that you simply
don't know what your going to find.
2. Applications
Recon, earth observation, and comsats now, perhaps materials processing
soon, and manufacturing farther out.
3. Technology development
Argue over spin-offs til you're blue in the face, the point is that
large aerospace ventures (like space programs) drive both key
technologies and engineering processes. I would argue that the biggest
benefit of the Apollo program was the emergence of systems engineering
and integration as disciplines in their own right.
A properly defined space program to adress these areas (and there may be
others), focused on a series of objectives and milestones would be far
better than the drift we see today. Even better would be if this could
be accomplished on an international level. Finally, more resources are
needed. There are two ways to do this. First, always remember that
productivity drives programs - if you can do it better, faster, and cheaper,
you get to do more. And I really think the good done by a properly focused
space program would attract the attention and funding it deserves.
We now return to the discussion of the Nirvana of SSTO vs. the hell of STS.
(I like 'em both - but zealots can't admit anyone elses viewpoint has
value.)
----
Mark Benson benson@med.ge.com| "Are we gonna talk about it, or
GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, WI USA| do something about it?" HRP, 10/92
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Dec30.160648.14156@mr.med.ge.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!uucp.mr.med.ge.com!news.mr.med.ge.com!benson@gemed.ge.comShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!uucp.mr.med.ge.com!news.mr.med.ge.com!benson@gemed.ge.com From: benson@gemed (Mark Benson) Subject: Re: Justification for the Space Program Message-ID: <1992Dec30.160648.14156@mr.med.ge.com> Sender: news@mr.med.ge.com Nntp-Posting-Host: colorado Reply-To: benson@gemed.ge.com (Mark Benson) Organization: GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, WI Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 16:06:48 GMT Lines: 74