More Money, and a New Path to the Stars

Feb 02, 2010 by Leslie Mullen
Artist concept of the Ares rocket. NASA spent 9 billion dollars developing the Orion-Ares concept, but now wants to scrap the program. Credit: NASA

The Obama Administration plans to cancel NASA’s Constellation program that was to take American astronauts back to the Moon. Instead, NASA will oversee a competition among commercial space developers to come up with the technology to reach the stars.

Constellation was an umbrella program that included the development of a new type of , including the Ares rocket and the Orion crew module. A commission studying the feasibility of the program came to the conclusion that it was behind schedule, and there was not enough money or enough new technology development to allow the program to reach its goals.

“The commission looked under the hood and found a constellation of problems,” said Jim Kohlenberger, chief of staff of Obama's Office of Science and Technology Policy. He said that even though the goal of the Constellation program was to send humans back to the Moon by 2020, they couldn’t have achieved that goal until the 2030s, “if ever.” “It was called ‘20/20 vision.’ I think it was nearsighted by about 20 years,” he added.

NASA expects the commercial technology to launch humans into space should be in place by 2016. The Space Shuttle, which was scheduled for retirement in 2010, has 5 more launches planned for this year. Afterwards NASA will use Russian launchers to reach the . NASA wants to continue to invest in ISS for the next decade and beyond, using the facility to conduct scientific research.

According to astronaut Sally Ride, who was a member of the commission which reviewed the Constellation program, ISS was to be sacrificed after 2015 in order to pay for the Constellation program. She noted that other NASA programs also had suffered in order to pay for Constellation.

Size comparisons between the Saturn V rocket that took astronauts to the Moon, the space shuttle, and the Ares rocket designs. What sort of launch systems might be developed by the commercial space industry? Credit: NASA

There is a great deal of controversy in putting the human space program in the hands of the commercial sector. But NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said that commercial launch vehicles have carried all U.S. military and commercial satellites into orbit for many years, and NASA also has used commercial launch vehicles in the past.

“NASA will set standards and processes to ensure that these commercially built and operated crew vehicles are safe,” said Bolden. “No one cares about safety more than I. I flew on the space shuttle four times. I lost friends in the two tragedies. So I give you my word these vehicles will be safe.”

Bolden said that NASA has awarded Space Act Agreements for the development of human spaceflight to Blue Origin of Kent, Washington; The Boeing Company of Houston, Texas; Paragon Space Development Corporation of Tucson, Arizona; Sierra Nevada Corporation of Louisville, Colorado; and United Launch Alliance of Centennial, Colorado.

Buzz Aldrin, the astronaut who walked on the Moon with Neil Armstrong, endorses the proposed changes for NASA. “I am excited to think that the development of commercial capabilities to send humans into low Earth orbit will likely result in so many more Earthlings being able to experience the transformative power of spaceflight,” he said. “I can personally attest to the fact that the experience results in a different perspective on life on Earth, and on our future as a species.”

NASA also wants to work with the commercial sector and their international partners to take astronauts beyond low Earth orbit, for the exploration of the Moon, nearby asteroids, and Mars.

While the human exploration of our solar system remains a NASA goal, there are now no specific dates for achieving this, or even an indication of which missions would be attempted first. Lori Garver, NASA Deputy Administrator, said that specific details about future missions will be revealed in the next few months.

“The Moon definitely continues to be an important destination for the future,” said Garver. Asked whether she expects to see humans walking on the Moon again in her lifetime, Garver responded, “I absolutely believe that. I believe I could do it myself, as a matter of fact.”

“We’re not canceling our ambitions to explore space; we’re canceling Constellation,” she added.

Other changes in the proposed budget include a plan to improve the facilities at the Kennedy Space Center to make it “a 21st century launch complex”, and an increased focus on Earth climate science.

NASA would receive a budget increase of 6 billion dollars over 5 years, which adds up to a total budget of 100 billion dollars over those 5 years. This budget increase, as well as the Obama administration’s plan to cancel the Constellation program, will need to be approved by Congress before it can be put into effect.

Explore further: Informing NASA's Asteroid Initiative: A citizen forum

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

NASA proposes $17.6 billion budget

Feb 05, 2008

U.S. space officials proposed spending $17.6 billion next year with a focus on the International Space Station and space shuttle programs.

GAO finds risks in NASA program

Apr 03, 2008

The U.S. Government Accountability Office says it's found major risks to the successful development of NASA's replacement for the space shuttle.

NASA: Good night moon, hello new rocket technology

Feb 01, 2010

(AP) -- President Barack Obama is redirecting America's space program, killing NASA's $100 billion plans to return astronauts to the moon and using much of that money for new rocket technology research.

Space commercialization contract signed

Feb 01, 2007

NASA says it has signed a space commercialization contract with PlanetSpace Inc. of Chicago and the Transformational Space Corp. of Reston, Va.

Recommended for you

Informing NASA's Asteroid Initiative: A citizen forum

6 hours ago

In its history, the Earth has been repeatedly struck by asteroids, large chunks of rock from space that can cause considerable damage in a collision. Can we—or should we—try to protect Earth from potentially ...

Image: Rosetta's comet looms

12 hours ago

Wow! Rosetta is getting ever-closer to its target comet by the day. This navigation camera shot from Aug. 23 shows that the spacecraft is so close to Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko that it's difficult to ...

A salty, martian meteorite offers clues to habitability

12 hours ago

Life as we know it requires energy of some sort to survive and thrive. For plants, that source of energy is the Sun. But there are some microbes that can survive using energy from chemical reactions. Some ...

User comments : 3

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

TexasMeteorites
1 / 5 (3) Feb 02, 2010
The Constellation program is being scrapped. This is really bad news. I was looking forward to these programs successfully launching their vehicles. Is there anything we can do to salvage the program? What portion of these programs is tethered to employee medical care costs? Are the premiums too high and not really producing anything or are they merely insurance policies? What about cutting costs at the university research levels and stop funding such things as fake meteoritics research. Such as that sponsored by MAPS which is almost completely bogus as shown at this link.

http://www.bccmet...ary.html
david_42
5 / 5 (2) Feb 02, 2010
The Aries 1 made no sense at all and if we really need a heavy-lift vehicle, something like the Shuttle C would be far less expensive than Aries V.
RoboticExplorer
not rated yet Feb 03, 2010
The Constellation program is being scrapped. This is really bad news. I was looking forward to these programs successfully launching their vehicles. Is there anything we can do to salvage the program? What portion of these programs is tethered to employee medical care costs? Are the premiums too high and not really producing anything or are they merely insurance policies? ... Such as that sponsored by MAPS which is almost completely bogus as shown at this link.

@TexasMeteorites: Your entire post is sarcasm? Right? Or are you really suggesting cutting University research, Education, and that an over budget, ridiculously expensive,$100+Billion program to replicate something we did 41 years ago is a good idea? One more question, what on earth does NASA employee medical costs have to do with the Space program? Your link also does not have any independent references to justify its claims.