PDF문서augustine_report.pdf

닫기

background image

Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee

1

Review of United States Human Space Flight
Plans Committee

The Review of United States Human Space Flight

Plans Committee (also known as the HSF

CommitteeAugustine Commission or Augustine

Committee) was a group reviewing the human

spaceflight plans of the United States. Their goal was to

ensure the nation is on "a vigorous and sustainable path

to achieving its boldest aspirations in space."[1] The

review was announced by the Office of Science and

Technology Policy (OSTP) on May 7, 2009. It will

cover human spaceflight options after the time NASA

had planned to retire the Space Shuttle.[1] [2] [3] A summary report[4] was provided to the OSTP Director John

HoldrenWhite House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and NASA Administrator on September 8,

2009.[5] The estimated cost associated with the review was expected to be US$3 million. The committee was

scheduled to be active for 180 days.[6] The report was released on October 22, 2009.[7]

Findings

The Committee has concluded that, "the ultimate goal of human exploration is to chart a path for human expansion

into the solar system." It also observed that "destinations should derive from goals," and "human spaceflight

objectives should broadly align with key national objectives." Destinations beyond low Earth orbit that were

considered by the Committee include the Moon, Mars, and near-Earth objects as well as the moons of Mars, Phobos

and Deimos. Among these, the Committee felt that "Mars stands prominently above all other opportunities for

exploration" because "if humans are ever to live for long periods on another planetary surface, it is likely to be on

Mars."

The Committee did not explain why it thought that human expansion into the solar system must involve a planetary

surface. Others have proposed, for example, building free-floating space habitats and colonization of the asteroids.

The Committee's final report does mention the possibility of evaluating near-Earth objects for "their utility as sites

for mining of in-situ resources."

The Committee judged the 9 year old Constellation program to be so behind schedule, underfunded and over budget

that meeting any of its goals would not be possible. The President removed the program from the 2010 budget

effectively canceling the program. One component of the program, the Orion crew capsule was added back to plans

but as a rescue vehicle to compliment the Russian Soyuz in returning Station crews to Earth in the event of an

emergency.[8]

The proposed "ultimate goal" for human space flight would appear to require two basic objectives: (1) physical

sustainability and (2) economic sustainability. The Committee adds a third objective: to meet key national objectives.

These might include international cooperation, developing new industries, energy independence, reducing climate

change, national prestige, etc. Therefore, the ideal destination should contain resources such as water to sustain life

(also providing oxygen for breathing, and hydrogen to combine with oxygen for rocket fuel), and precious and

industrial metals and other resources that may be of value for space construction and perhaps in some cases worth

returning to Earth (e.g., see asteroid mining).

Some of these resources are available on Mars, and perhaps on the Moon, but the Committee report noted the cost 

and difficulty of "travel into the deep gravity wells of the lunar and Martian surface." It did not emphasize options


background image

Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee

2

such as asteroid mining (other than the one mention noted above) or space-based solar power that could involve the

private sector and the development of new space-based industries, and meet key national objectives such as energy

independence and reducing climate change. The Committee report did favor strengthening the private space launch

industry, and increased international collaboration.

In its final report, the Committee proposed three basic options for exploration beyond low Earth orbit, and appeared

to favor the third option:

• Mars First, with a Mars landing, perhaps after a brief test of equipment and procedures on the Moon.

• Moon First, with lunar surface exploration focused on developing the capability to explore Mars.

• A Flexible Path to inner solar system locations, such as lunar orbit, Lagrange points, near-Earth objects and the

moons of Mars, followed by exploration of the lunar surface and/or Martian surface, optionally involving the

development of a propellant depot[9] .

Objectives

The review was commissioned to take into account several objectives. These included support for the International

Space Station, development of missions beyond low Earth orbit (including the Moon, Mars and Near-Earth objects)

and use of commercial space industry. These objectives must fit within a defined budget profile.[6]

Among the parameters that were considered in the course of the review were "crew and mission safety, life-cycle

costs, development time, national space industrial base impacts, potential to spur innovation and encourage

competition, and the implications and impacts of transitioning from current human space flight systems". The review

considered the appropriate amounts of research and development and "complementary robotic activity necessary to

support various human space flight activities". It was tasked to also "explore options for extending International

Space Station operations beyond 2016".[10]

Budget limits

The Statement of Task defines the fiscal year 2010-2014 budget profile (in millions of US dollars) for NASA's

Exploration program as:[11]

 Year 

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

 Budget  3,963.1 6,092.9 6,077.4 6,047.7 6,274.6

The fiscal year 2009 budget projection for Exploration had been:[12]

