Unaffordable and Unsustainable?

Signs of Failure in NASA’s Earth-to-orbit Transportation Strategy

A Policy White Paper of theSpace Frontier FoundationPublished: 25 July 2006For more information, or comments, contact:Jeff Krukin, Executive DirectorSpace Frontier Foundationjkrukin@spacefrontierfoundation.org

Space Frontier Foundation Page 2 25 July 2006

Unaffordable & Unsustainable? Signs of Failure in NASA’s Earth-to-orbit Transportation Strategy

Executive Summary

Over the past 30 months, NASA has madefundamental errors in its implementation of theVision for Space Exploration (VSE), errors whichcan be fixed today but will be fatal if leftuncorrected. In particular, NASA has laid out astrategy for Earth-to-orbit transportation that isalready showing signs of failure to meet its ownstated goals: closing the gap in U.S. humanspaceflight, supporting full utilization of the ISS,and enabling affordable and sustainable explorationbeyond Earth orbit.In developing this strategy, NASA has apparentlyignored key elements of the White House’s SpaceExploration Policy and several criticalrecommendations of the

President’s Commission on Implementation of U.S. Space Exploration Policy

(“President’s Commission”). Instead of planning itsexploration transportation in a way that maximizeseconomic (and national security) benefit, NASA isworking with its incumbent contractors to develop aseries of government-designed and owned spaceexploration transportation systems to service ISS aswell as explore the Moon.For example, many elements of Dr. Griffin’s initialplan to “reduce the gap” in U.S. human spaceflighthave had to be abandoned, and therefore the gap islikely to be larger than any U.S. politician expects.Worse still, the high cost of operating these systemsto service the ISS, compounded with likely cost,schedule, and performance problems in developingthe lunar transportation elements, will delay andmake unsustainable – and probably unaffordable –the human exploration of the Moon and beyond.The Foundation proposes a solution that will easilywork within NASA’s existing budget at fundinglevels already supported by the White House andCongress. We will explain why this solution:1.

Is our nation’s best chance to “minimize the gap”in U.S. human spaceflight,2.

Is consistent with White House space policy andthe recommendations of the President’sCommission in specific areas where NASA’splans are not, and3.

Will allow Congress to restore funding (andavoid future cuts) to NASA’s technology,science and aeronautics programs.We will show that NASA can expand its timidoutreach to America’s NewSpace industry (mostnotably its underfunded Commercial OrbitalTransportation Services (COTS) program) to solvethe near-term challenges of minimizing the “gap”and affordably servicing ISS. Furthermore, we willshow that turning over low Earth orbit (LEO) spaceoperations to NewSpace is the only way NASA canfocus its talents and resources on returning humanityto the Moon and achieve the goals of the VSE in anaffordable, sustainable and credible manner. Also,turning LEO over to NewSpace will broaden theU.S. space exploration community, grounded in thetraditional American values of free enterprise,entrepreneurship and opportunity that opened ourfirst frontier of the West.We propose that NASA can and should pay for thisby immediately eliminating all work on Block 1 of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), which isdesigned for missions to the ISS. Since COTS willbecome the primary approach to reducing the gap inU.S. human spaceflight, this eliminates the schedulepressure to fly the CEV by 2014. By focusing onCEV Block 2, which is targeted at the Moon andbeyond as the President intended, NASA cantransfer back the funds it moved from the ScienceMission Directorate to pay for rushing the CEVBlock 1 and Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV).Furthermore, as the CEV-to-ISS schedule pressurewill be gone, the urgent rush to develop the CLVwill be removed. Because CLV has substantiallychanged since the decision to use the Shuttle SRBoption, NASA should reopen its CLV trade study tofairly assess options such as the Atlas V or Delta IV,consistent with White House policy that the VSEshould support U.S. national security interests.Finally, consistent with the recommendation of thePresident’s Commission to decisively transform therelationship between NASA and the private sector,the White House should enforce this by establishinga new policy — after 2010 the U.S. will buy

all

crewand cargo services with a destination of low Earthorbit (like the International Space Station) from U.S.commercial providers using privately-owned andoperated spaceships.In summary, America is the world’s most powerfulnation and the world’s leader in high-tech innovationbecause we are better at capitalism, not because weare better at socialism. Using the tools of capitalismis now our nation’s best and only chance to have anaffordable and sustainable human space explorationprogram, and the best way to minimize the gap inU.S. human spaceflight and turn the ISS into asuccessful initial human settlement in Earth orbit.

