Martian Sunset

NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory continues to share great images of Mars, and this particular video helps you to realize how amazing the Spirit rover mission was over its six year mission.  Between January 2004 and March 2010, the little craft was uncovering the mysteries of Mars.  While we all talk of human missions, these images helped me to understand how fascinating the first glimpses of a new world can be, whether containing in a spacesuit or viewed via a robot.  All of it impresses me.

Go here for more on the Spirit rover's legacy.  And for an even better video experience, I recommend you download the videos above via JPL's free video podcast.

Was the Shuttle Worth the Cost?

As I noted in my last piece, Shuttle mission cost estimates range from $450 million and $1.5 billion per launch.  What did we get for this outlay?  The opinions vary, but here are a few comments summing up the Shuttle program.

John P. Shannon, Manager, Space Shuttle Program Office (from the July 20, 2011, article in Aviation Week, Space Shuttle Boss: Lessons Justified Cost)

"The U.S. gained the most capable, sophisticated spacecraft ever flown, with a safety record better than any other existing launch vehicle."

"...the tangible accomplishments in the program’s 30 years—135 flights, 852 astronauts flown to orbit, 3.5 million lb. of cargo mass delivered and 179 payloads deployed."

"Critics of the shuttle sometimes point back to hyperbole from 40 years ago. There were promises of cheap, routine access to space. However, these promises were made by a NASA that had a total of 25 human orbital spaceflights (four Mercury, 10 Gemini, 11 Apollo). It could be argued that NASA did not have the experience to make those promises at that time. The shuttle, as designed, would never approach those goals, but as the sole American human spaceflight vehicle, it served as a tremendous learning tool. Where we are today in our understanding of how to live, work and operate in the space environment is far beyond where we were after Apollo and Skylab."

Lawrence Krauss,  professor and director of the Origins Project at Arizona State University (from the July 22, 2011, editorial in the Wall Street Journal, The Shuttle Was a Dud But Space Is Still Our Destiny)

"Yes, there have been highlights, and such things as the Hubble Space Telescope launch and repair missions were not only exciting, but useful. However, the real question is whether they were necessary to achieve the science goals. The initial repair mission was required because of poor engineering on the ground, which may be the fault of the decision to deploy the telescope from the space shuttle."

"Certainly, the shuttle program can't be justified on the grounds that it helped us build the International Space Station. The station is a largely useless international make-work project that was criticized by every major science organization in this country. All that can be said for its scientific justification is that it now houses a $2 billion particle-physics experiment that managed to avoid serious scientific peer review early on; otherwise it certainly would not have been recommended for funding."

What Now? - Shuttles and Observatories

With the final Shuttle flight underway, the America space program is now reliant on the Russians for trips to the International Space Station (ISS) before it can become reliant on the private sector that has yet to prove its mettle.  Yesterday President Barack Obama called the crews of Atlantis and the International Space Station and discussed the future of the space program, noting that the U.S. space program is proud to partner with the Russians and other nations.  Of course, we are completely dependent on such partnerships now. 

So what will it cost us to get American astronauts to the $100 billion ISS in the future?   NASA has negotiated a rate of $43 million to $63 million per astronaut on a Russian Soyuz capsule after buying about 46 seats through 2016 when the first U.S. commercial craft are expected to be available.  Given that a Shuttle launch is estimated to cost from $450 million to $1.5 billion apiece (there are many calculations out there depending on what you throw in the cost bucket), this is quite a deal for now.  For example, the last Atlantis mission carries only four astronauts, which works out to $112.5 million to $375 million per seat.  Of course, this does not include the cost of the Shuttle's primary purpose - lifting non-human payload into space. That said, considering that the cost of the entire Russian space program is estimated to be only $2 billion per year, maybe the Russians are onto something in these dire days of government funding. 

And speaking of funding, for those who thought that less money on human travel might loosen funds for more non-human missions, the James Webb space telescope offers an example of how funds may not be flowing elsewhere in NASA. The House of Representatives would like to cease funding of this $6.5 project due to cost overruns, even though billions have already been spent to date and nothing else is on the drawing board to replace the Hubble telescope when it reaches its endpoint.  Without a Shuttle to keep the Hubble in running order, NASA may soon lack a space telescope should the Jame Webb get knocked out of orbit on the Hill.  Unlike the Hubble, the James Webb space telescope will operate in an orbit outside the Earth's atmosphere, thereby offering a more accurate view of the cosmos.  If the President is serious about partnerships he should understand that a number of nations have money running on the James Webb telescope. 

Hitching rides with the Russians and now no Hubble replacement.  This is not where we need to be if we plan to be a leader in space exploration.