NASA Boss Says Mars Colonization Will Be Corporate Only

99luftballon writes "The head of NASA Ames Research Center has said that he expects any colonization of Mars, the Moon or asteroids to be done by private companies rather than by NASA. There's some interesting parallels with the East India Company, although that was hardly a triumph of capitalism. From the article: 'Dr. Simon Worden, director at NASA Ames Research Center, told The Register that the agency was firmly enmeshing itself with the private sector, citing cooperation on the Dragon capsule being developed by Elon Musk's SpaceX team as a good example. NASA developed a heat shield material called PICA (Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator), capable of withstanding 1850 degrees Celsius (3360 degrees Fahrenheit), and gave it to SpaceX, who manufactured it.' The article also mentions Google's head of space projects, who has 'Intergalactic Federation King Almighty and Commander of the Universe' on her business cards."

Comments

China

[BasilBrush]

Colonization of Mars will be done by China. What's it got to do with NASA?

Re:China

[WindBourne]

That is not certain. If NASA is allowed to get private space going, then it is a certainty that by 2020, that NASA via private space will be on the moon. And likewise, within 5 years later, private space will go to Mars. Why? Profits. By building multiple private space stations in orbit, multiple nations will want to use them. From there, if companies like SpaceX, ULA, Bigelow will want to get to the moon. Why again? Profits. They KNOW that nations will pay much more to go to the moon and explore. So will other companies. The ability to mine for water and send it back to the ISS and private space stations much cheaper than from earth would be a big deal. Likewise, the ability to mine Uranium, breed it, and then fuel rocket engines with it to go to Mars will be a strong demand.

America DOES have a problem. We have to get past politicians like Hatch, Coffman, Hutchinson, Shelby, Wolfe, Nelson, etc., but I know that even Coffman is already being called on his destructive actions against NASA. The others will be looked at as well.

Re:China

[Teancum]

As much as this is suggested, I highly doubt it... at least not without somebody else going there first and developing the technologies independent of China.

While I will admit that China may be a major player in the future of spaceflight, their culture is one that does not encourage technological innovation, and their governmental system is also one that does not encourage innovation other than trying to figure out how to make stuff cheaper by cutting quality.

I am also not really impressed with the progress that they are making in terms of spaceflight. They are doing stuff, but it is very slow (especially compared to what the good old USSR did back in the 1950's and 1960's.... and don't even get me started with a comparison to NASA in the 1950's and 1960's) and their operational tempo is absolutely pathetic. By operational tempo, they are setting themselves up to a whole bunch of problems in the future because their ground crews and engineers simply aren't gaining any experience in actually putting people into space. It has been a couple of years since the last manned spaceflight by China, and people do forget how to do simple things if you don't practice those skills. For example, would you trust an aircraft mechanic who only repaired an engine once every 3-5 years? Why would you trust a rocket engine built by a team of technicians who only built one set of engines every 3-5 years?

On top of that, the operational tempo they have right now isn't even sufficient for maintaining a LEO space station, much less trying to establish any sort of outpost/base somewhere beyond LEO. They simply don't have the personnel who are trained with the experience necessary to get much done in space. Both Roscosmos and NASA have those people, and a number of private companies in both Russia and America have veterans of those programs to get private astronaut corps of their own going. This could change, but it would take a substantial increase in the Chinese space budget and a real commitment on the part of the Chinese government to really get stuff done in space. The European Union (either through the ESA or some other similar organization) might also get into the game, and to me they are the one other potential rival in terms of getting a substantial manned presence in space. The Europeans have the technology and the wealth necessary to pull it off, what they lack is the political will to accomplish much.

Re:China

[Rogerborg]

who else but the Chinese? If the Chinese don't do it then no one will.

The Muslim Ummah taken as a whole is perfectly capable of it. Middle East money, Iranian, Pakistani and Malaysian technology, badda boom, badda bing, Mosques on Mars.

Re:China

[mbone]

Sergei Korolev died in 1966, and the N1 was finally canceled in 1976. So, by "a number of years ago" you mean "decades ago." If the Soviets could plan in (say) 1970 to land on Mars 47 years later, I don't see why the Chinese couldn't plan now to land on Mars in (say) 2049, which would be the Centennial of their revolution. And, if they pursue this goal, I think they could, in that time frame, pull it off.

 

Re:China

[cobbaut]

They are doing stuff, but it is very slow (especially compared to what the good old USSR did back in the 1950's and 1960's.... and don't even get me started with a comparison to NASA in the 1950's and 1960's) and their operational tempo is absolutely pathetic.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but it took Americans a couple of decades before they mastered fully automated docking. The Chinese accomplished this on their very first attempt.

Their progress seems to go very slow, but underneath it is an admirable long term plan (5 years plans that fit into ten year plans, that fit themselves into longer term plans!). I guess that's the advantage of having a dictatorship. They are not that far behind on what they announced back in 1999 (manned flight in 2002 (done in 2003), moon probe in 2007 (done in 2007), space station and docking around 2010 (done in 2011)...).
This summer they will man their first space station, twice. Next year Tiangong 2 will go up, by 2015 they will have 20 ton modules (tiangong 3) and improved launch power (CZ5).
Next year also the Chinese will land a rover on the Moon: first rover on the Moon since the Soviets in 1976, but more importantly it will be the only rover on the Moon.

Their Shenzhou spacecraft program might resemble the American Mercury or Gemini, but it includes all Apollo features as well. By 2020 they will have landed on the Moon, to stay a bit longer than a couple of days!

