The lights may be starting to go out for NASA\u2019s Space Launch System program.<\/p>\n
On Wednesday, one of the Republican space policy leaders most consistently opposed to commercial heavy lift rockets over the last decade\u2014as an alternative to NASA\u2019s large SLS rocket\u2014has changed his mind.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe need an off-ramp for reliance on the SLS,\u201d said Scott Pace, director of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University, in written testimony. He issued the statement in advance of a hearing about US space policy, and the future of NASA\u2019s Artemis Moon program, before a subcommittee of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.<\/p>\n
A physicist and influential policy expert, Pace has decades of experience researching and writing space policy. He has served in multiple Republican administrations, most recently as executive secretary of the National Space Council from 2017 to 2020. He strongly advocated for the SLS rocket after Congress directed NASA to develop it in 2011.<\/p>\n
\u201cIdeally, NASA should be able to buy heavy lift services to send payloads to the Moon\u2014up to about 45 metric tons to \u2018trans-lunar injection\u2019 which is about the same performance as the SLS Block 2,\u201d Pace wrote. \u201cI was a supporter of SLS when it was created as NASA required heavy-lift vehicles to send humans to the Moon and Mars. At the time, it did not appear (to me) that a private sector heavy-lift vehicle would be feasible within two decades. Today, the situation is different, with heavy-lift options from SpaceX, Blue Origin, and United Launch Alliance.\u201d<\/p>\n
,<\/p>\n
As part of his policy recommendations, Pace said NASA should seek to use commercial providers of heavy lift launch so that NASA can send \u201cmultiple\u201d crew and cargo missions to the Moon each year. He notes that the SLS rocket is not reusable and is incapable of a high flight rate. \u201cIt has had one flight, but has trouble supporting one flight per year, much less congressional targets of two \u2018cores\u2019 per year,\u201d Pace said.<\/p>\n
The US Congress has long championed the SLS rocket, in large part because it has delivered jobs to favored NASA centers and districts. Essentially, the program was established to continue jobs that were attached to the Space Shuttle program after that vehicle ended its tenure in 2011.<\/p>\n
Pace\u2019s comments may land with a thud on the desk of Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas), who chairs the House Science Committee, and may not have expected this tone toward the SLS when Pace was invited to the hearing. Earlier this month Babin reiterated his support for the rocket program, saying, \u201cThere\u2019s no other way we\u2019re going to get back to the surface of the Moon before the Chinese without the SLS.\u201d<\/p>\n
This is why Pace\u2019s comments are so notable. He has long been a voice in favor of traditional space policy and served as a key architect of the Artemis program during the first Trump administration. However, in his testimony he says the use of commercial space technologies is necessary in order to have a more sustainable lunar program.<\/p>\n
,<\/p>\n
\u201cA revised Artemis campaign plan should be a high priority for the new NASA Administrator,\u201d Pace wrote. \u201cThere may be some painful adjustments with industry and our international partners, but it is better to do so now than to continue on an unsustainable, unaffordable path. The Artemis policy is a good one, supported by Congress and multiple administrations. However, we need a more sustainable and credible approach.\u201d<\/p>\n
In terms of NASA\u2019s budget, to justify its funding or seek more resources, Pace says the agency needs to innovate more and that traditional programs of record should be used \u201conly as a last resort.\u201d He also says the agency could consider options, such as ending the life of the International Space Station before 2030, due to its age and an increasing number of anomalies.<\/p>\n
Pace also said he believes that the space agency should target both the Moon and Mars.<\/p>\n
Although he does not think a human landing on Mars is feasible within the next five years, Pace said that a human flyby of the red planet might be possible during that time frame, or potentially a return of Mars soil samples.<\/p>\n
Pace also sets out the rationale for human expansion into the Solar System. The nation\u2019s long-term goal should be the sustainable development of spaceflight activities, and human expansion into the Solar System.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn the near-term, lunar settlements might be similar to Antarctic research stations,\u201d Pace wrote. \u201cIn the longer term, those settlements and those on Mars have the potential to be entirely new communities much as the Great American Desert was transformed by the coming of the railroad. While there are massive technical, economic, and biological uncertainties, the vision of becoming a multi-planetary species is certainly an exciting one. The goal of \u2018Mars\u2019 is not just a race but can be thought of as a shorthand term for much bigger, indefinite objectives for America\u2019s future.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The lights may be starting to go out for NASA\u2019s Space Launch System program. On Wednesday, one of the Republican space policy leaders most consistently opposed to commercial heavy lift rockets over the last decade\u2014as an alternative to NASA\u2019s large SLS rocket\u2014has changed his mind. \u201cWe need an off-ramp for reliance on the SLS,\u201d said […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":44437,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[5146,624,21],"class_list":["post-44434","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-scott-pace","tag-sls","tag-space"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44434"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=44434"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44434\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/44437"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=44434"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=44434"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=44434"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}