3rd_generation

A Third Generation American Space Program
Space Policy 3..0
By David A, Dunlop, Moon Society Director of Project Development
January 7, 2009

Executive Summary

The New Obama administration has pledged to create a new National Space Council as a mechanism to debate, set and coordinate US Space Policy. As the world's largest national economy the US has a variety of space policy goals that must be clearly stated and a variety of government agencies that support the implementation of these goals. The US government also is the leading international space faring power in both military and civilian operations. The US must use it leadership in space to advancement

not only its own interests but to serve common global interests by creating an “Earth/Moon econosphere” that permits economic hope and growth for the world economy by gaining access to clean space energy supplies and that also protect the Earth's environment by creating alternatives to the acceleration of destruction of the Earth's environmental systems through use of space based resources and space associated technologies

The US must improve the alignment of it space policy policy objectives with its administrative and political system. All of the “eggs”, even the civil policy eggs, should not be in NASA's basket. Congressional space policy development and oversight should more broadly follow the Federal Department structure so that space energy development, Earth observations, space transportation, commercial space development are debated across a wider range of committee than at present. Both Congressional funding and oversight of US space policy should break out from a NASA and DOD only perspective. This broader perspective is one appropriate to the factor that we are now in a third generation of space faring activities where space operations reflect an increasingly complex evolution of interests and responsibilities

We suggest a realignment of responsibilities among US Departments with NOAA being the principal and lead agencies on US Earth observation and that additional resources be given to NOAA to advance it system of systems collaboration with international partners. We also suggest that the Department of Energy assume responsibilities for a space related energy work including Space based solar power, nuclear systems, and new propulsion technologies. We suggest that the Department of Agriculture be given responsibilities for space systems development for Closed Environment Life Support Systems and Closed Environmental Agricultural Systems. The Department of Transportation should have overall responsibility for developing a low cost high frequency transportation infrastructure to LEO and beyond and to do so via a model of commercial development. These goals again should be coordinated with International allies and the community of space faring nations. NASA's focus should be narrowed to the pursuit of Scientific and Human Exploration goals, and technology development in both space related technology and a renewed vigor in aviation

A reappraisal of NASA's Constellation Program is needed to make the goal of human return to the Moon one which is coordinated with other nations so that there is a synergy of efforts to open the resources of space to the needs and requirements of the Earth.

Section I: US Space Policy Goals

What the Obama Administration Can Do in Space Policy.

The Role of a New National Space Council

During the Presidential campaign the Barack Obama indicated that under his administration he would recreate a National Space Council, an instrument that has been used previously by Democratic Presidents. The NSC should assist the President in setting national goals involving space and the activities of the US government. It should also set a public policy climate that encourages the growth of private enterprises in space.

Space Policy Goals

What goals should be identified and policies pursued by the new National Space Council?
An Obama administration must propose US space policies that share the risks and benefits, the work and the costs of Creating an Earth/Moon Econosphere and that increases the access and peaceful uses of Space for everyone.

Some US Space Policy goals:

1. Should advance US interests internationally

a.     The new US administration should make space cooperation a top agenda item for the G-20 nations by the President and also work bilaterally with nations signing the Global Exploration Agreement, the International lunar network agreement, Important goals are to agree to build a common lunar base and lunar exploration initiative. The ISS partnership should be expanded to include the emerging space faring powers of China and India. A Geo platform demo project should also be adapted by this expanded group of nations.

b.    A diplomatic initiative to “guarantee access” to LEO must be balanced with US national security interests and protocols on space debris, weaponization of space, missiles and nuclear proliferation.

c.    The potential for “disposal” of toxics such as plutonium and other nuclear materials used in RTG's should be considered as acceptable and peaceful international options serving recognized deep space science missions.
Disposal and potential reprocessing of “high jeopardy” toxic wastes in space should also be the subject of working groups when both the high cost of disposal on Earth and the uncertainties of long term disposal make safe space disposal an new option to consider.

2. Should enhance US national security

The investment and maintainability of US Space assets such as US AF Space Command, US Naval Space Command, NRO, GSIA, NRO, etc. is critical to US national security. These strategic assets are necessary to maintaining a stable international order and protecting the interests of the US and it's allies and encouraging other competitors nations that a peaceful soft path of space cooperation is of mutual advantage.

