Skip to main content

Man on the Moon

38 years ago yesterday, we landed on the Moon. Ever since, the space program -- around the world -- has gone backwards. Almost immediately after Neil Armstrong transmitted, "Houston, Tranquility Base here. Eagle has landed", President Nixon started hacking at NASA's budget. Congress followed suit and that's been the trend and pattern ever since.

The engineering nightmare known as the space shuttle was the result, an under-funded, under-engineered, over-wrought, half-assed manned space vehicle that has never lived up to a single promise. Most stories in the press blame NASA but the real blame lies with the political leadership of the United States. NASA said the shuttle would cost X and Congress told NASA it could have three-fourths of X. NASA cowered and said, "Okay." Congress then gave them one-half X. On and on, asking for more while paying less. NASA's "fault" lay in never saying, "Well, that's not enough to make this thing work."

You can tell just how lousy the shuttle is by looking at its proposed replacement, the Ares (I, IV, and V) launch vehicle and the Orion crew capsule, which looks suspiciously like the very successful Saturn/Apollo combo.

Today the Moon is lost. Bush talks about returning, but there's no fire to the proclamation or the project. No one is trying to grab the public's imagination about space. It's as though the combined efforts of Star Trek and Star Wars were focused on making space boring. For many there's a sense of "been there, done that". Other trot out the old crap about how we must focus our efforts here on the ground before we return our attention to the stars.

Oh my and wow, that's inspirational.

Burt Rutan pegged it 100% when he said that NASA screwed the pooch when it dismissed the "Face on Mars" as a trick of light, shadows, and weather. If they had played it as a mystery to be solved NASA would have had funding for a hundred years.

We need a Delos D. Harriman, The Man Who Sold the Moon (by Robert A. Heinlein). We need that fire, that passion, that desire, and that obsession.

We live on a pale blue dot, floating in the vastness of space and time. Microscopic brains maintain we must focus on the here and now, but the Apollo program was a vision of the future. One that we turned away from.

I watched the US space program evolve as I grew up. It was a natural progression, from simple ballistic shells to the ability to travel to the Moon. It just required an application of national will. It seemed natural that having landed on the Moon we would exploit that knowledge. Something like the now-proposed Ares spacecraft would have been a natural, something larger and more capable than the Saturn.

The old adage is that once you're in orbit, you're halfway to anywhere. The most difficult part of any space mission is getting off the planet, out of our gravity well. If we had continued to explore the Moon we would have had to develop a more permanent presence there. Once that was done, materials from the Moon could have been "dropped" into Earth orbit for building...anything. Much easier to drop from the Moon than lift off Earth.

Again, this would have required vision, dedication, and the will and desire to achieve. Instead, we walked away. Apollo 18 sits on the lawn in Houston, a fully operational Saturn V rocket unused and wasted.

I scan the news in vain to see something commemorating this date in history. Nothing. Ares and Orion are an effort to return us to where we were 38 years ago. Someone should take note. If all goes as planned, we'll have lost 50 years on our quest into space.

If.

I look around, listen to our national leaders, see the trend towards introspection toward no end, with no purpose other than narcissism, and a turning away from exploration, from the thrill of discovery. I am not optimistic.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Not the Hero We Deserve, But the Hero We Need

The Dark Knight is the best film I’ve seen in years. Not just the best “superhero” film, but the best film of any type. It’s not perfect, not quite a masterpiece, but it’s flaws are, to me, tiny and overwhelmed by the time the film ends. While relatively bloodless, it is consistently brutal, not just in what it depicts but in the themes that drive it. TDK is a film for adults, please leave the kids at home. Let’s deal with those “flaws” first, the largest being the character Rachel Dawes . In Batman Begins , I blamed Katie Holmes . Her acting was weak, to say the least, which is regrettable in that who she is and what she says and does are important to the film. Critics agreed and either for that or other reasons, Katie was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal , who is a better actress. Yet here she’s weak, real weak. Maybe it’s the character, not the actress, which is frustrating because Rachel is a pivotal character. The film,...

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that ...

We pause now for a minor rant…

“My car has a flat tire.” “You should buy a new car.” Every time I hear President Obama and other Democrats talking about “health care reform,” that’s what the conversation sounds like. A health care crisis is declared and the only solution is to replace the entire system. At most, around 15% of the American population is without health care insurance. Ignoring the fact that for most of them, this is a matter of choice, it also means that 85% are insured. And of that 85%, something like 70+% like their current coverage and don’t want the government to touch it. So for the vast majority, the current system works and works great. Yet, because of the minority for whom it allegedly does not...toss it all, start again. Admittedly, regardless of insurance coverage, it all costs too much, but again, the only accepted approach to controlling costs are to throw out everything and turn it all over to the government. Tactics that are proposed to address specific cost issues are not consid...