Archive for the ‘Space Policy’ Category

Obama says he plans to see Americans to Mars

Saturday, July 9th, 2011

Statement by the President on the Launch of the Space Shuttle Atlantis

July 8, 2011

Today, Americans across the country watched with pride as four of our fellow citizens blasted off from the Kennedy Space Center in the Space Shuttle Atlantis, and America reached for the heavens once more.

Behind Atlantis and her crew of brave astronauts stand thousands of dedicated workers who have poured their hearts and souls into America’s Space Shuttle program over the past three decades. To them and all of NASA’s incredible workforce, I want to express my sincere gratitude. You helped our country lead the space age, and you continue to inspire us each day.

Today’s launch may mark the final flight of the Space Shuttle, but it propels us into the next era of our never-ending adventure to push the very frontiers of exploration and discovery in space. We’ll drive new advances in science and technology. We’ll enhance knowledge, education, innovation, and economic growth. And I have tasked the men and women of NASA with an ambitious new mission: to break new boundaries in space exploration, ultimately sending Americans to Mars. I know they are up to the challenge – and I plan to be around to see it [emphasis added].

Congratulations to Atlantis, her astronauts, and the people of America’s space program on a picture-perfect launch, and good luck on the rest of your mission to the International Space Station, and for a safe return home. I know the American people share my pride at what we have accomplished as a nation, and my excitement about the next chapter of our preeminence in space.

Source: White House.

Obama on Space at Twitter Town Hall

Wednesday, July 6th, 2011

July 6, 2010: President Obama answers a question about space at his Twitter Town Hall.

QUESTION: “Now that the space shuttle is gone, where does America stand in space exploration?”

THE PRESIDENT: We are still a leader in space exploration. But, frankly, I have been pushing NASA to revamp its vision. The shuttle did some extraordinary work in low-orbit experiments, the International Space Station, moving cargo. It was an extraordinary accomplishment and we’re very proud of the work that it did. But now what we need is that next technological breakthrough.

We’re still using the same models for space travel that we used with the Apollo program 30, 40 years ago. And so what we’ve said is, rather than keep on doing the same thing, let’s invest in basic research around new technologies that can get us places faster, allow human space flight to last longer.

And what you’re seeing now is NASA I think redefining its mission. And we’ve set a goal to let’s ultimately get to Mars. A good pit stop is an asteroid. I haven’t actually — we haven’t identified the actual asteroid yet, in case people are wondering. (Laughter.) But the point is, let’s start stretching the boundaries so we’re not doing the same thing over and over again, but rather let’s start thinking about what’s the next horizon, what’s the next frontier out there.

But in order to do that, we’re actually going to need some technological breakthroughs that we don’t have yet. And what we can do is for some of this low-orbit stuff, some of the more routine space travel — obviously no space travel is routine, but it could become more routine over time — let’s allow the private sector to get in so that they can, for example, send these low-Earth orbit vehicles into space and we may be able to achieve a point in time where those of you who are just dying to go into space, you can buy a ticket, and a private carrier can potentially take you up there, while the government focuses on the big breakthroughs that require much larger investments and involve much greater risk.

The End of the Space Age?

Monday, July 4th, 2011

The cover story of the July 2 edition of The Economist loudly proclaims “The End of the Space Age.”

National Space Society Director Al Globus responds below (opinions expressed are his own and not necessarily those of the National Space Society).


The last space shuttle flight is on the launch pad, so we can expect any number of gloom and doom articles like The Economist’s  “The end of the Space Age.” These articles mourn the end of the socialist model of human space flight: government developed, owned, and operated vehicles taking government employees into space.  “The end of the Space Age” is particularly odd because it starts with a long list of vigorous commercial space activities, which together have a combined budget perhaps 10 times greater than NASA’s.  In other words, “No bucks, no Buck Rogers” doesn’t mean the bucks have to come from government.  In fact, there are a lot more bucks if they don’t.

The piece goes on to claim that we will henceforth be limited to Low Earth Orbit (LEO).  Apparently The Economist didn’t notice that the Russians have already sold one seat for a private mission around the Moon and, if they can sell one more, the mission is a go. Furthermore, as these articles frequently do, The Economist ignores the rover on Mars, the orbiters circling Mars, Moon and Mercury, the mission to Pluto, and the private robotic race to the Moon spawned by the Google Lunar X Prize. It’s as if Lewis and Clarke’s primary objective, creating detailed maps, is somehow irrelevant if done comprehensively and accurately by robots at relatively low cost.

