Category: Civil

House SS&T Committee Clears 2014 NASA Authorization Bill

House SS&T Committee Clears 2014 NASA Authorization Bill

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 29, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 29, 2014 11:33 pm ET

Bipartisanship was the order of the day at the full committee markup of the 2014 NASA Authorization Act (H.R. 4412) this afternoon.  The bill cleared the committee on a voice vote after adopting a manager’s amendment to the text that was approved by the Space Subcommittee earlier this month.

The bill provides funding recommendations only for FY2014, which is already underway, so are not very relevant.  Instead, the bill’s importance hinges on its policy aspects.  It does not include language adopted last year on a party-line vote prohibiting spending on President Obama’s Asteroid Redirect Mission, for example.  Instead, it states that a core mission of NASA is to land people on Mars and using missions to the surface of the Moon, cis-lunar space, near-Earth asteroids, Lagrange points and the moons of Mars are fine as long as they are incorporated in a Human Exploration Roadmap that NASA is required to develop and provide to Congress.

The bill also reaffirms that NASA is a multi-mission agency supporting a balanced program of human spaceflight and exploration, earth and space science missions, and aeronautics.

Among its more specific features, the bill prohibits NASA from spending FY2014 funds to shut down or prepare to shut down the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA).  The Obama Administration is proposing in its FY2015 budget request to mothball the airplane-based observatory because it cannot afford its $80 million per year operating costs.   Although that is part of the FY2015 budget request, which is not addressed in this bill, there is concern that NASA might use existing funds in FY2014 to begin the process of shutting down SOFIA, a joint project between NASA and its German counterpart, DLR.  FY2014 ends on September 30, however, and whether this bill becomes law before then is problematical.  Many members of this committee oppose the decision to put SOFIA in storage.

The bill as approved by subcommittee, and the manager’s amendment to it approved today, are on the committee’s website.  Perhaps what was most remarkable about the action today is that it was conducted in such a bipartisan manner, quite a difference compared to last year.  The bill approved by the committee last year on party-line votes was never reported from committee.  This bill, H.R. 4412, is the replacement.  Rep. Donna Edwards (D-MD), the top Democrat on the Space Subcommittee, said today “we are light years from where we began in 2013.”

Last Updated: Apr 29, 2014 11:33 pm ET
Orbital and ATK Announce Merger

Orbital and ATK Announce Merger

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 29, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 29, 2014 11:25 am ET

Orbital Sciences Corporation and ATK announced this morning that they will merge into a new company, Orbital ATK, headed by Orbital’s President and CEO David Thompson. The deal is expected to close in December 2014.

The merged company will be headquartered in Dulles, VA where Orbital currently is located and will have eight major operating locations in Arizona, California, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia.  ATK will spin-off its sporting group to its shareholders, who will hold 100 percent ownership of it.   ATK shareholders will own 53.8 percent of Orbital ATK and Orbital shareholders will own the other 46.2 percent.  The merger will be a stock-for-stock exchange using the tax-free “Morris” structure.

Calling it a “merger of equals,” a presentation from the companies point out the synergies.  Orbital develops and manufacturers small- and medium-class space systems, space and suborbital launch vehicles, commercial and scientific satellites, and advanced space systems for national security and human exploration.  ATK produces solid rocket propulsion systems for space and strategic applications; precision weapons, missile warning systems and tactical rocket motors; munitions; and composite aerostructures and satellite components.

The merged company will have 13,000 employees and combined revenue of $4.5 billion.

Last Updated: Apr 29, 2014 11:25 am ET
Rogozin Warns Sanctions Could Boomerang, Suggests Trampoline for Sending Astronauts to ISS

Rogozin Warns Sanctions Could Boomerang, Suggests Trampoline for Sending Astronauts to ISS

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 29, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 29, 2014 4:56 pm ET

Statements attributed to Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin appear to be the first public linkage between tensions over Ukraine and the future of U.S. astronauts aboard the International Space Station (ISS).  U.S. officials have repeatedly insisted that the ISS would not be affected by the deterioration in U.S.-Russian relations.  This appears to be the first public statement by a Russian official.

