Skip to main content

Robert Zubrin on why you should never let governments plan manned space exploration

Robert Zubrin is effectively THE expert on potential human exploration and colonization of Mars.

That's why his opinion of current NASA plans is both so biting and so important:
As the centerpiece for its future human spaceflight program, NASA proposes to build another space station, this one located not in low Earth orbit but at the L2 Lagrange point just above the far side of the Moon. This plan is indeed remarkable in as much as an L2 space station would serve no useful purpose whatsoever. We don’t need an L2 space station to go back to the Moon. We don’t need an L2 space station to go to near-Earth asteroids. We don’t need an L2 space station to go to Mars. We don’t need an L2 space station for anything.
 One has to wonder how much further along the whole space exploration enterprise might be, on a global basis, if it hadn't been tied to both national defenses and governmental monopolies.

Comments

Delaware Watch said…
Why do I suspect that the essential qualification for this man to be "THE" expert is that he is critical of government planned space Missions?

Nice of you to provide the link but alas THE expert bases his criticism in large part on something a governmental agency did extraordinarily well: the soft landing ability of the Curiosity mission.

Perhaps you can discover a new THE expert who can criticize even that.
Dana,

It is legitimately my fault for neglecting the link the Robert Zubrin (and I do not have it this second) but he is very much an establishment scientist who has been working on scenarios for manned Mars exploration for thirty years. Your surmise would be wrong: he has only soured on NASA's manned exploration wing in the past 4-5 years.

I made a clear distinction in the post regarding manned exploration and robotic exploration. Sorry that you don't get that.
And, Dana, do you even understand what a LaGrange Point is, let alone why virtually every reasonable proposal for such a space station that has previously been made (include internal NASA proposals) has centered around L4 and L5, not L2?

Or are you just assuming, as usual, that the government is always right?
The Last Ephor said…
Steve,

As far as I can see the main problem is one of cost/benefit. Currently, if there were neatly stacked bars of gold bullion on the surface of the moon it would still be a net loser to go get them. I understand there will be technologies developed along the way that would be money makers but how do you propose to make this lucrative? What about the Van Allen belt problem? Long term weightlessness problem?
Duffy

There's actually a crapload of research on all of these issues right now.

Micrc-G manufacturing in LEO has been studied extensively and profitable ventures, especially with imprinting circuits on microchips do potentially exist.

There are potential answers to the weightlessness problem being studied now, and the best argument for L4/L5 colonies is active research into the long-term sustainability of mostly closed eco-systems.

As for bars of gold on the Moon, I'd be very interested in meeting the people you got to stack them, but . . .

. . . they could be shipped back very economically if you take the time to build a catapult . . .

My primary argument is this: if manned space exploration was market-driven, we would have each step at the time it became profitable, and we wouldn't be paying the massive overhead we are paying now, year in and year out. . . .

As far as "pure science" robotic missions, I'm OK with leaving that to the government
tom said…
L2 isn't even a stable equilibrium (unlike L4 & L5). I station placed there would have to burn fuel to maintain it's position.

Popular posts from this blog

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

With apologies to Hube: dopey WNJ comments of the week

(Well, Hube, at least I'm pulling out Facebook comments and not poaching on your preserve in the Letters.) You will all remember the case this week of the photo of the young man posing with the .22LR squirrel rifle that his Dad got him for his birthday with resulted in Family Services and the local police attempting to search his house.  The story itself is a travesty since neither the father nor the boy had done anything remotely illegal (and check out the picture for how careful the son is being not to have his finger inside the trigger guard when the photo was taken). But the incident is chiefly important for revealing in the Comments Section--within Delaware--the fact that many backers of "common sense gun laws" really do have the elimination of 2nd Amendment rights and eventual outright confiscation of all privately held firearms as their objective: Let's run that by again: Elliot Jacobson says, This instance is not a case of a father bonding with h

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?