ISS leaking air

I've got a couple of thoughts on this I'd like to
bounce around, so bear with if they don't all seem to
coherently fit together :)

The space program is and has always been a tool to be
used for foreign and domestic policy. In the
beginning, NASA aimed to show the superiority of the
American way of life. This can be seen while reading
the National Aeronautic and Space Act of 1958
(http://www.hq.nasa.gov/ogc/spaceact.html). See
Section I in the section titled "Declaration of Policy
and Purpose".

The ISS in its current envisionment was to fulfill a
foreign policy goal of getting Russia to incorporate
its space program into a peaceful enterprise. This
was done by first insisting that Russia create a space
Agency similar to NASA and then by trying to only deal
with this agency to give it power. This was
successful in many ways, both in creating a
government, civilian-based space agency in russia and
keeping its scientists from going to countries that
the US does not like.

In terms of future habitation of space, its helped
somewhat further our understanding of space biology.
I think if we ever got it completed and were able to
man it to its full crew of seven, it could prove to be
a good asset. If nothing else, its a good launch
platform for sending out missions further out. This
was one of the first visions as outlined in SP-509
(http://lifesci3.arc.nasa.gov/SpaceSettlement/spaceresource84/toc.html)

I was a really big fan of the plan outlined in this
document. I still think it makes sense in its
incremental approach towards space habitations. Sure,
the Mars Direct may be more ambitious and grandiose,
but I don't hink the public will shelter the hefty
costs associated with it.

I think it makes sense for the internation space
effort to go at an incremental approach towards
colonization. The benefit of this approach is that at
each stage (LEO/GEO/Lunar/Mars/Oniel), the pace of
technology keeps up with the pace governmetn progress
and is able to follow it commercially. What I mean is
that once we are ready to build a habitat in GEO,
industry will be able to commerciallize humans in LEO.
Once we goto the moon, GEO human habitation is
commercially available, and etc.

In each stage, the community of governmental space
agencies blaze the trail and industry comes on its
tail and fills in the gaps. This process to me is
good in terms that it is sustainable at every step.
Its not glamorous, but its at a pace in which
commercial interests can follow governmental programs.
(which gets back to what I think what a government
agency should be doing, blazing new paths that its
industries can then serve).

Thats enough of these thoughts for now. I'll try in
future postings to clarify any of these thoughts if
you'd like.

Ryan Z

--- Rick Fischer wrote:
> Without sound crass, I am beginning to wonder who
> supports our current space
> program?
>
> Am I being paranoid in thinking that because of
> budgetary cuts over the last
> 30 years in NASA's budget, that the existing ISS and
> its support structure
> is wasting its time? What part has begun to become
> useless? The scaled down
> version of the ISS?
>
> Babbler, can you recall any useful things that have
> come out of ISS? Space
> exploration, or in this case low orbit space
> stations is dangerous. If the
> public wants a more vivid program they need to spend
> money on it and not
> choke it to a slow death.
>
> It appears that people become excited about space,
> but start to cower when
> funding is needed.
>
> It's quite obvious that I am a pro NASA supporter
> here, and hope that I am
> not in the minority.
>
> Thanks!
> Rick Fischer
> rick.fischer@...
>
> Inside KSC.com
> http://www.insideksc.com
>
> Join the Inside KSC Yahoo List Group
> mailto:inside_ksc-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> From: babbler36 [mailto:babbler36@...]
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 9:36 PM
> To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [spacesettlers] ISS leaking air
>
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/01/05/space.station.ap/