National Aeronautics and Space Administration

22785-looking back cover 11/20/02 1:42 PM Page 1
22785-looking back cover 11/20/02 1:42 PM Page 2
Looking Backward, Looking 

forty years of u.s. human spacefligh

8 May 2001

Looking Backward, Looking 

forty years of u.s. human spacefligh

Edited by Stephen J. Garbe

The NASA History Series

National Aeronautics and Space Admin

Office of External Relations

NASA History Office

Washington, DC 

2002
Looking Backward, Looking Forward: Forty Year

Spaceflight Symposium / edited by Stephen J. Gar

p. cm. -- (The NASA history series) (NASA 

Includes bibliographical references.

1. Astronautics--United States--History. 2. Mann

flight--History. I. Garber, Stephen J. II. Series. III. N

TL789.8.U5 L66 2002

629.45’009--dc21

200201
v

Introduction—John M. Logsdon . . . . . . . . . 

Opening Remarks—Daniel S. Goldin . . . . . 

Keynote Address

Human Spaceflight and American Society: 

The Record So Far—Charles Murray . . . . . 

Perspectives on the Past Forty Years of Hum

The Spaceflight Revolution Revisited

—William Sims Bainbridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Mutual Influences: U.S.S.R.-U.S. Interactions 

During the Space Race—Asif Siddiqi . . . . . . 

Making Human Spaceflight as Safe 

as Possible—Frederick D. Gregory . . . . . . . 

What If? Paths Not Taken—John M. Logsdo

The Experience of Spaceflight

Apollo and Beyond—Buzz Aldrin . . . . . . . . 

Breaking in the Space Shuttle—Robert Cripp

Going Commercial—Charles Walker . . . . . 

Science in Orbit—Mary Ellen Weber . . . . . 

Training for the Future—T. J. Creamer . . . 
vi

usg uaotesobet ub

About an Element of Human Greatness

—Homer Hickam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

The Ethics of Human Spaceflight—Laurie Z

Future Visions for Scientific Human 

Exploration—James Garvin . . . . . . . . . . . 

The International Space Station and 

the Future of Human Spaceflight

Preparing for New Challenges—William She

About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

The NASA History Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Preface and 

Acknowledgments—Stephen 

1

3

using robotic spacecraft, human spacefligh

expensive endeavor that engenders great popu

support for NASA. Much of this public interest 

boundaries of adventure, by exploring the uni

physical environment of space. Humans can 

in space that machines cannot. We can think, 

judgment calls based on experience and intu

In little more than forty years, we have g

planning, and hoping that humans will ent

rotating crews of astronauts and cosmonauts 

aboard an International Space Station (ISS

from the Cold War, which set the historical 

power competition in space during the 1960s, 

involving over a dozen cooperating nations. 

Not only have humans proved that it is 

in the harsh physical environment of space, 

cosmonauts have conducted important scient

feats in space. We’ve discovered that micrograv

ratory setting that is potentially useful for s

array of disciplines such as pharmacology, ma

physics, as well as more obvious fields such 

The pool of people who have flown 

broadened tremendously in the past forty yea

from a group of seven handpicked men that we
4

key roles on the ground. Older astronauts 

even seventies have flown in space. Beyon

manders, NASA now trains scientists and en

specialists to fly in space. Even more than the 

who are not “career astronauts,” NASA has 

civilians, such as teachers, into space. The is

general and of civilians in space in particul

flowed in importance over time but continu

recent history, the subject of paying tourists in 

the forefront.

This obviously relates to the ongoing to

ization. Spaceflight has always been expensiv

and especially in the 1990s, the federal govern

at ways to privatize certain space activities. D

in the commercial sector have expressed varyin

in making human spaceflight a profitabl

robotic applications satellites such as remot

munications have been significant ventures sin

both the government and the private secto

commercialization of human spaceflight som

mid-1990s, NASA turned over certain key op

of the Space Shuttle to the private United S

attempt to lower the government’s costs f

tions.” Recently, NASA has also entered into 
5

but commercialization efforts certainly have 

force in space history.

The history of human spaceflight has also 

icantly by technologies that were initially de

aerospace sector. The computer and biotech

have had major impacts on how space oper

and executed. In addition to exponential incr

power, the advent of digital microelectronics h

technology possible, which in turn has imp

computers, advances in biotechnology enabl

knowledge, safety, and health in space; spac

ergistically benefits the biotechnology indust

One technology that thus far has prove

pensive, reliable launch vehicle to improve 

space. There are many reasons this has p

Perhaps the first is that escaping Earth’s gra

continued to be an inherently difficult task te

many knowledgeable people would argue th

has not provided sufficient financial resour

problem after the end of the space race an

commercialization still looms large in the sp

vate companies have devoted truly signif

address this problem because they typically 

investment will not be rewarded any time soo
6

the Space Shuttle. According to this controver

the launch technology per se is not unduly exp

a different paradigm for ensuring that we can 

space with reasonable safety and cost factors

Safety has always been and always sh

concern of any program that puts people in 

ronment such as space. Nevertheless, our vi

evolved historically. Hopefully we have le

“proactive” in preventing accidents, but wh

and how is this actually implemented in prac

several decades, a growing body of social scien

assessment and management has emerged, bu

seriously analyzed risk in spaceflight from 

What qualifies as an acceptable risk for a 

may obviously be totally unacceptable in the 

Such a safety debate has played out in 

an appropriate power source for long-dura

missions such as a voyage to Mars. While nucle

forms may be acceptable to the majority, alth

all sectors, of the general public for deep-spa

and the like, it faces greater opposition for 

On the other hand, would it be possible t

model of the nuclear submarine? While the te

be present to make this technically feasible, p
7

While the history of human spaceflight 

one of great technological achievement and 

farers have also suffered many disappointmen

human tragedies and in failing to meet goals w

selves. Disastrous accidents such as the Challe

the Apollo 1 fire are etched into our collective 

us to take prudent risks and be ever vigilant ab

lives are at stake. At another level, we have b

trated by our inability to achieve aims such 

and inexpensive spaceflight. Why have we fa

Is our technology base still immature, or are t

cultural, and social factors that limit our ab

yearning to explore space? 

What is our next logical step after the I

humans to Mars? Before we attempt such long

we still have much to learn. Even though NA

humans on Skylab and the ISS, most Shuttle 

to two weeks in duration. We still need to 

about how microgravity affects human phys

causes motion sickness in many astronauts b

acclimated, but researchers still cannot pred

become ill, nor is there a good treatmen

Microgravity also causes bone density to dec

reversed by exercise in space, but how much 
8

Other, perhaps more subtly vexing ch

duration missions fall into the realm of psych

on end, the crews presumably will be confi

spaces that will make submarines seem roo

potential claustrophobia, the crew will certain

Not only will no other humans be anywhere 

and visual communications back home will 

so astronauts will not be able to speak directly 

if a problem arises or to their families for perso

submarine crews and polar expeditions may pr

for how to deal with the psychological stres

human spaceflight to other planets will clear

pated challenges precisely because it has not 

Public opinion has also influenced th

spaceflight in ethical dimensions. When s

financial and human resources to space exp

other, more immediate problems such as soci

and healthcare? Our values also play importan

resources within NASA’s budget. We must ba

the knowledge that comes from Earth remo

with the inspirational value of having astron

places. Ethics also play into issues such as ho

alter the environments we are exploring an

dawn of the space age, few people gave su
9

significance in the future.

Even more important than determining 

nologies and crews are prepared for long-d

spacefarers and their supporters would do we

there must be a fundamental rationale for fur

flight. Ideally, it should be concise and easily 

the public can readily understand it. Curren

are struggling to convince Congress and the 

exploration is important enough to suppor

funds at all. Clearly, NASA’s future budgets a

large as they were during the early space ra

need to be thrifty and innovative.

The future is likely to bring other unant

Will the Chinese initiate a serious human spa

their own? Perhaps the future internationa

will make it advantageous for NASA to coo

Will another country such as Brazil loft astro

the next forty years? Will space become a ne

military conflict, despite many years of internat

it peaceful? Will the discovery of life, even if u

on another celestial body rally efforts for furthe

of the solar system, let alone further reaches 

A confluence of anniversaries made th

propitious time for reflection on a forty-year re
10

traveled into space and orbited Earth, took plac

Coincidentally, this date was also the twentiet

launch of STS-1, the first Space Shuttle flight. I

was the fortieth anniversary of President 

famous “urgent needs” speech in which he p

American on the Moon “before this decade is 

Apollo Project. Last but not least, the Expe

the ISS had finished its historic first mission in 

Thus, the NASA History Office joine

NASA Office of Policy and Plans and the G

University Space Policy Institute to put togethe

on 8 May 2001 on the history, policy, and pla

flight. The seminar was open to the public an

points of those who have flown in space and a

experts. The speakers were a fairly diverse lo

ground and views, but all were accomplishe

gave thought-provoking comments. 

The program began with opening and k

then-NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin an

Charles Murray. An inspiring speaker, Gol

audience to persevere through the inevitable 

challenges facing human space exploration. M

eral moving anecdotes about the Apollo pro

management techniques stood out. 
11

about his unusual career path to the Moon 

launch vehicle system that enthralls him. T. J. C

the continuity of building on the achievemen

him and specifically mentioned how the d

panelist, Bob Crippen, was a trainer for h

Scientist Mary Ellen Weber discussed how 

gravity research could be for the average pe

also enthralled listeners with her experience 

down from on orbit at incoming meteorites. 

first astronaut to fly specifically on behalf of 

how NASA could best work together with p

The second panel featured a variety of hi

on the past forty years. The distinguished spe

specific topics as Soviet-American reaction

race, the importance of safety, and counterf

author of a monumental volume on the Sov

Asif Siddiqi, reinforced how the perceptio

actions, and reactions of the U.S. and the U

dimensions of the space race. John Logsdon 

“what if” questions to push historians to rethi

of the causes of key events. Astronaut and ma

discussed how thinking about reliability has s

people to demonstrate a specific safety flaw be

be postponed to the current situation, wh
12

spaceflight. A variety of speakers, from engi

to a philosopher and a popular author, gav

opinions on the challenges facing human spacef

Neil de Grasse Tyson challenged space buffs 

engineering or scientific project in history tha

at least one of three reasons—national security

gratification. Robert Zubrin, a passionate a

missions to Mars, echoed Frederick Jackso

frontier thesis that it is our destiny to ex

Homer Hickam proposed that one underapp

human spaceflight is to tap solar power for u

evoked Wernher von Braun in emphasizing t

clearly why space exploration is worth do

Laurie Zoloth challenged listeners to conside

quences of human exploration of new places. 

the audience by discussing exciting new tech

be used to send humans beyond Earth orbit. 

Finally, William Shepherd, the command

One crew to the ISS, gave his take on some le

his personal experience that could be applicab

spaceflight missions. Shepherd views the ISS 

on the way to Mars and discussed his vision 

lenging journeys could be accomplished. He 

only do we need to develop more powerful and 
13

the military service academies. 

Such a seminar is not only a collected w

many authors, but also in the sense of many p

the same people who helped stage the semin

the production of this volume. Louise Alstork, 

Jennifer Davis, Colin Fries, Mark Kahn, Rog

Odom of the NASA History Office helped gr

seminar and the book. Jonathan Krezel, B

Michelle Treistman of the George Washingto

Policy Institute assisted John Logsdon in s

Many thanks also go to Tawana Cleary, who 

the astronauts’ appearances, and to the good 

for all of their work. Special thanks go to Mik

mer Office of Policy and Plans, who helped in

the seminar, and who also chaired a panel. I

ing the book, special recognition goes to Mich

Dixon, Melissa Kennedy, and Jeffrey McLean 

Design group at NASA Headquarters. Thank

fessionals for their help with logistical matters 

new and provocative ideas that promise to m

and debates on the course of human spacefligh

Introduction—John M. L

15
16

Astronaut Alan B. Shepard receives the NASA Distinguis

President John F. Kennedy in May 1961, days after his hi

flight. Shepard’s wife and mother are on his left, and the oth

are in the background. NASA Image S67-19572.
17

White House, where President John F. Kenned

On that same day, 8 May 1961, Vice 

Johnson presented President Kennedy with 

dations concerning the future of human sp

tained a historic memorandum signed by N

James Webb and Secretary of Defense Rober

These recommendations had been dev

and-a-half weeks after Kennedy, on 20 Apr

the Vice President to carry out a review to id

gram which promises dramatic results in wh

This set of recommendations led to Kennedy

erate the space program, aim at across-the-b

nence, and set a lunar-landing goal as the 

space program for the 1960s. A decision was

1961, but the decision paper that led to Apo

lowed reached the President that day. 

To start this celebration of forty yea

spaceflight, there’s no more appropriate per

Administrator of NASA, Daniel S. Goldin. 

Administrator longer than any of his eight p

made remarkable changes in the organization

back ten, fifteen, or twenty years from n

Administrator, we’ll find that he set NASA 

course for the twenty-first century.

Opening Remarks—Daniel 

19
20

Daniel S. Goldin with a model of the Mars Pathfinder’s 
21

1. Remarks at the presentation of NASA’s Distinguished Service 

B. Shepard on 8 May 1961. Public Papers of the Presidents of th

Kennedy, 1961 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Off

While the specifics of what will unfold 

of the twenty-first century are not certain—an

of the space program—I can say with certainty 

are boundless. Accordingly, I am both excit

have been and where we are going.

Alan Shepard, of course, had become th

fly into space during a 15-minute suborbital fli

riding a Redstone booster in his Freedom 7 

ceremony that followed, President Kennedy rec

and sacrifice of all those involved in Am

spaceflight. The President commented that S

the first United States astronaut was an outsta

to the advancement of human knowledge, sp

a demonstration of man’s capabilities in subo

President Kennedy also juxtaposed the 

Alan Shepard with the secrecy of our rival at 

Union: “I also want to pay cognizance to the 

was made out in the open with all the pos

which have been damaging to our country

great risks were taken in that regard, it seems 

some right to claim that this open society of 

much, gained much.”1
22

place in it, and brought untold benefits to the p

We have learned to survive in the incred

ment of space. We have landed on the Moon. W

remarkable vehicle, the Space Shuttle, which en

travel to and from Earth orbit much more readi

launch technology, and we will have a vehicle 

just to low-Earth orbit, but, eventually, we w

to take us out of Earth orbit.

I’m especially pleased to recognize the 

Shepard as the first Mercury 7 astronaut to f

truly an American hero, and I’m proud to hav

long after I arrived at NASA, Alan met me to t

were doing at NASA was very important and 

wanted to make himself available. He said that h

I asked to help accomplish the NASA mission

testify before Congress, or meet with senior o

schoolchildren, or take a trip across the w

happy to do it. 

He was an individual who had been the f

in space, as well as an individual who had walk

offered to carry the message of the importan

flight to the masses because he believed in i

believed in this great nation of ours. Alan Sh

NASA is a representation of the best that Am
23

modern descendants of Lewis and Clark, 

Charles Lindbergh. They set their sights on 

of space and the journey to unknown pla

knowledge and understanding. They inspire 

verance. They lead us, as Americans, to a lof

was the first American there. 

In some respects, we have come a long wa

flew the tiny Freedom 7 space capsule forty yea

ways, we have not yet journeyed so far. Alan w

first to say that while the technology has change

human mind and the courage of the human he

Those who venture forth into space are 

Shepard and every other astronaut should not b

as passengers or visitors in space. They are b

trail that will be followed by others once they 

safe. When we make the way safe, we are goin

As I was preparing these remarks, I tho

sibilities. We’ve been locked in Earth orbit fo

are going to break out. There’s no doubt in m

are there. This is the anniversary of NASA’s fo

space exploration, and it represents an impo

we celebrate it today, we continue to move tow

In our quest to make what is envisione

build, we launch, we learn, and we fail. Then 
24

yet more wondrous. Let us work together to m

us burn into our brains that this civilization is 

live on only one planet. 

Let’s burn it into our brains that in ou

extend the reach of this human species onto o

other bodies in our solar system. Let’s build 

leave our solar system to go to other stars an

lowed by people.

I wish that Alan Shepard could have 

today. We lost a true pioneer when he pass

liked to say of space exploration, “I know it 

important for it to be done,” and “I want t

lives on in that quest for our future in space. 

I would like to close by dedicating this a

present, and future of U.S. human spacefligh

Alan Shepard, the first American hero of the 

personal hero. Thank you very much.
Human Spaceflight and Ameri

The Record So Far—Charle

25

27

few people in this audience have had a cha

world, either vicariously or for real. For m

NASA’s human spaceflight program is the S

you know is an extremely large bureaucrac

know is a historical event. 

So to kick off today’s presentations, I w

of Christmas Past.” If we want to think abo

for human spaceflight as part of America’s f

to understand how NASA people understood 

the Apollo era.

It is also important to understand that t

tioned during the Apollo Program was wildly 

way NASA functions now. In fact—and I sa

respect to the current NASA team members 

work—the race to the Moon was not really 

Russians; it was a race to see if we could get 

NASA became a bureaucracy, and we won. Bu

experience should be ones that we still have at th

First, I would like to provide some persp

Think back to 20 July 1990. This was the twe

of the first lunar landing, but that is not wh

From 20 July 1990 to May 2001 is the same am

the founding of NASA to the first Moon landin

If you think back to what you were doing on 
that Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo would us

largest booster in the U.S. launcher inventory 

which was less powerful than the escape tower o

Space Task Group that was responsible for N

spaceflight efforts was formed only a few month

Occasionally I am asked, “How can we 

tempted to say, “Well, junk the current space 

to Langley Air Force Base, put together for

have no experience whatsoever, give them ele

will do it.” Now that is facetious, but it is ho

of time was between ground zero and the firs

The speed is only symptomatic, howev

NASA functioned during those early years, an

a few of those characteristics. The first was si

forty-five people who were initial members 

Group, Robert Gilruth was the oldest at forty

George Low got their jobs at thirty-two and 

tively. Chris Kraft got his first big job at the 

Glynn Lunney and Gene Kranz, lead flight d

big Apollo missions, became flight directors 

and they were still barely into their thirties w

flight directors for the Apollo flights.

People were very young, and it made a 

talk to the people of Apollo, they will say over a

28
29

One of the things that youth brings wi

form tightly knit teams, another characteristic 

It was so small to begin with that everybody 

Even though by the time Apollo flew, it had 

tens of thousands of people, those initial con

There were people who had known each othe

and at Lewis Center who dealt with each oth

nothing to do with their places in the organi

Joe Bobek, who was a second-generatio

with only a high school education but a 

became chief inspector for the Apollo spac

George Low was the courtly offspring of a

family, a brilliant engineer, and exceedin

Before every Apollo flight, George Low wou

down to the pad and sit down with his old me

Lewis Research Center. They would talk a

Low needed to know about that spacecraft.

You had people such as Joe Shea and 

demotions all the time during the Apollo P

sent out of Washington to the Centers. They 

lower on the ladder than they had been bef

they did that was because that was where th

I do not want you to feel that I am co

and starry-eyed about Apollo. Were there an
30

nearly as important as focusing on the job at 

People were calling back and forth, ignori

in their quest to solve problems. Incredibly 

were running the program. People such as G

was in charge of human spaceflight at H

extremely well-versed in virtually all details o

terms of engineering, Mueller could wrestle to 

tively low-level engineer on his own partic

same thing could be said again and again 

Shea, Low, Max Faget, and all the rest. Th

yes, but they knew just about everything t

about the systems they were dealing with, an

difference when they wanted to obtain the re

time work and the commitment of the troop

Another important aspect of the progr

get away with more easily when it’s a youn

incredible audacity. I shall give you three exa

The first example goes back to Georg

He came into NASA as head of human spa

underlings to work on a comprehensive look 

how it was going. They were not going to 

before 1970 or 1971; that was absolutely 

George Mueller do? He imposed on the Cen

This meant that the first flight of the Satu
31

done very well by testing incrementally, one 

The engineers from Langley had don

their experimental aircraft over the years an

one step at a time. Here was this guy from th

third culture, as it were, that made up NA

telling them, “We’re going to do all-up testi

do it all at one time.” No committees made th

Mueller made that decision. It was not a po

was not doing it just to get to the Moon bef

that was clearly one of the motivations for it. 

logic behind it was absolutely fascinating. I re

at this decision-making process as a case stud

neering thinking combined with enormous 

what was necessary to get a job done.

The second case of audacity was Georg

make Apollo 8 a circumlunar mission. Again, in 

it was done and why it was done, we are not 

wild-eyed adventure. There were engineering 

possible and why it was not only possible, b

was the kind of decision which pushed everyt

a quantum leap ahead of where it would hav

The third case of audacity is not a parti

years that Joe Shea was the head of the 

Program Office. It has been Joe Shea’s legacy 
32

tougher on Joe Shea than Joe Shea was on h

I submit to you that he was doing exa

that George Mueller and George Low were 

came up tails for him. But if it had come up ta

in Apollo 8, people would have said, “Wha

doing trying to send the second manned f

spacecraft around the Moon?” If the first fli

on the all-up had failed, people would have sa

really dumb to try to test all three stages at o

it had ever been done, everybody told him h

and look what happened.

The Apollo Program was audacious, and o

But the only reason we had a spacecraft as m

had in 1967 was because Joe Shea had been 

for four years and accomplishing wonderful 

In trying to pull together my though

NASA operated, I would like to suggest con

12 mission. I recommend that NASA have a 

for senior management staff on Apollo 12, m

fascinating example of managing a space pro

recall, Apollo 12 was hit by lightning. It w

lightning twice in the boost phase of the fi

everything onboard to flinders. All the warn

Down on the ground, it wasn’t that all the da
33

spacecraft had been hit

by lightning. All the controllers knew was that

the platform had been

lost; the guidance platform had been lost; that

they weren’t able to read

any of their data; and it

was taken for granted

that what you had to do

at that point was abort.

