13 thoughts on “Ending Apollo To Mars”

  1. Good talk, Rand. I learned a lot from it.
    According to Proverbs, “Where there is no vision, the people perish”
    As you indicated, we need a coherent vision for why we’re leaving Earth, and then the specific destination(s), in order to justify the costs. We also need enthusiastic spokesmen (Rand, et. al.), entrepreneurs (a la Musk) and propagandists (like Hollywood) to sell the idea to our political leadership, academia heads and citizenry. Otherwise, the undertaking will likely peter out. Although this country is tragically divided along political and philosophical lines, I remain cautiously optimistic that can be achieved.

    1. …we need a coherent vision for why we’re leaving Earth…

      No. We are still very much in the “how” stage.

    2. As you indicated, we need a coherent vision for why we’re leaving Earth,

      Why? The explorers and settlers who came to the New World did not share a single collective vision.

      That is the mistake NewSpace advocacy groups made back in 2004 when they declared that everyone must “support the President’s Vision.”

      There is nothing wrong with free people pursuing a multiplicity of individual visions. Being a flock of sheep following a single leader has not been an effective approach so far, has it?

      and then the specific destination(s), in order to justify the costs.

      Again, why? Trying to predict which destinations will be the most successful, decades or centuries from now, is a mug’s game. People are too ornery and unpredictable to behave the way central planners think they ought to.

      We also need enthusiastic spokesmen (Rand, et. al.), entrepreneurs (a la Musk) and propagandists (like Hollywood) to sell the idea to our political leadership, academia heads and citizenry. Otherwise, the undertaking will likely peter out.

      That is collectivist thinking. Appealing to political leaders, academia, and citizenry at large is not the only way things get done. Or even the best way.

      Pioneers like Daniel Boone didn’t wait for politicians and academics to decide where the settlements should be and create a Coherent Vision of the American West. They took the initiative to pursue the path they thought was best. Sometimes they succeeded beyond anyone’s expectations; sometimes they died trying. That is the sort of spirit it will take to settle the space frontier.

  2. I couldn’t give a heads up, because they only want people on the approved list to call in

    Although its nice that people keep tabs of your comments section to make sure no untermensch sneak in. I thought that was pretty funny.

    These FISO’s are a good source of detailed information on whatever their topic is for the day. They would benefit from bringing in questioners from outside their approved list. Like when someone is giving a presentation on space based solar power, having someone in the audience who actually works in the field here on Earth to ask questions. Same with mining, robotics, and other topics. Or even going the reverse route and having people outside the industry give a presentation and then ask questions of them from a space based perspective.

    Maybe they do on occasion? But not in any that I have listened to. A Future in Space Operations is one larger than just professors, government contractors, government workers, and even people who work in what is loosely called the space industry. If there is to be a future in space, it will rely on much broader groups of people.

  3. First, good presentation. Second. if you can tell us, what kind of reception did you get and what kinds of questions.

    Finally, typo on page 12, “Interstellar” misspelled.

  6. Obviously, Johnson did not cancel the Apollo program in 1967 since Apollo and eventually Skylab continued until 1973.

    Johnson did stop the construction of the heavy lift (Apollo 1B) and the super heavy lift (Saturn V) vehicles in 1967 after NASA had produced 15 Saturn V vehicles and 14 Saturn 1B vehicles while he was in office.

    Only one crewed Saturn 1B and one crewed Saturn V vehicles were launched while Johnson was in office, leaving 12 Saturn V launch vehicles and 9 Saturn 1B vehicles to be utilized by future presidents.

    So there was no logical reason for Johnson to build more than 29 heavy lift and super heavy lift vehicles at that time. In fact, two Saturn V vehicles and four Saturn IB vehicles went unused by the time the Apollo/Skylab programs actually ended.

    Marcel

    1. Fair point.

      LBJ suspended the Saturn production lines, and presided over the gutting of Apollo Applications; but the rockets and vehicles already in the pipeline were enough to take care of planned missions for years. It was, in the end, Nixon who made the final decision to abandon the Apollo/Saturn architecture for STS in 1972.

      That said, what Rand points out helps illustrate that political support for Apollo was already ebbing even BEFORE the first Apollo flight, and the first steps to cutting it back had already begun; and that whatever NASA would be able to do after Neil Armstrong stirred up the regolith under his boots, it wouldn’t be what had gone before as a sustainable project. The money just wasn’t going to be there – barring the discovery of alien artifacts or unobtanium on the Moon.

Comments are closed.