Indentured Servants

[andymadigan]

I wonder how many people will end up as indentured servants unable to purchase transport back to earth, working in dangerous working conditions on a world run by corporations. They'll be lured by false promises, or maybe even sent by countries with overpopulated prisons.

Re:Indentured Servants

[Teancum]

Slavery started in "the south" (and the "north" of the British colonies like New York and Massachusetts.... which both had slavery in 1776) in part because the indentured servant program was deemed as ineffective. Poor people from Ireland and London's south end would move to America, and by the time their seven to ten years of servitude were done they finally had the skills necessary to be effective.... but their term of service was up. Several of these "servants" would also simply disappear into the American wilderness and set up farms or homesteads of their own where law enforcement to make sure these indentured servants would finish their terms of service was largely ineffective.

People of African descent stuck out as much more obvious and had a much harder time being able to disappear in a similar fashion. Yes, it was also utterly racist and some of the first people from Africa were also indentured servants, but the general process of indentured servitude wasn't really the problem. It was the more permanent status of general slavery and the fact that such a status could be inherited that caused the problems. I'll admit indentured servitude can lead to general slavery as well, but it doesn't have to be seen as something so ugly either. Strong limits simply need to be set on how it is implemented with a recognition that civil rights do apply to those "servants" as well.

Re:Indentured Servants

[Black Parrot]

You mean like the US and Australia?... I am not an ozzie so I wonder about indentured servents.

There may have been indentured servants in Oz, but the big issue was its use by the British as a penal colony.

But this is how people came ot the new world and how slavery started in the south.

No, indentured servitude is when free persons agree to a longish labor contract in exchange for something, e.g. passage to the New World.

Slavery in the Americas started with the Spanish policy of repartimento, which was the use of natives for slave labor, rationalized as repayment for the favor of being saved from their pagan religion by their conquerors. But when they took people from the Mexican highlands and put them to work on the coastal plantations, they suffered greatly and died soon. So a certain Bishop Las Casas, somewhat enlightened for his time, but not by modern values, recommended bringing in African slaves, who would be more acclimated to that sort of work environment.

According to Wikipedia, he later decided that that wasn't right either, and took a stand against it. (Wikipedia also says he wasn't the only one who advocated it in the first place. My knowledge of this comes from Prescott's monumental History of the Conquest of Mexico, which is long and sometimes tedious, but well worth the read if you're interested in the topic. But it's ~150 years old now, so I'm inclined to lean toward the Wikipedia version. See the article on Las Casas, and while there click the link to the article about the import of African slaves.)

Britain and its colonies got in on slavery much later, becoming entangled with the Spanish in the slave trade. (The above was well before the British had the colonies that eventually became the USA and expended across "the south".)

What's up with the summary?

[FleaPlus]

The summary somewhat misrepresents what Worden said. From the article, here's Worden's actual statement, which seems quite sensible to me: "Governments can develop new technology and do some of the exciting early exploration but in the long run it's the private sector that finds ways to make profit, finds ways to expand humanity. ... Most of private individuals I've talked to about interest in settling on Mars, including Elon Musk, talk about in the next few decades they think the private sector will fund settlement missions - whether to the Moon, Mars, or asteroids. As a government laboratory our job is to develop to enable those kinds of things by developing technology and early exploration, and we hope the private sector will find a way to do something like that."

Re:Criminals are unlikely.

[mcgrew]

Because some people deserve only death for what they've done

You know, I can't understand the "death penalty" thing at all. Death is no penalty -- we are all under a death sentence, every one of us. But when you or I die, it is very unlikely that you're going to die peacefully in your sleep. You're going to have cancer, or a heart attack, or pneumonia, or alzheimer's, or fall down in the nursing home and break your hip after suffering from arthritis for decades.

Timothy McVeigh, however, who killed hundreds of people, many of them children, knew exactly when he was going to die and how he was going to die, and had a chance to repent his evil deeds and make peace with his maker (McVeigh was a Catholic). Then he was painlessly put to sleep like a beloved pet with an incurable disease.

I say fuck the bleeding heart conservatives. Someone commits an atrocity, keep them locked in a cage, until they die as horribly and unexpectedly as I surely will. I consider that a good expenditure of my tax dollars.

As well as what you said; Illinois abolished the death penalty when DNA proved that half of death row were innocent. Over half of all prisoners in the US are nonviolent and were incarcerated for drugs, half of those for marijuana. Now THAT is a serious waste of tax money.

Here's a single example of a terrible waste inolving an old friend's brother.

There was a dope dealer in Cahokia, IL who deserved prison; he was also a theif, and violent. He sold every drug there was, including steroids and heroin. After 20 years dealing dope he finally got caught. Of course, the feds offered him a deal.

So Mike's brother, who didn't even smoke pot, let alone sell drugs, gets a call from Radford (the dope dealer). Radford needed money to make a purchase and if Mike's brother would loan him a thousand bucks he'd get two thousand back in a week. Loan a guy a thousand bucks at 100% weekly interest? Of course he did. he had the money, he made a good living as a truck mechanic.

And of course it was a setup, and the DEA's tape recorders were rolling. Mike's brother, who had never had any connection with the drug trade in his life whatever, not even as a customer. spent five years in federal prison for conspiracy to distribute cocaine. As did half of his high school graduation class, most of whom were likewise innocent before the setup.

Radford, who'd been the town's biggest dope dealer for two decades, spent two years in prison.

Mike's brother's wife divorced him when he was in prison and married another man. He's now unemployable and a hard core alcoholic and yes, now is a doper himself.

Anybody who doesn't think the justice system is severely dysfunctional in the US is either ignorant or delusional.