In space lies death, danger and the promise of the unknown

The launch date of the narrator’s moon trip is scheduled around a crew member’s dental appointment and a bridesmaid obligation. The amateur moon travellers have “no Mission Control to boss us around” and rely on an assortment of mobile apps such as “MoonFaze app (free)” and “Max-Q app (US$0.99).”

The “Apollo 13” actor’s fictional trivialisation of space travel reflects both the decline of the US government’s space programme and the advancement of technology in the real world. Computer capability has increased exponentially in the decades since 1969. Nowadays even the cheapest smartphones are immensely more powerful than the Apollo Guidance Computer and the period-era computers at Nasa Mission Control Centre combined. At the same time, space technology seems also to have been stalled since the US moon mission.

After sending men to the moon, generations of “serious” decision-makers in Washington seem to conclude that enough has been done. The Great Recession dealt another blow to the US space programme as budget cuts surpass universe exploration as the US government’s top priority. While emerging nations such as China and India are beefing up their space programmes to serve a mainly nationalistic purpose, they are still far behind the US in terms of technology.

As a result, the future of space travel increasingly lies in the hands of private companies, the contractors that help ferry stuff to the space station for the government, and the more adventurous entrepreneurs trying to build a space tourism industry. Space travel seems to have lost its prestige as a world-changing endeavour and become a hobby and a PR stunt for the super-rich.

The two major accidents involving private space companies in the past few days highlighted the challenge and dangers of space travel. On October 28, the Orbital Sciences Corporation set the unmanned Antares rocket to self-destruct as it began to fall back to the ground 15 seconds after liftoff. The rocket by Orbital, a Nasa contractor, was carrying 5,000 pounds of supplies and experiments for the International Space Station. Then on October 31, a Virgin Galactic rocket plane crashed after an explosion during a test flight over the Mojave Desert, killing one pilot and seriously injuring another. An explosion apparently took place shortly after SpaceShipTwo was detached from its carrier plane, causing it to break apart and fall to the ground.

Founded by entrepreneur Richard Branson, Virgin Galactic has been driving toward its first space commercial flights next year. Over 700 people who can afford the US$200,000 (now raised to US$250,000) per-head tickets, including Tom Hanks, Angelina Jolie and Leonardo DiCaprio.

The accidents of the Antares and SpaceShipTwo and the death of a test pilot presented major setbacks to the private space business. More importantly, they reveal the unchanged fact that (in the words of Virgin Galactic CEO and president George Whitesides) “space is hard”.

The improvement of our computer chips does not cancel out the powerful grip of gravity. Breaking off the Earth’s pull on us remains as complicated, costly and dangerous as it has ever been. To achieve that demands the same energy, focus and dedication as that devoted to all the landmark missions in human history. While nation states should not be the exclusive drivers in space programmes, they should not withdraw from the endeavour.

The commercial nature of the crashed rockets’ markers is not necessarily a problem. Nasa space programmes have their shares of major accidents. The point is that commercial companies should not be the only ones spearheading human beings’ ultimate adventure. It is shortsighted to the extreme to regard space programmes as expendable due to their lack of immediate commercial benefits.

Space travel can be an inspiration for all and should not merely be a business model, a rich man’s hobby or a nationalistic exercise.