to earth. As matters stand we do not have any
launch vehicle system available to carry humans
and cargo into space.
I participated in the space program before the first
of the moon missions at ILC Industries, the designers
and manufacturers of the Apollo space suits. One of
the most interesting aspects of that project was the
fact that the chief designer for all U.S. high altitude
and space suits was a man with little education.
George Durney was “discovered” while he as selling
reupholstery services and curtains for Sears. The
man was the consummate genius with fabrics. This
vividly contrasts with today’s paradigm that in order
to get ahead one must have an advanced education.
A terrific education may make progression into
success easier for some folks, but it is no assurance
of a successful career. The business of learning and
getting good grades on tests improves a completely
different set of skills than one encounters in the
business of earning.
While the usual article we read today covers one or
perhaps two issues, this one, of necessity, does
much more because of the interleaved concepts that
affect our daily lives.
My two hallmark efforts at ILC Industries were:
1) recovery of profit for work done to the tune of
$15 million on which the documentation had been
misplaced, and 2) writing the fist proposal for
modifications to the then existing space suits to
make them appropriate for the lunar mission
requirements.
My copy of the cover page for the draft is displayed.
That was another of the classic hurry-up assignments
of that day. I had a week to complete the proposal, and
I worked 95 hours that week in order to get it done,
along with three secretaries who did all the typing while
I wrote and prepared charts and tables. I was then given
a few days in which to revise the draft to change the
name of the document (it became the Omega
Configuration for the existing space suit) and to reduce
all the estimated numbers by 15%. Since the suits were
fabricated on a cost-plus basis, the actual cost of
building any suit was covered anyway, and ILC’s
profit was negotiated after the fact based primarily
on the approved aspects of the expenditures.
We knew already that the future of the manned
US space effort was going to be the space shuttle,
a project I opposed then, and now in hindsight,
for the same underlying reasons. In order to
demonstrate my reasons for opposing the shuttle
program we temporarily depart from a discussion
of space and briefly go underground.
I used, as my model, the New York City subway
system. I’ve known the story since my youth
since I first rode the NYC subway in 1946. It
was a dilapidated and old system at that time,
but it still functioned well enough. But in looking
on the internet for a web page or more to include
in support of my thesis, I found that modern
NYC politics has done extensive revision of the
underlying facts, to the point that a published
copy of a 1904 brochure is the only place I was
able to find the unabashed and unrevised truth.
You can find that brochure at:
http://www.nycsubway.org/articles/subwaysouvenir.html
In the 1800’s, New York’s city fathers recognized
the need for a public transportation system and,
unlike Iron River’s elected officials, determined
to do something about it.
(From the web page: “Our city-loving Mayor was
still the practical business man and while he
advocated all speed in the pushing forward any
crying public need, he was wise enough to consider
the ways and means by which the public need was
to be supplied.” I've always been of the opinion that
that's the way things are meant to be!)
After a number of attempts, they finally got the
state constitution amended to accommodate the
needed public transportation system. Thy found a
contractor willing to build what became known as
the IRT system, and to run it under franchise for
50 years. “By the terms of the contract, the road
was leased by the city to Mr. McDonald for fifty
years…” Work began in 1898.
By the time I rode on the system in 1946, and
later, the equipment was mostly worn out and
was technology from the year 1900. Of course
the cost of the ride for the entire 50 year
franchise was limited to a nickel, 5 cents.
Consider the reasoning. Working with budget
limitations in mind, the ideal circumstances would
be that in the last minute of the last hour of the
contract, the last train would arrive to its
destination and irreparably break down, all used
up. That didn’t happen because the IRT system
was too large and equipment deterioration isn’t
100% predictable anyway. In 1948, when the
City of New York took over the system, the very
first thing that happened was that the fare was
doubled, to 10 cents. And the City, of necessity,
began to acquire new rolling stock as well as
infrastructure supporting the system. The
important point is that what the City received
from the contractor at that point was a much
deteriorated public transportation system
comprised of old technology.
And the space shuttle system has some parallels.
The last flight was completed using 30 year old
technology. Oh yes, the shuttle is quite impressive,
but the advances made in materials alone over the
past three decades has made the existing spacecraft
significantly obsolete. The weight reduction, using
modern technology and limited use vehicles reduces
the cost per pound for launches of men and products.
Any long term, multiple reuse vehicle is built heavier
than a one or two use vehicle.
My final objection to the shuttle model of manned
space flight has to do with the dearth of technological
advance. If we had continued with limited use vehicles
as we started with, an ongoing effort to make
improvements would have benefited not only the
space program, but also helped to drive our
technologically based economy as well as other
health an social programs. None of such development
was available to the US public once the shuttle design
was frozen.
It used to be that the United States was “the
innovator.” I foresaw our loss of that status when
Japanese manufacturers came out with the first
F 1.9 camera lens. The best that anyone had
achieved up to that point in time was F 2.8. The
improvement in lens technology was huge! And
then we saw our manufacturing moving overseas.
Now a company founded by a most favored son
and inventor, Thomas Edison, is moving to
China. General Electric’s X-Ray unit is moving.
Our economy, and soon to be followed by our
living standards, is collapsing because we’ve
moved from being a nation of innovation and
capitalism into one whose inhabitants believe
social programs are the be-all and end-all rather
than technological and productive progress.
The demise of our manned space program is
merely another in a sequence of harbingers of
the truths that represent our future.
As a final chuckle, I wonder if the history of
mankind in space will be revised as much as NYC
subway history has been.
Bill Vajk
