----- Original Message -----
From: G B Leatherwood
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 2:16 PM
Subject: What's Next


This is really addressed to Bruce Moomaw, but this is the only email address
I have for him. No, it's not about Europa, so don't get on my case. I know
that, but this is the only way I know to get my thoughts out.
Bruce, you have repeatedly bashed the space shuttle and the ISS as colossal
boondoggles, and I have often taken issue with that position for a variety
of reasons which I thought at the time were valid. However, and this is a
big HOWEVER, I'm beginning to agree with you and the others who question the
sense of continuing something that is not only not producing anything
worthwhile, but is diverting badly needed resources from finding better ways
to explore space--or "explore" it at all. Please see my question at the end
and see if you can come up with anything.

A number of the things I've been reading on the internet following the
Columbia disaster have to do with arguments for and against keeping the
shuttle/station program alive.
One comment seems to be a lament that the public just doesn't seem to care
all that much about the program, whatever it is. Joe Latrell went to his
kids' schoolroom to talk with the kids about the disaster and was met with
indefference--"Thanks for dropping by," I think the response was.
Why? Because as far as the shuttle/station is concerned, there is NO
exploration taking place! We've been circling the earth at 240 miles up for
years, and aside from the Hubble repair mission and the Columbia research
mission, we haven't gone anywhere or done anything new. So what's to get
excited about? Damn little.
That raises the question of whether we have learned all we can from the
station, and very little, if anything, new will come from spending billions
more. Same is true of the shuttle. True, it's the only thing we have, but
maybe the time HAS come to bring the folks home, lock the door, and go up
only as often as necessary to boost the station back up to the proper orbit.
I would favor keeping it there as a relay point for trips further out, but
maintaining a crew seems to be a waste of time and human power. One thing it
could be used for is a "space classroom" for future mission personnel so
they could get the feel of microgravity, space suits, and tool use. Pretty
expensive, but maybe worth it.
In an article on Slashdot.org, (www.slashdot.org) Gregory Benford said that
we have not
conquered two things we must have before we even think seriously about going
to Mars: (1) a true self-supporting biosphere, and (2) an artificial gravity
that could be produced by centrifugal force with the habitat module on one
end of a tether and a spent container of appropriate weight on the other. He
commented that Russians who have set the endurance records in microgravity
never have regained full mobility, and even those who have been up for six
months or more are still having problems. Check out the whole article.
So what's to do? Maybe the answer IS to stop spending more billions on a
program which has essentially run its course and put the money into
development of better propulsion systems, such as nuclear or ion drives,
better comm and computer controls, and so on. Prepare to go to the Moon and
set up permanent housekeeping so we can develop the true biosphere we need
and get used to living, working, and playing in reduced gravity.
Any ideas on how we get this brilliant and insightful thinking to the
decision makers?


Well, first, my E-mail adress is [EMAIL PROTECTED] .  Second, I've got
another piece coming out in SpaceDaily soon elaborating on my reasoning in
that bitter editorial I published the night of the accident.  Simon says
he'll shorten it from the original (about 6500 words) down to 3000, but I'll
be happy to send you the original if you want.  I tried to cover ALL aspects
of the argument.

Basically, our feelings are a lot closer together than you might think.  My
major objection to the Shuttle and the Station is that they're sucking money
out of ALL useful aspects of the space program, including a redesigned
manned ship for those infrequent occasions over the next two decades in
which manned orbital spaceflight might be justified -- which could be both
cheaper and far safer than the Shuttle --  and also out of the technical
work genuinely useful for any preparations for manned flights into the Solar
System in the more distant future, as well (of course) as out of the
unmanned missions which will be much more scientifically productive (and, I
think, equally inspirational to the general public) over the next few
decades.  I've attached a reading list to the article in which people with
far more engineering and scientifid background than I have reached the same
conclusions -- and proposed new and more productive paths to follow.

Back to Europa: I'm still having hell's own time scraping up any information
on this proposed "JIMO" nuclear-electric powered orbiter of Europa, Ganymede
AND Callisto, apparently largely because it's still in the earliest
preliminary design stages.  I'm starting, however, to form a pretty firm
belief that it's technically misconceived -- it will be hard enough to
design a plain Europa Orbiter to resist Jupiter's radiation at that distance
from the planet, and radiation-proofing a big nuclear prpulsion system
against that radiation (which takes the form of protons and electrons; a
completely different problem from radiation-proofing the drive against its
own neutrons and gamma rays) will be a very big additional problem.  Every
planetary scientist I've read so far (including last summer's crucial
Decadal Survey) concludes that the best first mission for a NEP-powered
spacecraft would instead be a Neptune orbiter, on both scientific and
engineering grounds -- and even that would be more appropriately launched
around 2015 than around 2011, allowing us to develop the drive in a more
leisurely way.  I'm afraid that Sean O'Keefe -- despite what seems to me to
be good intentions -- is, due to his lack of engineering background, being
led around by the nose by second-level NASA officials.  Before I say this
with absolute certainty, though, I'd like to know more about JIMO.

==
You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/

Reply via email to