Constellation and Commercial Crew Not Mutually Exclusive

June 30, 2010 by J Paul Douglas
Filed under: Commercial Space Flight

Lawmakers introduced the “Protecting Human Space Flight Act of 2010″ yesterday with the aim of forcing NASA to spend 90 percent of the program’s remaining funds in the last quarter of this fiscal year. Let’s all hope that they succeed.

If you find that puzzling coming from a commentator touting commercial, human space flight, remember this: Constellation is, and always has been, about going back to the moon – so much more so following the earth-shaking discoveries made in just the last several months (see A New Decade and Infinite Possibilities, January 11, 2010 STN). Most of the pundits have reduced the argument to an either-or proposition: a) go back to the moon, or b) fund the private sector to create a commercial transport system to low earth orbit. I assure you, there is an option c.

Yes, private enterprise can and should be funded for the creation of a commercial transport to LEO. And yes, Constellation should go forward, albeit without Ares (see Constellation Plan-B A Good Idea, March 5, 2010 STN). But funding one to the exclusion of the other makes no sense. The inspiration and purpose behind transporting humans to the International Space Station and all other points in earth orbit is to create an environment economically conducive for building an orbiting infrastructure, itself capable of supporting transportation to the moon and eventually Mars. Building a inexpensive transport system while canceling Constellation is about as useful as building an elevator to nowhere. Conversely, moving forward with Constellation and spending a needless amount of its budget reinventing booster rockets when the private sector can do it at a fraction of the cost is equally ridiculous. Such an expenditure could undercut other systems like the Altair lunar lander to the point where they are ultimately unachievable. Again, the whole point is going back to the moon. To put it in perspective, if you’re goal is to drive across country, your limited funds are better spent on a good set of tires. How much sense, then, would it make to spend your entire vacation budget on inventing and manufacturing your own wiper blades, leaving no money for the tires… any tires? The bottom line is that going back to the moon and creating a commercial crew transport capability are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, the one compliments the other.

How is it that these simple but conspicuous principles completely escape the grasp of our President and the Administrator of NASA? Perhaps it’s the difference between knowledge and wisdom. And perhaps the administration also suffers from a case of Not Invented Here. As for the commercial folks backing the cancelation of Constellation, I’m less critical. Before the President’s proposed 2011 budget was announced, they were facing rigid, myopic forces bent on shutting them out. Still, parties on both sides should be concentrating more on what’s best for the country. It’s called balance, and when it’s observed, everyone wins.

Tweet This Post