Space Frontier Foundation Page 3 25 July 2006

Unaffordable & Unsustainable? Signs of Failure in NASA’s Earth-to-orbit Transportation Strategy

Preface

The Space Frontier Foundation (“Foundation”) hasstrongly and publicly supported America’s Visionfor Space Exploration (VSE) since it was unveiled30 months ago. After all, we have called for NASAto get out of Earth orbit and start exploring againsince we were founded nearly two decades ago.

Until now, however, the Foundation has remainedlargely silent about the details of NASA’s

implementation

of the VSE. Instead, we chose togive our friends inside NASA a chance to succeed,even though many Foundation members wanted usto speak up in opposition. And we specificallypraised

the appointment of Dr. Mike Griffin asAdministrator, hoping his record of innovation inindustry signaled an opportunity to “dramaticallytransform” how NASA conducts its mission.But we cannot remain silent any longer. Today, wesee many of the same patterns of failure that havedoomed previous NASA space transportationdevelopment efforts being offered as somehowlikely to work this time. Indeed, everything aboutNASA’s implementation of the Vision appearsnostalgic, as if retracing the steps of Apollo 45 yearslater will somehow lead to success today.For now, we are confident that NASA’s plans forsolving the politically vexing “gap” in U.S. humanspaceflight between retirement of the Shuttle and theinitial operation of a Crew Exploration Vehicle, andthen affordably servicing the International SpaceStation, will fail. The remainder of this White Paperdetails why, and what policymakers can do to avoidthe disastrous consequences of those failures.

NASA’s Apparent Disregard of White HousePolicy Puts the VSE at Risk

The White House’s Vision for Space Exploration(VSE) represents this generation’s first rallying callfor an expanding human presence in space. TheFoundation strongly supports the VSE.

In fact, the Space Frontier Foundation’s very first project was a Returnto the Moon petition drive.

See the March 2005 Foundation press release athttp://www.space-frontier.org/PressReleases/2005/20050312mikegriffin.html

The VSE is a wonderful step forward. However, in the Space FrontierFoundation’s view, the President missed an opportunity to takeadditional but critical steps. It is not just about “

exploration

” or

The VSE, as offered by the President two and a half years ago, represents a major change in direction of our nation’s civilian space efforts, including severalkey reforms the Foundation has advocated for manyyears. Most importantly, the VSE gives NASA areal exploration mission on the “far frontier”(beyond Earth orbit) and transfers responsibility forthe “near frontier” (e.g. low Earth orbit) to theprivate sector

. Perhaps it was for this reason thatthe White House invited the Foundation to hear thePresident’s speech at NASA HQ on January 14th,2004.In announcing the VSE, the President alsoestablished the

President’s Commission on Implementation of U.S. Space Exploration Policy

(“President’s Commission”) and directed it to makerecommendations on implementing the VSE. Onecore recommendation of the President’s Commissionwas that NASA should “

decisively transform

” itsrelationship with the private sector, “

most immediately in LEO

,” and that “

NASA’s role must belimited to only those areas where there is irrefutabledemonstration that only government can perform the proposed activity

.”NASA’s planners have apparently ignored orrejected this element of White House explorationpolicy and explicit direction from the President’sCommission, and therefore will not deliver an“affordable” and “sustainable” exploration program.The Foundation believes that this divergence fromthe goal of “economic benefit” is a root cause forwhy NASA’s plans appear to be in the early stagesof a major programmatic failure.When President Bush announced the VSE

, he calledfor the United States to “

Promote international and

“extending human

presence

across the solar system.” It is also aboutthe permanent human settlement of space, the value to human societyof a real frontier, developing the material resources of space for thebenefit of humanity, protecting human civilization from a cataclysmicdisaster, and protecting the Earth’s fragile biosphere.

The Foundation has written extensively on this subject for over adecade, and has repeatedly testified before Congress on the subject.For example, on March 16, 1995, Space Frontier Foundation testified toCongress on the “Near-Frontier, Far Frontier” policy model (seehttp://www.space-frontier.org/Policies/manifesto.html). You can alsoread the Foundation’s congressional testimony from April 9, 1997http://www.space-frontier.org/Policies/alphatown.html, and October 1,1998http://www.space-frontier.org/Policies/frontieragenda.html.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/space/renewed_spirit.html