By Jeff Foust on 2010 October 22 at 10:32 am ET When NASA deputy administrator Lori Garver started her keynote speech Thursday morning at the International Symposium for Personal and Commercial Spaceflight in Las Cruces, New Mexico, she said she thought for a moment before accepting the invitation to speak. “As you may be aware, I have a bit of a reputation for favoring those issues being discussed at this conference, personal and commercial spaceflight,” she said. “For some reason a lot of folks think I have my thumb on the scale for you guys in Washington.” While she said that she did have a long history in the commercial space field, “I would argue that my policy work over the years has been pretty balanced,” ranging from consulting for major aerospace companies to, when she was at the National Space Institute in the 1980s, being “considered an absolute stooge of the aerospace industry by the L-5 Society.”
Much of her speech focused on the recently-passed NASA authorization bill. “This is a bipartisan bill. I believe that deserves recognition,” she said, referring to the relatively contentious, partisan atmosphere today. “It is a compromise, we recognize that,” she added later. “No one ever gets everything they want in politics, and the administration’s proposals were seen by so many as a dramatic shift. This is significant progress, and in a very, very short period of time.”
One area of compromise, of course, is in commercial crew development, where the authorization bill includes about $2 billion less from 2011 through 2013 than in the president’s proposal. “The healthy $1.3 billion for commercial transportation activities over the three-year period is a lot more than we’ve spent in the past,” she said. “This is a real start.”
The challenge now, she said, is to implement the policies supported in the bill, including eventually transitioning the launch of NASA astronauts to commercial providers. “We now need to trust others,” she said. “But have we done it before? Yes, and in so many ways,” such as relying on companies to launch critical NASA space science missions. She indicated later that transition won’t be easy for the agency. “We often say we want to turn our more routine activities over to the private sector. But that’s hard for people at NASA; we do not see transporting people to space as routine.”
The success of commercial crew, and NASA’s new direction overall, requires bringing together both entrepreneurial and established aerospace companies, she concluded. “How can we together merge those histories, merge the braintrust that is the space community?” she asked. “We will only succeed if we utilize all of our resources.”
During the Q&A after her speech, she was asked about one other recent hot issue, administrator Charles Bolden’s trip to China. She said Bolden was on his way back from China on Thursday and that he “truly believed that he accomplished his objectives, which were purely to meet and start getting to know the leadership of the Chinese space community, and to start learning about their program.”
By Jeff Foust on 2010 October 21 at 8:44 am ET In a luncheon speech Wednesday during the International Symposium for Personal and Commercial Spaceflight in Las Cruces, New Mexico, George Sowers, vice president for business development at United Launch Alliance, discussed what he said could be considered a “logical” approach for the near-term future of NASA’s human spaceflight program. “Once we agree on the goals, it becomes a lot easier to debate how to achieve those goals,” he said.
Taking as a starting point the statement from the Augustine Committee’s final report that the goal of the human spaceflight program is to chart a path for humanity’s expansion into the solar system, Sowers outlined four lower-level goals that derive from that ultimate goal “that I think we can also all agree on and that provide a good starting point to logically build a framework for a plan.” Those goals:
- Close the human spaceflight gap as quickly as possible
- Begin human exploration beyond LEO as quickly as possible (“we need to make schedule an overt goal,” he said, referring to the long delays in such missions in existing plans and proposals)
- Develop technologies and infrastructure that will enable long-term sustainability
- Fit within NASA’s budget, which he believes will likely be flat or even cut in the coming years as part of deficit reduction efforts.
On that last goal, Sowers said, “I am tired of hearing people in our community whine about not having enough money. $19 billion a year for NASA is a lot of money. And if we focus on the mission, instead of rice bowls and constituencies, I think it is more than enough.” That line triggered an impromptu round of applause from the audience.
He then followed with a few general suggestions on how to achieve those goals in the near term:
- Fully fund a commercial crew development program along with Orion, providing “two horses in the race” to close the gap. The two can coexist, he said, since they serve different markets, likening commercial crew efforts to regional jets and Orion to a long-range jumbo jet. Flying Orion early, he said, can be done by flying it on an existing vehicle, the Delta 4 Heavy. “I am continually amazed about how radical some people see that common-sense idea,” he said.
- Delta 4 Heavy and Orion can also be used for simple beyond LEO missions through the use of in-orbit refueling, which he called “the most important near-term technology for sustainability for the exploration program.” Testing this technology on the ground and space should be a priority, he said.
