George W. Bush has determined that it’s time to go back to the moon and then on to Mars. All the Democrat presidential candidates did what candidates do — criticize the policy as an idea looking for a political moment. Presidential defenders replied it may be good politics, but it’s also good for the country.
Like the War on Terror, a critical U.S. policy and enterprise is getting lost in election year political debate. In fact, the decision to go back to and beyond the moon is long overdue. We should all agree we are going to take on this challenge for six very important nonpartisan reasons.
First, the Shuttle is getting old. The first Shuttle mission and launch of Columbia occurred April 12, 1981. By 2010, our astronauts will be lifting off in spacecraft design that is nearly 40 years old. The Space Transportation System (STS) now is exceeding its original design life. The new system designers need to focus on what type of system to build. Do they build one to keep flying in circles around the Earth? How many years do we need to continue doing that?
Second, and along that same line, the Space Station is aging. Space historians will recall that Space Station program was in disarray until Vice President Dan Quale, far more remembered for his ability to misspell potato, pulled the disparate factions together to develop a unified national strategy and a collaborative international venture. By 2010, the Space Station will be a 10-year-old product of a 1980s design. The station on the moon can provide us more information about many more aspects of science and engineering, and it’s only three days away.
Third, we have an eroding economic foundation in aerospace. The United States has a $70 billion business base and a substantial trade surplus. This year Airbus will overtake Boeing as the world’s leading manufacturer of airplanes. In addition to the European Union, the Russians, Japanese, Chinese, Ukrainians, Israelis and others are building and launching satellites and several are sending missions to the moon and planets. The United States, in response, has spent most of the last 12 years undercutting our research and development capability by cutting the NASA budget.
Fourth, the Chinese are going to the moon. That has national security implications even more important than economic ones. Peers can agree on cooperation and demilitarization. We can’t hope to protect our intelligence community and military satellites and our nation by simply protesting to a moon-based Red Army.
Fifth, we have artificially and wastefully divided NASA into two groups to pursue manned and unmanned missions. By combining those resources and focusing NASA’s efforts, we can reduce relative costs and substantially increase the agency’s efficiency.
Last, the peripheral benefits of the space program have become ubiquitous in our lives in products and processes from fruit drinks to biomedicine; and in the news we follow from STS launches to the Mars Rover’s investigations. Our ability to be pathfinders and our national identity are founded on our belief in our entrepreneurial and exploring spirit. As a nation, we must be able to continue to say: “I am an American. I was born of pioneers. I am a pioneer.”
JAMES MAZZEI
Mr. Mazzei a consultant with the Aerospace Corp., an adjunct professor at the University of Maryland and George Mason University and a lecturer for the Armed Forces Electronic Association.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.