Here is the first vignette from that 

Sitting at one of the mission control cons

Aaron. He later rose to great heights in NAS

he was only twenty-five or twenty-six years 

he had been sitting in the control room at H

test at the Cape, which they often did just to 

their systems better. 

This particular time, at some point durin

suddenly turned to weird numbers. Incidental

Apollo controllers did not have nice graphics 

black screens. They had fuzzy white numbers

fuzzy white numbers on them at that time. Tha

viewed. The numbers were constantly changin

Shortly after liftoff o

lightning struck the Ap

vehicle and the launc

KSC-69PC-812. Spe

Teague for help with t
34

onds old and so 

kind of thing you 

Apollo controlle

Aaron had 

called up the Cap

aged to figure o

on. He was to

board, called th

ing equipment, 

have restored the

switched to aux

was something th

done that was not a formal part of his job. It w

of similar experiences he’d had. This was not som

trollers had practiced in any simulation since the

one of the only people in all of NASA who kne

In the critical launch phase, when they were a

when everything was going crazy, Aaron looke

he understood within a matter of seconds wh

On the Apollo 12, the spacecraft had b

twice in the initial ascent phase. Controllers h

but managed to reset it. They had a couple of h

through tests of the spacecraft, and then t

whether to go forward with translunar inject

Technicians in the Firing Room

listen to Apollo 12 and Mission

Control overcome lightninginduced electrical problems.

NASA Image KSC-69P-856.

Special thanks to Kipp Teague for

help with this image.
35

because here’s what happened. These twenty-

twenty-eight-, twenty-nine-year-old controlle

the systems down there in the control room

around to the back row and said, “We’ve got 

let’s go,” and there was no fretting about it. 

When I was interviewing Gene Kranz 

“Gee, this seems to me like a very dicey thing 

checked out the spacecraft, but, after all, the 

by a huge bolt of lightning through all its 

was very matter-of-fact about it—“No, you g

leads you.” So I finally asked him “if a simi

with the Space Shuttle and you had to make 

decision to go out of Earth orbit, would you d

Gene Kranz was not often at a loss for an an

and stared at me for about five seconds, and 

a laugh, and he didn’t say anything.

That was the way that that mission wo

of everything that made the human spaceflig

wonderful adventure, as well as an excelle

which later people could learn.

I second the remarks of Administrato

future of human spaceflight. I think that his a

just right. The only thing I would add is tha

human spaceflight must most of all capture the 
36

The essence of human spaceflight is 

things. That is how it captures the public i

600 years ago, with the invention of the sci

deep abiding human impulse to understan

which previously had been confined to philo

was let loose on all the other ways that we 

world. Now, in the twentieth century, I think 

flight touches the wellspring of the human 

great many people. Human spaceflight also r

next adventure in that continuing quest to 

explore—only this time it is to understand and e

We are never going to get a majority of t

to share in that aspiration any more than you c

of the people in Europe who wanted to get 

boats and go to the new world. There alway

such as “We would be better off spending 

poverty here on Earth.” There is, however, 

who has a lot of influence, and they can be 

only way that they can be energized is if 

remains true to its mission—it must do someth

one brick after another. It must continue to 

with audacity, by going [to] new places, by d

taking on grand missions.
37

The Spaceflight Revolu

Revisited—William Sims Ba

39
40

Hermann Oberth in the foreground appears with officia

Missile Agency at Huntsville, Alabama, in 1956. Left to ri

(seated); Major General H.N. Toftoy, Commanding Offic

Dr. Wernher von Braun; and Dr. Robert Lusser. NASA I
41

1. William Sims Bainbridge, The Spaceflight Revolution (New Yor

imagines it will be possible to build a truly 

lization in which most human beings live 

Earth. The first theory holds that progress c

from the inexorable working of free market

tems, whereas the second believes that revo

mations must sometimes be accomplished by 

that transcend the ordinary institutions a

mundane existence.

My 1975 Harvard doctoral dissertation

as The Spaceflight Revolution, attributed 

development of space technology in large m

movement that transcended ordinary comm

scientific motives.1 First, visionaries like Kons

Robert Goddard, and Hermann Oberth deve

of spaceflight. Then tiny volunteer groups 

their ideas in Germany, America, Russia, and 

the vanguard of a radical social movement a

the goal of interplanetary exploration. Shr

entrepreneurs, notably Wernher von Braun a

took the movement on a military detour, gai
42

2. Michael J. Neufeld, The Rocket and the Reich: Peenemünde an

Ballistic Missile Era (New York: Free Press, 1995); Walter A. Mc

and the Earth: A Political History of the Space Age (New York: B

3. National Commission on Space, Pioneering the Space Frontier 

Books, 1986).

technical needs of the German war machine a

values of the Soviet Union in the developm

Their analyses focus on later phrases in space h

the social movement was crucial at the very 

room to debate how long it was influential 

tional factors took control. The role of a 

movement in the development of spacefligh

interesting question for historians, but it be

tant if we use the past to try to understand th

me, the crucial question has always been “C

nology develop to the fullest possible extent 

irrational impetus that a social movement ca

Human beings have not left low-Earth o

for thirty years the emphasis in space has bee

projects that satisfy some of the conventional 

society. The 1986 report of the National Co

argued that the solar system is the future h

where free societies will be created on new wo

resources will benefit humanity.3 However, go
43

4. Frank Morring, Jr., “NASA Kills X-33, X-34, Trims Space Sta

Space Technology (5 March 2001), pp. 24–25.

5. William Sims Bainbridge, Dimensions of Science Fiction (Cam

Press, 1986).

institutions have the capacity to break out of 

situation. Then we will survey the roles that s

various kinds might play and conclude with 

one particular nascent movement that might 

foundation for a spacefaring civilization.

When The Spaceflight Revolution was w

hopes that the Space Shuttle would be an e

technical success, but sadly, the cost of launc

remains prohibitively high for many appli

recent disappointment is the cancellation of 

inescapable realization that we are still a long w

to develop a low-cost launch system.4

Science-fiction writers and other visiona

a vast array of alternative orbital launch m

electric catapults and Jacob’s ladders, have 

scientific principles but may present insurmo

difficulties. Others, like antigravity and react

no basis in science and thus must be presu

third of a century ago, practical nuclear fi
44

6. Richard W. Siegel, Evelyn Hu, and M. C. Roco, Nanostructur

(Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer, 1999); M. C. Roco, R. S. Will

Nanotechnology Research Directions (Dordrecht, Netherlands: K

and William Sims Bainbridge, Societal Implications of Nanoscien

(Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer, 2001).

7. Robert Zubrin and Richard Wagner, The Case for Mars (New 

There is some hope that nanotechnolog

with materials based on carbon nanotub

stronger yet lighter than metals.6 However, the 

that it is not easy to work with radically new 

in demanding aerospace applications, and 

decades away from being able to manufactur

wings, and other large structures from carbo

Perhaps Robert Zubrin is right that 

Martian resources will significantly reduce th

expedition.7 However, the cost may still be m

willing to invest. Thus, the Mars society that 

around Zubrin’s vision may be more import

spirit of the spaceflight movement than for a

nical innovation it offers.

Technological breakthroughs in rocket

help promote space development, but the adv

to see over the next several decades will n

themselves. We also need a profound boost i

invest in an aggressive space program.
45

8. For example, see the National Research Council report, Peop

Remote Sensing and Social Science, ed. Dianna Liverman, Emilio 

Rindfuss, and Paul C. Stern (Washington, DC: National Academ

9. Robert W. Smith, The Space Telescope (New York: Cambridg

vision, navigation, weather observation, agri

and prospecting for natural resources.8 The t

perfected, and incremental progress can be achie

in information systems and simply by investin

small satellites of the kinds we already have.

Current space technology has proven t

robot space probes to any location in the sola

billion miles beyond. Orbiting observatories, 

old Hubble Space Telescope, are effective 

information about the vast realm that lies b

space probes.9 Much can be accomplished ov

in space science without the need for major new 

Indeed, one could argue that if science were 

of spaceflight, we would have done well to k

the forty-year-old Saturn I, rather than devel

ticated launch systems.

Many scientists and ordinary citizens b

justification for the space program is the kno

in the universe gained by probes and space te
46

10. Matthias Krings, Anne Stone, Ralf W. Schmitz, Heike Krain

Svante Pääbo, “Neandertal DNA Sequences and the Origin of Mo

(1997) 90: 19–30; see also Dennis H. O’Rourke, S. W. Carlyle, a

DNA: Methods, Progress, and Perspectives,” American Journal of 

557–571.

11. Jeffrey T. Richelson, America’s Space Sentinels: DSP Satellites 

(Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1999).

where rapid advances could be expected to f

any increased investment. 

The search for human origins is a noble 

exciting scientific initiative waiting for th

achieve profound discoveries. Very little is cu

primary data collection in paleontology and 

few million dollars a year could work wo

anthropology, tools of genetic science alrea

chart the evolution of the human species and 

persion. For example, existing techniques are 

ing the DNA of Neanderthal specimens and 

relationship to modern humans.10 All that is n

Military reconnaissance satellites have b

fected, and they are already capable of accom

data gathering the defense establishment is w

For a quarter century, enthusiasts have urged 

a space-based missile defense system, perhap

weapons. If it required orbiting many lar
47

12. William Sims Bainbridge, The Spaceflight Revolution (New Y

1976), pp. 241–243.

13. Electric Power from Orbit: A Critique of a Satellite Power Sys

National Academy of Sciences, 1981).

14. Gerard K. O’Neill, The High Frontier (New York: Bantam B

Johnson and Charles Holbrow, editors, Space Settlements: A Des

DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1977).

advance civilian spaceflight.

Since the 1960s, there has been much tal

exploitation of outer space. For a time, atte

the idea of collecting solar energy in space and 

and there still is hope that some new indus

require weightlessness will prove to be econ

However, space-based solar energy systems w

costly and are not currently part of the w

energy needs.13 Today, materials scientists are 

about a wide range of terrestrial nanotech

than about the dubious value of weightless m

Like military applications, hypothetical 

would probably be in low-Earth orbit; alth

have argued that it might be cheaper to bui

materials because of the low velocity req

Moon.14 This would demand some degree of 

and it would thereby build a transportation 

would reduce the cost of deep-space mission

Nonetheless, it is very difficult to develop 

the Earth itself could ever benefit from importat
48

15. Daniel Bell, The Coming of Post-Industrial Society (New Yor

16. Kim Stanley Robinson, Red Mars (New York: Bantam, 1993

Bantam, 1995); Blue Mars (New York: Bantam, 1997).

Mars that would be cost-effective to bring to Eart

would be of value if we had already decided t

would need some motivation other than raw 

In purely economic terms, beyond synchron

lunar orbit there may be no bucks; therefore

Some say that the pressure of populatio

will force humanity to colonize other worlds

plausible version of this scenario was sugges

Robinson’s series of novels about terraform

ruling classes might want to develop Mars a

selves when Earth becomes unendurably ove

Unfortunately, examination of actual f

ity trends does not provide a clear demograp

space colonization. The population explosion 

in many poor nations, but they certainly do n

for spaceflight. Fertility rates have dropped s

industrial nations that they are poised for a p

that would remove their motivation to expan

Recent United Nations estimates pre

nations of the world will each lose more than a m
49

17. Population Division, Department of Economic and Social A

World Population Prospects: The 2000 Revision (New York: Unit

18. Frederick W. Hollmann, Tammany J. Mulder, and Jeffrey E. 

Assumptions for the Population Projections of the United States

Population Division Working Paper No. 38, United States Censu

19. Ronald Inglehart and Wayne E. Baker, “Modernization, Cul

Persistence of Traditional Values,” American Sociological Review 

65: 19–51.

Republic (two), Austria (two), Greece (two), 

Yugoslavia (two), Sweden (one), and Portug

rates are also already below the replacemen

Canada, France, New Zealand, and the Unit

Fertility rates are still above replacem

States, and the U.S. Census projects population 

the next century.18 In part, growth is assured b

by the fact that fertility rates are still high 

groups. Major uncertainties are the roles of r

The collapse in European fertility rates may 

by secularization and by indirect effects of 

America is far more religious than almost an

today, other than Ireland and Poland, and it

ment is quite different from that of Europ

United States eventually follows the other in

abandoning religion and adopting the w

American fertility rates could collapse just a
50

allow a steadily increasing portion of the po

interested in space. Spaceflight accomplishes 

year, and the growing status of science fiction 

should also contribute to increased enthusias

However, opinion polls reveal only mo

port for the space program. Perhaps the bes

General Social Survey, a repeated scientific 

sample of Americans that has included a q

space program for twenty-five years. In 1973

the American public wanted funding for t

increased. By 1998, this fraction had grown j

A pessimistic way to look at this is to note t

3 percentage points over a quarter century w

centage points every century. Linear extrapola

a majority of the population would suppo

funding in about the year 2325.

Of course, a crude projection like that i

fensible. Support has moved up and down over 

in response to events. The highest level of su

responding to the nation’s return to space a

disaster, when 18.9 percent wanted funding in

trend over the twenty-five years was actually 

funding should be reduced to feeling it was ab

61.4 percent wanted the space program reduc
51

20. William Sims Bainbridge, “Collective Behavior and Social M

Rodney Stark (Belmont, California: Wadsworth, 1985), pp. 492–

edition (1987) and third edition (1989).

funding increased and no decline in the prop

lation who want it reduced; so projections a

the assumptions on which they are based.

While opinion polls give some reason f

they certainly do not reveal the kind of rapid 

that would be required to break out of the 

Hope springs eternal, but there is little reason 

a breakthrough in space technology or a surge in 

vation will transform spaceflight in our lifetim

consider the possible impact of another spaceflig

The regularities of human interaction 

terms of four levels of social coordination—

collective behavior, social movements, and so

Parallel behavior is when individuals do rou

for similar reasons, but without influencing 

An example is the isolated pioneers who dev

tual basis of spaceflight, including Tsiolkov

the early work of Oberth. On the basis of th

national network of informal communication 
52

21. William Sims Bainbridge, “Beyond Bureaucratic Policy: The 

pp. 153–163 in People in Space, ed. James Everett Katz (New Br

Transaction, 1985).

22. Neil J. Smelser, Theory of Collective Behavior (New York: Fr

Toch, The Social Psychology of Social Movements (Indianapolis: B

Ted Robert Gurr, Why Men Rebel (Princeton: Princeton Universi

ics, riots, fads, and crazes. 

It often happens that collective behav

degree of formal organization and become a 

For spaceflight, the watershed was the foundi

untary organizations, notably in Germany, th

Soviet Union, and Britain. A successful soci

becomes incorporated in or co-opted by a 

such as government space programs. Then, 

asms of the typical institutionalized moveme

bureaucratic inertia, and it is very difficult 

established institutions.21

Much of the traditional social-scientific 

movements focuses on the movements of dep

society.22 These often take the form of prote

cally challenge the comfortable status of soci

influential people, the evolutionary process

societal institutions feel safer and more reaso

tionary movements. 

Since the end of the Apollo program, a n

social movement organizations have support
53

23. Trudy E. Bell, “American Space-Interest Groups,” Star and Sky 

pp. 53–60.

24. Michael A. G. Michaud, Reaching for the High Frontier: The 

Movement, 1972–84 (New York: Praeger, 1986), p. 308.

25. William Sims Bainbridge, “Religions for a Galactic Civilizat

Science Fiction and Space Futures, ed. Eugene M. Emme (San Die

Astronautical Society, 1982).

A really new spaceflight movement mig

relationship between the established space 

branches of government that provide the m

might alienate many opinion leaders in the g

if it energized the enthusiasm of others. At th

social movement would demand fresh thinkin

ventional notions about what science, te

human spirit could accomplish in space.

Religious movements are especially sus

era, yet they have the capacity to break thr

tines and to experiment with utopian altern

extraterrestrial society.25 Few people alread

space program, and few members of the gen

pared to embrace a radically new religion. 

faithful believers in the traditional religions. 

probably secularists with neither religious fa

in religious enthusiasts.

Most people seem horrified by the few 

religions oriented toward contact with extr
54

26. Robert W. Balch, “When the Light Goes Out, Darkness Com

Movements, ed. Rodney Stark (New York: Paragon House, 1985

the Ships: Disillusionment and the Revitalization of Faith in Bo 

Gods Have Landed: New Religions From Other Worlds, ed. Jame

University of New York Press, 1995), pp. 137–166; Ryan J. Coo

Encyclopedia of Millennialism and Millennial Movements, ed. Ric

Routledge, 2000), pp. 177–179; Winston Davis, “Heaven’s Gate

Obedience,” Nova Religio 3 (2000) http://www.novareligio.com/ 

27. Susan J. Palmer, “Purity and Danger in the Solar Temple,” J

Religion 11 (1996), pp. 303–318; “The Solar Temple,” Encyclop

Millennial Movements, ed. Richard Landes (New York: Routledge

28. Susan J. Palmer, “The Raëlian Movement International,” Ne

Europe, ed. Robert Towler (Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus Universit

pp. 194–210; Phillip Charles Lucas, “Raelians” in Encyclopedia 

Millennial Movements, ed. Richard Landes (New York: Routledg

29. Bhaktivedanta Swami, A. C., Easy Journey to Other Planets 

Press, 1970).

but has hurled a powerful religious challen

society by setting out to clone human beings 

cal method for transcending the limitations o

Religious movements have a tendency 

supernatural rather than natural means. An e

book published by the Hare Krishna moveme

Other Planets, advocating chanting rather th

best means to experience other worlds.29 Thu

space-oriented cults will seek to explore the g
55

30. Rodney Stark and William Sims Bainbridge, The Future of R

University of California Press, 1985); A Theory of Religion (New 

Rutgers University Press, 1996); William Sims Bainbridge, The S

Movements (New York: Routledge, 1997).

rights, women’s liberation, and environme

remind us that social movements are ofte

changing society’s priorities. Perhaps a totally 

ment could emerge in the next few years, em

to serve fundamental human needs that in ear

have motivated religious or political moveme

Let us imagine a successful social mov

that could actually build an interplanetary a

civilization. I will present one idea here, but 

possible. The idea relies upon plausible devel

science and technology that seem remote f

namely cognitive neuroscience, genetic eng

nology, and information systems. But the fu

transcendental movement that would provid

apply these developments to the foundation of 

The chief impediment to rapid develop

is the problem of returning a profit to the 

invest in it. The most obvious way to motiv

in interstellar exploration is to invite them to 
56

31. Ray Kurzweil, The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Comput

Intelligence (New York: Viking, 1999).

32. Roger A. MacGowan and Frederick I. Ordway, III, Intelligen

(Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1966).

flying living human bodies and all the necess

planets. There is, however, another possible w

Visionaries in a number of cutting-ed

begun to develop the diverse toolkit of techn

required to overcome death. A prominen

Kurzweil, a pioneer of computer speech recog

that human beings will gradually merge wi

over the next century, thereby becoming im

dates back at least to Arthur C. Clarke’s 19

and the Stars. In 1966, Roger MacGow

Ordway speculated that successful spacefa

evolve past the state of being biological or

“intelligent synthetic automata.”32 We have 

some distance in that direction over the pa

and we now see the real possibility of achiev

manner that preserves unique human perso

natural with synthetic modalities.

For a number of years, I have studied 

archiving aspects of human personality in c
57

33. William Sims Bainbridge, Survey Research: A Computer-Assi

California: Wadsworth, 1989); this textbook includes nine softw

datasets; Social Research Methods and Statistics (Belmont, Califo

this textbook includes eleven software programs and datasets.

34. William Sims Bainbridge, “Religious Ethnography on the Wo

the Internet, ed. Jeffrey K. Hadden and Douglas W. Cowan, Vol

and the Social Order (New York: JAI/Elsevier, 2000), pp. 55–80

35. The Question Factory, www.erols.com/bainbri/qf.htm

36. www.informedia.cs.cmu.edu/eod/

aspects of personality that were generally m

psychological tests.34 In addition to placing 

generation open-ended surveys on my own W

team creating Survey2000 and Survey2001

questionnaire projects sponsored by the N

Society. My initial result was a set of eight pe

software modules incorporating 15,600 item

urements.35 Anyone can begin to archive his 

using these Windows-based programs today.

A complementary approach involves m

visual recordings of a person’s perceptions, sp

For example, Carnegie-Mellon University

Demand project is developing “tools, techn

allowing people to capture a record of their 

trusively.”36 Steven Spielberg’s Survivors of 

History Foundation has videotaped the rem

than 52,000 survivors of the European holoca
58

37. www.vhf.org/

even today produce a realistic dynamic simulatio

Many people today carry personal 

(PDAs), and some of these are already con

Over the next few years, these will evolve int

ways to the world of information, serving as 

agents, brokers, guides, and all-purpose ser

time they perform all these functions, they 

record the user’s wishes, thoughts, act

Advanced devices of this type will adapt to t

personality, so they will have to learn many 

person anyway. They will also be companion

play games with the user. Many forms of pe

methods can be blended seamlessly with thes

A combination of foreseeable advances 

science and technology will permit vast im

ability to capture and reanimate a human p

cognitive neuroscience, perhaps drawing upon 

sor developments in nanotechnology, will b

structure and function of a living human brain
59

38. William Sims Bainbridge, Goals in Space (Albany, New York

York Press, 1991).

niques for efficient storage and access of peta

individual. Finally, advances in genetic engin

systems, and robotics will allow archived hu

again, even in transformed bodies suitable fo

ets and moons of the solar system.

