- 09 Jan 2018 20:25
#14878111
IMO it was more the politicians. The Shuttle program was a massive boondoggle because the money had to be split among different contractors in different states to satisfy certain powerful Congressmen. It was also too big, because it had to accommodate certain Air Force spy satellites that of course were miniaturized soon after. I remember when the Shuttle design was announced, I made four predictions:
1. That it would not bring down the cost of putting mass in orbit (accurate).
2. That it would kill astronauts either on launch or re-entry (accurate).
3. That it would not come close to achieving its planned launch rates (accurate).
4. That the first genuinely low-cost orbital launch system would employ two fully reusable vertically stacked stages burning LOX and LCH4, not H2 (40 years later, that is exactly what SpaceX has done).
However, there is a sense in which democracy, especially the election cycle, is to blame. Space exploration is inherently an enterprise with very long lead-times. Worthwhile objectives need stable funding and long-term plans that are not at the mercy of a four-year political horizon. It may be that China will surpass the USA in space -- thus becoming the dominant player in the future of the species -- because it can make plans for decades, generations and centuries, while the USA cannot plan more than four years ahead.
I think if the goals and benefits had been explained properly, and pursued honestly and competently, it would have been easier to maintain public support. In particular, the stakes in space are the future direction of human civilization. Assuming we continue to exist as a species, eventually our descendants who live on earth will be dwarfed by the population living off the earth. Do we want the latter to be mainly American, or Russian/Chinese/whoever?
IMO if they had perceived value for money, they would have supported the space program. NASA became incredibly wasteful under the Shuttle program, and divorced from the people's values.
starman2003 wrote:And who or what is ultimately to blame for that? Democracy, and the masses it empowers.
IMO it was more the politicians. The Shuttle program was a massive boondoggle because the money had to be split among different contractors in different states to satisfy certain powerful Congressmen. It was also too big, because it had to accommodate certain Air Force spy satellites that of course were miniaturized soon after. I remember when the Shuttle design was announced, I made four predictions:
1. That it would not bring down the cost of putting mass in orbit (accurate).
2. That it would kill astronauts either on launch or re-entry (accurate).
3. That it would not come close to achieving its planned launch rates (accurate).
4. That the first genuinely low-cost orbital launch system would employ two fully reusable vertically stacked stages burning LOX and LCH4, not H2 (40 years later, that is exactly what SpaceX has done).
However, there is a sense in which democracy, especially the election cycle, is to blame. Space exploration is inherently an enterprise with very long lead-times. Worthwhile objectives need stable funding and long-term plans that are not at the mercy of a four-year political horizon. It may be that China will surpass the USA in space -- thus becoming the dominant player in the future of the species -- because it can make plans for decades, generations and centuries, while the USA cannot plan more than four years ahead.
They won't accept even modest sacrifices for space.
I think if the goals and benefits had been explained properly, and pursued honestly and competently, it would have been easier to maintain public support. In particular, the stakes in space are the future direction of human civilization. Assuming we continue to exist as a species, eventually our descendants who live on earth will be dwarfed by the population living off the earth. Do we want the latter to be mainly American, or Russian/Chinese/whoever?
In one year about four times more was spent on tobacco alone than on NASA's budget.
IMO if they had perceived value for money, they would have supported the space program. NASA became incredibly wasteful under the Shuttle program, and divorced from the people's values.