Document Text Contents
Page 79
74
Mars like Mariner. These probes would orbit the planets for a period of time before moving on to
another, and, while in orbit, would launch a lander that could analyze the planet’s surface.
Although Voyager would eventually come to fruition in the 1980s to explore the outer solar
system, this was not feasible in the 1970s due to serious budget constraints.
27
In the late 1960s,
particularly after the Apollo 11 moon landing, Congress began a trend of constraining NASA’s
budget, forcing the institution to limit its ambitious projects. The government had denied NASA
funding for Voyager multiple times in the late 1960s, and, as late as 1967, “beyond 1969, NASA
had no approved planetary flights and few scientific flights of any kind.”
28
NASA scientists
anticipated reductions in personnel that would hamper the connections between NASA and
university scientists. This budget constraint appeared like a helpless scenario to some scientists,
as they realized that “the fate of a new round of proposals for planetary exploration may turn
more on events in Vietnam than on anything the space agency and its friends in Congress and the
scientific community can do to refurbish NASA’s image and explain its goals.”
29
Space
initiatives simply were not as high of a priority as ongoing struggles within American foreign
policy. Instead of Voyager, NASA decided to focus on a single Martian expedition that would
land on its surface which would cost half as much as the planned Voyager mission.
30
NASA
authorized the mission as the next major project in 1969 and requested funding from Congress
for Viking for the 1970 budget that Congress did approve.
Throughout the Mariner missions, some scientists noted that the next, logical step after
was a lander, and information collected by the Mariner missions, particularly Mariner IX, were
27
Voyagers 1 and 2 would flyby outer solar system planets such as Jupiter, Saturn, and more in the 1980s, providing
important early examinations of these worlds.
28
Luther Carter, “Planetary Exploration: How to Get by the Budget-cutters?” Science 158 (1967), 1025.
29
Ibid, 1028.
30
“Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Space Science and Applications of the Committee on Science and
Astronautics,” U.S. Government Printing Office, November 21-22 1974, 14.
Page 155
150
Viking-Mars: Anatomy of Success. Hampton, Virginia: National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Langley Research Center, 1978.
Waldrop, M. Mitchell. “Boland, NASA at Odds over Launch of Mars Observer,” Science 235
(February 13, 1987): 743.
-----. “Budget Decision Threatens Planetary Plans.” Science 230 (November 1, 1985): 526.
-----. “Planetary Science in Extremis.” Science 214 (December 18, 1981): 1322-1324.
-----. “Planetary Science up from the Ashes?” Science 218 (November 12, 1982): 665-666.
Walter, Malcolm. The Search for Life on Mars. Cambridge, MA.: Perseus Books, 1999.
Washburn, Mark. Mars at Last! New York, New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1977.
Weaver, Kenneth. “Journey to Mars.” National Geographic, March 1973.
Weston, Charles. “A Strategy for Mars.” American Scientist 53, no. 4 (1965): 495-507.
Whipple, Fred. “Great Achievements in Space Exploration.” Bulletin of the American Academy
of Arts and Sciences 35 (May 1982): 30-40.
Wilber, Charles. “Biologists’ View of Mars.” Science 149, no. 3680 (Jul 9., 1965): 135.
-----. “Exploration in Space.” BioScience 14, no. 8 (Aug., 1964): 30-34. Accessed
Wilford, John Noble. “NASA Loses Communication With Mars Observer.” The New York
Times, August 23, 1993.
Wilford, John Noble. “Scientists are still of Two Minds about Life on Mars.” The New York
Times, November 10, 1976.
Winters, Jeffrey. “A Survey of Ancient Mars.” Discover, July 1998.
W. K. “New Vegetation Found on Mars.” New York Times, September 25, 1955.
Wolfe, Audra. Competing with the Soviets: Science, Technology, and the State in Cold War
America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012.
74
Mars like Mariner. These probes would orbit the planets for a period of time before moving on to
another, and, while in orbit, would launch a lander that could analyze the planet’s surface.
Although Voyager would eventually come to fruition in the 1980s to explore the outer solar
system, this was not feasible in the 1970s due to serious budget constraints.
27
In the late 1960s,
particularly after the Apollo 11 moon landing, Congress began a trend of constraining NASA’s
budget, forcing the institution to limit its ambitious projects. The government had denied NASA
funding for Voyager multiple times in the late 1960s, and, as late as 1967, “beyond 1969, NASA
had no approved planetary flights and few scientific flights of any kind.”
28
NASA scientists
anticipated reductions in personnel that would hamper the connections between NASA and
university scientists. This budget constraint appeared like a helpless scenario to some scientists,
as they realized that “the fate of a new round of proposals for planetary exploration may turn
more on events in Vietnam than on anything the space agency and its friends in Congress and the
scientific community can do to refurbish NASA’s image and explain its goals.”
29
Space
initiatives simply were not as high of a priority as ongoing struggles within American foreign
policy. Instead of Voyager, NASA decided to focus on a single Martian expedition that would
land on its surface which would cost half as much as the planned Voyager mission.
30
NASA
authorized the mission as the next major project in 1969 and requested funding from Congress
for Viking for the 1970 budget that Congress did approve.
Throughout the Mariner missions, some scientists noted that the next, logical step after
was a lander, and information collected by the Mariner missions, particularly Mariner IX, were
27
Voyagers 1 and 2 would flyby outer solar system planets such as Jupiter, Saturn, and more in the 1980s, providing
important early examinations of these worlds.
28
Luther Carter, “Planetary Exploration: How to Get by the Budget-cutters?” Science 158 (1967), 1025.
29
Ibid, 1028.
30
“Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Space Science and Applications of the Committee on Science and
Astronautics,” U.S. Government Printing Office, November 21-22 1974, 14.
Page 155
150
Viking-Mars: Anatomy of Success. Hampton, Virginia: National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Langley Research Center, 1978.
Waldrop, M. Mitchell. “Boland, NASA at Odds over Launch of Mars Observer,” Science 235
(February 13, 1987): 743.
-----. “Budget Decision Threatens Planetary Plans.” Science 230 (November 1, 1985): 526.
-----. “Planetary Science in Extremis.” Science 214 (December 18, 1981): 1322-1324.
-----. “Planetary Science up from the Ashes?” Science 218 (November 12, 1982): 665-666.
Walter, Malcolm. The Search for Life on Mars. Cambridge, MA.: Perseus Books, 1999.
Washburn, Mark. Mars at Last! New York, New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1977.
Weaver, Kenneth. “Journey to Mars.” National Geographic, March 1973.
Weston, Charles. “A Strategy for Mars.” American Scientist 53, no. 4 (1965): 495-507.
Whipple, Fred. “Great Achievements in Space Exploration.” Bulletin of the American Academy
of Arts and Sciences 35 (May 1982): 30-40.
Wilber, Charles. “Biologists’ View of Mars.” Science 149, no. 3680 (Jul 9., 1965): 135.
-----. “Exploration in Space.” BioScience 14, no. 8 (Aug., 1964): 30-34. Accessed
Wilford, John Noble. “NASA Loses Communication With Mars Observer.” The New York
Times, August 23, 1993.
Wilford, John Noble. “Scientists are still of Two Minds about Life on Mars.” The New York
Times, November 10, 1976.
Winters, Jeffrey. “A Survey of Ancient Mars.” Discover, July 1998.
W. K. “New Vegetation Found on Mars.” New York Times, September 25, 1955.
Wolfe, Audra. Competing with the Soviets: Science, Technology, and the State in Cold War
America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012.
