Recently there has been quite a bit of discussion in the news about the launch of a privately owned (as privately as possible, I should say) space satellite. Ever since Obama changed the focus/strategy of NASA, with a supposed emphasis (it’s really just a big shell game: NASA’s budget actually increased) of privately owned satellites, there has been argument from every side about what this means.
One particular article I read was by AOL News which commented in particular on Senator Richard Shelby (Alaska) who, to summarize, doesn’t like Obama’s new NASA policy and doesn’t think the private market can handle the launching and maintenance of satellites. While I could comment on the peculiar fact that Senator Shelby is a Republican, and that he should be more enthusiastic about private ownership of previously federal programs, instead I will point out something else.
Senator Shelby essentially said that the space company, SpaceX, wouldn’t be able to launch a satellite. When they did so successfully, and put a payload into perfect orbit, he is quoted assaying that the launch only replicated what NASA accomplished in 1964.
This is an unfortunate truth, but should be considered with additional details: That’s basically all NASA is doing today as well.
What I mean is this: For all the awesome things NASA has been doing, they really are stuck back in the same technology and inner bureaucracy that they had back in late 60′s.
Think of this: It was almost 40 years ago that we launched some dudes to the moon, but if we tried now we wouldn’t even be able to. Estimates I have read say that it would take 10 years to get ready for a moon launch.
My point isn’t about whether we should go to the moon or not, I’m only saying that it’s time to let NASA go.
All the people working at NASA are very intelligent, they have the know-how to start a new company. In fact, the recent private launch by SpaceX was done by mostly old NASA employees.
But I can hear you asking: What about the International Space Station? We can’t just let it go, can we?
Two words: Sunk cost.
RSS
Facebook