 Year 

2010

2011

2012

2013

 Budget  3,737.7 7,048.2 7,116.8 7,666.8

A subcommittee in the House of Representatives has announced a plan to cut the 2010 budget from 3,963.1 to

3,293.2 ($US million), a cut of $669.9 million or 16.9%.[13] [14] Chairman Alan Mollohan stated the cut was a

"pause" and "time-out" caused by the review of human space flight.[15]

Future of the U.S. Program

The review aims to "examine ongoing and planned National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)

development activities, as well as potential alternatives, and present options for advancing a safe, innovative,

affordable, and sustainable human space flight program in the years following Space Shuttle retirement". The panel

will "work closely with NASA and will seek input" from the United States Congress, "the White House, the public,

industry, and international partners as it develops its options". "It is to present its results in time to support an

Administration decision on the way forward by August 2009."[1]


background image

Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee

3

On April 15, 2010, President Obama spoke at the Kennedy Space Center announcing the administration's plans for

NASA. None of the 3 plans outlined in the Committees final report were completely selected.[9] The President

rejected immediate plans to return to the Moon on the premise that the current plan had become nonviable. He

instead promised $6 billion in additional funding and called for development of a new heavy lift rocket program to

be ready for construction by 2015 with manned missions to Mars orbit by the mid-2030s.[16]

Members

• Norman Augustine (chairman), former CEO of Lockheed Martin, former chairman of the Advisory Committee on

the Future of the United States Space Program[17]

• Wanda Austin, CEO of The Aerospace Corporation

• Bohdan Bejmuk, former Boeing manager

• Leroy Chiao, former NASA astronaut

• Christopher Chyba, Princeton University professor

• Edward F. CrawleyMIT professor

• Jeffrey Greason, co-founder of XCOR Aerospace

• Charles Kennel, former director of Scripps Institution of Oceanography

• Lester Lyles, former Air Force general

• Sally Ride, former NASA astronaut, 1st American female in space

Subgroups

The committee formed four work subgroups to examine different aspects of the committee's charter which each

providing progress reports by July 2, 2009.[18]

General Lyles, who also serves as Chairman of the National Academies Committee on the "Rationale and Goals of

the U.S. Civil Space Program", led the International and Interagency Integration subgroup. Lyles .[19] That

committee expects to release its final report July 31, 2009.[20] The Shuttle and International Space Station subgroup

was led by Dr. Ride. Mr. Bejmuk led the Access to Low Earth Orbit subgroup. And Professor Crawley leads the

Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit subgroup.

In the committee's summary report[9] provided to Whitehouse and NASA on September 8, 2009, the panel concluded

that human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit was not viable under the FY 2010 budget guideline.

Meetings

 Date 

 Type 

 Location 

June 16, 2009

Preparatory Meeting, Non-Public

Washington, D.C.

June 17, 2009

Public Meeting

Carnegie Institution for Science, Washington, D.C.[21]

June 18, 2009

Site Visit, Non-Public

Dulles, Virginia

June 24–25, 2009 Site Visit, Non-Public

Huntsville and Decatur, Alabama, and Michoud, Louisiana

July 8–9, 2009

Site Visit, Fact Finding Meetings, Non-Public Hawthorne, Canoga Park and Sacramento, California

July 21–23, 2009 Fact Finding Meetings, Non-Public

Ogden, Utah and Las Vegas, Nevada

July 28, 2009

Public Meeting

League City, Texas

July 29, 2009

Public Meeting

Huntsville, Alabama

July 30, 2009

Public Meeting

Cocoa Beach, Florida

August 5, 2009

Public Meeting

Washington, D.C.


background image

Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee

4

August 12, 2009

Public Meeting

Washington, D.C.

October 8, 2009

Public Teleconference

References

[1] "U.S. Announces Review of Human Space Flight Plans" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

ostp.

 

gov/

 

galleries/

 

press_release_files/

 

NASA Review.

 

pdf) (PDF).

Office of Science and Technology Policy. May 7, 2009. . Retrieved September 9, 2009.

[2] "NASA launches another Web site" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

upi.

 

com/

 

Science_News/

 

2009/

 

06/

 

08/

 

NASA-launches-another-Web-site/

UPI-78541244470860/

 

). United Press International. June 8, 2009. . Retrieved September 9, 2009.

[3] Bonilla, Dennis (September 8, 2009). "Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

 

offices/

 

hsf/

 

home/

index.

 

html). NASA. . Retrieved September 9, 2009.

[4] "Summary Report" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

 

pdf/

 

384767main_SUMMARY REPORT - FINAL.

