Let’s move on now!

Robert G. Oler

I find very very little to disagree on with the post you made. Some (grin) but not much.

The problem with human spaceflight is that it never really transitioned from “test flying” to actual accomplishing something of relevance. Going and doing in space by humans became (and is) a means until it self. One can see this in all the justifications for it being cobbed up to try and save the status quo.

The quote by Robert Crippen about saving “high tech jobs”…is illustrative…he never says why those jobs have value, just that the are “high tech” and that alone should make them valuable.

Problem is that today’s America is not the sleepy America of the 60’s where “high tech” was “wow” but it is the America where my ten year olds video conference from their home computers with their school “counterparts” in Greece.

There is no “return to the Moon to stay” or whatever the phrase is…unless there is an industry in space that can justify the expense through the possibility that at some point “industry” will take advantage of the capability that is developed (or can take advantage of it).

Going back to the Moon, to stay as they say, is kind of like Supersonic flight. The same reason that has stymied commercial supersonic flight exist for going back to the Moon and “staying”

Robert G. Oler

”One of the reason is that the space community has followed the Cold War path for way too long, not diverging, not evolving, one bit since then. Don’t we keep hearing the old tired cries of the “what if the Chinese, the Indians were to stand foot before we do?” and the “because it’s hard” arguments? None of the future generation of tax payers relate to any of that stuff (to be polite).”

Even worst are the attempts to justify it on science or soft power projection or so called technology spinoffs. Those arguments haven’t worked with the public for 40 years – why would anyone expect them to work now? Hey, those arguments are bad enough to even turn off space advocates from supporting NASA.

The only thing that will sell space to the public is the way New Space is selling it, namely that its about space settlement, tourism, space energy, wealth creation! That is what the nation wants to see from space, not more boring National Geographic specials on Saturn…

I’ll also steal a line from Al Gore in saying that public support is a renewable resource.

And the sales pitch that one sees today is right out of the cold war handbook (latest article on the “Chinese are going”:

http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14678539

it is a fairly sad state of affairs

Robert G. Oler

One of the reason is that the space community has followed the Cold War path for way too long, not diverging, not evolving, one bit since then. Don’t we keep hearing the old tired cries of the “what if the Chinese, the Indians were to stand foot before we do?” and the “because it’s hard” arguments? None of the future generation of tax payers relate to any of that stuff (to be polite).

So, today, where is the next generation? On the Internet and IT world in general, not space, and I am only stating a fact not criticizing one way or another (just in case). Remember how (in part) this WH won the election? Until some one makes a case that this next generation will support the game will be over, or at the very best on life support.

Most science may be done with robotics, a lot of science. So very little hope on that side.

The possible arrival of COTS and the so-called “private” sector is the only real hope, at least for now. It does appeal to the youth. Better believe it because I can see a lot of reason to trash the whole thing. And an Ares-1X failure would likely entomb Constellation, if not HSF, and whether it’s a prototype or not won’t matter…