Customer Reviews

Lost in Space: The Fall of NASA and the Dream of a New Space Age

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

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!

..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!

Greg Klerkx, a journalist who has covered NASA at times, offers in "Lost in Space" a quirky, idiosyncratic perspective on the U.S. space effort. It is one of several works that periodically appear taking NASA to the woodshed for failures, both real and perceived, that have prevented the accomplishment of a grand vision of space exploration. Of course, that "grand vision" is highly idiosyncratic and Klerkx's vision is certainly idiosyncratic as well. For Greg Klerkx, the grand vision of space exploration should lead to a renaissance for our species as we become a multiplanetary species, but it has been subverted by the military-industrial complex, government bureaucrats, and small minded politicians.

For Greg Klerkx, NASA is little more than a poorly-run government bureaucracy more concerned with self-preservation than in extending the space frontier. He invokes conspiracies too often to explain what has happened in spaceflight since the Apollo program, and condemns the relationship between NASA and its predominant contractors. Klerkx celebrates the private space entrepreneurs who have been pursuing the X-Prize, the Mars Society's analogue for Martian habitats at Devon Island, and MirCorps' efforts to privatize the Mir space station in the 2000 time frame. Through those efforts, Klerkx believes, NASA's monopoly on space activities may end. And it cannot come too soon for the author of "Lost in Space."

"Lost in Space" represents the view of a small but vocal group of space advocates who bemoan the current state of space activities in the United States. Brought up on the promises of Apollo in the 1960s, Moon habitats and space stations where tourists could travel, and possibilities for an endless frontier beyond Earth, these folks lament what might have been. Greg Klerkx offers a voice to their distemper.

Without question, "Lost in Space" is remarkably one-sided. NASA is neither so sinister nor as self-interested as the author believes. As presented here, NASA can do essentially nothing right but Klerkx's prowse seems to celebrate the alternative space community as incapable of doing no wrong.

"Lost in Space" presents a passionate discussion, sometimes fascinating and illuminating, but also carping and repetitive. It is certainly far from balanced. I recognize that balance was not necessarily Klerkx's objective and I agree with many of his criticisms of NASA, but sometimes his zeal to indict the space agency overreaches his evidence. As a challenge to the status quo this is an eloquent addition to the literature. Just don't take it as the final word on the subject.

Why have we never sent a man to Mars? Why don't we have an operational space station, much better than the ISS, in place now? Why no continuing manned moon presence?

Klerkx asks and answers these questions and more in his scathing critique of the post-Apollo NASA here. It's a good read, and contrary to some reviews, arguably it NEED to be polemical, as NASA isn't listening -- and that itself is one of Klerkx's points.

I can agree that one can excoriate NASA without necessarily saying private enterprise is the answer to everything in space. And, I did find the book a bit disjointed at times. Nonetheless, it's a very good read.

And, as to the reviewer who claims Klerkx jumped on the post-Columbia bandwagon -- what's wrong with that? It's called striking while the iron is hot.

"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.

In what amounts to a comprehensive investigative journalism piece, Klerkx documents and writes the story that 95% of commercial space professionals already know, but which 95% of the American public does not.

Written by somebody who loves space, and who grew up loving NASA, this is an eye opener for anybody else who loves space, and grew up loving NASA. You will are likely to have one of two reactions: 1) Wow, I did not know that. I never understood why we have not made more progress in space. We need to do something!; or 2) An automatic reaction to defend NASA, and attempt to discount what is an ugly truth.

As a long-time space industry indsider, I know many of the people who Klerkx writes about, I noted one or two minor nits, but most of this easy read is based on fact, and I even learned a few things.

Most of what passes as "space books" today is propaganda for the huge government/aerospace contractor marketing campaign. I highly recommend this book to those who want a factual look at some space secrets which are not generally known. Best of all, Klerkx does not conclude with a negative message, but provides an optimistic prescription to opening space for all of the people.

To succeed our society needs to the facts that Klerkx documents.

For those wishing to understand the vast and complicated history of NASA and human spaceflight, LOST IN SPACE is an essential and mesmerizing must-read. Klerkx tackles this difficult subject matter with comprehensive, concise, and eloquent first-hand accounts and perspectives. For space enthusiasts and those completely unfamiliar with this realm, LOST IN SPACE offers an absolutely compelling, behind-the-scenes look at our past, present, and potential future in spaceflight. It is impossible to read this book and not become truly engaged in the development of the next space age.

This book can be a very fun read, taken for what it is.

The author obviously has a very strong point of view regarding NASA vs private space efforts. The good thing is, his opinion is so obvious, that it's easy to take into account. Then when he says things like, NASA fought CAIB tooth and nail at every step, then it's easy to see that he's wrong, or at least over-simplifying. Esp. if you've read New Moon Rising or Comm Check.

The thing that makes this strong opinion palatable is the fact that the author is a very talented writer. The narrative is quite involving; probably the best science writer I've read since James Gleick. When the story is this good, I'll forego objectivity and enjoy the ride. Other books are better at presenting all sides.

The other redeeming quality is the author's wealth of knowledge about the people and events of private space. The accounts of MirCorp, Spacehab, Kistler Aerospace, and others provided many details that I hadn't read before, and shed light on why some things happened the way they did.

Overall I would recommend this book for its great story-telling and its wide survey of private space happenings. But I'd go to other books to get a balanced view.

When I purchased this book, I expected another viewpoint on the NASA culture that contributed to the Columbia accident. This is not that type of book. I suspect that this book was in the works well before 01 February 2003. The timing of the book's publication, however, was not an accident.

Mr. Klerkx has an ax to grind. In summary, the book is pro-private rocket launches, pro-space tourism, and pro-manned Mars mission. Which means the book uses 355 pages to show how NASA is not the proper government agency to sponsor and support such activities. Some very neat parallels are drawn between the early commercial aviation industry and the X Prize and SpaceShipOne. Unfortunately, the story always comes back around to bashing NASA, its current and recent leadership, and the current presidential administration.

Read this book only if you want to see some NASA bashing. If you want to learn about private efforts to reach space and the effort to prepare for manned travel to Mars, find a different book.

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.