Rating: 
Summary: Well written, lively, viewpoint subject to challenge.
Review: "Ho, hum! Another book about space. Looks like it's by one of the 'blame NASA' crowd. Ardently peddling his own bit of vaporware, most likely." That was my reaction when I first heard of this book. Just the same, I bought it and read it, and now I'm glad that I did. Just in case you don't read to the end of this review, I'll put my conclusion up front: READ THIS BOOK.
Klerkx does represent that NASA, after its heroic age leading up to the Apollo moon landings, got hardening of the mental arteries. Struggling just to survive as a sinecure for government bureaucrats and a jobs program for engineers, it became less and less venturesome, less and less innovative. As budgets and head count fell away, it became increasingly the captive of corporate aerospace giants. Today, among many space enthusiasts, it is regarded as a roadblock rather than an ally. Klerkx presents their case.
As a longtime space enthusiast myself, I encounter this point of view all the time. Its advocates are a dime a dozen. What makes Klerkx different is that he's a trained journalist and makes a stronger case than I would have thought possible. It helps that he writes well -- he knows how to interview people and make their lives interesting to the reader. Just incidentally, he writes grammatically. Even the typos are rare in this book. I would have to read it clear through a third time to find any, and I could probably count them on the fingers of one hand.
The book interviews a lot of people, many of whom once worked for NASA, but were axed in budget cuts, or becamse disillusioned and quit. Obviously their stories share a bias, but there are too many of them to brush off easily. Some had illustrious records in the glory days. Some have pursued outstanding second careers. Some doggedly stuck to space-related endeavors at great personal risk and sacrifice. Some put up astounding amounts of their own or other people's money. They believe what they are doing.
It you attend space-related conferences, you've probably met some of these people, or passed them in the hall among the throng. Klerkx's book would be worth getting if only for its bios of some very interesting, but mostly unsung, people.
That said, what about Kerkx's thesis? What if all of it were true: that NASA has become stagnant, uses every trick in the book to remain the gatekeeper of American space efforts, and is captive to giant aerospace corporations (down to just two of them, by now)? Even so, would it make sense to blame NASA for what has happened, and is still happening? I think the point is arguable. If you venture outside the smallish circle of space frontierspeople, you quickly discover that the vast majority of the public are either like the National Taxpayers Union Foundation, which wants the money returned to the taxpayers, or like any of the many lobbies for rival government expenditures. They may admire space achievements in a survey, but they don't want to spend more on it than they might, say, on a fireworks display.
NASA may have its own bureaucratic imperatives for seeking control of what Americans do in space, but in the last analysis it is a public agency. In the last analysis, the fault for its paralysis lies with Congress, which in turn reflects public opinion, which isn't at all in the space enthusiast camp.
Beyond that, there's a much mightier force than NASA, all but ignored by the "private space frontier" fans. Can we really believe that if there had never been a NASA, the opening of space would have been left to the discretion of several thousand inventors and entrepreneurs? Control of space is a MILITARY ASSET. The historical accident is not that the moon program was launched in a time of international rivalry. The accident is that a disastrous choice of engagements in Vietnam gave a bad name to military rivalry in American folklore. Therefore, thirty years after the moon landings, their motivation is regarded as foolishness. But the technology of guided missiles and of reconnaissance from space is a serious business, and there is no chance that the government would have stayed aloof from developments if NASA were out of the way.
This observation is all the more pungent now that we're militarily engaged on the home front as well as abroad. If the eccentric, kindly professor can build a rocket in his garage and launch it from his back yard, so can the demented terrorist living in a cave.
Still, I, like Klerkx et al., have spent a lifetime wishing for an open space frontier,one in which ordinary folks like us could personally participate. One has to hope that somehow the societal obstacles will dissolve. And I do applaud the efforts of the private players.
