space race brief

8/9/2019 Space Race Brief

1/7

Joshua Mirth PARADE, Wisconsin

Space Brief

To fulfill the purpose of space exploration and to make it more beneficial, the worldmust cooperate instead of competing. ~Yuki David Takahashi

Table of Contents

Space Brief.................................................................................................................................................1International Space Station....................................................................................................................2Space Race............................................................................................................................................3

+X: ..............................................................................................................................................31: Cooperation aided the space race.............................................................................................32 Turn: Competition was harmful to space exploration...............................................................43 Impact Turn: Results of space race were pointless...................................................................54: Future cooperation will be beneficial......................................................................................6

1{7} Space Brief: Space Brief


2/7


International Space Station

ISS is a cooperative effort

The European Space Agency, International Space Station Legal Framework, 24 October 2008,

http://www.esa.int/esaHS/ESAH7O0VMOC_iss_0.html

The International Space Station is a co-operative programme between Europe, the United States,Russia, Canada, and Japan for the joint development, operation and utilisation of a permanentlyinhabited Space Station in low Earth orbit. The legal framework defines the rights andobligations of each of the countries and their jurisdiction and control with respect to their SpaceStation elements.

ISS cooperation beneficial

James Oberg (NBC News space analyst), Astronaut explains secret of space stations success: Its

actually two stations in one, says one-time resident Susan Helms. MSNBC May 9, 2005.[Susan] Helms [a veteran NASA astronaut who worked on the ISS] pointed out that the spacestation comprises modules designed by NASA and its U.S. contractors, as well as modulesdesigned by the Russian Space Agency and its industrial partners.

It's essentially two space stations joined together by a hatch, and its overall redundancy by being a 'two-in-one' design has been its savinggrace, she said of the international space station. Each space station has a significantly different design philosophy, but each one is alsocapable of many functions that can 'carry' the other one simultaneously.

As a result of this design philosophy, she continued, by having such different approaches, each space agency ultimately played to differentstrengths of their system designs, and in effect, created a larger 'system of systems' that can manage a wide variety of contingencies.

Attitude control orienting the station in a desired posture as it circles Earth is an example of a critical function that is independentlyenabled by both American and Russian hardware. This function is incredibly important to power supply and thermal control, she said, and itcan be controlled by either the U.S. gyrodynes or the Russian propulsion system.

The beauty of the [American] gyrodynes is that they require no consumables, she elaborated, but the beauty of the Russian system is that it'sincredibly reliable and built for robustness. Neither system is perfect, but managing them in a synchronized fashion has created an overallcapability that is greater than the sum of the parts, in the face of the unexpected.

I rememberwhen all three computers on the U.S. segment simultaneously experienced a genericfailure, due to something the designers had not foreseenSince the Russian half of the station had its own systems for these same services,the temporary loss of the U.S. systems was only a nuisance and not a crisis. The Russian segment picked up the slack inmanaging environmental life support and attitude control, and the situation was therefore neverperceived by the crew as life-threatening, even with a total U.S. computer failure, Helms said.

2{7} Space Brief: International Space Station
http://www.esa.int/esaHS/ESAH7O0VMOC_iss_0.htmlhttp://www.esa.int/esaHS/ESAH7O0VMOC_iss_0.html


3/7


Space Race

+X:

What is the next thing to explore?

[If Mars: that's a really big gap. Need evidence to show competition would get us there. If don'tknow, well, that's the problem, there is no obvious next step, thus it doesn't look like we'regetting anywhere.]

Was getting to the moon a major goal of the space race?

[Insert moon wasteful and irrelevant]

How did the NASA's technological developments get to ordinary people/companies?

[Collaboration with private industry]

1: Cooperation aided the space race

Cooperation within the space race

Roald Sagdeev, (Proffessor of Physics at the University of Maryland, former head of the Russian Space

Research Institute, now director of the University of Marylands East-West Space Science Center.),

United States-Soviet Space Cooperation during the Cold War, NASA, 2008,http://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/coldWarCoOp.html

Despite the continued space competition between the United States and U.S.S.R., Khrushchevsent Kennedy a letter raising the possibility of space cooperation on a modest level after John

Glenn became the first American to orbit Earth on Feb. 20, 1962. That led to two rounds ofdiscussions between NASAs Deputy Administrator Hugh Dryden and Soviet academicianBlagonravov. An agreement led to the opening of cooperation in three areas: 1) the exchange ofweather data from satellites and the eventual coordinated launching of meteorological satellites;2) a joint effort to map the geomagnetic field of Earth; and 3) cooperation in the experimentalrelay of communications. This link became a primary forum for subsequent U.S.-U.S.S.R.interaction on space.

NASA allowed for cooperation, unlike USSR.

