Space.com has a sneak peek at the recommendations in the upcoming Aldridge Commission report.
Much of what is touched on in the article sounds good, at least at the level of detail presented: spinning off NASA centers as research and development centers akin to the nuclear labs, procuring LEO launch services competetively, and making organizational changes based on Pentagon experience to improve managerial and financial effectiveness.
But then they bring up the old eye-roller: enabling technologies:
The commission also identified 17 enabling technologies needed to accomplish the exploration goals. These include an affordable heavy lift capability, advanced power and propulsion, automated spacecraft rendezvous and docking capability, high bandwidth communications, closed loop life supports systems, better spacesuits for astronauts and others.
Some of these make sense…clearly we will need new suits to support extended operations on the lunar surface, for example, and we’re already working in improved power and propulsion. But are closed-loop life support systems really needed to accomplish the proposed exploration goals? Is a true closed-loop system even possible? Improving life support efficiency is certainly worthwhile, but wouldn’t it make more sense to develop ISRU methods for making up the “last 10%” from local resources?
Perhaps ISRU is part of the Commission’s full recommendations. I suppose we’ll know by mid-week.
The most logical field demonstration of ISRU would be on the eventual (Mars) sample return mission. I hope that is not too much to hope for in the next 6-8 years.
Not to say NASA couldn’t do it in that time frame, but they currently project a sample return “no earlier than 2014” (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/future/2005-plus.html).
“In the more immediate future, the commission wants NASA to turn over nearly all launch activity to private firms”
“The commission specifically exempts the launching of human crews from this recommendation”
This basically sucks. According to this, NASA could as well start building another “next generation shuttle” if they want to.
And wtf is this commission doing discussing technologies at all, i thought they were strictly for organizational advice.
From the Commission website:
“The Commission shall examine and make recommendations to the President regarding:
a. A science research agenda to be conducted on the Moon and other destinations as well as human and robotic science activities that advance our capacity to achieve the Policy;
b. The exploration of technologies, demonstrations, and strategies, including the use of lunar and other in situ natural resources, that could be used for sustainable human and robotic exploration;
c. Criteria that could be used to select future destinations for human exploration;
d. Long-term organization options for managing implementation of space exploration activities;
e. The most appropriate and effective roles for potential private sector and international participants in implementing the Policy; and
f. Methods for optimizing space exploration activities to encourage the interests of America’s youth in studying and pursuing careers in mathematics, science, and engineering; and
g. Management of the implementation of the Policy within available resources.”
So, yes, proposing “enabling technologies” as it appears set to do is within the Commission’s purview (see point b.). The problem I have with “enabling technologies” is that the very concept implies that we cannot carry out the intended missions until and unless we develop and implement the technologies so defined — which may or may not be true for a particular technology (surface suits, for example…we don’t currently have any, and the Apollo models would not be suitable — pardon the pun — for the proposed missions), but it opens the door to mis-prioritizing all sorts of pet projects and wish-list items.