- On-orbit refueling and propellant depots also allow for a smaller HLV, he said, reducing overall costs. “A smaller, lower-cost heavy lift vehicle in a budget-constrained environment allows earlier and more frequent missions, which keeps the program sold,” he said. How small? He said an HLV that can place 70 to 80 metric tons in LEO is in the “sweet spot” since, combined with propellant depots, it can support exploration missions beyond LEO all the way to Mars.
On the last point, Sowers was asked what he thought of shuttle-derived HLV concepts. “I don’t have a negative opinion on shuttle-derived heavy lift,” he said, although he said he had some “skepticism” about it because of its potentially high fixed costs.
By Jeff Foust on 2010 October 20 at 8:32 am ET Former NASA administrator Dan Goldin doesn’t speak much publicly about his tenure as NASA administration from 1992 to 2001, nor about space policy issues today. So it was a bit of a surprise to see him speak last week at a symposium last week on the 50th anniversary of NASA’s astrobiology efforts in the Washington DC area. While he was careful to keep his comments focused on his work as NASA administrator to develop astrobiology research efforts, such as the agency’s Origins program and Astrobiology Institute, he did offer some subtle comments that reflect upon the agency’s current situation.
Goldin, at point in his talk, recalled the unpopular “zero-based review” of the agency that took place while he was administrator. “But the fact of the matter is, the President of the United States said, ‘This is what you gotta do,'” Goldin said. “So every time a NASA administrator gets skewered in the press, think about the fact that that person is being a loyal American and listening to the President of the United States.” He continued: “The administrator, if they’re good, does what the President asks him, what the Congress asks. You can argue, but when the argument is over, say yes and do yes, or say no and leave. There’s nothing in-between. And I say this because I see the frustration, as I read the newspapers, across NASA.”
Goldin also commented on how NASA traditionally has not done a good job communicating what it does to the public. Ask the general public what NASA does “and the first words out of their mouth will be shuttle or Apollo”, he said. “Then ask them about the search for life: you will watch their eyes will light up, because they aren’t really aware that NASA really cares about the search for life.” That, he said, was a reason why NASA’s small SETI program was cancelled by Congress the year Goldin became administrator. “SETI went down because NASA did not explain to the American people why they were doing it. They viewed it as an entitlement.”
“The American people pay for the space program; they love the space program,” he added, “but they want to know that NASA actually cares about them and is willing to take the time to explain to them, not to talk down to them, but to talk in two- and three-syllable words and explain, concisely, why they’re doing what they’re doing.” He picked up that theme a little later in his talk, recalling the town hall meetings he held as NASA administrator in the early 1990s. “The American people really passionately care about the space program, but they don’t think we communicate with them. We take for them for granted… They need to understand what NASA is doing.”
By Jeff Foust on 2010 October 17 at 10:52 am ET Is NASA administration Charles Bolden being pushed aside by the White House? That’s the claim of a Houston Chronicle article Saturday, cobbling together various events, ranging from controversy about his China trip to his now-infamous al-Jazeera interview, suggesting that the administration is considering replacing Bolden. (The article also claims that the administration slighted Bolden by not holding a “high-profile White House signing ceremony” for the NASA authorization bill, but such ceremonies are the exception rather than the rule for legislation in general.) The article doesn’t ask whether Bolden’s recent globetrotting “well beyond the limelight” was at the instigation of a White House wanting to push him aside, or of his own volition.
In separate interviews in the Daytona Beach News-Journal today, Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL) and her Republican challenger, Sandy Adams, discuss topics including space policy. Kosmas reviews the provisions of the NASA authorization bill in her interview, noting that “NASA and protecting the Space Coast and the space exploration program is a very high priority for me.” In her interview Adams discusses general support of spaceflight, including human missions to Mars as part of a “long-term vision for NASA” and the need to not rely on other nations for access to the ISS. Her language is vague in places, though: when she says “I think it’s a vital part of our national security” it’s not clear if she’s referring to human spaceflight, which she mentioned immediately preceding that comment, or spaceflight in general.
Should Republicans take control of the House in November’s elections, Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX) would be in position to chair the House Science and Technology Committee, on which he is currently the ranking member. However, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports that Hall is also a candidate to chair the House Energy and Commerce Committee, as Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) has been that committee’s top Republican for six years, a limit under current party rules. Hall, though, indicates he’d prefer to run the science committee in a GOP-led House, saying of chairing the energy committee: “I probably ought to make a run for it but I’m not going to.” Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) is widely rumored to also be interested in chairing the science committee if the GOP wins the House next month.
