Manifest Destiny in outer space

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen
• Videos

By

In the wake of the Columbia disaster, it is gratifying to see that the majority of political leaders across the spectrum have met the setback with an attitude of resolution rather than retrenchment. There is no doubt: America will persevere in space.

Yet, it is not enough to continue the quest. We must win it. The American space program, begun so brilliantly in the era of Apollo, has spent the past thirty years without remotely comparable levels of achievement.

Why was the space program of the Apollo era so much more productive than that of today? Was it because of vastly superior funding? In point of fact it was not. NASA's average budget during the period from 1961 to 1973, when it built up from near-zero space capability to storm heaven with the Mercury, Gemini, Ranger, Surveyor, Mariner, NERVA, Apollo and Skylab programs, was $17 billion in 2003 dollars. That is only slightly more than NASA's current $16 billion budget. The problem is not lack of money but lack of focus and direction. For the past three decades the US space program has floundered without any central motivating goal. As a result, funds have been spent at a rate comparable to that of the 1960's without producing anything approaching commensurate results.

We need a defining goal to drive our space program forward. At this point of history, that focus can only be the human exploration and settlement of Mars.

Why Mars? Because of all the planetary destinations currently within reach, Mars offers the most -- scientifically, socially and in terms of what it portends for the future of humankind.

How do we get there?

Humans to Mars may seem like a wildly bold goal to proclaim in the wake of disaster. Yet, such a program is entirely achievable. From the technological point of view, we're ready. Despite the greater distance to Mars, we are much better prepared today to send humans to Mars than we were to launch humans to the moon in 1961 when John F. Kennedy challenged the nation to achieve that goal -- and we were there eight years later. Given the will, we could have our first teams on Mars within a decade.

How can we do this? Let us start with the present, with the space program flat on its back.

The Shuttle needs to be replaced with a small crew transfer capsule, which at a mass 10 percent of the orbiter would be light enough to launch on top of a Delta or Atlas launch vehicle. These expendable launch vehicles cost one-tenth as much as a Shuttle launch, and would be safer to ride to orbit as well, since they are modern, brand new every time they are flown and positioned beneath the payload they are lifting rather than to its side. Thus, if something goes wrong with the booster, (as in the Challenger incident) the crew capsule can get away, and if something should fall from it (as with Columbia), the crew vehicle will not be hit.