That's the big picture. Before we part company, I also have a smalltime point to make. Klerkx repeatedly characterizes the L5 Society as "O'Neill's L5 Society". Actually, Gerard O'Neill kept it at arm's length. The organization was seeded at the second of the Princeton Conferences on Space Manufacturing Facilities, which was indeed organized by O'Neill. A group of participants, including me, put our names on a list of those eager to set up a grassroots organization. O'Neill, however, was rather edgy about the idea, and did not promote it. His own persona was better represented by the Space Studies Institute, subsequently set up to do research that would demonstrate critical technologies. O'Neill's value to the movement lay precisely in the fact that he was a physicist with a proven track record. Involvement with the hoi polloi (never free of kooks) could only impair that value.
Rating:
Summary: A refreshing antidote...
Review: ..to the usual right stuff glorification of an organization whose efforts to build on the thrill of Apollo have disappointed me and apparently also the author. The track record Klerkx puts together in this book of NASA's dealings with big contractors like Boeing is shocking, and it really throws into question whether NASA has what it takes to send people back to the moon or anywhere else. The stories of the entrepreneurs are interesting and the whole book moves along very nicely, without too much technical gobbledegook. A really interesting read, although it's pretty long, so give yourself some time!
Rating: 
Summary: A letdown at the end
Review: Books like this consist of two parts: what's wrong with the way things are, and what should be done to fix it. Very strong on the first part, where he laid out the entrenched Shuttle-Space Station interests in NASA and some of the ways they've ditched any effort that threatens those programs. Then the book veers off into a in-depth look at the Mars simulation on Devon Island, which, while interesting, is starting to get off the point. The last chapter is a disaster. After going on about how NASA is structurally incapable of dramatic change, he then says NASA should basically fix itself. Why does he think that will happen? As long as the politically powerful centers are allowed to dictate self-serving policy, NASA will continute down the path of big, expensive technology projects that keep the centers going but accomplish little. Furthermore, Klerkx assumes the manned Mars mission is the way to go, without asking the obvious if it will end up as a dead end like the Moon missions. Very little thought is given in the book as to how to set up economically sustainable activities in space, such as space tourism. So good first half, very weak last chapter.
Rating: 
Summary: Access to the potential of space remains open to only a few.
Review: Klerkx has written, at once, an absolutely damning assessment of NASA; yet he has also written a book, which enthusiastically and passionately, advocates many of the great things that the organization has achieved over the years - from the historic moon landings, to the astounding successes of the interplanetary robotic explorers like the Viking probes to Mars. The assessment is mostly shocking though. With a clear, precise, and journalistic style Klerkx paints a rather uncomplimentary picture of an organization that is almost alive - a giant be-moth of an institution that rather than being "a streamlined purveyor of space-faring know-how" is a "fractious bureaucracy roiling with politics and infighting, thick with red tape and feral self-interest." NASA is conveyed as an organization that persistently wastes tax payers money, curries political favor in Washington to suite its own ends, has slip-shod and half baked safety records, and stifles the possibility of letting private, corporate entrepreneurs and investors contribute to sending humans into space. The fact that NASA has fundamentally failed to reinvent itself is the essential premise of Lost In Space. And Klerkx argues that over the years the Organization's monopoly on space travel has become so masterful that it has become disadvantageous everyone else: NASA's word has become final on all things related to space - from spending billions using a technological relic like the Space Shuttle to "putter around aimlessly in orbit" to insisting that the Russian space station Mir was "standing in the way of progress" and had to go, to deciding that only NASA trained astronauts are worth sending into space and that there is no place for fee paying members of the public like the millionaire Tito, who want to go into space for the fun and experience of it. Human space flight is "whatever pace NASA says it should be" and anyone who dares suggest anything different, is typically "dismissed as a dreamer or a heretic and out of touch with NASA's reality." Klerkx covers a lot of territory in this book, and packs the narrative with lots of stories of NASA's history from the development of Von Braun's initial rockets, to the Cold War and the moon landings. He talks about the cash-strapped seventies and the birth of the Space Shuttle, and the nineteen eighties with the design and development of the International Space Station. With a fast-paced, almost "hurried" style, the author talks about the fight to save Mir, the challenges and fights that the private sector faces launching humans into space, the reasons for the Challenger and Columbia disasters, and the stalled hopes and dreams of eventually landing humans on Mars. Lost in Space is a meticulously researched book - a grand, and epic, yet inherently critical look at one of the world's greatest institutions. And I would recommend this book for anyone who works in the space industry and who is intrinsically concerned about the future of space exploration. This is a thought-provoking, timely, surprising, and quite astonishing read. Michael
Rating:
Summary: A Fascinating Look at NASA's Past and Future Trajectories
Review: Klerkx is an accomplished investigative journalist who has revealed the best and the worst of a near-impregnable bureaucracy. His timing is perfect. Written in the midst of a shuttle disaster and a presidential mandate that we go to Mars, his book provides a rich and sometimes troubling behind-the-scenes account of what goes on inside NASA and other space entrepreneurs. Yet in chaos he sees opportunity: a "United Nations" of space exploration called the International Space University, where, as he puts it, efforts are being made to "...find a common future for humans in space." In so doing, Klerkx takes you on an exciting journey along the exhilarating trajectory of all pioneering quests.