What is really happening is that space development is moving beyond national prestige projects towards delivering direct value to people on the ground.  NASA, and The Economist, have not yet realized this. Most of NASA’s budget, the human space flight program and space science, has almost no direct benefit to the people who pay for it. The parts that do directly benefit taxpayers, Earth observation, solar science, protection from asteroids, and aeronautics, are woefully underfunded by comparison. Worse, space solar power receives no funding at all, even though successful development would solve major energy and environmental problems, not to mention put those who do it in the global energy driver’s seat. After all, what would make a nation stronger, a man on Mars for a few months or a terawatt of space solar power? What would protect us better, knowledge of quasars or knowing exactly which asteroids are likely to hit us and how to deflect them? The cost to government of developing space solar power and finding asteroids is a fraction of heavily funded but significantly less useful activities.

The Economist bemoans the fact that the International Space Station (ISS) is due to be deorbited in 2020.  They fail to mention that until a year or two ago it was scheduled to be deorbtied in 2014, and that by 2020 there may well be a private alternative. Bigelow Aerospace has two small space stations in orbit and is developing a full sized facility as you read this. The market: national human space flight programs for a tiny, tiny fraction of the $100 billion cost of the ISS. However, to succeed, Bigelow Aerospace needs a commercial launch vehicle for the crews. Fortunately, President Obama has proposed and funded a program to do exactly that:  develop private commercial human space launch.

I mourn the end of the shuttle. The shuttle is, by far, the most capable space vehicle ever built. However, the coming government fiscal tsunami will severely reduce all government programs, including NASA. We need to refocus NASA’s brilliant space program on developing industry and commerce. Our model should be space communications, which pays lots of taxes today, not the Apollo program, which has been dead for 40 years. Ask yourself, what will make us stronger and more space-capable: putting small numbers of government employees on big rocks far away? Or developing space solar power, space tourism, micro-g materials, and asteroid mining?

– Al Globus

ISDC 2011 Video Presentation - Paul Spudis

Thursday, June 9th, 2011
Paul Spudis Dr. Paul Spudis: Cislunar Space - The Next Frontier. Dr. Spudis, of the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Huston, was presented the 2011 NSS Space Pioneer Award for Scientific and Engineering Paper for his paper on “Mission and Implementation of an Affordable Lunar Return.” 32 minute video (slides and paper included).

ISDC 2011 - Flight System Development Forum

Tuesday, June 7th, 2011

ISDC conference report by Dave Fischer

This is the first of two articles about the NASA Heavy Lift Vehicle program mandated by Congress.

Dan Dumbacher, Director of Engineering (NASA HQ)
Todd May, Associate Director, Technical (NASA MSFC)
Garry Lyles, Associate Director for Technical Management (NASA MSFC)

Dan Dumbacher introduced the panel by noting that NASA has been tasked with development of the next Heavy Lift Vehicle, and the folks at the Marshall Space Flight Center would like to get on with the job of building the next launch vehicle.

However, NASA’s budget is constrained by the current economy, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Indeed, it is likely to decrease somewhat over time.

The primary challenges in the confusing state of affairs revolve around the constituencies, as it always does in a political environment. The NASA Reauthorization Act of 2010, the 2011 budget from the administration, and the language of the compromise budget resolution for NASA in the summer of 2011 have all contributed to the muddled state of affairs.

The current manned programs include the International Space Station and Commercial Cargo and Crew. The new beyond-low-Earth-orbit program will require new infrastructure, a new launch vehicle, a new spacecraft (such as the Orion - Multi Purpose Crew Vehicle), and ground support.

Todd May comes from the International Space Station project, certainly the most ambitious and complex international project ever conducted. Todd reviewed the results of the 13 heavy lift proposals received from industry. There is no magic rocket. However, cost was heavily influenced by NASA management and oversight practices as well as flight rate.

Garry Lyles then gave a detailed description of the work done over the past year on the heavy lift vehicle. Interestingly, he noted that he had spent time at a conference of building architects. They taught him that design beauty grew out of the requirements of the building, and that operational simplicity grew out of internal complexity.

