High School Math
Teacher
E-LSA Aircraft Pilot
Amateur Space Historian
Independent Movie Director
The Future of NASA
by Joe Maness
17Apr2010
The latest controversy involving NASA, former astronauts, and President Obama has got me all tighted up in knots. On the one hand, can see the point of view of the astronauts that signed the letter to the President urging him to keep the "staus quo", so to speak. On the other hand, I believe that the President has some great points (and no, I am not an Obamabot).
Neil Armstong is one of my personal heros. I wanted to be an astronaut when I was 6 years old. I (obviously) never made it, but I did fly backseat in Navy jets, I have a degree in Applied Mathematics, and I own my own airplane. All because JFK called for the USA to go to the moon. I was inspired to go into math and science because of the Apollo space program. So all the Apollo astronauts became my heros.
Fast foward to 2010. Obama has cancelled the "Moon Program" (affectionatley known as "Apollo on Steroids"), and now my heros are at odds with the other man I very much admire and respect: the President.
Here is my own humble opinion: (and I have to preface this by stating that I really really hate to write what I am about to write): I think that Armstrong and the other astronauts have a valid point, but Obama's point is more valid. I don't even think it is an issue of economics; the current program was woefully over budget and behind schedule.
Besides, if "Apollo on Steroids" was such a great idea, why didn't Armstrong, et al, write a letter in support of the Direct Derivative (DD)? Now that was a program to support, if that was what they really wanted. Instead, they wanted to continue a program that was over budget and behind schedule. The DD had one launch vehicle, where as the "status quo" builds two different types of launch vehicles (crewed and uncrewed). DD also had plans for in orbit refueling, which, IMHO, is a skill that any space faring civilization needs to master.
I have been an advocate of the DD version of things from the beginning. I believe that because we did NOT embrace DD, the President had NO CHOICE but to cut the current program. The problem is, is that even POTUS does not have it 100% correct (see, I told you I'm not an Obamabot).
The President wants to use a Heavy Launch Vehicle (HLV) to go to an Asteroid, and then eventually to Mars orbit and then onto a Martian Landing. The problem with the idea is that we should go to the moon to practice everything we need to do on the asteroid and Mars. I've always believed that to set up a permanent presence in space, a space station and a lunar colony are both imperative. From there, humans can branch out to the Solar System.
In conclusion, both Armstrong and Obama have it wrong, and they both have it right. However, Obama has it more right than Armstrong. Too bad that Armstrong does not see this.
A lot of stuff has happened since 20Jan2009. A friend that I had not seen since college blew into town, and I had a great time hanging out.