Rating: 
Summary: Many Accusations, Little Proof
Review: The dust jacket of this book disingenuously describes it as revealing how NASA "devolved from a pioneer of new horizons to a blundering bureaucracy concerned mainly with its own existence." To the contrary, Klerkx STARTS with the given that NASA is a "blundering bureaucracy concerned mainly with its own existence" and then attempts to explain how NASA and its big contractors Boeing and Lockheed Martin have thwarted every attempt by private entrepreneurs to get into the space industry. The problem is not that Klerkx is wrong -- he may be correct, for all I know -- but that he presents little evidence to prove that he is right. He makes his case by relying almost exclusively on information from the private entrepreneurs themselves, who understandably are frustrated by the current state of the space program and the failure to fulfill the dream of 2001: A Space Odyssey. However, little attempt is made to present NASA's side of the story or to give hard evidence of NASA's supposed real agenda. Instead, Klerkx relies on innuendo and circumstantial evidence. For example: NASA and its contractors are entrenched with using expendable launch vehicles (solid/liquid rocket boosters). NASA awarded a contract to Lockheed to develop a reusable launch vehicle, the X-33. Lockheed failed and the project was cancelled. Therefore, NASA and Lockheed conspired to kill the X-33 in order to protect their vested interests in expendable rocket boosters. Without hard evidence, the conclusion does not follow from the premise and we are left with the same sort of conspiracy theory used to "prove" that big oil and big auto companies have suppressed technology that would allow cars to run on water. The result is that NASA is blamed for everything that goes wrong and gets no credit for anything that goes right. According to Klerkx, when NASA fails to support the entrepreneurs, as when it refused to help them maintain the Mir space station, this is evidence that NASA doesn't want competition in space. But, when NASA does ostensibly support the entrepreneurs, for example by funding the X-33 and DC-X experimental reusable launch vehicles, this ALSO is evidence that NASA doesn't want competition in space, because NASA simply is co-opting these programs in order to gain control over them and kill them. In other words, whatever NASA does with respect to private space initiatives is evidence that NASA doesn't want them to succeed. As such, the book comes off as simply rationalizing private industry failures by blaming NASA for everything. "Lost in Space" is better understood as a howl of frustration from the private sector, those who bought the dream of space travel championed in the 50's and 60's and who are bitterly disappointed by the failure of that dream, than as an objective account of the current space program.