He chose to test the concept of machine beauty with the Requirements Analysis Cycle (RAC). Three teams were created. One was devoted to Lox/H2, the second to Lox/RP and the third could choose either combination, but would focus on a lean manufacturing philosophy. Their results would be folded into the first two teams within the first half of the cycle. The final instructions to the teams were to be innovative and have fun.

The teams conducted several thousand parametric studies. One result was that many combinations would satisfy the physical requirements. By the end of the studies, the primary drivers of affordability, however, turned out to be lean systems engineering, stable requirements and simple organization. Reduction in development time was critical. Private industry knew that first to market with reduced cycle time meant lower people costs, which are a major component of overall costs. The subject of how NASA’s program might relate to Falcon Heavy was not addressed.

Difficult changes will be required from the traditional risk-averse NASA culture in order to accomplish these goals. It is going to be hard for NASA to adapt and adopt the key practices:

1. The machine will be complex, but the operation must be simple
2. Adjust the design in order to simplify the manufacturing process
3. Requirements must be early and stable
4. There must be margin in performance
5. Cycle time must be as quick as possible, but no quicker
6. Streamline the oversight of contractors

Without these cultural changes, it will be impossible for NASA to accomplish the heavy lift task in front of it.

ISDC 2011 Video Presentations

Saturday, June 4th, 2011

Presentations from the 2011 NSS International Space Development Conference in Huntsville, Alabama.

Jeff Greason

Jeff Greason, President of XCOR Aerospace. Keynote Address at the Awards Banquet: A Settlement Strategy for NASA. This talk is widely regarded as a major statement in the field of space policy. 42 minute video.

Robert Bigelow

Robert Bigelow, President of Bigelow Aerospace, dedicated to developing next-generation crewed space complexes to revolutionize space commerce and open up the final frontier, and recipient of the 2011 NSS Space Pioneer Award for Space Development. Keynote Address at the Governors’ Gala. 32 minute video.

Owen and Richard Garriott

Owen and Richard Garriott. Father and son astronauts. Owen Garriott spent 60 days aboard Skylab in 1973 and 10 days aboard the Space Shuttle in Spacelab-1 in 1983. His son Richard Garriott is a video game developer and entrepreneur who funded his own 12-day trip flying on Soyuz to the International Space Station in 2008. 42 minute video.

Adam Harris

Adam Harris: SpaceX and the Future. Adam Harris is Vice President for Government Affairs, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX). SpaceX President Elon Musk is recipient of the 2011 National Space Society Space Pioneer Award for Business Entrepreneur. 24 minute video.

ISDC Awards

NSS Awards Ceremony: 2011 ISDC Awards Ceremony in Huntsville, Alabama, May 21, 2011. 43 minute video.

ISDC 2011 Keynote Speech - Jeff Greason - A Settlement Strategy for NASA

Wednesday, June 1st, 2011

Jeff Greason’s speech at the Awards Dinner at the 2011 NSS International Space Development Conference is being widely regarded as a major statement in the field of space policy. A video of the speech is now on the NSS website.

Greason is President of XCOR Aerospace and was a member of the Augustine Committee (Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee) established by the White House in 2009. He began his talk by defining the differences between goals, strategies, objectives, and tactics.

“Between having a goal and having tactics, you have to have a strategy — and we don’t. Until we have one, we’re going to continue to flail.”

We do have a goal, says Greason. Although it’s not widely recognized, it can be found in nearly every major policy document and commission report over the last 25 years. The Augustine Report, for example, “concludes that the ultimate goal of human exploration is to chart a path for human expansion in to the solar system.” But none of them quite dare use the “S” word, even though that’s what they are really talking about — [whisper] settlement. The reason they don’t dare use the word is they are not sure we can do it.

This point is illustrated in one of Greason’s slides about the lack of a strategy for settlement:

Absense of strategy.

Absence of strategy.

Greason then laid out — nondogmatically, as one of many possible approaches — his ideas for a possible strategy. “The purpose of the initial human outpost is not to be there and look cool. It is not to unfurl flags and take pretty pictures, and it is not the holy grail of science, although we will get all of those things. It’s to make gas.” Basically, each destination has the resources to make propellant to help reach the next destination — a strategy he calls “Planet Hopping.”

