WHAT WE DO


JOINRENEWJOIN

Give a gift membership.
  

Projects: Space Advocacy

Budget Proposal FAQs

NASA logo

Will the cancellation of the Constellation program delay a human return to the Moon and exploration beyond Earth orbit?
Constellation was unable to meet its original goal of returning a human to the Moon by 2020; it could possibly have met a date in 2028.  The Ares I rocket would not have been ready to service the space station by the time it was scheduled to be “de-orbited.”  Development had not yet started on the heavy-lift launch vehicle needed to reach the Moon and beyond.  

The new plan is more realistic because it commits new money and new assets for rocket development, and it adds money for advanced technology for the heavy-lift vehicle.   It doesn't attempt to develop a lunar base before we have the means of getting there.   It engages international partners to share the burden and the glory.   If this proposed plan for NASA is endorsed by Congress, humans may well reach beyond the Moon more quickly and more affordably than was possible with Constellation.  

Are commercial rocket builders ready and able to take over transportation to and from the International Space Station?
The NASA-developed Ares 1 rocket would be cancelled by the Administration’s FY2011 budget, and its task to take astronauts and cargo to the International Space Station would be taken over by commercial launch systems.  This could involve “man-rating” existing rockets, such as the United Launch Alliance’s Atlas or Delta, or relying on new companies, such as SpaceX or Orbital Sciences, to provide launch services. 

Critics rightly raise the issue of safety -- this is of paramount concern of anyone who seeks to send humans off their home world – but the issue is not irresolvable. Commercial contractors can work closely with NASA to ensure that safety is not compromised in any new launch program.

This new direction holds the promise of creating an exciting new space industry, built on NASA’s great legacy, and releasing the energy, innovation and dedication of thousands of workers who will design, build, launch and operate the new launchers.

Is the United States giving up on the Moon?
A permanently inhabited Moon base, as conceived in the 2004 Vision for Space Exploration and as developed in the Constellation program, would be deferred to an indefinite future, but human explorers would still return to the Moon, perhaps to lunar orbit to demonstrate human/robotic exploratory techniques that could be used at the Moon and, one day, at Mars. 

China and India have announced their plans to send space travelers to the lunar surface, and some critics have raised the question of whether the U.S. should once again enter a race to the Moon.  The Planetary Society counters that the time for racing is over. With the costs of human spaceflight beyond Earth orbit rapidly inflating to the point that no one nation can afford to do everything in space, international cooperation, not competition, is the way to go.

We might also respond with a question of our own: Should the United States, Earth’s preeminent space power set its eye on more distant and difficult goals, and so lead humanity from Earth into the realm of the planets?

What about the launch “gap?”
Whether Congress directs NASA to continue with its current Constellation program and builds the Ares 1, or NASA follows the new budget to redirect its energy toward nurturing a commercial launch capability, there will be at least a 4 to 5 year gap in U.S. launches to Earth orbit and the International Space Station.  The Augustine committee to review NASA’s human spaceflight program estimated a 6 to 7 year gap, even in the Ares program were given full funding. There is no way to avoid a gap other than keeping the aged space shuttle fleet flying, and that is not a viable option.

To make a great leap outward will require some sacrifices along the way. In this case, the U.S. will be dependent on the Russian launch industry for those X to Y years. But the Soyuz is one of the safest rockets flying, and the Russians have proven dependable launch providers.

Won’t billions of dollars be wasted if Constellation is cancelled?
Ares 1 development has so far cost some $9 billion.  The heavy-lift Ares 5 has not even made it to development yet.  There is no reliable estimate of how much it would cost to carry Constellation to its conclusion. 

Unable to fund both Constellation and the International Space Station (ISS), in the existing plan NASA would pull out of ISS in 2015, effectively turning it over to other nations to use.  There has even been talk of “de-orbiting” ISS in 2016.  So, after spending $75 billion on ISS, the U.S. would walk away from this orbiting laboratory. 

The Administration’s FY2011 budget proposal would extend ISS operations to 2020, even while funding the development of commercial launch vehicles to ferry people and cargo to the station.  That would be a more prudent investment.

Is the proposed budget enough to do the job?
The Augustine committee found that NASA would $3 billion a year more to keep human spaceflight on a sustainable trajectory.  The proposed FY2011 budget includes a $5.9 billion increase over the next 5 years, not quite meeting the mark set by the committee, but an impressive increase at a time when the Administration has proposed a three-year freeze on most non-defense discretionary spending. 

In this new approach, the cost of developing new launch vehicles will be shared between NASA and private companies; in the past, NASA shouldered the entire cost.  International partners will be invited into the human spaceflight program, opening the possibility of costs shared across nations.

We take this budget submission as a hopeful sign that keeps open the possibility of better budgets in the future.  The Planetary Society will be fighting to make it so.

What happened to Planetary Society support for the Vision for Space Exploration?
In concept, when it was released in 2004, President Bush’s VSE to send humans back to the Moon as a test-bed for Mars exploration was all we could have hoped for.  In practice, neither the Administration nor Congress gave NASA the money it needed, and the vision failed to generate the public support necessary to make politicians outside of aerospace states care enough to fund it.

The Constellation program ran behind schedule and over budget, as so many difficult technical programs do.  With significantly more money, it is possible Constellation could still meet its goals of returning astronauts to the Moon sometime in the 2020s, but there is no prospect of that money materializing.  It is now, in Sally Ride’s words, “an un-executable program.” 

If the proposed NASA plan also doesn’t get sufficient support from the Administration and Congress, it could go the same way as Constellation.  We must guard against that. The Planetary Society will actively engage its membership to monitor progress and ensure that space exploration advances beyond the Moon.

Back to the 2011 Budget Campaign page.

WRITE CONGRESS TODAY!