Aucbvax.5167
fa.space
utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!space
Sat Nov 14 03:35:45 1981
SPACE Digest V2 #34
>From OTA@S1-A Sat Nov 14 02:55:18 1981

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 2 : Issue 34

Today's Topics:
                         Privitization of space
                   private vs. public in SPACE Digest
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 13 Nov 1981 1003-CST
From: Clyde Hoover <CC.CLYDE AT UTEXAS-20>
Subject: Privitization of space
To: space at MIT-MC

       The discussion about private business getting into the space
business in a serious way DOES belong here, because it falls into the
scope of SPACE digest (I feel), and there hasn't been much traffic on
this list recently anyway (things need to be livened up around here).

       To wit:

       While opening space to non-governmental use has potential
dangers, (one can see cost-cutting on safety hardware for a priviate
shuttle, leading to a launch pad explosion or reentry burnup), leaving
it exclusivly in the hands of the government (especially the military)
makes it a political hostage.

       Let me advance another scenario that can happen if the
bureaucratic hold on space is not broken:

       1983 - Furthur budget cuts for NASA cause cancellation of fourth
              Shuttle orbiter. Funds for completion of Discovery (the
              third orbiter) are in doubt. The Air Force steps in and
              pays for the third and fourth orbiters. Congress readily
              approves this "national defense" expenditure.

       1984 - Increased doubts about Shuttle availability and
              reliability (due to trimmed operational funds) lead
              potential customers to use expendable vechiles instead
              (Ariadane for example), cutting income from cargo loads.

       1985 - The Congress wonders why the Shuttle is in such red ink
              and declares "The taxpayers of America cannot afford to
              subsidize this money-losing boondoggle". NASA gives some
              under-booked shuttle flights to the Air Force.

       1987 - Shuttle use has fully replaced expendable rockets for the
              military. Since the military is continually launching new
              spy satellites, plus testing particle-beam weapons,
              Vandenberg AFB is keeping busy while Cape Canerveral is
              winding down.

       1988 - The Shuttle is declared "too vital for national defense
              to be used for other things", since the military now
              leans heavily on it (and they have the bucks to
              do so), so NASA is reduced to buying cargo bay space from
              the Air Force to do science.

       I admit for this pessimistic scenario to take place, a lot of
things have to go wrong in the next year or two. I neither expect nor
desire these things to happen. However, if space remains, as it is now,
exclusively in the hands of the government, this CAN happen, and there
will be no failsafe against it.

       A solution is to open up space to private speculation (with
proper licensing and [gasp] regulations). In the interim, the money for
the R&D must continue to flow from the taxpayers to build the basic
technology for space industrialization (the Shuttle).

       Alright, folks.... let's see those brickbats fly!
-------

------------------------------

Date: 13 Nov 1981 10:25:22-PST
From: decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley
In-real-life: Steven M. Bellovin
Location: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
To: decvax!duke!unc!space@Berkeley
Subject: private vs. public in SPACE Digest

The reason I originally objected to this appearing in space is that
it's not a question about the space program, it's about the free
market vs. government ownership, and the author just happened to pick
the space program as an example.  No new facts about the space program
or NASA were presented, just the standard arguments.  Even if we weren't
discussing this very topic on POLI-SCI -- and we are -- that would
still be a more appropriate forum.  The subset of the discussion belonging
here is that pertaining to specific examples, such as the two or three
private firms building rockets (including one American firm -- their
first test was about as successful as the early Vanguard tests).

               --Steve

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest
*******************

-----------------------------------------------------------------
gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <[email protected]>
of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/


This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:

1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.

2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:

The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.