“Inner space is useful. Outer space is history.” Thus reads the subhead of the cover editorial in the current issue of The Economist. It’s just another major media outlet taking the opportunity of the Space Shuttle’s retirement to declare the end of human space exploration. At least this magazine mentions Elon Musk and Sir Richard Branson, two of the entrepreneurs working to make space truly accessible for the first time. In editorials last week, the New York Times didn’t even do that, saying, for example, “America still has no vision at all for its space program, no plan for where to go next or how.”
Fact is, with the competition of the Shuttle out of the way, NewSpace, as the burgeoning commercial space flight industry is sometimes known, is number one on the runway, and there’s no good reason to assume that it will fail. SpaceX became the first private company to launch and then recover a spacecraft from orbit last year, and is on track to begin cargo deliveries to the International Space Station this year. Certainly it’s not fair to say that America has no plan in space. In fact it’s completely inaccurate.
If I were slightly more paranoid, I’d say there was a conspiracy afoot, especially since I pitched an editorial to The Times summarizing the President’s and NASA’s commitment to foster the development of commercial spaceships and return to the kind of blue sky research that got us to the moon. My pitch was well received, and then…silence. After that initial enthusiastic reception, I got no further replies to my queries. Next came the gloom and doom stories about how the Shuttle’s last mission is the nail in the coffin for America’s preeminence in space. Did the editors I pitched get overruled by their bosses?
A case could be made for a conspiracy. Billions of dollars of NASA pork are at stake. Powerful politicians are doing everything they can to stave off the inevitable commercial space age. They’re working to preserve the fiction that only big government programs can get people into space, cut the relative pitance NASA is awarding NewSpace for working hardware, and add billions more to those already spent on a succession of government concept vehicles.
Nevertheless, I choose to be optimistic, chalking up the inaccuracies in the media to misinformation. After 50 years of government-owned space flight, it’s hard for people to let go of the idea that space is a government program and not just another place to do business.
I’m continuing my education campaign on the radio this week. Click on the station names below to link to live streams. All times are Eastern.
Times UPDATED 7/11/11 at 9:20 a.m.
Monday, July 11
7:10 a.m., KDKA, Pittsburgh, PA
5:50 p.m., WDUN, North Georgia
Tuesday, July 12
11:30 a.m., KTSA, San Antonio, TX
1:00 p.m., WLRN, Miami, FL
Thursday, July 14
1:15 p.m., KLWN, Lawrence, KS
—
—
—
the ISS was a three-beds-only space-hotel, while, now, after its upgrade, the ISS is a six-bed-only space-hotel (a total of 12 astronauts per year with crew rotation) but, since it’s an INTERNATIONAL space-hotel, two of these astronauts (four per year) are european, two (four per year) russian and ONLY two (four per year) american
—
well, the FOUR european and russian astronauts (eight per year) always will use the Soyuz to fly to/from the ISS, since it’s a ready available, cheap and very reliable spacecraft
—
of course, the TWO american astronauts (four per year) will fly on Soyuz capsules from late 2011 to 2017 and the MPCV-Orion from 2018 to 2020, when the ISS should be de-orbited and burned in the atmosphere
—
so, the total number of american astronauts that will fly to the ISS should be around 9*4+2=38 but ONLY if each astronaut will fly ONCE
—
clearly, it’s not rational to train an astronaut to fly only ONCE, then, each astronaut should fly at least four times in 2012-2020, reducing the total number of NASA astronauts (with some backup astronauts) to ONLY 10-15 between 2011 and 2020
—
and, of course, since the ISS is an “hotel for six” and ONLY TWO of them can be americans, ALL these 10-15 astronaut will fly to the ISS with Soyuz and Orion
—
so, when one or more of the “american Soyuz capsules” called “Dragon” or “Blue Kliper” or “CST-pollo” and “Dream(only)chaser” (that “should” fly with crews around 2016-2018) will be available, should NOT have a MARKET, since the ISS does NOT have enough “beds & breakfast” ALSO for the “commercial astronauts”
—
Shuttle era: 30 years (1981-2011) 135 missions, 900+ astronauts, 2000 tons of (high value & resupply) cargo to LEO (+ the astronauts and cargo launched with Soyuz and Progress)
—
Soyuz+Orion era: only 9 years (2011-2020) about 20 crew missions, 38 american astronauts, about 100 tons of cargo-resupply-only carried with Progress, ATV, HTV, Dragon and Cygnus
—
“commercial spacecrafts” era: it may happen only after 2016 and only for cargo, while, the crew missions may never happen in this decade, since… 1. the Soyuz and Orion missions will be more than enough for the ISS and… 2. after 2020, the ISS should no longer exist, so, ZERO places to go = ZERO manned and cargo missions
—
—
—
@gaetano you make assumptions about flight rates, who says that when cheaper access is available that they won’t rotate crews at a greater rate. You fail to mention that American crew rotation has been done by soyuz before, almost exclusively lately even though the shuttle was still flying to ISS, so apparently there are reasons besides crew rotation to fly humans to the ISS. You also fail to mention Bigelow. What’s that guy spending all that money for in Nevada? Before the end of the decade there will be a commercial space station in orbit and before this decade is out, an addition 500 people will have flown in space, which eclipses the total number that flew in the first 50 years of worldwide HSF. The excitement has just begun.