After receiving criticism from the aerospace world, including Neil Armstrong, on the cancellation of the Constellation program, President Obama has worked out what he thinks is the best path for American space flight. I watched and listened, alongside my colleagues, as our commander in chief stirred up emotions with memories of the 1960′s space race.  He reminded us with his typical eloquence of how, with burning hearts of national pride, paper, pencil, and slide rules, we placed 12 men on the surface of the moon and brought them all back safely.  From there, for me, the inspiration dropped off quickly as the President outlined his plans to land us on an asteroid in 15 years and then orbit (yes, only orbit) Mars in 25 years.  He explained to all of us that we have already been to the moon – been there, done that – and wrote it off as a waste of time and money.

After shaking thoughts of Armageddon and Aerosmith songs from my head, I imagine what value the US will gain from landing on an asteroid.  Keep in mind that the moon is about 237,000 miles from the earth and it took astronauts 8 days to get there, walk around, and get home.  Mars on the other hand, at its closest approach, is 35 million miles away.  I expect fuel-efficient missions to and from Mars would last 1.5 years.  That is quite a difference.  An asteroid, however, at least one we could actually reach, is 5 million miles away, and experts estimate a mission to and from would last 200 days.  The asteroid has no gravity to escape.  This simplifies many things, but creates new obstacles.  Landing softly on the moon and lifting off again requires a lot more fuel than escaping an asteroid.  ”Landing” on an asteroid is not possible, and every step taken would be a push off into space without something to hold the astronaut down.  A spacecraft would have to just float alongside the asteroid.

So what are possible benefits of going to an asteroid?  We would gain valuable experience in longer space missions, learn more about the history of the solar system, possibly gain valuable platinum or other materials, push forward propulsion technology, better radiation shields, and it would be cheaper than landing on the moon.  All of these things would help us get to Mars more safely.

What are the benefits of landing on the moon?  We could gain valuable experience in longer space missions (assuming we stay longer than the Apollo missions), learn more about or natural satellite, possibly gain valuable resources, push forward propulsion technology (because Mars is still the goal), better radiation shields (because we will be in space longer), and we could begin building a permanent base there.

The benefits of both seem similar, except that in the end, you can say you landed on an asteroid (yipee) andgetting to Mars isn’t any cheaper, or you could have machines on the moon harvesting hydrogen for future moon launches to Mars – which long-term, will save money.  I remain skeptical of the intrinsic value of landing on an asteroid rather than the moon.  If I had it my way, we would do both, but an exploding debt and an increase in social program spending makes it nearly impossible.  I hope, in the end, we get to Mars before the Chinese.  And if the President wants to land on an asteroid and I am privileged enough to get on the team that makes it possible, I will do so with pride and the toughness and competence Gene Kranz told us never to forget.

You’ve probably heard the story, the SEALs who captured that jerk who is openly responsible for burning and displaying the contractors in Fallujah are being prosecuted for – according to the detained jerk – punching him in the little belly and hurting his widdle wip.

Well, we can’t stand for prisoner abuse, that’s for sure. We have to crack down on this right away and HARD. So here’s how the SEALs should be punished:

In a loud deep voice:

“BAD! BAD Navy SEAL BAD. That’s a naughty SEAL!”

Pause for a moment scowling. Allow the SEAL to show submission. Now release the SEAL from correction. In a happy high pitch voice say:

“Ok. Now come here. That’s my good little boy. You’re such a sweet-heat. I love you. I love you. Kisses? Oh – kisses… Now go kill some terrorist! Go on. Go kill some terrorist. Go get’m. Go get’m. Kill them before they kill us. Go kill them before they kill us. They have plans. They want us all to die. No woman’s rights – none at all. Go kill’m first. They strap bombs to children and the mentally disabled. They think God wants them to do it. Only brave men like you can stop them. Go on now. Go get’m.”

I hope this point doesn’t have too many layers to be easily comprehended.

This week the Ares I-X rocket was launched from Cape Canaveral.  It was a new beginning in the storied history of American Spaceflight.  The I-X is a prototype of the Ares I, which is expected to see test launches in 2012 and begin launching crews into low Earth orbit and supplies to the International Space Station in 2014.  Ares I-X is now giving engineers valuable data for making tweaks to their design.  It consists of a solid rocket booster very similar to the rocket boosters you see on either side of the space shuttle, except that it is a little taller and the nozzle throat is a little bigger.  Stacked on top of that is the liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen fueled second stage which utilizes an engine derived from the Saturn V (the second stage was empty for this test flight).  The rest of the rocket, which will someday include a crew module and abort system (pointy thing at the top), was nothing but dumbed-down avionics and mass mockups of components that will eventually be used in Ares I and beyond.  If you haven’t already, take a look at the flight video.  You can go here:  http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/constellation/ares/flighttests/aresIx/index.html The video is on the right hand side.  Note the shock wave.

The Orion program is similar to the Apollo program in that we will plop a module on top of a big rocket and when it returns it will float down on parachutes.  It seems like a step back from the Space Shuttle, which glides down and lands on a runway.  The problem with the Shuttle is that it became orders of magnitude more expensive than was originally planned.  The module concept may be “archaic”, but it is more simple and cheaper.  The Shuttle’s thermal tiles number in the thousands, many of which are unique.  They are fragile, as shown by Columbia.  The turn-around time for the Shuttle is much longer than originally planned mostly due to the tiles.  The Shuttle is a beautiful thing, but not the right fit for getting back to the Moon.

Of course we will not be launching an Apollo twin.  The Ares rockets will be more advanced and safer – they include a launch abort system for the crew in case something goes horribly wrong during launch.

So now that we know more about the Ares I rocket than we cared to, why do we care?  The Ares rockets will eventually take us to the Moon and on to Mars, and it will be expensive.  The Augustine Commission, appointed by Obama, claims that NASA will need to add $3 billion to their $18 billion budget, $10 billion of which already goes to the Orion program.  That is a lot of money.  Seems like that money would be better spent shoring up our enormous budget deficit, but as long as the current administration continues acting like they have daddy’s credit card, we will just print more money to pay for it all.  The truth is human’s need to explore.  Exploration is something that defines us all.  The desire to search out the unkown burns in each of our hearts.  I believe this desire was intentional.  At every advancement in science, humans ventured further out to sea, further under sea, or further above sea.  Better yet, it was the desire to go further that spurred the development of great technological advancements that made living easier and more enjoyable.  Scientific advancement goes hand-in-hand with exploration.  Even more so, it provides energy to the most powerful machine the United States has: inspiration that fuels the imagination of our kids.  Space is a challenge that stares us in the face and dares us to come forward.  It is riddled with vast amounts of unknown difficulties and dangers, yet at the same time it holds storehouses of knowledge waiting for us to find.  The truth of the matter is, whether we go or not, China will, and they will gain the knowledge and resources we were to afraid to go after.