April 14, 2010 10:09 AM

Neil Armstrong Vs. Buzz Aldrin Over Obama's Space Plans

By
Stephanie Condon
Topics
Domestic Issues ,
Obama Administration

(Credit: AP)
America's most famous astronauts are at odds over President Obama's plans for National Aeronautics and Space Administration, which he plans to lay out on Thursday at a conference at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

The president's plan to cancel a program known as Constellation, which aimed to send astronauts back to the moon by 2020, would be "devastating" for the United States, three astronauts wrote in an open letter, first obtained by NBC News. The letter was signed by Apollo 11 commander Neil Armstrong (at left in the picture), the first man to walk on the moon; Apollo 17 commander Eugene Cernan, the last man to walk on the moon; and Apollo 13 commander Jim Lovell.

The White House is responding to criticisms of the plan with a defense from Armstrong's Apollo 11 crewmate Buzz Aldrin (at right in the picture above), the second man to stand on the moon.

"We need to be in this for the long haul, and this program will allow us to again be pushing the boundaries to achieve new and challenging things beyond Earth," Aldrin said in a statement provided by the White House.

Mr. Obama is actually proposing to increase NASA's budget, but he wants to terminate the $108 billion Constellation project, which the United States has already spent more than $10 billion on. Instead, the administration wants to outsource many of NASA's current manned exploration programs to private spaceships and focus on developing a new heavy-lift rocket for eventual manned flights to a variety of deep space targets, ultimately including Mars, CBS News space analyst William Harwood reports.

President Barack Obama, right, greets Apollo 11 astronauts, from left, Buzz Aldrin, Michael Collins, and Neil Armstrong in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Monday, July 20, 2009, on the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 lunar landing.

(Credit: AP)
The termination of Constellation is already facing resistance from members of Congress concerned about job losses it could create. The administration counters its plan will create 2,500 more jobs at the Kennedy Space Center than would have been expected under Constellation.

Armstrong, Cernan and Lovell, however, are more concerned with how the president's plans could jeopardize the United States' position as a leader in space. The point out that commercial spaceships may not be available as soon as expected and that the U.S. would have to rely on Russia for space transportation until then.

"For The United States, the leading space faring nation for nearly half a century, to be without carriage to low Earth orbit and with no human exploration capability to go beyond Earth orbit for an indeterminate time into the future, destines our nation to become one of second or even third rate stature," the astronauts wrote. "Without the skill and experience that actual spacecraft operation provides, the USA is far too likely to be on a long downhill slide to mediocrity."

The administration argues that the U.S. could end its reliance on Russia's spacecraft more quickly with the development of private-sector rockets than it could have with the Constellation program's Ares rockets, Harwood reports.

Aldrin agreed: "The steps we will be taking following the President's direction will best position NASA and other space agencies to send humans to Mars and other exciting destinations as quickly as possible," he said.

The astronauts also took different perspectives on how Mr. Obama's NASA plan would impact the national psyche.

The letter signed by Armstrong suggested the president's plan could imperil the inspiration historically attributed to NASA.

"The people around the world were inspired by the human exploration of space and the expanding of man's frontier," the letter said. "It suggested that what had been thought to be impossible was now within reach."

Aldrin, on the other hand, said, "The development of commercial capabilities to send humans into low earth orbit will likely result in so many more earthlings being able to experience the transformative power of spaceflight."


Add a Comment See all 16 Comments
by benoodel March 25, 2011 12:53 PM EDT
I think we should be seriously be talking about building a space elevator. Although until the development of carbon nano tubes and graphene this was a pipe dream it is becoming more and more feasible. With an operational elevator we could run hundreds of tuns into geostationary orbit by the day effectively allowing the elevator to pay for itself very quickly. If cost is still a concern we could always allow other nations to run supplies into space for half what it would cost them to launch a rocket. It would be like having a Panama canal to the stars. It's also more eco friendly. It would allow us to launch missions to other celestial bodies for far less money and not have to take reentry into earth atmosphere into consideration. Not to mention at the end of the cable we could build a massive space station capable of supporting hundreds of scientists and to increase funding more the occasional very wealth civilian who could pay. Actually it could open up space tourism to more then the incredibly rich. The fees from private companies using the elevator would be helpful and allow for more of space to become open to the private sector. In short we should take a serious look at building this thing.
Reply to this comment
by thadius5 April 15, 2010 3:40 AM EDT
With today's sophisticated robotics, cameras and sensors that can be attached to unmanned spacecraft, there is little practicality in sending men into dangerous space missions now.
Reply to this comment
by midlclass April 14, 2010 3:52 PM EDT
Why? can't we do both? were america if we spent as much on nasa as we did in iraq we would all ready have a low orbit craft a base on the moon and figuring out how to get paris hilton in a space suit to go to mars. in the sixties we spent as much on the space program as we did on vietnam! alot of people working for a common goal alot of technology that made america that much better, spock! where are you when we need your logic?
Reply to this comment
by nicholas-cares April 15, 2010 2:49 PM EDT
I TOTALLY AGREE! with all the money we are wasting to protect the poppy fields in afgan. we could be using that money to develop a space station, that can be used to learn more about harnessing nuclear energy! or just doing more in space in general
by azfalcon April 14, 2010 2:50 PM EDT
"Now how do we break gravity for the first 50,000 feet?"

