F
R

2
-
2
0
0
2

SPACEFLIGHT PLANS IN EUROPE FACE BUDGET CRUNCH

By Matthias Gründer

Europe aspires to a leading position in the areas of space science and technology, Earth observation, telecommunications, satellite navigation, launch vehicle technology, manned space flight and planet research. So we are told in the documents approved by the responsible ministers of the 15 ESA member states and Canada at the recent meeting of the Council.

But what does "a leading position" mean? Now that the Russians have dropped out of the cosmic race to all intents and purposes there are only three centres of spaceflight left in the world to pursue such ambitious goals, the USA, Japan and Europe, and the USA is extremely unlikely to be ousted from the number one position in the foreseeable future, despite all the budget cuts at NASA.

That the 15 ESA member states which, together with their associate Canada, include five of the G-7 states, should be reduced to being compared with Japan is sad enough. But that now - at least in Germany - all visions have gone by the board and space technology is only worthy of promotion if it can express itself in numbers, shows just how profoundly German thirst for knowledge and inventive spirit is being gagged by a new generation of politicians who seem more like bookkeepers than farsighted leaders.

The fact that Germany is the second largest contributor to ESA after France cannot obscure the reality that the culturally ingrained human drive to increase the pool of knowledge would fall by the wayside in the future, were it not for the scientific programme, in which all the member states have to contribute in proportion to their gross national product. And in manned spaceflight Germany's role is particularly sad .

There is a reluctance here to admit that the German contributions were largely agreed by the predecessors of the present government, which actually begrudges having to pay them. In other words, Germany will contribute towards the cost of building the International Space Station (ISS) but not towards its operating costs. But what reasonable person builds a new house in the landscape if not to use it?

The USA is not exactly indifferent when it comes to squabbling over the ISS. After an independent panel headed by the former CEO of Martin-Marietta, Thomas Young, issued a damning report criticising management and cost planning at NASA, the US government proposed slimming down the ISS, reducing the number of Shuttle flights per year and trimming back the on-board research programme.

All this occurred without any consultation with the other partners in the ISS programme, and now, although ESA is prepared to pay its share of the bill, 60% of the funds earmarked are to be withheld until NASA has finally confirmed its original promises. Bleak prospects indeed for manned space flight.

Even so, one reasonable proposal was carried through by Germany in Edinburgh, namely, regarding the future industrialisation of the Ariane programme. This proposal was seeking to reverse a ridiculous situation in which customers and industrial partners of Arianespace were not allowed to contact it directly but had to go through the French space agency, CNES. In the future there will now be only one industrial prime contractor in the form of an EADS subsidiary.

Even the French Research Minister agreed to this proposal, albeit gnashing his teeth, but it remains to be seen how far the Edinburgh resolutions will be carried through so soon before the elections in France. One thing is certain, namely that the influential CNES will not relinquish its role without a struggle.

And finally there are still problems over implementation of the European satellite navigation system, Galileo. ESA has released its contribution, and Germany would like to lead the project. Yet, almost four weeks after Edinburgh, the EU transport ministers had still not been able to agree a common financing concept. The fact that the finance ministers have already registered their veto has not helped.

Despite all these problems, the position at the Federal Ministry of Research is that Edinburgh "paved the way for the biggest reorganisation of European spaceflight since the foundation of ESA". Maybe that is true as far as the bookkeepers are concerned.

From page 50 of FLUG REVUE 2/2002