Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 24 June 2009 | Nature | doi:10.1038/4591038a
US human spacefaring questioned
Review panel takes a hard look at NASA's goal of returning astronauts to the Moon.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email webadmin@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
Perhaps NASA goals should undergo the same scrutiny that the rest of us endure when submitting a grant proposal. What is the point of repeating a project that was performed conclusively and at great expense four decades ago, now, in the throes of war and depression?
I must agree with Randolph here. Sending personnel into space must be compensated in the form of results. If there is not extensive cost-benefit analysis, including the possible cost of their lives, then it will have been wasted. The compensation must outweigh alternatives to which $100 billion could be applied. Environmental changes presents new demands that could be appeased if research stations are established on the moon, or some similar scenario. Such a special case as this would then have to be evaluated for potential for success--but those analysis are not properly covered by our media (including this article). What happens if the next administration cuts the funding, leaving a $100 billion spending spree on a soon-to-be abandoned project? There are too many questions that need to answered. A massive topic as this ($100 billion massive) should receive a great deal more attention by Nature than this.
I would seem that the outcome of this committee composed " a mix of aerospace executives, astronauts, engineers, a retired general and two scientists" is predestined. Will this panel seriously be able to consider the proposition that manned space flight is a sad waste of money and time ? Unmanned probes can do just as well (actually better because they work in a quiet, human-waste free environment) for less cost. Manned space flight is simply a luxury when we need to solve so many global challenges here. Maintain a habitat on the moon ? How about we try to maintain habitats in our inner cities ?