Another CU researcher’s take on space exploration
| July 20, 2009 | 5:22 PM
More journal entries from Cindy House »
Earlier Monday, I posted a Q&A with University of Colorado space researcher Dr. Larry Esposito on the future of space exploration. With all the hoopla going on for the Apollo 11 anniversary, I wanted to post this story early and was unable to include comments from other researchers I contacted.
Later on Monday, I heard back from Dr. Fran Bagenal, who has a different perspective on space exploration (and who correctly took me to task for not using gender-neutral language in my questions!). Like Esposito, Bagenal is a professor of astrophysical and planetary sciences and a member of the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at CU. Here are her responses:
RMI: American attitudes toward our space program have changed dramatically since the moon landing in 1969. What, in your opinion, is the main reason we have become apathetic to space exploration?
Bagenal: I disagree — I think there is HUGE enthusiasm for space exploration. What has changed since Apollo is the motivation for space exploration. We are no longer competing with the Soviet Union. Both robotic and human exploration are motivated to find out what’s out there, to get out there and to experience the universe beyond the confines of Earth’s surface.
RMI: In our efforts to resume human missions to the moon, what are the benefits of NASA’s Constellation program, sometimes referred to as a “souped-up Apollo”? Why aren’t we looking at completely new types of spacecraft?
Bagenal: I am not sure what you mean by this — rocketry, particularly the computer control, has advanced enormously since the 1960s. The new spacecraft will be very different — much more sophisticated — than the Apollo program. And than the (space) shuttle.
RMI: What are some of the key research projects CU is working on in relation to human space exploration?
Bagenal: I deal with the science part of NASA, which comprises about 1/3 of NASA’s budget. CU is involved in ongoing and future missions that study the Earth (surface, atmosphere, climate and the space around Earth), the Sun, the planets — and astrophysics (e.g. a CU-built spectrometer, COS [Cosmic Origin Spectrograph], was inserted into Hubble on the recent servicing mission). I am involved in the New Horizons mission to Pluto (due to fly past Pluto on July 15, 2015), the Juno mission to Jupiter (due to launch in 2011), the Cassini mission to Saturn and MAVEN mission to Mars (due to launch in 2013).
RMI: With the focus on the moon and then Mars, are there any aspects of our space program (human or otherwise) that have fallen by the wayside or been put on the back burner — and shouldn’t have?
Bagenal: NASA has spent about 2/3:1/3 [ratio] on human:robotic exploration (more or less) for the past several decades. There are always more things we would like to do than there are funds for in the NASA budget; e.g. we have been working on a mission to explore Jupiter’s moon Europa — perhaps the best place in the solar system to find a large body of liquid water that might harbor life — for over a decade, but there are just not enough funds in the current
budget to get the mission started. The cost would be about $2.5 billion — or about a Starbucks coffee per taxpayer per year for four years. Earth Sciences has lots of plans for missions that would allow us to monitor the environment and climate. So, we have to set priorities and wait our turn. There is a little juggling of budgets between the human exploration and science parts of NASA, but there just is not enough in the science budget to pay for the needs of developing Constellation.
apollo, dr. fran bagenal, space exploration, university of colorado
