Buzz Aldrin: American Space Exploration Leadership -- Why and How

[bananas]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/buzz-aldrin/american-space-exploration_b_1184554.html

Buzz Aldrin
American Space Exploration Leadership -- Why and How
Posted: 1/5/12 12:00 AM ET

As we flip the calendar to 2012, we get the first blast of space news, and the resurgent relevance of human space exploration. China just announced plans to lead humanity in to the moon and beyond, the tail of their comet a strong defense mindset. The Chinese challenge comes at a time of a dangerous convergence, the international debt crisis and a contentious, highly consequential presidential election. In short, 2012 is an inflection year -- the year we will and must decide whether the U.S. has the will and ability to lead the world in human space exploration. For me, I am betting we do -- and here is how I suggest we begin.

In 1969, Neil Armstrong and I walked on the moon. Shortly thereafter, I participated in work on the "next generation of space transportation systems." Without getting too technical, my strong tendency was to support a two-stage reusable launch system, with crew only in the second stage, allowing a first stage to return to Earth unmanned. This seemed both efficient and safer than the alternatives. I found myself on the minority side of the discussion, and relented. Over the past forty years, I have had multiple of occasions to regret that decision. We are now at another turning point -- and this time, we must resolve to do it right.

In short, to make a real difference -- from an exploration, science, national security and international leadership perspective -- our Nation needs to commit to seeking a permanent presence on Mars. This idea has already been widely supported by leaders in both political parties -- and seems central to the vision many Americans have for the country. While the goal uniquely protects U.S. leadership in space exploration, provides insurance for our national security, uniquely presses the envelope of science, and is certain to trigger a fusillade of economic opportunities here on Earth, there are big questions that loom -- and now compel answers. Specifically, two questions leap off the page: When and how. If China's ambitions help create new urgency, the how becomes central.

Space architectures capable of supporting a permanent human presence on Mars are extraordinarily complex, with many different interdependent systems. It is too much information for one short article. But for now, I want to focus on just one element: crew transportation systems.

<snip>

[phantom power]

1. Why: "another bunch of commies are pulling ahead of us"

Oh well, at least is seems to motivate us.

[xocet]

2. Yes, it is sad that the goal in and of itself is not enough to motivate the USA. n/t

[Ron Obvious]

3. Apollo 11

I'd like to take the time here to encourage anybody anywhere near Washington DC to visit the Air and Space Smithsonian if they can. I was a child during the moonlandings, and was as huge a fan as any nerdling could be. I collected the stickers of the various missions and devoured all I could on the subject. Had someone asked me to come along, I would have accepted in a heartbeat! I also assumed that by the time I was old, i.e. about 30 or so, travel to the solar planets would be commonplace. I'd likely have my own craft capable of reaching the moon, and might very well honeymoon on Mars.

Instead we got the stupid shuttle and decades of money wasted on useless near-Earth orbit missions at great expense It never was about the exploration and the science, was it? It was always a dick-waving contest with the commies and nothing more. Privatised space missions? Don't make me laugh. Where's the profit going to come from?

So, back to the Air and Space museum. When I first stood next to the actual Apollo 11 capsule, I was almost in tears. I was in absolute awe that anybody could have the awesome courage to blast off in that tiny tin can with thousands of gallons of liquid dynamite under their arse. I wouldn't have the courage today if you'd paid me a fortune. These men were HEROES, and I don't use the word lightly.

If the moonlandings happened today, we'd be every bit as transfixed as we were more than forty years ago, surely! And we did it! More than forty years ago, with computers less powerful than the phone in your pocket!

If only the short-term profit motive didn't override the exploration and scientific curiosity motives. Think of how exciting the world we live in could have been.

[Maslo55]

5. private

Private space in this case refers to privately executed, but mostly publicly funded missions. So thats where the profit comes from.

[Lionel Mandrake]

4. Horseshit

Buzz Aldrin writes:

" ... from an exploration, science, national security and international leadership perspective -- our Nation needs to commit to seeking a permanent presence on Mars."

What's wrong with this statement?

1. Unmanned space missions are far more cost-effective than manned spaceflight for science.

2. Sending humans to Mars has nothing to do with national security.

3. "International leadership" sounds nice but doesn't mean anything.