Is President Obama Against Manned Space Exploration?

Though currently busy deciding which truly unnecessary government expenditures to cut in order to rein-in on a runaway deficit, is there truth to the rumours that President Obama is against manned space exploration?


By: Ringo Bones


I’ve just heard President Obama's staunchest critics - both famous and the not-so - after finishing this year’s State-of-the-Nation Address. Quite a number of them voiced criticisms aimed at President Obama worded in a way that can be defined as no longer politically-correct in this day and age. But the question now remains, is President Obama really against manned space exploration?

It might be just an unfortunate coincidence that NASA’s Space Shuttle fleet is slated to be retired during President Obama's first term in office that's already mired in a weak economy and runaway deficit spending noting that the myriad of parts of the Space Shuttle can no longer guaranty the safety of its crew and reliability of operation. Not to mention that the Shuttle fleet might at the present austere fiscal environment of post-subprime mortgage crisis America be seen as an unnecessary government expense that is driving the US government’s runaway deficit.

Though a search for a better and low-operating-cost replacement for NASA’s Space Shuttle fleet is already under way – under the Obama administration’s watch I might add, it is worth noting that historically, the US Republican party – unlike their Democratic counterparts – has been largely anti-scientific research since the end of World War II.

Back in the mid-1950s when the XB-70 Valkyrie program was slated to replace the B-52 as a Mach 3-capable strategic heavy bomber, then Republican President “Ike” Eisenhower wanted the program scrapped because it was too expensive and might only be marginally better than the existing fleet of B-52s. Fortunately, when Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kennedy got elected, the XB-70 program got a new lease of life as a platform for aviation and aerospace research. The XB-70 program only got cancelled when a tragic crash destroyed one of the three prototype planes.

So is President Obama – which is a Democrat lest you forget – really against manned space exploration? While the other camp – ie. The Republicans – obsessing over Creationism / Intelligent Design / Bible-based sham science to be taught in American schools, President Obama’s renewable energy programs that would grant America one more step to be independent from Arab crude are blocked by now-Republican majority congress. Not to mention other scientific programs that would eventually lead into a low-cost and more reliable replacement for NASA’s ageing Space Shuttle Fleet. President' Obama's plans to out-compete and out-innovate the People's Republic of China could might as well be shot-down by the US Republican party who unfortunately has been "cozy" with Mainland China since Bush senior was President.

The rumours behind President Obama’s disdain for America’s manned space exploration and intentions to scrap it are more likely to be politically motivated by the other camp and very likely to be untrue. After all, will our kids still be able to navigate all the way to the Moon if American schools start teaching that the Earth is the “center” of the Universe?

Should NASA’s Space Shuttle Fleet Be Retired?

With no suitable replacement before it’s much publicized retirement date of 2010. Should NASA’s aging space shuttle fleet be retired knowing that existing stopgap measures like the Soyuz spacecraft could stray into hostile territory?

By: Vanessa Uy

While the harrowing incident of the Soyuz spacecraft straying off-course by more than 400 kilometers from its planned landing site. Almost a headline story back in April 21, 2008 - now fades into obscurity. But there are some of us who still care beyond the 8.2 G pull of such an “uncomfortable” Earthbound ride. The April 21 incident highlights the Soyuz spacecraft’s inherent problem: it can’t be controlled with a reliable degree of certainty on where to land. Worst of all, replacement spacecraft of comparable controllability to NASA’s current fleet of space shuttles won’t come on line at least until March 2015.

America’s NASA developed their space shuttle fleet in the first place to meet a requirement for a spacecraft / return vehicle that can be piloted back to the Earth’s surface to a precise location. Like a paved runway commonly used by large commercial jet-powered aircraft and preferably on US soil. A feat that space capsule-type vehicles like the Soyuz spacecraft – despite their lower operating costs – can never do.

Though it never happened yet, returning astronauts from the International Space Station using an Earth return vehicle similar to Soyuz might accidentally land in a hostile territory. Like the tribal areas in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, which is technically not that far from the Russian controlled Central Asian plains which their space capsules regularly lands given the number of kilometers the Soyuz spacecraft could stray. And there are no international treaties yet that protects these astronauts from being taken hostage. Like the Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants would even respect it if preexisting ones exists. The Somali pirates who recently abducted vacationing French tourists in a luxury yacht sailing in the waters of the Horn of Africa between Somalia and Djibouti probably never even heard of the International Maritime Conference in Washington in 1899, or would give a damn if they had.

So astronauts and space tourists will have to settle to pray for luck that they don’t land in a hostile region and be taken hostage by militants. Given the extremely cramped -quarters of our current space vehicles, carrying infantry weapons like modern assault rifles could be very inconvenient for our astronauts. I just hope that computer game billionaire Richard Garriott will have the best of luck as he underwrites and personally makes Project Immortality a feasible reality.
By the way, Project Immortality is about storing digitally-sequenced human DNA on the International Space Station or ISS to avert a “Doomsday Event” – i.e. mankind won’t just go extinct if our planet ever becomes biologically uninhabitable because viable genetic material of humans are stored safely in space. Does this remind you of an episode of Star Trek about those genetically enhanced “übermensch”? Richard Garriott’s bravery is admirable though, given that the Soyuz spacecraft could have him landing in front of Osama Bin Laden's cave.