|
|
||
 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
|
Essays, Opinion, & Commentary |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
April 21, 2006 The Role of Private Enterprise in Putting Man into Space by Thomas Sullivan
I. Has NASA failed in it's quest to put man out into the cosmos? Will profit coupled with man's need to explore be the driving engine which sends man into space? Most importantly, will the United States be a leader in terms of space exploration, or will America fall by the wayside and let other countries fulfill this role? In this article, I will attempt to answer these questions. I will also provide an argument which favors an active role for private enterprise in putting true explorers into space. The United States can get back to it's foundation of innovation and exploration, but in order to so, it must follow a new course, one which is distinctly different from the path it has followed. Innovation, invention, and exploration are key components which have made America one of the greatest countries in the world. The question is this. Did most of these innovations take place within the purview of government intervention? The fact is that most innovations within the United States have taken place outside the realm of government. Think about some of the major innovations that have occurred within the American society over the past 100 years or so. Was Orville and Wilbur Wright, the inventors of the airplane, employed by the government? Of course not. Most of their research and development for the invention of the airplane took place within a small bike shop in western Dayton, Ohio, the birth place of aviation. The invention of the airplane did not take place within an extensively funded government lab. Orville and Wilbur Wright were just a couple of self-taught engineers who loved to think about how man can fly. Their invention made the world a forever smaller place. Thomas Edison, who was also born and raised in Ohio, is accredited with 1,093 patents earning him the nickname "The Wizard of Menlo Park" used his own money to build the Menlo Park research labs in New Jersey. In 1889, Thomas Edison established the Edison General Electric Company. Thomas Edison had many inventions, the most well known being the incandescent electric light, disc phonograph, and the film projector. Thomas Edison is considered one of the most prolific inventors of our time and his inventions were created within the realm of private enterprise. The invention of the personal computer came from an assortment of various inventions by many people, mostly within academia, with a major contribution from Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak tinkered in Job's garage in an area now called Silicon Valley, the southern part of the San Francisco Bay Area in northern California. Their tinkering led to the development of Apple Computers in 1976, and they helped popularize the concept of the home computer. Steve Jobs was one of the first to see the commercial potential of the GUI and mouse, and saw that these technologies were incorporated into the Apple Macintosh. The garage in which they tinkered belonged to Steve Job's parents, not the United States government. Did the seed for the invention of the personal computer germinate within a government lab? John Vincent Atanasoff is considered the actual father of the electronic computer. Atanasoff was an Associate Professor of Physics at Iowa State University in 1939 when he came up with his idea of a computer. Many other inventions would be needed in order to produce what we now recognize as a computer, but he is considered to be the one who started it all. The point is he came up with his idea within academia, and not within the purview of government intervention. The story of Bill Gates and the development of the Microsoft family of operating systems took place within private enterprise. The Windows family of operating systems is the most widely used on earth and has been a major player in bringing information technology to the developed world. The story of Henry Ford is equally impressive. Contrary to popular belief, Henry Ford did not invent the automobile. He wasn't even close. Daimler and Benz are traditionally credited with building the first cars in 1886 in Germany. Ford actually perfected the assembly line technique. This allowed for a drastic drop in production cost, bringing a rich man's toy within reach of the masses, thereby changing Western society. Henry Ford's development of the assembly line technique also took place within private enterprise, outside the purview of government. Americans are inventors, innovators, and tinkerers. Freedom of thought and exploration are woven within the fabric of our society. Whether it be the airplane, computer, or major advances in medicine, many inventions that are enjoyed by man today, had their development in the United States, outside the purview of government. Most of these innovations occurred within academia or private enterprise. The role of government is to govern the people. From Wikipedia, in its broadest sense, "govern" means the power to administrate, whether over an area of land, a set group of people, or an association. The government's role is to preserve the environment of freedom and democracy so that intellectual curiosity can flourish within this environment. The government's role is also to provide funding, and should not be in the nuts and bolts operation of putting man into space. The ingenuity of man within the realm of private enterprise and academia, has resulted in most of the technological advancements we enjoy today, and to explore space, we will need technological advancements. The cosmos will be explored by man operating from the base of private enterprise and the technology needed to explore the cosmos will be developed within that enterprise. Why is this so? NASA is an agency driven by fear of tragedy. More mishaps will decrease the probability of sufficient government funding. This cycle of fear, mishaps, and the hope for continual funding is one that seems to have no end. But mishaps are part of the business of putting explorers into space. What can better withstand the expected mishaps? A government agency or private enterprise. If a private enterprise fails, it's competitor can step in to fill the gap, and the engine of private enterprise can continue to push man into space. NASA is not a private enterprise competing within the world market place. If NASA is the only entity for space exploration and it fails, there is nothing else to fill in the gap. NASA is not what it used to be during the Apollo days. Given it's current mind set and culture, it will be difficult within this framework to send man out into the cosmos as true explorers. They have given the nuts and bolts of putting man into space to private contractors. If private contractors are actually putting man into space, then the next logical step is for companies within private enterprise to step in and meet the