Russia’s Interfax news agency reportedly quoted Rogozin as saying that “Sanctions are always a boomerang which come back and painfully hit those who launched them.”  He also reportedly said that if the aim of new sanctions imposed by the Obama Administration yesterday are intended “to deliver a blow to Russia’s rocket-building sector, then by default they would be exposing their astronauts on the ISS.”  The Obama Administration announced restrictions on exports to Russia yesterday for items on the U.S. Munitions List — which includes commercial satellites — if they might aid Russia’s military.  Details were not provided.

Rogozin’s comments were in Russian and English translations were reported by a number of western news outlets, some of which also cited remarks along the same lines on Rogozin’s Russian-language Twitter account.  Alan Boyle of NBC News reports that Rogozin suggested via Twitter that the United States “bring their astronauts to the International Space Station using a trampoline.”

The United States and the other non-Russian partners in the ISS have had to rely on Russian Soyuz rockets and spacecraft to get back and forth to the ISS on a routine basis since the space shuttle was terminated in 2011.  The ISS crews also must rely on the Soyuz spacecraft as “lifeboats” in case they need to evacuate the station in an emergency.   Today, there are three Russians, two Americans and one Japanese aboard the ISS.  NASA continues to report that all is well there.   Russia and the United States jointly operate the ISS and it would extremely difficult for one to operate it without the other.

The United States, Europe, Japan and Canada — all partners in the ISS — each announced new sanctions against Russia in the past two days because of its activities in Ukraine.  CNN has a handy list of the individuals and entities that have been sanctioned so far.  None appears to be directly related to space station activities other than Rogozin himself, who was among the first group of Russians sanctioned by the United States in March.   As noted, the Obama Administration also is restricting exports to Russia that might aid Russia’s military.  It also instructed NASA to limit its cooperation with Russia other than for activities that are exempted, such as ISS.

Congressional actions are also reflecting the current tensions.  The House Armed Services Committee’s Strategic Forces subcommittee is preparing to mark up its section of the FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act tomorrow.  Among other things, it plans to provide $220 million to DOD to develop an American-built liquid rocket engine to replace the Russian RD-180 engines used for Atlas V rockets.  Instead of referring to “Russian” engines, though, the language refers to “non-allied.”  The bill also requires a report from DOD assessing threats to U.S. space operations especially from China and Russia.

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), who chairs the House Appropriations subcommittee that funds NASA, said in a speech yesterday, that the United States is facing “real competition in space” not only from China, but “for the first time since the end of the Cold War, an overtly hostile Russia that is threatening our allies in Europe.”

Last Updated: Apr 29, 2014 4:56 pm ET
Wolf Insists Return to Moon Should be Next Step and Congress Would Pay For It

Wolf Insists Return to Moon Should be Next Step and Congress Would Pay For It

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 28, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 28, 2014 7:57 pm ET

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) insisted today that the next step for the U.S. human spaceflight program should be a return to the Moon, underscoring once again the lack of consensus on the nation’s future space program.   Another prominent House member insists on a flyby of Mars in 2021, while President Obama wants to go to an asteroid.  Wolf’s enthusiasm for returning to the Moon was coupled with optimism that Congress would increase NASA’s budget to pay for such a goal.

Wolf knows a lot about money and Congress — he chairs the House Appropriations Committee’s Commerce-Justice-Science (CJS) subcommittee, which funds NASA.  A veteran lawmaker, he plans to retire from Congress after 17 terms at the end of this year.

In his talk to George Washington University’s Space Policy Institute this afternoon, Wolf lambasted the Obama Administration for everything from a lack of leadership on the space program to the worst human rights record of any recent U.S. administration because of failure to intervene in crises such as Darfur.  In addition to his work on the appropriations committee, Wolf is co-chairman of the congressional Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission.  A substantial portion of Wolf’s talk today was about human rights abuses in China, Sudan and elsewhere.  China’s poor human rights record is a major reason that Wolf opposes U.S. space cooperation with that country.

Regarding NASA’s future in human spaceflight, Wolf criticized the Obama Administration’s decision to terminate the Bush-era Constellation program that focused on a human return to the Moon by 2020 as a step towards sending humans to Mars.  Scott Pace, Director of SPI and host of today’s event, was a high ranking NASA official when the Constellation program was designed and initially implemented under the leadership of then-Administrator Mike Griffin.

