Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee

This article may need to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information, and remove this template when finished. Please see the talk page for more information. (October 2009)

Official logo

The Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee (also known as the HSF Committee or the Augustine Commission) is a group reviewing the human spaceflight plans of the United States. Their goal is 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 Holdren, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and NASA Administrator on September 8, 2009^[5] The estimated cost associated with the review is expected to be US$3 million. The committee is scheduled to be active for 180 days.^[6]

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 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 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.

Objectives

The review is commissioned to take into account several objectives. These include 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 to be considered in the course of the review are "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 will consider the appropriate amounts of research and development and "complementary robotic activity necessary to support various human space flight activities". It will also "explore options for extending International Space Station operations beyond 2016".^[7]

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:^[8]

The fiscal year 2009 budget projection for Exploration had been:^[9]

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%.^[10][11] Chairman Alan Mollohan stated the cut was a "pause" and "time-out" caused by the review of human space flight.^[12]

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]

Members

• Norman Augustine (chairman), former CEO of Lockheed Martin, former chairman of the Advisory Committee on the Future of the United States Space Program^[13]
• Wanda Austin, CEO of The Aerospace Corporation
• Bohdan Bejmuk, former Boeing manager
• Leroy Chiao, former NASA astronaut
• Christopher Chyba, Princeton University professor
• Edward F. Crawley, MIT 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

Subgroup structure

The committee formed four work subgroups to examine different aspects of the committee's charter. These subgroups provided progress reports July 2, 2009.^[14]

International and Interagency Integration

General Lyles leads this subgroup. Lyles also serves as Chairman of the National Academies Committee on the "Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space Program".^[15] That committee expects to release its final report July 31, 2009.^[16]

Shuttle and International Space Station

Dr. Ride leads this subgroup.

Access to Low Earth Orbit

Mr. Bejmuk leads this subgroup.

Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit

Prof. Crawley leads this subgroup. In the committee's summary report [1] provided to Whitehouse and NASA on September 8, 2009, the panel concluded that human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit is not viable under the FY 2010 budget guideline.

Meetings

See also

• Advisory Committee on the Future of the United States Space Program (1990)
• Commercial Orbital Transportation Services
• Constellation program
• DIRECT
• Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle
• Vision for Space Exploration
• Shuttle-Derived Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle

References

External links

• Official website
• Human Space Flight at NASA.gov
• HSF Committee's summary report at NASA.gov
• HSF final report and findings press conference at NASA.gov

v • d • e National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Policy & History NACA (1915) · National Aeronautics and Space Act (1958) · Paine (1986) · Rogers (1986) · Ride (1987) · Space Exploration Initiative (1989) · Augustine (1990) · U.S. National Space Policy (1996) · CFUSAI (2002) · CAIB (2003) · Vision for Space Exploration (2004) · Aldridge (2004) · Augustine (2009) General: Space Race · Administrators · Chief Scientist · NASA Budget · NASA spin-off · NASA TV Robotic Programs Past New Millennium · Hitchhiker · Pioneer · Mariner · Lunar Orbiter · Ranger · Surveyor · Viking · Planetary Observer · Mariner Mark II · MESUR · Mars Surveyor '98 Current Living With a Star · Lunar Precursor Robotic Program · Earth Observing System · Great Observatories program · Explorer · Small explorer · Voyager · Discovery · New Frontiers · Mars Exploration Rover · Project Prometheus · Mars Scout Human spaceflight Programs Past X-15 (suborbital) · Mercury · Gemini · Apollo · Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (with USSR) · Skylab · Shuttle-Mir (with Russia) Current Space Shuttle program · International Space Station program Future/Planned Constellation program Individual Featured Missions (Human and robotic) Past COBE · Magellan · Pioneer 10/11 · Voyager 1/2 · Galileo Currently Operating MRO  · Mars Odyssey  · Dawn  · New Horizons  · Kepler  · Space Shuttle  · International Space Station · Hubble Space Telescope · Spitzer  · RHESSI  · WMAP  · SWIFT  · GALEX  · THEMIS  · Mars Exploration Rover  · Cassini  · GOES 14 · Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Future Glory · SDO  · Juno  · James Webb Space Telescope  · MAVEN  · EJSM  · JDEM · RBSP · MSL · Constellation program: Ares I · Ares V · Orion · Altair Space Comm and Nav (SCaN) Space Network · Near Earth Network · Deep Space Network (Goldstone · Madrid · Canberra) NASA Categories and Lists NASA personnel · NASA programs · NASA probes · NASA images · NASA NASA Astronaut Groups · List of astronauts by selection · List of NASA contractors