need for space exploration. The basic problem with current NASA contractors is that they have the same NASA mind set because they are under the dominion of NASA. There is a fear of mishaps within contractors without true competition within the market place. NASA awards contracts to the lowest bidder. But does the lowest bidder provide the highest level of safety? Once a company is awarded a contract, they remain a NASA contractor for many years and simply become an extension of NASA. NASA has become an autocratic agency with it's arms extending outward to many companies. Currently, NASA's manned space flight program can do no more then low earth orbit. Year after year of low earth orbit does not excite the American people. Astronauts today are no longer household names. An American president here and there will give a speech saying we are going to Mars. Even President Bush's January 14, 2004 speech seems to have already been forgotten by the American public. When we went to the moon this was the start of an exploration. A goal was set on May 25, 1961 by President John F. Kennedy, during a speech before a Joint Session of Congress, to reach the moon before the end of the decade. NASA kicked into high gear and achieved one of the greatest accomplishments in the history of mankind. We took the first step into space and then just stopped. Since then all of the manned space missions have never gone beyond low earth orbit, and the American public becomes bored easily. For NASA to gain the American interest and support of the Apollo days, they must send true explorers out into space. NASA wants to take such small, time consuming incremental steps that by the time comes when the really exciting work begins, the American support and interest may be eroded to the point where NASA may no longer have the financial means by which to accomplish such an endeavor. If we are going to go into the cosmos, then lets do it and stop the futile activity. A private enterprise is not a bureaucracy. If safety issues arise from qualified personnel within a bureaucracy, these issues may not resonate to the proper people within the organization. A case in point is the Challenger disaster. On January 28, 1986, just over a minute into their flight from Cape Canaveral in Florida, the Space Shuttle Challenger blew up. The knowledge of a strong potential for an O-ring failure, at low temperatures, between the segments of the solid rocket boosters of the space shuttle, existed within the bureaucracy of NASA before the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion. More specifically, this critical information in terms of probability of O-ring compromise was expressed by engineers at Morton Thiokol, the contractor for the development and production of the solid rocket boosters. This highly critical information never percolated upward from Morton Thiokol to the proper people within the NASA organization. This information was filtered out within the NASA bureaucracy. Information transfer within a bureaucracy must pass through several levels and stoppage can occur at any level due to an individual deciding that the information is not significant. Or, by the time the information reaches the right people, the degree of criticality may be gone. The information that the engineers originally wanted to express may appear less critical. In a bureaucracy, to many people make to many decisions. In February 2003, the relatively recent break up of the Space Shuttle Columbia upon reentry into the atmosphere is another example of critical information not percolating upward to the proper people within NASA. The destruction of Columbia during atmospheric reentry was due to the development of a hole in the forward section of one of the wings. This hole was caused by foam breaking off of the main fuel tank during the launch phase. The break off of foam from the main fuel tank during launch had occurred many times on previous shuttle launches, and this was known within the NASA community. It just happened that during those launches, the foam did not damage any critical structure. Eventually this problem caught up with NASA. Information pertaining to the problem of foam departure I believe was also filtered out within the NASA bureaucracy. It either appeared as non-critical to the decision makers, or it never reached the right people. In either case, certain people within the bureaucracy structure did not think foam departure was a critical issue. Did those astronauts that died know about the level of foam departure on previous flights? Sadly, we will never know the answer to this question. In private enterprise, safety issues which arise will be known by most members of the organization. These issues will not have to pass through several layers within a bureaucracy. To put it bluntly, NASA uses to many people in order to get man out into space. A government bureaucracy is not suited for exploring space. A government bureaucracy is suited for mail delivery, not space exploration. In private enterprise, which is non-bureaucratic by nature, a relatively small group of people are working toward a common goal. By nature, private enterprise is leaner, smarter, and non-monolithic. It has to be in order to compete within the market place. Information passes more easily between parts of the organization, and waste full unnecessary spending will not fly within a private enterprise. NASA depends on it's contractors to deliver a high level of safety. A private enterprise depends on itself to provide a high level of safety. The structure of a private enterprise is more suited to the endeavor of sending out explorers into space. The government should award grants to the most promising companies with the understanding that the sending out of explorers into space does indeed benefit mankind. Americans are at their best when they compete. Competition is an integral component of American society. What was the driving force that put us on the moon? It was the competition with the Russians. At the present moment in time, this type of intensive competition does not exist. Although, it does appear as if China may be a future competitor. China has already stated that they want to put a man on the moon. If China truly attempts to get a man to the moon, I believe that would be the shot in the arm NASA needs to awaken it from it's slumber. I believe most American's have the competitive mind set that we should not lose at anything, whether it be in the Olympics or sending a man back to the moon. Americans need to compete to accomplish something. It is competition which drives the advancement of technology. But can we afford to wait until a competitor steps into the arena? In reality, China is at least fifteen years away from sending a man to the moon. China needs to develop space walking and docking techniques, and this takes time. Do we need to wait at least fifteen years or more for China to become a competitor so that NASA can then kick into high gear? Why not let companies within the realm