'If I Ran NASA for a Month'


We asked four Embry-Riddle professors who teach students to design spacecraft, rockets, and space missions to tell us: "What would you do if you were in charge of NASA for a month?"

Nick Devereux, Associate Professor of Physics, Prescott campus
"I would reaffirm NASA's commitment to manned exploration. The manned space program, a very visible part of NASA's pursuit, is very important because it motivates the next generation of scientists to go to school and work hard because they are inspired by the space program. Many want to become astronauts, and it is absolutely critical to the continued success of the United States in leading the world in science, engineering and technology.

"Next, I would refocus NASA on its long-term goal. It needs to be something the public can easily understand. Landing on the moon was that type of goal. We were involved with a space race with the Russians that motivated the whole country to get behind the moon missions.

"Today we live in a much more global society. With the International Space Station, NASA has already set the precedent for international cooperation. I think a cooperative program with the Chinese, Russians and European countries would make a Mars mission something the world could visualize and support."

Rodney Piercey, Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, Daytona Beach campus
"The first thing I would do as NASA's director would be to begin a "refactoring" of cargo and manned space flight. I would have a directive to build heavy-lift rockets to take cargo and equipment in space. These vehicles can be designed under totally different criteria. They can have a higher risk factor because you don't have people on board, so you can better balance the costs and risks on the side of economy.

"At the same time, I'd begin development of the next generation of manned space vehicles. They would be less risky and designed with the latest in life-support technologies. The goal wouldn't only be to put people in orbit; I would have a much further-reaching program in place.

"And driving that mission would be a total refocusing of our space efforts, as they did in the 1960s. My goal would be to make a commitment to do all the exploration necessary and design the vehicles needed to put our people on Mars in 10-15 years - and stick to it."

Mahmut Reyhanoglu, Professor and Program Coordinator of Engineering Physics, Daytona Beach campus
"First, I would put the emphasis on developing robotic spacecraft to handle all of our low-Earth orbit projects. I wouldn't want to risk humans just to go out 400 kilometers and circle the earth every 90 minutes. Our technology would easily create unmanned vehicles to accomplish those types of low-orbit projects.

"If we're going to accept the risks of manned space flight, and I believe we have to, I would put our resources on a much higher goal: developing a spaceship with the propulsion system necessary to get to Mars. We are much better prepared today to go to Mars than we were in the 1960s to go to the moon. But when the entire country was behind it we still pulled it off by the deadline.

"Another goal of having safer, more reliable space vehicles would be to encourage space tourism. That's one thing more people are imagining, and it's a way to make space travel commercially viable. Done right, the program could almost pay for itself. And commercializing space exploration is another thing we need to think about."

Darrel Smith, Professor of Physics, Prescott campus
"I think the first thing I would do is totally revamp our space transport system. The shuttle was a great first step and it could probably go another 20 years, but we really need to get to work on something that uses the latest technologies. It will take years to develop, so we need to get started right now.

"Next, I would redefine and redirect the science program for the International Space Station. Science, or useful science anyway, is pretty much on hold up there right now. The original goal of the station was to be able to do really interesting, cutting-edge science. I think it's lost that direction. Right now, we have our hands full just maintaining the station itself, and that's not a good use of time or money.

"To fix that, I'd establish a Space Station Science Institute like the one they have for the Hubble Space Telescope. If people really got excited about the scientific possibilities the ISS offers, it would speed things up and we could really make an impact on the different fields of science we are planning."