Greason includes the following elements of a strategy for space settlement:

* The key is to realize that cost per human being in space MUST constantly decrease in order to succeed.

* Each capability we add MUST be designed from the outset to transition to a private sector supported activity. Only in that way can we add new capabilities with constant budget.

* Each step forward must make maximum use of in-situ resources, both to lower cost of operations and to provide low cost resources to support next steps. This allows for exponential growth over time rather than linear.

Greason also pointed out that we have to realize that NASA’s budget is not going to go up. However, he added “It’s my belief that if we pursued this the right way, we actually could afford to do this, all the way out to the first landings on Mars, for the kind of budget NASA’s getting now.”

But Greason warned that if we continue on the current path, without a strategy, “we’re going to build a big rocket, and then we’re going to hope a space program shows up to fly on it. And in my opinion, that strategy — the strategy of default — is going to result in the end of the NASA human spaceflight program.”

New International Law Textbook Discusses Lunar Real Estate

Friday, May 13th, 2011

A new international law textbook contains an article on “Space Settlements, Property Rights, and International Law: Could a Lunar Settlement Claim the Lunar Real Estate it Needs to Survive?” by Alan Wasser and Douglas Jobes. Wasser, a former CEO of the National Space Society, argues in favor of “Land Claims Recognition” to help fund lunar settlements.

If and when the Moon and Mars are settled in the future through other incentives, the nations of Earth will eventually have to recognize these settlements’ authority over their own land. But to create an incentive now, governments would need to commit to recognizing that ownership in advance, rather than long after the fact.

Land claims recognition legislation would commit the Earth’s nations, in advance, to allowing a true private Lunar settlement to claim and sell (to people back on Earth) a reasonable amount of Lunar real estate in the area around the base, thus giving the founders of the Moon settlement a way to earn back the investment they made to establish the settlement.

The 42-page article was originally published in the Journal of Air Law and Commerce, Vol. 73, No. 1, 2008. The full article in PDF format is available on the NSS website as part of the NSS Lunar Bases and Settlement Library (”Additional Papers” section).

The textbook, International Law: Contemporary Issues and Future Developments, edited by Sanford R. Silverburg, was published in March 2011 by Westview Press.

Letter from the NSS Legislative Blitz

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011

by Brian Cleaver

“I am definitely in.”

It was these four words that I had said to Rick Zucker, Executive Vice President of the National Space Society, on February 24, 2011, that gave me a very unique opportunity to directly impact the future of our country’s human space exploration program by bringing my thoughts and ideas on human space exploration directly to the heart of our country in Washington DC. The National Space Society, in the grassroots event known as the Legislative Blitz, visited Capitol Hill for a series of congressional meetings on Monday, February 28, 2011 and Tuesday, March 1, 2011. I was fortunate enough to be able to participate in a series of congressional meetings on that Monday.

With the National Space Society having the support of a group of organizations known as the Space Exploration Alliance, which includes Explore Mars, the Mars Society, Students for the Exploration and Development of Space, Federation of Galaxy Explorers, Space Generation Foundation, and numerous other notable organizations, the National Space Society had a very powerful message to deliver to our members of Congress which I was able to participate in sending. As a student studying International Relations at American University in Washington DC and as someone who has experience interning in the government, I can appreciate the uniqueness of this opportunity. I highly recommend that any student or other person get involved in participating in doing something they are passionate about – ensuring the success of our country’s space exploration program.

As a member and vice president of another space-related organization, Save NASA, I have a great deal of experience working on promoting the importance of human space exploration to our members of Congress by various means. Our organization was created shortly after President Obama announced changes to our country’s human space exploration program in February of 2010.

As a former student at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, Florida, I and other students who were a part of Save NASA at Embry-Riddle worked on promoting the importance of human space exploration to our members of Congress by organizing students at a Campus-Wide Presentation and by organizing what we named a Roadside Awareness Rally. We also created a petition that received 823 signatures from people across the United States and the world. Eventually, another student and I visited Capitol Hill on two occasions. We had a series of meetings with staffers from a variety of congressional offices to discuss how we feel that human space exploration can change our world like nothing else can and to discuss why we feel that human space exploration should be among the United States’ top priorities.

