Planning the post-Apollo space program: Are there lessons for the present?

The current debate over the future of human spaceflight in the USA has been a fascinating, and troubling, exercise in futility for those inextricably committed to an expansive vision of human exploration and development of space. The retirement of the Space Shuttle, originally set for the end of 2010 but later extended into 2011, the technical and funding problems of the Constellation follow-on program that led to its cancellation in 2009, and the emergence of commercial vendors who might be able to offer human access to Earth orbit have all complicated the current environment. In view of this situation, the question may be legitimately asked: what might we learn from earlier efforts to develop a human spaceflight capability the last time such a transition took place? Using the post-Apollo transition from the ballistic capsule to a winged, reusable vehicle as a case study, this article seeks to illuminate the planning, decision-making, economic, and political issues that have arisen in this policy debate. It suggests that a web of interlocking issues—only one of which was technical—affected the course taken. Instead, politics, economics, social and cultural priorities, values, and institutional considerations all helped to frame the debate and shape the decision.     

Management dynamics of NASA''s human spaceflight programs

The public management dynamics of human spaceflight at NASA in the post-Apollo era—Space Shuttle, International Space Station, and the United States national vision for space exploration—are examined. A number of variables are applied to assess this. Public management processes are identified as a function of political accountability, organizational decision-making and cultures, and technical aspects directed at high reliability and safety of the large-scale, complex, and high-risk technologies that characterize NASA's human spaceflight programs. The findings indicate that these variables are causally linked to management outcomes through dynamics of centralized and decentralized organizational approaches. The success or failure of NASA's human spaceflight programs are linked to organizational management based on dynamics between centralized aspects of management, like controls over cost and schedule, and decentralized aspects, such as engineering authority over technical development.     

Evolving public perceptions of spaceflight in American culture

There is a belief that exists in the United States about public support for NASA's activities. The belief is almost universally held that NASA and the cause of space exploration enjoyed outstanding public support and confidence in the 1960s during the era of Apollo and that public support waned in the post-Apollo era, only to sink to quite low depths in the decade of the 1990s. These beliefs are predicated on anecdotal evidence that should not be discounted, but empirical evidence gleaned from public opinion polling data suggest that some of these conceptions are totally incorrect and others are either incomplete or more nuanced than previously believed. This paper explores evolution of public support for space exploration since the 1960s. Using polling data from a variety of sources it presents trends over time and offers comments on the meaning of public perceptions for the evolution of space policy and the development of space exploration in the United States.     

Can space exploration survive the end of the Cold War?

The first, heroic age of space exploration was drived by national rivalry between the USA and USSR. There have indeed been recent achievements, but as the Cold War ends the superpowers are turning their attention to domestic issues and the prospect looms of a prolonged hiatus in space exploration. The only way forward is through international cooperation, but this will never happen without a serious investment of political will. A well-planned, long-term strategy for the exploration of Mars could provide the necessary focus.     

Observations on the evolution of satellite launch volume and cyclicality in the space industry

Satellites have been rightly described as the lifeblood of the entire space industry and the number of satellites ordered or launched per year is an important defining metric of the industry's level of activity, such that trends and variability in this volume have significant strategic impact on the space industry. Over the past 40+ years, hundreds of satellites have been launched every year. Thus an important dataset is available for time series analysis and identification of trends and cycles in the various markets of the space industry. This article reports findings of a study for which we collected data on over 6000 satellites launched since 1960 on a yearly basis. We grouped the satellites into three broad categories – defense and intelligence, science, and commercial satellites – and identified and discussed the main trends and cyclical patterns for each of these. Institutional customers (defense and intelligence, and science) accounted for over two-thirds of all satellites launched within our time period (1960–2008), and, in the 1960s and 1970s, they accounted for 90% and 73.5%, respectively. A fair conclusion from this data is that the space industry was enabled by, and grew because of the institutional customers, not commercial market forces. However, when the launch data is examined more closely, a growing influence of the commercial sector is noticeable. Over the past two decades communication satellites accounted for roughly half of all launches, thus reflecting an important shift in the space industry in which the commercial sector is playing an equal role (on a launch volume basis) to that of the institutional market. Cyclical patterns in the satellite launch volume over the past decade are separately discussed before we sum up with a conclusion.     

