Large scale lunar&NEO programs and Hypothetica

>>>>>NEAR
Shoemaker mission was pretty abysmal. Each week that Atlanta newspapers
have some article or another on the Shuttle or ISS, but only thrice did I
see anything in the local paper concerning NEAR Shoemaker.>>>>>

A short while ago, I started a discussion on this list of a program
concept, in which a hypothetical European country, 'hypothetica', initiated
a large space program directed towards the exploitation of Lunar and
Asteroidal resources.
Two scenarios were discussed: (1) The national mobilisation model, were
the country, makes the space program their national mission-statement, and
commits huge national resources upwards of $20Bn/annum for at least 10
years, towards its completion. (2) The national side project model. The
country commits $3Bn/annum towards a slow, gradual development of
technology, geared towards industrial development within 30-40 years.

Both models have their pro's and cons.

The side-project model.
CONS: requires a great deal of time and patience. It is a long term, mainly
blue-sky project and it runs the risk of being cancelled by successive
governments. Takes place so slowly, that other world governments may beat
you to it. Does not provide you with humans in space capability for some
years.

PRO'S: Will go relatively un-noticed (will not spark jealousy reactions in
other nations). It will provide a small, but persistent boost towards
national economic growth. The smaller size of the program makes it easier
to manage. Long term conditioning of the public through interactive
programs and by the media, can be used to gear them towards the idea of
space colonisation.

The National mobilisation model

PRO'S: Can accomplish real results, in quick time:

Big dumb booster program could provide cheap access to HEO within 5 years
of start. Setting up of moon base could be accomplished within six years.
Full scale HEO workshop (100m diameter steel spherical hull) completed
within seven. First SPS satellite and mass communication systems contract
could be accepted after 7 years. First SPS completed at year 8. Offer to
build the US a massive defence shield using cheap lunar materials and
dumb-booster launch systems. Fully completed at year 20. Mars colonisation
within 15 years. Using the Big-dumb-booster principle, 10,000 people, could
affordably be lifted to HEO every year, once a program was in place that
could build island-1 type colonies that would house and feed them.

Can produce huge economic growth, maybe as high as 10% per year? A public
works project could be used to involve a significant portion of the public
and private companies. The realisation of the true potential of space would
inspire millions of people. A great many people would be swept up due to
the enormous scale of the program. Less time for other nations to react.
With 10,000 people in space, each and every year, everyone who had not been
in space, would know someone that was either in space or had been in space.
I think that it can generally be accepted that once a person has seen the
Earth from space and the moon up close, they would almost invariably
support further space travel. The sight of such things is a wake up call
for most astronauts. How many of the Apollo astronauts, would honestly have
opposed further space travel after having seen the things that they had? In
other words, the program would become self perpetuating in the eyes of the
public. No one is going to want to give up the forbidden fruit once they
have tasted it.

CONS: The program would spark both foreign interest and concern. Many
would fear that hypothetica was trying to steal their own future heritage.
It would probably start a new space race that could leave Hypothetica in
the dust. If the other nations felt threatened by the fact that hypothetica
had space ambitions, things could get really ugly.

The program would suck up a lot of money. The financial vacuum that it
creates, may harm some essential services within Hypothetica. This could
turn public opinion against the program. If this happens, the program would
be cancelled with many of the projects half finished.

Can anyone think of any other advantages or disadvantages for each type of
program? can anyone punch any holes in these ideas?

Tony