New lives must be lived on new world

from a zero death rate would soon fill any one p

would lose its finest treasure if there were n

the past, several religions imagined that the a

in Heaven. Once reanimation of archived h

becomes possible, it will be necessary to enac

stitutional law that resurrection must not be 

only in the heavens.

We see the beginnings of this prohibitio

resurrection in the remarkably powerful wo

to ban human reproductive cloning. Othe

likely to be banned on Earth in later decades

forms of artificial intelligence and android ro

neering is already under concerted attack, 
60

39. Bill Joy, “Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us,” Wired (April 2

40. William Sims Bainbridge, “Computer Simulation of Cultura

Interstellar Colonization,” Journal of the British Interplanetary So

41. Sebastian von Hoerner, “Population Explosion and Interstel

the British Interplanetary Society (1975) 28: 691–712.

in substantial scientific infrastructure on the 

Calculation of the geometric realities fac

the universe suggests that there might not be 

galaxy for endless copies of absolutely everybo

of an expanding sphere of inhabited worlds 

to the cube of its radius, while the surface ar

onization ships can directly reach new sola

only as the square of the radius.40 To some e

can be dealt with by gradually increasing the 

But unless a means of instantaneous interstell

the rate of expansion of the human populatio

The answer is a simple one. A person m

by contributing in some way, direct or indirect, 

and maintenance of the entire system that exp

space. Thus, each generation has a moral con

that follow. Every person who contributes 

right to expect at least one more life. Futur

honor that promise if they are to have any ho

tions after them will grant them a second life 
61

42. Nathan Keyfitz, “The Family that Does not Reproduce Itsel

Fertility in Industrial Societies, ed. Kingsley Davis, Mikhail Berns

Campbell (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 19

Wattenberg, The Birth Dearth (New York: Ballantine Books, 19

whose religion or philosophy does not encou

failing, whereas uneducated populations a

groups are growing. Well-educated people ca

graphic growth of their population through inte

By “arrival of the fittest,” those with the mo

and cultures will spread across the galaxy.

Even a very low birthrate per lifetime ca

growth when an individual has many life

reproduce. Additionally, some individuals w

nary contributions to human progress may th

to live out several lives simultaneously in diff

reproducing themselves as well as giving bir

are distinct personalities.

We have the technology, already today

human personalities at low fidelity within wh

database destined eventually to be transport

gain entry to Starbase, a person must contrib

some way to the creation of interstellar civil

to help develop technologies for archivin
62

When the time comes for the first inter

they will be carried out not by biologically ba

first brief lifetimes, but by eternal Starbase m

ing the archived but active personalities 

colonists. At the destination, the crew will no

raforming planets, but will adapt the colonist 

(biological, robot, cyborg) [that] can thrive in 

ment. Subsequent waves of colonists can be s

files in a technically feasible version of the 

dream of teleportation.

A Starbase movement could offer the st

today, and this realistic hope would motivate 

interplanetary then an interstellar civilizatio

advanced technology from fields other tha

promises to serve the instinctive desire for sur

alizing human beings as dynamic systems of 

monizes with the fundamental principles 

society. Such a movement could provide pow

tions for a second spaceflight revolution.

In conclusion, ancient Greek scientists kne

a sphere, and they understood roughly how l

the classical civilization of Greece and Rome f

knowledge, send expeditions to the America

New World. Similarly, our more technically a
63

present civilization quickly to hasten the nex

the successor spacefaring civilization will get 

the seeds of each new civilization need to 

within the old—just as Christianity took ro

society and later helped shape industrial soc

years ago, Christianity was but one of many cul

within the Roman Empire, but it rose to becom

movement of all human history. Thus, optim

to launch many space-related social movemen

one of them would eventually take humanity 

At the extreme, optimists and pessimis

the human species, as it is currently defined, 

the task. With a lifespan generally under a 

quick returns on our investments, and our in

ily satisfied by modest lives on our home p

optimists differ from pessimists in that the

evolve into something higher, a truly cosmic s

the universe is home.

Count me among the optimists. Probabl

leaders and policymakers in the standard aero

corporations will find the Starbase idea to

tastes. Yet business as usual is not going to c

civilization. In time, the standard institutions of 

will disintegrate, like those of the Roman E
64

has nearly stalled. The future demands a new 

movement to get us moving again.
Mutual Influences: U.S.S.R.-U.S

During the Space Race—As

65
66

Sputnik 1.
67

In the past ten years, our view of t

changed dramatically. Much of this has had 

of the Soviet Union and the subsequent 

unprecedented amount of information that 

rewrite that one side of the history of the spa

we only knew bits and pieces of what the So

know not only what they did, but why they 

which is an important aspect of writing histor

about making sense. It is about building patt

together pieces and making those pieces f

chronologies. The writing of this new history 

mental maturity of our field and space history. 

move from chronologies to making sense.

One of the things that I want to talk a

we have understood the space race. Trad

viewed it in terms of action and reaction. On

other and did certain things, and then the o

that. So there was this chain reaction of even

The new historical record suggests that’s 

truth, but perhaps we need a slightly more n

would like to touch on three very importan

space race and reexamine those events in the 

mation—Sputnik, the flight of Yuri Gagarin 

Moon race.
68

would argue that the space race actually beg

As most of you know, Sputnik was lau

International Geophysical Year, a period o

research organized by scientists all over the w

number of key proposals from the American 

during the International Geophysical Year [IG

As most of you know, the Eisenhow

announced in July 1955 that the United Sta

satellite during the IGY. The reasons behin

fairly complex, and so I will not go into that

But what’s most interesting from the 

they reacted to this announcement. This an

Eisenhower Administration set up a series of d

Soviet side about how they should react. Thes

minated in a project to preempt the America

a huge scientific observatory. So, for the So

already begun immediately after the Eisenhow

announcement.

An interesting sidebar to this occurred 

Wernher von Braun’s team-tested a missile. Th

believed that this missile was actually trying t

which shook them. This misperception fuele

urgency that “we have to do this before the 

they dropped their plans to launch this huge sc
69

sense, the space race might not have begun on 4 

rather it perhaps began two years earlier. T

distinction that may lead us to think abou

sharply different way.

The second issue is Yuri Gagarin’s fligh

apart from Sputnik, no other event has been 

both sides in the early years of the space age. For 

their high point, their peak. For the Americans, 

important because it set off deliberations that led 

to the Moon. Again, this demonstrates an actio

The new information also suggests tha

were reacting to the Americans, or at least wh

Americans were doing. Gagarin’s flight was p

reaction to Mercury, and the timing of his f

ways, a reaction to what von Braun and othe

terms of when NASA would launch the first 

A lot of it had to do with timing, but a lo

It could have easily been Alan Shepard who w

in space. It turned out to be Yuri Gagarin. 

was an action-reaction dynamic, and it’s imp

into account in looking at other events in the 

Finally, I would like to go to the third issue

race. We know that the Soviets were in a rac

the United States, and they tried hard. K
70

landing. It was a national priority only in 19

little, too late.

The action-reaction dynamic also pla

race. One of the interesting things that I hav

research is how American information seepe

side and how the Soviets dealt with it. Apol

case because repeatedly throughout the 1960

ply did not believe that the Americans wo

Moon by 1969. They really had this feeling, 

this in documents. “Well, yes, they’ve got th

and that equipment ready, but it would jus

them to make the 1969 deadline.” What rea

was the Apollo 8 mission in December 

impressed upon the Soviets the imminent r

Moon landing. But again, by then, it was too 

I think what all of this indicates is that

seeds of the Soviet failure were actually laid muc

of complacency that emerged after Gagari

ways, the Soviets believed that “we’re the b

was too late before they realized that the U.S

Apollo and, thus, was a real threat.

Another interesting point concerns the 

The Soviets handled their failure in an unsu

that they had hidden their effort in the first pla
71

Whether or not one thought Apollo was a g

for the ultimate future of the American space 

of it as an international competition and a 

supreme rivalry was called into question for 

the 1970s and 1980s, many critics were fru

pointed that “we’ve spent so much money a

the Moon first, and yet, there was no race af

Of course, in the past ten years, we hav

clearly that there was indeed a space race. We 

fought, and we know the Americans won. 

example of how history itself is dynamic and 

out that nothing is fixed. I expect that how 

Moon race forty years from now will be q

how we remember it today.

We should not compartmentalize histor

is restricted by artificial boundaries and we c

history by looking through these blinders. W

our perspective by looking at the other side a

stand the action-reaction interrelationship th

the 1960s and 1970s.

I would like to end with some final th

evaluate history. Professional and academ

want to write about events and people from 

dispassionate distance. We tend to evalu
72

at the flight of Yuri Gagarin or the flight of 

almost impossible to see these as events outsi

But I think it is also important to recogn

the flight of Yuri Gagarin, for example, was s

of human history. It was the first time that a 

left the planet Earth. I think that historians s

of appealing to that sense of the human im

back from geopolitics and the Cold War to s

much broader perspective. I hope historian

challenge in the future.
Making Human Spacefligh

as Possible—Frederick D. 

73
74

NASA’s safety priorities.
75

space without human crews. Rockets tipped ov

on lift off, rockets careened off course . . . it su

Before we could put a life at risk, the 

made safer. How? Mostly through the applic

engineering—essentially the “Fly, Fix, Fly” a

This approach did eventually lead to 

ever, to produce a spacecraft intended for ro

into space, NASA needed to design safety in

just add safety on after a problem was dis

drove NASA to become the home of some 

design engineers and produced some of the 

quality, and reliability engineers. 

NASA demonstrated through the Mercu

could launch a human into orbit around the 

the astronaut and spacecraft safely. During th

we perfected complex rendezvous and dockin

formed spacewalks. Both astronauts and equipm

during longer durations in space. By the time t

ended, NASA was doing what was once t

Even with increasingly complex equipmen

arounds between missions, the astronauts alw

safely. Success was becoming routine and exp

NASA experienced a rude awakening 

when the Apollo 1 capsule burst into flame
76

short sparked the fire. In a 100-percent oxygen e

quickly engulfed the capsule. But the test w

with an unfueled launch vehicle, so it was n

ardous! NASA never considered the possibil

the test—crew evacuation and fire suppressio

the test scenario. 

NASA responded to this tragedy by s

oversight, clarifying responsibilities, improvin

improving test safety analysis and emergen

making safety design enhancements to the 

Congress established the Aerospace Safety 

provide an independent review of the safety 

and operations. NASA established an Offic

independent of the flight program office, to r

design, manufacturing, test, and flight from a 

NASA recovered from this tragedy. 

landed on the Moon six times and returned 

13 mission demonstrated that NASA could rec

technical mishap and return the crew safel

1970s, NASA conducted the Apollo-Soyuz 

Skylab program—logging more human space

For a period of time, America did not ha

presence in space. Throughout the 1970s, w

and building the next generation of [the] reu
77

way, the astronauts always returned home sa

Again, success was becoming routine—

day in 1986, when the Space Shuttle Challeng

failure in the seals of one of its boosters and e

after liftoff. All seven crewmembers were kil

In the painful months that followed, t

critical reviews by NASA and external bodie

gram was grounded, and each safety practice 

examined. Safety goals and procedures were r

nizational and individual attitudes were cons

found a number of management flaws. For ex

problems in the boosters had surfaced on 

However, this information was not widely c

expressed by safety engineers did not always 

in a timely manner. Additionally, the magnit

the associated ramifications may not have be

by the decision-makers. There had been gr

NASA to launch the Shuttle regularly and o

believed that they had enough data to prove 

not safe. A collective mindset evolved—if n

that the launch was unsafe, it must be safe! 

In the few years after the Challenger a

in place a number of improvements to its saf

included:
78

• Improving communications. NASA cr

avenue to communicate safety concer

manner—the NASA Safety Reportin

• Strengthening risk-management progr

significant problem reporting, trend 

pendent systems assessment capabili

These improvements form the basis for 

Mission Assurance Program, and since retur

every NASA Space Shuttle flight has flown a

How has human spaceflight safety adv

forty years? Well, for one thing, we know mo

about engineering, materials, and robotics. 

assurance tools are much more advanced. We 

of improved nondestructive evaluation, and w

modeling and sophisticated “what if” scenar

Today, we know more about program 

more about what it takes to fly safely. We kn

million things that can go wrong, and we 

never become complacent. We will not allow 

lied by schedules, and we won’t let cost co

skimp on safety. 

We don’t ask our engineers and manag

prove it is not safe to fly. Rather, we ask them to 
79

NASA managers prepare a Certificate Of Fli

call it the COFR. Before I sign the COFR, 

understand all the safety issues and their res

have confidence that everything has been don

as safe as it can be, it is my job to not sig

Administrator would not have it any other w

The International Space Station heralds 

exploration for America. On this program

highest priority. My staff performs continu

independent assessment on the design, develop

of the International Space Station. 

In sum, I’d like to describe the illustrati

74]. This picture represents NASA’s safety hi

lated the safety hierarchy a little over two y

our quest to be the nation’s leader in safety 

health, and in the safety of the products and s

The safety hierarchy stresses that we are a

assuring that our programs, projects, and 

impact safety or health for the public, astr

employees on the ground, and high-value equip

When people are thinking about d

they’re also thinking about doing things righ

couple of years, we’ve had some pretty good 

since the failures of the Mars 98 missions th
80

like to say, “mission success starts with safet

In the future, looking forward, we wil

spaceflight even safer. That is NASA’s visio

duty to both those who will travel into space 

people who will make the journey possible. 
What If? Paths No

Taken—John M. Logs

81
82

President John F. Kennedy speaks before a crowd of 

University on 12 September 1962. NASA Image 69-HC
83

alternatives to the way things happened. If 

half a step, you know that’s not true; that alo

could have been very different if different 

made, if different events had happened. So 

picked a few situations in those forty years an

along with me: “What if things had been dif

This notion of counterfactual history h

I have used it as a class assignment for my stud

asking them to write about what might have 

choices had been made. Dwayne Day, a form

a colleague, has suggested a whole symposium 

space history, and that might be an interesting t

As I looked into preparation for this talk, I d

body of literature on counterfactual history. A

in the Internet age, there are even Web sites d

So let us start with the first “what 

Redstone 2 flight on 31 January 1961 carr

Ham. It went too high and too fast. Ham exp

on reentry, and the spacecraft landed seve

down range. He was a very angry chimpanzee 

reached the Mercury capsule. The problem th

ation in flight trajectory turned out to be very 

it was quickly diagnosed as a malfunctioning 

been fixed, and the next flight, which had 
84

1. Aleksandr Fursenko and Timothy Naftali, One Hell of a Gam

and Kennedy, 1958–1964 (New York: W. W. Norton and Compa

place on 24 March 1961. The reality is if th

had been successful, then the 24 March flight 

Alan Shepard. He would have been the first h

Yuri Gagarin.

What might have been the impacts of th

to speculate that the Soviet reaction, the U.

Gagarin’s flight, President Kennedy’s subsequ

Gagarin flight, the press reaction, and the po

provided the fuel for Kennedy to ask his adv

matic space program with which the United 

might all have been entirely different. It is qu

United States would not have decided to try t

Union in spectacular space achievements. Th

space history would certainly have evolved.

Here is another possibility. In President K

State of the Union address, he invited the Sov

erate in the exploration of space. In fact, ea

geted space as an area for trying to develop 

and reduce tensions with our Cold War adve

forced by the reaction to the Gagarin flight 

never gave up the cooperative idea. There’s 

Hell of a Gamble1 that traces the fact that Ke
85

25 May. Ten days later, in Vienna, he met Nik

the one and only time and suggested “Why 

Moon together?” As Asif Siddiqi has suggeste

Soviet Union didn’t have a lunar program, re

United States very seriously, and the officia

link cooperation to general and complete dis

was no positive response from Khrushchev.

Kennedy never really went away from th

1963, at the United Nations in the most pub

suggested, “Why should this be a matter o

Why don’t we do it together?” Khrushchev

written that at that point the Soviet leader 

think more about cooperation. Kennedy, ten 

assassinated, sent a memo to Jim Webb asking 

erate with the Soviet Union in space, inclu

lunar-landing effort.

What would have happened if Khrush

been yes? Well, there are lots of possibilities

been yes at Vienna in 1961, for example, th

that made Apollo possible likely would ha

political support was based on competition, 

United States gaining a preeminent position 

Soviet Union had accepted Kennedy’s offer, I

would have ever happened.
86

2. Stephen Baxter, Voyage (William Morrow and Company, 199

Soviet Union could have contributed to the p

that would have made international coopera

Alternatively, if Kennedy had not bee

days after he had signed the government dir

of cooperation, perhaps cooperation could ha

the United States and the Soviet Union, the 

ers in the 1960s, could have found a way to 

had happened, other things such as the I

Station might have happened much sooner. 

precedent for collaboration in space explora

working on making succeed now. We might 

start down the cooperative path thirty to thir

Here is another counterfactual notion t

you are familiar with the 1969 recommend

Task Group that the U.S. accept a post-Apo

planetary exploration before the end of the c

series of large space stations during the 197

that goal. What if, instead of rejecting that re

the aftermath of Apollo, Nixon said, “Yes, w

might have happened? There is a fascinating b

by British engineer Stephen Baxter, that star
87

3. Howard McCurdy, The Space Station Decision: Incremental P

Choice (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins New Series in NASA History

with one Saturn V flight by the late 1970s, wh

been? What kind of Space Shuttle would w

Shuttle had been developed primarily as the 

the station, we might have been able to bui

straight-winged, highly operable vehicle. The 

report called for the initial mission to Mars 

extremely ambitious von Braun version, 19

been at Mars by now if the choice to set th

goal had been made over three decades ago. 

We have all gotten used to the concept of a

Station. There was not a whole lot of debate lea

Reagan’s late 1983 approval of the Space Station

be international or not. The advocates of the int

knew that there was opposition within the Rea

So they didn’t have it debated as part of the origi

The decision to make the station international 

of the administration in the weeks before Reaga

the Space Station in January 1984. But what if th

a U.S.-only Space Station? What if we had not in

partnership? Would the station have survive

and schedule problems over the past two 

McCurdy has written in his book, The Spac
88

would have been canceled.

But there is an alternative possibility. 

character of the station program added cost 

the program. If there had been no internation

program might have gone forward, with NA

tors settling on a feasible design that cou

budget and on schedule.

What if the decision had been made to p

because of the weather conditions on that Jan

when the mission was rescheduled and launc

been successful? I think subsequent history 

much different. Here are just some of the p

there was an accident waiting to happen bec

of increasing acceptance of risk. If the accide

flight 51-L, it would have come sooner rather 

consequences for the program wouldn’t have 

ent. Another possible scenario is that the S

become increasingly reliable. The Shuttle wo

to carry commercial and military payloads, n

loads. The plan at the time of Challenger wa

four flights per year. We might have appro

adequate budget and improvements in reliabi

We would not have a commercial ELV 

happened. Certainly the Challenger accident 
89

into a more balanced and appropriate mixe

be about where we are now. 

Here is a final counterfactual possibi

inviting Russia to join the Space Station pro

parents, including Dan Goldin, Yuri Koptev 

in Russia, and Leon Furth, who was Al Gore

Advisor. There were many reasons to invite R

gram, but it was not a straightforward yes 

There was some significant skepticism about 

idea. If Russia hadn’t been included in the 

Station program, what might have happened 

It may help to recall that in June 1

Representatives approved the NASA budget, 

Station, by one vote, 216 to 215. Bringing 

that to a hundred vote margin the next year

was on the path to cancellation in the early y

administration. It is thus a very plausible c

Russia into the partnership saved the stat

without Russia, it would have been canceled

have had to worry about all the problems with 

Looking back at that period, the redes

the advisory group to the White House, heade

Charles Vest, had several options that they 

Russian involvement. They believed that the
90

have occurred. As the United States and it

found out how hard the station was and gra

the program as a multinational venture, inc

vehicles and all the power modules that are 

gram would have ended up looking more or l

over the past decade.

I think the point of this exercise in coun

is twofold—first, to recognize that not only 

made in the past that defined the character 

pened and that different choices were possib

led to different outcomes, and, second, tha

making similar choices for the future. Today

will have significant long-term consequences 

ment. Decision-makers have an image of a de

they make choices, but they also realize tha

current choice and desired result is always 

philosopher Yogi Berra is often quoted as ha

predictions is hard, especially when they are 
Apollo and Beyond—Buzz 

91
92

Buzz Aldrin inside the Apollo 11 Lunar Module on 20 Ju

taken by Neil Armstrong, mission commander, before th

on the Moon. NASA Image 69-HC-893.
93

led me to want to look at the extension of a

At MIT, I worked on intercepting other spac

Based upon that education, I got into 

not by route of the test pilot school. I was 

esoteric, egg-headed approach. I did help to tr

were on the first rendezvous missions. 

I was slated initially on the backup cr

That meant that I would skip two missions, a

on the prime crew with the next one. The onl

was no Gemini 13. Because of a tragic aircraf

the lives of the primary crew on Gemini 9, 

some crew adjustments. So Jim Lovell and I 

On that mission, I was able to take my SCU

and training underwater for spacewalking a

some of the Navy people how to do spacew

infinite wisdom of the Air Force, I was aske

test pilot school after I left NASA, even thou

through any test pilot training.