From Halley's Comet to solar terrestrial science : The evolution of the Inter-Agency consultative group

The Inter-Agency Consultative Group (IACG) is an organization which seeks to maximize scientific returns from focused areas of space science through international cooperation. In its 11-year history the IACG has experienced both monumental success (with the collaborative exploration of Comet Halley) and, more recently, some serious growing pains in its second phase of operation, which focuses on solar terrestrial science. In this post-Cold War period, with increased interaction between countries offering greater opportunities for cooperation, the lessons to be learned from the IACG's experience will be valuable ones.     

Space science and applications in CSIRO: towards a strategic plan

This Australian discussion paper, developed over a period of 12 months with input from a wide selection of scientists throughout the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) and prepared for CSIRO by C B Faudry, G P Harris and G J Huntington, recognizes that methodologies in space science are tools to be used in the support of CSIRO's science programs. It addresses the strengths and capabilities of CSIRO in the area of space science and puts forward policies, identifies roles and areas of opportunity for CSIRO. Implementation strategies are suggested. Following this step, the CSIRO Office of Space Science and Applications (COSSA) in consultation with Instiutes and Divisions will develop further the coherent strategy for space science research in CSIRO and use it to prepare a rolling strategic plan for this important area of science in the organisation. Copies of the report are available from COSSA at the address below.     

Truly dead or just comotose?: The status of space biology at the half-century mark

2007 was the 50th anniversary of Sputnik II, which launched the dog Laika into orbit and began the discipline of space biology. Compared with other young sub-disciplines within biology, space biology has been largely a failure. From day one Cold War politics led to dishonest or insufficient reporting of scientific results. International competition seems essential for getting organisms into orbit but political competition can lead to poor science. The People's Republic of China, as a new player in space exploration, provides hope for progress in space biology. It remains to be seen, however, whether it will invite significant international collaboration in space biology and establish higher standards than have characterized space biology research in the past 50 years.     

Why go to the moon? The many faces of lunar policy

What is it about the Moon that captures the fancy of humankind? A silvery disk hanging in the night sky, it conjures up images of romance and magic. It has been counted upon to foreshadow important events, both of good and ill, and its phases for eons served humanity as its most accurate measure of time. This paper discusses the Moon as a target for human exploration and eventual settlement. This paper will explore the more than 50-year efforts to reach the Moon, succeeding with space probes and humans in Project Apollo in the 1960s and early 1970s. It will then discuss the rationales for spaceflight, suggesting that human space exploration is one of the least compelling of all that might be offered. The paper will then discuss efforts to make the Moon a second home, including post-Apollo planning, the Space Exploration Initiative, and problems and opportunities in the 2004 Vision for Space Exploration, and cancellation of that program in 2010.     

Lessons from half a century experience of Japanese solid rocketry since Pencil rocket

50 years have passed since a tiny rocket “Pencil” was launched horizontally at Kokubunji near Tokyo in 1955. Though there existed high level of rocket technology in Japan before the end of the second World War, it was not succeeded by the country after the War. Pencil therefore was the substantial start of Japanese rocketry that opened the way to the present stage.In the meantime, a rocket group of the University of Tokyo contributed to the International Geophysical Year in 1957–1958 by developing bigger rockets, and in 1970, the group succeeded in injecting first Japanese satellite OHSUMI into earth orbit. It was just before the launch of OHSUMI that Japan had built up the double feature system of science and applications in space efforts. The former has been pursued by ISAS (the Institute of Space and Astronautical Science) of the University of Tokyo, and the latter by NASDA (National Space Development Agency). This unique system worked quite efficiently because space activities in scientific and applicational areas could develop rather independently without affecting each other.Thus Japan's space science ran up rapidly to the international stage under the support of solid propellant rocket technology, and, after a 20 year technological introduction period from the US, a big liquid propellant launch vehicle, H-II, at last was developed on the basis of Japan's own technology in the early 1990's. On October 1, 2003, as a part of Governmental Reform, three Japanese space agencies were consolidated into a single agency, JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency), and Japan's space efforts began to walk toward the future in a globally coordinated fashion, including aeronautics, astronautics, space science, satellite technology, etc., at the same time. This paper surveys the history of Japanese rocketry briefly, and draws out the lessons from it to make a new history of Japan's space efforts more meaningful.     

