|
|
|
|
|
What the Moon-Mars Commission's Report Should Say...
by James Burk
Editor, ProjectConstellation.US
Like many other space enthusiasts, I have been waiting patiently for the final report of the President's Commission on Moon, Mars, and Beyond, which is due within a week. While NASA's new Office of Exploration seems to be hitting the ground running, the momentum of this country's space effort seems to depend on what the Moon-Mars Commission report will contain.
For the last few months, I have watched live and later pored over nearly every moment of the Commission's public hearings. I have read the transcripts and the written testimony submitted by the many expert witnesses. Overall, I have found the experience very enlightening and informative. Were I sitting on the commission in front of those witnesses, I think I would feel well prepared to do what is necessary to write the report.
Everybody within NASA and the other national space agencies, everyone in the worldwide space and launch industries, and everyone who dreams of someday going into space is eagerly awaiting what the Commission's report will have to offer. Their recommendations will surely be adopted by NASA just as the important recommendations of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) have been.
The Commissioners will need to think big, to look outwards for the next few decades, and come up with a set of requirements or suggestions that will be as applicable today as they will be 20-30 years later. They will need to set the tone that will take humanity on the greatest journeys ever taken.
So, if I were on the Commission and writing their report, I would argue that the following five main recommendations are critical to be included. They form the foundation of an implementation plan that will be able to carry out this new space vision and sustain it.
Recommendation #1: NASA Needs Fundamental & Youthful Transformation
This is perhaps the most important of all; Without a transformation of NASA, this journey won't even begin. Frankly, the NASA of today is not the same as the NASA of Apollo. The historic time of the 1960's, now referred to as the "Golden Age of Space", has created an agency that rested on its laurels almost as soon as the original organizational goal of landing on the Moon by 1970 was achieved.
I personally don't feel that NASA should be dismantled as an agency, but certainly all options should be on the table for whoever will lead the transformation. Closing some of the sacred field centers, which are relentlessly guarded by congressmen fearing angry voters in their local districts, should certainly be an option. However, there is likely a way to do this fundamental reorganization by preserving existing brick & mortar institutions but changing the mentality and methodologies of the people who work in them.
NASA has become a giant bureaucracy, inhabited by career bureaucrats which are retiring at a record rate. NASA needs a dramatic infusion of youthful talent, much like the dot-com culture that existed in the late 90's but mostly evaporated when the Internet bubble burst. Many of those same talented young technophiles are still unemployed. The government should provide a wide range of incentives to get these young men & women reemployed, working for NASA and other space-related government agencies & companies.
Recommendation #2: Every branch of government needs to participate
This is a national vision, not a NASA vision. NASA will likely be the "lead federal agency" for the new vision, but certainly should not be the sole owner. Every government agency: local, state and federal, should take part in the vision and do what they can to participate in its success. NASA should be a part of going to space, not the exclusive agent of space for this country.
At a basic level, organizations like the National Science Foundation, US Geological Survey, NOAA, and all branches of the armed forces should directly participate in the research and development of new space technologies, including new launch vehicles, satellites, LaGrange point assets, and planetary bases. There is a lot of science to be done in the course of exploration, and our science-based agencies will need to participate.
The U.S. Military should be willing to spend the big bucks to develop new launch systems, since they will ultimately be dual-use vehicles that the military will want to use, even if NASA were to develop them independently. Plus, I recognize based on the current national situation, that the US Military budget will likely not be cut anytime soon, and they have far more resources than NASA does or likely ever will. Spending 30-50 billion to develop new launch technologies over several years for the Pentagon is relatively minor in their whole scheme. That said, they should be made to share any breakthroughs with NASA and private industry, so that everyone can benefit from cheaper access to space.
At a further level of cooperation, there exists a huge need to educate the public about space and excite them about the possibilities. Local and state governments should ensure that math & science education is strong (more on that later). Other federal agencies like the Department of Education should take the lead in public outreach for the new space efforts.