After awhile, I took what I did at MIT 

idea of cycling orbits. As an extension of ren

that to the situation of going to Mars. Fina

writing a science-fiction story about going to 

recommend that you take a look at that beca

lot of what I think we could be doing in the 
94

1. Buzz Aldrin and John Barnes, Encounter with Tiber (New Yor

Because of the cost of launching rockets

though there might be a need for some im

Shuttle system. So I embarked on looking a

for the Shuttle. Those are pretty big machine

looking at the Zenit as a reusable propulsio

an airplane, and we started looking at Atlas 

I put together a company called Starcr

four or five years ago. Then I also realized t

want to get into space. So I formed a nonpro

Share Space. I’d like to share some of my th

Share Space and our nation could do togethe

Forty years ago, President Kennedy re

space exploits by setting a course for the Mo

stroke is required to answer the Soviet Unio

passenger travel to the International Space St

Passenger space travel is a huge pot

enough to justify the creation of reusable lau

low cost and high reliability will give the n

them enormous commercial and military 

nations that continue to rely on today’s spac
95

which leads to reusable vehicles, will reduc

costs by one or two orders of magnitude

Foundation wants to ensure that America re

passenger space travel.

A near-term step is using the Space Shut

nomic and medical research on passenger spa

more spare seats are available on Shuttle flights 

Soyuz missions. The Share Space Foundation w

these Space Shuttle seats to journalists and to 

auctions, and televised competitions.

As a nonprofit organization, Share Spac

the proceeds for research into the medical 

involved in passenger travel. This knowle

design of next-generation vehicles to serve th

The rest of the proceeds might go into a 

the cost of developing reusable launch vehic

transportation is the key that makes space a

everything from expeditions to Mars to prov

electrical power to Earth. In addition, if the 

in the development of such vehicles, it will 

effective control over the most militarily imp

of the twenty-first century.

A little over a year ago, I worked with 

the University of Texas, Massachusetts Insti
96

build a spacecraft incorporating this concept. Th

system, and we are in the process of doing 

paper for the American Institute of Aeronaut

Now the space transportation elements 

on consist of two pillars. One of them is two-

comes in three sizes—small, medium, and lar

of space transportation is Shuttle-derived c

volume. That’s based upon the external tan

that that would put up habitable volume.

For small boosters and orbiters, we could 

ets on the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicl

We could also use a Russian engine, RD-120, 

stage of the Zenit rocket. In orbiter small, th

research lab, reusable upper stage, that they 

there’s also an Air Force space maneuver ve

available and boosted with varieties of this b

of course, can apply to the EELV program as 

The booster medium is what we wou

star booster 200, and it has the unique pr

rocket inside of it, the Atlas 3 rocket, with t

Now the booster and orbiter medium could 

on line relatively quickly and could provide c

for ten to twelve people to low-Earth orbit. T

made in this four-year period, this first admi
97

booster, goes into low-Earth orbit. With tw

tank, it can then rendezvous with things at th

port really comes from the habitable volum

We would envision looking at a prototype du

actually launching one before the end of the 

space station orbit of the International Spac

could supplement what we think is a desir

orbiter on station. Owen Garriott, who flew 

pioneering the activity of long-duration orb

left at the Station and relieved on Station 

thereby relieving the burden of having to r

Soyuz and a half module, both of which hav

poned now by NASA because of cost ove

large now is a fly-back booster for the Shuttl

go with the Shuttle system as it proceeds tow

large booster launches an orbiter large into 

Space Shuttle transportation two into the fut

With two boosters and a tank, it can the

which means it can intercept cycling space s

ships are a derivative of what we first put 

inclination and then work close to the I

Station, perhaps take the nose section of t

actually on the ISS as a larger half module t

right now.
98

orbit. We can be taking adventure travelers 

now to these facilities. They’ve been going th

phase here. The driving force for all of this a

volume traffic, which is required to make 

adventure travelers economical. You can’t m

ten or twenty people once a month or once a 

have sixty or eighty people every other day o

Regarding the booster medium, there a

such as the tank. There are also new elements 

that houses the Atlas 3 rocket. We have this sor

we can replace the Delta class and the Titan 

boosted by the propulsion modules. It replaces 

the Shuttle, and the fly-back boosters eventua

rockets on the heavy lift rocket that puts up bot

or two empty oxygen tanks or cargo that’s going t

We are also using Star Booster 200s wit

and we’re using Castor 120s and a center sta

tons to geo-transfer, which accommodates m

going to geosynchronous orbits. If we want 

then we use a larger booster here. It’s launch

pad, and we obviously are not burning th

liftoff. The boosters burn to fuel depletion at 

6, so that the thermal protection system on th
99

automatically turning back to the launch site. W

to Bert Rutan, and it took him the longest tim

was not taking off horizontally, but it was a 

unmanned vehicle. As I mentioned, this o

mated with one orbiter of the same shape 

derivative from the present Space Shuttle. We fa

and external hydrogen for safety reasons and 

orbiter vehicle . . . . The cruise back is about 

we land robotically at 150 knots, and, when 

runway, we then can remove the propulsion m

the reliability of the best rocket engines that 

When we have better rocket engines than t

or RD-180s here, then we would institute 

expect that the fly-back booster might be bui

might also have RD-180 engines on it, becaus

orbiters from the space maneuver vehicle to 

and the orbiter large that I envision would m

by the world’s biggest airplane company tha

airplane company, and then it acquired the 

the present Shuttle.

It’s been a pleasure for me to come ba

that honors one Shepard, and we’re going to 

Shepherd a little bit later. 

Breaking in the Spac

Shuttle—Robert Cripp

101
102

Astronaut Robert Crippen, pilot of the first Space Shuttl

cabin of the Columbia orbiter during a mission simulatio

NASA Image 80-HC-600.
103

I’d like to speak a little bit about the era 

the astronaut corps. I joined NASA in kind 

the time period when everybody going int

pilot. I was attending the Air Force Test 

though I’m a Navy guy. In that time perio

through and selecting astronauts from the te

put my hand up and said, “I’d like to join.” 

both NASA and the Department of Defe

astronauts, and, somewhere in the selection 

having to make a choice. There were lots of 

list, and there weren’t many folks on the Dep

list, so I figured that was my best chance to f

me to DoD for something called the 

Laboratory,” or MOL for short.

I did get selected for that program, whi

various political reasons in 1969. During Ap

and Buzz were on the Moon and Mike C

around the Moon, I and the other MOL 

interviewing with Deke Slayton saying, “Hey

for us in the program?” It turned out Dek

could use some of you. But there’s not goin

fly until around 1980 when we get the Spac

this time, the Space Shuttle wasn’t even an o

said, “Well, I don’t need all fourteen of you, 
104

midst of the Apollo program. It turned out th

starting to cancel Apollo flights because of va

political reasons. But NASA had already mov

the test pilot regime and picked two different 

NASA administrators decided that scientis

how to fly. So these new scientists-astrona

were sent off to the Air Force Training Comm

fly and become pilots. The first of this group 

Jack Schmitt on the last Apollo flight, Apollo 1

scientist-astronaut on each Skylab mission. Jo

flew on the first flight, Owen Garriott was on 

flight, and Ed Gibson was on the last.

So we were already starting to broaden 

we wanted as far as crewmembers. There 

between Skylab and the first Shuttle flight

announced during Apollo 16, but it took a w

Shuttle. We had one interim flight (Apollo-S

we didn’t have many people in the astronau

got down to somewhere around twenty peop

small, which I thought heightened my oppo

fly—not like it is today with around 160 in t

But I was fortunate enough to be standin

at the right time when the crew selection wa

Shuttle flight, and I was selected to be th
105

was forty-three when I flew STS-1. So som

perseverance. So if you have to wait a little while

In 1978, three years before the Shuttle b

it was obvious that we would need a broade

nauts. The 1978 group was the first time that w

referred to as mission specialists, who did no

We did not train them as pilots, but we did ma

on the T-38, and, essentially, they all learned 

That was also when we decided that 

some women onboard. People keep talking ab

flight, but it’s better today to refer to it as h

was taught that very well on my second flight

Ride was one of our mission specialists, and 

me if I said manned spaceflight. In additi

Sullivan happened to be on my last flight, 

first U.S. woman to perform a spacewalk. So 

who flies, the kind of categories we’re look

move forward with the International Space S

more scientists rather than test pilots. This 

when we go back to the Moon and go on to M

tainly will, as Mr. Goldin said.

I will conclude by saying it is going to b

if somebody could pull together a symposiu

now and look where we’re at in spaceflight. 
106
Going Commercial—Charle

107
108

Charles D. Walker, STS-41D payload specialist, closes a st

samples supporting the Continuous Flow Electrophoresi

iment in the Shuttle’s middeck on 6 September 1984. NA
109

in space for many years. I had read a lot of 

closely watched Al Shepard’s first short jaunt 

by Gus Grissom’s.

Gus Grissom’s flight actually brought it ho

because Gus grew up 12 miles from my home

in Indiana is a long way, but still everybody 

state. So we thought of Gus as a hometo

impressed upon me that, gosh, real people 

You have to be very well qualified and physic

the rigors of spaceflight. But I figured that 

from Indiana could go into space if he gets a g

went to Purdue University, the same school 

and graduated in engineering.

Even then, I believed that I was going 

spaceflight equipment. It was only in the 1970s

build the first reusable space ship, that I came 

tion that, “It’s not just the test pilots, not jus

of the world, that are going to get go into s

and engineers too. Gosh, I am an engineer. M

Lo and behold, I had the opportunity to 

of the largest aerospace companies in this c

Douglas. I specifically asked for the opportu

program that was going to fly equipment in s

at that time was subcontracting to Rockw
110

me for a little while, but then I said, “That’s not re

I was looking for an opportunity to do en

tific research with processes that could be com

the point at which I wanted to jump into th

nonprofessional astronaut’s opportunity to fly 

is certainly a personal experience, and I’ll tou

But I also want to reflect first on the prof

My opportunity to fly came through my em

McDonnell Douglas was looking for an opp

the unique microgravity environment of space. I

company selected a process called electrophor

strated the capability to purify biological mater

was first very briefly demonstrated on the Ap

fluid form, virtually every biological substan

complex mixture of proteins and cellular mater

is useful to purify pharmaceutical and other 

Purification processes here on Earth have to op

But for separation processes in biotechnology

created because of the churning in an imp

process. Going into a low-gravity environm

that from happening, and that was the theo

electrophoresis technology.

The early experiments didn’t seem to va

wanted to carry it forward on a scale that 
111

McDonnell Douglas applied to NASA for th

the experiment. The first opportunity was on th

Unfortunately, it looked like NASA’s proces

equipment and our processes for safety and 

to take up to three years.

In the business world, that’s called a s

you’ve got one-year research budgets, you 

more frequently, and your budgets are scrubbe

You have to show results. We needed to hav

cant progress and creative thinking in a lot le

time. This was before John Young and Bob Cri

the first flight of STS. 

The decision was made to try to fit the e

into the crew compartment. Later I found o

some friction because our package was goin

the food preparation facility space. We accept

and we engineered the experiment to fly in th

compartment volume, rather than in the resea

be tended by the crew.

The first time it happened was on STS-4

this flight was very successful. But I want t

took a big investment on the corporation’s 

the first such NASA-industry joint endeavor 

there was no exchange of funds. NASA got 
112

crew training, McDonnell Douglas invested m

The safety and fit checks took up to a ye

through. Now this was the first time this had b

Space Shuttle inside the crew compartment. Th

ting for experiments in the Spacelab module, bu

The process was grueling at times. A lot of en

nical effort was put into meeting the safety an

Function was different. It didn’t necessar

We didn’t have to be successful, except for o

NASA simply wanted to make sure that i

Shuttle vehicle, safe for the crew, and that it f

We did fly that first time in June 1982

about that, from a historical standpoint, is th

the first industrial payload to fly aboard the 

we also did it in an extraordinarily rapid pe

year or so to prepare for that first flight was t

more flights within forty-one months. There 

other industry-sponsored or industry-partic

load that has had such a rapid turnaround 

once every seven months with a different 

Most of the equipment was the same, which 

to fly so rapidly. Industry remained interested 

rapid turnaround time and frequent access th

lution toward a research and a commercial ob
113

operator was one of the two crewmembers onbo

The first four missions only had two crew

Hank Hartsfield, in the right seat on that mi

cipal operator of the equipment. He turned 

took some very good photographs that help

experimental work.

It went very well, so much so that then 

NASA the big question. “Say, training miss

pilots to conduct our research is good and 

best way for us to obtain the maximum 

research engineer along.” NASA’s response 

kind of been looking forward to an opport

don’t know that now is the time, but now th

question, let’s see if we can find an answe

they’ve got to meet all the qualifications that o

do.” NASA then asked my company, “Have 

mind?” Well, lo and behold, I’d had my hand 

years already. It was getting tired by that poi

glad that NASA said maybe yes.

It took a while to go through the checko

process, and, quite frankly, I didn’t go through 

process at the same time that the astronau

going through selection; although the proces

it was a bit of a challenge to synch up with the A
114

and a professional challenge absolutely. But th

with not only these tremendous career NASA 

go into the environment that few other hum

a chance to do was a thrill beyond belief. T

career objectives in that regard made it even 

Since then, times certainly have chan

about research in space, and in particular the in

we’ve got to come forward from that time in 

today. Today we think about the Space Shu

which I daresay it was originally intended, as 

as a laboratory going into space and coming 

versatile space transportation system.

We’re building an International Spac

Sixteen international partners are putting t

laboratory that is unsurpassed in that enviro

it there is the largest technical peacetime pr

taken. The challenges are immense, but the 

tremendous too. Science is being done there no

to be done. Industrial research will be done 

in basic scientific and technological applicati

There have been some recent studies s

marketing study for commercial opportuni

applications on the ISS, a study which was 

1999. Their finding was that the commercial 
115

respond to research and objectives, and to tes

a potentially commercial program and kn

going. You need to be able to change course 

and cut losses when necessary.

Right now to get on the ISS, it’s about 

cycle for review of safety, fit, and functionality

first flight aboard a research rack. That’s a litt

But unfortunately we are still largely at t

say, “Well, when I can redo my experiments

readdress them?” And the response is, “We

able to either have telepresence installed 

manipulate conditions, temperature, pressure o

your experimental objectives are and your e

ity, or maybe we can find some crew time, a

arrange that, but probably not on the sched

like instantaneously, or you’ll have to wait u

or some part of it can be brought back home 

many months, or maybe even a little more th

is very difficult for industry to accept limitat

Another issue is that there are no payloa

up through the ranks anymore. That was my ca

astronaut, a payload specialist, one who spe

a research mission. There aren’t any in the pr

think that’s a problem for industry and for sc
116

an insurmountable opportunity here.” This r

in human spaceflight. We’re doing marvelo

from an engineering standpoint. We now h

good use. We need to optimize the 30 percent 

federal government and the international part

in terms of the Station’s power, volume, and 

the recent issues with cost and schedule, as M

this Agency will find a way. 

This country and the partners will find a 

ISS’s capability. We need help from this gov

Congress, from our partners to do that, but 

then this facility is going to be world class—

this-world class.

I’m pleased to be a part of not only the h

and the history of industry’s participation in spa

pleased to be a part of the future, the future app

benefits that our spaceflight program is goi

economy, to our careers, and to those of us tha

and participants as well, to the great joy of seein

this country, as a part of our intellect, applied 

It’s a wonderful tomorrow. I’m glad to 
Science in Orbit—Mary Ell

117
118

Mary Ellen Weber works with a syringe related to the B

System (BDS) aboard STS-70 in July 1995. NASA Imag
119

system in your body—how your fingernai

digest food, how you circulate blood—has ev

The reason your heart is not in the m

but in the upper part of your body, is because 

ourselves as test subjects into space in an 

there is no gravity, and we get to observe wh

sensors that tell your body how much water y

in your neck, and, when all that fluid shift

your body thinks you have too much water. I

function with about 30 percent less water th

the ground. That’s just one of the amazing 

place in the human body. As an astronaut, 

happen to your body, to see your body strugg

in just a matter of days, you get to see your b

and flourish in this whole new environment.

This was an opportunity that I could not e

I could dream about it when I was in college get

neering degree and then later getting a doctorate 

I had a dream to go in space and to be 

this and be able to make these kinds of studie

But I only hoped; I didn’t think it would actua

did, back in 1992, it was certainly a dream 

finally had the opportunity to fly in space in 19

it was just the most incredible thing I have e
120

that work year after year, dedicating them

experiments, to asking the critical questions 

can then answer when they’re up in space.

One of these experiments that I got t

1995 was the bioreactor. This is an incredib

incredible equipment. What it allows you to 

cells, not just a layer of cells in a petri dish, b

tissue outside the human body. I had the opp

the first bioreactor of this new generation i

colon cancer tissue—not cells, but tissue—gr

Charlie Walker discussed the challenges 

technology. Since his firsthand experience, I 

work with a venture capital firm which has 

this technology. There is a market need out t

pensate for the high cost and the limited acce

believe we have a winner here.

It is just an amazing opportunity, as an as

of both flying the experiments in space and of 

companies identify the opportunities that spac

pany is trying to make a liver-assist device. Rig

liver failure, you have two choices: you either ge

die. There is nothing else out there right now. Bu

that can grow tissues that function like the tiss

believe we can make a device that can save mil
121

that is happening and has been going on for 

new flu medication coming out that is target

flu enzyme that keeps any flu virus from at

and, because we know the protein structure, w

this drug with very limited side effects. 

This is what is possible when you have 

ronment. These are the possibilities of scie

have just begun to tap into this with weeklong 

flights, and we are only beginning to chip aw

questions. With the Space Station now, 365 d

we have an opportunity to enter into a who

science—not just understanding space, but 

bodies, proteins, and tissues react and grow 

I am so proud to be a part of this space 

to be a part of something bigger than all of u

years, people looked up at the sky and tried to 

out there, what were those points of light? Th

about astrological figures. They just couldn’

are so fortunate in these past forty years to 

when we are just beginning to get the ans

amazing to be an astronaut, it’s an amazin

With the sacrifices and the commitments of 

this country, we will indeed propel our civiliz

era of space exploration. 

Training for the Future—T. J

123
124

Timothy J. Creamer, mission specialist. NASA Image 99
125

a space baby. I was born in 1959 and have 

environment. If I go back just a little bit furth

question, “How did we get here?” That takes u

ture of the mid-1800s, with Jules Verne, Edg

H. G. Wells, and the other visionaries that p

we had seen in front of us a little bit closer. 

The red planet became either the myt

source of unmentionable horrors that drove 

1895, the first science-fiction movie appeared

to really prosper in the 1920s. For instanc

about a guy whose girlfriend is being kidnap

he tracks them down across the galaxy using 

became radar. As it turned out, the descriptio

so accurate that the inventor was initially de

his radar system. The visionaries of the past 

do what we’re doing in the present and begin 

further in the future. 

Today’s main focus is the Internationa

course. When my class came in 1998, we we

you mind waiting a long time before you 

“No.” That was and is the right answer. So 

with the expectation of helping to build th

called the Space Station, and it has been an 

and enthusiastic time. Often I get asked do I 
126

In the not-too-distant future, we will h

Space Station. Then the question becomes w

course, as you’ve heard this morning, some 

are the Moon and Mars.

It is the giants I mentioned earlier up

we stand. As it turns out, Bob Crippen’s mid

carry this legacy forward. I walked into clas

was our primary instructor. She made cookies t

in the class and teased us with candy, and thr

got the right answer.

Then she took us into the simulator and sh

ways we can do bad things to ourselves. She is a 

and wonderful mentor, but the truth is that s

us into the future so we can do our job and 

legacy that our predecessors formed for us.

The truth is we are extremely excited 

doing. I can’t wait to fly, and the flying is only 

the job. We are making contributions every 

Space Station and helping to build the future
Expanding the Frontie

Knowledge—Neil de Grass

127
128

A spaceborne radar image of the Great Wall of China 

400 miles west of Beijing. The wall is easily detected from 

its steep, smooth sides provide a prominent surface for 

beam. The image was acquired by the Spaceborne Im

Synthetic Aperture Radar (SIR-C/X-SAR) aboard the S

April 1994. NASA Image 96-HC-228.
129

forums such as this. It is a point of view that 

scape in which most of this conversation woul

if any of our grand plans for space exploratio

We all know how important it is to fly. W

it since 1903, and it is a point of pride in our 

could do things the birds could do.

By the way, many people before the W

that it would be impossible to fly. Even some w

Lord Calvin among them, said, “We’ll never 

air flight.” Well, of course, birds are heavier 

have no problems flying. So there couldn’t b

against heavier than air flight. So we have t

what we say is impossible.

I would like to offer an argument fo

unlikely that humans will ever leave low-Eart

hundred years. I am not going to invoke laws 

that point, because, basically, if the laws of ph

something, then it can happen. This is why, o

who said nothing would ever go faster than the 

ignorant, because, in fact, we already had ri

faster than sound.

So when I say, no, I do not believe we wi

low-Earth orbit, it is not because I do not thin

possible. That is no longer an issue. I believ
130

tory of the world. I think we could quibble 

means, but I can provide a short list of five o

all agree are some of the major funded proje

One of them would be the pyramids. Anothe

Great Wall of China. The Manhattan proje

project were two other major funded project

resources of a nation were redirected to enab

take place. I would also include great explo

voyages of Columbus and Magellan. We m

going to Mars or going anywhere other th

might constitute a major funded project in m

In looking at the history of such proje

three drivers. Only these three incentives can i

to agree to spend that much money on a maj

One driver is, of course, economics. If t

economic return, it is an investment. Such w

Columbus and of Magellan, and of most exp

Incidentally, if you went to the explore

“Why are you doing this?” He would typicall

I’m an innate explorer. I want to know what

of that mountain.” These are admirable traits

such expeditions have those traits. But in t

behind the explorer is writing a check. Italy 

check for Columbus, but Spain did.
131

There is a third cause. It is perhaps 

driver—military defense. As examples, the G

and the Manhattan project were clearly mo

security concerns.

