Apollo Astronauts Split Over Obama's Space Policy
|
|
Apollo 17 astronauts pause for a photograph while exploring the moon. Their lunar lander and rover sit perched behind them. CREDIT: NASA. |
A former Apollo astronaut is upset with recent Congressional
testimony by fellow space travelers ? including the first and last men to walk
on the moon ? that derided President Barack Obama?s new space agenda.
Apollo 9 astronaut Russell Schweickart, a long-time supporter
of asteroid research and mitigation, has taken issue with comments from the world's
first moonwalker Neil
Armstrong, of Apollo 11 fame, and Apollo 17 commander Eugene Cernan, the
last human to step off the lunar surface.
On May 12, both Armstrong and Cernan told a Senate committee
that U.S. President?s Obama?s vision for space ? which aims to send humans
to an asteroid by 2025, but would cancel NASA's most recent moon-oriented
effort ? is faulty, absent of details and is in need of proper review.
Schweickart, however, strongly disagrees.
?I write this letter, as an Apollo astronaut, to state my
strong support for the proposed NASA space program as modified by President
Obama,? Schweickart wrote in a May 16 letter to Sen. John D. Rockefeller, IV (D-West
Virginia), who chairs the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science &
Transportation that hosted Armstrong and Cernan.
?With what I believe to be the coming loss of U.S. leadership
in human space exploration in mind, the question of how best to regain that
leadership breaks into two fundamental elements; our current situation and our
direction going forward. In terms of relative importance I weigh these at
80 percent and 20 percent respectively,? Schweickart writes in open testimony provided
to SPACE.com by the former astronaut.
Schweickart has requested that Senator Rockefeller add his
letter to the testimony record of the May 12 hearing on the future of U.S.
human space flight.
Dead
end road
In February, President Obama unveiled a 2011 budget proposal
for NASA that, if approved, would cancel the agency's Constellation program
developing new Orion spacecraft and Ares rockets. Those vehicles were slated to
replace NASA's aging space shuttle fleet, which is due to retire this year after
three final flights (one of which is under way today aboard the shuttle
Atlantis).
On April 15, President Obama outlined a sweeping new space vision
for NASA that aims to send humans to visit a nearby asteroid and aim for Mars in
the 2030s. A heavy-lift rocket design ? vital for any interplanetary missions ?
would be selected by 2015, Obama said.
Buzz Aldrin, Apollo 11 lunar module pilot and Armstrong's
fellow moonwalker, supports the plan. But Armstrong, Cernan and many lawmakers
? among others ? have spoken out against its shift away from the moon and the
Constellation, which NASA has spent more than $9 billion on since it began in
2004.
Armstrong warned senators last week that the looming gap
between the retirement of NASA's shuttle's this year and the rise of new
commercial spacecraft which NASA would seek out for flying astronaut risks
ceding U.S. dominance in human spaceflight over to other countries. "Other
nations will surely step in where we have faltered," he said.
But Schweickart said a radical change is needed if the United
States is to make any progress.
?Our
current situation is akin to being on a dead end road,? he noted in his letter to
Senator Rockefeller.
?Instead
of being on a path toward the goal we all seek, i.e. to regain our leadership
position in human space exploration, we must recognize that we are (and have
been) on a path to nowhere. We are confronted with arguments to ignore the
clear signs of this sad situation and even encouraged to accelerate along this
futile path,? Schweickart said.
Schweickart
observes that the alternative to this is support for President Obama?s
proposed space agenda.
From
the former astronaut?s viewpoint, the Obama plan ?recognizes and eliminates the
waste of precious resources in the current program and heads us in a productive
direction toward our desired destination. In other words, when you recognize
you are on a dead end road, stop, turn around, and head in a direction more
useful to your goal.?
While
Armstrong found utility in a return to the moon, as he expressed
during his recent Senate testimony, that view is not supported by Schweickart.
?Why,
after 60 years, should
we be devoting incredible resources and effort to going back to the Moon
instead of to a challenging, pioneering new goal?? he said. "No one
is comfortable with the fact that we?ve gotten so far down the road on the
Constellation program before realizing the depth of the hole we?re in. ?When in
a hole? as the saying goes, first stop digging!?
The
right answer, according to Schweickart, is to ?stop, turn around, and figure
out the best new path to regain our leadership in human spaceflight? and toward
our agreed long term goal of the human exploration of Mars.?
That new path begins with the intermediate goal of to sending
astronauts on a mission into deep space, to a near-Earth asteroid, he added.
Intermediate
Mars trajectory
In Schweickart?s view, sending astronauts to explore an
asteroid should actually be less expensive than a return to the moon?s surface.
?This
is therefore, both an imaginative, new, and logical goal, and a natural step in
developing the capability for the human exploration
of Mars.
Furthermore the public interest and support for U.S. astronauts exploring
an asteroid, a new and very different ?world?, would be strong, Schweickart
said.
As a well-versed advocate of dealing with Earth-threatening
asteroids through his Association of Space Explorers affiliation, United
Nations position papers, as well as the B612 Foundation ?a group dedicated to
thwarting hazardous objects to our planet ? Schweickart points out that space
rocks occasionally threaten life on Earth as the result of an impact.
Furthermore, Schweickart suggests, they are fascinating
scientific objects, and they contain -- relative to the moon?s surface - a
wealth of valuable resources which may one day minimize the cost of space
operations.
Shift in launch services
In a related space matter, as addressed in last week?s Senate
hearing, Schweickart said that without a commitment to a NASA shift in
acquisition of launch services, the space agency and the U.S. Government ?will
be locked into developing and providing well understood transportation services
which should rightly be relinquished to private enterprise.?
Schweickart said that ?NASA should, as proposed by the new
space program, continue to encourage and assist U.S. enterprise in meeting the
performance and safety requirements inherent in flying both cargo and people to
low Earth orbit without absorbing all of the cost. This cooperative effort
would both minimize the existing gap and bring into being an exciting, new US
industrial capability, replete with industrial innovation and job creation.?
However, Schweickart does concede that the endeavor ? as
critics have pointed out ? is a risky one.
?Of course it?s risky. All space activity is risky. But
wisely accepting and managing this risk will ultimately lead to a new and
exciting U.S. business capability which will be the envy of the world,"
Schweickart said. "The alternative is for NASA to continue to divert its
precious human and economic capital to a challenging but very well understood
transportation service rather than toward pioneering new and more advanced
technology.?
- Gallery
- Neil Armstrong on the Moon
- Most
Memorable NASA Missions, Back
to the Moon
- Neil
Armstrong: Obama's New Space Plan 'Poorly Advised'
Leonard
David has been reporting on the space industry for more than five decades. He
is past editor-in-chief of the National Space Society's Ad Astra and Space World
magazines and has written for SPACE.com since 1999.