3. Should advance scientific knowledge

a. A NASA Science Mission Directorate budget of at least $ 5 Billion should continue to advance the understanding of our sun and the solar system.
b. NASA & NSF astronomy programs should continue to advance the understanding of our Sun and solar system, our home galaxy, and the scope of the larger universe. and to engage the minds and energies of the next generation.

4. Should develop technology

(Lowered space transportation costs should increase the impact of existing funding levels for space science and exploration. More missions and more participation in such missions will result from a high flight rate low cost transportation system.) Funds for COTS providers access to LEO must be expanded. The COTS funded Falcon 9 system must be successfully man rated by 2010-2011. Other options in pursuit of a more cost efficient and redundant high flight rate capability must be reconsidered such as man rating EELVs, an unmanned Direct 2 architecture or other reusable HLLV alternatives which have been proposed by private sector sources.

Development of in space refueling systems must be developed and the utilization of tanks “retired in orbit” for this infrastructure must begin as a means of capitalizing a high flight rate transportation system which will in the long term be supplied from lunar fuel sources.

The Federal SBIR commercialization and technology development initiatives should be targeted on technology development road maps that create an Earth/Moon econosphere by using space resources and locations.

VASIMR propulsion technology research should be further developed as an enabler of pioneering the tools to move effectively beyond the Earth, out into the solar system beginning with the Moon, then Mars, and more distant targets such as Ceres, and the main asteroid belt.

5 Should protect the Earth's environment

US (NOAA and DOD) Earth Observation Assets must make the understanding, monitoring, and protection of the Earth from space one of the highest national priorities. US funds should be effectively leveraged with international partners sharing responsibilities both both collection and analysis of space data in the international system of systems initiatives.

6. Should expand the national and global economy

US Space policy should work with other nations to create an Earth/ Moon econosphere. The investment in space policy initiatives will greatly expand the nodes of the space economy including:

1     High flight rate space transportation (expands existing commercial transportation)

2    GEO communications platform (expands existing commercial capacity)

3    Space construction (new commercial & government construction)

4     Space fueling infrastructure ( new commercial industry) and operations

5     Space manufacturing ( new industry commercial)

6    Space research and development lab facilities (expands existing ISS national lab new commercial development )

7    Space tourism and national governmental human space flight initiatives ( new industry + new government partners)

8    Space science missions ( expands existing exploration activities via various Working Groups   OSEWG, ILEWG, MWG, Other WGs, etc.

9    Lunar base construction (expands and internationalizes VSE/HSE) government and commercialization partnerships to develop a “lunar condominium by 2030.” a comprehensive exploration of the lunar surface, and an “inflationary lunar base.”

10    Space energy solar energy systems development & demonstration (new commercial industry R & D) Solar Power Sat Tech Demonstration Project ( DOE-lead fusion technology developments ITER & Helium 3, and nuclear isotopes industry expansion fission power systems nuclear isotopes thermal electric power systems nuclear disposal & reprocessing

7 Should learn to utilize space resources

ISS National Lab program and expansion via commercialization new initiatives and Federal $ in partnership with private sector

1    Low gravity experimentation    (ISS National Lab)
2    O-G manufacturing            ( National Lab)
3    Vacuum manufacturing        ( National Lab)
4    Nano manufacturing of electronics and other lithography construction systems. (National Lab)
5    Pharmaceuticals and biotechnological production systems.( NIH Labs )
6    Space Solar Power technology demonstrations and technology developments can be coordinated with the GEO Platform communication initiatives. (DOE lab)
7    Fusion power technology development via the ITER program and nuclear isotopes and Helium -3 fuels need to be maintained by DOE and supported by lunar mission measuring in situ conditions and demonstrating in situ processing of materials.(DOE funding)
8    In situ processing of lunar and asteroidal materials ( A National Lab dedicated to this purpose should be created on the lunar surface)
9    Advanced nuclear thermal power technologies should be utilized in long duration science missions. (DOE labs)
10.       Space based reprocessing and storage of toxic materials on the lunar surface must be studied as an alternative to Earth based disposal systems. (The growth of this industry could well result in another independent requirement for a high flight rate to LEO and cislunar space.
11.    Global demand for mass produced electronics and pharmaceuticals might result in a high flight rate to LEO.
12.    Demand for high flight rates in space for other new initiatives will work in synergy with space tourism and result in much lower ticket prices and therefore a genuine mass market for human tourism. Thousands of people per year experiencing space will help to transform the human and cultural perception of Earth.

