Counterpoints to the FUD

There is a lot of FUD – fear, uncertainty, and doubt – being thrown up in the nascent debate over NASA’s new direction.  Some people are saying that commercial providers aren’t ready to be trusted with America’s astronauts and won’t be for some time.  Others suggest that it calls for the wholesale commercialization of NASA.  Still other sources insinuate that we are facing the elimination of the astronaut corps.  From where I sit, none of it is accurate.

NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden has repeatedly reiterated that he believes there will continue to be a role for a professional NASA astronaut corps.  Deputy Administrator Lori Garver said at last week’s Commercial Space Transportation Conference that the “wonderful people working Constellation did not fail,” but that they were not given the resources they needed and that it did not make sense to continue developing a system that would not even be ready to arrive at the ISS until after its planned de-orbit.  There will still be a need for specially-trained scientists and engineers for on-orbit operations, probably even more so as the number of “spaceflight participants” increases.

With regards to the commercial launchers themselves, SpaceX has launched a paying customer on their Falcon 1 (after sorting out their initial test issues) and will begin testing Falcon 9 in the spring.  Their Dragon vehicle is on schedule to begin deliveries to the station next year. Orbital has launched a multitude of vehicles from Wallops and for the Air Force and has partnered with the Italians to base their cargo module off the MPLM, a proven flight technology.  I’ll also note that both companies have former astronauts, Ken Bowersox and Frank Culberston, respectively, as senior company officials responsible for safety and mission assurance.

Boeing is leading one of the CCDev proposals – in a partnership with Bigelow Aerospace – for a new crew vehicle capable of being launched on either a Delta IV, Atlas V, or Falcon 9 rocket.  One can hardly say that the prime contractor for the ISS and half-owner of both United Space Alliance and United Launch Alliance isn’t capable of sending crew to the Station.

Mark Geyer himself said at the Orion all-hands last week that there is nothing in the new proposal that precludes Lockheed or Boeing from being commercial crew providers. I also heard the commanding general of the US Air Force Space Command say last week that they already depend on commercial providers for small and medium launch vehicles and that he sees commercial space development as essential to national security.  To achieve their goal of Operationally Responsive Space access, they need higher flight rates and lower costs than can be accomplished with monolithic, centrally-planned programs.

Also, no one is proposing a wholesale privatization of NASA.  The commercial space industry fully expects NASA to take the lead on manned and unmanned solar system exploration beyond LEO.  They are committed to enabling that by providing as many services as they can to LEO – and safety is as much a priority for them as it is for the rest of us.  DARPA, Space Command, the National Space Security Office, and the FAA all expressed their support for these ventures last week.

We must also consider that the passback on the budget was only given to NASA two days before its release.  For whatever reason that happened, the agency simply hasn’t had time yet to turn the broad policy outlines in the budget proposal into actionable program plans.  If we trusted our NASA leadership to make Constellation work, despite the tens of billions of unallocated dollars it would need, then we should at least give them the time they need to get this initial planning done.

That way, we can make informed decisions  and conduct a fair debate.  I think those us that are professionals in this field have an obligation to be honest about whatever personal biases we may have, but to also render objective analysis to our stakeholders and provide benefit to our profession, as a whole.

Call me a utilitarian, if you will, but this is what it comes down to for me.  Our focus should be on doing the right things to move the space program forward, honestly and with integrity.  Even when it hurts in the interim.  If we don’t work together to make our profession more inclusive and innovative and to support American industry, we will fall behind.  Everyone I talked to at the AIAA/FAA conference last week said that their foreign counterparts aren’t afraid of NASA continuing to do business as usual.  It’s how far we’ll leap ahead, if we unleash American industry, that concerns them.

I have no doubt that our future is in space and I am more certain of that now than ever before.  I agree with Alan Stern; who said over telecon that this is the best chance we’ve seen yet to build something more like what we all dreamed of when we watched 2001: A Space Odyssey.  There is opportunity in uncertainty, if we are willing to embrace it.

Related Posts

Comments are closed.