Roald Sagdeev, (Proffessor of Physics at the University of Maryland, former head of the Russian Space

Research Institute, now director of the University of Marylands East-West Space Science Center.),United States-Soviet Space Cooperation during the Cold War, NASA, 2008,http://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/coldWarCoOp.html

The civilian nature of NASA, legislated in the 1958 Space Act, made it possible for theAmerican researchers to collaborate on and disseminate scientific advances, an opportunityenvied by many of us Soviet scientists.

3{7} Space Brief: 1: Cooperation aided the space race
http://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/coldWarCoOp.htmlhttp://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/coldWarCoOp.htmlhttp://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/coldWarCoOp.htmlhttp://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/coldWarCoOp.html


4/7


2 Turn: Competition was harmful to space exploration

Competition destroyed excitement for space science.

Yuki David Takahashi (Physics graduate from Caltech, with MSc from University of Glasgow, currentlypursuing PhD at Berkeley), Cooperation: The Only Choice of Mankind as Space Explorer, 26 May

1995, http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.html

Being directly interested in space science is the most obvious way to utilize the uniqueness of that region, but that interest is difficult to keep up

if people compete in exploration. Admittedly, American people were very interested in the space programduring the space race when the United States and the Soviet Union competed for the Moon landing. On televisions and radios manywatched and listened to every launching of a spacecraft to make sure it was successful. Soon, however, people in bothcountries were so concerned about the race that they were more enthusiastic about thecompetition than actual space science. If racing is their interest, they do not need to choose expensive space expedition astheir arena. Exploring space is worth it only when it involves something unique to space. Race field is certainly not a feature of space .

Moreover, some analysts say that because the American people viewed the space program as just a racewith the Soviets, they lost their interest in space once the Apollo 11 ended the race by landing on[the] Moon (Blonston G1). The competition did not achieve the purpose of space exploration becauseit eventually destroyed peoples excitement toward space science.

Secrecy caused by competition, hurts efficiency and cost.

Yuki David Takahashi (Physics graduate from Caltech, with MSc from University of Glasgow, currently

pursuing PhD at Berkeley), Cooperation: The Only Choice of Mankind as Space Explorer, 26 May


Competition is destructive: competitors never help each other but wish for each others failure and sometimes even damage each other.

Then why do people compete? For no physically or socially beneficial reason is the answer and experiences show why. During theMoon race, both the United States and the Soviet Union had to take extra care to keep as muchinformation secretive as possible. In Men from Earth by Buzz Aldrin who is the second astronaut to land on Moon, he saidAmericans had to guess the Soviets technology and plans from their public statements as well as radio intercepts of their spacecraft

communications (97). If they had not been racing, they could have asked the others directly for theseinformation instead of disgracefully tapping wires with much waste of time and money.

4{7} Space Brief: 2 Turn: Competition was harmful to spaceexploration
http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.htmlhttp://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.htmlhttp://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.htmlhttp://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.html


5/7


Competition risked astronauts' safety.



[Buzz] Aldrin also described how the goal of the Soviet space program was simply to beatAmericans with the firsts even if they had to lower their safety. For the first woman in space, the Sovietshastily selected several women and put them into intensive training. Valentina Tereshkova, the first woman in space, was only a factory worker

who was good at skydiving. Also when the Soviet prime minister, Nikita Khrushchev, heard that Americahad plans to send two men together into space soon and three men later, he instantly decided to send threecosmonauts into space at once. To hurry, the engineers had to modify a previous spacecraftdesigned only for one crew member; and consequently the three cosmonauts could not evenwear space suits in the small capsule (Aldrin 109-110). Although the three cosmonauts were able to come back alive, the timewasted on the mission greatly interrupted the development of the more important Soyuz spacecraft. Aldrin said the Soviets had won anothermeaningless propaganda victory (111). The pressure from competition can make people risk even humanlives and still gain essentially no profit.

3 Impact Turn: Results of space race were pointless

No scientific reason to race to the moon.

President John F. Kennedy

Everything that we do ought to really be tied into getting onto the Moon ahead of the Russians....otherwise we shouldn't be spending this kind of money ...the policy ought to be that this is thetop-priority program of the Agency, and one of the two things, except for defense, the toppriority of the United States government. ... But were talking about these fantastic expenditures

...and the only justification for it, ...to do it in this time [then estimated late 1967 or early 1968]or fashion, is because we hope to beat them and demonstrate that starting behind, as we did by acouple years, by God, we passed them.

Moon race irrelevant.




Today, many people criticize the wasteful competition in the Moon race. Thomas Hughes, aspecialist in sociology of science at the University of Pennsylvania, said, The Moon shot didnthave much bearing on other pursuits because it was basically irrelevant. It was an achievement that was notdedicated to a social need (Blonston G1). Since the Moon race has brought about numerous inefficiencies and dangers, space explorers mustnever repeat such competition if they are to make everyones life more exciting through benefits of exploration.

