Space and Nationalism

1. Space and Nationalism • Exploration seems to be usually coupled to Nationalism • Many land explorers searched out new frontiers for the glory and power of their countries (often sponsors) • Also a profit motive - the search for treasure. • Space exploration is no exception • All new developments have been seen as glorifying the country of origin (also sponsors) • Space exploitation does not however have such a strong nationalist connotation • Profits for the commercial branch • Secrecy for the Defense branch • But enough knowledge available to spur an arms race. • Historically the race to demonstrate orbital capability was extremely nationalistic • To the extent that it shaped US science/technology policy • Also the teaching of mathematics, science and engineering in schools and universities was impacted

2. The Early Days • As a result of the capture of people and hardware from the German V2 project after WW II the USA and the Soviet Union were the only two countries that had developed the capability to place spacecraft in earth orbit. • Both countries were working on weapons with greater range and lift capabilities than the V2. • Finally the Russian rocket R7 succeeded in placing Sputnik-1 in LEO in October 1957 • This was followed about one month later by Sputnik-2 which included a dog (Laika) to study the effect of space flight on a living organism. • On the science and engineering front the US was chagrined by these two events • The general public worldwide was also aghast at the fate of Laika. • Between these events the honor of the country had been challenged and the government swung into action

3. Explorer - 1 • Explorer-1 satellite with booster rocket attached • Discovered radiation belts with Van Allen’s experiment • Von Braun was responsible for the launch rocket Explorer - 1 William Pickering James Van Allen Wernher von Braun

4. Enter the Europeans -1 • In the 1950’s time frame in the post WW II recovery period no single European country could support more than a sounding rocket space program. • However the corporate and nationalism forces pressed for Europe to enter the space development arena in competition with the USA and USSR. • Several countries banded together in the early 1960’s and set up the European Space Research Organization (ESRO) which later evolved into the European Space Agency (ESA)

5. Enter the Europeans -2 • ESA maintains an industrial arm originally called the European Launcher Development Organization (ELDO) which has developed the Ariane rocket • Launch site in Kourou, French Guiana • Now up to Ariane-5 with a planned capacity of 12 tonnes to geosynchronous orbit. • A total of 140 Ariane launches had been made by the end of 2000 • ESRO/ESA has launched many scientific satellites, often on US rockets, ranging from early aeronomy satellites to sophisticated satellites to make astrophysical measurements. • As a secondary objective the requirement to let contracts to European companies has helped develop space related industry in Europe.

6. ESA • Member countries contribute annual fees from national taxes • In return ESA • Shares its organizational centres between contributing countries • Issues industrial contracts in proportion to amounts contributed by member countries

7. ESA Member Countries • The 10 founding members of ESA included the largest Western European countries France Germany Italy Spain UK • Together with Belgium Denmark Netherlands Sweden Switzerland. • Five others joined later Ireland, Austria, Norway, Finland and Portugal • Canada is a Cooperating State

8. ESA Administrative Centers • Headquarters • Paris, France • Technology Center (ESTEC) • Noordwijk, Netherlands • Research Institute (ESRIN) • Frascati, Italy • Control Center (ESOC) • Darmstadt, Germany • Astronaut Center (EAC) • Cologne, Germany • Spaceport • Kourou, French Guiana • Some recent examples of ESA science projects follow:

9. ESA/Ulysses Showing trajectory around the sun including times when the solar poles are scanned.

10. ESA/Ulysses Result • Note solar wind minimum at the solar equator (ecliptic plane) • Also change of direction of magnetic field between N. and S. hemispheres

11. ESA/SOHO - 1 • SOlar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) • Located at one of the Lagrangian points between earth and sun

12. ESA/SOHO - 2 • Artist’s impression of SOHO located between the earth and the sun • Provides constant monitoring of solar activity and an advanced warning of increased solar activity.

13. Proliferation to Other Countries • In the 70’s and 80’s other countries joined the “space club” • Japan developed both launchers and satellites • China did likewise • India has an active space research organization • Many other countries developed access to space through purchases of commercial satellites and launchers.

