Whereas the Russians had their limited resources in competition with each other, America had NASA to keep our resources aligned in a cooperative effort. In doing so NASA director James Webb had control over a huge piece of the U.S. economy (estimates range from 6%-20% depending on the definition of control). Regardless of how you define it NASA became a huge industrial machine. It was a typical big government program. It had to be to accomplish the political and scientific goals of landing a man on the moon by the end of 1969 (Kennedy's goal). Once Kennedy was martyred by assassination, his goal took on an almost religious zeal in America. I know, I was one of its most dedicated followers. I was born in Florida in 1961 and grew up in the midst of the space age's "Go Fever". My father's best friend was an engineer at Kennedy Space Center (the cape). The moon was the ultimate brass ring.
Little did a trusting America realize that the NASA brass had another not so visible agenda. Not an evil one by any means but one that dealt with the preservation of the space industry after the accomplishment of NASA's legal mandate. That hidden agenda was to protect NASA's piece of the taxpayer pie and insure future work for the contractor's. NASA leadership had made sure to spread the contracts around the country and no congressman wanted lay-offs in his district. There were of course still layoffs after Apollo ended. According to an interview with Apollo 17 mission commander Gene Cernan many of the Grumman engineers got their pink slips as soon as Apollo 17 lifted off the pad. Jerry Pournelle, author of "Lucifer's Hammer", has been a critic of the shuttle program for reasons that go beyond the technical merits or demerits. He rightly observed that the STS program kept the space industry infrastructure intact at the expense of other programs. Ironically it did it under the guise of cheaper access to space whereas in reality the STS was anything but cheap. One example he noted was the absurdity of reusing solid rocket boosters (SRBs) and of building them in sections to begin with. They were made in sections (which later helped cause the Challenger disaster) because of the need to transport them by rail from Utah (where the manufacturer was located). They should have been made as a single, solid piece in one of many other states closer to the cape but the political clout of the era kept the contract in Utah. BOOM!
The shuttle engines were reworked Apollo J-2 engines (from the Saturn V second stage). Although they have been upgraded and reworked they are not new technology and did little to advance the state of the art. Using them did insure that a lot of people kept their jobs though (again, not evil but also not NASA's mandate). Although there is a sound logic in using what you know works it has the side effect of stifling progress.
NASA spent the bulk of the space budget keeping the existing platform going at the cost of designing something better. The Orion project, which should have been simple by comparison, has turned into a $3.9 billion nightmare. It's original mission of going to the moon on Constellation has been scrapped and many critics consider it too complex for the relatively simple task of being a taxicab to the ISS but it has kept a lot of the space industry employed.....for now.
Meanwhile SpaceX Corp has developed the Dragon, a commercial space vehicle under NASA's much less expensive COTS program (Commercial Orbital Transportation Services). In 2008, NASA announced the selection of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 launch vehicle and Dragon spacecraft to resupply the International Space Station (ISS). The $1.6 billion contract represents at least of 12 flights (with options on missions for a total contract value of up to $3.1 billion). That is less than the money spent just to get Orion partially built.
To help keep perspective, each shuttle launch was running about $1.6 billion. Although the Dragon lacks many of the shuttles capabilities the cost saving and technological advancements it represents are proof positive that we are finally past the Shuttle era and on a truly commercially viable future in space.
No comments:
Post a Comment