Senior panel that reviewed the manned space program: NASA's budget must be increased or the landing on the moon will be delayed or canceled

The panel proposed five alternatives that include difficult choices such as abandoning the space station, or postponing the development of landing systems on the moon

A panel asked to review NASA's manned space program gave the White House a 12-page review of its findings, including two options for replacing the aging shuttle fleet.
The panel, chaired by former Lockheed-Martin CEO Norman Augustine, will not release the full report before the end of September.

The committee determined five alternatives for manned flights and found that according to the current budget there is no ability to fly beyond a low route.
Among her recommendations:

• A significant staffed activity can be done in a less stressed budget, which will increase by about 3 billion dollars above the proposed 2010 budget
• The funding must increase to a level that will allow a launch to the moon first or that will give NASA flexibility in choosing the flights, and that will be able to give results in a reasonable time window.

Of the five basic options highlighted in the summary, two call for the continuation of the Constellation program, under which NASA is developing the Orion passenger vehicle and the Ares 1 launcher to replace the shuttle, as well as the Ares 5 heavy cargo launcher, and another system that will allow the agency to return astronauts to the moon. Four of the options include a recommendation to postpone the retirement of the ferries from the end of 2010 as currently planned to some time in 2011. One of the proposals raises the possibility of extending the program until 2015.

The first option, which serves as the baseline, describes what would happen if NASA continued the Constellation program according to NASA's five-year budget. According to this proposal, US involvement in the International Space Station will end in 2016. However, this option does not fund the continued launch of the shuttles in 2011, but also does not fund the abandonment of the space station.
Orion and Ares 1 will not be available before 2016. Ares 5, meanwhile, will not be available until the late XNUMXs, and the Altair lander and other systems planned to operate on the moon will not be available well into the XNUMXs, if at all, the report said.

Therefore, several alternative recommendations were prepared. The second option, which is done in accordance with the current NASA budget - 18 billion dollars, talks about extending the life of the space station until the year 2020, and starting work on a smaller version of the Ares 5 cargo launcher. This option also includes funding for a technological development program and assistance for the development of manned launch capabilities In the hands of the private market that will be used to put astronauts into low altitude orbit. Even according to this plan, there will be no ability to launch heavy payloads until the mid-twenties and beyond, and it does not include funding for the development of other systems required for landing on the moon.

The other three options rely on a scenario that includes an increase of 3 billion dollars per year in the NASA budget (that is, 21 billion dollars per year instead of 18 billion) until the year 2014, and then a growth in the rate of inflation estimated at about 2.4% per year. The first of these options includes the continued development of the Constellation program, but also the launch of the space station in 2016 and the extension of the shuttle project until 2011. In this framework, NASA will continue to develop Orion, Ares 1 and Ares 5, with the maiden flight of the passenger capsule and the launcher expected in 2017 and landing on The moon in the mid-twenties.

A fourth option - known as 'the moon first' would include extending the life of the space station until 2020, funding technological development and relying on commercial systems to bring passengers into low orbit. There are two variations to this version - one calls for the cessation of the shuttles in 2011 and the development of a lighter version of Ares 7, and the other includes the extension of the shuttles to 2015, and the development of a cargo launcher based on those used by the shuttle, with the goal of flying to the moon in the mid-twenties.
The fifth option known as the flexible route will begin with manned flights beyond low orbit in the early twenties, including flights near the moon, visits to the Lagrange points and near-Earth objects, as well as approach flights to Mars. These events will occur at a rate of one per year, with a landing on one of the Martian moons or a return to the Moon expected in the late XNUMXs.

Summary:

• The right task at the right size - NASA's budget must match the agency's missions and goals. Moreover, NASA must be given the ability to design the organization and infrastructure accordingly, and to maintain the necessary infrastructure to continue being an important national body.
• international partnership: The US can lead a courageous international effort in the field of manned space research. If the international partners are encouraged to be involved, including a critical path to success, this will have positive consequences in the field of foreign policy, and more resources can be made available.
• Short-term planning regarding the space shuttles: The existing ferry fleet can be launched safely and proudly. The ferry operations must be extended until the second quarter of 2011. It is necessary to budget for this option.
• The gap in manned launches - In the current situation, the gap in the USA's ability to launch astronauts into space may continue for seven years. The committee did not identify any attempt to find a solution to reduce the gap to at least six years. The only way to reduce the gap would be through the extension of the ferry program.
• Extension of space station activity: The return on investment for both the US and its international partners will increase as the life of the station is extended. Failure to extend the operation will harm the US's ability to develop and lead international partnerships in the space field in the future.
• Lifting heavy loads: The ability to launch heavy loads into a low longitude orbit in addition to the ability to transport cargo far from Earth's orbit is an important ability and it will also be useful for the scientific community and the national security community. The committee examined the Ares family of launchers, launchers based on the shuttle's capabilities and launchers from the EELV family. Each such approach has advantages and disadvantages, trade-offs, life cycle costs, operational complexity and a different way of doing business within the program and with NASA.
• A commercial spacecraft to lift passengers into low orbit: Commercial services that will enable the raising of crew members to low earth orbit are within reach. While this may cause risk, it can also provide early capabilities at a lower cost than the government can achieve. A new competition that will also provide appropriate incentives can open the market to all aerospace manufacturers in the US and will allow NASA to focus on more challenging things, including manned launches beyond Earth's orbit, based on the continued development of Orion and its adaptation.
• Technology development for manned flights and commercialization of space: Investing in a planned and funded technology development program is a critical step in order to enable progress. The manned flight strategy can be achieved in a faster and more economical way if the required technology is developed in advance. This investment will also help robotic missions, the commercial space industry and other government users.
• Orbit to Mars: Mars is an ultimate destination for manned flights, but it is not a good first destination. A visit to the moon first followed by a flexible route to reach Mars is essential to the success of the plan. The two do not have to be bound together. Before the journey to Mars, we must master the technologies in free space and gain experience working on the surface of the moon.

For the report on the NASA website

More on the subject on the science website

• NASA wants to return to the moon by 2018
• The official announcement of the Orion program (2005)
• The Apollo program - what would have happened if