Wolf has been relentless in his criticism of the decision to terminate the Constellation program, ardently arguing that a return to the Moon is a program that would appeal to U.S. taxpayers and international partners alike.   NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden told Congress last year that the reason the United States is not sending astronauts back to the lunar surface is because it does not have the estimated $8-10 billion needed to build a lunar lander. 

Today, Wolf was asked whether Congress would increase NASA’s budget to pay for a lunar return of if NASA would have to stop doing other activities in order to find the money.  He said that if a President now or in the future announced a plan to return to the Moon, that would be a “game-changer” and lead to increased NASA funding.

The Constellation program, with a human return to the lunar surface as its centerpiece, was cancelled by the Obama Administration after a review by the 2009 Augustine Committee found that it was not affordable unless NASA’s budget was increased by $3 billion per year.  The Bush Administration did not request such increases and while Congress did increase NASA’s budget in some years, it was not by that amount.

The Augustine Committee laid out options for the human spaceflight program, but did not make recommendations.   Months later, the Obama Administration cancelled the Constellation program and instead proposed to augment NASA’s budget over 5 years by $6 billion to invest in game-changing technologies especially in propulsion, extend operations of the International Space Station (ISS) to 2020 (from 2015), and use government money to facilitate development of commercial crew systems to take astronauts to and from ISS.  The announcement,  made as part of the FY2011 budget submission on February 1, 2010 rather than as a separate policy statement, stunned and infuriated members of Congress from both political parties.  The President consequently gave a speech at Kennedy Space Center on April 15, 2010 where he announced his vision for the future of the human spaceflight program:  to send astronauts to an asteroid by 2025 and to orbit (not land on) Mars in the 2030s.  A human landing on Mars would follow, he said, within his lifetime.

Wolf today decried President Obama’s asteroid mission — currently the
Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) — as “not worthy of a great nation,” a
reference to the Augustine Committee’s report “Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation.”  One option in that report is the “Flexible Path” that includes missions to asteroids and Lagrange points.

Congress and the White House have been battling over the future of the human spaceflight program ever since.  It is less a partisan war between Democrats and Republicans than between Congress — which passed two laws (the 2005 and 2008 NASA authorization acts) supporting the Bush plan — and the White House.

Today, there are three strongly held positions on what the next step should be for the human spaceflight program:   Wolf’s view that we should return to the lunar surface and before China gets there; Obama’s plan for an Asteroid Redirect Mission that very specifically excludes returning to the lunar surface, though there would be operations in lunar orbit; and a concept called Mars 2021 championed by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) to send astronauts to flyby (not land on or orbit) Mars with launch in 2021 and incorporating a flyby of Venus enroute.  

Smith chairs the House committee that authorizes NASA activities.  That committee, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, will markup its version of the 2014 NASA authorization bill tomorrow (Tuesday, April 29).  The next day, Wolf’s appropriations subcommittee will markup the companion appropriations bill.  (Not sure of the difference between an authorization and an appropriation?  See our “What’s a Markup:  Answers to that and Other Mysteries of the Legislative Process” Fact Sheet.)

There is little disagreement (though it is not unanimous) that sending people to land on Mars is the long term goal.   The question is all the steps in between.  Wolf’s support of a human return to the Moon seems as heartfelt as Smith’s insistence on the Mars flyby mission.   Both are influential members of the House — Wolf in charge on money, Smith in charge of policy. 

Where that leaves the Obama plan, which NASA is assiduously trying to articulate as part of achieving the long term goal of sending people to land on Mars, is an open question.  Today Wolf said “No matter how much NASA tries to dress this up or rationalize this proposal to the Congress and to the public, it continues to ring hollow.” 

The disarray in planning the future of the U.S. human spaceflight program continues.  Wolf prognosticated that “most people believe” that whoever becomes President in 2016 will “abandon this uninspiring” ARM mission and “pivot towards more compelling missions.”  Whether that happens and whether Congress is wiling to appropriate the necessary funds is an open question.

