Just read this on the CNN site. Looks like Bush's plan is along the lines I was thinking. Finish off our obligations to the space station using the shuttle, then dump the budget for both. No more shuttle. Sounds like they're planning for Soyuz-like "Crew Exploration Vehicles" riding on top of rockets.
cnn.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Bush to seek billions for moon, Mars treks
From Miles O'Brien
CNN
Wednesday, January 14, 2004 Posted: 3:24 AM EST (0824 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Wednesday will call on Congress to increase funding for NASA by nearly a billion dollars annually over the next five years, while radically transforming the space agency's manned space flight goals -- from low Earth orbit -- to audacious missions to the moon and ultimately, Mars.
"I think what the president has touched on is an important aspect of what is part of our human makeup -- which is to be explorers," said NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe in an exclusive interview with CNN.
The nine-page executive policy directive will be unveiled Wednesday afternoon by the president during an address at NASA headquarters in Washington.
The directive will offer a detailed blueprint to lead NASA from its focus on the space shuttle and the International Space Station to a whole new class of rockets and spacecraft that will carry humans on exploratory journeys much longer and farther than the shuttle can travel.
Space shuttles are limited to low Earth orbit -- no higher than about 300 miles above the surface -- and can stay in space for slightly longer than two weeks. The International Space Station orbits the Earth at an altitude of about 240 miles.
The space agency will use its first spurt of new funding to begin work immediately on a so-called "Crew Exploration Vehicle" designed to carry small crews of people -- not cargo -- into deep space. The CEV may or may not be a reusable craft as the shuttle is.
"It is going to look totally different then what the space shuttle looks like today," said O'Keefe. "So we have to get about the business of developing that capability right away."
The Bush plan calls for NASA to fulfill its obligation to 15 other partner nations to complete the International Space Station in the next five to six years.
As it turns out, those station assembly and resupply sorties will be the final missions for the space shuttle fleet, which first flew in 1981 and is currently grounded in the wake of the Columbia tragedy a year ago.
As part of its investigation into that accident, which killed the seven-member crew, the Columbia Accident Investigation Board has told NASA it must re-certify the space shuttle fleet for flight if it wishes to continue using the fleet beyond 2010.
The Bush administration has decided not to initiate this onerous, expensive task, thus sealing the fate for the remaining shuttles -- Atlantis, Discovery and Endeavour.
NASA projects a new CEV might be ready for a mission to the moon by 2013. The space agency would like to establish a base on the surface of the moon -- as a test bed and way station for a manned Mars expedition -- which could come as soon as 2020.
"This is part of our makeup. It is part of what we do," said O'Keefe. "It is part of what defines great nations and great objectives."
There is congressional concern that the lofty goals in the Bush initiative may far exceed the proposed budget.
"The first year after [President John] Kennedy announced the Apollo program, the NASA budget was doubled," said Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Florida, the only current member of Congress who has flown in space.
"And in the second year it was doubled again. That's not realistic today. But five percent a year increases are not going to get us to the moon in 2013."
In fact, it cost the United States about $24 billion to put men on the moon in the 1960s -- $100 billion in today's dollars.
The $4 billion to $5 billion dollar increase proposed by the administration for NASA over the next five years pales by comparison.
But NASA administrator O'Keefe said the funding requested by the Bush administration is more akin to seed money for development, which will more precisely frame the debate for more funding in the future.
O'Keefe hopes NASA can develop a robust, modular system for space travel that will allow policy makers to make "a la carte" decisions on destinations.
"Each of the individual milestones or objectives is to be priced out," said O'Keefe. "It depends on which option you choose. But between now and then, the objective is to try to find the means to make any of those debates possible."
NASA said it will use money from the space shuttle and space station programs' budgets as they wind down to further fund the new space effort as it progresses.
If all goes according to plan, it appears likely there will be at least a three-year period beginning in 2010 when the United States will not have a vehicle capable of carrying humans to space.
While not unprecedented -- nearly six years elapsed between the last Apollo mission in 1975 and the first space shuttle flight in 1981-- it is an issue that is causing some concern among space advocates.
"There's going to be great concern in Congress and in NASA that you're going to have that period of time with no human space flight actual, no humans actually flying from the United States. We'll be dependent on the Russians for Soyuz," said Marc Schlather, president of ProSpace, a grass-roots space lobbying group.
The seed of this bold idea was planted in the summer of 2002, during O'Keefe's first months as administrator. The former Office of Management and Budget official, secretary of the Navy and congressional staffer came to NASA primarily to rein in the space station budget, which was spiraling out of control.
As the dust settled on that effort, O'Keefe began a series of discussions with people inside the agency to discuss NASA's long-range goals. O'Keefe said he was surprised that the agency had no plans to explore beyond low Earth orbit.
In separate discussions with President Bush, O'Keefe shared his surprise and began discussing a bolder vision for NASA. The president was immediately supportive, according to O'Keefe.
The idea was percolating within the administration when Columbia disintegrated over Texas on February 1.
In a tragic twist of irony, the loss of the orbiter and crew added new urgency and focus to the administration's big plans for NASA. |
