President Obama has finally submitted his 2011 budget to congress, and one item that generally sails through without too much hoopla is the NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) budget. But not this year.
A war may just break out in congress over Obama’s proposed budget for NASA. The US space agency was formed in 1958 out of the old NACA (National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics) by then-president Eisenhower, in reaction to the Soviet Union’s 1957 launch of the world’s first artificial satellite, Sputnik.
NASA brought together the national resources required for the USA to catch up to and surpass the Soviets. It developed and oversaw all of the unmanned US deep space missions such as the Mars orbiters, landers and rovers, the Venus imagers, multiple science missions to Jupiter, Saturn, the outer planets, asteroids and comets, the Hubble Space Telescope, most of the International Space Station. It also developed the 29-year-old space shuttle program of 130 missions so far, among other programs.
However, the most attention and admiration was captured by NASA with its Apollo moon program of the 1960′s and early 1970′s. On July 20th, 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin first stepped out onto Earth’s moon. Through December 1972, another ten humans trekked to and worked on this alien terrain. Additionally, six more NASA astronauts were scheduled to go on three more moon missions beyond Apollo 17, until then-president Nixon axed the NASA budget due to an increasing deficit caused primarily by the US$25 billion a year (in 1970 dollars) Vietnam war. By comparison, NASA’s budget in its moon-exploring heyday was approximately US$5 billion a year. And while the Vietnam war was a miserable failure, NASA’s success and accomplishments were the pride of the USA.
It’s hard to believe that it all happened 40 or so years ago. It makes the idea of NASA withdrawing from human space flight unimaginable. But Obama’s 2011 budget plan proposes to do just that by ending the relatively new NASA Constellation program, which was initiated over five years ago by the Bush administration to return humans to the moon and then explore beyond while retiring NASA’s space shuttle.
Constellation, which has cost over US$9 billion so far, has been chronically underfunded. The blue-ribbon Augustine Commission, tasked then-incoming president Obama to review America’s space program and suggest ways forward, reported that the underfunded Constellation program could not get humans out of low Earth orbit (LEO) before 2030 at the earliest, even if funding was suddenly and dramatically increased.
Thus, by terminating Constellation and retiring the space shuttle program after its five final missions, all scheduled in 2010, the USA would for the first time since 1961 have no human space transportation system either in its inventory or even on NASA’s drawing board.
Instead, NASA would provide (and in fact is already providing) research and development “seed” money for private companies to develop their own private human-rated spacecraft. No schedule or clear time-line to achieve this capability would exist. Accomplishments would be governed solely by the profit motive.
This is certainly feasible from an entrepreneurial point of view, since several private companies such as Orbital Sciences and United Launch Alliance already provide non-human-rated space transportation service to both government and industry. They are set to receive more R&D money from the US government through NASA.
But there is a huge problem with this plan: It clearly leaves the USA totally dependent on foreign technology and foreign availability for transportation into space, with no clear idea of when that situation might change. Earth is by no means a tranquil place. Both foreseen and unforeseen needs may arise that demand that the US government redirect and rebuild its own human space launch capability.
However, without maintaining its extraordinarily skilled and experienced space workforce, the US will lose its ability to react quickly to resurrect its human space launch capabilities. That would leave the US very vulnerable to the whims of possibly uncontrollable sources. And this doesn’t even address the loss of national pride, or the the loss of interest in a space industry career by young people, who previously were sparked by the most accomplished and successful human spaceflight capabilities on the planet.
There seems to be only solution to this dilemma: End the Constellation program while funding free enterprise research and development, but still maintain the space shuttle until the private enterprise products are online. That would mean maintaining at least one space shuttle launch per year until its replacement is operational. It could take five or even ten years, and would add some budget costs to NASA. But without keeping the space shuttle operational, the USA will be have to hitch all its rides into space, just like someone hailing a taxi in the rain because he or she doesn’t own a car.
But if the Obama plan is passed as is,in 200 years our descendants just might be hearing Captain Kirk say, “Beam me up, Scotty”…..in Chinese.
Howie, my Bruthhhaahh!! You’re missing one very important angle on this paradigm shifting effort – Obama’s been listening to Bill Clinton: The best way to beat the ReThuglicans is to be a BETTER Republican than they are. We all know the Radical Right’s rhetoric never matches reality (they’re worse on economic matters than the Dems; they’re worse on National Security issues than the Dems; etc.). NASA has been a gravy train for the military/industrial complex for the better part of the last 50 years. By cutting NASA’s space funding, Obama has fired a very hot & low shot across the bow of the Pentagon and the biggest defense contractors – you want silly space toys? You go snuffle up some private capital to finance it.
Think about it. In one elegant move, Obama is not only cauterizing a long-gushing financial hemorrhage that no longer gives back to the public that pays for it, but he’s also given the Rethugs a kick to the solar plexus (pun intended) by implanting himself into this critical High-Tech playground that they have all but owned since Reagan’s reign (of terror).
Yes, it is heartbreaking to see NASA at such a low point that the only decent thing to do is to shoot the ol’ hag through the skull to put her out of her misery, but that is in fact where NASA is. Obama’s doing the right thing, and he’s doing it while back-handing Mitch McConnell with an iron gauntlet.
Brian!!!!! Nice to hear from you!
While not disagreeing with you, it still leaves the US without a heavy-launch capability for 15 years or more. Not good. And its doubtful at best that private enterprise will EVER be able to afford launching humans beyond low Earth orbit EVER. Also not good.
SOOooooo…what’s the solution?