- BIG NEWS:
- Iraq
- |
- Health Care
- |
- Mitt Romney
- |
- GOP
- |
 |
||
Thank you, Mr. President.
That's what we should say to President Barack Obama in light of his Fiscal Year 2011 space budget for NASA. The President courageously decided to redirect our nation's space policy away from the foolish and underfunded Moon race that has consumed NASA for more than six years, aiming instead at boosting the agency's budget by more than $1 billion more per year over the next five years, topping off at $100 billion for NASA between now and 2015. And he directed NASA to spend a billion per year on buying rides for American astronauts aboard new, commercially developed space vehicles-that's American space vehicles. Other NASA funds will go into developing and testing new revolutionary technologies that we can use in living and working on Mars and its moons.
The Aldrin cycler (which I proposed two decades ago), your time has finally come! Those technologies will sustain long term, deep space exploration in the years ahead-just like my concept for a cycling spaceship moving between Earth and Mars. For that, we don't need the Moon!
But this change in direction will not be easy -- like turning a big ship around in a small space. For those who will think about opposing this new plan, let me explain why I think it's a necessary step forward, not back. Having walked on the Moon, I know something about what we need to explore, really explore, in space.
For the past six years America's civil space program has been aimed at returning astronauts to the Moon by 2020. That's the plan announced by President George W. Bush in January of 2004. That plan also called for developing the technologies that would support human expeditions to Mars, our ultimate destination in space. But two things happened along the way since that announcement, which became known as the Vision for Space Exploration.
First, the President failed to fully fund the program, as he had initially promised. As a result, each year the development of the rockets and spacecraft called for in the plan slipped further and further behind. Second and most importantly, NASA virtually eliminated the technology development effort for advanced space systems. Equally as bad, NASA also raided the Earth and space science budgets in the struggle to keep the program, named Project Constellation, on track. Even that effort fell short.
To keep the focus on the return to the Moon, NASA pretty much abandoned all hope of preparing for Mars exploration. It looked like building bases on the Moon would consume all of NASA's resources. Yet despite much complaining, neither a Republican-controlled nor a Democratic-controlled Congress was willing or able to add back those missing and needed funds. The date of the so-called return to the Moon slipped from 2020 to heaven-knows when. At the same time, there was no money to either extend the life of the Space Shuttle, due to be retired this year, or that of the International Space Station, due to be dropped into the Pacific Ocean in 2015, a scant handful of years after it was completed.
Enter the new Obama administration. Before deciding what to do about national space policy, Obama set up an outside review panel of space experts, headed up by my friend Norm Augustine, former head of Lockheed Martin and a former government official. Augustine's team took testimony and presentations from many people with ideas on what way forward NASA should take (that group included me). In October, it presented its report to the President and to Dr. John Holdren, Obama's science advisor and a friend and colleague of mine. The report strongly suggested the nation move away from the troubled rocket program, called Ares 1, and both extend the life of the space station and develop commercial ways of sending astronauts and cargoes up to the station. And it suggested a better way to spend our taxpayer dollars would be not focused on the Moon race, but on something it called a "Flexible Path." Flexible in the sense that it would redirect NASA towards developing the capability of voyaging to more distant locations in space, such as rendezvous with possibly threatening asteroids, or comets, or even flying by Mars to land on its moons. Many different destinations and missions would be enabled by that approach, not just one.
But with the limited NASA budget consumed by the Moon, no funds were available for this development effort -- until now. Now President Obama has signaled that new direction -- what I'm calling Flexible plus, containing much of the steps called for in the Augustine report. If Congress agrees, we'll turn over all space taxi services to the private sector and aim NASA at fully using the station -- extended to at least 2020 in Obama's plan -- and spending a billion dollars a year in creating these new private sector spaceships. When the time comes to start building deep space transports and refueling rocket tankers, it will be the commercial industry that steps up, not another government-owned, government managed enterprise. And if we want to use the Moon as a stepping stone in the future, we'll have to join with our international partners for the effort. No more "go it alone" space projects. If you or your children or grandkids ever hope to fly into orbit, these new vehicles are their only hope for a ride to space.
