Today I'd like to highlight a fantastic article by sci-fi author Neal Stephenson over on Slate. Neal digs deep into the origins of our modern space program to explore the question of "lock-in", or whether the path by which we developed space technology has left us high and dry on a local maximum of efficiency while we should really be exploring alternate launch techniques.
Check out the article here. It's a great read, and full of interesting food for thought. Then come back tomorrow and we'll delve deeper into Stephenson's ideas, and what might come next.
"Let's launch a rocket up the side of a mountain in Africa!"
Posted by: Tim Kwa | February 07, 2011 at 10:46 PM
Hey, I resemble that remark!
Posted by: Michael Woods | February 07, 2011 at 10:56 PM
Interesting - Stephenson didn't really mention the hypothetical alternatives like (off the top of my head) launch loops, space elevators, nuclear thermal or magnetoplasma rockets, externally powered lightsails, etc. There just aren't a lot of international-scale "big science" projects that are getting popular support and even close to necessary funding, I think you can count them on one hand: fusion research (ITER and laser inertial confinement facilities like NIF), particle physics (LHC), deep space astronomy / cosmology (JWST, etc), Mars rovers, and the ISS. I think the problem is when the development cost starts getting more than a few million $, investors (whether government or private) start getting really cautious when it comes to high-risk experimentation. Unless a decisive engineering/cost/etc advantage or new scientific results are guaranteed, the purse strings stay shut.
On a related note, I've got a puzzle for you: what is the very specific piece of common heritage that ties together the following two British rocket-related engineering projects: the Bloodhound SSC, and the Skylon?
Posted by: Tony Kelman | February 07, 2011 at 10:56 PM