 

pdf) (PDF). NASA. September 7, 2009. .

Retrieved September 9, 2009.

[5] Bonilla, Dennis (September 8, 2009). "See What the Committee Is Doing" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

 

offices/

 

hsf/

 

related_documents/

what-the-committee-is-doing.

 

html). NASA. . Retrieved September 9, 2009.

[6] Bonilla, Dennis (September 8, 2009). "Charter of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

offices/

 

hsf/

 

about/

 

charter.

 

html). NASA. . Retrieved September 9, 2009.

[7] Sciencemag - No to NASA (http:/

 

/

 

news.

 

sciencemag.

 

org/

 

scienceinsider/

 

2009/

 

10/

 

no-nasa-augusti.

 

html)

[8] Stencel, Mark (April 15, 2010). "NASA's Flight Plan Gets Small Course Corrections" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

npr.

 

org/

 

templates/

 

story/

 

story.

php?storyId=126023150). NPR. . Retrieved 15 April 2010.

[9] Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee; Augustine, Austin, Chyba, Kennel, Bejmuk, Crawley, Lyles, Chiao, Greason, Ride.

"Seeking A Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of A Great Nation" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

 

pdf/

 

396093main_HSF_Cmte_FinalReport.

pdf)Final Report. NASA. . Retrieved 15 April 2010.

[10] http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

ostp.

 

gov/

 

galleries/

 

press_release_files/

 

NASA%20Review.

 

pdf

[11] NASA (June 5, 2009). "Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans - Statement of Task" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

 

pdf/

356131main_Statement of Task - HSF review - Final.

 

pdf). NASA. .

[12] NASA (May 7, 2009). "FY 2010 Budget Estimate by Section - Exploration Systems" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

 

pdf/

345955main_8_Exploration_ FY_2010_UPDATED_final.

 

pdf). NASA. .

[13] Amy Klamper (June 8, 2009). "Lawmakers Slash $670 Million From NASA Budget Request" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

space.

 

com/

 

news/

090608-nasa-budget.

 

html). Space.com. .

[14] Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (June 4, 2009). "Subcommittee Recommendation - Summary Table"

(http:/

 

/

 

appropriations.

 

house.

 

gov/

 

pdf/

 

CJSFY10SubSummary06-04-09.

 

pdf). House of Representatives. .

[15] Mollohan, Alan (June 4, 2009). "Opening Statement of Chairman Mollohan" (http:/

 

/

 

appropriations.

 

house.

 

gov/

 

pdf/

 

CJS-FY10-06-04-09.

pdf)House.gov. House of Representatives. .

[16] President Barack Obama on Space Exploration in the 21st Century (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

 

news/

 

media/

 

trans/

 

obama_ksc_trans.

 

html)

[17] "Report of the Advisory Committee on the Future of the U.S. Space Program" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

hq.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

 

office/

 

pao/

 

History/

 

augustine/

racfup1.

 

htm). NASA.gov. December 17, 1990. .

[18] "Committee Subgroup Progress Reports" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

 

pdf/

 

368040main_July2_SubgroupProgressReports-Final.

 

pdf). NASA.

July 2, 2009. .

[19] "Committee: Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space Program" (http:/

 

/

 

www8.

 

nationalacademies.

 

org/

 

cp/

 

CommitteeView.

aspx?key=48933). United States National Academies. .

[20] "Project: Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space Program" (http:/

 

/

 

www8.

 

nationalacademies.

 

org/

 

cp/

 

projectview.

 

aspx?key=48933).

United States National Academies. .

[21] "Federal Register Vol. 74, No. 103" (http:/

 

/

 

www.

 

nasa.

 

gov/

 

pdf/

 

355538main_Federal Register Notice - June 17 meeting.

 

pdf). NARA.

June 1, 2009. .



background image

Article Sources and Contributors

6

Article Sources and Contributors

Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=454543798  Contributors: Alinor, ArielGold, Arivoli.r, Auric, BNSF1995,
Beaucouplusneutre, Bubba hotep, Colds7ream, Craigboy, GW Simulations, Huntster, HyperCapitalist, JCDenton2052, Jatkins, Jonverve, Jrincayc, LanceBarber, MBK004, Martarius, Medic463,
Minna Sora no Shita, N2e, Nasa-verve, NeuronExMachina, NotWith, Ohconfucius, Ohms law, Radical Mallard, RadioFan, Rajeevtk, Roguelike, Sdsds, Voronwae, 33 anonymous edits

Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors
File:Augustine Commission logo.svg
  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Augustine_Commission_logo.svg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: NASA

License

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/