By Jeff Foust on 2005 November 7 at 7:39 am ET No doubt many of you noticed the Reuters article published Friday that cited a Chinese source who claimed that China was planning a manned lunar mission by 2017. There are a number of flaws in the article: it was published in a relatively minor publication, the “Southern Metropolis News”, and cited a Chinese scientist, Ouyang Ziyuan, who previously claimed that China was planning a manned mission by 2010 only to later say he was misquoted and that a manned mission would come only after 2020. (Ouyang, involved in China’s robotic lunar program, arguably doesn’t speak for China’s manned space program any more than Robert Zubrin speaks for NASA when he says the space agency could send humans to Mars by 2016.) Nonetheless, this article may be used by some in the US as a sign that the country needs to accelerate the Vision for Space Exploration lest we be “beat” back to the Moon.
This episode serves as an introduction to an article in this week’s issue of The Space Review by Dwayne Day, who reports on a recent conference on China’s space program in Washington. The article notes that China’s space program is as misunderstood in the US as the American space program is misunderstood in China. The Chinese government had hoped that the launch of Shenzhou 5 two years ago, the country’s first manned mission, would open the door to cooperation with the US, only to find that American obstacles to cooperation were political in nature (like human rights issues and Taiwan.) Quote: “The Chinese believe that space cooperation could help improve relations between the two countries. They view it as a steppingstone toward better understanding. In contrast, the American government believes that cooperation can only occur after the political relationship between the two countries has improved.”
There are a lot of interesting insights in the article about how the US views China’s space program, and vice versa. It also deflates a lot of the rhetoric about a potential race to the Moon between the two countries, including opposition to human spaceflight within China itself. However, it also shows that there are significant obstacles to any future cooperation between the two countries in space.
By Jeff Foust on 2005 November 4 at 7:52 pm ET To no one’s surprise, the Senate today confirmed Shana Dale as NASA deputy administrator. Griffin: “With Shana coming on board, I’m confident we now have the right leadership team to guide the agency as we move forward in the next great era of space exploration.” And with concerns about budget shortfalls, the implementation of the ESAS, and the fate of the shuttle and station, Griffin will need all the help he can get.
By Jeff Foust on 2005 November 3 at 1:02 pm ET Yes, there is a connection, however tenuous it may be. The Republican challenger to Robert “Bob” Hull, a Democrat who represents the 38th District (covering a portion of Fairfax County in northern Virginia) in the House of Delegates, is B. Leland Cheung, who the Washington Post describes as a “space tourism entrepreneur”. The term “entrepreneur” might be a bit of a stretch: Cheung works for Space Adventures as its chief information officer, and has a satellite engineering background.
Space policy, as you might expect, is not a major issue in Virginia in general nor the 38th District, although the Post article notes that Cheung believes “his business experience and training as an engineer position him to help lead Virginia’s high-tech economy, and to help students acquire ‘the tools they need to reach for the stars.'” And you probably knew a quote like this would be coming from Cheung himself, regarding his opposition to a proposed gas tax increase: “You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to realize we’re currently being overtaxed.”
While the article doesn’t include any polling information about the race, reading it leaves the impression that Cheung may be in a bit over his head in this campaign. While Del. Hull has raised $54,000, Cheung has raised less than a tenth of that, and is relying primarily on door-to-door campaigning; even that has proven tough. “I really haven’t had the time to dedicate to the campaign and to do the things I wanted to do,” he told the newspaper. “I had no idea the amount of work I was getting myself into.”
By Jeff Foust on 2005 November 3 at 7:16 am ET At around the same time Shana Dale was at her confirmation hearing Tuesday, NASA administrator Michael Griffin opened a half-day conference on international cooperation in space exploration at the Center for Strategic & International Studies across town. In his speech he attempts to create an analogy between the creation of the interstate highway system a half-century ago with the exploration architecture. Notably, he sees the development of a transportation infrastructure, in the form of the CEV, crew launch vehicle, and heavy-lift launch vehicle as essential to the implementation of the Vision:
Our plan derives its form in recognition of the fact that, for the foreseeable future, by far the biggest “barrier to entry” for lunar and Mars exploration will be the size and cost of the transportation systems required to take people beyond Earth orbit. This is the key enabling technology for space exploration, one that the United States must and will continue to develop and maintain. Moreover, within the community of spacefaring nations today, America alone can bring to bear the discretionary financial resources to provide the man-rated, heavy-lift transportation systems required for this task.
Outside of that transportation infrastructure, however, is where Griffin sees opportunities for international cooperation to help enable lunar exploration, in part because developing that transportation infrastructure will cost so much:
But with this task accomplished, our presently foreseeable fiscal resources will be exhausted. We will not, by ourselves, be able to conduct the robust program of lunar surface exploration and exploitation that a world with a surface area the size of Africa merits. We will not, by ourselves, be able to take advantage of what lies at the exit ramps of the new “interstate highway”.