There is little reason to believe that Congress would add this kind of budget boost to the Bush lunar program, since it hasn't done that for the past six years. But if we really wanted to establish new companies and create new jobs in the space business, then Obama's idea is clearly the way to go. America's space entrepreneurs have all the talent and tools they need to take advantage of the proposed Obama plan. Even our rocket pads at the Kennedy Space Center, where the same pads from which Apollo 11 was launched more than 40 years ago are still used, will get a user-friendly makeover. And NASA will do what it does best -- preparing the capability to explore.
I know that change can be a scary thing. And I know the forces of the existing Constellation program are already preparing to fight the Obama plan. But I hope when the emotion subsides, my friends in Congress will see as I see the wisdom and strength that this new approach will give our nation's space program.
I'll be speaking out about the plan more in the weeks ahead. In the meantime, I ask my friends and readers to get behind Obama's new policy. Join with me and help usher in a new age of space. A space program that truly goes somewhere! With his deeds, not only words, President Obama has revitalized our struggling space program. His has been a "Profile in Courage" when it comes to space and science. And that's why I call it his JFK moment.
Follow Buzz Aldrin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/therealbuzz
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Space flight like anything else can go three ways- evolve, revolve or dissolve -(or a combination of)
The problem is since the 1970's the manned space programme has spent two much time revolving and dissolving - not nearly enough evolving. The unmanned missions are brilliant, however i only see them a pathfinders and partners with humans on allowing us all to explore, expoit and evolve.
People have trouble selling space, waste of money. My answer is simple- quote them the father of spaceflight "man born into cradlle of eart, but man cannot live there forever. If humaity is likea baby and it is evolving, ie growing up, theworst thing you can do is keep it in its cradle all its life. Look after the cradle of life (very important) but keeping the baby in its cradle when it starts to outgrow it is very cruel
unwards and upwards i say
In the book there are many idea's for 2 - a heavy lifter- look at Philip bono's ideas. It least there should be ongoing r and d until some system develops. you could try Usind More small technology demonstrators until the boundaries are broken. Reentry to me seems the biggest hurdal with the the high temp's. remember all modern transport is designed to survive within its speed and environmental factors. AND are fully reusable.
At present no one has built a reusuable vehicle to allow humans to (A) go to orbit and back, and (b). on to other places.
Buzz has helped solve (b). A is the biggest challenge, getting people and cargo off earth.
Space flight like anything else can go three ways- evolve, revolve or dissolve -(or a combination of)
i have a simple plan perhps people can work to. EXPLORE - EXPLOIT - EVOLVE
Nasa should be exploring both manned and unmanned system so that humanity can follow the three E's
NASA does this by developing manned and unmanned vehicles to carry this out
to enable people to explore 1 leo 2. moon 3. Inner solar system 4, outer solar system.
FOR BUSINESS OR PLEASURE - WHY ELSE DO WE TRAVEL
Any mass transport system uses 1 - passengers with small cargo ( car Bus, train, ferry airliner) 2- heavy lifter (air cargo, oil tanker, lorries)
When it comes to 1. Passengers some sort of shuttle- (a rocket is one way). But there are others. I can recommend Dennis's Jenkins Book 'Space Shuttle' All sorts of good ideas. Personally i think horizontal take off/landing is the best way. There were plans for what were called ACES and LACES systems. whereby the shuttle only carries Hydrogen at take off and collects the oxygen as it goes up. Would there be enough left to transfer to other ships. Oxygen is a very expensive basic and essential commodity is space.
Buzz Aldrin has an excellent proposal here and it should be followed thorugh. WHY! i will give you a very good reason. COMPARE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF RAILWAYS. i live in Southern Britain, where the industial revolution that led to today's technology started. Richard Trevithick, a cornish engineer working in south wales (just a few miles from where i live, developed the very first machines capable of independent movement), The descendants of his work led to land, sea , air and space craft.. I think Buzz's idea is on a par with George Stephenson
This could be the beginning of opening the solar system as a mass transit system for business or pleasure.
