A Commercial Space Race?

(1) In 1950, no human made object had ever reached orbit.

(2) In 1970, humans gleefully walked the moon.

(3) In 1990, humans were building bases on mars.

(4) In 2010, humans were exploring the depths of the solar system.

While statements (1) and (2) are true, how come statements (3) and (4) are false? It should seem logical: in twenty years not only had humans achieved going from total inexperience in matters of spaceflight to sending a man into space, they even achieved making men land on another world! Anyone would have expected us to have conquered the solar system in forty years.

In the late sixties, Arthur C. Clarck and Stanley Kubrick concurrently made a film and a novel both called “2001, a Space Odyssey”, in which humans head to Saturn¹. The idea of humans heading to Saturn in 2001 was supposed to be, for the least, plausible.

From 1950 to 1970, Space Race took place. Competition between super-nations led them to find any means of showing off their superiority. Americans and Russians were trying to demonstrate their supremacy by taking control of space. They were imagining space military bases and fights in weightlessness. This competition between nations that drove incredible technological leaps no longer exists. One can argue that China will start pulling some pressure on the United States, since they sent men into space in 2005, and said Chinese men would walk on the moon around the mid (two thousand) twenties. In my opinion, this is far from being the United States main preoccupation since China probably doesn’t have great aspirations in matters of space exploration, but rather wanted to show it could be a space power if it wanted to. Either way, it doesn’t seem there is any race or competition for space domination going on.

Ok, back to History. The Space Shuttle has been the only means of transport to space from the United States since 1980. It replaced the Apollo CSM (Command and Service Modules). Space travel with the Space Shuttle was supposed to become cheap and ordinary, thanks to the fact that it was a reusable plane. However, the first projections were far too optimistic (some were expecting weekly back and forths into orbit!). It takes a lot more time, money and effort to adjust and re-launch the Space Shuttle than planned. After the Columbia disaster in 2003, NASA had the moral obligation to accelerate the pace on replacing the Space Shuttle by something newer and safer. They decided to retire the Space Shuttle by the end of 2010.

NASA plans to “replace” the Space Shuttle program by the Constellation program. Instead of having one indefinitely reusable spacecraft for both sending men and payloads, NASA will have one launch system for sending men into space, and one heavy duty launch system for sending large payloads. While Ares V (named in reference to the legendary Saturn V) will send payloads, the Ares I rocket will send up to six astronauts in the Orion capsule. However, the Ares I / Orion couple will only be ready in 2017.

This estimate is very optimistic in my point of view, because NASA is running on Bush’s “vision” for the future right now. Obama is reviewing this plan in 2010, and may cut NASA’s budget.

Meanwhile, NASA will fly its astronauts on Russian Soyuz spacecraft, as they did after the Columbia disaster. During these seven long years, Russians can whim and blackmail America as they please. Not good for America. Good for Russia.

As you might have guessed, the main idea here is that commercial competition could be and should be at the heart of the development of space transportation systems. Not only would this create a new emulation between aerospace constructors to create new technologies, it would also reduce costs, increase efficiency and eliminate this political pressure.

What does commercial space travel look like today?

Of course, NASA has already had numerous deals with private firms. For example, Lockheed Martin is going to design and build the Orion capsule. The Apollo program’s Lunar Module was designed, developed and built by the Grumman Corporation (now merged with Northrop) in the sixties and early seventies. However, these spacecrafts were and will be part of a NASA program, designed only according to NASA’s very specific needs, and exclusively operated by NASA.

In 1996, an international competition called the Ansari X-Prize was launched. Ten million dollars were to be awarded to the first private company which sent men into space in a 100% privately funded spacecraft. Absolutely no public money from any Government could be used.

A few different private aerospace constructors believed in the construction of a suborbital² spacecraft. However, Scaled Composites dominated the contest.

Scaled composites won the prize with their very elegant SpaceShipOne. While the project cost about 20 to 30 million dollars and returned 10 million dollars, Scaled Composites knew they had achieved most of the work for the creation of a larger space ship that could be commercialized and return a lot of money. A deal was signed with Virgin Galactic (a new brand of Virgin Group) to develop SpaceShipTwo, a similar but larger spacecraft (recently unveiled). You can already purchase tickets to space for $200,000. The first commercial flights are to be expected around 2011 or 2012.

Ok, but this is not helping NASA.

True. While Scaled Composites and Virgin Galactic will send wealthy space tourists in space for about 5 minutes, NASA more or less urgently needs a cheap way of sending its astronauts into orbit and to the International Space Station. Cheaper than the 50 million dollars Russians demand, for the least.

Elon Musk, founder, CEO and chief technology officer of SpaceX (founded in 2002) says his company can be ready to send astronauts to the International Space Station within 3 years of receiving a NASA contract. Elon Musk says SpaceX would charge NASA only 20 million dollars per Astronaut per flight, less than half the price Russians ask for. He also states that other private firms such as Orbiting Sciences and ULA (United Launch Alliance, a joint venture between Lockheed and Boeing) are “confident of getting the job done” in about four years³.

But wouldn’t commercial space travel be unsafe?

I seriously doubt it. The main goal of a governmental administration is to faithfully and heroically serve its country.

The one and only real goal of a commercial organization is to make money. Even when a private company “fights” for ecology and sustainability, it actually hopes to attract customers (and investments) by publicizing their actions or advertizing for their green products. Commercial airlines companies and airplane constructors made air travel safe⁴ because they know customers lose confidence when they learn about crashes.

COTS

NASA launched the COTS (Commercial Orbital Transportation Services) in 2006 to coordinate eventual commercial solutions for delivering crew and cargo to the International Space Station (ISS). NASA signed contracts in 2008 with private space transportation companies Orbital Sciences and SpaceX to operate their own cargo vehicles to supply the station from 2010 to 2015. NASA’s only alternative to that would be paying the Russian Space Agency for their Progress cargo spacecraft for the European Space Agency (ESA) for their Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV).

COTS looks promising. By its prizes and partnerships, it generated dynamism mostly in the unmanned sector.

But that’s just a beginning.

We may be entering a new era of space exploration, but we need private ventures to bravely risk the huge investment. Will they succeed in superseding the government agencies in innovation, scope and vision?

Contact the author via email

___