Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!husc6!think!craig From: craig@think.UUCP Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space Subject: Things aint so bad Message-ID: <7973@think.UUCP> Date: Mon, 31-Aug-87 13:49:26 EDT Article-I.D.: think.7973 Posted: Mon Aug 31 13:49:26 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 2-Sep-87 00:39:17 EDT References: <13312@amdahl.amdahl.com> Sender: news@think.UUCP Reply-To: craig@mneme.UUCP (Craig Stanfill) Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge, MA Lines: 54 Xref: linus sci.space.shuttle:292 sci.space:2681 Bashing the U.S. space program seems to be very much in vogue these days. Our long-term position, it has been claimed, has badly deteriorated, this being a result of short-sighted policy making. I beg to disagree. The problems in our current space program are not the result of short-sightedness so much as long-sightedness on the part of NASA coupled with blindness on the part of Congress; our problems are not so much long-term as short-term. What do I mean? Even granting its problems, we DO have the shuttle; no-one else presently has anything nearly as zippy. This is an important long-term asset. The problem is that it is not as good in the short-term as had been billed; NASA oversold the STS as the sole solution to our near-term orbital needs. This led to the disasterous policy of scrapping our expendible launch capability. I speculate that this happened because of NASA's judgement that, a re-usable space transport is, in the long term, essential. The problem came about when NASA's vision came into collision with Congress's blindness with respect to funding the space program; to get the shuttle at all, they had to oversell it. This also led to the Challenger accident; NASA got out onto a limb in overselling the shuttle initially; they were under intense pressure to deliver on their promises. So, when technical problems kept causing schedule slip, NASA got sloppy. So where are we left? We have some serious short-term (the next 5 years) problems; U.S. space activity has ground to a halt, and will not recover for a while. However, recovery is certain, provided sufficient money is forthcoming. Come on now, we know how to build expendable lift vehicles; there is no fundamental problem stamping out more Titans and designing a new heavy-lift vehicle. A few years and a few billion dollars, and our short-term problems will be solved. The real long-term problem is Congress: they have to realize that space is the growth industry of the 21'st century; that we have certain short term needs, but that if they don't provide enough money to solve both short-term and long-term problems, one or the other will suffer. Fortunately (or we would be in fundamentally bigger trouble than we are now), NASA succeeded (in the 1970's) in keeping the focus on the long term problems with the Shuttle program. If congress forces NASA to focus on our short-term problems, but does not provide sufficient money to attack both the short-term and long-term, we are doomed to lose, and all our 30-year old space program will have done is to have created yet another industry for the Japanese to come in and kick our butts in.