Left Flank

By way of responding to Brendan, both Senator Mel Martinez (R., Fl.) and presidential candidate Mayor Rudy Giuliani have both pointed out the shuttle-Constellation gap. Giuliani believes it's a 'money issue'; Martinez wants to extend the working life of the space shuttle. But, 2013, at the minimum, is a long time to fly shuttles.

So, what to do for five or more years? Peter Diamandis, CEO of the X Prize Foundation, has an idea or two about the next phase of space exploration:

Two fundamental realities will drive space exploration forwards. First, wealth is accumulating in the hands of ambitious and visionary individuals, many of whom view space simultaneously as an adventure and as a place to make money. What was once affordable only by nations can now be funded by individuals.

Second, corporations and investors are realising that resources on Earth are limited and are running out. But everything we hold of value on Earth—metals, minerals, energy and real estate—is in near-infinite supply in space. As space operations become more affordable, companies will set their sights on extra-terrestrial resources, and what was once thought of as a vast wasteland will become the next «gold rush».

(…)

This is not to say that governments will have no role. They will retain the critical work of pure science, and of answering some of the biggest unknowns: for example, is there life on Mars? Governments should play the important role of big customer and get out of the operations business. In the same way that government agencies don't build their own PCs, or fly their own commuter airlines, in the future governments will buy seats on commercial orbital vehicles, and stay aboard commercial space stations. Politicians will also need to determine what laws govern space and its colonies—and how to respond if space colonies strike out on their own and claim independence.

And, government retains its monopoly on the use of force in space. All the national space agencies will have to devise a way to keep this corner of the solar system peaceful, as well as stay out of each other's way. There is also the question of defending the terrestrial infrastructure, like launch pads, and protecting against industrial espionage. But, the US, according to Everett C. Dolman's Astropolitik, should, firstly, achieve control of the entire near-earth environment, followed by forming an agency capable of coordinating the activities of commercial and military projects. NASA has devoted too many resources to exploration. Instead of the romantic individualism of racing to Mars, NASA should devote itself to establishing forts on the vast plains of the solar system.

A decade just might be long enough for Americans to prepare for this new world.

Here's a simple concept for turning space into a wasteland unfit for satellites running civilian and military technology essential to modern life: just blow up a few satellites in orbit.

One shot China has been practising became clear a year ago, on January 11th 2007. In a nuclear-proof air force command centre, built on giant shock-absorbing springs within Cheyenne Mountain, outside Colorado Springs, officers tracked a missile fired from a mobile launcher deep inside China. It followed what one American official said was a «strange» trajectory, designed neither to land a warhead nor to put a payload into orbit. Instead it intercepted one of China's ageing weather satellites. The impact about 850km (530 miles) above Earth created a huge field of space debris, contributing about 28% of the junk now floating around in space.

(…)

The core fear is that any conflict in space would cause the most injury to America since America has the most to lose. Damaged planes crash to the ground and destroyed ships sink to the bottom of the sea. But the weightlessness of space means that debris keeps spinning around the Earth for years, if not centuries. Each destruction of a satellite creates, in effect, thousands of missiles zipping round randomly; each subsequent impact provides yet more high-speed debris. At some point, given enough litter, there would be a chain reaction of impacts that would render parts of low-Earth orbit—the location of about half the active satellites—unusable.

As matters stand, ground controllers periodically have to shift the position of satellites to avoid other objects. This month, NASA was tracking about 3,100 active and inactive satellites, and some 9,300 bits of junk larger than 5cm, about 2,600 of them from the Chinese ASAT test. Given their speed, even particles as small as 1cm (of which there may be hundreds of thousands) are enough to cripple a satellite.

For America, then, avoiding a space war may be a matter of self-preservation. The air force has adopted a doctrine of «counterspace operations» that envisages either destroying enemy satellites in a future war or temporarily disabling them. But for the most part, America's space security relies on passive measures: sidestepping an attacker by moving out of the way of possible strikes; protecting the vital organs of satellites by «hardening» them against laser or electromagnetic attack; replacing any damaged satellites; or finding alternative means to do the job, for example with blips or unmanned aircraft.

More esoteric space research has ideas such as sending small satellites to act as «guardian angels», detecting possible attacks against the big birds. It also includes plans for breaking up satellites into smaller components that communicate wirelessly, or deploying «space tugs» that would repair and refuel existing satellites.

I dare any Republican to suggest a big wall in space. This is yet another reason why NASA needs a strong dose of privatization, so that it can assume its proper role of defense, not exploration.

On one hand, I'd think Ko San, ROK's first astronaut could find better things to do than mix dirt in space. On the other hand, there is a certain diplomatic symbolism involved by both mixing North and South Korean dirt (in a Russian spacecraft), and using Japanese technology for other experiments.

"We still think this is one country. So I'm going to bring the soil of North and South (Korea). I'm going to mix them up in space," he said. The 31-year-old scientist will leave Earth in April aboard a Russian Soyuz rocket and spend 10 days conducting experiments at the International Space Station.

(…)

The Ministry of Science and Technology said Wednesday that Ko will use equipment developed by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) in his experiments at the International Space Station.

Japan and Korea will sign a declaration agreeing to cooperate in space exploration in Seoul on Thursday. Korea will use JAXA's portable device for measuring space radiation and an HDTV camera for Ko's space experiments.

I'm sure no Japanese equipment will touch the sacred dirt.

Reading Tim Johnson wax nostalgic trying to justify China's space program, I feel his sentiment.

As NASA’s chief acknowledged earlier in a speech a few weeks ago, the Apollo program brought all kinds of intangible benefits to the U.S. as well as tangible scientific progress on things that affect our daily lives, like CAT scans, infrared thermometers and other medical technologies.

Whether China can make those kinds of strides is yet to be seen. But its space program is also likely to have intangible benefits.

Meanwhile, America's NASA is becoming proficient at boring people with details only engineers and mechanics could appreciate. Space, instead of thrilling treks to the moon, is also an international construction project. But, building a diplomatic tool in Earth orbit just can't compare to raw nationalism

I'd think NASA would get the clue and forgo white elephant projects, like a trip to Mars, and let private companies make space travel even more routine and dull.