I do think though that many people are not well informed about NASA's work. The problem as i see it is a lack of teamwork exploring all options to space. Mutual respect for each other seems to be missiong. If you disagree just let the others get on with it and see how far they get. Closed minds is the problem. Everyone is all over the place,
There are those who say the space program is a waste of money. That there are problems; that money can be better spent at home. History shows this belief to be flawed. Nations ultimately perish without vision, hope, and the daring to look outward, expand and grow. Great nations do great things; plain and simple. For these reasons the Administration's space plan is flawed.
The plan says give low earth orbit to commercial competition. Fair enough; but in a globbal economy that means buying seats from Russian and Chinese firms because those will be the economical choice. In the end our space industry will falter.
The plan says throw money at technology with no goal orientation. Off in the distance Mars beckons but we're not setting a time to go. Does anyone believe those dollars will be expended wisely? Call me a cynic but I don't. Without commitment, the goal will get traded off time and time again. No my friends, the sad truth is that a decade from now we will be no further along in the quest to explore.
Napoleon once said to his generals "For God''s sake, if you are going to take Vienna, take Vienna." He spoke of the endless planning, preparing, and studying the problem until no action is taken. We see it all the time: health care, immigration reform, term limits, energy policy. The simple fact is that without human exploration we reduce America's space program to a science hobby shop.
In all of our solar system, there is only one place that is free from the pollution of human-made electromagnetic radiation. All of our broadcast media, radio, television, cellphone microwaves, radar, satellite transmissions, propagate out from Earth to fill the solar system and beyond. As a result, many channels are invisible to radio telescopes that might scan the universe for signs of intelligent life, or to learn more about the mysteries of how our universe is structured and was formed. Our human radiation occludes our radio telescopes' ability to "see." Except in one location: the back side of the moon.
Perennially facing away from Earth the back of the moon is a "clear channel" zone where we could set up radio telescopes and learn much more about our universe. There are things we really need to know, for instance, is our universe structured with "dark matter" and "dark energy"? does our universe have more than three dimensions? is intelligent life nearby? To answer these questions we need radio telescopes on the back of the moon. To put them there and to maintain them, we need a human-occupied base on the moon. Don't forsake this opportunity by sending rockets to Mars instead. We need to take this smaller step before venturing further.
See Jeff Goldstein's Profile
Dr. Aldrin-
Yes, it's scary. My fear is that in the midst of this change, without focus over the next few years, we as a nation will simply allow NASA's efforts for human spaceflight beyond low Earth orbit to go gentle into that good night. So, I hope with all my heart that this is indeed a JFK moment.
When you walked on the Moon, I was 11. You inspired me. So I will again put trust in my hero. And if fear did not overcome you traveling in a tiny craft some 240,000 miles from home, I'll buck up and support the plan.
You'll surely not recall, but I met you at Buzz Aldrin Elementary School a few years back. I was asked by Gina Ross to get her teachers excited about exploration, learning, and the new school year. Then you walk in. I won't forget that any time soon. I actually wrote the experience up at Blog on the Universe for teachers and students, so they could read about the power of heroes.
If you have 5 minutes to burn, here it is-
http://bit
On behalf of all those you have inspired, happy 80th.
Jeff
Jeff Goldstein:
I visited your site, good work thank you very much.
And much respect to Mr. Aldrin.
It may be difficult for some to relate to what NASA means to America, and how it has been interwoven into the very fabric of our daily lives. Many that want to cut funding have such limited knowledge base concerning NASA. Without offense, I say to those people, please do your homework . If we continue funding welfare over education (NASA) the outcome can only be more "welfare". As a whole we are to a great extent living off the technological and economic structure built by Mr. Aldrin's generation. We must step up to the challenge further advancing this cause. This is a mission that reaches far beyond manned space flight.
