FLUG REVUE August 2004: NASA has new tasks

NASA'S ROLE SET TO CHANGE

By Matthias Gründer

Reactions to President Bush's spaceflight initiative announced in February 2004 have ranged from euphoric approval to doubts as to its feasibility. An independent commission was tasked with investigating how NASA can implement Bush's vision.

Bush's plans assume that the remaining space Shuttles will be back in service in 2005, but that when the International Space Station is finally completed in 2010, they will finally be sent into retirement. At the same time, unmanned missions to the moon are to be launched from 2008 and manned missions from 2015. The crew exploration vehicle (CEV) necessary for this purpose is to be ready to use for unmanned flights from 2007 and from 2013 for manned flights, initially serving as a crew rescue vehicle (CRV) for the ISS. The pictures on these pages (to be found in the German article) show a Lockheed Martin design for the first stage of development of a CEV, designated the Orbital Space Plane (OSP).

Between the retirement of the Shuttle and the earliest date at which a manned CEV could be ready to orbit the Earth for the first time, there is thus a gap of at least three years. Past experience, on the other hand, suggests that this period is likely to end up being considerably longer. To put this in perspective, in the case of the programme launch of the Space Shuttle in 1972, those responsible assumed that it would be built and able to undertake its first mission just six years later, but in reality the first orbiter did not fly until 12 April 1981. Numerous technical problems, and especially unresolved problems over the financing of the project, still lie ahead of the development engineers, so that the USA is likely to be dependent on its international partners to transport its astronauts into space for more than three years.

RESEARCH ON THE MOON FROM 2017

If the ISS is completed in 2010 in line with present plans, which depends on the first Shuttle since the Columbia catastrophe actually resuming operation next year, then it will be 16 years later than President Reagan's original plan formulated in 1984. President Bush wants the Americans to terminate their funding of and involvement in the ISS in 2017, in order to shift the focus of their research to the moon. It is hard to believe today that the USA will be willing to give up its presence in Earth orbit, which was such a struggle to achieve. But if it were to do so, then responsibility for the ISS would pass to the USA's contractual partners, who would then be dependent on the Russian Soyuz capsules or a possible successor to cover their transportation requirements.

Meanwhile, on instruction from the White House, NASA's plans to found an ISS Research Institute have also been shelved. The Bush administration would actually prefer to abandon the ISS today than tomorrow and use the resources freed up to realise the President's vision, if only the USA were not bound by international treaties. The ISS Research Institute is the second major loss for the space agency after the cancellation of the Hubble service missions.

In this respect, the prospects of implementing Lockheed Martin's OSP look pretty bleak, as it would be too expensive to finance access to the ISS privately and the period of its effective use would be too short. At the same time, in its present configuration as CEV, it is not expandable. Thus, Bush has imposed a timetable on his successors that is steeped in uncertainty, yet it is they who will have to find the money to pay for future space travel. To pay for it, they will need the support of the taxpayer, who at the end of the day will determine whether this venture is necessary, albeit expensive, or simply an unnecessary luxury trip.

Meanwhile, on 30 January 2004 the President appointed a commission headed by Edward Aldridge to come up with proposals as to how the President's vision can be transformed into reality. The main focuses of the hearings and research conducted over the next four months were as follows:

to formulate a scientific timetable for manned and unmanned missions to the moon and possibly beyond;
to come up with proposals as to how to develop technologies and strategies for exploiting the raw materials to be found on the celestial bodies with a view to propagating human life in the solar system;
to define criteria for the selection of future destinations in space;
to address organisational issues over the long-term management of space research activities;
to identify effective ways of including private industry and international partners;
to promote space companies in a way that will inspire America's youth to aspire to a scientific or engineering career;
and to implement the vision within the financial constraints.

These constraints were set, at least for the coming financial year, with the publication of the NASA budget at the beginning of February, thus enabling the agency to make firm plans for the near future.

INDUSTRY IS GEARING UP FOR NEW MARKETS

While the commission members were conferring, industry also responded. The Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company founded a new Space Exploration division to organise its future spaceflight activities. Boeing established a Space Exploration Systems office and an Earth Science Applications office. Shortly afterwards, space companies and educational organisations in the USA founded a “Coalition for Space Exploration” dedicated to the task of mobilising the public to back the vision, something which should really have been the job of the government.

The 60-page commission report published on 16 June would bring extensive structural changes, including the closure of whole divisions of NASA, if its recommendations were to be implemented. It was stated quite frankly that anything that was not an issue of US sovereignty or concerned manned spaceflight should be handed over to private industry, because the latter worked more effectively and at lower cost. NASA, whose organisation has not kept up with the times, should retire from Earth orbit and relinquish the field to private investors.

Industry is rejoicing, but the research establishments are voicing criticism: they argue that it will be virtually impossible to attract sufficient private capital for high-risk space projects unless an adequate return can be guaranteed. And finally, the US astronauts threw in their weight by announcing they were not prepared to fly into space in some vehicle mounted on an Atlas or Delta rocket as long as these could offer only a 97.5% guarantee of safety. Even the ageing Shuttles are able to offer a 99.1% guarantee!

The Americans must be aware that their current partners will not be prepared to stay behind in the space station while they themselves undertake the next step to the moon. Bush's vision currently speaks only of challenges for America, yet Europe, Japan and Russia have their own plans for Mars flights, while even India and China have their sights set on the moon.

It is high time that all the plans were co-ordinated, and the Americans do not have to be the first to embark on every first step in future space research. The representatives of space agencies of other countries who were questioned by the Commission on the initiative have been making such points. Even small kindergarten children are reluctant to play with the child who always wants to be the leader. The cosmos is no place for races, and manned space flight, with all its costs and risks, must cease to be a competition between nations. The USA has presented one possible route into the future, but the way forward depends on international co-operation.

From page 70 of FLUG REVUE 8/2004

Last updated 8 July 2004

FLUG REVUE, Ubierstr. 83, 53173 Bonn, Germany