Space Revolution Diaries: Netroots Nation and Space

Yesterday, Bill White did a diary announcing the push for series of panel sessions about space.  As he said, I am involved, and below the fold, you can see my thoughts, about why this is important, how our ideal setup would be, and the topics that would be included (and some that might get added).

It really is quite interesting how much 8 years can change things.  After the collapse of the satellite telecom market in the 90s, commercial space had fallen severely back.  In addition, we saw the failure of the X-33/VentureStar.  However, we he did finally see the first pieces of the station get launched, in 1998, but that was going rather slow itself.

I remember reading a magazine article that talked about flying the Space Shuttle passed 2020, and the general consensus was that manned spaceflight would continue to go in fits and starts, but would largely be a government institution, and no one could really see manned spaceflight happening without governmental funding (at least in the near future).

These past 8 years really have changed things, and not always in the best ways.  We have seen some incredible lows, like the loss of Columbia.  On the other hand, we have seen some incredible developments, such as SpaceShipOne's flights, and the first true paying space tourists, like Dennis Tito and Anousheh Ansari.  

I revisit all of this for a very simple reason - it is quite clear that things will need to change in US governmental space policy, much like thing things will need to change everywhere in the government, when we elect whoever is the Democratic nominee president.  If we weren't aware of it before, it should now be clear to everyone that Nasa's budget is driven more by politics than anything else - there isn't a lot of philosophy behind it, or science, or commerce, or anything - it has become about jobs in certain districts (at least IMHO).  There are countless examples of this, dating back actually to the 1960s, but it was politics that drove the shuttle to being dangerous and expensive.  

If you look at the original inception of VSE, the idea of a balanced robotics and manned program was explicitly required, and there was much discussion about the role that private industry could play, as well as new forms of Nasa contracts that would provide a much better ROI.

Today, what we have, for the most part, is unmanned spacecraft that aren't flying, a "shuttle replacement" capsule and rocket system that is facing serious technical problems (and replicate some already existing infrastructure), a return (largely) to cost plus contracts, a zeroing out for prize programs, just to name a few of the problems.  In short, there is an inertia that is trying to return Nasa to its traditional operations.

However, there are a few things that will make maintaining the status quo unlikely - the slow but steady march towards retiring the shuttle, the increasing evidence that private space can do a significant amount, and the persistent evidence that Ares I cannot fly Orion safely, to name a few.  It is true that Nasa is always and will always be something of a political animal, but today its politics that drive almost everything at Nasa.  

So, much like this election is about change in other sectors of the government, so to must change take place within the space sector, and especially at Nasa.  Part of this change will not be pleasant - even if we continue on with Ares I and Orion, it is clear that Nasa will be facing job cuts, similar to what we have seen with military base closings, Nasa will likely face a similar amount of pain.  

Further, we are becoming increasingly aware that space doesn't just exist in the purview of Nasa - after the Chinese ASAT test last year, there has  been increased concern about space weaponization.  And of course, I've documented the rise of the commercial space sector.  

Which brings us to Netroots Nation, and space - The next 5-15 years I believe will set the tone for how humanity interacts with space, and what role America has in that interaction, and it will have major ramifications.  Despite my (many) complaints, I truly do believe that Nasa is a great agency, and that it is part of a great nation, the United States of America.  Much like Markos has talked about crashing the gates of the Democratic Party (and the US government in general), we need to be there to crash the gates that are America's space policy.  It is because we, as citizens/consumers/people either don't know, or don't care, about space that has allowed it to become such a political beast.  And Netroots Nation would give us an excellent opportunity for everyone to become informed about it.  Because, while there are plenty of space conferences going on (like the Newspace conference that is unfortunately going on at the same time, for example), these conferences have, in the past sometimes been something of an echo chamber - Space advocates need to be talking to people who are not normally engaged, but who are politically active.  And, while people generally don't pay detailed attention to the on goings at Nasa and in military space, and in space business, many people are aware of things like Hubble, and ISS, and SpaceShipOne.  And all of us were promised trips to the moon, and we want to know what happened to those tickets, if you will.

Given all of this, in my mind, this raises 3 discussions that need to be had - a robust discussion about the philosophy of spaceflight, an education into what NewSpace is, and whats happening with it, and a discussion about US Space Policy.  Since Bill has proposed a 4 hour mutli-session (a moment to pause here, while again I pimp Bill's diary and suggest you all vote in the poll), , I believe these are the topics that need to be covered during those sessions - I would dedicated an hour for Newspace education, and an hour and a half for the other 2 sessions.

Session 1 - Space philosophy, or Space constituancy

Right now, I am reading a book called The Overview Effect.  It was written shortly after the Challenger accident, and many of the comments I made here were echo those comments that Frank White said in the Prologue.  We don't have a good, clear idea as to why we are in space, and we need to have it.  Are we there simply to study the science of space?  Are there resources for us to exploit?  Is it the next battle ground?  These kinds of questions see the rise of the manned vs unmanned debate, military vs civillian debate, and what level of commercialization will happen.  I've often argued that manned spaceflight and unmanned spaceflight serve 2 entirely different purposes, and this is where I'd make that case.  And the answers to these questions have direct implications to what space policies the Government pursues.  And so this would be the very first track.

Session 2 - NewSpace education

I am amazed at the number of people who, while they are aware of the flight of SpaceShipOne, assume that the "successor" to the shuttle will be Orion and Ares I.  I'd argue that a much better use of the word successor would be to argue that Dragon and Falcon 9 are the successor to the shuttle (at least the shuttle concept).  While they are aware of the International Space Station, they have no knowledge of the Bigelow stations that are in orbit right now, and that its entirely possible that the number of people on board private space stations in the next decade will be many more than those on governmental stations.  While they are aware of Virgin Galactic's ticket price of $200,000, and the might be aware of the $20-40 million ticket price that Space Adventures is charging for an orbital flight, they are not aware of the reasons to believe that those ticket prices will drop, and drop rapidly.  This would be a chance for people to learn about the NewSpace industry, and learn that its not just a vacation for the superrich.  

Session 3 - US Space governmental policy

Another broad topic, another 1.5 hour disscussion/panel session, about US governmental space policy.  Of course Nasa policy would be heavily discussed, but also there would be discussions about Space weaponization, the role of space commerce, and how we interact with other countries.  Should it be Nasa's express/main purpose to see the development of off-planet commerical manned activities?  What role, if any, should China play in ISS?  Should space tourism get a liablity insurence shield?  In all of these topics, the US government plays a role, and we need to talk about how it should/will act.

As I have been known to say, the next 5-15 years have the potential to prove very exciting for space, and now is the time we need to talk about these things, so everyone (Progressives, the Democratic party, America, and humanity as a whole) can take advantage of what space can be for us.