Last Updated: Apr 28, 2014 7:57 pm ET
NASA Seeks Ideas For Private Sector Use of ISS, Future Commercial Space Facilities

NASA Seeks Ideas For Private Sector Use of ISS, Future Commercial Space Facilities

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 28, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 28, 2014 3:17 pm ET

NASA is seeking ideas on how the private sector can use the International Space Station (ISS) in new ways and ultimately “pave the way for private microgravity research facilities of the future.”

The Obama White House approved extending operations of the ISS until at least 2024 in January.   Previously it had committed only to operations through 2020 and is still seeking agreement from some of the ISS partners for that extension, never mind 2024.  ISS is a partnership of the United States, Russia, Japan, Canada and 11 European countries.

NASA often talks about extending operations to 2028, the 30th anniversary of when the first ISS modules were launched, but the idea is that whatever the end date, at some point, the ISS will end.  The question is — what then?  The goal is for microgravity research and other activities to continue on space facilities owned and operated by the private sector.

The NASA Request for Information (RFI) released today asks for ideas on how to make better use of ISS itself by the private sector and to lead towards follow-on private sector facilities.  NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations Bill Gerstenmaier said the RFI is intended to “help identify how to open this … laboratory to the private sector in better and more practical ways — ultimately, helping to pave the way for private microgravity research facilities of the future.”

On Thursday (May 1), NASA and ISS researchers will showcase research activities taking place aboard ISS at an event sponsored by the American Astronautical Society (AAS) on Capitol Hill.  In June, AAS will hold its third ISS Research and Development conference in Chicago that brings together current and potential ISS researchers.

NASA is ramping up its efforts to demonstrate that its human spaceflight program is an integrated set of missions each leading to the next, starting with the ISS and ending with humans landing on Mars.  NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden emphatically drew the linkage between ISS and human exploration beyond low Earth orbit at a March 2014 congressional hearing before the House Science, Space and Technology.  He proclaimed that if operations of the ISS ended — because of the current friction between the United States and Russia, for example — he would recommend cancelling the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Orion spacecraft currently being developed to take humans into deep space.  “I don’t want anyone to think I need SLS or Orion if I don’t have the International Space Station,”  he said.

At the same time, Gerstenmaier has begun stressing that the private sector needs to provide for continuation of operations in low Earth orbit as NASA shifts its focus to sending humans to lunar orbit and beyond.  This RFI is a step in that direction.  Responses are due by June 30, 2014.

 

Last Updated: Apr 28, 2014 3:17 pm ET
U.S. Imposes New Russian Sanctions Including Restricting Export Licenses – UPDATE

U.S. Imposes New Russian Sanctions Including Restricting Export Licenses – UPDATE

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 28, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 28, 2014 11:06 pm ET

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney released a statement this morning (April 28, 2014) announcing that additional sanctions are being placed on Russia because of the situation in Ukraine.  Asset freezes on 17 Russian companies and export license restrictions are among the new sanctions.

The statement is general so it is not clear at this point whether any of the actions will affect space-related activities.  The relevant part of the statement is as follows:

“The Department of the Treasury is imposing sanctions on seven Russian government officials, including two members of President Putin’s inner circle, who will be subject to an asset freeze and a U.S. visa ban, and 17 companies linked to Putin’s inner circle, which will be subject to an asset freeze.  In addition, the Department of Commerce has imposed additional restrictions on 13 of those companies by imposing a license requirement with a presumption of denial for the export, re-export or other foreign transfer of U.S.-origin items to the companies.  Further, today the Departments of Commerce and State have announced a tightened policy to deny export license applications for any high-technology items that could contribute to Russia’s military capabilities.  Those Departments also will revoke any existing export licenses that meet these conditions.”

Later in the day, the White House released a transcript of a telephone briefing in which a few — but not many — details were provided.  Two members of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inner circle were sanctioned and 17 “entities” that are “affiliated with the oligarchs we designated a few weeks ago, on March 20, including the Rotenberg brothers and Gennady Timchenko.”

Perhaps of more direct important to space activities are export restrictions.  A “senior administration official” says that export license applications at both the Department of State and Department of Commerce have been on hold since the beginning of March and they are being scrutinized to “see which ones involve technology that the Russian defense industrial complex is in need of, and those are the ones that will be denied.”  Microelectronics was cited as one example.

