{"id":39638,"date":"2014-02-25T22:23:47","date_gmt":"2014-02-25T14:23:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wp-productionenv-bjg9h2g2bgg5b8aa.southeastasia-01.azurewebsites.net\/news\/asap-claim-nasa-is-employing-indecision-to-allow-for-roadmap-flexibility\/"},"modified":"2014-02-25T22:23:47","modified_gmt":"2014-02-25T14:23:47","slug":"asap-claim-nasa-is-employing-indecision-to-allow-for-roadmap-flexibility","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/news\/asap-claim-nasa-is-employing-indecision-to-allow-for-roadmap-flexibility\/","title":{"rendered":"ASAP claim NASA is employing indecision to allow for roadmap flexibility"},"content":{"rendered":"

Concerns have again been raised about NASA\u2019s shaky exploration roadmap, with the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) claiming the Agency has elected to go down the \u201cindecision-is-the-key-to-flexibility\u201d path. Although only two missions have been manifested, the panel cited concerns about launching a crew into deep space on what would be the debut of Orion\u2019s life support system.<\/p>\n

Roadmap \u2013 or lack thereof:<\/p>\n

Uncertainty over NASA\u2019s return to Beyond Earth Orbit (BEO) exploration is nothing new.<\/p>\n

Most of the issues are casualty of politics, with NASA\u2019s budget constantly under negotiation, without a long-term funding cycle that would be required for a concerted push towards human missions to Mars.<\/p>\n

NASA\u2019s budget is also spread over numerous objectives, usually resulting in starved flagship programs, sometimes the cause of delays and additional costs.<\/p>\n

\"Z5\"Billions of dollars have been secured to build NASA\u2019s next flagship launch vehicle, the Space Launch System (SLS) \u2013 a very capable Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (HLV) that utilizes flight proven hardware.<\/p>\n

However, the current NASA budget has resulted in SLS window shopping for payloads, with a credit card that\u2019s maxed out.<\/p>\n

SLS will debut in 2017, a test flight that employs the 70mT Block 1 version of the HLV, lofting an Orion on a mission that will send the spacecraft 70,000 km past the Moon on a 25 day flight.<\/p>\n

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});<\/p>\n

\"Z6\"The Exploration Mission -1 (EM-1) launch date is fallout from a previous political requirement to be ready to launch a crew to the International Space Station (ISS), in the event NASA\u2019s Commercial Crew Program (CCP) suffered a major schedule issue.<\/p>\n

As a result of this 2017 target, the monster rocket would then spend four years waiting for her next mission, a near-repeat of EM-1, but this time with a crew, potentially hooking up with a captured asteroid near the Moon. However, this mission continues to be portrayed with a number of worrying caveats.<\/p>\n

One problem relates to the large effort that will be required to actually target and capture an asteroid. A lot will depend on identifying a suitable space rock, ahead of a 2019 mission to capture it and transport it into the region targeted for EM-2 two years later.<\/p>\n

\"Z3A\"Another problem relates to the current scenario where the ambitious deep space mission would be the debut crew mission on Orion.<\/p>\n

Key to the safety of the astronauts on EM-2 is the Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS), as noted at the latest ASAP meeting at the Johnson Space Center (JSC).<\/p>\n

\u201cA topic of energetic discussion and interest was the December 2017 EM-1 mission and the EM-2 crewed mission, targeted for August 2021. EM-1 is an uncrewed, full-system launch and extended duration flight, but it may launch without a working Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS),\u201d noted the meeting\u2019s minutes.<\/p>\n

\"Crew\u201cThe first crewed mission (EM-2 in August 2021) would be the first flight of the full-up ECLSS, and it is being examined in terms of options. The baseline is a high lunar orbit (HLO), but there are discussions about stretching that mission to send two crew members on an asteroid sample return mission.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Panel\u2019s concern is: Should we take on that aggressive an approach on the first crewed mission on a new system?\u201d<\/p>\n

Panel member Dr. Donald McErlean provided an interesting response, noting there are evaluations into \u201csome intermediary missions,\u201d cited as \u201cin addition\u201d to EM-1 and EM-2.<\/p>\n

Few details were provided, other than a reference to \u201cone of which involves several orbits around the Earth to do ECLSS check-out before doing a HLO.\u201d Dr. McErlean noted none of these have been selected, but they are being considered.<\/p>\n

\"Z8\"It has previously been noted that the first crewed mission could combine those objectives, spending 30 hours in a High Elliptical Orbit (HEO), prior to heading out into deep space, allowing for a confidence checkout of the ECLSS.<\/p>\n

With the ECLSS question providing another consideration to when the first crew will launch on Orion, along with the potential it won\u2019t be on the EM-2 asteroid mission, the ASAP chair stepped in to talk about the uncertainty surrounding the opening salvo of NASA\u2019s exploration roadmap.<\/p>\n

VADM (Ret.) Joseph Dyer noted that while the incremental aspect of SLS and ESD (Exploration Systems) is interesting, \u201cit is easy to see where it comes from.\u201d<\/p>\n

See Also<\/h4>\n