Article

This is a slightly edited version of the Executive Summary of a joint report on cooperation in space science produced by the Space Studies Board of the USA National Research Council and the European Space Science Committee of the European Science Foundation. Using analysis of 13 case-study missions it reviews 30 years of joint missions and makes 14 recommendations based on its findings. These include the importance of setting a scientific rationale for each mission and of ensuring that objectives are shared by engineers and others involved in it, the need for independent periodic assessments and that all agreements should specify the scope, expectations and obligations of the respective agencies and relevant partners.The USA and Europe have been cooperating in space science for more than three decades. This history of cooperation has survived significant geopolitical, economic and technological changes, such as the end of the Cold War, the pressure of budget reductions and the increasing focus on economic competition and the global marketplace. Both Europe and the USA have learned from one another and acquired a knowledge base as well as an infrastructure to implement joint missions and research activities. More importantly, the decades of cooperative space research efforts between the USA and Europe have built a community of scientists whose joint scientific exchanges have established a heritage of cooperation on both sides of the Atlantic.The scientific fruits of this heritage are plainly evident in achievements such as a signature for supermassive black holes provided by the Hubble Space Telescope (HST); the first views of the solar atmosphere and corona illuminated by the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO); the sharing of expensive research facilities on the International Microgravity Laboratory (IML); and the impressive data on ocean altimetry from the Ocean Topography Experiment (TOPEX-POSEIDON) mission, which is significantly improving our understanding of global ocean circulation.There were no guideposts for the emergence of space science cooperation between Europe and the USA. In the process of introducing new procedures and improvements to facilitate cooperation, missteps occurred, and there were political, economic and scientific losses. This report takes stock of US–European history in cooperative space endeavors, the lessons it has demonstrated and the opportunities it suggests to enhance and improve future US–European cooperative efforts in the sciences conducted in space.     

A new role for a new millennium? The changing nature of space activities

Space activity has lost the momentum it had in the past. During the Cold War the use of space was constrained by specific political and military conditions which gave it a strong but narrow identity. The aerospace industry, in particular, was in a position to develop protected and exclusive ties with the public sector. These times have passed and diminishing competition between the two main space powers has had consequences for the planning of major space undertakings. Space activity is in the process of being thoroughly transformed as it is forced to become more connected to general economic and industrial activity, especially in the field of information. An opportunity for a sector that has been struggling could also prove to be risky as space activity is losing some of its previously strong identity. Space currently seems to lack the high level of public support from governments it once enjoyed, while not finding an alternative in the industry itself to this declining investment. This situation should lead both the space community and the political authorities to consider new general space applications that will be more in line with the preoccupations of our modern societies and thus contribute to solving the principal global issues of tomorrow.     

International space programmes and policies : N. Jasentuliyana and Ralph Chipman, eds North Holland, Amsterdam and New York, 1984, 552 pp, $65.00

The Second United Nations Conference on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space ( 82) identified crucial problems and made recommendations on strategies for developing countries to bridge the gap with advanced nations in the area of space technology. This article addresses some issues which, although implicit in the Report, are not discussed in detail therein. The role of space science and related scientific research is particularly emphasized. Close attention is paid to the role of human factors, such as the motivation to conduct research, the motivation to engage in international cooperation, and the motivation to utilize and exploit space. Possible opportunities for space research for developing countries, as well as relevant issues concerning management of space, are briefly discussed.     

“We can lick gravity,but…”: What trajectory for space in Australia?