14. The Cold War • The cold war between the USA and USSR was a major driver in the development of space technology and instrumentation. • Being a cold war the nationalism was extreme in order to try to emphasize where each country was ahead of the other. • Some of the satellites did allow science experiments in the payload and proved valuable assets for space science. • Spin off from the technology and actual data now released have been positive aspects of the enormous amount of money put into the space branch of the cold war.

15. Star Wars • The culmination of the competition to dominate in space systems was the Strategic Defense Organization or SDI (commonly called “Star Wars”). • The project to spot and destroy incoming, armed ballistic missiles diminished at the end of the cold war, but was retained under a newly named organization (Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO)) • There is still concern about the threat of isolated attacks from terrorist groups • Research on detection techniques and destruction of the attacking weapons is still supported by the DoD. • There are many skeptical of the realistic chances of the planned protection schemes.

16. The Race to the Moon • The USA and USSR were in intense competition to land people on the moon. • However, fairly early on the USSR realized it did not have the resources to place people on the moon. • They were very active in producing lunar landers and orbiters throughout the Apollo missions. • This national competitiveness was a contributing factor to the speed of the evolution of the missions of manned spacecraft to the moon. • USSR attempted to have the last word by sending Luna-16 to the moon in 1970 to collect and return lunar soil samples automatically. • They used it to make the point that it my not be necessary to include the expenses of manned flight to study the composition of planet surfaces.

17. Manned Space Flight • The race to get the first person in space was again a very intensive nationalistic competition between the USA and USSR • USSR won when Yuri Gagarin first orbited the earth in Vostok-1 in 1961 • He was followed by Titov in Vostok-2 in 1961who was the first person to spend an entire day in space. • The USA followed in 1962 with its first orbital flight by John Glenn when he orbited the earth in 1962 in Mercury-6 • The USSR the placed the first woman in orbit in 1963 when Valentina Tereshkova flew in Vostok-6. • These pioneering manned flights were followed by many others in both the USA and USSR culminating in the Skylab, Mir and Space Shuttle flights. • Having people in space was and continues to be a matter of national pride

18. The Race to the Planets • Both the USA and USSR were also very competitive in exploring the solar system planets. • Both countries had extensive programs of planetary flybys, orbiters and landers. • As with the lunar projects, the competition helped keep the resources flowing in both countries and speed up this aspect of space exploration.

19. The Space Station Saga - 1 • The USA had been planning a space station for many years • Mir provided the stimulus to move along more rapidly to develop a national facility. • The original design was described as a “Cadillac” solution and kept escalating in the estimated total cost every year. • Finally congress said enough and NASA was sent back to the drawing board to come up with a less expensive solution. • Smarting from this and the ongoing success of the then new Mir resulted in a very rapid redesign to meet the cost constraints placed on it by congress. • Part of the cost saving came from sharing of components of the Space Station with other countries to develop the International Space Station (ISS) (C.f. the formation of ESA) • Russia was invited in as a major contributor to both build and launch parts of the station.

20. The Space Station Saga - 2 • The reasons for the Russian involvement were complex and not wholly economic. • After the end of the cold war there was an effort to prevent their science and technology going to countries which were or could become enemies of the USA. • One way of achieving this was to include the Russians in the Space Station team • Congress was wary of this because of the possibilities of delays caused by the state of the Russian economy driving up the US internal costs • This indeed happened and the cost problem was compounded by the USA having to transfer funds to Russia to speed up completion of their unit

21. The Space Station Saga - 3 • The current status is that after a late delivery of the Russian Zarya other modules are being added including the first of the large solar cell arrays. • The first long duration crew arrived in Dec 2000, and have just returned to earth in the Space Shuttle after four months on board ISS. • A second 3-person crew is now on board, and the ISS has entered its continually populated phase • The crew size will remain at three until a new, larger escape craft is attached to the ISS. • The addition of the US Unity module will allow early science experiments to be started once the equipment is ferried to ISS.

22. Issues • Nationalism is a powerful force to accomplish goals. • Good or bad? • Is international collaboration a better strategy? • Pro • May contribute to world peace. • Best experts in each country can participate. • Taxpayers feel better about diverting some funds to other areas. • Con • Joint decisions often influenced by nationalism. • Language barrier. • Mixed engineering units and standards.