Meanwhile, the State Department said that “effective immediately” the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls will “deny pending applications for export or re-export of any high-technology defense articles or services regulated under the U.S. Munitions List … that contribute to Russia’s military capabilities.”  It also will revoke any existing licenses that meet those conditions.    Other pending applications will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. 

The Obama Administration is in the process of updating export control regulations on commercial satellites, but at the moment they remain on the U.S. Munitions List.   Several Russian rockets, including Proton, Soyuz, Zenit (which is partially Ukrainian), and Dnepr, are used to launch satellites that are manufactured in the United States or contain U.S. components.  Whether the Administration deems them to “contribute to Russia’s military capabilities” is an open question.  Two other interesting facets of the issue are that  International Launch Services (ILS), which markets the Proton rocket commercially, is a U.S.-based company, and the Soyuz rocket is launched not only from Russia, but from Europe’s Kourou launch site in South America a part of a European-Russian arrangement.  The United States wants to present a united front with Europe in imposing sanctions, but Europe has not announced its plans yet.

Note:  this article was updated at 11:00 pm ET on April 28, 2014.

Last Updated: Apr 28, 2014 11:06 pm ET
What's Happening in Space Policy: April 28-May 2, 2014

What's Happening in Space Policy: April 28-May 2, 2014

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 27, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 27, 2014 10:58 am ET

Here is our list of space policy-related events for the upcoming week and any insight we can offer about them.  The House and Senate will be back in session after a two-week spring break with a full agenda of NASA, NOAA and national security space decisions on tap.

During the Week

House committees and subcommittees will be making decisions on budgets and policy for the nation’s space program this week as they mark up appropriations and authorization legislation. (Not sure what a markup is?  Or the difference between an authorization and an appropriation? See our fact sheet:  What’s a Markup?  Answers to That and Other Mysteries of the Legislative Process.)

Customarily the House acts on appropriations legislation before the Senate, and, indeed, the Senate Appropriations CJS subcommittee is still holding hearings on FY2015 budget requests for the agencies under its jurisdiction.  Its hearing on NASA’s request is on Thursday. 

Also of interest is a House SS&T Environment Subcommittee hearing on NOAA’s FY2015 budget request on Wednesday.

NASA is engaged in a full court press to articulate the outline of the agency’s plan on sending humans to Mars and how the Asteroid Redirect Mission fits into it.   After meeting with the NASA Advisory Counci a week and a half ago and participating in a three-day Humans 2 Mars summit at George Washington University last week, NASA will hold its own public “exploration forum” at NASA Headquarters on Tuesday afternoon (interestingly, the House SS&T committee is marking up the NASA authorization bill at the same time, which, we imagine, is entirely coincidental).

Lots of other interesting events are scheduled, including a symposium on Capitol Hill sponsored by the American Astronautical Society on Thursday highlighting science experiments conducted on the International Space Station and Women in Aerospace’s annual conference on Wednesday featuring top government officials including Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James.

Here’s the list of everything we know about as of Sunday morning.

Tuesday, April 29

Wednesday, April 30


Thursday, May 1

Last Updated: Apr 27, 2014 10:58 am ET
Musk Confirms Falcon 9 Reusability Experiment Worked

Musk Confirms Falcon 9 Reusability Experiment Worked

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 25, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 25, 2014 10:49 pm ET

SpaceX’s announcement today that it is filing suit against the Air Force over a launch vehicle contract overshadowed other company news — confirmation that the reusability test of the Falcon 9 first stage last week was successful.

SpaceX CEO and Chief Designer Elon Musk began a press conference at the National Press Club this afternoon by talking about the “good news” story of the Falcon 9 test before moving on to the news about the lawsuit.

The April 18 launch of SpaceX’s CRS-3 cargo mission to the International Space Station (ISS) included a test of returning the Falcon 9’s first stage to Earth and deploying landing legs as though it was returning to land.  The goal is for these stages to return and land at Cape Canaveral and be reused.  Musk tweeted that day that initial data showed the rocket stage had reignited its engine after separating from the second stage and Dragon spacecraft (which went on to Earth orbit), descended vertically, deployed its landing legs and survived for 8 seconds after reaching the water.   Today’s comments confirmed that account and provided additional information.

