America is again facing a challenge, though this time the issue of concern has a very large international impact. The U.S. government is choosing a new policy that would determine if the USA remain the leader in space exploration.
NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, marked two big anniversaries this week. April 13 marked the day the crew of Apollo 13 called Houston reporting they had a problem, ending their mission to land on the moon 40 years ago. This month also marked the 29th anniversary of the first shuttle launch with the liftoff of Columbia in 1981. Concurrently with the anniversaries, the Obama Administration has been working on a new policy that would change NASA’s future in human spaceflight.
The president’s plan includes decommissioning the space shuttle program before the end of this year. This means that the United States might be compromising its status as the world leader in space exploration and travel.
The Cold War might be over, but the competition between nations to reach the stars is still on. Under the new plan, NASA will be paying Russia to take the American astronauts to the International Space Station.
The cost will be no more than $50,000 per astronaut. NASA will also cut its plans to send people to the moon or mars in the near future. Paying America’s most competitive space rival to take the astronauts to space can signify defeat. In addition, the laying off of many workers due to the change in NASA’s objectives has upset a significant portion of the American population.
Many are under the impression that the economic situation is the only reason for the change in NASA’s plans. It is the reason, but it is not the only one.
The U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee reviewed NASA’s current missions and presented alternatives and recommendations to help the American space program. The committee concluded in its final report that the human space flight program is “on an unsustainable trajectory”.
As an engineering major, I find the new alternatives and recommendations the committee presented devastating, considering the short terms effects. Who wants people to lose their jobs? And who wants the U.S. to lose its presence in the international space exploration field? (Hopefully you answered no one.)
The truth is the committee wants NASA to take a new approach towards space exploration and research. NASA is not just about astronauts landing on the moon and Mars. NASA is more about huge advancements in technology, computers and medicine that helped humans land on the moon.
NASA must still continue conducting experiments in outer space that would help scientists and engineers shape the future better. In addition, under the flexible path approach that was presented by the committee, NASA should focus on developing technologies that make the human space flight program able to go beyond just Mars and the moon. The committee asks for efforts to concentrate on new technologies that will help humans go beyond low-Earth orbit. They also want to create a commercial market for the aerospace industry. (The White House is not moving towards socialism as some have been claiming recently.)
As a [future] engineer, I know that such decisions concerning NASA’s objectives are not easy. The engineers and scientists are analyzing and exploring all possible solutions, but as professionals they have to ethically make a sound decision. Many ethical theories exist to support or disregard a change in NASA’s missions but I am sure of one thing: humanity’s advancement should be the main goal of any new plan. While I agree more with the new alternatives, I do not disagree with NASA’s current missions. There is no right and wrong answer. There is sound judgment, and the president and Congress have to have that sound judgment.
Abdallah Abu Ghazaleh is a freshman majoring in electrical engineering. He can be contacted at [email protected].