Aucbvax.5167 fa.space utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!space Sat Nov 14 03:35:45 1981 SPACE Digest V2 #34 >From OTA@S1-A Sat Nov 14 02:55:18 1981 SPACE Digest Volume 2 : Issue 34 Today's Topics: Privitization of space private vs. public in SPACE Digest ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13 Nov 1981 1003-CST From: Clyde Hoover Subject: Privitization of space To: space at MIT-MC The discussion about private business getting into the space business in a serious way DOES belong here, because it falls into the scope of SPACE digest (I feel), and there hasn't been much traffic on this list recently anyway (things need to be livened up around here). To wit: While opening space to non-governmental use has potential dangers, (one can see cost-cutting on safety hardware for a priviate shuttle, leading to a launch pad explosion or reentry burnup), leaving it exclusivly in the hands of the government (especially the military) makes it a political hostage. Let me advance another scenario that can happen if the bureaucratic hold on space is not broken: 1983 - Furthur budget cuts for NASA cause cancellation of fourth Shuttle orbiter. Funds for completion of Discovery (the third orbiter) are in doubt. The Air Force steps in and pays for the third and fourth orbiters. Congress readily approves this "national defense" expenditure. 1984 - Increased doubts about Shuttle availability and reliability (due to trimmed operational funds) lead potential customers to use expendable vechiles instead (Ariadane for example), cutting income from cargo loads. 1985 - The Congress wonders why the Shuttle is in such red ink and declares "The taxpayers of America cannot afford to subsidize this money-losing boondoggle". NASA gives some under-booked shuttle flights to the Air Force. 1987 - Shuttle use has fully replaced expendable rockets for the military. Since the military is continually launching new spy satellites, plus testing particle-beam weapons, Vandenberg AFB is keeping busy while Cape Canerveral is winding down. 1988 - The Shuttle is declared "too vital for national defense to be used for other things", since the military now leans heavily on it (and they have the bucks to do so), so NASA is reduced to buying cargo bay space from the Air Force to do science. I admit for this pessimistic scenario to take place, a lot of things have to go wrong in the next year or two. I neither expect nor desire these things to happen. However, if space remains, as it is now, exclusively in the hands of the government, this CAN happen, and there will be no failsafe against it. A solution is to open up space to private speculation (with proper licensing and [gasp] regulations). In the interim, the money for the R&D must continue to flow from the taxpayers to build the basic technology for space industrialization (the Shuttle). Alright, folks.... let's see those brickbats fly! ------- ------------------------------ Date: 13 Nov 1981 10:25:22-PST From: decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley In-real-life: Steven M. Bellovin Location: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill To: decvax!duke!unc!space@Berkeley Subject: private vs. public in SPACE Digest The reason I originally objected to this appearing in space is that it's not a question about the space program, it's about the free market vs. government ownership, and the author just happened to pick the space program as an example. No new facts about the space program or NASA were presented, just the standard arguments. Even if we weren't discussing this very topic on POLI-SCI -- and we are -- that would still be a more appropriate forum. The subset of the discussion belonging here is that pertaining to specific examples, such as the two or three private firms building rockets (including one American firm -- their first test was about as successful as the early Vanguard tests). --Steve ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest ******************* ----------------------------------------------------------------- gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/ This Usenet Oldnews Archive article may be copied and distributed freely, provided: 1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles. 2. The following notice remains appended to each copy: The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996 Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.