He called the test a “huge milestone … No one has soft landed a liquid rocket boost stage before.” That is true, although NASA routinely recovered space shuttle solid rocket boosters (SRBs) from the ocean and reused them.

A boat hired by SpaceX could not get close enough to see the event or recover the stage.  Musk said that another test will take place on the next Falcon 9 launch, a commercial launch for Orbcomm, and laughingly said he was going to hire bigger boats.  He also said that the April 18 launch just happened to take place during a huge storm at sea and the landing area was in the deep ocean.  He is hoping for better weather for the Orbcomm launch and the rocket stage will drop into the ocean closer to shore, increasing the chances it can be recovered.   The rocket stage was destroyed by wave action, Musk said.  It was two days before any boat could reach the area and all that was left were pieces of the interstage section, one of the four landing legs and other “bits and pieces.”

SpaceX did get some video of the reentry (presumably from an aircraft that was tracking the flight), but the “link was very weak,” Musk said today.  They are trying to clean it up and will post it on the SpaceX website.

Musk said tests will continue over the ocean until he is comfortable it can land with accuracy.  He hopes to be able to return one of these stages to land later this year and is working with the Air Force to identify landing locations at Cape Canaveral.  The plan is to refly that stage next year.   Eventually, he believes it will be possible to return a stage to land and reuse it the same day.  Current SpaceX launch prices do not assume reusability and 70 percent of the cost is associated with the first stage  Therefore, prices could drop “as much as 70 percent” in the long run if reusability proves out, but that depends on being able to refly it with minimal work.  He also noted that customers need to be comfortable with the idea.

The space shuttle is the only operational reusable launch vehicle ever developed and it never achieved promised economies.  Musk repeated what he has said many times — that reusability will only be cost effective if it is “both rapid and complete.”  The shuttle was only partially reusable (the large External Tank was not reusable) and turnaround times were months, not weeks or days.

Last Updated: Apr 25, 2014 10:49 pm ET
SpaceX Files Protest of Air Force EELV Contract, Continues Criticism of Atlas V Russian Engines – UPDATE

SpaceX Files Protest of Air Force EELV Contract, Continues Criticism of Atlas V Russian Engines – UPDATE

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 25, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: May 5, 2014 6:28 pm ET

SpaceX CEO and Chief Designer Elon Musk announced today, April 25, that he is filing suit against the Air Force for the contract it awarded to United Launch Alliance (ULA) in December 2013 for Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) launches over the next five years.  The two EELVs are Delta IV and Atlas V and, in addition to announcing the lawsuit, continued his criticism of the Atlas V because it uses Russian RD-180 engines.

Musk wants to compete against ULA for national security space launches that could be launched using his Falcon rockets — the existing Falcon 9 and the Falcon Heavy now in development.  He said the block buy contract for 36 EELV cores awarded on a sole source, non-competed basis is “not right.”   He argued that SpaceX rockets are good enough for NASA and the commercial satellite sector, so why would they not be good enough for launching something “as simple as a GPS satellite.” 

“The ULA rockets are four times as expensive as ours,” he asserted, and therefore the contract is costing U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars more than necessary.

In a press release distributed at the National Press Club event, SpaceX calculates that the average cost of a ULA launch is $460 million based on figures publicly available in budget documentation presented to Congress by the Department of Defense (DOD).  By comparison, Musk says that the launch of a Falcon 9 would be about $90 million for the Air Force; about 30 percent higher than the $60 million price to a commercial customer because of “mission assurance” requirements imposed by the Air Force.  The commercial price for a Falcon Heavy launch is $135 million, the press release states.

It is impossible to compare those prices to launches conducted for the Air Force by ULA because DOD does not account for ULA costs in a compatible manner, a point that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has criticized for several years.  It recently reported that DOD is improving its visibility into the ULA costs, but a per-launch cost or price is not available.  One can only look at how much money is requested for EELV launches and divide by the number of launches that year to obtain an average.

