Many visions for our future in space have been submitted in the Government and academic proposals (from NASA and other organizations), business plans of the companies (such as Bigelow Aerospace) and, of course, science fiction (which 2001: A Space Odyssey is a famous example). There are plenty of visions, but having all of them catch up to the point of obtaining the support necessary for successful implementation is a challenge. Some visions were very grand, in the hope that gathered the necessary support, while other more modest, in the hope, adequate support would be easier to get. So far, none of the visions for large usage of space (in particular, human presence of low Earth orbit) have reached the required support. A good question is: why have on none of these visions for space caught? A related question is: why should we implement all space-vision?
In March 2011 Buzz Aldrin (the second person the Moon) and joined Stephen Hawking (physicist and author), a unified space vision continue to expand of our presence in the area "the perpetuation of the species with a timetable to ensure increasingly ambitious missions" to promote, but with the help of the current technology missiles that comprehensive development programs are not required.[1] An alternative vision, (former Director of Johnson Space Center) and others, presented in a report 2009 by George Abbey advisable, the NASA on energy and environmental concerns.[2] These efforts strive to develop a compelling vision to get the necessary support. It is clear that they still not quite successfully in the process.
The visions presented tend to deal, as we go could to do the work for the vision, cursory attention to addressing why we want to achieve the vision. Speaking as an engineer, this is understandable when you consider that most of the visions of engineers designed and we want to find out, how to do things, to determine how a vision may be the most fun is part of. While determining how is a necessary part of the implementation of a vision and show that it is possible, without a clear statement of why it is important and what concerns are covered by this vision and how it visions are better than other them, it becomes difficult to support required to achieve the vision to acquire. This, I believe, is the heart of the matter. Consider the Apollo program and the "space race" between the United States and the Soviet Union. The motivation was klar-- the threat Kennedy felt by the USA and President a long speech put his proposal at the end of Congress about national security. The vision was to definitively show that the United States had more features than the USSR. So, Apollo was a generally felt concern, and did so in a way that avoided a direct conflict, a real possibility at the time. Those who suggest that a new space race-this time perhaps with China or risk of an asteroid impact the basis for a new vision for space should attempt to use the same basic motivation, who was successful in the Apollo program, fear of the threat of environmental damage. During Apollo successfully on this motivation appointed, a serious disadvantage was also revealed, namely, ended the motivation with our success. In other words, fear can be a successful motivation for short-term performance. But proponents want to space long-term, continuous development of the space and this is, as we can reach the largest use so a vision based is required on an other motivation. The task of finding clarity for such a vision we see us.
If for space exploration, introduced in 2004 as part of the Shuttle Columbia accident a year earlier it is President Bush his vision it is the open on a theme: "the desire to explore and understand", bring "tangible benefits, to improve our lives in countless ways."[3] This is much more supported a long-term vision, but as the needed support proved difficult.
There is another factor, of a framework for the Apollo program that seems to be such successful implementation of crucial importance. Kennedy's phrase, that in the space "deserves the best of humanity and the opportunity for peaceful cooperation never again can progress" expressed a higher purpose. The thrust (pun intended) of the programme was to peaceful cooperative activities (even if in a competitive race"") aligned and this higher purpose guided our actions, including the last Apollo mission, with a Soyuz spacecraft of the Soviet Union to join. Four decades after Apollo 11 landed on the Moon is, how much for peaceful cooperation to. While current topics can motivate, helps a clearly understood cause higher purpose to focus and our efforts. This is canceled in the survival of the space station program, which was almost by the Congress in 1993, survived with the inclusion of Russia as a partner. The higher purpose was to promote the peaceful interaction with Russia after the end of the cold war.
So, what can we learn from all this? For the greatest chance of success for companies in the space of a long-term, continuous support must the vision clearly large felt concern of the public, in respect meet, to offer no advantage other approaches. The motivation for the vision needs to promote long-term efforts, and the vision include a higher purpose, which results in our actions and calls us to give our best. A desirable higher purpose for a view of the space remains peaceful international cooperation development, although other purposes also well suited to our efforts, but to do the cooperation can result what? Public concerns, of an appropriate basis and approaches to international cooperation, which could allow most progress may be handled in the next article of this series.
[1] Wall, Mike, "Stephen Hawking and Buzz Aldrin join forces for space exploration," space.com, 8 March 2011, http://www.space.com/11071-stephen-hawking-aldrin-space-exploration.html
[2] Abbey, George, Neal lane and John Muratore "NASA maximize potential in flight and on the ground of Europe: recommendations for the next administration," James A. Baker III Institute for public policy, Rice University, Texas, 20 January 2009.
[3] Smith, Marcia S., "space exploration: overview of President Bush's"vision for space exploration"and key issues Congress," CRS report for Congress, order code RS21720, December 2004.
This article is based on exceeding the threshold: promotion into space towards the Earth by Paul O. Wieland, PE. Threshold 2020 press, 2010, ISBN 978-0-9825127-1-5, the 2011 independent publisher IPPY Book Award gold medal winner in the category of science. Go for more information about http://www.threshold2020.com/ or write to contactus@threshold2020.com.
Paul Wieland is a professional engineer for NASA from 1983 to 2005 on programs such as Spacelab-3, the Hubble Space Telescope, space shuttle Challenger accident investigation and development of the international space station worked. He is to speak, how their activities help to us to ensure a sustainable future.
