The pendulum swings…. Apollo 1, Challenger, Columbia…. Tragedy strikes and NASA is labelled reckless. Sticker shock hits with Constellation's robust reliability, and NASA is labelled "risk averse". Even with some of the technical challenges and criticisms thrown at Ares and Orion, their system architecture promised far more reliability than any of the commercial challengers out there. The problem is after billions in investment to learn the hard lessons of vehicle and crew survivability, and the evolution of greater space flight reliability, the fickle public, ignorant politicians, and dismissive commercial space entrepreneurs have become impatient with the hard work of reliable space travel. NASA is a victim of its own success. Prodding processes dedicated to minimizing risk in a very risky business.
Decades from now if this nation one day regains its determination to be a great world leader, we will ask where the NASA expertise went and how come they weren't supported in the early 21st century. The answer will be that their expertise was dismissed as over-cautious, wasteful, and too caught up in the details. After years of commercial space blunders, failed companies, and even catastrophic space tourism exploits, the pendulum will again swing back. The public will wonder why those details were dismissed by a dollar-driven industry… Like the adventurist barn-stormers of the early 20th century, "Sure, I'll take you for a joy-ride over the state fairgrounds for five dollars."
I don't buy the NASA criticism… Quite frankly, no one has yet to do it better. The Russians might be able to get there, but their on-orbit capabilities are dwarfed by NASA. And those that throw stones have never managed complex manned space flight systems. They are all too busy writing blogs and going to space policy conferences.
Sent from my iPad
No comments:
Post a Comment