Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site decwrl.DEC.COM Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-euclid!paulhus From: paulhus@euclid.DEC (N. CHRIS PAULHUS DTN 223-6871 MLO8-3/T13) Newsgroups: net.columbia Subject: some thoughts Message-ID: <1620@decwrl.DEC.COM> Date: Tue, 11-Mar-86 12:57:40 EST Article-I.D.: decwrl.1620 Posted: Tue Mar 11 12:57:40 1986 Date-Received: Thu, 13-Mar-86 07:59:42 EST Sender: daemon@decwrl.DEC.COM Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Lines: 83 "If you never have a dream, you never have a dream come true." - J. Cricket The dream IS alive. First, a big Thank You to Kurt Reisler for getting these notes some visibility in high places. I hope you edited them a bit - there's a discouraging amount of nit-picking, ego boosting, immature junk that makes reading these submissions a chore at times. But the gems of rational, informed comment and conjecture make it worth while. (Who was it that stunned a SF com with a GOH speech that started: "90% of Science Fiction is junk." And then redeemed himself by continuing: "90% of everything is junk." I hope the following sentiments can be included in the next submission to Senator Garn's office. I was one of the ones who wept for joy that Christmas Eve when men first orbited the moon. As I was one of those who died a little bit when the Apollo fire killed 3 of our finest, and on that cold Tuesday this January. I honestly don't think our elected representatives understand the depth of attachment that the American public has with our space program. They should ponder the reason that the National Air and Space Museum is the most popular attraction in D. C. Watch the people there sometimes. It's like they have been granted admission to a shrine. These people really care. But, unlike many interests, they have not made their voices heard. A little of it has surfaced in the last month - a silver lining for a very grey cloud. My rational reasons for supporting the space program are two: I am concerned about the survival of the human race. Never before have we had the power to destroy all of mankind by war, either with nuclear weapons and their special winter, or with biological terror. We are skating on such thin ice right now, with all our eggs in one basket. The science fiction community has produced many scenarios showing how we could loose the race to get mankind a toehold off earth, and many showing how we can just make it by establishing colonies in orbit, on the moon, and elsewhere. I really, really believe that this should be of concern to forward-thinking people world wide. The second reason for support is more a gut feeling, nowhere as strong - it is mankind's nature to push the boundaries of our reach to greater limits. We have evolved such that the conquerors and pioneers have survived to breed and expand. To be content with what we have or what we can do is to deny something basic that makes us human. But, if this was the only reason for going into space, I would agree that we had an agenda here on earth to take care of first. But I have a strong feeling that we really are in a race, that a clock is ticking. Many will agree that in many earth-related ways, our quality of life has peaked (I've often heard that about 1970 was the high point) and that resources are getting scarce and expensive at a rapid rate as we go after the lower grade ores, the less productive oilfields, the next increment of arid land that we must irrigate. We must start looking to off-earth sources for resources if we are to maintain the quality of human life. Our technology improvements will cause the overall quality of life to improve for a while, but the time of reckoning is probably not too many generations away. Too soon we will not be able to afford to get to space. We must do it now. I am surprised at how shocked the public is at the Shuttle loss. Anyone with experience with new aerospace systems knows that there are risks, there will be losses. Years ago, many argued for the funding for the fifth shuttle with the presumption that at least one orbiter would be somehow rendered un-flyable. (But oh God, why did it have to happen in this manner, on this flight, with Christa aboard?) (With the revelations of safety concerns over the past, I'm rather ticked at NASA management for allowing civilians aboard, knowing what they knew.) But, as General Yeager says, these things happen. Our task is now to make sure it doesn't happen again. The question of engineer's responsibility disturbs me. As a registered P.E., I have accepted some strong responsibility to the public. (Thankfully, I work in a non-life threatening area [noise control] and do not have to face critical decisions.) But I wonder how I would have done in the Morton-Thiokol engineers' place. At what % risk assessment do you go over your boss's head, outside of proper channels? When someone 'superior' to you questions your judgment, how confident of yourself do you become? At DEC in the engineering community where I consult, there is a guide: "Do what is right." that I have seen turn a can of worms into a simple (but often costly) decision. I ended up in consulting, on my own, after my previous employer had enough of my telling him what I would and would not do. And so I overhauled VW engines for 3 years in my basement before my business became viable. I think, if I were in the M-T engineers' place, I would have done the right thing. I don't know. N. Chris Paulhus I am concerned about the future, because that is where I am going to live.