Griffin said he plans to engage potential international partners “on a bilateral and multilateral basis in more serious discussions as to how we can form productive partnerships to advance the objectives of the Vision.” Griffin was careful not to say exactly what he had in mind for international cooperation, although earlier in the speech he threw out some ideas ranging from resupply vehicles to life support systems. According to someone in attendance, an audience member asked Griffin about reports that NASA was asking Japan to provide nuclear power systems for lunar exploration. Griffin reported said that such discussions were premature and way below his level.
By Jeff Foust on 2005 November 2 at 7:49 am ET NASA Administrator Michael Griffin will be the sole witness at a hearing of the full House Science Committee on Thursday at 10 am. The title of the hearing is simply “Status of NASA’s Programs”, which should give members plenty of latitude to quiz Griffin on issues ranging from shuttle and station plans to ESAS to financial management. The hearing will be in Rayburn 2318 and will be webcast.
By Jeff Foust on 2005 November 2 at 7:45 am ET I did not see Tuesday’s Senate Commerce Committee confirmation hearing for NASA deputy administrator Shana Dale, but based on news reports in the Houston Chronicle and Space News [subscription required], but it would seem that the senators in attendance at the hearing focused less on Dale’s credentials and more on the state of NASA’s financial management system. The senators, it seems, were following up on last week’s House hearing on NASA finances, which featured the release of a GAO report that strongly criticized the agency for failing to improve its financial management despite the development of a new system designed to address past concerns.
This might sound like a minor issue, but even the perception that NASA can’t properly keep track of the funding it does receive could become an issue in a time when some members of Congress are sharpening their budget axes. Florida Today, a newspaper hardly known as a being a NASA basher, went so far in an editorial Sunday to recommend that “moon funding should be withheld until NASA proves it has its fiscal house in order.” Dale, whose nomination will likely go to the full Senate for approval later this week, told members of the committee that she would work with the financial auditors who have flagged problems with the existing system, as well as people within the agency and financial experts in other government agencies, to fix the problems.
By Jeff Foust on 2005 October 31 at 12:45 pm ET In the event you have not previous read about this, the Senate Commerce Committee will be holding a confirmation hearing Tuesday morning at 10 am to review the nomination of Shana Dale as deputy administrator of NASA. The hearing, in Dirksen 562, will be webcast. I won’t be able to watch the hearing, but this should be a fairly routine event in any case; if you do watch the hearing and hear something interesting, please post a comment.
By Jeff Foust on 2005 October 28 at 7:31 am ET I talked briefly last night with someone familiar with the progress on the NASA authorization legislation. (As you may recall, the Senate and House have each passed their own authorization bills, HR 3070 and S.1281, in July and September, respectively.) A formal conference to work out the differences between the bills has not started yet, but some initial “pre-conferencing” has begun to take care of some of the minor, easier-to-resolve differences. Look for a final version of the bill in the next few weeks.
By Jeff Foust on 2005 October 28 at 7:25 am ET Last night the National Air and Space Museum hosted a screening of the upcoming PBS documentary “Race to the Moon” about the Apollo 8 mission. In attendance at the event were the three astronauts from that mission: Frank Borman, Jim Lovell, and Bill Anders. During a Q&A session after the screening, someone asked the three astronauts what they felt about the recent addition of SpaceShipOne to the museum and the role of commercial spaceflight. Borman’s response:
Well, I think Spacecraft One [sic] was a nice stunt. You spend twenty-five million dollars to win ten. I’m not taking anything away from it because the people who flew it were very brave and courageous, but I don’t think it leads to much, and I think it’s inappropriately displayed up there next to Lindbergh’s and Yeager’s airplanes.
Borman’s comments were met with a smattering of applause from the audience that filled the museum’s IMAX theater.
Why mention this here? Borman’s comments, and the fact that at least some fraction of the audience agreed with him, suggest that proponents of commercial human spaceflight—especially those who want to sell such services to the government—have not convinced everyone yet of the utility of such efforts.
By Jeff Foust on 2005 October 27 at 12:55 pm ET Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta apparently thinks that President Bush doesn’t get enough credit for promoting commercial spaceflight. Mineta, speaking at the COMSTAC meeting yesterday, said, “I admit that I am a bit surprised about how little is known about how the Bush Administration is enabling commercial space.” As examples, he pointed to the Vision for Space Exploration, the commercial space recommendations contained in the Aldridge Commission report, and the “clear and important role for commercial human spaceflight” in national space policy.
Compare Secretary Mineta’s comments with those made last week by Congressman Bart Gordon, who said that “I don’t think President Bush is a space guy when it comes down to it.” Gordon reached that conclusion, SPACE.com reported, in part because of Bush’s “apparent lack of interest in space issues while he was governor of Texas.” Of course, there aren’t many opportunities for state governors to speak out on space issues…
|
|
