Will the New USA Space Strategy Launch the Next Google? Focus Now on Tech Innovation & New Ventures

“Knowledge of the universe bestows awesome power. To understand the secrets of atoms and galaxies is to become like gods.”

~W.J. Kaufmann III, Galaxies and Quasars 

On July 20, 1968 Apollo 8 landed on the moon, barely 22 years after mankind had first placed a man- made object in orbit. Unfortunately, the Moon landings were short lived; in December 1972, the Apollo 16 mission was the last time that humans walked the face of the moon. Since Apollo 16, we have moved on to the International Space Station (ISS), sending satellites to other Jupiter, Saturn and beyond, robots to rove on Mars, and Voyager probes that have left our Solar System.

The Obama administration's cancellation of Constellation Program recognized that we focused too much of our effort and funding on just getting to the Moon, neglecting investments in the key technologies that would be required to go beyond and possibly launch a space-age generation of Googles and innovations that could transform the US economy, creating new high-tech jobs and spin off other new businesses that will seek to take advantage of affordable access to space.

Commercial launch vehicles have for years carried all U.S. military and commercial – and most NASA – satellites to orbit. Now, as 50 years ago when we upgraded existing rockets for the Gemini program, NASA will set standards and processes to ensure that these commercially built and operated crew vehicles are safe. These vehicles will fulfill a critical NASA need, spur industrial innovation, and free up NASA to do the bold, forward-leaning work that that need to explore beyond Earth.

The new budget provides new investments in three new technology development programs to expand the capabilities of future explorers far beyond what we have today. The first program, funded at $7.8 billion over five years, will invent and demonstrate large-scale, new and novel approaches to spaceflight such as in-orbit fuel depots and rendezvous and docking technologies, and closed-loop life support systems so that our future robotic and human exploration missions are both highly capable and more affordable.

At $3.1 billion over five years, an aggressive, new heavy lift research and development program will focus on development of new engines, propellants, materials and combustion processes, leading to innovative ways of accessing space to go beyond low Earth orbit. This will increase our capabilities and significantly lower operations costs – with the clear goal of taking us farther and faster into space. And the budget also provides $4.9 billion over 5 years for a broad space technology program, including investments in very early stage and game-changing approaches, cross-cutting technologies such as communications, sensors and robotics. 

Until The first X-Prize competition changed the standing of private companies’ vs. government, all major advances in space technology have been directed and funded by national governments.  Its challenge was for a private industry to develop a reusable spacecraft. “On October 4, 2004 SpaceShipOne rocketed into history, becoming the first private manned spacecraft to exceed 328,000 feet twice within the span of a 14 day period signaling a seminal event -the shift to space exploration as an entrepreneurial venture.

SpaceShipOne, bankrolled by Microsoft’s co-founder, Paul Allen, was produced by a partnership between the Virgin Group of Companies and Scaled Composites, showing that private industries can and should develop space technologies free from government funding and oversight. Virgin Galactic is now creating a  private spaceport in New Mexico -offering private individuals to purchase a ticket to travel into space.

Objects today that we may think of as ordinary and not very “high-tech” could most likely be traced back to a breakthrough in space technology -the result of "The Hidden Revolution," after a book by author Jim Schefter who wrote: “From foam padding adapted for football helmets to flexible tires on the Apollo 14 pull-cart that didn't turn rock hard in frigid temperatures incorporated into winter radial car tires."

The next space race may not between competing nations, but between governments and the private industries.

The knowledge we'll gain in biology, chemistry, medicine, materials research, and just about every aspect of modern life will make awesome gains.

Posted by Casey Kazan.

Comments

[Andman Island]

Nice post.

[Neal Wiser]

It's bad enough when you make a mistake in your opening paragraph, but you made 3(!) big ones in your first two sentences. First Moon landing was in 1969 (NOT 1968) by Apollo 11 (NOT Apollo 8). And the last landing was Apollo 17, NOT Apollo 16.

I can understand not knowing Apollo 17, but not knowing the year or mission number of the first Moon landing is inexcusable for a science writer writing about the space program, much less someone with any education. Really, really bad.

[James]

@Neal : those mistakes are, as you say, inexcusable. Maybe they are besides the point though. This is the second article, by my count, where the main theme is spinning this dismal plan for NASA. Hundreds of billions to bail out Unions, and Goldman Sachs (who mostly make up this admin's financial team), and foreign countries via AIG, yet a piddling increase in NASA's budget. Make no mistake this is not the grand scheme for a new, better, focused NASA the writers want you to believe. It is the gutting of NASA. Period.

[Neal Wiser]

Hi James, Unfortunately, I tend to agree with you. Re; the article, I was just annoyed that someone who should know better made such careless errors.

[Jim Scotti]

Uh, 4 errors in the first paragraph - it was less than 12 years after Sputnik, not 22 years.....

[me]

yeah apollo 17 was the last mission that man walked on the moon.... come on, I'm starting to doubt how valid shit really is on this site.

[EvilCosmicMonkeyfrom Knoxville]

" me ": I saw the " 1968 " error right away, but went back to see the Apollo 8 mistake. They need a FACT - CHECKER on this blog that has a history background. This tendency to present erroneous information as valid information with the occasional explosion of typographical errors is getting rather old.

As to the " New USA Space Strategy ", our new CiC is cutting NASA's budget very close to the bone, I understand President Obama is cutting funding for the Constellation Moon / Mars Initiative. This MAY be a good thing, because a. ) Some experts in the aerospace field have said that the Orion spacecraft wasn't really all that safe - & we need to move beyond rockets, really - and b. ) the field could be opened to entepreneurs like Richard Branson & Virgin Aerospace. The reduction in force could send more aerospace workers into the private sector. Not a bad thing, really.

[Tiffany jewellery]

I can understand not knowing Apollo 17, but not knowing the year or mission number of the first Moon landing is inexcusable for a science writer writing about the space program, much less someone with any education. Really, really bad.