...the punch in the gut that Sputnik caused on these shores is not to be under-estimated.
Your comment reminded me of one terrific documentary by Robert Stone, Satellite Sky. It opens with the US media wetting themselves over the launch of Sputnik. Sure, it's not the most balanced of documentaries, but it really paints a picture of a country facing impending Armageddon!
It has the Name That Tune episode with John Glenn. He cracked me up with his answer about taking careful, incremental steps for the trip to the moon. "You want to make sure you get there?" interrupted the interviewer... "Well, sure, but I really want to make sure we get back!" The film of Nixon's discomfort talking to Khrushchev was cringing. Especially when he compared US televisions to Russian rockets...
The public interviews: Joe Citizen was monumentally pi55ed off that a foreign nation, let alone an 'enemy nation' got into space first.
The fickle nature of Americans caused us to lose interest and NASA...
It was a fortuitous collection of circumstances that allowed the moon landing. Arguably the most impressive engineering project of the 20th century. And NASA's budget has been steadily falling, with just a few boosts here and there, since 1966. I think if NASA's current budget was moved over to defense, the military wouldn't even notice.
NASA's sterling reputation was lost with the Challenger and the Columbia, and if you think the disasters are over, wait until we try to send people to Mars.
Budget constraints and more than a little hubris contributed to those terrible days. Call me crazy, but I don't think NASA will have a big say in any manned missions to Mars.
reply
share