of private enterprise compete for start-up funding from the government. Once they produce a viable service, they can compete among themselves. Let the research and development occur within these companies, and most importantly let them compete. These companies can have the same characteristics of any company that wants to produce a viable product or service. They will not be under contract from NASA and will operate as a separate private enterprise entity. We have already seen that there is a demand for what space companies can offer to the general public. Many well-to-do people with plenty of money to spend, will pay for a ride into space. Jim Branson's company Virgin Galactic, will locate its world headquarters and Mission Control in New Mexico. The State of New Mexico will build a $200m spaceport. The first flights are planned to begin in 2008. They are now starting to take reservations and deposit commitments for the first year of operations. The Virgin Galactic ticket price has been set at US$200,000 and the minimum, fully refundable deposit to secure your spaceship seat is US$20,000. I believe over time, competition within the market place will cause this price to go down. They already have a waiting list of paid customers, and the space port has not even been built yet. The government can help these type of companies get started, and the service these space companies produce will sustain them and allow for further growth. A company can make money from space tourism and the same company can be involved in sending explorers out into space. A company can be involved in space tourism, exploration, and can provide a research and development platform. Government grants can be awarded based on how strong the potential exists for space exploration and research. The federal government can provide funding for the research and development platform, just as it does for other areas of research which benefit mankind. This I believe is the future of man's endeavor into space. Man will be exploring the cosmos with private enterprise being the driving engine. If one enterprise fails, one of the competing enterprises will win out. Sure there will be some disasters and risks will be taken because that is the nature of the business. But when unfortunate disasters or mishaps do occur, the private enterprise engine will not grind to a complete halt. Mojave Aerospace Ventures (MAV), a company founded by Paul Allen and Burt Rutan, have taken the first steps toward this archetypical dream of exploring the cosmos, and they did it with a fraction of the budget that NASA uses and with a team of 130 or so people to boot. The MAV team won the Ansari X-Prize by sending a man into space and returning him safely to earth and then they repeated this within two weeks. The Ansari X-Prize was an unadulterated competition between different teams around the globe, and it was a display of what can be achieved when different groups compete for a single prize. What the MAV team accomplished was unbelievable given the facilities and resources which were available to them. The MAV team won the Ansari X-Prize within a society where freedom and democracy are regarded as a right to all individuals. The United States is such a society. It is the government's responsibility to protect this democracy and freedom. It is not the governments responsibility to send man out into space. Burt Rutan has said that he has never worked a day in his life. He only plays. His passion for his work is what produces results. Burt Rutan and his team represent the core of what makes the United States the greatest country in the world. MAV has shown the world what private enterprise can accomplish. Even if MAV endeavors never go beyond earth orbit, they have taken the first step within the proper mind set and culture, and this is what will put man into the cosmos. This mind set and culture of pure unadulterated intellectual curiosity is what really will put man into the cosmos. Not NASA's mind set of fear. NASA has failed to put man out into cosmos. But NASA is only as good as the American people who support it. Lets not forget that it is the American tax money which pays for NASA. For NASA to do it's job, it has to be sufficiently funded. The problem is, NASA spends way to much money to get the job done. Will the American people continue to support NASA? It's time the American people either fish or cut bait. If the United States wants to be a leader in the future in terms of space exploration, it has to pay for it with money and yes, lives. If the American public can not back NASA, then the only alternative is space exploration within the realm of private enterprise. Profit coupled with man's need to explore will most likely be the driving engine which sends man into the cosmos. I believe the United States must follow a new course, one which is distinctly different from the path it has followed. The United States will be a leader in terms of space exploration and I do not believe it will fall by the wayside and let some other country fulfill this role. The United States can get back to it's foundation of innovation and exploration which after all, is what has made America one of the greatest countries in the world. I believe we will be the first back to the moon, and yes, we will be the first to step on Mars. If NASA is not capable for whatever reason, companies within the realm of private enterprise will find a way. NASA has played it's important role by lighting the torch in sending man to the moon. We are now at a point in the history of mankind where that torch should be passed to private enterprise. God has placed the planets and all the stars within the universe there for a reason. It is God's intention for us to move outward into the final frontier. We do this to fulfill the natural curiosity that God has given us, and in the process we better the lot of mankind. Lets go...
Thomas Sullivan is an IT Consultant/Search Engine Optimizer, Pilot, and Space Enthusiast. He manages Pilot Portal USA - Weather Briefing, Flight Schools, Aviation Directory and Weather for Pilots - Weather Checklist, Weather Data. For questions or comments you can go to his email located at his websites. Article Source: http://www.articlerich.com
Because The Radical Academy publishes essays and articles on its website does not imply acceptance or approval of the comments or opinions expressed by the author of the material. Nor is the Academy responsible for any misrepresentation of the facts included. It is your job to be a critical reader. |
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Enrich your life with a science or nature book... Enrich your life with a science or nature magazine...
Science Resource Center Main Page
|
|||||||
|
|
||
|
|
||
[Homepage] [Newsletter] [Search] [Support the Academy] [Link to Us] [Contact the Academy] [Citing Articles from Our Website] [Privacy Policy & Disclaimer]
Copyright 1998-99, 2000-01, 2002-03, 2004-05, & 2006 by The Radical Academy. All Rights Reserved.