Companies Playing Key Role In NASA Moon Plans

When President Bush unveiled his Vision for Space Exploration in early 2004, he declared that the United States would return to the moon, with a series of robotic missions paving the way for future human exploration by 2020. Not all of these planned lunar projects will make it off the drawing board, but private companies will play a key role in NASA’s plans, and tangible returns on investment might materialize more quickly than expected.

“New human spaceflight development of this magnitude, such as the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, occurs once in a generation. The next five years are a critical period in our nation’s space flight efforts,” NASA Administrator Michael Griffin testified in March 2007 before the House Committee on Science and Technology on the status of NASA’s human exploration programs.

When it comes to NASA’s emerging plans for human exploration of space, the future is full of promise for commercial space companies, according to the Coalition for Space Exploration, a collection of space companies and advocacy groups which supports the Vision of Space Exploration. “The exploration of space will undoubtedly provide opportunities for the commercial space sector as human outposts are established on the moon and people ultimately venture on to Mars and other destinations,” says Joe Mayer, chair of the Coalition’s public affairs team and a Houston-based manager for business development for Boeing Co. “Commercial space will develop, as it has in the past, as market conditions warrant and as government funding constraints drive a push to secure the most cost-effective space products and services available.”

Multiple Business Opportunities

Project Constellation, the name for NASA’s plans to develop the technology needed to return to the moon, consists of the Commercial Orbital Transportation System (COTS) demonstration program to resupply the International Space Station, the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle and its accompanying Crew Launch Vehicle known as Ares 1 and the heavy-lift Ares 5 rocket for carrying lunar infrastructure and supplies.

Orion consists of a crew module for astronauts and cargo, a service module that provides propulsion and electrical power, a spacecraft adapter that bonds Orion to the launch vehicle and a launch abort system designed to carry Orion and its crew away from a rocket in the event of an emergency.
Lockheed Martin Corp. was awarded the prime contract for the program in August 2006, but in April, NASA rolled back the delivery date of the first Orion space capsule from 2011 to late 2013, adding $385 million to Orion’s total cost. Its first flight with astronauts is scheduled to take place in 2015.

“Orion will develop the capability for long-term stays on the moon in preparation for future exploration of Mars,” says Wayne Dixon, Orion program manager at Phoenix-based Honeywell Aerospace, an Orion subcontractor. “While the Apollo program had an astronaut remain in the command module during lunar landing, Orion will not. The Orion vehicle will have to be capable of operating without a human pilot and support docking of the lunar module upon return.”

Utah-based Alliant Techsystems, Inc. (ATK) is the prime contractor for the first stage of the Ares 1 rocket, leading the design, development, testing and evaluation as well as overseeing early test flights and initial operation. ATK supports Orion as well with the development and initial units for the launch abort motor. Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne is the prime contractor for the crew launch vehicle upper stage engine. For Ares 5, ATK is the prime contractor of the reusable solid rocket boosters, while Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne is the prime contractor for both the J-2X upper stage engine cluster and the twin RS-68 main engines.

The Ares 1 rocket will leverage technology and hardware from both the space shuttle and the Saturn 5 rocket, says Mike Kahn, ATK’s vice president of Space Launch Systems. “The challenge will be to control the requirements creep that typically occurs early in a program, and minimize changes that do not offer reliability/safety improvements or lower cost,” he says. “From a political standpoint, minimizing the gap between shuttle and Ares is important for a smooth transition and funding plays a key role in this.”

NASA plans to award the contract for the upper stage of the Ares 1 rocket, later this summer. ATK is partnering with Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne to compete against a Boeing team that includes Hamilton Sundstrand, Moog Inc., Northrop Grumman Corp., Orion Propulsion Inc., Summa Technology Inc., the United Space Alliance and the United Launch Alliance. At the same time, Honeywell is seeking a separate contract to support NASA with design, development and production of instrument unit avionics on the Ares 1.

The wide range of technologies being developed under Project Constellation is creating opportunities for companies. NASA’s proposal requirement for the Ares 1 crew launch vehicle upper stage procurement stipulates that 17.3 percent of the contract work go to small businesses, but Boeing is exceeding that requirement. “NASA selected Hamilton Sundstrand and Moog for advanced development contracts. Since NASA had already chosen them, we brought those folks on our team to inform NASA’s design along with us,” says Ed Memi, Houston-based spokesperson for Boeing’s Space Exploration unit. “Our small businesses teammates have enabled us to perform in an excellent manner, manage our costs and Boeing is employing similar strategies with other space-based efforts, including the competition for the Ares 1 upper stage production and instrument unit avionics contracts.”

In 2006, Boeing increased its total number of NASA Mentor Protégé Agreements to 25. “Our supplier outreach efforts include small business workshops that expose local small businesses to our programs in the areas in which they reside,” says Memi.

‘No Technical Issues’

Such complex development programs often fall victim to technical problems, and in mid May, details began surfacing about the Crew Exploration Vehicle, including an effort to reduce weight. The latest modification involves a 1,000-pound reduction in the module’s weight. NASA also announced the elimination of the pressurized cargo vehicle in April and two-year extension of the Orion delivery date to 2013. Further changes could be made following a program review and strategic planning session planned over the summer.
 
Despite these adjustments, Skip Hatfield, NASA’s Orion project manager at Johnson Space Center in Houston, declared that there were “absolutely no technical issues right now. It is strictly a matter of winding the program up with the overall schedules and the funding that we have available to do it.”
As the multinational Global Strategy for Exploration works its way to final draft stage and as a Space Summit at the White House becomes a reality later on this year — perhaps — the fact that NASA can confidently state that all the technical issues are firmed up now is no doubt reassuring.

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.