NEW HORIZONS? The Martian landscape, photographed here by NASA's Opportunity rover in 2010, may in the coming decades witness its first human visitors.
Image: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Cornell University
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
On April 12, 1961, Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin did something no human had done before. On board the Vostok 1 spacecraft, Gagarin became the first person in space after rocketing into the sky from a launch site in Kazakhstan for a nearly two-hour flight. What is more, Gagarin became the first human to orbit Earth, a feat that the U.S. would not achieve until its third manned spaceflight, John Glenn's three-orbit flight on Friendship 7, February 20, 1962.
Fifty years later, both the space race—and the Cold War of which it was a part—have come to an end. The Soviet Union is no longer, but the Russian space program has become an invaluable partner to NASA's human spaceflight program. Over the past decade more than a dozen countries, including Russia and the U.S., have sent astronauts to the International Space Station, the longest-serving continuously manned orbital outpost in history. Meanwhile, China has built up a formidable program of its own, sending three manned missions into space since 2003.
But human exploration of the solar system has contracted in scope since 1972, when the last set of Apollo astronauts to visit the moon returned to Earth. Whereas the first 10 years following Gagarin's flight were peppered with firsts—notably the pioneering moon missions Apollo 8 and Apollo 11—the last four decades have witnessed little else but trips to and from low Earth orbit.
That ought to change, finally, in the decades to come. Space agencies around the world are planning ambitious missions to the moon and to even farther-flung locales that have never been visited by humankind. No one knows who the next Yuri Gagarin will be, or what flag will adorn his or her spacesuit, but below are a few solar system destinations that might find themselves festooned with fresh footprints in the next 50 years.
The moon
Humankind has landed and walked there before—six times, in fact—but since 1972 the only lunar visitors have been of the robotic variety. The U.S. remains the only nation to send its astronauts to the moon, and for several years it looked as if NASA would be back before anyone else. President George W. Bush proposed in 2004 that NASA return humans to the moon by 2020, but the feasibility of that goal was already waning when President Barack Obama scuttled the moon shot in 2010. Obama chose to scrap the Bush-era moon goal and the spacecraft system that was to enable it in favor of a more flexible strategy toward space exploration using a new deep-space launcher, whose specifics have become a point of contention between NASA and Congress.
Meanwhile, China has been ramping up its lunar exploration program, sending unmanned orbiters to the moon in 2007 and 2010. China has also demonstrated the ability to send its space flyers, sometimes known as taikonauts, into orbit—and officials have said that taikonauts could set foot on the moon by 2025. That timeline seems to mesh with the other leading contender for a lunar return. Along with China and the U.S., Russia is the only nation with a proved ability to send humans into space. The head of the Russian space agency has said that cosmonauts would land on the moon by 2025.
But, as with the plans for a Chinese moon mission—and as NASA is well aware following its abandoned Bush-era plans—many technical challenges stand between the decision to go to the moon and planting a flag on the lunar surface. It remains to be seen which nations, if any, are willing to pursue the expensive, complicated and dangerous goal of a manned moon landing.
Near-Earth asteroids
When Obama steered NASA away from the moon, he directed the space agency toward a manned asteroid landing around 2025 instead. The attractions of such a mission are myriad: For starters, no nation has ever achieved it nor has any nation's astronauts ventured so deep into the solar system. And asteroids are a rich library of scientific information, preserving a record of the chemical conditions that prevailed when the solar system was in its infancy. An asteroid visit might also afford a significant logistical advantage over a moon landing: The much weaker gravitational pull of an asteroid means that a spacecraft could simply rendezvous with it at close range so astronauts could spacewalk to the surface without the need for a full-fledged landing module.
But nothing in space travel is easy, and touching down on an asteroid might be a sight more complicated than a simple rendezvous. Asteroids are often odd-shaped bodies that spin extremely rapidly. Some are little more than rubble piles, and their loose structure combined with weak gravity means that the vicinity of an asteroid might be littered with loosely bound debris.
In any event, such a mission would require NASA to develop a heavy-lift launch system to spring a crew of astronauts out of Earth orbit, and the specs, timeline and cost of such rockets have caused friction between the space agency and Congressional funders.
See what we're tweeting about
11 Comments
Add CommentThere can be no progress in manned space flight by U.S. civilian astronauts until NASA becomes an independent agency, free from all political interference. NASA must have a guaranteed percentage of the federal budget each year and the authority to set its own goals in space.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNasa needs engineers in charge, not former Astronauts who think that rocket power is the way to go byond the ISS. Nasa was offered the technology of the Flying Saucer, discovered and patented. They could even have flown a Shuttle to Mars. Thanks to incompetence Nasa is now moribund.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAn effort to develop a new Copernican model of spacetime enabling faster than light transit is a much more sensible spacefaring investment. The need for this kind of conceptual framework has been generally acknowledged in the physics community for decades, and the success of such research will produce economic benefits on Earth almost certainly within a decade, and in the process revolutionize theoretical physics, energy production, and provide transformative changes, benefits, and admittedly: new risks in other areas within 3-5 years of a initiating a concerted, well-designed research portfolio - having merely a normal amount of luck.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe should investigate all the fields and fund it accordingly. It is so sad that over 40 years ago we traveled to the moon and now with all of our technology we can't even duplicate this simple feat. US does not even have the rockets to take us there anymore. Shameful how the space race has ceased. Sad and shameful.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is my contention that the Government does not believe in Jesus Christ. They have no hope for the future. They sent way to much money on space exploration (since no faith in God) believing the planet will one day die. This is more money wasted as in bailout. Their is a God named Jesus christ if anyone belives it or not he will be returning soon. He will conquor the Government and de throne all corupt leaders.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEvery knee will bow every tounge will confess he is lord God!
We carried the load for the rest of the world for fifty years in manned space flight. Since we are now enjoying the benefits of Tang and freeze dried cuisine designed for space flight. So, now we can sit back and enjoy watching the Chinese travelling to the moon. I wonder if that will turn out like Chinese coal mining?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am dumbfounded by the intellectual quality of the comments being posted here about NASA and future manned space flight. If they are indicative of the intellectual capacity of the current Scientific American readership, then the editors need to look at their editorial content and marketing very carefully in future. Perhaps I sampled too few?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs there any intelligent life out there?
A lot of science is based on previous science fiction. The internet, satellites, your car all far fetched ideas at one time thought to be made by insane people with too much time on their hands.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe reality is by researching these "flying saucers", single stage to space craft, 100 year missions means that even if only a small proportion comes true in the next 100 years its a fantastic achievement.
Youre right about the first comment though, NASA must remain a govermment institution, that cannot write its own checks. If you want commercial institutions go join Virgin Galactic, or spacex. There are a few of them already.
Well, the username "burntsynapse" suggests at least self-awareness, and longplainfirstnation appears to be outstanding in his fieds.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisbigbaddude...You do realize this a science magazine don't you...ps..real soon has been for the last two thousand years...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen do you predict...1..10..100..1000...you just sound so sure, thought you must have some inside information from your current cult....
Jesus I was thinking the same thing, except for the first post about depoliticizing NASA and guaranteeing its cash flow. Especially that Christian nut case, what's he doing reading science anyway? Doesn't he know that's a sin? :)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this