We often take our vast freedoms for granted; while others throughout the world have never tasted it ! Life isn't only about what you need or want, sometimes it is a fight to preserve what we already have.
Obama backpedals on NASA. No today yes tomorrow maybe latter...
The space program was worth its money simply in the tens of thousands of lives saved from the advances it spurred in medical technologies and weather forecasting. If we need to cut something, let's start with the social programs that pay for folks to sit on their fat lazy asses and do little.
I guess you do not believe in compassion? And what about the outsourcing of American jobs overseas?
Dr. Aldrin,
I remember when I was 9 watching those images of you and Neil taking those first steps on the Lunar surface. A much needed moral boost for our country not to mention an act that kept us at the cutting edge of science and technology.
I appreciate that you are still providing your insights on space exploration and even in these times of budget woes feel we need to stay ahead in science and technology, space exploration included. I don't think most people realize the side benefits the early space program provided.
Personally I think we need to take care of this planet before we ever consider the colonizing another, but do fully support continued esploration and understanding of our cosmos.
"eXploration"
Alex,
I have emailed my three members of Congress and President Obama to reduce the Defense budget to 400 Billion dollars. That's a 350 Billion dollar savings!
A 4.5 Billion cut to NASA's budget isn't a lot of money...ac
The problem with the US budget is that NO ONE wants to do without something. So, we just muddle through. Muddling through, however has been getting harder.
I pay water and sewer charges to my town because I need the services. I pay for food because I need to eat. I buy electricity, etc. and when I have money left over, I go on vacations. I could care less about outer space.
As for research and other benefits..
I was against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. One trillion wasted in these two wars. The US will slowly decline in the next 20 years if we don't stop the unnecessary spending. I cannot eat rocket fuel, jet fighter planes or moon rocks.
Cutting Offense=True Defense
I disagree, Mr Aldrin.
The budget deficit is huge. I would decrease NASA's budget by 15 to 25%, end manned space exploration and use the money saved to reduce the national debt.
I could care less about "competing" with China or other countries.
As the years have gone by, I have watched airlines go bankrupt, people becoming homeless, a reduced standard of living for many Americans and a financial system that is dysfunctional. We have enough work to do on earth. Outer space can wait until we have solved today's problems.
$4.75 billion, that's how much you would save if you reduced NASA's budget by 25%...in other words .04% of the national debt (using the figure of $12 Trillion that I found on the intertubes). Yeah, huge money saving there eh.
How about we cut defense by 10%, which would be $78 Billion and do that whole tax idea with the big banks that about destroyed our economy. That would go a bit further in reducing our debt. It would work a whole lot better than putting people out of a job by eliminating positions at NASA.
Keep in mind also that NASA's budget goes to funding countless research projects geared toward helping people. For example, I recently applied for a NASA scholarship for undergrad students that would provide $15,000 to go to school. I'd say that's certainly trying to help out people trying to improve their lives but are strapped for cash. Then there are the hundreds of research grants that they provide. They've also been integral in environmental research and helping launch these little things called satellites that we so heavily rely on today.
Alex, do you realize that if you cut defense by 10% the US military would have to scrape by on (gasp) only $637,200,000,000 per year???
When you were just a tike YOU explored like everyone else.
It is in our nature.
first of all, the reason we have such debt and deficit problems is because we have fallen behind in technology and industry and can no longer compete with countries like china. our economy has slowed and we don't produce.
secondly, reducing the nasa budget by 20% would be a tiny drop in a huge bucket for our debt. it would do nothing. it wouldn't even be noticed. but it would kill most of nasa. everything would stop and there would be massive layoffs, which would again raise the deficit because those people laid off would not be paying taxes or buying things.
so your post is ridiculous
It's funny how you basically say that you could "care less" about about NASA and space exploration, and yet are worried about the national debt.
