F
R

2
-
2
0
0
1

EUROPES MANNED SPACEFLIGHT PLANS OUTLINED

FLUG REVUE: The ESA Council at ministerial level and the EU Research Council resolved on 16 November 2000 to work together more closely in combining forces and competences. What are the implications of this for manned spaceflight in Europe?

Feustel-Büechl: This decision affects all the subject areas in which ESA is actively engaged. ESA and the EU are to move closer together, and ESA is to become the space agency of the European Union.

A concrete example of such co-operation is the European Astronaut Centre EAC. In March 1998 we proposed that national astronaut activities should be transferred to a central structure. This has worked out very well, to everyone's satisfaction. As a result there is a single manned spaceflight programme covering the whole of Europe.

FLUG REVUE: Does this mean that ESA astronauts who are employed primarily on European missions also carry out national missions?

Feustel-Büechl: Although all the European astronauts are all concentrated in a single organisation, we have not demanded a "single ESA astronaut corps". We make little distinction here between national and international activities.

All our astronauts fulfil both roles and for this reason we have absolutely no problem with any of them performing national tasks or even national missions. As long as this takes place within the framework of the agreed common rules, it is fine. In any case it is a good thing that we should learn slowly to harmonise regional and European interests. Astronauts are icon-like figures for us all and they transport our message - that we each have a nationality but hopefully will soon become ardent Europeans as well.

FLUG REVUE: In that respect you are a kindred spirit of Professor Kröll, head of the German Aerospace Centre. He too has long been in favour of Europeanising the institutions. But doesn't the transformation of ESA into an EU agency mean giving up national competences?

Feustel-Büechl: Naturally I can't speak here for the strategy of ESA as a whole, but ESA and the EU will develop a common spaceflight policy. A classical example is navigation, where the EU defines the regulatory framework while ESA builds and installs the system. Both ministerial councils are agreed here as to the split in responsibilities - which isn't difficult since the EU doesn't have any expertise in spaceflight.

It is the national institutions which are more of a problem. Professor Kröll's "Union of the centres" as an instrument of Europeanisation is a very reasonable idea. It promotes the development of joint responsibility for future common structures and programmes. We need to push this forward so that eventually we can achieve complete integration. On both sides there remain fears and worries which must be carefully broken down.

FLUG REVUE:Despite everything surely it is a problem that the primary driver behind the willingness to combine forces internationally is financial necessity, or will this necessity automatically bring co-operation in its wake?

Feustel-Büechl: If we're going to philosophise - in the old days war was the father of all things, and if today it is a case of money being the father of all things, then I am quite happy with that state of affairs. We may still have disputes over money but we are no longer killing each other.

But of course there are other points to consider. Concerns about the environment are also bringing people together without financial pressures being the primary motivation. Or look at the way the Russians have been collaborating on the ISS. Of course we did hope that this would result in savings, but even more important were the political and cultural considerations.

The disintegration of the eastern bloc has also increased the willingness in the West to work together more closely and more effectively. One of the notable consequences of this positive development is that - despite all the fighting over money - the same engineers who some years ago were still developing weapons to be deployed against each other have joined forces in thinking about how to build a space station or send people to Mars. That is fantastic.

FLUG REVUE:What will be next after the ISS? A second station or a flight to Mars, a change of spaceflight strategy so to speak?

Feustel-Büechl: I can well imagine a second station. Ariane too has developed into a large family. I am quite sure that we will learn from building and operating the present station how to upgrade and improve everything.

The ISS still has a number of development stages to go through which we are not even in a position to identify today. In 20 years' time we are bound to have to replace some of the equipment, and perhaps then the ISS will also serve as a "cosmic station" for flights to the moon or to Mars. A "customer service centre" for the maintenance of orbiting satellites is another option, or perhaps a combination of the two. As a springboard for new projects it definitely has great prospects.

Up to now the Europeans have booked one shuttle flight every few years and every year had their own payload in space for around 10 or 14 days. With "Columbus" we will have a permanent laboratory in space from 2004, with around 100 times the research capability we have had up to now. That is a huge quantum leap, and I expect both from the scientific and commercial viewpoints a huge step forward in the benefits which spaceflight brings to us all.

FLUG REVUE:16 astronauts are currently undergoing training at the European Astronaut Centre, and the Head of the EAC, Professor Ernst Messerschmid, is saying, "Anyone who tries can fly." But statistically each of them can expect only 1.2 flights to the ISS. Isn't that too little?

Feustel-Büechl: Yes, it is very little. We are legally entitled to 19 flights to the space station, which are guaranteed, but that doesn't include Umberto Guidoni, who will fly on board a Shuttle in April. His involvement stems from an agreement between the USA and Italy on the delivery of components to the station which provided that an Italian astronaut should be taken along.

We continue as before to work closely with the Americans, and there will also be parallel Shuttle flights which don't go to the ISS. Here we expect that European astronauts will be given the odd chance to fly along. But we are also negotiating with the Russians about extra missions, both short taxi flights of up to 14 days' duration and full three-month flights. This would significantly extend our opportunities. In any case we want to significantly improve the flying opportunities for our astronauts. On the other hand our astronaut corps is currently too strong, so we won't be recruiting any new candidates in the foreseeable future.

From page 64 of FLUG REVUE 2/2001