It has already been done. Look up Scaled Composites and read.
Reply to this comment
by Clark Nova April 14, 2010 2:50 PM EDT
It's well known that Buzz 'Motormouth' Aldrin will say anything for a price or chance to get in front of a camera. Armstrong, on the other hand, has been as far from being a publicity hound as is humanly possible. When Armstrong makes a public announcement it's well thought out, important, and carefully reasoned.
I'm with Armstrong on this.
Reply to this comment
by rafaeldrc April 14, 2010 12:18 PM EDT
I believe mankind has done all they can do with our limited technologies for deep space travel. We, as a species, will continue to discover and add more to our knowledge base with time but it is impractical to travel to the Moon or Mars at tax-payers expense simply because we must remain the "leader". Instead, I prefer we continue with satellite development and unmanned probes. Our money is better spend on pure and applied research and development leading to minor and some times, major discoveries. It is this chain of discoveries - through time - that will allow us someday to travel deep in space, not rocket science stretched beyond its capacity. It may be several generations from now that mankind has the privilege to say that Mars for them is as far away as Madagascar is today, for us.
Reply to this comment
by K. Daraa April 14, 2010 12:36 PM EDT
Rafael, if the Americans had used this kind of thinking in the 1950's and 1960's we would never have gone to the moon in the first place. Rafael, do you know, that the greatest period of inventiveness and productivity in US history was from 1955 to 1975. Many of those inventions and applications of research and technology were taken from research for the space program. Thomas Edison once said, "...genius is one percent inspiration, and ninety-nine percent perspiration. Accordingly, a 'genius' is often merely a talented person who has done all of his or her homework." Edison liked to build on other peoples good work best. If we "break" the chain of research and discoveries, we are destined for mediocrity.
by rafaeldrc April 14, 2010 12:50 PM EDT
K. Daraa... I am aware of what you say. I helped to build a technology that is in use today by most in the computer industry but each technology has its limits. I think rocketry has sever limits and it is time to spend money in developing other technologies. CERN may provide far more than we spent to build it, as well as base studies at universities and research institutions.
by Scimajor April 14, 2010 12:10 PM EDT
"We need to stop using rockets to get to 50,000 feet, and only use rockets after 50,000 feet"

I compeletly agree. Scaled Composites has used this model successfully to put a man in space and on a very tight budget. NASA, a state funded company with a budget several of orders of magnitudes larger, has been unable to duplicate this feat.

This is why Obama is asking the private sector to take over this part(i.e. getting us out of the atmosphere) of space exploration.
Reply to this comment
by K. Daraa April 14, 2010 12:21 PM EDT
The private sector will only do it if there is direct, and immediate monetary gain. Any delays and all bets are off, forget it. Food for thought: Why are US intelligence agencies complying with this without audible protest? Some superior program must already be developed, and in use. You don't hear any muffled screams inside or near the beltway do you?
by K. Daraa April 14, 2010 12:10 PM EDT
NASA has basically become another political victim of democrat-zation of all things government. The crews were almost always military, throughout the space programs history, and with final deliveries of material to the ISS there isn't science being conducted. Soon, all the expertise on rocketry will be gone the way of the retired baby-boomers. We need to separate politics from space, and attempt to train a new generation of scientists with the knowledge management gained from six decades of experience dying off every day. Thanks Neil Armstrong for being such a great spokesman and representative for the space program. I met you just last month in England, and really enjoyed your presentation and advocacy for the US government's outstanding space program. Thanks for being out there almost every day of every year since you were active in the astronaut program.
Reply to this comment
by doctor_know April 14, 2010 12:35 PM EDT
NASA's budget is increasing... why are you so worried?
by edgy44 April 14, 2010 11:10 AM EDT
Nasa has basically become another military branch. The crews are all military now, and there is no science being conducted. We already know how to build rockets. What we need are non-military crews in space. We need to separate the military folks to the USAF, and the science folks to private launches. We need to stop using rockets to get to 50,000 feet, and only use rockets after 50,000 feet. Armstrong has not been a spokesman for space or NASA. He basically has been in a closet since splashdown.
Reply to this comment
by I_am_me1953 April 14, 2010 12:29 PM EDT
Ok, no rockets below 50,000 feet.

GREAT IDEA!

Now how do we break gravity for the first 50,000 feet?

Sling shot? Gonna be one helofa rubber band. Since this is your idea, you get to take the first test flight.
See all 16 Comments
.

Follow Political Hotsheet

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook
  • Building You a Better Morning

  • CBS This Morning

    "CBS This Morning," anchored by Charlie Rose, Gayle King and Erica Hill, airs weekdays from 7 to 9 a.m. ET and at the same time in other time zones.
    Learn more...