If you knew Th’ Gaussling very well, you would be quite surprised at his increasing skepticism with our approach to manned spaceflight.  I am an aerospace enthusiast. The most thrilling and terrifying moments of my life have occured at 7000 ft MSL with a Cessna strapped to my ass.  It is distressing to go public (well, under my pseudonym) with criticism of our manned space flight effort.

My first question is, what are we getting out of the ISS?  We’re racking up a lot of flight hours and the aerospace contractors are doing good business. The purpose of the ISS seems to be “Learning How to Build an ISS” if you watch NASA TV.  Where are the dividends to society? I’m sure they are there. Where is the tech transfer?

I know that research is being done on the ISS. But, how productive is it?  How close are we technically to going to Mars? The assessment of criteria for a Mars mission is supposed to be one of the work products of the ISS. Has anyone articulated how the big picture is looking? 

Apparently, a trip to Mars will involve a lot of gardening.

Hmmm. I can just hear it-

“Hey Bob! Where d’ya s’pose them sonsabitches at Kennedy put that g*ddamned shovel? ”

“Simmer down, Annie. For the third time, it’s behind the weed-eater next to the inertial navigation unit. Shee-yit!”

Given the commercial interests in building manned-flight rated hardware, are we really being honest with ourselves on the question of man-vs-robot? In other words, could we spend less and learn more from robotic space hardware?

Friends connected to NASA tell me that monies that were once available for activities not directly related to manned spaceflight are drying up. NASA is preparing for a return trip to the moon. We’re going to the moon again, but without any fanfare or sense of purpose. The public is largely disengaged and uncompelled. The public is disengaged because no one has heard the purpose articulated.

A country that has interest in an ongoing moon station will have to come up with more than just stunt or prestige value.  Huge inputs of national treasure will be committed to the enterprise.  Commercial interests should be folded in to produce goods and services in order to recover costs in some fashion.  The return of material products from the moon will have a very large transportation cost per kilogram.

The production of intellectual property, information, broadcasting services, or remote sensing will likely be the most attractive commercial products. Actually, the moon would be a good place for a Bank. Imagine a Swiss-style bank with safe deposit boxes located on the moon.  How much more secure a location for small treasures and damning evidence could there be? 

Similar ideas have been put into practice, starting with pirate radio of all things.  The Principality of Sealand was started as a micro-nation on a retired gun platform off the east coast of England. The plan initially was to have a remote location for pirate radio broadcasts.  Today, Sealand is the location of a secure data sanctuary called Havenco. The idea of a remote, encrypted data sanctuary was the theme of the book Cryptonomicon.

Naturally, other nations have voiced disapproval of the data sanctuary concept, citing potential for money laundering and other criminal activity. Havenco may find itself cutoff from the telecommunication network that keeps it alive.

The moon would be a great site for off-shore banking activity. Nobody owns the moon. It is outside the boundaries of all the jurisdictions on earth.  Funds could be electronically transferred to a remotely operated bank on the moon.  Hell, you could leave the doors unlocked and forget the vault.  At minimum, all you need to do is land a computer, a dish for data transfer, and some solar panels for power.  Once a year a service visit can be made by LunaBank people to service the equipment and swap deposit boxes. 

Aphorism #114. If you want to make money, you have to serve the people or institutions who have the money.

Eventually, though, there may well be jurisdictions on the moon. One day, the moon will be partitioned, so the last thing a LunaBanker wants is to suddenly be a part of the Soviet Union Russia or China on the moon. Or nearly any nationality, for that matter. The Swiss may be preferable, owing to their favorable history with this kind of business.

This scheme is very simplistic.  It will require more thought than that presented here and the criminal potential will have to be prevented. The question of what minimally constitutes a “Bank” and its relation to nationality naturally arises in this discussion. No doubt, there is more to it than my simple scribblings. But the point of this essay is that we as a spacefaring society need to start discussing this kind of activity and not just leave it to a cloister of specialists.