Recommendation #3: The program must be sustained, not just over 20-30 years, but forever
The idea that this project requires a "long-term commitment" is somewhat of an understatement. In fact, it would be visionary to attempt to reorganize parts of our society around space exploration, as ultimately that will be what happens once human beings occupy space on a routine basis. We need to make space a part of everyday life, tattoo it on our foreheads, and write it into our DNA. Once we go out into space, we will never go back, and critics need to understand that and understand the benefits of doing that.
NASA's current vision appears to go out to 2021, with human landings on the Moon and the continuation of robotic Mars exploration with Sample Return and further surface exploration. We need to look further, to a 50-100 year plan for space exploration. We need to set goals so far that they hurt, because that is how the real advances in technology and space exploration will be made. In the late 1990's an effort was discussed to create an interstellar precursor mission which would send a space telescope outside the orbit of Pluto. We need to do things like this; Mars and Jupiter are great, but I can't wait until we explore Alpha Centauri. We need a 100 year plan to do that.
Sustaining this vision will also require the existing worldwide space industry to grow exponentially. Much like computers have, space needs to become more and more profitable so that new companies are always being created to go after new opportunities. This should not be hard to do, because once cheap access to space is achieved, and people begin to colonize the moons, planets, and asteroids, the commercial opportunities will truly be limitless.
Recommendation #4: Resources need to be protected from the critics who would have us turn away from space
For decades, critics of spending government money on space have repeated the same mantra: Spend the money here on earth and fix our earth-bound problems first. While it is an attractive argument given the massive expenditures space requires, it is also a fallacy. Even if we could spend an infinite amount of money, there will always be social problems and unmet needs. That is part of human civilization, and turning away from space will only make things worse.
The arguments of critics must be countered decisively. We need to make people understand that going into space will help solve the many social problems. And it will also do much more; going into space can help to answer some of the most profound scientific questions which are relevant to every human being: Who are we? Where do we come from? Are there others like us? Space exploration can also help to make discoveries which will fundamentally improve the human condition, and advances in related fields such as medicine, manufacturing, and computer technology.
Another fact to counter the critics is, "If we don't do it, someone else will." Some of the same critics of space also want to see America succeed on the world stage. Space exploration led by America offers a powerful and peaceful demonstration of the benefits of our society. It is in many ways a much better solution than, for example, countering terrorism with more violence. What is more positive and influential to a young Arab boy or girl, watching America conquer Iraq or watching America conquer Mars?
Space resources need to be set aside and protected from governmental raiding. Much like Al Gore's "lockbox", we need to set aside the resources that are needed, and do it years it advance. Responsible fiscal management from NASA and the other partners is also part of this. Congress should have a zero-tolerance policy toward deviations and overruns in these space programs. (more on this later)
Recommendation #5: The American Math & Science education system is in disarray and needs to be reformed
American students were #1 in the world in the 1950's in math & science skills. Now every year we are closer to the bottom of industrialized nations. This problem has been ignored for decades and, for me at least, is extremely disturbing. The effects are profound: not only are people lacking in basic skills that are needed in a 21st century technical society, but also the problem endangers our economy and accellerates the exodus of technical jobs out of the country. The Hart-Rudman commission on terrorism threats even said that the decline in math & science education was the second largest national security threat that America faces.
The 21st century is about technology & America's economic and political leadership in the world depends on our ability to innovate and create new products & ideas, which will lead to industries that create technology jobs for Americans. The next generation of Americans, in school now, will create the new space industries of tomorrow. It is imperative that we give them all the tools they need to succeed in learning math & science.
Secondary Recommendations:
In addition to the most important five things that I feel the commission should recommend. There are some secondary recommendations some have suggested that I also agree should be included in the report.
National Space Council should be reconstituted
The National Space Council, headed by the Vice President, coordinates space policy direction for the nation. Lyndon Johnson, the first head of the National Space Council was a strong advocate of going to the Moon and was at least partially responsible for the growth & success of NASA.
