What will our space ambitions actually look like a
decade from now? Three experts tell Richard
Hollingham.
Space has not been this exciting since the 1960s.
Nasa recently launched Orion , its first new spacecraft to
carry astronauts since the Space Shuttle, and is
developing a massive new rocket to rival the Saturn V.
Europe has landed a space probe on a comet 510 million
kilometres (317 million miles) away and China is
developing its next space station.
Meanwhile private companies are changing the
economics of space by forging ahead with plans for
human spaceflight, space tourism and even missions to
Mars .
The next few years will also see the final construction
of the James Webb Space Telescope – a space
observatory the size of a tennis court.
So in the decade from 2020, can we look forward to a
glorious new space age of Moon bases, Mars colonies
and more remarkable cosmic discoveries? To try to find
out, we canvassed the opinions of an expert panel for
their predictions beyond 2020.
Our experts are:
SP: Scott Pace, Director of the Space Policy Institute in
Washington DC
DB: David Baker, ex-Nasa engineer, author and editor of
Spaceflight magazine
MG: Monica Grady, professor of planetary and space
sciences at the UK’s Open University
As you would expect, there are plenty of uncertainties
in the coming years in space – not least the impact of
domestic and international politics. Nor do our
panellists always agree. However, here are the six
predictions they came up with:
1. Humans will go back to the Moon
DB: If only because it’s up there, you can see it in the
night sky. The Moon’s just three days away and it
requires very little extra capability to send astronauts
there for relatively short periods of time. China is very
much targeting the Moon as a place it wants to put its
astronauts.
MG: I envisage a semi-permanent habitation of the
Moon. This is not colonisation; this is going to the
Moon and using it for a launch pad for rockets to Mars
– a lunar base for future exploration of the Solar
System.
SP: The problem with the current US space policy is
that not only did it get rid of the Moon as the next step
and substituted this rather vague path to Mars and
asteroids, it left out our international partners. We had
many potential partners that were interested in the
Moon. It belongs on the agenda because it’s driven by
the geopolitical, technical and economic interests of
the US and our major partners.
2. But not – yet – to Mars
MG: Although Mars is a goal for human exploration,
once you’ve gone there and planted a flag there, I’m not
exactly sure what happens next.There are discussions
about whether we should make Mars a protected habitat
in the way that we have protected habitats on Earth.
SP: When we said we’re going to Mars, a lot of our
fellow space agencies said, ‘well that’s nice but it’s a
lot more than we can handle’. Strategically we picked a
direction that left out the most crucial thing in today’s
world, which is international partnership.
DB: One has to realise there’s never been a time in
Nasa’s history when it hasn’t been as controlled by its
public relations department hooked into the White
House. The view the public is being presented with
from Nasa is very different to the capabilities of the
agency.
The new Orion spacecraft is capable of three weeks of
autonomous operations in space. It’s not capable of
providing human habitation on the way to Mars. Going
to Mars is drastic, dangerous and premature.
3. China and India will become major space nations
DB: We are starting to see a space race between India
and China and I think that is going to play out gradually
over the next few years.
SP: I don’t really think there’s a race in that sense. For
China space is a way of instilling national pride and
support for the Communist Party, a way of improving
industrial quality and of attracting young people into
the science and technology fields.
DB: In the West we get a new space policy with every
new president or government. There is a general lack of
continuity and a lot of time and money are wasted.
China has the advantage in this – it has a non-
democratic political system that can lay out plans
several years in the future and expect to see those
accomplished.
4. The future of the International Space Station (ISS) is
uncertain
SP: The Americans are committed to be there until 2024,
the problem is whether our partners will be there
through that time and that depends on the future
relationship with Russia. Both the US and Russia are
very tied to the ISS, it’s a deeply mutually dependent
exercise. Every effort is made to insulate that from other
problems in our relationship.
DB: The Russians can’t continue to operate the ISS on
their own, as it’s not owned by them. I think the whole
thing will be deorbited. By the time we get to 2020 it
will be more than 20 years since the initial elements
were launched.
SP: The future of the space station depends on the
future of international partnership. And if we don’t have
a clear path on what we do next after the space station,
the real answer is we’re going to be going out of
business. Human spaceflight will certainly continue but
it won’t be led by the West.
DB: We are seeing a number of quite serious concerns
about keeping it running. Over the last year we’ve seen
a lift in the number of hours spent on maintenance.
SP: By the mid 2020s we’ll see a Chinese station up
there and Europe is in discussions with China over
having one of its astronauts on board.
5. Private ventures could eclipse the agencies
DB: I think we’re going to get XCOR and Virgin Galactic
flying people. You’ll have your high-rise joyriders but I
think the real promise is sending scientists and
experiments on sub-orbital flights.
MG: First of all it will be the super-wealthy and the tech
geeks (or the super-wealthy tech geeks), in the same
way that the super-wealthy took the first aeroplane
flights. When the airlines were getting going, we forget
that many of them such as British Airways were
government-owned. It will be the same with rocket
flights to the Moon. At the moment it’s the agencies
but eventually it’s going to be companies like SpaceX,
Virgin Galactic or their successors.
SP: The lack of future [US] government plans beyond
the ISS are quite dangerous for the emerging
commercial space sector. Without clear government
demand, it’s difficult to see how they can thrive on
their own. If you look at the development of SpaceX’s
and Orbital’s capabilities there are billions of dollars of
Nasa funding to meet Nasa’s needs.
DB: The future lies not with grand visionary mega-
concepts of the Von Braun era but the solid
consolidation of private corporations wresting it away
from government. Then I think you’ll see performance.
6. Humans will continue to boldy go
SP: Defining what it is to be human involves answering
questions like: ‘Where can we go? What can we see?
What can we learn and bring back?’ In partnership with
robotic systems, we want to go to as many places as
we can. And we should.
MG: No doubt the robots will be able to do everything
the humans do and they’ll be no need, for scientific or
technical purposes, to send people. However, there is
curiosity – what people what to do and find, there’s
the aspiration and inspiration. People will still go once
the robots have shown us how to do it.
DB: I think while there are going to be these mega
projects – I would love to see these happen – I don’t
think that’s the way space is unfolding. It’s going to be
market-led, people-led, we’re seeing the
democratisation of the space programme.
MG: We are seeing the tech benefits that come from the
space programme. There are jobs in it. The UK space
industry, for instance, is one of the biggest providers of
income to government. I’m optimistic because I don’t
think that the inspiration value of space exploration has
changed.
No comments:
Post a Comment