A fascinating combination of economic

interstate highway system. After Eisenhower 

European theater of operations where he s

Germany was able to move goods and services 

he said, “I want some of those back home.” So 

was built for economic reasons, as well as na

So these are the three drivers that I hav

found one exception to these.

Now let’s go back to the Apollo progra

remember the 1960s. I knew from age nine th

the universe. I watched the Apollo astronauts 

and it meant something special to me. But w

encountered other things, such as picketing o

ment building where my family wanted to m

it from integrating racially. There are other r

such as the next paycheck that affect the gen

Also, I remember that there was this mo

space program, “We are Americans. We’r

going to explore space. Let’s go ahead. This 

The film we saw this morning was honest abo
132

1. Special Message to the Congress on Urgent National Needs, 2

Papers of the Presidents of the United States: John F. Kennedy, 196

Government Printing Office, 1962), pp. 396–406.

mit itself to achieving the goal before the de

ing a man on the Moon and returning him 

No single space project in this period will be 

mankind or more important for the long-ra

space, and none will be so difficult or expens

If you hear that, you say, “By gosh, 

exploration. We’re about the exploration o

next frontier—just like the Columbus voyag

explorers of the fifteenth century. Our next n

But remember that this speech was given o

Yuri Gagarin was launched into orbit by the So

jolt to the American ego after Sputnik in 195

The following paragraph of the speech 

win the battle that is now going on around 

freedom and tyranny, the dramatic achievem

occurred in recent weeks should have made 

did Sputnik in 1957, the impact of this adve

of men everywhere who are attempting to ma

of which road they should take.”1
133

to be defense couched on the premise of exp

Now, of course, space travel is exp

believe that one day it will be cheap. I’m not 

vinced of it. I have the Space Shuttle operatio

Shuttle pilots in 1982. The whole opening 

how cheap it will be to run the Space Shuttle, 

it will be than any previous way we ever wen

Space Shuttle missions would cost $30 millio

what it turned out to be, of course. It costs 

to keep the Space Shuttle in orbit. Now you 

cost overruns,” but my concern here is not 

much it costs, but whether a nation can susta

ebbs and flows of political climate and the 

economic cycles.

If we can send people to Mars for $50 

Evidence shows that if you start out saying it’

it just does not end up that way. So we need a 

When one of these three drivers is in 

matter. Yes, there were debates in Congress a

Apollo program, but they were just pro forma

it took to put Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstro

Now is space really our frontier the w

the frontiers of the old explorers? Space, 

supremely hostile to life. You can say, “We
134

2. William H. Prescott, History of the Conquest of Mexico and H

Peru (New York, Random House, Inc., undated), p. 1,074.

moving city-state, in search of this land. He 

across the mountain ranges and in the valleys a

I will quote from William Prescott’s accou

step of their [the crew’s] way, they were obl

passage with their axes, while their garment

effects of the drenching rains to which they 

caught in every bush and bramble, and hu

shreds. Their provisions, spoiled by the weat

failed, and the live stock which they had ta

either been consumed or made their escape 

mountain passes. They had set out with near

many of them the ferocious breed used in hu

tunate natives. These they now gladly killed, 

carcasses furnished a lean banquet for the fa

On the brink of abandoning all hope

going to send half of you guys back. We’re no

It’s probably still out there, but we’re runnin

I’m going to send half of you back to get mo

So he sent one of his top men back to 
135

the tattered garments of the soldiers supplied a s

At the end of two months, a briganti

rudely put together, but it was strong enoug

company. The company got on the boat, w

The river fed into the Amazon. They said, “H

know where this goes. It goes into the Atlan

the Atlantic and then sailed back to Europe. 

ing for these guys, found out they weren’t co

he hiked his way back to their base camp and 

My point here is they came to South 

things happened, so they just went home. Y

life and limb. But I wonder what would happ

people out to space and suppose they crash-l

If we accept that space and the oceans 

tiers, what would such marooned astronau

have to mine for new materials on the surfac

rebuild their spacecraft. They would need to 

rocks and make silicon wafers and imbed cir

computers. Then they would need to relaun

into space. That is the counterpart to the 

ration analogy.

Of course, if astronauts crash-landed so

the planet might not have air. At least Pizarro’s tea

They did not have to worry about whether t
136

we want to be able to bring astronauts back.

So if exploration is what really matters 

of nation, then perhaps we should genetically 

of ourselves that can survive the hostile envi

We’ve got cloning. We’re inside the genome. L

in fact, we’ve done that already. Yes, we hav

selves that survive the hazards of space; th

You don’t have to feed them or bring them b

complain if you lose them in space.

So my concern is if costs turn out to be w

ically been and the time to execute program

historically has, then I am not convinced th

and political cycles will allow such programs t

not satisfy one of these three criteria. The rec

us this, unless somehow you want to believe t

today than 6,000 years of our predecessors.
Pushing Human Frontiers—Ro

137
138

An artist’s conception of two habitats that a crew would 

Mars. This image was produced for NASA by John Fra

NASA Image S93-45581.
139

need to do it.

I’m going to start out with a quote by 

torian. Frederick Jackson Turner gave a p

“The Significance of the Frontier in Americ

annual meeting of the American Histo

Incidentally, this was three years after the fr

closed in the American census of 1890. He 

wards on 400 years of European presence 

Turner wrote: 

To the frontier, the American intellect o

ing characteristics. That coarseness of 

bined with the acuteness and inquisi

practical, inventive turn of mind, quick 

dients; that masterful grasp of material t

in the artistic but powerful to effect gr

nervous buoyancy, the energy, the dom

ualism, working for good and evil, an

buoyancy and exuberance which com

dom—these are the traits of the fron

called out elsewhere because of the ex

frontier. Since the days when the fleets 

sailed into the waters of the New World

been another name for opportunity, and 

the United States have taken their to
140

Movement has been its dominant fact

this training has no effect upon a 

American energy will continually dem

field for its exercise. But never again wi

free land offer themselves. For a momen

tier, the bonds of custom are broken an

is triumphant. There is not tabula rasa. 

American environment is there with its 

mons to accept its conditions; the inhe

doing things are also there; and yet, in 

ronment, and in spite of custom, eac

indeed furnish a new opportunity, a g

from the bondage of the past; and freshn

fidence, and scorn of older society, imp

restraints and its ideas, and indifference 

have accompanied the frontier. 

Mediterranean Sea was to the Greeks, 

bond of custom, offering new experienc

new institutions and activities, that, a

ever-retreating frontier has been to the 

directly, and to the nations of Europe m

And now, four centuries from the 

America, at the end of a hundred years 
141

tutions were all based upon the existence of th

documented this at great length in his book a

many of the key issues in the growth of Am

turning points all hinged on the frontier.

The question that he raised explicitly r

the frontier was what happens to America a

Can a free, innovating society be preserved 

room to grow? Turner predicted a growing b

American society, increased hostility to imm

skepticism on the idea of progress, and a dec

of both institutions and individuals to take 

associated social phenomena. With respec

bureaucratization, he seems to have been on 

If we want to have the kind of freedom 

prior to the closing of the frontier, a new front

one could discuss where such a new frontier m

the oceans, the Moon, asteroids, or orbiting sp

stage of human history, I do not believe that 

ronment can afford the function that a true ope

1. Frederick Jackson Turner, The Frontier in American History (N

and Winston, 1947, 1962), pp. 37–38.
142

understand this is if the American Revolut

today as opposed to 1776, the colonists wo

colonists only were able to break away from 

own way because of the extreme logistical d

with maintaining control across transoceanic d

teenth century, because the British clearly ou

So if you want to create a truly new 

branch of human civilization that can experi

of existence and go its own way, it does ha

Without going into detail, I believe that of a

reach of our technology, Mars is by far the be

it is the planet that has all the resources nee

and, therefore, potentially civilization. By c

does not have these resources. Mars has got w

enough away to free its colonists from intellectu

domination of the old world and rich enough 

birth to a new civilization.

Now why do we need to go to Mars? 

more generally speaking, a new frontier in s

fundamental historical reason is because Weste

will be wiped out if the frontier remains clos

mean by “humanist culture?” I mean a societ

mental set of ethics in which human life an

held precious beyond price. That set of ph
143

and divine nature of the

soul as popularized by

Christianity, but it never

became effective as the

basis for ordering society

until the blossoming of

Christendom into Western

civilization as a result of

the age of discovery.

The problem with

Christianity, despite its

very interesting philosophical notions, was that it was fixed. All 

owned. Basically, it was like a play where t

written, and the parts had been assigned. T

players, the bit players, the chorus, and ther

someone without a place. The new world ch

plying a place in which there were no establ

tions—a theater with no parts assigned. The 

for the development of diversity by allowing 

institutions that were enforcing uniformity.

There are many problems that face us 

actually land on Mars, but there is fundament

with our situation forty years ago. We are m

An artist’s conception 

explore Mars. This im

John Frassanito and A

NASA Image S93-0506
144

we had a military opponent did put a little d

but, from a material point of view, we are c

pared in every respect. 

Let us talk about what the twentieth c

like without a Martian frontier. For one thing

be looking at declining human diversity. Glob

and jet aircraft are linking the world togeth

and so cultural diversity will, of necessity, dec

animal type is considered strong if it has ma

nents, and I think it’s ultimately a weakenin

that we are faced with losing diversity. H

generic level of technology, which is mak

maintenance of diversity on one planet, has 

prospect whereby new and more profound lev

establish the expansion of new branches of 

other planets.

I also believe that without a new fronti

the risk of technological stagnation. The B-52 

atic of technological stagnation. The B-52 we

a century ago, and it is still in service. It wou

ceivable to any of the pilots flying the fir

grandchildren serving in the United States A

flying the same aircraft. Technological pro

slowed down in the last portion of the twent
145

Aviation went from the Wright flyer to the D

third, from 1933 to 1966 or so, we went to 

power, jet fighter aircraft, and Saturn V rock

tinued on that vector, today we would hav

colonies, solar-powered cars, and fusion rea

ously do not. The world today, at least in 

technology, has not changed that much sin

especially compared to how it changed in th

the century.

A frontier is a tremendous driver for tec

because what you typically have at a frontier 

One of the most wonderful things about colo

century America was the tremendous labor 

everything you’ve heard, which is all true, ab

conditions in the industrial revolution in New 

places, the fact of the matter is that wages 

higher than they were in similar establishme

that’s why millions of people voted with thei

At every level of society, opportunity 

Furthermore, because labor was so expens

tremendous driver for technological progress

labor-saving machinery. 

On twenty-first-century Mars, no com

be in shorter supply than human labor. The
146

standard of civilization, just as America set a 

civilization which then promulgated back in

that if you want to maximize human pot

higher standard of civilization, and that be

that benefits everyone.

Without an open frontier, closed world 

the Malthus Theory, tend to come to the f

there are limited resources; therefore, we are 

petition with each other for the limited pot. 

nical and potentially genocidal regimes, and 

this in the twentieth century. There’s no tru

Theory, because human beings are the creator

With every mouth comes a pair of hands an

seems to be true, you have a vector in this 

extremely unfortunate. It is only in a u

resources that all humans can be brothers an

The fundamental question which affec

of itself is whether the world is changeable o

makers of our world or just its inhabitants? S

view that they’re living at the end of history w

already defined, and there is no fundamental 

life because there is nothing humans can do t

other hand, if humans understand their own 

of their world, that’s a much more healthy p
147

and for all time the precious and positive na

species and every member of it.

About an Element of H

Greatness—Homer Hic

149

151

When I was a boy in Coalwood, WV

besides my father and my mother, was Hunt

von Braun. After Sputnik was launched in 

newspapers we received in our little coal cam

stories of how American scientists and engine

working to catch up in the space race.

It was as if the science fiction I had r

coming true. Gradually, I became fascinated 

I read every article I could find about the me

and launched them, and kept myself pinned 

for the latest on what they were doing. Dr. 

was mentioned often.

At night before I went to sleep, I thou

might be doing at that very moment and im

down at Huntsville or Cape Canaveral high o

his back like Michelangelo, working with a 

lines of one of his rockets.

I started to think about what an adven

work for him, helping him to build rockets a

into space. For all I knew, a man with tha

might even form an expedition into space, lik

Either way, I wanted to be part of his team.

To do that, I knew I would have to prep

way, get some special knowledge about some
152

1. Homer Hickam, Rocket Boys: A Memoir (Doubleday Dell: 19

supposed for a coal mine superintendent’s so

To get an early start, five other coal 

began to build our own rockets. The people o

us, with some derision, the Rocket Boys. Y

write a book1 about those days, and later th

turned into a major motion picture called 

who would have guessed such a thing would 

coal miner’s sons wanted to build rockets?

In the manner of Dr. von Braun, we Roc

until we were flying our rockets miles into t

we boys of Coalwood won a gold medal at th

Fair, bringing unexpected honor to our little 

school. A lot of people said we were lucky. Bu

allowed us to reach our goals. It was because 

to take advantage of our successes, just as our h

In the fall of 1957, Huntsville’s Arm

Agency had just completed a flurry of adva

rocket science. Under Dr. von Braun’s guid

most of the difficult problems associated w
153

the line, to prepare us for space.

When Sputnik hit this country like a fly

President Eisenhower turned to Huntsville t

American glory. Von Braun and his team laun

lite in sixty days of the go-ahead, and, less th

were cutting metal on another project even th

officially approved—the Saturn family of roc

took the United States to the Moon.

This, I think, is history worth savoring 

many ways, the situation in space developme

what it was in the years prior to 1957. Th

what should be done in space and who shoul

the Redstone was there to allow us to build 

rocket engines that made the Saturn rockets, th

to us today, if only we have the courage to pi

them for what we need to do. I want to give yo

to think about. The first thing is that NASA 

versive organization. Anything else you hear is 

Some people, of course, will argue th

been a more conservative bureaucracy on 

even takes polls to see what it should do nex

decide technical matters.

I grant you NASA as a bureaucracy is 

mean is its charter. NASA is supposed to de
154

2. 2 Peter, 3:13.

We strive for something greater than ourselve

considered by most of the population of the 

being outlandish. What we want is to build 

literally allow people to leave this planet, an

and its philosophies, and its religions beh

world, new ways of governing themselves, ne

Back when I was a Rocket Boy in Coal

trouble, as I almost always was, a preacher w

name was the Reverend Little Richard of th

of Distinct Christianity—came to me and tol

dream. He had seen men on the Moon, and 

When he woke, he had opened his Bible, and 

on the testament of Peter. “Nevertheless we

promise, look for new heavens and a ne

dwelleth righteousness,” he quoted.2

It took me awhile to figure out what th

getting at, but then I understood it. I was a b

St. Peter. My life was going to be dedicated to fu

the opportunity for mankind to look for thos

new Earths, and all that would follow.
155

It is time to put those old things in the m

belong. Let me explain.

It seems to me there are two ends 

American people love. The front end where 

and the tail end where the rocket engines ar

the working back end of the rocket got more 

front end. It is time that the old chemical rock

us to this point be set aside and a new breed 

be constructed. If we don’t do this, we are 

stuck in low-Earth orbit—not doing any be

to bolt together another Mir or Alpha or wh

call it, a bunch of small modules like wiener

astronauts can stay cooped-up for days, taking t

and peering at e-mail from home.

The Bush administration here in Wash

trying to figure out what to do with NAS

President George W. Bush knows, as all of us 

honest, that we are essentially spinning ou

spaceflight is concerned. And so it will alwa

building advanced propulsion systems. Witho

do not have enough lifting capacity or the a

explore space. The one thing we don’t need th

we’ve already learned this—is that space is 

people. Zero-G is debilitating to our bones 
156

back to the Moon and definitely Mars with c

tems is asking for trouble, and that’s troubl

Administration or the next or the next is eve

propulsion engineers, the good folks of Ma

Center who head up propulsion for NASA, 

or we’re never going anywhere.

Here’s what my admittedly cloudy crysta

I believe we won’t send humans back to the 

the way we did it in the Apollo program. 

technology to the outer edge of the envelope, 

corps of professional astronauts to go. That w

I think spaceflight is going to evolve ver

the exploration of Antarctica. The first exped

Pole in the late nineteenth and early twen

essentially sprints and publicity stunts, prim

for national prestige and personal glory, altho

in the dubious veneer of science. These sp

plished with the technology of the day—ste

shelf followed by the use of dogs and manpo

turous journey to the pole and return. Many 

more suffered from frostbite, hunger, and ex

Roald Amundsen, a Norwegian, reach

14 December 1911, followed within days 

Britisher Robert Scott (who died with his enti
157

An explanatory drawing of the NERVA (Nuclear En

Application) thermodynamic nuclear rocket engine. T

1960–1973 and was managed by NASA and the Atom

but the nuclear engine was never actually deployed for 

Image NPO-70-15803.

as roughly equivalent to the Apollo program

It would be four decades later befor

arrived at the South Pole. They were America

flew there in an airplane. I believe it will be in 

of this airplane that will carry people back t

Mars and beyond.

But what kind of engine am I talking ab

this space equivalent of the South Pole airplan

one, if we’re to see it in our lifetimes, must 
158

1972. That was a terrible decision. We had 

cessfully tested nuclear rockets in the open 

engines that could be operated with high 

durations, the key to the solar system. I beli

back to the future, to revisit the successful d

old nuclear rocket, and to go forward with ot

ing the SAFE engine (Safe, Affordable Fission 

developed in Huntsville at Marshall Space F

similar engines are on the drawing boards at 

need to get behind the Rocket Boys and Girl

Cleveland and Pasadena, and show the cou

chase away the Chicken Littles who deride n

its manifestations as somehow inherently evil

fact, is one of the cleanest forms of energy 

and it’s time somebody stood up and made it

Need I remind one and all that right now 

of nuclear reactors tooling around in the world

submarines and aircraft carriers? How many 

in the dark? Not one of them. This is safe techn

of the fools in our society who fear it and keep 

I believe it’s time to put chemical rockets 

for NASA. We should go ahead and build 

Space Station for political reasons and then 

business over to a contractor or the National 
159

world. This is the key. If we are to go into spa

have to have a big reason. That reason, I beli

duction of energy.

Right now, we’re passing through a 

time—a cheap energy bubble. This cheap ene

available only in the Western world, is what 

port ourselves, air condition ourselves, com

another, run milling machines, make plastic, 

things that make up our civilized, industrial, h

this country, we can see that bubble just s

California. But it has actually already burst in 

The cheap energy bubble we enjoy is be

When that goes away, and it will, if we have 

to prepare for alternative energy, our advanced 

Wind energy, ocean energy, land-based solar e

be added to the mix, but it will never suppla

until we turn to space. In the meantime, howe

to come up with new forms of energy, we 

thinking about building nuclear plants for e

we also should start building nuclear engine

the solar system. Because those engines will b

energy, like we’ve never imagined. The solar sy

is filled with energy, something we must hav

I am a boy of West Virginia, after a
160

Coalwood once was, a place where men an

their families, and where a rough frontier—

encountered by mankind—can be shoved ba

country to lead the way.

One of the things Dr. von Braun insti

that it was as nearly important to explain wh

space as to build the machines to take us the

and magazine articles, spoke to everyone he 

informally, and spent his life to his dying day 

everyone on the importance of and need for 

I think all of us in this room need to con

to get out into the public eye and explain wh

why we need to build the machines to go the

Why should we go? I think there are ac

reasons: 

1) Because the solar system is filled 

energy, and we need to go get it, and, 2) th

even more important, because we need a pu

and our country.

Our Constitution established a relativel

ernment and guaranteed strong individual f

so, what it really did was to allow the old Ya

wherever they wanted to go, build up busine

outdo and outsell the rest of the known w
161

using the freedom they had to do it.

You’ve heard of Yankee Traders. That

drive a hard bargain, and we make a profit. 

the way, we just happen to bring our impo

with us—that of life, liberty, the pursuit of 

triumph of the individual over the governmen

even our own.

A country needs a purpose, especially t

we need an eternal frontier to push up agai

conquer and settle it. The nice thing about do

system is a very rich place, filled with not o

but energy, a nearly inexhaustible supply. 

thing this country and this planet desperatel

ing to pay for now and forever is energy. T

where it is. We’ve got to go after it.

I believe, then, that Americans have bot

a patriotic duty to convince ourselves it is ti

giant step into space. The way to do that is 

Braun did—cut metal and start flying. Succes

If we start flying advanced propulsion drives

energize the country and perhaps inspire a 

Rocket Boys and Girls. 

I call on NASA today to lay out a fifte

produce a working advanced propulsion en
162

big, bad rocket booming around space, I beli

holding Americans back from the new fronti

In Rocket Boys, I tell of the time when 

what was the hardest thing he’d ever learned

rail outside his office and said, “entrop

explained. Entropy, he said, is the tendenc

move toward confusion and disorder as time 

fourteen at the time, so I’m certain I looked 

how perfect the thing,” he explained patientl

created, it begins to be destroyed.” I asked h

hard to learn. “Because,” he smiled, “I don’t 

I hate that it’s true. I just can’t imagine,” he 

back inside his office, “what God was thinki

Entropy ultimately killed Coalwood. Whe

everything fell into disrepair, and my father’s 

crumbled. I don’t want that to happen to 

could, and I believe it will if we don’t develo

open up a new frontier.

