
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: THURSDAY, July 5, 1990                   TAG: 9007050189
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-8   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

A BAD WEEK

WHEN U.S. astronauts returned from mankind's first lunar landing in July 1969, President Nixon proclaimed it "the greatest week since the Creation." It was certainly a great week for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the cap to a long string of successes. By propelling Americans ahead of the Soviets in the space race, NASA came to be known as the can-do agency, ultimate professionals in a pioneering science.

The glory days and the greatest weeks are long past. Last week was one of NASA's worst - not as bad as when the shuttle Challenger exploded after launch in January 1986, but bad enough to put another large tear in the agency's tattered reputation.

First, NASA acknowledged that the ballyhooed Hubble space telescope has a defective mirror that makes the instrument nearsighted. A few days later, NASA announced it is grounding its space-shuttle fleet indefinitely until it can locate and fix potentially dangerous fuel leaks.

The latter, probably, is only a mechanical problem that can be remedied with additional time - although it must be fixed within a few weeks if the flight schedule is to be maintained. More embarrassing is the Hubble malfunction.

The $1.5 billion telescope was supposed to give humans their clearest picture of the skies since the telescope was invented. Unlike its earthbound cousins, this one would not have to peer through atmospheric distortions. Alas, it brought along its own distortion, the result of a minuscule error in grinding a mirror. Like a myopic person, Hubble can manage only a fuzzy view of the stars.

NASA says a space flight in 1993 can fit Hubble with spectacles. The contractor that ground the mirror made a bad mistake, but NASA compounded it by not discovering the error. The agency left itself vulnerable for such slip-ups by dividing responsibility for the instrument between two NASA centers, which contended with each other on design and testing. Moreover, says space historian Robert W. Smith, NASA cut corners on testing because of budget constraints.

Budgets were tight not because Congress was stingy, but because NASA had chosen, for the nth time, to go for a big, showy project instead of launching a series of smaller 'scopes first. NASA sold Congress on Hubble with an unrealistically low cost estimate, knowing it could ask for more funds later and that a single big project would be harder to cut than several smaller ones.

If that situation sounds familiar, it should. In 1984 NASA came to the legislators with a plan for an orbiting space station, Freedom, for a mere $8 billion. In six years, costs have gone into orbit. The latest estimate for building and operating the station is $120 billion. A big project; and given NASA's performance in the past few years, the only guarantee it carries is for a monster price tag.

by CNB