Comments on: Biden: McCain would put space program “on ice”

By: sc220

sc220 — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 22:25:49 +0000

Monte and Vladislaw: You both have good points, and I think you point to something that the space community does not want to recognize. Space is just not that important. IMHO, it will require dramatic advancements in technology, at least to a point where going into orbit is as easy as sailing between Europe and America. Without that, it’s best to concentrate on improving scientific understanding of the cosmos.

By: Vladislaw

Vladislaw — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 15:02:54 +0000

when the moon was taken off the table for private ownership, space became a moot point. If the new world would have been placed off limits and all you could do was cross the ocean and paint scenic pictures and grab a few rocks and then had to sail home and were left with just stories to tell the crowds, “here is a painting of what I saw, here is a rock a found on the beach” you would have seen what you see today with space travel.

There was absolutely NO INCENTIVE for ANY country smaller then the USA to compete in space, the UN treaty GUARANTEED they NEVER had to start spending on science education and start a space program NOW! Because the treaty effectively barred the US from exploiting their advantage of being first. For a supposed capitalist country that rewards any other inovator for being first, there was no reward for being first to the moon because no one got to own anything when they got there.

By: Monte Davis

Monte Davis — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:01:28 +0000

More “pessimistic” — or simply more realistic? Maybe Americans have come to understand, slowly and subliminally, that

1) there really isn’t much of a linkage between the military uses of space that do matter (surveillance, comms, GPS) and manned spaceflight

2) having the #1 manned spaceflight program is really a pretty small part of our national prestige, reputation or whatever you want to call it. In fact, it was pretty small forty years ago: Apollo and (for a little while) STS made us feel good about ourselves, but I’ve never seen any evidence that it impressed the former North Viet Nam, or OPEC, or non-aligned nations deciding where to place their bets, above and beyond other US capabilities and achievements.

For people who think they’re all about the future, space fans are deeply invested in attitudes that had their day in 1957-1967, faded rather quickly after that, and show no signs at all of revival outside the space-fan bubble.

By: Chance

Chance — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 03:15:20 +0000

The sputnik factor will not play as heavily as many assume. In 1957 being anything but the first or best in almost any field was foreign to most Americans. Sputnik was a real shock. In 2008, Americans are a bit more pessimistic about things. The outcry over being second or even third in space will be muted.

By: Bruce Behrhorst

Bruce Behrhorst — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 23:12:33 +0000

It’s obvious both presidential candidates will have to support a national space program that’s a given. To what extent is the issue.

Given the interest in future Russian space program use. And the continued success of the Chinese national space effort. The only question I have is can Americans spell “Sputnik” presently ?
Because the ‘Sputnik factor’ will begin to play heavily on the American psyche as we move forward-no, not worried about a faltering U.S. space effort.