Dr. von Braun’s grand dream need never d

a twenty-first-century revolution in transporta

could fundamentally change the way we fly th

the world, even care for the sick if we do it rig

require cheap and clean energy. It exists in th

variety of forms. Solar energy is the most obvi
163

moving again, and get serious about conquer

we’ll assure the country’s prosperity, and the w

for centuries. Along the way, maybe we’ll fina

my old preacher thought St. Peter’s commen

new heavens was so important.

According to His promise, it’s a big 

responsibility, to try to fulfill such a promi

believe, however, the Rocket Boys and Girls o

So let’s do it! Let’s go!

The Ethics of Huma

Spaceflight—Laurie Zo

165
166

Left: Meriwether Lewis. This 1816 aquatint is by Wi

courtesy of the National Portrait Gallery. Image NPG.7

Right: William Clark. This 1832 oil painting is by Geor

tesy of the National Portrait Gallery. Image NPG.71.36
167

1. See, for example, Stephen E. Ambrose, Undaunted Courage: M

Thomas Jefferson, and the Opening of the American West (New Y

1996), p. 86.

into a land so unknown that the maps are 

hands. He is inventing a technology that he 

master engineer President Thomas Jefferson h

an oak table at Monticello, and he is jerry-rig

wood for iron. He is looking to hire on men f

will be bold, physically able, and yet compo

together in a small boat in terrifying danger. 

fail him utterly in the middle of the journe

anguishes about funding for the project, abou

ing to make the boat, and about the way the 

precisely or postponed for another year. C

about the expenditures, and he must balanc

mission—commerce, science, exploration, an

“I visit him every day and endeavor by 

power to hasten completion of the work . . .” 

builder, and, of the river, its level dropping

may impede my progress, but shall not prev

being determined to go forward . . . .”1

Jefferson replies, assuring him of the ne

grounding his encouragement in the hopes tha
168

And while there was much to say then—and 

given by contemporaries like Adams and o

much to say now about the ethics of such 

arguments, the promises, and the vision that 

ney are familiar because they are the substanc

has animated much of NASA’s efforts. 

In this reflection, taken at the forti

NASA’s years of space exploration and the 19

the summer that Lewis and Clark set out, 

exploration of this sort as a complex mora

hope to both celebrate forty years of space 

mark the way ahead. Taking this particular 

other possible tasks reflects not only on wh

we intend to become, but also on what we h

humans, and as Americans. 

Like all exploration, space travel is 

extended journey; it challenges us to stand li

before an unknown continent and an unknow

was profoundly inhabited, alive with others 

adox that faced him, and of course might 

could not know, and we cannot know. In thi

three core philosophical questions: first, of 

human self, and how we are shaped by such 

ond, of the technical process and rules of the t
169

take two sorts of tasks. The first is to respon

question: Is it ethical to travel in space? The se

the moment that I can convince you that the 

justified, is to comment on what ethical challeng

It is appropriate to have a philosopher 

the fortieth anniversary celebration, since it 

that the National Academy of Science first c

philosophers to comment on space travel. T

time whether it was indeed a worthwhile p

space and what might be expected of such a

stake in any such boundary crossing is ho

essential human perimeters changes our own 

such boundary crossing worsen our human c

enhance it? In this way, the geopolitical que

the quest for ontology, Pisarro hunting for the 

for gold, and for territory. 

What follows are a series of ethical c

problem of discovery in the larger world and t

dilemmas of our explorations, as well as ho

alters our concepts of life on Earth. In this, 

cist is to function as both a skeptic and a str

optimism of science and the pessimism of ph

1. First premises and original cla

ethical to explore space? 
170

the transmission of why we have un

work and what it makes of us to do so

How is space travel a moral activity? Li

make in the world, the activities themselves w

think about ourselves. However, is this its

hubric sense of ourselves? Does the very plac

the center of the narrative begin the consid

unjustly? In 1971, Lewis White Beck consi

ration in his presidential address to the Ame

Association. Beck had a skeptical view at fi

For Beck, the problem was our ability to justl

tain exploration that creates the essential 

“[Space travel] is so far beyond human reach t

while discussing at a sober philosophical cock

technology required presents no insurmounta

stands in the way of using it is human unima

tience, and the instability of human civilizatio

But Beck was incorrect in this assessm

year of our reach, we have a Space Station d

2. Lewis White Beck, “Extraterrestrial Intelligent Life,” presiden

before the American Philosophical Association in New York Cit
171

essential questions, and they are framing qu

science, but classically, in ethics. Questions s

Are we overreaching our boundaries an

human limits?

We will always tell the truth?

What does it mean to be free?

How can we face death nobly?

Will we use resources fairly?

Can we be trustworthy? 

What do we owe to one another?

What do we owe to the future we cann

For such questions, surely not new on

phers, such as Aristotle suggested the need t

character—excellences. One way to think o

name the virtues called out by such questions

courage, justice, and fidelity, which I sugges

cal principles of space exploration. 

We are shaped not only by such princip

ratives and historical arguments, and it is 

problems of space and our relationship to it 

debates in philosophy, about the relationshi

the universe. One of the key arguments begin

sideration of how we should regard spa

Lucretius begins by noting that Earth has no 
172

unique? Are other worlds possible, and wha

our self-understandings? 

In the Middle Ages, and through the ei

was commonplace to understand the unive

plural one—the universe was full of life, and 

alone. The entire thrust of emerging scien

Darwin’s work, was a part of this understand

ship of organism, contingency, and environm

that space travel interests us because it offers 

coming to an unblemished, uncorrupted wor

mated much of eighteenth-century travel as w

of the great new chance, of new social pos

land, is a central part of the American vision 

Clark, and others their optimistic spirit. 

B. Is space travel just? 

Let us concede that space travel is in fa

haps ontologically necessary. But a central q

not only whether the act is good for us as 

intrinsic good, but whether space travel is ju

3. See, for example, Whitney J. Oates, ed. The Stoic and Epicure

The Complete Extant Writings of Epicurus, Epictetus, Lucretius, a

(New York: Random House, 1940), pp. 111–114.
173

4. European Principles of Bioethics, 2000.

5. A. J. W. Taylor, “Behavioural Science and Outer Space Resea

Association, Washington, DC, 1989; Jeffrey Davis. “Medical Iss

Mars,” Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, vol. 70, N

O. P. Kozerenko, et al. “Some Problems of Group Interaction in 

HPEE, April 1999, vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 123–127; Nick Kanos, et 

Space: Results from the Shuttle/MIR,” Gravitational and Space B

June 2001, p. 35–45.

exploration an unjust and wasteful use of sc

ter spent on urgent tasks at home? How c

intricitly designed nineteenth-century boats 

century beautiful starships over a landscape 

poverty, the closing of hospitals, the need f

schools, over the tensions of war? 

For space travel to be just, argue the 

attend to principles of justice, which includ

vulnerability and of solidarity.4 Since such 

attention to the situation of the disempowe

eties, and the need to maintain a democra

resources held in common, and since the assu

eties must find purpose in bearing the burde

ethical space exploration ought to have ap

science developed therein to human health a

Space travel can be justified as fair if di

accrued by its undertaking. To a great extent

be the case. First, the experience of microgra

to create effects similar to aging in humans. S
174

6. See, for example, the NASA Ames Standard Animal Policy fo

as available on the Internet.

logical orientation, and balance. Study of p

balance, as well as studies about how neurol

proceeds in microgravity, is also ongoing. S

research clearly will be a strong part of N

Cross-over and dual-use medical research is 

proposals that would allow the developm

sensing devices. But much of what is valid a

is premised on what we cannot know. Suppo

research is predicated on this understanding. 

that every protocol that calls for the use of a

subjects, for example, insists on a social justi

NASA policy, and, while the intent of researc

of the human (and animal) condition, and th

the reality is that, in true science, we cannot 

count on their application prior to th

Healthcare is only one sort of science that 

efforts in space as ethical in this way. Other a

research on climate change and other Earth sc

accessible from the vantage of space.
175

itself well to international cooperation. While 

case necessarily in the past, the future of s

profoundly international in character and 

places where the human species has the oppo

as a collective community, as Earthlings. Suc

allows a precondition for solidarity. Whethe

whether we do not will be key in the determin

of space travel. 

However, the claim that space science 

on an idea about science research as entirely i

view, science is a zero-sum game, and, if w

space, we will not be funding research on can

is, I believe, a false distinction. Human subj

the interrogation itself, and it is not entirely c

we would be if we turned from the task. We 

we have always done—both the work of disco

and the necessary work of compassion. It is 

this of us; it is our children who will ask fo

are needed in advance, by the work of basic 

we may need what will be the insights of basi

Forty years ago, it was President Kennedy wh

toward space travel, yet the most critical wo

were not about the Moon. They were about 

obligation creates the American self, about o
176

met fairly. Is the process and method of spa

it safe? 

a. “Nothing will ever be attempted if 

tions must first be overcome.” (Samuel John

Hence, if my arguments are correct, spa

ethical, but narrative in character. We send a 

bear both the narratives of historical stories 

experiments we envision back to us—we exp

will also be changed. But this creates ethic

how will the process of travel shape the pers

risk can we expect the person to bear? Let me 

sideration of the ethical issues encountered 

space travel itself, we are reminded that th

mental science itself—and space exploratio

things, a vast human clinical experiment—i

with human frailty, loss, risk, and error. We 

own peril. 

A key consideration will be how we under

crew and our corresponding obligations to 

7. Gwin J. Kolb, ed. Rasselas and Other Tales, vol. XVI of the Y

of Samuel Johnson (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990).
177

say, firemen, as soldiers with a duty to explor

selves? Each decision on the role of the crew a

understanding of our duties and their corre

resources. Space travel, even to Mars, will nec

of isolation in a small room, in conditions o

years. The crew will need different relationship

to the machines that they will depend on. Bec

human experimentation, it must be preceded 

mentation, necessitating the humane use of a

Microgravity presents unique and challenging c

welfare, requiring the coordination, expertise

national oversight committees directed entirel

NASA is committed to such oversight by a system 

mechanisms to review animal and human pr

Review Boards, and a Flight Animal Care a

established for this purpose. The IRB and the A

all of their functions by a clear and consi

research animals and for the scientific enter

focus on the issues of spaceflight allows the 

mature expertise in the development, design, ove

upon the science.

But the classic problems of clinical med

ethical dilemmas that surround the process 

machine-human interface needed in space cre
178

without undue constraint. If internal monit

much would we accept monitoring and r

behavior? Should we allow the monitoring 

serotonin? Should the nanochips be set to re

lower blood pressure, to alleviate stress? Shou

be regulated and sleep enforced by biochemi

If a machine makes decisions about fli

about emergency strategic options which cou

with accuracy, should the machine be overr

circumstances? When should human judgmen

and when should computers be allowed to ma

Should we, in the future, select for genetic ph

cisely than is already the case—for, of course

physical traits will be at stake in how crews a

screening include genetic testing, and should 

sions about leadership? In the future, should 

cally modify humans to make it safer for 

microgravity, in the way medications are u

experience, allowing for slower rates of bone 

For all such decisions about medical con

consent adequate, or is the yearning for the 

the crew so powerful that true informed con

since refusal might well mean losing one’s pl

Is the risk of space travel simply an unaccept
179

8. Quoted in William Speed Weed, “Can We Go to Mars Witho

Discover, May 2001, p. 36.

or volcanologists. Here again we find the histor

in the careful reflection on that exploration w

competitive race to the Pole—not unlike the 

crews in space. We know the paradox of the

In an article in Discover magazine, the 

Cook, Arctic explorer in the nineteenth cent

are as tired of each other’s company as we are 

ony of the black night . . . physically, men

morally, then, we are depressed, and, from m

know this depression will increase.”8 Discov

the case that the journey is most imperiled b

enclosure and boredom. Yet the intensity di

despair in the eighteenth century—in many d

enough, the opposite is the case. The closene

ated intensely loyal moral communities, on

never abandoned the ill, and where, in Meri

the very conditions of the trip, dangerous, ch

from the suicidal despair that awaited him 

when he returned. But in space, the one c
180

Meriwether Lewis’ collapsible boat failed to 

the explorers of that century, the crews in sp

from our world—in contact, after a lag, via 

but unable to affect events. They will be faced 

of choices about how to negotiate human rel

Ethical issues may well arise, as they 

explorators when a member became catastro

the recent cases of contemporary Antarctic m

be no option for return or for more than simp

gical interventions. Critical illness, accidents, 

occur. The usual understanding of bioethics 

subject of research or in clinical medicine as 

full autonomy. But the conditions of space tra

cept absurd—there surely will be no comp

decision-making in the space capsules. Each 

and mortally affect the lives of the others. 

For such a dilemma, normative gui

created based on an open, reflective proces

democratic reflection on the events of the j

account of the risks. Lewis and Clark return

of citizens along the Mississippi. In fact, 

reported as front-page news. This was not on

citizens, but for the Indian nations they passed 

witnessed the journey. This open, frank, and 
181

9. John Locke, The Second Treatise on Government (Prometheus 

10. Jared Diamond, Germs, Guns, and Steel: The Fates of Human 

W. W. Norton and Company, 1997).

Of all the ethical considerations 

exploration in the eighteenth and nineteenth c

one was clearly how to encounter the others 

terrain—the “empty space” of the Americas, A

Asia. In the encounter with the native popula

had to first decide the moral status of these p

these people had the same sensibilities, duties, 

peans. Locke, Hobbes, and others sought to 

conscience was a feature of native persons.9 

itself was fraught with inequalities. As Jared 

Europeans had access to weaponry, techno

and healthcare stability (relative to the bacter

populations of the Americas).10 Encounters a

ences with life forms we cannot know will b

challenge, both ethically and philosophically

pate the range of possibilities, and much o

outside the range of ethics and into the range 

scenarios, which have done a credible job in 
182

11. Beck, pp. 105–107; Ernan McMillin, “Life and Intelligence 

Formulating Theological Issues, Extraterrestrial Life and World 

S. J. Dick, Plurality of Worlds (Cambridge: Cambridge University 

the series.

theological and ethical consequence. Will this 

species? For how long? What of the idea t

deceived in our perception, that, for examp

forms or extremophiles we cannot detect sur

2. Final considerations about the co

action—Is the telos of space travel ethical?

We are bound to think of how the mor

travel affects ourselves; however, taking the id

universes seriously means taking not only ou

means foregrounding our ethical obligations 

have no way of knowing how we will contam

but the Heisenberg principle reminds us tha

other place irrevocably. In our explorations 

with our best intentions, and often without 

our species has rendered the terrain uninhabit

best of intentions, we will carry with us bac

and our own bitter history. What we fear an

will shape our interpretation of what we se

things, and we will take samples. If we w
183

their thoughts, since, after all, it was more their 

My nine-year-old was careful to consider thi

stood it not as a matter of interest, but of obl

he asked me, “we are needed? What if we are 

space for some reason that we do not know 

Indeed. It is a part of our hubris to im

but another error to imagine we might turn a

Can it be said that humans have an obligat

only because of our needs, but because we m

Unlike the optimistic Jefferson, content to 

after centuries of conflict, we fear that we 

nature, or we will be unable to tame it. Jefferso

saw what they could bring to the new terrai

by what they understood as its unfinished n

space reflects this struggle to define its ends. 

it normative, good as it stands, or can it be 

charted, even altered, a place to repair in the 

habitable, the classic work of civilization and 

We carry the disturbing human tendenc

be sure, but we also carry ideas of justic

human imagination. We can be aware of 

including a crew, how it functions, and of o

diversity and freedom. 
184

12. Joseph Beiletiski and Laurie Zoloth, “The Sundowner Princi

and Ethical Norms in Animal Experimentation,” speech to the A

Bioethics and Humanities, Philadelphia, 2000. See also Sundown

NASA protocols and forms, for example Ames Space Center.

from the discourse that surround the creation 

are useful for a consideration of what under

in general and which might guide the near fut

ration—respect for life and welfare of subje

science, the search for social good, which im

idarity with the peoples of Earth, and a broa

accountability for both the science and the 

space. Such considerations ought to guide ho

difficult choices we must make to explore sp

The considerations:

1. Welfare and excellence of care of a

animal subjects under the control of the Age

ority of each and every project design. Resear

our special consideration for two reasons

grounds of essential ecological and moral 

nonmaleficence and basic stewardship of the 

second on the grounds of research respec

Nonmaleficence guides every intervention in 

we are asking to study the behaviors and bod

thus we need to care for their welfare in all re
185

2. Scientific endeavors shape the perim

work. NASA projects are guided by severa

experiment of space travel is one is which w

equipoise and which crew are both explorer

jects in conditions that may well afford socie

about physiology that creates benefits on E

competing moral appeal in the consideration 

burdens in the research design. 

It is the science that motivates the goals 

science cannot occur if the subjects are co

there cannot be valid scientific experiments, 

pose of space travel is lost. Much of the work 

directed toward the creation, manipulation, 

new terrain. Every aspect of space habitat, m

short-term effects of altered gravity, of radia

lenges will need both animal testing and hum

ect of survival and mastery of the environme

is the science that justifies the resource expen

for the safe exploration of space to proceed 

gent and thoughtful way. 

3. Space science and flight is unique in 

the significant ways that it is important is th

large, visible, and very publicly funded. H

many other large and publicly funded proje
186

13. See, for example Michael Walzer, Spheres of Justice: A Defen

(Basic Books, 1990) or John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambri

University Press, 1999).

hence, draws on the oldest American imper

with the publicly funded project to expl

Purchase, Americans have expected all such r

ocratically debated, widely published, and pu

Lewis and Clark published their letters, inclu

families, in national newspapers, and NAS

interest and stake holding that is precisely 

appropriate, however difficult, and, in this 

also public servants. Space is a part of what w

our common stock in our future, and, hence, 

shared and a matter of public discourse.13 Th

it is how Americans expect exploration to 

democracy, an idea as old as the idea of dem

the Greeks—humility, veracity, courage, justi

4. The discourse needs to be joined a

space free. By this I mean free in the oldest s

from the narrow place of restraint and dom

arena of human possibilities that is bounded 

social order, by the reality of human commu
187

the consciousness of the American endeavor 

of the American experiment. We were not mer

ous, or grumpy, or cramped, we were out for 

New Israel, for the City on the Hill. How ca

in this way? It is a question at stake in the n

we celebrate the fortieth anniversary of spac

be linked to an arms race? Will space be for sa

sive tourism? Can space exploration be a mu

How can we negotiate such difficult and con

we fully committed to a model that in for

allows for the collaboration competition at t

5. The exploration must be protective 

our universe. To be an ethical enterprise, th

of the journey must be rendered with 

Reciprocity must undergird the scientific imp

with the limits of our wisdom and the power 

temper all aspects of the task. 

I think this is possible, which of course 

a moral enterprise. It is also an “authentic c

Albert Camus believed, was our central leg

authentic if they will exist after us. How doe

ward and assess what might be left behind? 

looking historically at other points of decisio

erational tasks are self-consciously begun. 
188

14. Perkei Avot, 2:20–2:21.

permissibility of turning away from a task th

sibly hope to complete personally. Can one 

ects that we understand we cannot complete

tasks, construction, world repair, or, ultimate

reminds us that the task is without measure, 

finished, but neither can we turn away. The 

finish, but the work is not ours to ever refus
189

Future Visions for Scientific 

Exploration—James Ga
190

An artist’s conception of a future base and astronauts on 

was produced for NASA by Pat Rawlings.
191

basis of the significance of human spacefli

overall mission, periodic evaluation of its str

been conducted by various groups, most rece

the recent Human Exploration and Deve

Enterprise Strategic Plan. While such reports 

future pathway, they are necessarily constra

rules and assumptions under which they 

alternate approach, involving a small te

selected as “brainstormers,” has been ongoin

the past two years in an effort to capture a vi

future for human spaceflight not limited by 

design” solutions. This paper describes the gu

concepts developed by this team. It is not in

an implementation plan, but rather one perspe

result as human beings extend their range of e

flight beyond today’s beach-head of low-Ear

Exploration of unknown frontiers h

human spirit since the dawn of time, and it 

that this spirit embodied the settlement and u

opment of the American continent and cult

cept has been extended to the space enviro

been the stuff of science fiction, with the 

remarkable voyages of human beings to th

NASA’s Apollo Program. It is humbling to n
192

the protective shielding of the Earth’s Van A

is limited in its entirety to the brief flight

11–17. Only approximately 220 hours of ext

(EVA) time was conducted by the Apollo ex

the lunar surface between 1969 and 1972. G

forgotten legacy, one quickly recognizes the 

of safely moving human explorers “on site” 

This has posed a fundamental challenge to N

spectacular and perhaps unrivalled succe

Program of thirty years ago. 

NASA has recognized the challenges of hu

deep space (HEDS) and most recently formed a 

tists, systems engineers, project managers, and 

to develop a vision with a somewhat radic

conditions. The challenge given to this who

exploration team was to develop a scientifi

enabled by new technologies and resource-c

tually be implemented in an incremental fa

requiring a large total investment at the outse

that human exploration in this vision be dri

how human beings within deep space can uni

the furthering of scientific progress is unprec

human spaceflight activities planned (and un

are certainly linked to fundamental scient
193

alysts for the ISS were not linked directly to 

challenges articulated by NASA’s Earth a

Enterprises. Ultimately, of course, the experie

human adaptation to the near-Earth space 

microgravity . . . provided by the ISS is a 

stone for humans to re-enter the deep-space 

entific explorers. 

