But then your brain chokes on an amazing fact: there are four people inside that shuttle experiencing all this excitement and tension on a completely different level, one of unfathomable magnitude relative to where you stand on terra firma. Your heart pours out to them, imagining them three miles away, strapped in, prepared to do something extraordinary. If I'm this worked up as a spectator, I thought, imagine the feelings inside the heads of the astronauts.
And these are government employees. They're not millionaires. Not to disparage space tourists; if I had the money, I would be spending it on putting myself into orbit, no question. But does the public cry or hug en masse when Charles Simonyi blasts off from Baikonur in a Soyuz rocket? Do crowds gather? This question is in no way indicative of any fault in Mr. Simonyi's character or motivation. I stood behind him while we were waiting to get our launch credentials; he seemed like a perfectly nice gentleman. But the reason an estimated one million people packed up their cars and RVs to drive to the Space Coast for a space shuttle launch is because it is put on by the people. Everyone who made that launch possible--in the truest definition of a government employee, they're our representatives in this incredible project. We don't just associate ourselves with them, we live through them. That means something. They've devoted their life to this very civil, very scientific cause--the exploration of outer space.
Kennedy Press Site, Atlantis Launch: NASA
More than anything else it's the humans who made me tear up. Humans are what made us all feel that spontaneous joy next to the big clock in that field. Humans are what elicited a loud cheer in NASA's Tweetup tent accompanying main-engine cutoff--the point in the mission where a safe orbit is assured. Humans are what made me well up again when my phone buzzed with messages in my pocket, knowing my own friends and loved ones were on the other end, wanting to share in what I had just experienced.
This is not to say, though, that cancelling the shuttle program was a bad decision. After three decades of service, all in low-earth orbit, NASA has wisely elected to utilize cheaper launch systems, both foreign and private, for the laborious duty of ferrying supplies and eventually astronauts to and from the ISS, which has become the shuttle's primary mission.
What's troubling is the uncertain future for the type of American manned spaceflight that pushes the boundaries of exploration forward. It could be argued that the shuttle itself failed on that goal. But despite its compromised scope, the world's first reusable space plane became an iconic figure in the American space program, perhaps for no other reason than it carried more humans into space than any other launch system in history.
Mahoney John holds the view that human space exploration is the way to go especially in this era of new scientific and technological innovations. Space explorations opens up opportunities to gain knowledge, to gain a greater appreciation of the universe, for example it enables weather men to predict the weather via satellite and finally, space explorations have a positive impact on today’s global communications. Critics of space exploration have observed that investing in it is a waste of time and money; perhaps they have not realized that there is enough money to solve problems in U.S and fund NASA appropriately. It is a matter of choice because at the end of the day, space exploration is necessary and we learn so much from it.
The feeling that one gets from having humans fly into space as John Mahoney writes in a popular science post (Mahoney, 2011) can not be easily traced but can be found when one recalls the feeling of accomplishment that the four Atlantis astronauts brought upon many people. The presence of human aboard a space shuttle as it launches is what causes emotions to run high among spectators as it launches.
The inability of NASA to have humans in space needs to be quickly addressed is discouraging judging from the emotions that were witnessed at the launch of The Atlantis. Witnessing the rocket launch personally makes you realize the potential of human’s accomplishments.
(Mahoney) argues that the greatness of a manned mission to space is driven by the objectivity of the mission. It is important to note that Mahoney feels that it is a great accomplishment to have humans in space as it is no ordinary feat. Even though space tourists often go into orbit, they do not attract the nationalism that the astronauts from NASA attract. Perhaps this is due to the fact that while their mission is for individual satisfaction, the government astronaut’s mission represents the whole of humanity.
The author marvels at the promising trends in space exploration and hopefully alludes to the advancements being made by private companies in an attempt to continue the dream of manned missions to space. Mahoney believes that space X will ‘almost certainly’ be at the forefront in fulfilling this dream if their work on the falcon 9 Rocket and dragon capsule are anything to go by. It is fascinating to learn of the interests that human beings have in space exploration. The fact that private companies have dedicated millions of dollars to the manned space mission re affirms this. With the vastness and endless opportunities of space, one can not help but feel that space exploration is a major necessity and important mission for humanity.
Although Mahoney acknowledges the failures of the shuttle Atlantis based on the troubling uncertainties that accompany future manned explorations, he points out that its greatest achievement was its ability to take more humans into space than any of the previous attempted launches. In addition, although space explorations are expensive, we cannot ignore the fact that space has contributed immensely to humankind and the society as well through providing communication and education in remote areas, monitoring the threat of pollution, enhancing medical instruments for better health care and much more. However it is important to point out that the efficiency of a space mission should surpass the thrill and wonder of having man in space. The value attached to human life can not be sacrificed for space exploration considering the risks involved (Harland D.M 138). This along with other reasons has been the basis of many arguments made by critics against manned space missions.
In a USA Today editorial (Roland) argues that the problems on the space station Mir make it clear why manned space missions may not be ideal. Having people in space causes more problems than automated missions would. Automated space crafts perform almost all the important work in space. Roland observes that space crafts that carry astronauts must take along everything that keeps the astronauts alive, adding tremendously to the weight and complexity of the mission. In the event that something goes wrong, the whole mission is jeopardized by the need to preserve the lives of the astronauts. Space explorations have adverse effects on the environment like depletion of the ozone layer. Studies have shown that rocket engines emit reactive molecules that deplete the ozone layer. It is also important to know the plans NASA has on future human space flights bearing in mind this was supposedly the last time NASA is flying astronauts in space and their regard for the environment because studies have confirmed our worst fears that if left unregulated rocket launches could contribute to more ozone destruction by 2050 than CFC’s. Mahoney John uses a language that is well written easy to understand by readers. He also makes use of pictures to bring out his ideas clearly. I would recommend this article for future space studies.
Work Cited
Mahoney John. Dear NASA: Please Keep the Promise of Human Spaceflight Alive. Popular Science, July 11, 2011. (http://www.popsci.com)
Alex Roland. Leave the people home. USA today, July 7th 1997.
Harland D.M, Harvey B. Space Exploration. New York: Springer, 2008.
