[FPSPACE] Leadership in Space (was Spaceflight Now | Breaking News | Obama vows...)

[Kosmos327 at aol.com]

In a message dated 8/4/2008 4:52:35 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
jbcharle at gmail.com writes:

No-one  else seems to have responded to my question about what
constitutes space  leadership.  I know it is hard for me to quantify
it, even if I can  see past my own emotional bias.



Hi John,
 
I would say that for a nation to have space leadership it would have to  have 
an active space program, but not necessarily an active crew in orbit.  
However, having an active space program does not automatically constitute  
"leadership" unless you are comparing that nation to all the nation on Earth. I  
suppose that "tonnage, crew size, or number of people flown per year" could be a  
qualification if it is by an obvious measurable factor.
 
In the broadest sense, "leadership" is about pulling others in your  
direction by influencing them to follow you to a better place or position.  The times 
when certain nations were clearly seen as "leaders" is when they were  taking 
mankind where it hadn't been. In April 1961 the Soviet Union had a clear  
"leadership". In July 1969 it was clearly the United States holding the title of  
"Leadership". 
 
Today it would be hard for me to say that any of the spacefaring nations  are 
in a "leadership" position. The United States is working on, as you put it,  
"a new, more ambitious piloted program". But the Russian Federation, Europe, 
and  China also have ambitious programs in the works. Historically we have only 
 "claimed our destiny in space" when there was a heartless atheist 
communistic  rival spacefaring Superpower in or threatening to be in a "leadership"  
position. 
 
I think you're right, John, to point out that no candidate would run on a  
"let's cede our leadership in space" campaign. But if any President or  
candidate wants to get America in a real leadership in space position, talk  about 
substances of qualification. Talk about taking us again where no  man has gone. A 
base on the moon, or a trip to Mars would be examples of  substances of 
qualification. 
 
I think that a great way for the United States to gain a definite position  
of leadership in space is to look at the past. I'm sure many of us  remember 
"The Moon Speech" given by President John. F. Kennedy in May  1969. I would like 
to paraphrase a few thoughts from that historic  speech...
 
"... Now it is time to take longer strides - time for a great new  American 
enterprise - time for this nation to take a clearly leading role in  space 
achievement, which in many ways may hold the key to our future on earth.  
I believe we possess all the resources and talents necessary. But the  facts 
of the matter are that we have never made the national decisions or  marshaled 
the national resources required for such leadership. We have never  specified 
long-range goals on an urgent time schedule, or managed our resources  and 
our time so as to insure their fulfillment.  
... we nevertheless are required to make new efforts on our own. For  while 
we cannot guarantee that we shall one day be first, we can guarantee that  any 
failure to make this effort will make us last ... Space is open to us  now; 
and our eagerness to share its meaning is not governed by the efforts of  
others. We go into space because whatever mankind must undertake, free men must  
fully share.  
Let it be clear-and this is a judgment which the Members of the Congress  
must finally make-let if be clear that I am asking the Congress and the country  
to accept a firm commitment to a new course of action-a course which will last 
 for many years and carry very heavy costs ... If we are to go only half way, 
or  reduce our sights in the face of difficulty, in my judgment it would be 
better  not to go at all.  
... It is a most important decision that we make as a nation. But all of  you 
have lived through the last four years and have seen the significance of  
space and the adventures in space, and no one can predict with certainty what  
the ultimate meaning will be of mastery of space.  
... it is a heavy burden, and there is no sense in agreeing or desiring  that 
the United States take an affirmative position in outer space, unless we  are 
prepared to do the work and bear the burdens to make it successful. If we  
are not, we should decide today and this year.  
This decision demands a major national commitment of scientific and  
technical manpower, materiel and facilities, and the possibility of their  diversion 
from other important activities where they are already thinly spread.  It means 
a degree of dedication, organization and discipline which have not  always 
characterized our research and development efforts. It means we cannot  afford 
undue work stoppages, inflated costs of material or talent, wasteful  
interagency rivalries, or a high turnover of key personnel.  
New objectives and new money cannot solve these problems. They could in  
fact, aggravate them further-unless every scientist, every engineer, every  
serviceman, every technician, contractor, and civil servant gives his personal  
pledge that this nation will move forward, with the full speed of freedom, in  the 
exciting adventure of space."
I would love to see that kind of Leadership again.
 
Best Regards,
 
David L. Rickman
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? 
Read reviews on AOL Autos.      
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.friends-partners.org/pipermail/fpspace/attachments/20080804/26bf0322/attachment-0001.html