Nine months later, in February of 2011, as I was surfing the Internet, I coincidentally found out about the upcoming Legislative Blitz only five days before the first scheduled congressional meeting. While surprised at the convenient timing, at that point, I was really excited to hear that I would be able to get back to working on promoting the importance of space exploration to our members of Congress. I attended a meeting with my fellow “Blitzers” on Sunday, February 27, 2011. While there, I realized that I was in a room with very dedicated space enthusiasts who had flown across the United States to come to Washington DC to ensure the success of our country’s space exploration program.

The following day, we began the Legislative Blitz. The series of meetings I attended included meetings with the offices of well-known and very influential members of the House and Senate. In these meetings, I and other participants discussed the primary talking points outlined in the Space Exploration Alliance talking points document. These talking points emphasized the importance of launch capacity, utilizing the private sector, setting timelines and destinations, ensuring the continuation of researching and developing new technology, and ensuring that NASA’s long term mission of space exploration is sustained.

Coming from a group of students at Embry-Riddle who believe that going to the Moon and then onward to Mars is more beneficial than going to an asteroid and then Mars, I was given the opportunity to voice these personal views in these congressional meetings to people who have direct influence over our country’s space exploration program. I discussed my opinions by stating, among other things, how I believe that there are greater opportunities on the Moon due to it being closer to the Earth. I mentioned that going to the Moon opens up the opportunity for the establishment of a near Earth permanent lunar colony for scientific, economic and national security purposes. Furthermore, I was able to discuss how the Moon could lead the United States to utilizing an experimental energy source on the Moon known as Helium-3 that could potentially replace oil. I also was able to discuss our organization’s work and how students at Embry-Riddle, including myself, have played a role in ensuring the success of our country’s space exploration by influencing members of Congress.

Doubtlessly, by participating in the Blitz, I took part in an event that had an impact on our country’s space exploration program. A few weeks after the Legislative Blitz, I attended a NASA-related hearing and saw congressional staffers working at the hearing that I recognized from our meetings on the Hill during the Blitz. It is obvious that I had been a part of a series of very important meetings. Attending these meetings knowing that we can influence the direction of our country and our world was very unique and, overall, it was a lot of fun. The opportunity to attend congressional meetings is a great opportunity, and the opportunity to attend congressional meetings regarding something that a person is passionate about is an even greater opportunity. Without a doubt, joining the National Space Society for the 2011 Legislative Blitz was a tremendous opportunity which I recommend anyone who is passionate about space exploration take part in, and as the National Space Society has done in previous trips, I look forward to seeing our talking points play a tremendous influence in the direction of our country and our world.

NASA Budget for 2012

Friday, February 18th, 2011

NASA Budget

NASA’s 2012 Budget Estimate Overview can be found here (pdf).

The Budget Summary can be found here (pdf).

Funding Highlights:

  • Provides $18.7 billion, the same amount the agency received in 2010. Funding focuses on areas that will improve the Nation’s space capabilities, strengthen our competitive edge, and prepare the next generation of leaders in the field. The Budget also proposes to streamline operations and boost efficiencies at facilities
  • Maintains the Nation’s commitment to humanity’s foothold in space—the International Space Station—bringing nations together in a common pursuit of knowledge and excellence
  • Initiates development of a heavy-lift rocket and crew capsule to carry explorers beyond Earth’s orbit, including a mission to an asteroid next decade—the furthest journey in human history
  • Embraces partnership with the commercial space industry and the thousands of new jobs that it can create by contracting with American companies to provide astronaut transportation to the Space Station—thus reducing the risk of relying exclusively on foreign crew transport capabilities
  • Supports groundbreaking innovations by continuing a program of robotic solar system exploration and new astronomical observatories, including a probe that will fly through the Sun’s atmosphere and a new competitively-selected planetary science mission
  • Supports a robust and diverse fleet of Earth observation spacecraft to strengthen U.S. leadership in the field, better understand climate change, improve future weather predictions, and provide vital environmental data to Federal, State, and local policymakers
  • Sharpens the focus of the aeronautics research program by emphasizing enhancing aviation safety and airspace efficiency, and reducing the environmental impact of aviation
  • Initiates a pilot program to provide NASA Centers and surrounding communities with clean energy through the innovative use of NASA property