8th Grade Student’s Letter, Discussion, Sunday, 5-15-11 May 15, 2011
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.trackback
8th Grade Student’s Letter, Discussion, Sunday, 5-15-11
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1558-BWB-2011-05-15.mp3
Guest: Open Lines Discussion on 8th Grader student’s letter. Topics: This is a two hour forty-five minute discussion concerning the issues raised by the 8th grade student in his letter to me. You are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show programming. Be aware that this is a two hour forty-five minute program with one break coming at 90 minutes into the discussion. The student’s letter to me can be found blow following this program summary. During this program, we received call after call from different listeners as well as numerous emails concerning the student’s perspectives on NASA, downsizing the organization, and reducing the budget for our civil space policy in the context of the student letter. Rather than summarize each caller and email, I’ll simply say that I was surprised that there was so much support for the student’s views on downsizing NASA and reducing the budget. When I commented on this, several of the callers sent an email suggesting that it had more to do with combating NASA and government waste rather than reducing the size of the space program. Unfortunately, we did not hear from the student as all of us had many questions to ask him to clarify his thinking for us. One issue that did come up was how best to inspire given what the student said about inspiration in his letter. Here I talked about science fiction and what other guests have said about the space reality or NASA TV not keeping up with the sci fi or virtual world. The also developed into an interesting side discussion. That said, all of us congratulated the student for his knowledge, awareness, and interest in space and encouraged him to keep it up as he goes through middle school to high school and eventually college. Do read the letter, listen to the discussion, and post your comments on the blog as to your thoughts on what this student had to say about NASA, inspiration, and our space program. Remember, he is speaking from the perspective of an 8th grader. I urge everyone to take his perspective seriously because he is representative of our future, not just for space, but for our nation. At one point during the discussion, listeners were suggesting different purposes for NASA. I asked listeners to send in the language form the NASA Charter so we could see the original purpose for which NASA was created. This caused quite a side discussion that you will want to hear. One of the listeners kindly sent in the URLs for this information and I have pasted them here: http://history.nasa.gov/spaceact.html (this is the original NASA Charter) and the newer version of the charter at http://www.nasa.gov/offices/ogc/about/space_act1.html. The last caller of the day was Stephen from Edmonton and we talked about contests and prizes for inspiring the youth. He suggested that they be international and I wondered if he thought the U.S. taxpayer should fund award to people outside the U.S. or if such international contests should be sponsored by many of the national space agencies. We leaned toward a DARPA model and I requested listener assistance in finding the right person to do a DARPA program on The Space Show. Let us know your thoughts about what this student wrote me in his letter. That is what the blog is for. If the student and/or his family hears this program, I would welcome having the student and his parents as guests on The Space Show. You can contact me at drspace@thespaceshow.com
The Letter
4/12/11
Dr. David M. Livingston
Host of The Space Show
Dear Dr. Livingston,
You wrote in your response article to ‘Is Manned Space Exploration Worth the Cost?”, that our paying the costs of space exploration are worth it because of the spin off advantages that start businesses, help economic growth, and continue to inspire people today. I am writing to you to say that I disagree with your stance on space exploration, and believe the program should be downsized.
The big reason you present is that the cost is outweighed by the indirect advances and inspirations. I feel differently. I believe that the cost is more than the space program is really using. I believe with a slimmer budget programs such as NASA would run more smoothly. Any small percentage of the budget is still a huge enough amount of money to make a difference in wherever you may put it.
Also, what of rising costs? Sure, the cost is only a small percentage of the total budget, but how long will that last if we continue to overfeed the program? As we make advances, the cost will also rise. As we push the borders of space, so we also push the budget.
Lastly, is it true that people will continue to be inspired by an event so long ago? As the years go by, more and more people are bound to forget of the importance of a few men on the moon. And to make enough advances to keep people inspired also takes a huge amount of money.
All in all, I believe that the cost of space exploration needs to get slimmer now or never. Yes, inspiration is great, but do we need physical or mental inspiration? Many inspirations are coming to young people now from theorists, who never set foot in a rocket. To not cut spending on the program now is to lose it forever.
Sincerely,
8th Grader
NASA does have a number of inefficiencies and the varied Centers sometimes undermine each other or at least fail to cooperate fully.
IMO, if Congress stopped using NASA as a jobs program and let them get back to the risk taking that private industry can’t afford to do, i really think NASA would be in a much better position even with a static budget.
Still, kudos to this 8th grader for taking the time to write the letter.
The varied centers are often in open warfare with each other. Fighting for money and power.
Also its not Congresses fault they use NASA as a jobs program — its what the voters see as one of NASA’s 2 primary values. If they started doing something else more valuble to people, that could change — but they’ll have to start doing said valuble something else – before folks will see them as more then a national symbol and jobs program.
While many theorists are coming up with some very good ideas, I would like to know how many of them are serious about the success of their plans, at least those that are aimed to work in the near term. Of those who are, ask them if they would take a trip into orbit were it physically possible for them to do so.
Chances are the majority of these theorist would jump at the chance to go to space, if only for a little while, and those who wouldn’t are probably content to work in a support role to improve the chances of those who can.
You can not advance the ability of man in space without actually bending metal and/or going there ourselves. This is how theories are proven true or false.
If we are ever to reduce the costs of access beyond LEO, we are going to have to work and spend on these kinds of developments. There are a great many things that need to be researched and developed to protect or improve the tools and equipment used in space, and most of these things feed back into the improvement of conditions of life on Earth.
NASA and the Russian Space Agency, as the leading manned space agencies are constantly searching for these kinds of improvements, but they do not have to be the ones to do the development if they can point out the advantages of these improvements to the domestic products to the manufacturers.
With a seriously trimmed back budget, NASA may not be able to function in this capacity any more, and other NGOs like the Mars and Planetary Societies will be left to fund this kind of research on their own.
Good luck having the Mars adn Planetary socyeties doing anything with their budgets now.
> == If we are ever to reduce the costs of access
> beyond LEO, we are going to have to work and
> spend on these kinds of developments. ==
Actually the costs are not driven by technology limitations – but by the tiny market size. The technology side costs are similarto that of aircraft -but those costs are spread over a market millions of times smaller.
Oh, more directly his letter was focusing on how a smaller NASA budget could do more with a more focused effort. Neat trick in gov
Really – though he rambles – his focus seems to be NASA can’t still inspire because of the moon program, and he hopes a smaller more focused NASA would get results, not just burn pork in districts. Probably closer to what you’d support – then what you’d appose.
He has a couple good points. NASA hasn’t been advancing on any physical, technological, scientific, or economic volunteer since the ’80′s at best.
A NASA looking to regain old glory with “Apollo on Steroids”, is like a middle aged guy still trying bask in the glory of being a high school quarterback. A NASA fighting for pork budget for votes in Congress isn’t worth much either.
For a fraction of its budget it could do much more, but you can say that about all gov agencies. The point has to be to get a NASA that does something!!! Advance technologies, foster new industries or advancing current ones, SOMETHING!
Currently no ones proposing anything like that. The senate wants to keep the decline from going on. CCDev and Obama want it shut down – as he told Bolden he feels NASA must not shall not send people beyond LEO. No ones proposing a vision for what NASA should do to move us forward. Without that NASA is just treading water or breaking down.