In 2008 the Australian Senate Economics Committee held an inquiry into the state of Australia's space science and industry sector. One of the most important problems identified by the committee was that Australia lacked both a space agency and a national space policy in order to formulate a whole-of-government approach to space issues. This article briefly discusses Australia's historical political lacuna in relation to space before considering how space issues fit within broader contemporary policy frameworks at both the domestic and international levels. Using some of the findings from the inquiry, the author then addresses some core issues that the Australian government should consider when constructing a national space policy.     

The US civilian space programme : Charting a new course

The US space programme continues to face difficulties in restructuring to meet existing political and fiscal conditions, in part because the basic structure and focus of the programme derive from the tensions of the Cold War. This paper argues that the world's new, more complicated political and economic conditions present a challenge for US policy makers that can be met with a renewed focus on the pursuit of science and the public good, within the context of international economic competition and political and scientific cooperation.     

The participation of developing countries in space research

The Second United Nations Conference on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (Unispace 82) identified crucial problems and made recommendations on strategies for developing countries to bridge the gap with advanced nations in the area of space technology. This article addresses some issues which, although implicit in the Unispace Report, are not discussed in detail therein. The role of space science and related scientific research is particularly emphasized. Close attention is paid to the role of human factors, such as the motivation to conduct research, the motivation to engage in international cooperation, and the motivation to utilize and exploit space. Possible opportunities for space research for developing countries, as well as relevant issues concerning management of space, are briefly discussed.     

The contest for leadership in East Asia: Japanese and Chinese approaches to outer space

Japan and China, as two advanced spacefaring nations in Asia-Pacific region, are often referred to as rivals in space. China's successful manned space launch program in 2003 and ASAT test in 2007 were considered as turning points which potentially introduces a “space race in Asia”. This article argues that there are three defining arenas in a space race: competition for prestige or soft power, competition over military capability or hard power, and competition of international services or public goods. It analyzes the objectives, norms and logics of space policy in Japan and China, and argues that these two countries have quite different thinking over what to do in space, explaining that they are playing different games in the first two arenas. However, Japan and China are competing for leadership and influence over the region. APRSAF and APSCO, two similar regional space organizations, are the vehicles for this competition. It concludes that there is a space race only in the third arena as a competition for leadership in Asia.     

International cooperation in space — new opportunities, new approaches : An assessment

Now that the Cold War is over, the authors of this Viewpoint believe that in the interests of the USA as well as the rest of the world international cooperation should become a more fundamental element of US space policy. Cooperative agreements will not always be easy to reach and will require creative statecraft. To that end the USA should take the initiative in establishing a high-level international policy forum to facilitate discussions on the main goals and objectives to be served by international cooperation in space.     

Explaining public support for space exploration funding in America: A multivariate analysis

Recent studies have identified the need to understand what shapes public attitudes toward space policy. I address this gap in the literature by developing a multivariate regression model explaining why many Americans support government spending on space exploration. Using pooled data from the 2006 and 2008 General Social Surveys, the study reveals that spending preferences on space exploration are largely apolitical and associated instead with knowledge and opinions about science. In particular, the odds of wanting to increase funding for space exploration are significantly higher for white, male Babyboomers with a higher socio-economic status, a fondness for organized science, and a post-secondary science education. As such, I argue that public support for NASA's spending epitomizes what Launius termed “Apollo Nostalgia” in American culture. That is, Americans benefitting most from the old social order of the 1960s developed a greater fondness for science that makes them more likely to lament the glory days of space exploration. The article concludes with suggestions for how to elaborate on these findings in future studies.     

Supplying Earth-observation data from space

This article uses the context of the Earth Observing System (EOS) to address two sets of economic and policy issues that have been fundamental to the rancorous debate over EOS, and which promise to figure prominently in future discussion of other US space activities. The first set of issues concerns whether the purported cost savings from larger-scale spacecraft and multiple-sensor coordination are substantial enough to justify large-scale approaches, and the differences in the risk associated with the large-scale projects compared to smaller-scale alternatives. The second set of issues concerns the institutional organization of projects, namely whether a project's technology should be an almost exclusively governmentally funded, owned and operated activity as is now the case, or whether there could be a larger role than now envisaged for the commercial space sector.