Science and Space

space and astronomy articles.

Excerpts what NASA administrator Michael Griffin said to USA Today

Q: What would you tell taxpayers is the return on their investment(on space exploration)?

A: Today, we have communications, navigation, weather satellites. GPS (Global Positioning System) is in new cars of a certain price range. Everybody expects to see worldwide coverage of news all the time by satellite. And, when we talk about hurricanes, the pictures and the knowledge of when they are coming and where come from satellites. So, the unmanned portion of our space program justifies itself.

Q: Still, reaction to a return to the moon has been largely one of "been there, done that." Why not skip the moon and go to Mars?

A: Two reasons. The moon is important in its own right. The nature and origin of the solar system and the evolution of the planets, the formation of the Earth/moon system, is not a settled issue. Those are interesting scientific questions, and the moon can help us answer them. And I envision the moon being utilized as a source of resources for space activity.

Q: Wasn’t the purpose of the space shuttle program to lower launch costs?

A: Yes, and it didn’t happen. The shuttle is very expensive. It is a demanding technology. It’s our goal to make (the new vehicle) substantially cheaper than the shuttle.

Q: In retrospect, was the shuttle program a mistake?

A: My opinion is that it was. It was a design that was aggressive and just barely possible. We didn’t make the investment. Since we do not today have huge budgets, one of our goals is to focus on getting people in and out of space by dealing with the first 100 miles up and down — but do it in a simple, straightforward way. The shuttle was a valiant effort, but it is expensive to maintain and it is not logistically reliable. President Bush’s decision to retire it in 2010 is the right decision.

Q: Why wait until 2010?

To get out of that is possible, but you want to phase out of it in a graceful, disciplined, orderly way. We’ve got international partner commitments to build the space station with 17 nations. The shuttle is the best tool to do that.

Q: Was the space station a mistake?

A: I would not have built the space station. We are now trying to change the path while doing as little damage as we can. It cannot be done instantaneously. It’s a large boat with a small rudder.

Q: In returning to the moon and going to Mars, we will be sending the bill for most of this to our children and grandchildren. How do we justify that?

A: Whatever portion of the deficit you assign to NASA, we are a minute part of the whole thing. The nation has many needs. But any investment portfolio — and NASA is an investment for the future — spends most of its bulk on "high-reliability" things. It spends a little on high risk/high return. Being that the frontier of humanity is a high risk/high return venture, you should put in a little. We’re putting seven-tenths of a percent of the budget into it. You can wipe out that whole seven-tenths of a percent, including all of the utilitarian functions of the space program, and you wouldn’t notice it in the third decimal place in the budget.

posted by: kyawoo at 10:44 | link | comments (1) |
space science

Comments:

#1  14 October 2005 - 06:26

 

i read interesting your blog, and i invites you to visit mine at http://catmangirona.blogspot.com

Anonymous

Comments: