BRUC%MIT-MC@sri-unix.UUCP (03/11/84)
From: Robert E. Bruccoleri <BRUC @ MIT-MC> It is deeply troubling to see members of the space science community openly urging the cancellation of the space station for a number of reasons: 1) Politically, it can be disasterous for all space exploration efforts. There are many politicians who feel spending money on space is a waste of money, and will use these criticisms by experts to justify reduction of all space efforts. Any negative comments like this are bound to be taken out of context, and the good intentions of the critics won't mean squat. 2) It is divisive within the space community as a whole. We should not attacking each other in front of Congress over the small piece of the pie we get for our efforts; rather, we should work together to get more money for everyone's projects of interest. Also, it's bad for morale. The idea that a planetary scientist would write a Congressional committee urging cancellation of the space station which I support strongly is first depressing and second angering. These differences of opinion should be settled outside such an influential arena. 3) There are many space enthusiasts who want to go into space themselves, or at least make it possible for their children (that's my sentiment). A likely path to this is the settlement of space (a la O'Neill's High Frontier), and for that path, a space station will be very useful. 4) The space station proposed by Reagan is a civilian station, no military involvement. If that attribute can be maintained as the station is constructed and flown (assuming that it isn't cut), and if its commercial potential is realized, then there will business interests in stopping the militarization of space as military and civilian uses will tend to clash. Remember, the military applications of the shuttle arose because there wasn't enough support from the civilian space effort to get past Congress and the administrations. If DOD changes its mind about a space station and the civilian space station support is weak, the same thing could happen here. 5) Historically, (if you can draw conclusions about a 25 year old program) the fortunes of space science have been closely tied to manned space programs. It hasn't been exclusionary (every dollar spent on manned space is one less spent on unmanned space, as claimed). Every planetary probe up to and including Voyager was planned and started during the time of the Apollo program. With the improvement in NASA's fortunes with the flying of the space shuttle, we now have one new start (Venus Radar Mapper), and possible another (Mars Geoscience/Climatology). Trickle down, voodoo space funding if you will. But, if I were a space scientist, I wouldn't tempt history and I'd support bigger NASA budgets in any form. I could say more, but I've written enough. To Jan Wolitzky, you did a nasty thing to your brethren. It's unlikely that you'll repent, but I hope that we can undo the damage you've done.