Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!unmvax!uokmax!rwmurphr
From: rwmurphr@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Robert W Murphree)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Access to Space
Message-ID: <1991Jun18.224054.18744@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu>
Date: 18 Jun 91 22:40:54 GMT
References: <1991Jun8.071748.28566@sequent.com> <2980@ke4zv.UUCP> <1991Jun17.152849.11430@sequent.com> <1991Jun17.165036.6816@iti.org>
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
Lines: 26

aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>In article <1991Jun17.152849.11430@sequent.com> szabo@sequent.com writes:

>>We could also have a thriving space exploration 
>>and science program if the greedy astronaut programs were not soaking
>>up the bulk of the funds.  

>In the short run, yes. In the long run we are far better off building the
>infrastructure. Doing so wold reduce costs to LEO and permit a lot more
>to be done. Eventually we would get to the point where PhD students could
>send their own probes out. That will produce far more results in the long
>run than your short term approach.

>>The Europeans have quite substantial access to space via Ariane and Giotto,
>>et. al., with astronauts nowhere  in sight.

>And yet they still feel the need to build Hermes so they can have a manned
>program. In fact, ALL the spacefaring nations either have or are building
>manned systems at great expense. Perhaps they know something?

Actually, James Oberg once talked on macneil leher report about the soviet  
buran shuttle.  He said that basically it was a make work project for the
soviet space agencies involved.  What other nations know is that basically 
there is great prestige to manned space and less for unmanned.  But I don't
think there is any real use for shuttles except to make nasa video clips.