The challenge of science-driven huma

develop the traceability from the most imposin

to human “on site” activities that will drama

potential for major discoveries and progress. 

what humans can potentially accomplish by “

what can be achieved with high-bandwidth t

(i.e., vicarious presence on site by humans off 

articulated. Our existing experience with h

space suggests that human-based field studie

adjuncts are available to offer assistance and o

are uniquely “discovery oriented,” making pos

because of dynamic in-the-field responses to th

The Apollo human expeditions demonstrate

onsite responsiveness to the lunar geologic env

for nearly instantaneous adjustments, ther

field sampling results. In addition, humans ca

erectors and operators of sophisticated app
194

1. Daniel J. Boorstin, The Discoverers: A History of Man’s Search 

Himself (Random House: 1983).

of the human into the scientific process is a 

vision recommendation for science-driven h

Today, humans explore deep-space locations suc

and beyond, vicariously here on Earth, with n

However, to achieve the revolutionary break

punctuated the history of science since the 

Age has always required humans as “the disc

Boorstin contends in this book of the same name

human explorers on the lunar surface discovered 

orange glass, and humans in space revamped th

Hubble Space Telescope to enable some of 

nomical discoveries of all time. Science-driven 

is about developing the opportunities for su

associated with challenging problems such 

identify life beyond Earth within the universe

At issue, however, is how to safely inse

spaceflight systems required to allow human

do best in the hostile environment of deep sp

is minimizing the problems associated with hu
195

a mission to the planet Mars, this might entai

solutions for in-space propulsion that would 

minimized transfers to and from Mars. The 

reliable in-space transportation is challeng

mechanics of moving in space and the so-called 

To travel to Mars from Earth in less than the t

trajectories allow (i.e., Hohmann transfers) req

increase in the amount of fuel. Thus, month-

require a mass of fuel as large as the dry mass 

the existence of continuous acceleration engi

largest technological stumbling block to mov

as deep-space explorers—delivering the masses 

spaceflight systems to LEO or other Earth or

using the existing or projected fleet of Ea

launch vehicles. Without a return to Saturn 

an alternate path, one cannot imagine emplac

would be required for any deep-space voyag

itive number of Shuttle-class launches. One fut

involve mass launch systems that could be us

sumables, including fuel, water, food, and bu

LEO in pieces rather than launching integr

approach would necessitate the development 

and fuel-storage systems in Earth orbit, but 

natural separation of low-value cargo (e.g
196

cargoes out of the Earth’s gravity well at c

than $100/lb, opening up new launch industr

the launch requirements. Future-generation 

could then concentrate on high-value paylo

only and not have to carry low-value but hig

all as part of the same system. 

The new vision that emerges challenges th

associated with ETO, in-space propulsion, as 

trajectories to be used. Today we can hardly i

non-Keplerian transfers from Earth to deep-sp

to the unimaginable fuel mass requirements a

sion system performance levels. However, c

based propulsion could, in theory, deliver h

from Earth to Mars in as short as ten days, a

solutions are under study that might someda

cargoes to LEO for less than $100/lb and 

there in depots. This type of distributed app

ously require concerted investment and develop

it could facilitate shorter-duration scientific ex

for humans to destinations as distant as the a

or near-Earth objects such as comets and ast

Any vision for scientific exploration of de

must always confront the issue of human safe

to the environment to be explored. It may be 
197

requires shielding or other countermeasur

space radiation, variable gravity, psychologic

support, and telemedicine. Materials science 

well as more effective space power systems, m

vide the technological catalysts required. Carbo

may deliver amazing strength-to-weight p

enabling structures hundreds of times less 

tributing to shielding for human voyagers

delivery space power systems could pro

megawatts of reliable power to sustain hu

power surface-based exploration. For examp

an emerging requirement to access the sub

where liquid water may be stored. Such reg

dreds to thousands of meters below the surf

complex drilling operations, all of which w

dant and sustained power, as well as human 

The vision for human exploration consi

brainstorming team identified several breakt

areas for which order-of-magnitude impro

existing evolutionary pace of development 

cost-effectively send humans into deep sp

activities in mind. Point design solutions ce

that suggest there may be other nearer-ter

solutions. However, if the overarching aim i
198

nologies that must be matured if sustained 

beyond LEO is to be achieved. These include 

telemedicine, information technology (autom

and maintenance), power delivery systems

EVA systems, and human-robotic adjuncts an

tigative sensors. 

The science-driven, technology-en

described above, would delay ambitious h

space exploration until sufficient technolog

are in hand to follow the guiding principles a

a case example, we will consider scientific e

by human beings as embodied by this techno

this case, a cascade of robotic forerunners inte

ongoing robotic Mars exploration program 

the surface technologies and develop the r

base about Mars and its environment before 

inserted on the surface. Initial human-based 

would be tactical, making use of the wealth 

from precursor missions to focus on a few 

scales with very goal-driven field exploratio

tactical visits would be limited to six to nine 

enabled by a new generation of in-space tran

and involve surface residence times of thirty t

initial scientific expeditions might resemble 
199

ities would be focused on highly informed 

subsurface access, and on in-the-field-based d

tion, such initial human explorers would nat

tors of complex in situ geophysical an

instruments and experiments which would op

humans return to Earth. This sort of leave-be

would be a vital part of the first wave of loc

exploration, paving the way for longer-dura

posts at the most promising sites. Initial visit

involve limited EVA activities, perhaps at the 

associated with the Apollo J-series missions (i.

Conducting in situ life-detection experiments 

cally related materials assuming appropriate s

emerge as key activities of the initial campaig

The first wave of human expeditions wo

way to a more sustained presence, with op

resemble those at Antarctic outposts here on 

tantly, as enabling technologies mature, huma

of deep-space locations, including global acc

surface, will be facilitated. Sending tactical, 

sions to targets where the scientific action ha

virtue of robotic precursors is an ultimate 

vision, one can imagine a series of human-tend

drilling sites and associated astrobiology lab
200

human field exploration of main-belt asteroid

evidence of ancient liquid water and potent

cators. Finally, there are scenarios in which h

to the lunar surface would facilitate a serie

missions with which to determine the absolut

early-time portion of solar system history, an

with Earth, Mars, Mercury, and other object

This example vision might be viewed as 

of coupled scientific and technological develo

stage for an ever-increasing scope of human sc

a wide variety of destinations in deep space. D

of our science knowledge catalyzed by pushin

our technological developments would off

opportunities for engaging people, the ultima

deep-space exploration. This vision is all abo

to dramatically amplify what we can learn s

facilitate a pace of discovery that provides 

ture, and educational opportunities. By ag

new technologies, the potential for feedback o

into more traditional NASA programs, as well 

problems, would be maximized.

As with any vision, there are recogniz

challenges. Moving human vehicles to Mars 

short as weeks could require masses of fuel a
201

after the voyages of Columbus and other early R

to America, Magellan and his team successfu

planet Earth. Where could we be in twenty 

tained, integrated effort in which science, t

adventure of human spaceflight work togethe

are many, and what has been described her

developed during the course of an eighteen

single team of brainstormers. Our aim is to en

ration, and this vision is but one tale of a fut

203

Preparing for New 

Challenges—William She
204

William M. Shepherd, commander of the Expedition 1 c

Space Station, secures his helmet to his Russian Sokol sp

exercise on 20 October 2000. NASA Image JSC2000-E-
205

flier in World War II. My grandfather flew b

World War I. It had long been one of my amb

aviator, but I found out shortly before that 

didn’t have the eyesight to be a pilot. So I end

diver, a SEAL. I was sitting there listening 

about his adventures on the Moon, and I wa

bly would never have to worry about doing 

How strange events have turned.

I bring that up because I enjoy talking 

education a very relevant part of space expl

often forget what impact exploration, techn

spaceflight have on the young kids of this co

A little more personal history: I served in t

years, was selected in 1984 to go to Houston 

as an astronaut. I flew three times on the Shu

interesting flights. The longest flight I had w

after that, I was asked to go to Washington 

help as the Administration had changed in 1

there was a complete review of the Space St

were in the middle of trying to decide whe

Freedom would continue as a program or 

transformed into something else. So I had 

Washington working on how we would con

something that was more feasible. At the end 
206

So in early 1996, I started training in R

spent almost five years with Sergei and anoth

naut, Yuri Gidzenko, who is a colonel and a 

Russian Air Force. We trained, and, finally 

major delays, lots of slips and slides, we lau

[2000] and flew what was called the first exp

We launched from Baikonur on very mu

that put Yuri Gagarin into space, pretty mu

booster. I was very impressed with the ride. It 

the Space Shuttle, very smooth. We lived o

Space Station for 141 days. At the end of tha

the second expedition crew took over. A 

American astronauts are up there now, Yu

Voss, and Jim Helms, and flying on the Sp

speak. So it was a real privilege to lead the 

ISS a reality. 

What I really want to talk about is no

did, but what it all means. As the station is ta

now, I think it might be easier to see not o

were on its past development, but some of it

To start off, it might be interesting to co

ences and even similarities there would be b

flying right now and a human expedition to 

touch on some of the ISS program lessons that a
207

or even the political will to carry out a large an

program to Mars or even back to the Moon. I 

we do in the future will be broad in scope and 

in character, much as the partnership that’s been 

fly the station right now. The station partnership 

fect. It’s got a lot of bumps on it, and we ha

times with our partners. Even today we’re do

but the job is getting done, and I think it’s a mod

do things in the future. It’s not a perfect one, 

Secondly, an expedition to Mars will b

things that are big and heavy. I think that the 

Mars will be at least the size of the ISS an

times bigger. We need this because we have 

that’s very robust and self-sufficient. I think 

will see going to Mars are going to be too b

the current stock of expendable boosters or b

This is because we cannot afford to have a v

vehicles that are assembled in orbit that t

launches. We have got to do this in a way th

and allows us to have better test and checkou

these large pieces are sent up into space so t

and integration job in orbit is not as large.

So risk, time, expense, and these checko

all going to favor putting large spacecraft on 
208

that will be assembled in orbit. Regardless 

that we use, the vehicle that we would send 

very complex and will require the spacewalki

techniques that we’re developing and provin

ISS. There just is not any way to get some of 

particularly things like thermal systems or s

completely checked out on the ground. We 

assemble and perform such checkout procedu

Third, expeditions to Mars also are g

power. We probably will not put humans on M

tory using the energy for propulsion that 

chemical sources. I am not sure that we will 

isfy the ship’s own energy needs with solar 

reactions. Once we get to a place where we w

it is the Moon or Mars, we won’t be able to 

exploration of resources, efficient recovery, 

without large amounts of energy. We will nee

but high power levels. To me, all these t

enabling technology to make this happen i

some form of nuclear power. 

Missions to Mars are going to need mor

cut down the transfer times to get humans and 

back. In order to do this, we have got to find 

that are more efficient than the chemical rocket
209

highly autonomous. A Mars mission is going 

communications delays. Additionally, the t

vehicles to Mars do not lend themselves rea

trajectories where we can get humans home 

What this means is the crew onboard 

manage and control what they are doing wit

time help from the folks on the ground. It a

vehicles that we build are going to have to 

cannot put Soyuz capsules on this kind of 

them to be able to get people home. We have 

more like we build ships, where they can su

damage from combat or some other catastro

on. We cannot depend on mission control in 

Moscow to keep turning things on and off all 

because the awareness of what’s happening 

going to be 20, 30, 40 minutes behind what

in space. All these factors indicate that the m

are not only going to design but operate the

to be quite different than what we are doing 

The last thing that I think is going to ch

is that the environmental systems are going 

what you have on Space Station now. The Ru

pretty good job of closing off some of the e

on their Zvezda module. Their equipment w
210

If you include the other factors that I m

to go to Mars and do exploration there, I t

within the grasp of what we could reasonably 

be able to do. There are probably a lot of other q

in relation to a human Mars exploration pr

you just some of the ones that I think about 

The big one would be: What should the 

international partnership for exploration be? 

trolled? How will it be managed? I think the 

had recently with the Russians as partners 

Mr. Tito show that we have not worked out 

present International Space Station partnership 

are entitled to and how decisions are to be arriv

We will have to get better at doing this.

Another question is how will high-ene

plants and propulsors with high efficiency b

will they be tested? Can we do this on orbit? 

reliable, maintainable, yet survivable space

knowing that it diverges significantly from h

right now for work in space? How will the 

will be mobilized to carry out such a program

One of my favorite questions relates not t

but to culture. Are we open to the necessary cha

culture here in the United States, here at NA
211

members of European Union, the Brazilians

have to do a much better job of trying to du

efforts of the North Atlantic Treaty Organiza

military systems. We need standardized inter

and designs for space systems. We don’t even 

system that everybody agrees upon as to how 

and design it for space. We have a Russian sys

but we don’t have a standard system. 

We do not even have a standard voca

standard understanding of even how we do th

computer algorithms, the intricate computat

sary to guide vehicles through space. We th

each other’s approach, speaking about the U

but we have not converged on what we cons

mal procedures. So I think something alon

NATO experience is essential as a precur

exploration program done.

There are also some important issues 

will. I think the day is coming soon when 

interested to understand why the Space Sta

does. I don’t think the question about Spac

exploration is really one of cost, but rather of 

to see a good return on what we’ve invested 

to see that there is value present in what we 
212

soon at showing that the ISS has very strong 

I believe also that the role for astro

astronauts, folks at NASA, my colleagues, is n

tine operations in low-Earth orbit anyway. W

need to go build the infrastructure. NASA shou

out of the routine operation business in lo

should let the marketplace drive that. As was 

country with opening the West and laying rail

government helped facilitate putting down 

and we let commerce proceed. I think space ex

place the same way. NASA needs to be the risk 

writers, and, once that era is over, we need to 

tion proceed. Our business at NASA should 

So what are the problems? We’ve discusse

are well within reach of solution, while oth

talked about commercialization. No one rea

how to do it with the ISS, although we’re headi

We have talked about standards and th

ones, discussing how we merge all these par

joint international enterprise. I contend that w

ticularly poor job of capturing the design phi

ISS or the Space Shuttle, or any rocket for tha

own specific way? Why didn’t we put this fil

didn’t we pick another type of fan to put in 
213

aloging them so people who come behind w

job again can learn from these developments

We talked a lot about having autonomou

to develop some type of pilot advocate, a high-le

that can logically run complex systems. But b

the first step that we need to undertake is to d

language, a common computer application, th

model complex systems to provide the necessary 

interfaces and displays, and to build and driv

We need to work on higher energy sy

power. I was over in Russia in 1995 at the I

Processes, where Sergei Korolev worked in t

over there looking at possibly adding a solar 

to the ISS. It was going to be a carbon block t

flow led to a turban, and the carbon block w

parabolic reflector. The Russian engineers ha

wall, showing that this was going to be abou

tem with an exponential development growt

guys say what the heat source is going to b

They said, “Well, of course. It’s going to be 

the technical ability to do this is certainly righ

and the Russians clearly have been thinking 

We also need to figure out how to energize 

some type of electric-propulsion device that 
214

years are out, this technology will be utilized 

drag. The ISS has a drag on it of only a couple 

causes it to come down a couple hundred ya

orbital decay. A highly efficient propulsion s

that drag with a small amount of continuous 

keep the ISS from falling out of the sky and 

reduce our need to fly fuel up to re-boost it

because when the ISS is fully assembled and w

of 500 tons, we’re going to fly something on t

of propellant up to it every year to re-boos

such as this, that goes down by a factor of 

around a ton of hydrogen gas, but xenon m

that can be used in this plasma engine to pro

solve this re-boost requirement. This is a dire

kind of technology that will be useful to p

vehicles to Mars.

There are a lot of other questions that h

We’ve got to go after closed life support. The 

ing hard on this. They’ve got twenty years of 

Mir, and what they’ve put on the ISS right n

job of partially closing some of the gas and w

haven’t totally solved such problems.

I think the biggest single issue in add

problems that I have mentioned is we do not 
215

The National War College, Industrial Col

Services, and so forth.

We need to have a National Space Inst

kind of Federal Charter. Its purpose would b

the intellectual resources necessary for the hu

space. It would have this as a single purpose. 

where the appropriate knowledge, the experi

lectual energy could be focused on this single 

the status of other national colleges. It wou

college or a university, and it would be coll

leges and universities and other learning ins

the country and perhaps the world. Expe

almost any corridor could participate and 

this institute would do.

It also would have very strong busines

would have folks from industry come to this 

go back and work, and then come back and 

a means for individuals to become more profic

engineering operations, as well as the bus

aspects of space exploration. Such a national 

would need to establish and maintain close co

development and operations in human spa

this needs not to be some intellectual outpost w

happening, but rather needs to be in the cente
216

Sure, there are problems, but I think we are 

finding the necessary answers, at least to en

ration back to the Moon and probably to Mar

of marshalling the intellect and the will to go 

Should we have a clear policy at a n

make this happen? It is certainly something 

out by the people who are in the field right n

One hundred and forty-one days in s

from my tour on the ISS thinking that spendin

at the surface of Earth is very enjoyable, a p

says. Nevertheless, I really think that we s

vision by looking at the surface of other planets 

I am convinced that we have the means to do 
217

About the Authors

219

the Gemini 12 spacecraft on a four-day flig

Gemini program to a successful close. Aldrin 

record for extravehicular activity (EVA), sp

outside the spacecraft. He served as Lunar 

Apollo 11, 16–24 July 1969, the first lun

Aldrin followed Neil Armstrong onto the lu

July 1969, completing a 2-hour and 15-minu

Aldrin was born 20 January 1930, in Montc

ated from Montclair High School, Montcl

bachelor of science degree in 1951 from 

Military Academy at West Point, NY, grad

class; and received a doctorate of science in 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cam

was “Guidance for Manned Orbital Rende

honorary degrees from six colleges and univ

received numerous decorations and awa

Presidential Medal for Freedom in 1969, th

Trophy, the Robert H. Goddard Memoria

Hannon International Trophy in 1967. S

NASA in 1971 and the Air Force in 1972, he 

biography Return to Earth and several n

remained at the forefront of efforts to ensur

ing role for America in human space explora

lifelong commitment to venturing outward in 
220

p

The Spaceflight Revolution. Since then, he ha

other books and well over a hundred shorter 

computer software packages. His research te

on the social science of technology or religio

ing surveying, observational, and historical 

currently works for an agency of the federal 

he represents the social and behavioral scien

tion technology and nanotechnology initiativ

T. J. Creamer

Timothy J. Creamer graduated from 

May 1982 with a B.S. in chemistry. He 

through the ROTC program as a Second Lie

Army. He entered the U.S. Army Aviation S

1982 and was designated as an Army Aviat

graduating as the distinguished graduate from 

pleted a master of science degree in physic

Creamer previously worked as a Space Oper

the Army Space Command stationed in Hou

was assigned to NASA at the Johnson Space C

as a Space Shuttle Vehicle Integration Test En

NASA in June 1998, Creamer reported for A

Training in August 1998. Having completed tw

Space Shuttle and Space Station training, he 
221

Robert L. Crippen

Robert L. Crippen (Captain, USN, retir

from his position as president of Thiokol P

joining Thiokol, he served as a vice presid

Martin Information Systems in Orlando, FL

the Director of NASA’s John F. Kennedy 

January 1992 to January 1995. From Janua

1992 he served as Space Shuttle Director at N

in Washington, DC. Born on 11 September 

TX, Crippen received a bachelor of science 

engineering from the University of Texas in 

pilot from June 1962 to November 1964, he 

duty aboard the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Inde

attended the USAF Aerospace Research Pilot 

Air Force Base, CA. Crippen became a N

September 1969. He was a member of the 

crew for the Skylab 2, 3, and 4 missions, a

Soyuz Test Project mission. He was the Pilot 

test flight of the Shuttle program (STS-1, 12–

was the Commander of three additional S

accomplishments have earned him many no

NASA Exceptional Service Medal in 1972 

1981, including the Department of Defe

Service Award, the American Astronautica
222

Memorial Trophy, and the Harmon Trophy. I

the U.S. Navy Distinguished Flying Cross 

Meritorious Service Medal. He received N

Leadership Medal in 1988 and three Dis

Medals in 1985, 1988, and 1993. He is al

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astr

Astronautical Society, and the Society of Expe

Stephen J. Garber 

Stephen J. Garber works in the NASA 

received a B.A. in politics from Brandeis Un

degree in public and international affairs from 

Pittsburgh’s Graduate School of Public and In

and a master’s degree in science and technolo

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ

ten on such aerospace history topics as the co

lation of NASA’s Search for Extraterre

program, President Kennedy’s attitudes towa

of the Space Shuttle, and the Soviet space pro

James Garvin

James Garvin is the Chief Scientist for M

NASA Headquarters for the Space Science E

to NASA HQ in this position in April 2000 fr
223

sedimentary geology of the Viking Lander sit

as impact cratering processes. Upon arrival 

Garvin spearheaded the development of pla

altimetry as a tool for measuring landscapes 

Garvin served as Chief Scientist for the Shut

which flew in Earth orbit in 1996 and 1997 on 

respectively. Garvin has served NASA as a Sci

on the Mars Observer and Mars Global Su

RADARSAT (Canadian mission), and as the 

the Earth System Science Pathfinders program

airborne remote-sensing missions to Icelan

Western U.S., Navassa Island, and other targ

have served as analogues to Mars. More re

chaired the NASA Next Decadal Planning T

forward to the day in which fusion propulsio

explorers to the surface of Mars in little mo

took for the Apollo astronauts to reach the M

Daniel S. Goldin

The Honorable Daniel S. Goldin becam

of NASA in April 1992 and served until Nove

him the longest serving Administrator in NA

coming to NASA, Goldin was vice president a

of the TRW Space and Technology Group in R
224

Research Center, Cleveland, OH in 1962 and 

propulsion systems for human interplanetary 

member of the National Academy of Engine

the American Institute of Aeronautics and As

received the Robert H. Goddard trophy from 

Club. He holds several honorary doctorates and 

Frederick D. Gregory

Frederick D. Gregory is NASA’s Dep

Previously he served as Associate Administrat

Space Flight and as Associate Administrato

Safety and Mission Assurance. Mr. Gregory 

rience as an astronaut, test pilot, and mana

programs and launch support operations. As 

he logged 455 hours in space—as Pilot for the 

as Commander aboard STS-33 in 1989, a

aboard STS-44 in 1991. Mr. Gregory retired 

United States Air Force in December 1993. M

bachelor of science degree from the Unite

Academy and a master’s degree in informa

George Washington University. He is on the 

for the Young Astronaut Council, Kaise

Photonics Laboratory at Fisk University, an

College at Howard University. He is on the b
225

Distinguished Flying Crosses; sixteen Air M

Distinguished Service Medal; two NA

Leadership Medals; National Society of 

Distinguished National Scientist Award; the G

University Distinguished Alumni Award; 

Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and 

orary doctor of science degrees from the Col

and the University of the District of Colum

awarded the Air Force Association Ira Eake

numerous civic and community honors.