By Jeff Foust on 2010 October 15 at 7:33 am ET Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL) and her Republican challenger, Sandy Adams, sparred in a debate earlier this week, with space policy as one of the topics, the Orlando Sentinel reported. Kosmas, according to the report, took credit for the additional shuttle flight included in the recently-signed NASA authorization bill, as well as support for an extension of the ISS and commercial spaceflight. Adams said she wanted to “increase funding so that spaceflights can continue regularly”; what “spaceflights” she meant wasn’t specified in the article but Adams has previously discussed a further extension of the shuttle program, such as on the issues section of her web site. However, at this point in the wind-down of the shuttle program adding more flights may not be possible without at least an extended gap after next summer’s mission.
On Friday Florida Today endorsed Kosmas for reelection, citing in large part her work on space policy. “The tireless efforts of Kosmas to help craft a solid blueprint for NASA’s future and her fierce advocacy for the spaceport and creating post-shuttle jobs” has been the “one constant” for the Space Coast in this period of change, the editorial states. “The work has been the centerpiece of her term and earns Kosmas our strong recommendation for re-election.” Adams, the editorial continues, has an “appalling” lack of knowledge about NASA: during an interview with the paper’s editorial board on the day the House was voting on the NASA authorization bill “Adams hadn’t even read the measure and did not know any of its specifics.”
The same editorial also endorses the reelection bid of Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL), who, unlike Kosmas, is not facing a strong reelection challenge in his district immediately south of Kosmas’s. Although Posey was opposed to the administration’s original plan for NASA, he later supported the Senate version of the authorization bill. “It was the right decision in the best interests of the Space Coast, with both a NASA heavy-lift rocket and commercial rocket fleet approved,” the editorial notes, adding that “his knowledge of the commercial space industry can serve the Space Coast well”.
Kosmas previously won the endorsement of the Orlando Sentinel, but that paper has decided not to endorse Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL), instead throwing its support behins his Republican challenger, Dan Webster, for the Orlando-area district. Grayson is known in space circles for his sharp questioning of NASA administrator Charles Bolden in House Science and Technology Committee hearings earlier this year, as well as his opposition to commercial elements of the administration’s plans for NASA (“the epitome of socialism and corporate welfare”, as he put it during the markup of the House version of the NASA authorization bill in July.) Space policy, though, does not figure in the Sentinel’s decision to support Webster over Grayson.
By Jeff Foust on 2010 October 13 at 7:23 am ET Rep. John Culberson (R-TX) became the second member of Congress to speak out against NASA administrator Charles Bolden’s upcoming trip to China. In a letter to President Obama this week Culberson said he has “grave concerns about the nature and goals of China’s space program” and thus believes that there should be no cooperation between NASA and the Chinese space agency CNSA without the approval of Congress. “I do not believe it is appropriate for the Administrator to meet with any Chinese officials until Congress is fully briefed on the nature and scope of Mr. Bolden’s trip and planned discussions on cooperation.” Last week Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) expressed his own concerns about the China trip. Bolden, in a letter in response to Wolf, said that the trip “is intended to be introductory in nature and will not include consideration of any specific proposals for human space flight cooperation” or other new ventures.
Marco Rubio, the Republican candidate for Senate in Florida, met with Republican officials on the Space Coast Tuesday to discuss space policy issues. However, the Orlando Sentinel alleges that Rubio got some questionable advice from attendees, who put the blame for many of NASA’s current problems with the Obama Administration, even for those issues such as the post-Shuttle gap that have their roots in the Bush Administration. After the meeting Rubio, the current frontrunner in the three-man race, told the Sentinel that he believed NASA didn’t have a larger budget “because you don’t have fiscal discipline” in the overall federal budget. “If you had fiscal discipline then the federal government would be forced to focus on the issues [like space] that are important and that matter to our country.” (That assumes that other members of Congress would consider NASA an important issue, though.) He added that he believed that “the biggest overriding problem we have is that this administration failed to outline a compelling, long-term vision and goal for the program.”
By Jeff Foust on 2010 October 11 at 12:53 pm ET Today may be a federal holiday, but that apparently won’t stop the president from signing into law the NASA authorization bill. NASA organized a last-minute telecon with agency officials and legislators to discuss the “anticipated signing” later this afternoon of the bill by President Obama. (How last minute? I didn’t receive notice about it until well after it started; hopefully they’ll provide a recording of the telecon later today.) There had been reports that the bill would be signed last Thursday, but this report, with the imprimatur of NASA, seems more likely to be true. As noted last week, the fact that the president is signing the bill isn’t surprising, but what’s important in the near term is that it starts the clock on a number of studies due over the next several months, even as the agency waits for appropriators to act on funding the agency for FY11.
