Companies Playing Key Role In NASA Moon Plans

 

Funding Insufficient For Balanced Program

While NASA is confident that any technical issues can be overcome easily, perhaps the most difficult challenge facing Project Constellation is the budget.
Under its COTS program, NASA awarded nearly $500 million in contracts in mid-2006 to Rocketplane Kistler and Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) to develop launch vehicle systems for both crew and cargo in support of the International Space Station, and in April, the announced a three-year extension to 2011 of its current arrangement with Russia’s Roskosmos involving crew and supply missions to station. This drew an immediate reaction from agency and industry observers — some see this move as a sound and logical decision, while other view it as a sign that NASA remains skeptical that a COTS alternative will emerge by 2010 when shuttle flights are expected to terminate.

NASA also includes human research, lunar precursor robotics and exploration technology development under the exploration program. The human research program focuses space life science research on the areas posing the highest medical risks to astronaut crews performing long duration missions. The lunar precursor robotics program missions — the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite — are scheduled to be launched in October 2008 to map and survey the surface of the moon, identifying the best landing zones and shedding new light on the lunar environment and lunar resources. Exploration technology development involves many future human and robotic spacecraft technologies ranging from propulsion, life support, thermal control and protection systems to power storage and generation systems.

In fiscal year 2008, NASA is requesting $3 billion for all the Exploration Systems programs as well as International Space Station research in support of exploration. The funding request rises throughout the next four years, increasing to $4.3 billion in 2009 and $4.8 billion in 2010 before jumping to $8.7 billion in 2011 and $9.1 billion in 2012.

The House received a letter in mid-2006 prior to the awarding of the Orion CEV contract to Lockheed Martin from the General Accountability Office openly questioned the soundness of NASA’s existing CEV acquisition strategy.

“NASA’s current acquisition strategy for the [Crew Exploration Vehicle] ... commits the government to a long-term product development effort before establishing a sound business case. … (NASA) will not have the elements of a sound business case in place until the project level [program design review] in fiscal year 2008. Awarding a contract for design, development, production, and sustainment of the project as NASA has planned places the [Crew Exploration Vehicle] project at increased risk of cost growth, schedule delays, and performance shortfalls,” the GAO wrote.

Bart Gordon, chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology, says the funding plan sets reasonable priorities in the near term, but the need for billions of dollars to support and sustain Project Constellation leaves the three other NASA human exploration support programs underfunded. “The funding is insufficient for a balanced program of human and robotic exploration and, at this point, is mainly focused on development of the [Crew Exploration Vehicle] and [Crew Launch Vehicle] to replace the space shuttle’s crew carrying capability,” he says. “The mismatch between the tasks that NASA has been given and the resources being provided is a significant concern. The ability of the exploration initiative to compete for scarce resources when the administration changes will also be a challenge. From a technical standpoint, the initiative involves significant systems engineering and integration challenges, and the [United States] has not built human systems to go beyond low Earth orbit since 1972.”

Boston-based space industry consultant Charles Lurio says while an affordable and sustainable human space exploration program can be put together today, NASA’s Project program is neither affordable nor sustainable and calls for far greater use of commercial resources. “Constellation perpetuates the nationalized industry model of spaceflight,” he says. “NASA should be buying all exploration system vehicles from the private sector under fixed price, incremental milestone contracts. NASA is burning billions creating its own inherently overpriced transportation systems exclusively to lift those exploration components to orbit.”

Author and space expert Mark Whittington sees things a bit differently and credits NASA for its overall commercial-friendly approach in this instance. “Think of NASA’s exploration efforts as being like Lewis and Clark, blazing the trail for future commercial pioneers. The most immediate effect is to divert government space efforts away from low Earth orbit, making an opportunity for companies like SpaceX and Bigelow to fill the void,” says Whittington. “NASA is actually encouraging this process with the COTS program, which has the space agency investing in commercial launchers with the view of using them to resupply the [International Space Station]. The COTS program could be replicated for enabling commercial resupply of a future lunar base.”

The commercial space sector should feel the gentle tug of the moon, but be cautious at the same time. We are heading in that direction, and yet when we will actually get there remains open to question.

• FAA Space Report Shows China Surpassing U.S. Launch Market Output
• SS/L, NASA to Demonstrate Laser Communications on Upcoming Satellite
• ATK Chief Technologist: Orbital Debris Shield Receiving Rave Reviews from NASA
• NASA Sees Private Sector as Key to Escaping LEO
• SpaceX’s Musk Testifies Before U.S. Congress on NASA COTS, CCDev Progress

• The Bush Space Vision--A Big Splash, But No Cash
• Moon Plans Place Strain On Budget
• Satellite Solutions Emerge For Disaster Response
• Image Is Everything: Satellites Zoom In On Target
• Early Uplinkers: Doing Wheels And Dishes