Popular Science suggests seven things that NASA can do to reinvigorate space exploration.

My first reaction was that the article's thesis begs the question of NASA's future involvement in space exploration and settlement. Is it really necessary? Perhaps so. While private enterprise may eventually find reasons to explore and settle Mars, among other things, it may take a very long time for it to happen. An entity with other motivations -- science and national prestige, as the article indicates. -- may be able to get us there quicker. Properly structured, and with suitable provisions to encourage the involvement of and facilitate the later hand-off to private industry, these missions could avoid the "flags and footprints" fate of Apollo.

On the other hand...well, I have to hand it to Popular Science for hitting the jackpot in the third paragraph:

After interviewing dozens of experts—including NASA officials, astronauts, space policy analysts, and leaders in the private sector—Popular Science has come to the conclusion that to recover its authority, NASA needs to go somewhere: namely, Mars.

It's also Recommendation #1 (page 3), namely to officially designate Mars exploration as a long-term goal for NASA.

NASA's Mars plans won't be taken seriously until the agency lays out the logical progression of steps that must be taken and attaches realistic dates to them.

Once NASA establishes that its overarching goal is to reach Mars—say, within a generation—then other pieces of the space program will begin to fall into place. Research on the space station will focus on learning the biological effects of long-duration space travel. Unmanned probes will lay the groundwork for a future manned landing. And engineers will have a likely destination for the next-generation space vehicle. A commitment to Mars will refocus the agency and give it a sense of mission.

Which is what we have been saying all along.

Recommendation #3 (page 5) reiterates the Cato position on privatizing space activity between LEO and Luna.

"NASA is an exploration agency, not a construction company or a landlord," says Tumlinson.

It's a great approach towards the follow-on Mars activity I mentioned earlier -- transition local activities from NASA to private concerns while the agency is preparing for Mars, so that there will be a thriving space-based industry ready to step in at the right moment. Space tourism has great potential in this regard, and as noted, NASA needs to stop throwing up roadblocks to it and instead roll out the red carpet -- whether that means allowing limited ISS access, permitting a privately owned and operated "hotel" module to be added to ISS, or just getting out of the way of fully-private space launch and space tourism ventures.

Recommendation #6 (page 8) concludes with an observation that warms the heart:

But though a robot can send back interesting data, it can't make sophisticated interpretations. Unmanned missions, while important precursors to human exploration, are a poor substitute for it.

The seventh recommendation (page 9) makes the point that a lot of us have made: settlement of other bodies in the solar system is an important insurance policy against all manner of planet-wide calamities.

It's a good article, well worth a read.

Posted by T.L. James on March 20, 2002 09:07 PM