By Jeff Foust on 2010 October 10 at 3:34 pm ET According to one member of Congress, the House vote to approve the Senate version of the NASA authorization bill on September 29 went down to the wire. “They were thinking of pulling the bill” the day of the vote, claimed Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), in comments to the Bay Area (Texas) Citizen. “So we went to the leader and said¸ ‘no way, we’ll get the votes. We won’t give up and we won’t give in.'” They did, of course, get the votes, something the article credited to “an intense 72-hour Texas bipartisan drive”.
Another key supporter of the authorization bill, Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL), won the endorsement this weekend from the Orlando Sentinel in her reelection bid. Kosmas, the editorial notes, wasn’t able to win a lengthy extension of the shuttle program, but she and other members of the Florida congressional delegation “helped speed up the timetable for NASA’s next manned program.” Her Republican opponent, Sandy Adams, “has been pandering to the anti-government crowd in her party” yet, the paper argues, “she’s all for big government when it comes to NASA” by wanting to continue flying the shuttles. Kosmas, though, is in an uphill battle against Adams: according to the New York Times’ FiveThirtyEight, Adams currently has nearly an 85-percent chance of winning.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) doesn’t have nearly the same worries about reelection: FiveThirtyEight gives him a 100-percent chance of winning. That isn’t stopping him from raising money, though, and on Monday night Elon Musk is hosting a fundraiser for Rohrabacher at SpaceX’s factory in Hawthorne, California. It’s a $1,000 a person, but that does include catering by Wolfgang Puck…
By Jeff Foust on 2010 October 8 at 10:55 pm ET Prior to the passage of S.3729 in the House last week, science committee chairman Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN) has indicated that he planned to “continue to advocate to the Appropriators for the provisions” in the “compromise” version his committee drafted but never voted upon. Late Friday committee leadership, including Gordon, ranking member Ralph Hall (R-TX), space subcommittee chair Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), and subcommittee ranking member Pete Olson (R-TX), sent letters to the key members of the appropriations committees in the Senate and House outlining their views on what the committees should do to provide “further clarification and direction” to the language in the authorization bill.
A summary of the key points in the effectively identical letters from Gordon et al.:
- They expressed concern about the “$500 million unfunded mandate that requires NASA to keep the Shuttle program going through the remainder of FY 2011″ even though the additional shuttle mission would likely take place three to four months before the end of the fiscal year.
- On the HLV provision included in the bill, they argued that “NASA should determine the best approach for the future human space flight and exploration program”, worried that the “very prescriptive” Senate language on the HLV design will result in a vehicle too big for ISS crew transport missions and too small for exploration beyond LEO. They also express confusion about when the system is supposed to be ready: while the bill requires the “multi-purpose crew vehicle” (aka Orion) to be fully operational by the end of 2016, “the bill is not clear about the goal of having a fully capable launch system based on existing exploration program investments able to serve the ISS no later than December 31, 2016.” (The bill does state that, for the HLV, “Priority should be placed on the core elements with the goal for operational capability for the core elements not later than December 31, 2016.”)
- They state that while they support the development of commercial cargo and crew capabilities, any funding appropriated for those programs “should be given to first providing the funding needed for the proposed Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program… and that this need should be prioritized over commercial crew capability funding at this time.”
By Jeff Foust on 2010 October 8 at 7:12 am ET While President Obama didn’t get around to signing the NASA authorization bill Thursday, as Sen. Hutchison’s office had earlier reported, it didn’t stop her and several Houston-area members of Congress from praising the bill during a press conference Thursday afternoon at the Johnson Space Center. “This has not been an easy time,” Hutchison said. “We have a way forward today that is right for America, right for NASA and most certainly right for Johnson Space Center.”
Hutchison also published a letter to the “Houston NASA Community” as a Houston Chronicle op-ed on Friday, laying out her view on the bill. “I fought for this legislation because it was the right solution to the extraordinary challenge we were presented,” she wrote, but warning that “this is not the end of our struggle”. “Undoubtedly, in the months ahead, more questions will be raised about NASA funding and the feasibility of the approach laid out in the new law. Houston, I know the enormity of this task, and I promise that my work to advance the future of human space flight and to preserve the critical role of the Johnson Space Center will continue.”
Meanwhile, another member of Congress is at odds with NASA on a very different issue. As Space News reported this week, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) is opposed to plans by NASA administrator Charles Bolden to visit China later this month. “It should go without saying that NASA has no business cooperating with the Chinese regime on human spaceflight,” Wolf wrote, as quoted in the article, citing concerns ranging from technology transfer to human rights issues.
|
|
