Rockets, Space Stations and Space Probes, by Any Other Name (ContributorNetwork)
Discovery News points out an often overlooked problem the modern NASA has created for itself. The names that it gives for its spacecraft are so uninspiring as to put people to sleep rather than inspire.
The prime example is how "Space Station Freedom" was renamed "The International Space Station." The first name was inspiring, relating as it did the first outpost of humankind in space to the quality of freedom, something that is universally loved by common people, though perhaps not by all governments.
The "Space Launch System," the heavy lift rocket that NASA has now agreed with Congress it will build, has a name that only a government bureaucrat would love. The previous heavy lift rocket proposal was called "Ares," harkening back to the Apollo era custom of naming spacecraft after mythic gods and heroes, not to mention pointing to the ultimate destination of NASA's exploration efforts, Mars.
Discovery News suggests that the SLS be renamed "Zeus." The "Zeus V" does have a ring to it, though reviving Ares or even Saturn, after the rocket that sent men to the moon, also has possibilities.
The space shuttle orbiter fleet was named after great sailing vessels of the past, "Columbia," "Challenger," "Discovery," "Atlantis," and "Endeavour." The command and lunar modules of the Apollo missions to the moon had either grand sounding named (Apollo 11: "Columbia" and "Eagle") or else names motivated more by whimsy and pop culture (Apollo 10: "Charlie Brown" and Snoopy.")
Don Draper, the 1960s advertising man in the TV show "Mad Men" might say that it is all in the branding. A good brand name goes a long way toward selling a product, whether it is soap or a spaceship. "Orion" sounds much grander than "Multi Purpose Crewed Vehicle." "Ares" is better than "Space Launch System."
Frank Luntz, the author of "Words that Work," points out that conveying a message depends more on what people hear than on what one is saying. People receive messages based on their prism of emotions and beliefs. Luntz's principles might be applicable toward selling the space program itself, though that is beyond the scope of this piece. But naming space craft is something that using "words that work" would benefit from.
Words like "Resolution," "Endeavour," "Discovery," and "Voyager" have a greater tendency to inspire and uplift than "Grail," "Spirit," "Opportunity," and "Cassini."
"Hubble" is a case of a name, the one used for the first optical space telescope, that started out uninspiring, but gained its own cache due to the awesome images that it has brought over the years. Perhaps, taking a page from movie sequels, the "James Webb Space Telescope" should be renamed "Hubble II."
Private industry knows the virtues of brand names. SpaceX has named its launch vehicle "Falcon" and its space ship "Dragon," both after creatures that soar. Virgin Galactic (itself a cool name for a company) has named its first commercial space ship "VSS Enterprise," after the famous television star ship.
So, to paraphrase Shakespeare, would a spaceship, say "Apollo" go to the moon less heroically if it had been called "the Manned Lunar Vehicle?" No, but it would have been far less cool. And if anything, space exploration needs to be cool if people are going to pay for it.
Mark R. Whittington is the author of Children of Apollo and The Last Moonwalker. He has written on space subjects for a variety of periodicals, including The Houston Chronicle, The Washington Post, USA Today, the L.A. Times, and The Weekly.