How to reduce churn in space activities:
Establishing these goals is critical because, as the Augustine committee rightly noted, “Planning a human spaceflight program should start with … the goals to be accomplished by the program … its raison d’être, not … which object in space to visit. Too often … planning … has begun with ‘where’ rather than ‘why’.” And one might add that on occasion planning has begun with “what.” Our community has been so energetic in advocating destinations and vehicles that we appear to think that they are the “why,” which defeats sustainability.
These goals, a fundamental expression of “why,” serve several critical functions. Most importantly, they are the basis for setting priorities to determine the most relevant path through the destination-capability trade space. Having a path makes human space exploration coherent and provides the basis for measuring progress. “Why” makes human space exploration an intelligible and, one hopes, compelling whole that promotes stakeholder understanding and support. “Why” also differentiates human space exploration from its competitors in creating value, such as other ways to inspire young people or support competitiveness. There is a fundamental difference between “why” NASA should have a human space exploration program and its value.
Until people understand this, we’ll continue to spin our metaphorical wheels, and waste billions with little progress.
to expand permanent human presence beyond low-Earth orbit and … involving international partners.
Why is the second part needed? Aren’t international partners human?
So we can all agree the goal should be settlement, but you can’t have settlement without a where. I think we can do both the moon and mars but you know my preference.
While we don’t need a new gov. Apollo program, I think Zubrin has a strong point regarding focus. Frankly however, all we really need is a handful of banks willing to support a settlement charter. Real estate pays for everything regardless of the actual cost.
SpaceX has shown the way. Focus! Our space program, has been to paraphrase the general played by Carol O’connor in Kelly’s Heros… an embarrassment. He’s got the game on.
We need to be serious about getting dozens of ISRU researchers on the surface of mars (we can keep them there indefinitely at a reasonable cost) so we can start actual settlement which provides the actual financing.
The cost of preparing a home on mars is best done for others by those that have gained experience first… for the same material cost but ready to purchase before leaving earth. One square kilometer provides enough resources for 1200 colonists (at 3 per quarter hectare) although less density is preferred to start.
The Queen was pleased with Columbus because he returned with the promise of riches. Ultimately that is what will drive space exploration.
Actually we cannot all agree that the goal should be settlement, since I don’t agree with that.
The goal should be to make money. If settlement enhances that – fine. That’s exactly what happened here in New England in the early 1600’s. People came over during the fishing season because the fishing was great, and they took their catch home with them to sell. Eventually it was realized more money could be made if the settlement was permanent and you moved the product, not the producers.
The problem is that “Why?” doesn’t have an answer that enough people will agree with, and “there is no good reason” is not an answer those feeding at the trough want to be heard.