Lunar Livery Let-down
Back when I was a wee lad, and foolishly trusted government, I thought that space exploration was best left to the faceless bureaucracy of the state. I lived in perpetual fear of the day when a craft covered in advertisements set down in the dusty soil of Mars. I figured only government-run space programmes could provide the daring and technical skill to reach other planets, ad-free.
It seems to me, upon reflection, that the only way people are going to get to other planets is through the private sector. I've been confirmed in this view by recent events, such as the repeated grounding of the shuttle fleet. Further confirmation came in the form of NASA's new lunar exploration plan. The site is very user-friendly, and I invite all to take a look at it.
In short, after examining what I could of the proposals, I found that we're re-launching Apollo (the 1960s lunar plan), except the capsule as bigger and it takes twice as many rockets to do send one crew to the moon. Only the capsule returns to Earth, meaning it's another throwaway mission. Undoubtedly it will bring back more return than its Apollo predecessors, but that's not the issue.
The prime issue here is the lack of innovation and risk. NASA is a moribund and sclerotic institution, much like the EU or any other government agency (aside from the military, which naturally must take risks each day). Many exciting new concepts have been floated that could save money and build trans-lunar infrastructure and thus make our presence on the moon a permanent one. Yet all the government is capable of doing is attempting to make a Saturn V out of shuttle booster parts and old fuel tanks.
In order to conquer space, man is going to need to take risks and try new designs. To NASA's credit, they're financing a few truly visionary projects such as the Space Elevator. However, these plans are not proceeding like they should- technological failures, not bureaucratic inertia, should be the limiting force on space development. You certainly cannot explore a realm so dangerous as space without losses. It's a price of exploration, and one I'd personally pay. The rewards outweigh the risks by orders of magnitude.
On another note, it seems that the devilish Spaniards have decided to give out light sentences to several 9/11 conspirators, while using the opportunity to slam the US. This has brought the suggestion from many quarters that US intelligence efforts in Europe should stop cooperating with the local authorities. It sounds reasonable- US efforts get better results out of Pakistan than with many of the continental powers, who cannot even manage their own economies, let alone prosecute a war.
It seems to me, upon reflection, that the only way people are going to get to other planets is through the private sector. I've been confirmed in this view by recent events, such as the repeated grounding of the shuttle fleet. Further confirmation came in the form of NASA's new lunar exploration plan. The site is very user-friendly, and I invite all to take a look at it.
In short, after examining what I could of the proposals, I found that we're re-launching Apollo (the 1960s lunar plan), except the capsule as bigger and it takes twice as many rockets to do send one crew to the moon. Only the capsule returns to Earth, meaning it's another throwaway mission. Undoubtedly it will bring back more return than its Apollo predecessors, but that's not the issue.
The prime issue here is the lack of innovation and risk. NASA is a moribund and sclerotic institution, much like the EU or any other government agency (aside from the military, which naturally must take risks each day). Many exciting new concepts have been floated that could save money and build trans-lunar infrastructure and thus make our presence on the moon a permanent one. Yet all the government is capable of doing is attempting to make a Saturn V out of shuttle booster parts and old fuel tanks.
In order to conquer space, man is going to need to take risks and try new designs. To NASA's credit, they're financing a few truly visionary projects such as the Space Elevator. However, these plans are not proceeding like they should- technological failures, not bureaucratic inertia, should be the limiting force on space development. You certainly cannot explore a realm so dangerous as space without losses. It's a price of exploration, and one I'd personally pay. The rewards outweigh the risks by orders of magnitude.
On another note, it seems that the devilish Spaniards have decided to give out light sentences to several 9/11 conspirators, while using the opportunity to slam the US. This has brought the suggestion from many quarters that US intelligence efforts in Europe should stop cooperating with the local authorities. It sounds reasonable- US efforts get better results out of Pakistan than with many of the continental powers, who cannot even manage their own economies, let alone prosecute a war.
posted by The Admiral at 9:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home