Augustine Panel delivered its report and recommendations to Obama today.
This is important, it will set the menu of options for Obama to choose NASA's future, and a decision needs to be made, and soon.
Almost none of the options are good.
The basic problem is that NASA "Exploration" - the human spaceflight component, does not have enough funding in the projected budget to do what needs to be done - it can't run ISS, and the Space Shuttle while developing new launchers and hardware for new Exploration goals.
This is underfunding that goes back to Nixon, but has been most acute in the last 3-4 budgets as very bold goals were set and development of new hardware begun, without the funding to actually carry out the projects.
Something has to give. In the meantime Science and Aeronautics are being squeezed with cuts, extensions (that end up costing more in the long term, as always) and less and less new funding opened up.
Obama has to make a choice, and either cut, or give Bolden his orders, AND the resources to do it all.
""The U.S. human spaceflight program appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory. It is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources...
...The Committee strongly believes it is time for NASA to reassume its crucial role of developing new technologies for space."
Full Executive Summary at spaceref.com
The Committee developed five alternatives for the Human Spaceflight Program. It found:
* Human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit is not viable under the FY 2010 budget guideline.
* Meaningful human exploration is possible under a less constrained budget, ramping to approximately $3 billion per year above the FY 2010 guidance in total resources.
* Funding at the increased level would allow either an exploration program to explore Moon First or one that follows a Flexible Path of exploration. Either could produce results in a reasonable timeframe.
NASA will announce new policy first week of October, could be interesting.
There are two constraints on Science: NASA total budget, and what goes to Exploration.
These are NOT independent constraints.
- Log in to post comments
I hope they boost NASA funding. While a Mars mission would be nice if you watch Defying Gravity, I like the concept of a multi-year, multi-planet mission.
Hell, I wouldn't mind being on one to be honest. But alas I'm a lowly Info Sci guy.
The only constraint is that Obama has to spend enough on space to keep Florida voting for him and not one penny more. That's why we will continue to have an unsustainable trajectory. There no point in even discussing what we could or should do because we won't do the right thing ever.
Well, I can tell you what won't happen, which is increased funding. Obama is getting slammed for upping spending on healthcare, something every US citizen experiences on a daily basis. Somehow I don't think he has the political or budgetary leeway to actually inrease NASA funding in the near term.
Well, $3G per year extra is noise in the current budget bubble.
Obama seems to genuinely understand the importance of both basic science and R&D - but, politically it may be enough for him to boost DoE and NIH and toss NSF and NOAA a bone or two, while ramping down NASA.
Or Bolden may have the access and gumption to get something going.
What they can't do is business-as-usual - either fish or cut.
ie either ramp down Exploration fast and rescind NASA's primary mission to maintain access to orbit and human presence; or, give NASA the resources to carry out the mandate.
The third option, of savaging SMD to fund Exploration is horrible but unlikely, they'd have to cut Earth Science and that is not happening.
Should be enough senior Senate support to get a funding boost through. Pelosi seems to get science so House should go along also.
We can hope.