Back to the Moon,but at what cost to research?

[And amidst the drains and expenditures
with which the government already has to deal. --Ed.]

"NASA Administrator Mike Griffin let pictures serve to illustrate how America would return to the moon. Contrary to the initial public impression of Bush's Vision for Space Exploration (VSE), which was seen as a program to send humans to Mars, Mars barely got mentioned today...

"The architecture presented was the result of activities collected under the Exploration Systems Architecture Study which was implemented shortly after Griffin arrived at NASA. The plan is clearly Apollo revisited -- 'Apollo on steroids' Griffin joked.


Quicktime video of NASA's new (old) Moon mission

"There are a number of ways to look at this announcement. NASA's plan seeks to pick up where Apollo left off. The Apollo program was killed in the early 1970's just as it was moving from a sequence of engineering and political stunts to a program of full blown planetary expeditions. The last three landings, Apollos 18-20 would have featured some spectacular locations including the center or the crater Copernicus. Plans for even more expansive human exploration were also developed which could have led to a permanent human base in perhaps a decade or so. They were never relaized...

"As such, we have unfinished business on the Moon. Many say we should never have left. Others say would should have returned long ago. I doubt Gene Cernan and his contemporaries ever thought that he'd retain the title of being the 'last man on the moon' for so many decades...

"At one point Griffin made a point of saying that science will not be cut in order to fund implementation of the VSE. 'It is not about taking money from the science program -- or the aeronautics program in order to fund manned space flight. It is about utilizing the money that we have to achieve different -- and I think -- far more exciting goals -- in human spaceflight.' A few minutes later he repeated that statement adding that in his plans 'we do not take one thin dime' out of science.

These statements are in clear conflict with recent events. Hundreds of contractors working on life science activities at ARC and KSC have been laid off in past weeks. Life science managers at NASA Headquarters have been removed from their job and moved to unrelated jobs, told to seek work elsewhere, or transfered to other activities at field centers.

"Meanwhile life science research activities aboard the ISS continue to be reduced -- the most notable being the Centrifuge Facility which was to be housed inside the Centrifuge Accommodation Module. Although it has not (yet) been announced formally, all involved are working on the assumption that it will soon be deleted entirely form the program. The core purpose of the Centrifuge was to probe life's adaptation to gravitational field -- including fractional gravity such as will be encountered by humans on the moon and Mars.

"Griffin is making these draconian cuts (while denying that he is doing so) despite decades of recommendations to the contrary by august bodies such as the National Academy of Sciences. Indeed, until his arrival at NASA, one of the prime reasons for the ISS was cutting edge biomedical research. Not any more...

"Perhaps Mike Griffin will come to see that the life science upon which so much of the ISS was justified -- often as enabling technology for human planetary exploration - has value as well. Many have learned that when NASA says that something is 'science driven' what it really means is 'if we can afford it.'

"GSFC Center Director and former AA for Space Science Ed Weiler is often quoted as saying that 'exploration without science is just tourism.' So far all we have seen of Mike Griffin's moon plans is the tourism brochure."