New Space Age?

Question

In the book LOST IN SPACE (The Fall of NASA and the Dream of a New Space Age) Greg Klerkx compares the early days of aviation and air travel, the U.S. governments roll in it's developement, with NASA and the dreams of space travel.
.
Only 50 years seperates the Wright brothers from intercontinental passenger jet travel.
.
In the 50 years since Sputnik and the dawn of the space age space travel is still only for the chosen few millionaires and astonauts under the guise of "doing good science".
.
In the book, the authors contention is that NASA has let the public down in an effort to justify it's own continued existance.
.
Agree or Disagree? and any thoughts on the subject.
.

Answer 1

Well, personally I think that the first space travel we did was, in a way, rather premature. It was done partly for the sensationalism, as a publicity stunt, by the two major world powers to show off to each other during the Cold War. The equipment used during those early missions was rather primitive, and they only used it because they had to give a big demonstration of some kind and it was the only stuff they had available. I think in a more peaceful society, technology and industry would have advanced farther before the first major spaceflights than they did.

That said, in more recent times we definitely have been let down. The fall of the Soviet Union left the United States as the definitive leader in terms of space exploration technology and infrastructure. The United States was also the richest country on Earth, and had the most to spend on space travel. So, in order to make sure no one else had access to space, they had to keep the technology as expensive as possible, so that they remained the only country that could afford it. Yes, you read that correctly: They deliberately avoided researching or building anything that could make space travel 'too' cheap. And they were successful; until recently, they and Russia remained the only countries that managed to send anyone into space.

Then, recently, we've seen the rise of China as a new space power, with India scheduled to come up in the near future. And during the same period, we've seen new development in space travel by the United States on a scale that hasn't been seen in decades. The later part of the 1990s was considered the worst time for NASA, with the tightest budgets and lowest rate of missions. And then it was just a few years later that China launched their first astronaut, and around the same time that a private company launcher THEIR first astronaut. Coincidence? Hardly. The depressing truth is, NASA was never designed for space exploration. It was designed for politics. Space exploration was never a goal, space never the 'next frontier'. The government only operated up there to the extent that it could impress other governments down here.

Answer 2

"...Only 50 years seperates the Wright brothers from intercontinental passenger jet travel..."

Did the author mention that the quantum leap from the Wright Brothers to jet travel involved many other nations in the development and technical progress of the airplane? Such is not the case with space travel. For several decades it was mostly just the US and USSR doing any significant work. That's changing pretty rapidly now, with the French, Japanese, et. al. getting with the program in a big way.

Blaming NASA for the relatively slow progress in space flight is a misdirected indictment. Fifty years ago it was a Herculean struggle just to get a shiny grapefruit called Sputnik into space, but only 12 years after that we put two men on the surface of the moon. Today we put men into space for extended periods almost routinely, Earth is surrounded by a dense shell of aritificial satellites, a few spacecraft have actually left our solar system and are now in interstellar space, we can hit a target several billion miles away with a tiny spacecraft, and peer at the surface of Mars from inches away with a microscope.

All in all I'd say Greg Klerkx has some kind of axe to grind or some other agenda and has put his own spin on "Lost in Space"

Answer 3

I have some qualifications for an opinion, I think. I'm 61 years old and I saw Sputnik (actually, it was the third stage of the Sputnik rocket that was visible in the night sky. Sputnik itself was too small to see.)

My father got into the "space race" early, at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California (1960), and I saw some of the early rocket launches. (Really cool, really loud!)

But after the race to the moon, what else was there to do? Not much. It's pure economics. NASA always has to keep justifying its existence.

Answer 4

Eric, Lost In Space is science fiction. The reason regular Joes like you & me can't go yet is because Space travel is not pratical. It still costs several millions of dollars for just one mission. Is the average person ready to spend months in training to learn how to put on & take off a space suit? Not to mention reherse what to do in an emergency? It doesn't take much for something to go wrong up there. & when it does, 98% of the time it'll be life threatining.

Answer 5

Only Wright brothers? Remember Alberto Santos Dumont. Clear skies, friends. And a good look from Brasil.

Answer 6

Neither one is genuinely greater perfect or worse than the different. the perception device formed interior the Bronze Age is greater perfect for the Bronze Age yet worse for the area Age, and vice-versa. perception structures are all relative and easily may be judged as to how nicely they labored for the time and stipulations wherein they are utilized.

Answer 7

Hey Eric, and good to see you again here on Y!A!
I haven't read the book yet, but I will now that I've had the interest sparked!
Drop email when you get the chance!
Clear Skies... Ad Astra!
B