Rating:
Summary: Many Accusations, Little Proof
Review: The dust jacket of this book disingenuously describes it as revealing how NASA "devolved from a pioneer of new horizons to a blundering bureaucracy concerned mainly with its own existence." To the contrary, Klerkx STARTS with the given that NASA is a "blundering bureaucracy concerned mainly with its own existence" and then attempts to explain how NASA and its big contractors Boeing and Lockheed Martin have thwarted every attempt by private entrepreneurs to get into the space industry. The problem is not that Klerkx is wrong -- he may be correct, for all I know -- but that he presents little evidence to prove that he is right. He makes his case by relying almost exclusively on information from the private entrepreneurs themselves, who understandably are frustrated by the current state of the space program and the failure to fulfill the dream of 2001: A Space Odyssey. However, little attempt is made to present NASA's side of the story or to give hard evidence of NASA's supposed real agenda. Instead, Klerkx relies on innuendo and circumstantial evidence. For example: NASA and its contractors are entrenched with using expendable launch vehicles (solid/liquid rocket boosters). NASA awarded a contract to Lockheed to develop a reusable launch vehicle, the X-33. Lockheed failed and the project was cancelled. Therefore, NASA and Lockheed conspired to kill the X-33 in order to protect their vested interests in expendable rocket boosters. Without hard evidence, the conclusion does not follow from the premise and we are left with the same sort of conspiracy theory used to "prove" that big oil and big auto companies have suppressed technology that would allow cars to run on water. The result is that NASA is blamed for everything that goes wrong and gets no credit for anything that goes right. According to Klerkx, when NASA fails to support the entrepreneurs, as when it refused to help them maintain the Mir space station, this is evidence that NASA doesn't want competition in space. But, when NASA does ostensibly support the entrepreneurs, for example by funding the X-33 and DC-X experimental reusable launch vehicles, this ALSO is evidence that NASA doesn't want competition in space, because NASA simply is co-opting these programs in order to gain control over them and kill them. In other words, whatever NASA does with respect to private space initiatives is evidence that NASA doesn't want them to succeed. As such, the book comes off as simply rationalizing private industry failures by blaming NASA for everything. "Lost in Space" is better understood as a howl of frustration from the private sector, those who bought the dream of space travel championed in the 50's and 60's and who are bitterly disappointed by the failure of that dream, than as an objective account of the current space program.
Rating:
Summary: NASA - Not About Space Anymore
Review: This is a decent book that presents the opposing view to NASA's perspective on space travel. It does get long winded at times and could benefit with some editing. It is corageous in that it is one of a very few books that will state that NASA is lost and has no real direction. I was born in 1968, so I missed the interesting space missions. I remember as a kid watching the first Space Shuttle launch and being completely unimpressed. I could never really put my finger on my fascination with the Apollo program and my boerdome with the Space Shuttle until now. This book has been a real eye opener for me as a space enthusiast and a tax payer!
Rating:
Summary: Some Clarity
Review: This is a fine book, confirming much of the information and a few of the theories that I have about NASA.
I had come to many of the book's conclusions about NASA already, the bad ones. I could recognize that NASA didn't want to do the things that they ought to be doing, and this book confirmed a lot of the mechanics, a few of the why's and gave me a lot of leads that I didn't have before. I do believe that anyone who is seriously interested in the books topic material, the politics of NASA, also needs to pick up a 1996 title by Diane Vaughan titled "The Challenger Launch Decision" because that title clarifies the culture; and the culture (thanks Diane) and politics (thanks Greg) have conspired to render NASA totally ineffective.
I've read lots of reviews that knock this title for its conspiracy theories, but when one has read as much about NASA as I have (I could rattle off about 20 titles off the top of my head), everything else is pretty much ruled out. The normalization of deviance theory can't apply to the sorts of high level decisions this title addresses. The decisions to launch STS-33 and STS-107 is far different than the decisions to cancel X-33 and ASRM.
I don't think its a perfect book, but I give it five stars because it is so important for anyone wishing to understand NASA. If you really want to know why you can't simply walk into Miami International and fly to Mars, pick up this book.
Terry Wilson
aftercolumbia.tripod.com
Rating:
Summary: Pointed Ax-Grinding
Review: When I purchased this book, I expected a thoughtful analysis of managerial and oversight failure. I am supremely disappointed to report that in this book NASA can do no right. I approached this book with my own opinions: NASA has lost focus, has lost funding, and has lost the technological edge. Much of this has been due to political hacks running their pet pork through NASA and ignoring NASA's real mission, all the while cutting funding for programs to levels where virtually nothing can be effectively accomplished. I wouldn't say that Klerkx disagrees with that point of view per se; he does appear, however, to have a major ax to grind with management.
