Panel discusses future of human spaceflight in U.S.

By Ellen Liu     2/17/11 6:00pm

Students, alumni, faculty and staff explored space at a panel discussion about human spaceflight in the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy on Tuesday, Feb. 15. The presentation, titled "U.S. Human Spaceflight: Continuity and Stability," discussed NASA's future plans, including the possible commercialization of space travel, and featured prominent speakers from the aeronautics industry. It was sponsored by the Baker Institute's Space Policy Program - a regular sponsor of such space-related events.

Baker Botts law firm Senior Fellow in Space Policy George Abbey gave a brief history of recent space exploration, recounting the completion of the International Space Station and the reduction of the space shuttle program since then. He said that the U.S. had been using Russian and Japanese vehicles to transport astronauts to the station and that, in his opinion, none of the foreign aircrafts were more conducive to scientific research than the shuttle, which can carry up to 60,000 pounds into space and bring a significant load back to Earth as well. Abbey also said that though the space shuttle has been brought back into consideration for spaceflight, government officials and businessmen alike have called for its privatization, which - according to Abbey - is a good next step.

United Space Alliance Vice President and Space Shuttle Program Manager Howard DeCastro discussed the feasibility of commercial shuttle operation, listing the vehicle's strengths and citing some issues that needed to be resolved. According to DeCastro, the shuttle's orbiters now have additional service life, its recertification is complete and approved, vendors are available to provide its parts and its team is ready for flight.

---

---

According to DeCastro, people wouldn't have to worry about the shuttle's performance and safety or about a lack of personnel support because all of those elements are solid.

"We've retained the workforce and its critical skills," DeCastro said. "Why are people staying? They want to complete the mission, and they care about the shuttle, human spaceflight, the safety of the astronauts and each other."

DeCastro described NASA's strategic plan in 2011 as extending and sustaining human activities across the solar system, making full use of the International Space Station through 2020 and supporting commercial and cargo operations.

Regarding the usage of the space station, DeCastro explained that America was currently relying on Russia and other sources for transportation but the shuttle would both provide a logistical advantage and give the U.S. their own method of sending astronauts to the station. He also said the shuttle was a known vehicle with a history of successful missions.

In discussing the problem of funding the shuttle, DeCastro mentioned that NASA would need a significant commercial investment and a pay-as-you-go strategy, particularly if they wanted to utilize a newly developed Shuttle Derived Vehicle. According to DeCastro, the new SDV - which would help propel the shuttle into space - would lower costs and quicken the delivery process.

"There is a strong case for continued use of the shuttle if the SDV is NASA's choice for exploration," DeCastro said, "But in the end, it's NASA's decision."

Space Shuttle Program Manager at the Johnson Space Center Robert Thompson then discussed NASA's presence in the federal budget, stating that the space organization had, at one point, comprised five percent of the budget but currently only received one half of a percent of the funds - about $19 billion.

"The shuttle program is an iceberg; all you're seeing is the tip of the iceberg," Thompson said. "There are billions of dollars of infrastructure behind the shuttle program, and I think the country will have its head up in a log if it throws that infrastructure away and goes back to hiring a taxicab from the Russians and . building a great big spacecraft if they don't even know what they want to do with it."

Both Thompson and former chief engineer of the Apollo program George Jeffs spoke about the specifications and increased safety of the shuttle, including its improved reentry system and stated that the shuttle represented a stepping stone to further research in more advanced space craft. In addition, Jeffs said United Space Alliance should take the space shuttle program from NASA and proceed with its privatization because it was the prime time to do so.

"The fact [is]: we have flown so many missions and are so far down the learning curve [that it] makes that opportunity real," Jeffs said. "We will never have a better chance to put together a space [airline] than we've got right now, not only from the point of view of the maturity of the vehicle but from the point of view of the maturity of the operating teams."

Glenn Smith, a retired NASA manager of systems engineering for the space shuttle, listened to the panel discussion and said he enjoyed the talk and agreed with NASA's desire to continue using and commercialize the shuttle.

"The shuttle is the most practical, fastest, lowest cost way to keep Americans flying in space without paying the Russians, which is a downer for everybody," Smith said.

However, Smith cited NASA's failure to endorse the SDV as a misstep on their part because, in his opinion, the new heavy lift vehicle had been proven effective and should be used in the shuttle.

Tony Castilleja, a graduate student in mechanical engineering, said he had worked in the space shuttle program and also supported its commercialization. However, he cited funding as one of the issues NASA faced in pursuing this goal.

"I think the idea is good, but the delivery of policy, contacts and proposals is subpar," Castilleja said. "I hope we've found a way forward that'll save jobs and talent and reinvigorate a passion for space exploration that has been lost in the discussions.

---