Musk also continued to press the case, as he did at a March hearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee, that the United States should not be using the Atlas V rocket because it relies on Russian-built RD-180 engines.  He went so far as to suggest that paying Russia for the engines might violate sanctions imposed by the United States against Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin because of Russia’s actions in Ukraine. Rogozin is in charge of Russia’s space sector and one of several top Russian officials sanctioned by President Obama after Russia annexed Crimea.  “It is hard to imagine that Rogozin is not benefitting personally” from the engine sales, Musk stated.

Musk said SpaceX concluded the lawsuit was “the only option” to bring these matters into the light:  “Let the sun shine on this. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” 

He also said that the protest is not specifically intended to get launches awarded to SpaceX:  “If we compete and lose, that’s fine, but why wouldn’t they even compete it?”

Musk was asked why he waited so long to file suit, since the EELV contract was awarded in December.   He replied that although it was awarded in December, he did not know about it until March, specifically the day after the March Senate Appropriations Committee hearing.  He said he did not think it was “an accident” that it only became public at that time.

The contract award was posted on the FedBizOpps website on December 19, 2013, however, and written up in trade publications soon thereafter.  SpaceX has not replied to an email requesting clarification on what it was that the company did not know until March.

The day after the Senate hearing DOD officials did reveal in a budget briefing that the number of launches it is setting aside specifically for “new entrants” like SpaceX would be fewer than earlier planned over the next few years.  Those launches are in addition to the 36 launches in the December contract, however.

Late on April 25 SpaceX issued another press release summarizing its position and stating that it will formally file the lawsuit on Monday, April 28.  

NOTE:  This article was updated on April 26, 2014 with the additional information about the new press release and about a new website SpaceX said it was creating, freedomtolaunch.com, where it would post the lawsuit would at noon EDT April 28.  This article was updated again on April 28 to remove the clause about the new website.  The lawsuit is not posted there and instead of a countdown clock indicating when the website will be launched, there is simply a notice that it will be “launching soon.”

NOTE 2:  As of May 5, the freedomtolaunch.com website has made no changes despite the fact that the judge in the case has issued two rulings already.   That website clearly is not a good source of any information other than a link to the SpaceX press release.

Last Updated: May 05, 2014 6:28 pm ET
Spacewalkers Make Quick Work of Replacing MDM

Spacewalkers Make Quick Work of Replacing MDM

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 23, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 23, 2014 6:03 pm ET

International Space Station (ISS) crew members Rick Mastracchio and Steve Swanson made quick work of their task today of replacing a failed computer on the outside of the ISS. They were back inside, mission complete, in just 1 hour and 36 minutes.

The two NASA astronauts conducted a contingency (as opposed to planned) spacewalk to replace a Multiplexer-DeMultiplexer (MDM) that failed just before SpaceX launched its CRS-3 cargo mission to the ISS.  The MDM that failed is a backup unit and the primary unit was working fine so NASA determined the SpaceX launch could proceed as planned.  The MDM controls some of the robotic equipment needed to move SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft to its proper location on the ISS.  Dragon arrived at ISS on Sunday and was successfully berthed to an ISS docking port using the primary MDM.

However, NASA wanted to be sure a new backup was installed as quickly as possible, hence the spacewalk today.  The new MDM was up and running before the spacewalkers returned to the airlock.  The failed MDM will be returned to Earth so engineers can examine it.

Spacewalks typically last 5-7 hours, but on occasion are shorter in order to accomplish a very defined task or because of a problem that requires early termination.   Last year’s spacewalk where European astronaut Luca Parmitano’s helmet filled with water from the spacesuit’s cooling system ended after 1 hour and 32 minutes when it became apparent that something was quite wrong.   NASA has determined that the problem was silica particles that clogged a filter, but are still investigating the source of the particles. Mastracchio wore the same spacesuit today that Parmitano was wearing last July.  It has a new filter and the water system has been flushed several times.  No problems were evident today (it also was used in a December 2013 contingency spacewalk), but NASA still has not cleared that spacesuit or the other U.S. spacesuits aboard the station for regular use in planned spacewalks.

Last Updated: Apr 23, 2014 6:03 pm ET

SPACEPOLICYONLINE.COM

About | Contact | Privacy