Homer Hickam

Homer Hickam was born in 1943 and 

mining town of Coalwood, WV, where he ga

an amateur rocket builder. After leaving Coa

B.S. degree in industrial engineering f

Polytechnic Institute and then survived a c

Fourth Infantry Division in Vietnam. After 

war, Mr. Hickam found himself torn betwee

ing on spaceflight and writing. He therefore 

While he worked for NASA designing spac

astronauts, he began a freelance writing care

book, Torpedo Junction, a history of the battle 

along the American East Coast during Worl
226

lished in the summer of 1999 and was qu

Hollywood. The Coalwood Way, a memoir 

“equal, not a sequel” to Rocket Boys, was 

and quickly climbed the bestseller lists. The 

memoirs, entitled Sky of Stone, was publishe

John M. Logsdon

John M. Logsdon is the director of 

Institute of George Washington University’

International Affairs, where he is also a professo

and international affairs, and director o

International Science and Technology Policy. 

physics from Xavier University and a Ph.D. 

from New York University. He has been at G

University since 1970, and he previously taug

University of America. He is also a facul

International Space University. He is the auth

to Go to the Moon: Project Apollo and the N

general editor of the eight-volume series Explo

Selected Documents in the History of the 

Program. Dr. Logsdon is Chair of the Advis

Planetary Society and a member of the S

Logsdon has been a Fellow at the Woodrow W

of the National Air and Space Museum. He 
227

Charles Murray 

Charles Murray is the coauthor with C

Apollo: The Race to the Moon (1989). His o

Losing Ground: American Social Policy 195

Pursuit: Of Happiness and Good Governme

Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure 

(1994, with Richard J. Herrnstein). He is cu

a new book entitled Truth and Beauty: A

Nature and Causes of Human Accomplishm

his books and articles in technical journals, D

lished extensively in the popular press. Dr. M

at all of the leading American universities 

throughout the world. He has been a witne

and consultant to senior government offic

States, England, Eastern Europe, and the OE

frequent guest on major network news and 

grams. Dr. Murray has been affiliated w

Enterprise Institute since 1990. From 198

Fellow with the Manhattan Institute, wher

Ground and In Pursuit. From 1974–1981, 

American Institutes for Research (AIR), one 

private social science research organizations

ing chief scientist. Before joining AIR, Dr. Mu

in Thailand, first as a Peace Corps volunte
228

William M. Shepherd

William M. Shepherd was selected as an 

by NASA in May 1984. A veteran of four spa

has logged over 159 days in space. Most r

Commander of the Expedition-1 crew on the 

Station (31 October 2000 to 21 March 200

three flights as a Mission Specialist on STS-27, S

From March 1993 to January 1996, Shephe

the Space Station Program and served in va

positions. William Shepherd was born 26 

Ridge, TN, but considers Babylon, NY his ho

uated from Arcadia High School, Scottsd

received a bachelor of science degree in aer

from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1971, and t

engineer and master of science in mechanica

the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 

ing NASA, Shepherd served with the N

Demolition Team Eleven, SEAL Teams O

Special Boat Unit Twenty. He is a membe

Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AI

of NASA’s “Steve Thorne” Aviation Award.
229

gg 

from Texas A&M University, and his M.B.A. 

of Massachusetts-Amherst. He has published 

journals as Spaceflight, the journal of the Br

Society; Quest: The Journal of Spaceflight Histo

on the history of space exploration. He contr

the Russian aerospace industry for the yea

Encyclopedia Britannica. Mr. Siddiqi was the 

national essay contest on space explora

Bangladesh by the United Nations. He was th

the Robert H. Goddard Historical Essay Awa

National Space Club. In 1998, the American Inst

and Astronautics (AIAA) awarded the manu

Challenge to Apollo the prize for the best hi

dealing with the science, technology, and/or im

and astronautics on society. He is a mem

Interplanetary Society. He is currently a Ph.

department of history at Carnegie Mel

Pittsburgh, PA.

Neil de Grasse Tyson

Neil de Grasse Tyson was born and r

City, where he was educated in public schoo

graduation from the Bronx High School of S

on to earn his B.A. in physics from Harvar
230

galactic bulge. Tyson obtains his data f

California, New Mexico, Arizona, and in the 

of Chile. In addition to dozens of profession

Tyson continues to write for the public. In 

became a monthly essayist for Natural Histo

the title “Universe.” Tyson’s recent books inclu

The Sky is Not the Limit: Adventures of an Ur

the companion book to the opening of the n

Earth and Space; One Universe: At Home in 

thored with Charles Liu and Robert Irion); a

book on the universe for all ages entitled Just V

Tyson is the first occupant of the Frederick P

of the Hayden Planetarium, and he is a visitin

in astrophysics at Princeton University, wher

Charles D. Walker

Charles D. Walker is a director of mark

Company’s Space & Communications office in 

the early 1980s, he flew on three Space Shuttle 

industry-sponsored engineer and researcher. H

Specialist astronaut on those missions in

purification of biomedical preparations and pro

Programs on which Walker has worked includ

and the International Space Station. He has be
231

Walker serves on the boards, and as an office

profit and educational groups including the 

for Space Science Education, the Association 

and the National Space Society. He received de

and astronautical engineering from Purdue U

Mary Ellen Weber

Mary Ellen Weber has most recently wo

capital firm to identify promising areas of space 

companies for investment. Previously she w

Affairs liaison at NASA Headquarters in W

has served on a team designated to assess an

Station research facilities. Dr. Weber’s princip

ments within the Astronaut Office have inclu

preparations at the Kennedy Space Center, p

development, and development of standard

crew science training. Dr. Weber was selecte

fourteenth group of astronauts in 1992. Her 

was STS-101, the third Shuttle mission devo

Space Station construction. Her first mission 

mission she performed biotechnology exp

colon cancer tissues. Dr. Weber was born on 

Cleveland, OH; Bedford Heights, OH is h

graduated from Bedford High School in 1980; 
232

Weber has logged over 3,300 skydives since 

in the world’s largest freefall formation in 199

In addition, she is an instrument-rated pilot.

Laurie Zoloth

Laurie Zoloth is a professor of ethics 

program in Jewish studies at San Francisco S

is the incoming president of the American S

and Humanities. In 2000, Professor Zolo

scholar at the University of Virginia in the dep

and the Center for Medical Ethics. She is als

Ethics Practice, a group that has provided bio

and education services to healthcare prov

nationally, including the Kaiser Permanent

Area medical centers, and regional long-term 

is a bioethics consultant to NASA Ames Re

NASA’s Interagency National Animal Care an

She received her B.A. in women’s studies an

University of California at Berkeley, her 

University of the State of New York, her M

San Francisco State University, her M.A. in 

her Ph.D. in social ethics at the Graduate Th

Berkeley. She has published extensively in t

family, feminist theory, religion and science, 
233

ethics of ordinary life and emerging issu

research genetics. In 2000, the National I

awarded her an Ethical Legal and Social Is

Genome grant to explore the ethical issues a

the human genome.

Robert Zubrin 

Robert Zubrin is the founder and pre

Society, an international organization dedicat

exploration and settlement of Mars by both 

means. He is also president of Pioneer Astron

R&D company located in Lakewood, CO. Form

at Lockheed Martin Astronautics in Denver, 

degree in aeronautics and astronautics, and 

engineering from the University of Washing

inventor of several unique concepts for spa

exploration, the author of over a hundred 

and nontechnical papers in the field, and 

Lockheed Martin’s “scenario development te

developing broad new strategies for space e

capacity, he was responsible for developing 

mission plan, a strategy which, by using 

allows a human Mars exploration program t

cost 1/8th that previously estimated by NASA
234

Spacefaring Civilization, and First Landing, wh

Ace Putnam in July 2001. Prior to his work 

Zubrin was employed in areas of thermonucl

nuclear engineering, and radiation protection
235

NASA History Serie

237

Gemini Technology and Operations: A Chronology. NA

Link, Mae Mills. Space Medicine in Project Mercury. N

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1963: Chronology of Sci

Policy. NASA SP-4004, 1964.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1964: Chronology of Sci

Policy. NASA SP-4005, 1965.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1965: Chronology of Sci

Policy. NASA SP-4006, 1966.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1966: Chronology of Sci

Policy. NASA SP-4007, 1967.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1967: Chronology of Sci

Policy. NASA SP-4008, 1968.

Ertel, Ivan D., and Mary Louise Morse. The Apollo Spa

Volume I, Through November 7, 1962. NASA SP-4009

Morse, Mary Louise, and Jean Kernahan Bays. The Apo

A Chronology, Volume II, November 8, 1962–Septemb

NASA SP-4009, 1973.

Brooks, Courtney G., and Ivan D. Ertel. The Apollo Sp

Volume III, October 1, 1964–January 20, 1966. NASA 

Ertel, Ivan D., and Roland W. Newkirk, with Courtney 

Spacecraft: A Chronology, Volume IV, January 21, 1966

NASA SP-4009, 1978.
238

Van Nimmen, Jane, and Leonard C. Bruno, with Rober

NASA Historical Data Book, Volume I: NASA Resourc

NASA SP-4012, 1976, rep. ed. 1988.

Ezell, Linda Neuman. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol

and Projects, 1958–1968. NASA SP-4012, 1988.

Ezell, Linda Neuman. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol

and Projects, 1969–1978. NASA SP-4012, 1988.

Gawdiak, Ihor Y., with Helen Fedor, compilers. NASA H

Book, Volume IV: NASA Resources, 1969–1978. NASA 

Rumerman, Judy A., compiler. NASA Historical Data B

Volume V, NASA Launch Systems, Space Transportatio

and Space Science. NASA SP-4012, 1999.

Rumerman, Judy A., compiler. NASA Historical Data B

NASA Space Applications, Aeronautics and Space Resea

Tracking and Data Acquisition/Space Operations, Com

Resources, 1979–1988. NASA SP-2000-4012, 2000.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1969: Chronology of Sci

and Policy. NASA SP-4014, 1970.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1970: Chronology of Sci

and Policy. NASA SP-4015, 1972.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1971: Chronology of Sci

and Policy. NASA SP-4016, 1972.
239

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1974: Chronology of Sci

and Policy. NASA SP-4019, 1977.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1975: Chronology of Sci

and Policy. NASA SP-4020, 1979.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1976: Chronology of Sci

and Policy. NASA SP-4021, 1984.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1977: Chronology of Sci

and Policy. NASA SP-4022, 1986.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1978: Chronology of Sci

and Policy. NASA SP-4023, 1986.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1979–1984: Chronology 

and Policy. NASA SP-4024, 1988.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985: Chronology of Sci

and Policy. NASA SP-4025, 1990.

Noordung, Hermann. The Problem of Space Travel: Th

Edited by Ernst Stuhlinger and J. D. Hunley, with Jenni

NASA SP-4026, 1995.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1986–1990: A Chronolo

NASA SP-4027, 1997.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1990–1995: A Chronolo

NASA SP-2000-4028, 2000.
240

Levine, Arnold S. Managing NASA in the Apollo Era. N

Roland, Alex. Model Research: The National Advisory 

Aeronautics, 1915–1958. NASA SP-4103, 1985.

Fries, Sylvia D. NASA Engineers and the Age of Apollo

Glennan, T. Keith. The Birth of NASA: The Diary of T. 

J. D. Hunley, editor. NASA SP-4105, 1993.

Seamans, Robert C., Jr. Aiming at Targets: The Autobio

Robert C. Seamans, Jr. NASA SP-4106, 1996.

Project Histories, NASA SP-4200:

Swenson, Loyd S., Jr., James M. Grimwood, and Charle

This New Ocean: A History of Project Mercury. NASA 

rep. ed. 1998.

Green, Constance McLaughlin, and Milton Lomask. Va

NASA SP-4202, 1970; rep. ed. Smithsonian Institution 

Hacker, Barton C., and James M. Grimwood. On the Sh

A History of Project Gemini. NASA SP-4203, 1977.

Benson, Charles D., and William Barnaby Faherty. Moo

of Apollo Launch Facilities and Operations. NASA SP-4

Brooks, Courtney G., James M. Grimwood, and Loyd S

for Apollo: A History of Manned Lunar Spacecraft. NA
241

Compton, W. David, and Charles D. Benson. Living an

A History of Skylab. NASA SP-4208, 1983.

Ezell, Edward Clinton, and Linda Neuman Ezell. The P

of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project. NASA SP-4209, 1978

Hall, R. Cargill. Lunar Impact: A History of Project Ra

NASA SP-4210, 1977.

Newell, Homer E. Beyond the Atmosphere: Early Years 

NASA SP-4211, 1980.

Ezell, Edward Clinton, and Linda Neuman Ezell. On M

of the Red Planet, 1958–1978. NASA SP-4212, 1984.

Pitts, John A. The Human Factor: Biomedicine in the M

to 1980. NASA SP-4213, 1985.

Compton, W. David. Where No Man Has Gone Before

Lunar Exploration Missions. NASA SP-4214, 1989.

Naugle, John E. First Among Equals: The Selection of N

Experiments. NASA SP-4215, 1991.

Wallace, Lane E. Airborne Trailblazer: Two Decades wi

Boeing 737 Flying Laboratory. NASA SP-4216, 1994.

Butrica, Andrew J., editor. Beyond the Ionosphere: Fifty 

Communication. NASA SP-4217, 1997.

Butrica, Andrew J. To See the Unseen: A History of Pla

Astronomy. NASA SP-4218, 1996.
242

Heppenheimer, T. A. The Space Shuttle Decision: NASA

Reusable Space Vehicle. NASA SP-4221, 1999.

Hunley, J. D., editor. Toward Mach 2: The Douglas D-5

NASA SP-4222, 1999.

Swanson, Glen E., editor. “Before this Decade is Out . . 

Reflections on the Apollo Program. NASA SP-4223, 19

Tomayko, James E. Computers Take Flight: A History o

Digital Fly-by-Wire Project. NASA SP-2000-4224, 2000

Morgan, Clay. Shuttle-Mir: The U.S. and Russia Share H

NASA SP-2001-4225, 2001.

Leary, William M. “We Freeze to Please”: A History of 

Tunnel and the Quest for Flight Safety. NASA SP-2002-

Mudgway, Douglas J. Uplink-Downlink: A History of t

Network 1957–1997. NASA SP-2001-4227, 2001. 

Center Histories, NASA SP-4300:

Rosenthal, Alfred. Venture into Space: Early Years of G

Center. NASA SP-4301, 1985.

Hartman, Edwin P. Adventures in Research: A History o

Center, 1940–1965. NASA SP-4302, 1970.
243

Hansen, James R. Engineer in Charge: A History of the 

Laboratory, 1917–1958. NASA SP-4305, 1987.

Dawson, Virginia P. Engines and Innovation: Lewis Lab

Propulsion Technology. NASA SP-4306, 1991.

Dethloff, Henry C. “Suddenly Tomorrow Came . . .”: A 

Johnson Space Center. NASA SP-4307, 1993.

Hansen, James R. Spaceflight Revolution: NASA Langle

from Sputnik to Apollo. NASA SP-4308, 1995.

Wallace, Lane E. Flights of Discovery: 50 Years at the N

Research Center. NASA SP-4309, 1996.

Herring, Mack R. Way Station to Space: A History of t

Space Center. NASA SP-4310, 1997.

Wallace, Harold D., Jr. Wallops Station and the Creatio

Space Program. NASA SP-4311, 1997.

Wallace, Lane E. Dreams, Hopes, Realities: NASA’s Go

Center, The First Forty Years. NASA SP-4312, 1999.

Dunar, Andrew J., and Stephen P. Waring. Power to Ex

Marshall Space Flight Center. NASA SP-4313, 1999.

Bugos, Glenn E. Atmosphere of Freedom: Sixty Years at 

Research Center. NASA SP-2000-4314, 2000.
244

Wells, Helen T., Susan H. Whiteley, and Carrie Karegea

Names. NASA SP-4402, 1976.

Anderson, Frank W., Jr. Orders of Magnitude: A Histor

1915–1980. NASA SP-4403, 1981.

Sloop, John L. Liquid Hydrogen as a Propulsion Fuel, 1

NASA SP-4404, 1978.

Roland, Alex. A Spacefaring People: Perspectives on Ea

NASA SP-4405, 1985.

Bilstein, Roger E. Orders of Magnitude: A History of th

1915–1990. NASA SP-4406, 1989.

Logsdon, John M., ed., with Linda J. Lear, Jannelle War

Williamson, and Dwayne A. Day. Exploring the Unkno

Documents in the History of the U.S. Civil Space Progr

Organizing for Exploration. NASA SP-4407, 1995.

Logsdon, John M., editor, with Dwayne A. Day and Ro

Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents in the Hi

Civil Space Program, Volume II, Relations with Other O

NASA SP-4407, 1996.

Logsdon, John M., ed., with Roger D. Launius, David H

J. Garber. Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents 

U.S. Civil Space Program, Volume III, Using Space. NA

Logsdon, John M., gen. ed., with Ray A. Williamson, R

Russell J. Acker, Stephen J. Garber, and Jonathan L. Fri

Unknown: Selected Documents in the History of the U.

Volume IV, Accessing Space. NASA SP-4407, 1999.
245

Siddiqi, Asif A. Challenge to Apollo: The Soviet Union 

1945–1974. NASA SP-2000-4408, 2000.

Monographs in Aerospace History, NASA SP-4500:

Launius, Roger D. and Aaron K. Gillette, comps. Towa

Space Shuttle: An Annotated Bibliography. Monograph 

No. 1, 1992.

Launius, Roger D., and J. D. Hunley, comps. An Annot

the Apollo Program. Monograph in Aerospace History, 

Launius, Roger D. Apollo: A Retrospective Analysis. M

History, No. 3, 1994.

Hansen, James R. Enchanted Rendezvous: John C. Hou

of the Lunar-Orbit Rendezvous Concept. Monograph in 

No. 4, 1995.

Gorn, Michael H. Hugh L. Dryden’s Career in Aviation 

in Aerospace History, No. 5, 1996.

Powers, Sheryll Goecke. Women in Flight Research at N

Research Center, from 1946 to 1995. Monograph in Ae

No. 6, 1997. 

Portree, David S. F. and Robert C. Trevino.Walking to O

Chronology. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 7, 
246

1961–1998. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 9, 1

Portree, David S. F. NASA’s Origins and the Dawn of th

Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 10, 1998.

Logsdon, John M. Together in Orbit: The Origins of In

Cooperation in the Space Station. Monograph in Aerosp

1998. 

Phillips, W. Hewitt. Journey in Aeronautical Research: A 

Langley Research Center. Monograph in Aerospace His

Braslow, Albert L. A History of Suction-Type Laminar-F

Emphasis on Flight Research. Monograph in Aerospace 

Logsdon, John M., moderator. Managing the Moon Pro

From Apollo. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 14

Perminov, V. G. The Difficult Road to Mars: A Brief Hi

Exploration in the Soviet Union. Monograph in Aerosp

No. 15, 1999. 

Tucker, Tom. Touchdown: The Development of Propuls

at NASA Dryden. Monograph in Aerospace History, No

Maisel, Martin D., Demo J. Giulianetti, and Daniel C. D

of the XV-15 Tilt Rotor Research Aircraft: From Conce

NASA SP-2000-4517, 2000.

Jenkins, Dennis R. Hypersonics Before the Shuttle: A C

X-15 Research Airplane. NASA SP-2000-4518, 2000. 

Chambers, Joseph R. Partners in Freedom: Contribution

Research Center to U.S. Military Aircraft in the 1990s. 
247

Portree, David S. F. Humans to Mars: Fifty Years of Mi

1950–2000. NASA SP-2001-4521, 2001.

Thompson, Milton O., with J. D. Hunley. Flight Resear

Encountered and What They Should Teach Us. NASA S

Tucker, Tom. The Eclipse Project. NASA SP-2000-4523

Siddiqi, Asif A. Deep Space Chronicle: A Chronology o

Planetary Probes, 1958–2000. NASA SP-2002-4524, 20

Merlin, Peter W. Mach 3+: NASA/USAF YF-12 Flight R

NASA SP-2001-4525, 2001. 

Renstrom, Arthur G. Wilbur and Orville Wright: A Bib

Commemorating the One-Hundredth Anniversary of th

on December 17, 1903. NASA SP-2002-4527, 2002.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

22785-looking back cover 11/20/02 1:42 PM Page 1