Xref: utzoo sci.space:31843 sci.astro:13891 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!sequent!muncher.sequent.com!szabo From: szabo@sequent.com Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro Subject: IGY and the dawn of the Space Age Keywords: geophysics Message-ID: <1991Jun17.235158.16273@sequent.com> Date: 17 Jun 91 23:51:58 GMT References: <1991Jun7.210944.22123@sequent.com> <30916@hydra.gatech.EDU> <140789@unix.cis.pitt.edu> Sender: news@sequent.com (News on Muncher) Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc. Lines: 120 In article <140789@unix.cis.pitt.edu> suzanne@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Suzanne Traub-Metlay) writes: >Actually, the "space race" began even earlier -- Perhaps some folks missed the point. Prior to 1958, over 90% of the government money spent on rocketry was for automated weapons, particularly IRBM's and ICBM's. Less than 10% was spent on rockets for space exploration and their payloads (there was a low-key suborbital research program after 1949). This 10% included Explorer, Sputnik and other IGY satellites themselves; they were done on a shoestring as a result of efforts by scientists and space explorers much like those in today's AGU. Among these was one of the greatest space explorers of them all, James Van Allen, who discovered and studied the Van Allen radiation belts around the Earth and several other planets, among other unprecedented accomplishments. Due to Sputnik there was a large scare, resulting in a status race to see who could launch the largest payloads the farthest. The U.S. launched nearly 2 dozen automated satellites before launching John Glenn into orbit in 1961. At this point, the bulk of NASA funding was for these automated programs. As the decade progresed these used technology developed for Earth-orbit automated exploration to venture deeper into space, resulting in automated planetary exploration (eg Mariners, Veneras, Pioneers, etc.) Robots looked at Venus, Mars, and Mercury before astronauts circled the Moon, and at a fraction of the cost. The first self-sufficient space industry, satellite communications, was started at this time. The first company to build a GEO satcom, Hughes, did so over the objections of NASA planners, who were trying to force the industry to go towards a fleet of satellites in LEO. This would have eliminated the small-scale users with simple antennae that provide the bulk of the current market's revenues. Fortuneately, the people with their own money invested at Hughes and Comsat ignored the NASA planners and put the satellites in GEO. Through most of the 1960's, about the same (large) amount of money was spent on civilian space and military long-range missiles and space efforts, due to the IGY satellite scare. As the decade progressed, more money was funnelled into Apollo. This was the first "slaughter of the innocents", as the Mariner and Pioneer programs were cut back, and Grand Tour cancelled. As Gemini started flying and Apollo was reaching flight readiness the U.S. public started turning against what they perceived as wasteful astronaut programs. After 1965 NASA funding started to decrease. After the first Moon flights in 1968 and 1969 the funding decreased sharply. The largest manned program of them all proved to be a severe drag on NASA's efforts to obtain funding. Worse, as described the NASA leadership focused its efforts on Apollo by cancelling automated solar system exploration projects. Meanwhile, fortuneately, the DoD realized that space stations and astronauts were far less useful than automated spy satellites, and cancelled the Manned Orbiting Laboratory. NASA also learned the lesson for a while -- in between the Apollo and Shuttle funding peaks, the Viking and Voyager projects managed to get funded. Voyager was a cut-down Grand Tour. The NASA leadership officially told the Voyager crew not to go beyond Saturn. Luckily, they disobeyed. On a shoestring, the capability to flexibly teleoperate Voyager was designed in, so that the instructions for flying towards, and doing exploration at, Uranus and Neptune could be uploaded and executed at a later date. The results of these missions, especially Voyager, were dramatic and unprecedented. They received overwhelming support from the American public. U.S. prestige was enhanced. We remain the only country that has ever explored the gas giant planets and their moons. We remain the only country that has sampled Mars, photographed it in detailed color, and tracked its weather. The two Voyager spacecraft cost less than a tenth of one Apollo flight. But soon, the astronaut crowd was at it again. To save NASA, the convential wisdom went, it needed a "focus". Despite the funding drops in reaction to Apollo, it was decided that this would be yet another astronaut program. But they didn't stop at developing a new launcher; they needed to force a monopoly. The NASA leadership caused severe damage by cancelling or attempting to cancel the existing automated launchers. Part of the strategy was making gross underestimates of Shuttle costs. It went from a $100/lb. promise in 1970 to the $82,000/lb. it costs today. Central planning won out over free competition. As predicted by RAND and others, NASA also cannibilized its own space exploration efforts, cancelling a once-in-a-lifetime chance to explore Comet Hally, and violating international agreements by cancelling the U.S. half of the Solar-Polar mission. Galileo and Hubble, among others, ended up severely delayed, overpriced, and handicapped by being forced onto the Shuttle. All of this destruction to fund a centralized launch industry to be dominated by astronauts. Fortuneately, two events occured in the 1980's: the rise of the European automated commercial launch service, and the Challenger disaster. For astronaut groupies, Challenger only turned heroes into martyrs, and more money went into making the Shuttle "safe". But the commercial and defense sectors reacted quickly and decisively. The Reagan Administration revived the U.S. automated launcher business by divorcing it from NASA; putting it in the private sector. The DoD started developing the automated Titan IV to launch Shuttle-sized and smaller payloads without the overhead of astronauts. Despite problems with NASA, the DoD's automated infrastructure was quite effective during this period, motivating large increases to the DoD space budget, including the ambitious SDI program to develop automated missiles and spacecraft to shoot down ICBM's. This infrastructure proved to be useful in several campains from Panama to Desert Storm. Perhaps most importantly of all, it was decisive to the START treaties to lower the numbers of nuclear weapons. Real space infrastructure was helping humans on Earth, and during this period the DoD space budget grew from a fraction of NASA's to twice NASA's. The myth that astronaut programs are needed to motivate NASA funding, and the resulting destruction caused to space science, continues to this day. The latest example is the crippling of CRAF, Cassinni, and other projects to fund the latest astronaut toy, Space Station "Freedom". Only when the U.S. space program sheds its political misconceptions and starts focusing on productive programs will we be able to move beyond the current dismal state of the public civilian program. Until we wake up to the political and economic reality of the 1990's, space science and exploration will struggle near death. -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com Embrace Change... Keep the Values... Hold Dear the Laughter... These views are my own, and do not represent any organization.