In the view of Klerkx, it is time for NASA to let loose the reins of manned spaceflight, and allow private corporations go into space on their own. He presents his case that NASA stifles competition at every juncture while making his claims of incredible capitalistic prosperity in space. What he then goes on to claim, in an irresolvable paradox, is that NASA needs free market competition in manned spaceflight, but that because the required investment is so huge, no private company could afford it. His solution involves privatizing the shuttle and ISS. So let me see if I have this straight...he wants the US to foot the bill to develop manned spaceflight capabilities, but then just give it away? He doesn't say it quite that bluntly, but a large portion of the book details essentially that viewpoint.
He tends to vilify many NASA managers, some deservedly (like Dan Goldin), and some not. He also embraces some of the most arrogant and obnoxious of all the alternative space gurus, particularly the seemingly insufferable Robert Zubrin, although to his credit, he does adequately detail the personality conflicts that go everywhere Zubrin goes. He also adulates the Space Hab on Devon Island as doing extremely valuable research for Mars preparation. It may be fun to dress up in toy spacesuits and ride ATVs around in the arctic mud, but I hate to break it to you, Greg: Mars isn't like Devon Island, and this is basically Space Camp for ubernerds.
High on my list of issues with the book is the willingness to accept any data presented by the alternative space movement while simultaneously disregarding much of NASA's data. He repeats the mantra of low cost access to space endorsed by the alternative space movement that a truly low-cost, reusable vehicle is feasible, with claims of costs as low as $500-$1,000/lb for orbital insertion, versus $3,000/lb on a disposable launcher and $10,000/lb on the shuttle. I guess he wasn't paying attention in the early 1970s when the Nixon, Ford, and especially Carter administrations were preaching this exact same miracle of cost effectiveness for the shuttle.
Another theme permeating the book is that "normal" people should fly in space at a reasonable cost. Towards the end of the book, he even espouses the view that shuttle passengers don't really need training to go into orbit with the convoluted reasoning that 777 passengers don't need to know how to fly the plane in an emergency. That's true: of course neither do the shuttle payload specialists know how to fly the orbiter. At a half-billion dollars per launch, I think it is only responsible of NASA to expect that everyone onboard is put to some productive use. (This goes hand in glove with the adulation of Dennis Tito that runs throughout the book.)
The closing chapter is the weakest of the bunch, a trend which other reviewers have also noted. It essentially combines a lot of platitudes about the future with no concrete recommendations on how to help NASA (though there are a few pie in the sky theories aired.) There are lots of things I would like to take NASA to task for, notably the huge lack of focus in the shuttle and ISS, but at least I am willing to admit that NASA has strengths too, a virtually unimaginable concept to Klerkx. Only in the last pages of the book among much adulation for the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute does the real motivation of Klerkx become evident. In a passage dealing with the cancellation of the DC-X (which actually was a shame) he laments that the Stockholm Institute claims that in 2001 the governments of the world spent $772 billion on defense (although many institutions not as politically far left estimate a much lower figure.) Klerkx is dismayed that US spending allegedly accounts for a third of that, and laments this waste (without mentioning, of course, that the US provides about three quarters of all the world's peacekeeping forces.) His true colors as an anti-government, anti-military leftist become apparent, and make his vehemently anti-NASA stance then appear for what it is. The best illustration is the following passage which speaks for itself: "It may well be that one of the best, and most optimistically subversive, uses of military spending is to pursue better, cheaper and more reliable spacecraft. After all, the $60 million the military spent on the DC-X...kept at least $60 million from being spent on bombs." It finally all makes sense: Klerkx spends the whole book railing on government based development programs, then complaining when they are cancelled; the truth is he wants the government to pay for the development and hardware, and then give it all away. I'm sorry Mr. Klerkx: the real world doesn't work that way. (Heaven forbid the military would have anything to do with it, after all they only sponsored most of the programs, including the shuttle in part.)
The book gets two stars for presenting some interesting information, but if I had to do it over again I would have never bought this book or wasted my time reading it. NASA has problems, but none are as big as the holes in this book.
|