I for one, could "care less" about the national debt. People have been griping and griping about the national debt for as long as I can remember, and please tell me why the hell should I care about it? Because it makes my taxes higher? I'm just a normal working class guy, I've done manual labor and office work, I've got school loans, rent, bills, etc., I've worked hard and I'm smart but I've never made much money. What is the extra 50 bucks or so in tax savings going to do for me, when every cool thing that this country does for its citizens is sacrificed so we can pay down the national debt.
Maybe I'll take that I'll and buy a really cool coffee table book, with lots of pictures, like this one I have here in front of me with awesome photos from the Hubble Space Telescope. I'm a simple person and I just like stuff like that.
Seriously, though. Someone please explain to me why I should care about the national debt.
Because we are the first American generation stealing from our children. Their schooling is being cut, they will live a poorer life, and they will suffer because we have been spending their future earnings on ourselves. Every other American generation sacrificed for their children - we provided fun things for ourselves and satisfied our every need.
I think NASA funding is worthwhile and a relatively small amount but you are right on about ending manned space exploration. Its nothing but an exercise in vanity and adolescent adventure. Unmanned exploration is ten to a hundred times more productive of useful scientific info.
Ignorance pure and simple.
How about ending the wars we are in currently?
All they are doing is spending huge gobs of money and wasting young lives.
Do you believe it's ok to oursource American jobs?
If early man had taken that tack, we still would be in Africa.
Thank you, Mr. Aldrin. It is time that NASA and private industry leverage each others strengths simultaneously. I think such an approach will offer a much more effective use of both financial and intellectual capital. Then we can move much faster toward goals of exploration and human technological and social advancement.
Hopefully, the next great steps in human advancement will occur in a scant generation or two instead of over sixty years. Still, NASA has given us some wonderful gifts that make our lives better.
As a reminder to the naysayers, NASA technology spinoffs include:
automobile design software
aerodynamic bicycle wheels
long distance telecommunications
tv satellite dish
adjustable smoke detectors
fire fighter equipment
invisible braces
scratch-resistant lenses
memory foam (mattresses, prosthetics)
ear thermometers
satellite radio
shock absorbing helmets
hydroponic gardening
athletic shoe insoles
safety grooving for roads, runways
cordless tools (developed by Black & Decker under NASA contract)
water filters
Digital Image Processing (spinoffs are CAT scans and MRI)
ski boots
fail-safe flashlights
space pens w/ gel ink
joystick controller
advanced plastics
thermal gloves and boots
Oh what utter nonsense!
Most of the problems you cite are INVENTED deliberately to generate profit. They do not exist because they haven't or can't be solved. They exist because if they didn't, corporate profits would be low.
To say that we have to choose one thing over another is also ridiculous. I am astounded at these kinds of statements because they show a total lack of understanding of the matter at hand. It is significant that we move forward - more technology, more freedom, more choice. Not less! To say something has to wait while we run off "repairing" something else is misguided and it betrays your lack of understanding.
Stop corporate tax credits for hiring "cheap labor" from India and China and REQUIRE they employ Americans. Stop voting fools into office that remove New Deal legislation and swing open the doors wide to enable corporate RAPE of this country under the guise of "free" markets. This misery is designed - it is deliberate. It is NOT a sign that something is broken - it is ENGINEERED deliberately that way.
The earth has a finite amount of accessible natural resources (minerals). There are more accessible minerals located in the asteroid belt near Mars than exist in total near the earth's surface. You want to bust open the economy, invest in researching and developing robotic mining operations and a means of returning those resources to earth.
We can't fund what we now spend in the US without borrowing money. Who do you think can afford to mine in outer space?
Please, folks, stop justifying wasteful spending. Have any of you ever gone to a town meeting to cut wasteful spending? I did... in Connecticut, for 30 years...al
I've seen CT roads, sewers, prisons and bus systems. You've cut off your own nose.
Buzz, I love you for being the second man on the moon, and for having a devastating left hook at like, 80 years of age.
Seriously. All love for you.
Too many more important issues
This deserves your attention. Or if you are suggesting that we can't afford the energy and money? Because this can help with other problems
like what? like wasting a trillion dollars invading the middle east?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