The National Space Council was disbanded at the beginning of the Clinton Administration and should be reconstituted under George W. Bush and future Presidents. There should be legislation that provides for a Space Council so that doesn't happen again. Prominent members of the space community should be asked to join; people like Neal Degrasse Tyson, Buzz Aldrin, and Robert Zubrin.
Congress should have a zero-tolerance policy toward NASA financial mismanagement
The current NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe has done a great job of auditing NASA and returning it on a path to fiscal responsibility. Yet even he admits NASA has a long way to go. Congress did not act during the 1990s when previous financial scandals happened, under the watch of Administrator Dan Goldin. Congressmen became visibly angry many times during budget hearings, but never held NASA to account. Goldin earned the right to be fired from NASA many times, but never was. He actually became the longest running Administrator ever, even longer than James Webb. That is frankly embarrassing. If O'Keefe or lower managers in NASA repeat some of the same mistakes, they should be dismissed immediately.
NASA should get out of the way of the private sector
For too long, NASA has stifled creativity and entrepreneurialism on the part of non-governmental efforts to pioneer space. In the late 1990s, many firms such as Rotary Rocket and Beal Aerospace were working on bringing SSTO/RLV technologies to market, and NASA did everything to prevent their success. Firms like LunaCorp and TransOrbital were talking about private lunar missions and NASA did everything to stifle them, including spreading rumors of a new NASA moon probe, which ultimately amounted to nothing and caused their funding opportunities to dry up.
Let the commercial sector do what it excels at, namely cutting through bureaucracy and accomplishing goals on a short timeframe. Instead of stifling private sector efforts, NASA should do everything they can to help them. NASA should enhance and expand their programs to transfer technologies & methods developed internally to start-up companies.
During the Apollo days, most of the hardware and operations were conducted by private contractors. That model has worked before and should be returned to for future projects. Let NASA set the direction & goals, but let the private sector implement them and create wealth & commercial opportunities from them. That is a much faster way to get into space, and also much cheaper for the public.
The Public Needs to Take Ownership
As has been said many times during the Commission's hearings, the American & world public needs to "take ownership" of the space vision. What that means is that people need to get so excited about it that they want to go themselves, and they definately want it to succeed. That is not really hard to do because space sells itself.
NASA and the government, however, need to do everything possible to facilitate this happening. They need to "market" space and take the same actions that the many space activist groups have taken for public outreach. NASA representatives should regularly visit schools, universities, and local organizations (such as rotary clubs) to talk about space and get people excited. NASA should also create a volunteer corps which can assist in this mission, and assist in other activities that will promote space exploration.
The early retirement of the Hubble, and any other potential public relations disasters, must be avoided or dealt with in a professional manner. The way in which the decision to not service the Hubble with a space shuttle has been somewhat disastrous and a good example of "what not to do".
Science Should Drive Space Exploration
Space exploration is ultimately the search for the truth, as is science. The more that space exploration advances, the more science will advance. The converse of that can also be true. Science discoveries and unanswered questions can create goals and objectives for space exploration. Apollo-style "flags and footprints" missions are not as sustainable as science-driven missions where answers will spawn new questions.
In Conclusion
The final report of the Moon-Mars Commission will be historic and long-reaching. If many or all of these recommendations are included, and the report is influential within NASA and the worldwide community, then I believe the report will be effective at building a new space exploration initiative that can take us to the Moon, Mars, and Beyond.
If the report lacks a substantial number of these recommendations, I believe it will not be effective, and this will become an exercise that is largely academic. The Moon-Mars Commission report will be placed on a dusty shelf next to the Stafford Report, the Augustine Commission report, and the Post-Apollo Directions for the Future report, all of which discussed broad goals for the nation's space program that were never acted upon. I hope and pray that doesn't happen again.
James Burk is an independent space writer and the editor of ProjectConstellation.us and MarsNews.com