5{7} Space Brief: 3 Impact Turn: Results of space race werepointless


6/7


4: Future cooperation will be beneficial

Participants of cooperative efforts consider them more worthwhile.



Actual participants of collaborative projects can best confirm the superiority of cooperation. In 1985,ten years after the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, three American astronauts and two Russiancosmonauts who participated in the docking came together to call for further cooperation andfor joint missions to Mars (Booth 96). Th[e]is docking was the only large-scale collaborationbetween the United States and Russia until recently despite its peaceful result. No single person who wasinvolved in the project probably felt it was a worthless enterprise. In February this year, the American space shuttleand Russias space station performed a rendezvous and all the astronauts repeated happy comments. "It's the most beautiful thing I've ever seenin space," said James Wetherbee, commander of the shuttle, who had been in space before this mission. Alexander Viktorenko, commander ofthe space station, said it was "almost like a fairly tale... almost too good to be true" (Drago A8). These astronauts' impressions show that working

together is an exciting venture.

Cooperation improved Europe's Ariane space shuttle



Ariane [The European Space Agency's shuttle equivalent], anyhow, has been a great successbecause collaboration among the European nations has enabled outstanding efficiency.Establishment of cooperation, for example, allowed ESA to manufacture the rockets solid fuelon launch site, reducing the Arianes cost to $100 million per launch compared to the U.S. spaceshuttles $500 million (Luxner 13). By 1990, only 3 years after the Arianes approval, the launcher hadalready returned more than 3 times the investment made to develop it (Rycroft 329). By 1991, Arianespace,the ESAs manufacturer of Ariane, had captured as much as 50% of the global commercial launch market (Worshop 174). ESA is now the thirdlargest space agency next to those of the United States and Russia, but it is probably the most hopeful because of its openness to cooperate formaximum efficiency.

Collaborative comet-monitoring more efficient.


pursuing PhD at Berkeley), Cooperation: The Only Choice of Mankind as Space Explorer, 26 May1995, http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.html

Tons of othercollaborative efforts, of course, have been successful. When the Comet Halley approachedEarth in 1986, the Soviet Union, Japan, Europe, and the United States at first sent spacecraftindividually to investigate the comet. Because these nations realized that the profit would be thegreatest by operating the missions together, they set up an international agency called the Inter-AgencyConsultative Group to observe the comet cooperatively (Beaudan 37). Instead of working separately for exactly the same results,

cooperation would complete[d] the same job much more efficiently and would make available even furtherobservations.

6{7} Space Brief: 4: Future cooperation will be beneficial
http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.htmlhttp://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.htmlhttp://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.htmlhttp://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.htmlhttp://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.htmlhttp://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/1991_2001/cooperation.html


7/7


Cooperation would allow nations to use their specialties to everyones benefit.




Finally, the current practicality confirms that collaborative efforts are available and that the efforts will contribute tofulfillment ofthe purpose of space exploration. Russia has far more experience in physiology oflong-duration space flights than the United States. Richard Thomas, director of the Center for Strategic Technology atTexas A & M University argued against cooperation saying, Yes, they [Russians] have a lot of experience. But its like so much of their science.The fruits of that work are very slim indeed. The United States, while far behind in launches and practical space applications, maintains a

distinct technological advantage (Warren 9). This is absolutely not a good reason for not cooperating, but it is an excellent reasonto do cooperate instead. Russia can share its accumulated scientific results with the world and theUnited States can lead in turning these results into more substantial advantages for the benefit ofall people.

Welcoming Russia in the space station program would surely reduce the world political tension,too, multiplying the benefit of cooperation.

Competition focuses on victory, cooperation, on everyones benefit.




The only option the nations of the world have is to cooperate if they are to make everyones life moreexciting through the uniqueness and benefits of space exploration. Today, competition is out of concern. Thepurpose of competitors shifts from actually exploring space to just victory. Competition is destructiveand it hardly ever achieves high efficiency. In addition, it never shares the excitement with everyone. In the future, competition must remain out

of concern. Daniel Goldin, administrator of NASA, said early this year when the spacecraft of the United States andRussia performed the collaborative rendezvous, This is about cooperation, not confrontation. Instead of aimingweapons at one another, we can work on peaceful projects to benefit all the people of Earth(Neuharth A11). This indeed is the goal of humankind today, and everyone on Earth must work on it since it is for benefit of all. Today, so muchof confrontation is between nations, but if there were no national distinctions on Earth, problems would be significantly less. The nations of theworld must move toward global unification. To achieve this, cooperation in space will be an ideal approach since there exists no national borderfrom the first place. The world must start working together now to gain as much benefit and excitement as possible and not waste any of theopportunities and time. Human beings never need to fear cooperating. The result will never be negative, but always positive as cooperation isalways constructive.

7{7} Space Brief: 4: Future cooperation will be beneficial

space race brief

Documents