Private industry in space a risky, slow business: experts

Feb 04, 2010 by Jean-Louis Santini
This photo obtained from NASA shows a view of the International Space Station taken from the US space shuttle Endeavour in 2007. NASA's plan for the private sector to build spacecraft to fly astronauts to the International Space Station is a high-risk undertaking that won't show results for years, experts said.

NASA's plan for the private sector to build spacecraft to fly astronauts to the International Space Station is a high-risk undertaking that won't show results for years, experts said.

The abrupt shift "harnesses our nation's entrepreneurial energies, and will create thousands of new jobs," the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy said in a statement issued as the budget for the fiscal year that begins October 1 was unveiled Monday.

It also reflects a key recommendation made by the high-level Augustine Commission, which President Barack Obama set up last year to review US human flight plans and come up with a successor to the space shuttle, which winds down in late 2010 after nearly 30 years of service.

The US space agency's plan to turn manned space flight over to private enterprise was met with a less-than-enthusiastic reception in some quarters.

Obama has "accepted the move to put our human access to space on a commercial footing, with great uncertainty as to safety, schedule and cost," wrote four-time astronaut Tom Jones in the magazine Popular Mechanics.

John Logsdon, former head of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University, said critics of the new policy were "mainly concerned about safety."

Similar concerns about commercially built space vehicles figured high up in a report issued last month by the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP).

"No manufacturer of commercial orbital transportation services is currently qualified for human-rating requirements, despite some claims and beliefs to the contrary," ASAP's panel of independent experts said.

The annual report also warned it would be "unwise" to drop NASA's Ares 1 rocket, part of the costly Constellation project that was effectively killed by the budget plans, and hand over the ferrying of astronauts to the ISS to private industry.

ASAP was set up by Congress in 1967 after a flash fire ripped through a command module during a launch pad test of the Apollo/Saturn space vehicle, killing three astronauts on board.

Elon Musk, chief executive of SpaceX, one of the new generation of privately-owned companies with an eye on space, ripped into the ASAP report as "random speculation."

"If they are to say such things, then they ought to say it on the basis of data, not on random speculation," Musk, whose eight-year-old company has built and tested a launcher, said in an interview with Spaceflight Now.

Charles Precourt, former chief of NASA's astronaut corps and now an executive at aerospace and defense firm Alliant Techsystems, said in The Wall Street Journal that farming out large portions of the manned space program to private firms would be an "extremely high risk" path.

Putting all of NASA's spacecraft-building eggs in the basket of private industry was foolhardy, former astronaut Tom Jones said.

"Betting our nation's sole access to space on industry's ability to replicate 50 years of NASA experience on the fly is unwise. NASA should fly a new crewed spacecraft as quickly as possible, then move to commercial firms once they have a proven record of reliable cargo services," he wrote.

SpaceX already has a launcher, a capsule and a demonstration cargo contract with NASA.

Musk said SpaceX could be ready to ferry astronauts into space within three years of landing a human transport contract with NASA -- at a rate of about 20 million dollars per seat, less than half the 50 million that Russia currently charges NASA for seats on its Soyuz spacecraft.

SpaceX and other upstarts would be up against industry giants Boeing and Lockheed Martin, which together operate United Launch Alliance (ULA), whose stable includes Atlas V and Delta 4 rockets that have logged considerable flight hours.

ULA was awarded 6.7 million dollars on Monday to develop an Emergency Detection System, an element necessary for "a safe and highly reliable human-rated launch vehicle."

Logsdon said it was "very likely" that either ULA or one of its parent companies would earn a transport contract, and that the winning proposal would envision a flight-ready craft before 2016, the readiness date for the private sector put forward by the Augustine committee.

But he cautioned the date was too ambitious, and that the craft would have to be brought up to human-rated safety standards before they can carry into space.

Explore further: Europe sat-nav launch glitch linked to frozen pipe

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

NASA to get more money, but must scratch moon plan

Jan 28, 2010

(AP) -- President Barack Obama is essentially grounding efforts to return astronauts to the moon and instead is sending NASA in new directions with roughly $6 billion more, according to officials familiar with the plans.

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.

SpaceX Plans Reusable Seven Person Capsule

Mar 15, 2006

SpaceX said it plans to develop a reusable capsule that could carry a crew of up to seven into low Earth orbit, making it a competitor to assume some of the tasks of NASA's space shuttle fleet after it is retired.

Change in space for NASA: Renting the Right Stuff

Jan 31, 2010

(AP) -- Getting to space is about to be outsourced. The Obama administration on Monday will propose in its new budget spending billions of dollars to encourage private companies to build, launch and operate ...

Senator may have won fight over private rocket manufacturing

Jul 03, 2009

For months, a powerful Republican senator from Alabama has fought the Obama administration to block $150 million that the White House wanted to spend to help private companies build rockets capable of reaching the international ...

Recommended for you

Europe sat-nav launch glitch linked to frozen pipe

15 hours ago

A frozen fuel pipe in the upper stage of a Soyuz launcher likely caused the failure last month to place two European navigation satellites in orbit, a source close to the inquiry said Wednesday.

Cyanide ice in Titan's atmosphere

17 hours ago

Gigantic polar clouds of hydrogen cyanide roughly four times the area of the UK are part of the impressive atmospheric diversity of Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, a new study led by Leiden Observatory, ...

Video: Alleged meteor caught on Russian dash cam (again)

21 hours ago

Thanks to the ubiquity of dashboard-mounted video cameras in Russia yet another bright object has been spotted lighting up the sky over Siberia, this time a "meteor-like object" seen on the evening of Saturday, Sept. 27.

User comments : 4

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

david_42
4 / 5 (1) Feb 04, 2010
Having 7 private companies working on manned space programs is riskier than one government agency that is dedicated to producing more management jobs? NASA has spent $9 billion on Constellation and has put up one test vehicle, comprised entirely of dummy and mock-up parts.
rgw
4.5 / 5 (2) Feb 04, 2010
Remember, "An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications."
joefarah
not rated yet Feb 04, 2010
Whoa! NASA (and Russia) has sent astronauts to the ISS. Nobody else has. Why is that?

By all means fund private industry. If private industry is unable get astronauts to LEO by 2014, it will be costing NASA about $200M/yr for 4 astronauts (not their supplies). If one astronaut dies in the private industry effort, it will cause a delay of 3 years, plus a cost of several $B to fix it.

On top of all that, Ares V is a 25M-ton heavy lift vehicle - that's what we need. Not 10M-ton or less.

$9B went toward the entire Manned and Heavy Lift capability, including landing on the Moon - not to getting an astronaut to LEO. Ares I alone, is not the $100B program.

As well, the Augustine report had in mind using Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, etc. - established commercial enterprises that have built manned space vehicles. Guess who NASA was handing out the Ares contracts to? These same companies.

So you're really dealing with having the same companies do it with less NASA input.
NotAsleep
not rated yet Feb 04, 2010
As an example, the Air Force has been privatizing and outsourcing jobs and military projects at an increased rate for several decades. What we're finally starting to learn is that, while the initial cost may seem to be much smaller, the maintenance and upkeep of programs/systems (which account for 80% of a systems total cost) are significantly higher. There's a middle ground and I hope NASA finds it better than the Air Force