8. Should further develop global communications development via GEO platforms in conjunction with commercial partnerships

These platforms will provide capacity for communications growth, space power technology demonstrations, improved Earth observations, space weather, and cislunar GPS capabilities.

A very capable GEO platform could be built using telerobotic systems. A GEO platform could be built with extensive and redundant sets of solar arrays, “plug and play” transponders for redundancy and easy replacement, and the ability to service in place components with telerobotic systems. An advanced GEO platforms demonstration is a replicable project of global commercial significance. A global infrastructure of such facilities could create a web-enabled world that would lift the fortunes of poorer countries and enhance the development of human resources. A first project might be analogous to the international commitment to develop the ISS as a multi-national multi-year endeavor. Yet because of the finite number of GEO slots this would initiate an industry that would develop a constellation of such facilities to accommodate the needs of the billions of people not yet part of the developed global economy as well as improve services for the economic echelon of the “first billion.” of the developed nations. These platforms will insure that broadband capacity for the entire global population is in place as a critical enabling infrastructure for commercial communications, government communications, educational, health programs, earth observation, and solar energy research and demonstrations. A program of this magnitude also provides a justification for a truly cost efficient high flight rate heavy lift reusable launch systems.

9. Should further develop educational opportunities

Nations should routinely utilize GEO platforms capabilities to provide global access to educational services. Everyone should have the capacity to access and attend virtual education from K through college. The educational infrastructure should have to capacity to provide continuity of services, records of achievement, and individualized educational planning on a global basis to every child even as they move around in a transient fashion with families that are part of a mobile world economy.

10. Should further development of a global medical services infrastructure.

Plans to utilize GEO platform capabilities to provide global access to health information and medical services should be developed.

Everyone should have an individual health record, genomic record which can be accessed from anywhere in the global to assure both optimum care, efficient delivery, and effective use of health resources and treatment. Global standards for a health information infrastructure should be developed so that all countries can gain from the benefits and efficiencies such standardization can provide. Every individual should benefit from the ability to access their health records anywhere on the globe and in a way that will facilitate cost efficient use of these records by health professionals everywhere.

Section II: US Space Policy Oranization Options

Balanced Priorities

Every administration must pursue a set of balanced policies suited to the times, financial resources, and organizational structure of the government. US Space policy involves relationships with foreign governments, as well as the “family” of space agencies within the US government, and partnerships involving the resources of the private sector. The financial problems facing the US and the global economy also present the requirement to better manage national and international resources. These are opportunities for the US to demonstrate both national and international leadership. The Obama administration and the US Congress must determine achievable goals with a timetable of 4 to 8 years. At the same time such accomplishments should also move the US and allied countries forward on longer term agreed objectives such as lunar and Mars exploration, GEO platform infrastructures, and space based solar energy.

A.1 An Expanded NASA Partnership at Home

NASA's support base has been perceived as skewed because of the employment impact of its Centers and contractors on a few states:

Alabama:     Marshall SFC
California:   Ames RS , JPL, Dryden
Florida:        Kennedy Space Center
Maryland:    Goddard SFC
Mississippi: Stennis
Ohio:             Glenn
Texas:             Johnson SFC, Palestine (balloon launch facility)
Virginia:       Langley, Wallops

NASA must place a national emphasis on engagement, recruitment, training and employment of a new generation of American space scientists and engineers. The NASA Space Grant network of 550 Universities spread across the 50 states and territories should be a more vigorous focus for scholarships, research, and engineering development. A more competitive research process should make NASA's centers compete with an expanded network of NASA space grant science and engineering institutions. Procurement and contracting regulations must support a more competitive climate on both cost and schedule and not prevent new providers and new approaches from fair consideration.

New business development should also be stimulated through more SBIR programs in all 50 states. Students should be encouraged to develop the high tech sector across the country and produce a commercial “spin up” enterprises as part of their career training and planning. and supported by initiatives in the Department of Commerce, Small Business Administration, and the contracting process of other Federal agencies.

More of the nano sat/cube sat types of initiatives should be supported financially so that small science and engineering missions with hand-ons participation can be commonly provided through space grant institutions. The NASAs' SMD should increase it tempo of activities and funding for many small science missions throughout this space grant network as part of a detailed solar system exploration road map.

Student engagement should not be a “rare opportunity”. The experience of building and flying small mission packages must be a common pathway in career development for science and engineering. Models such as the competitive model created by the AFRL. the European Student Moon Orbiter funded by ESA, or the proposed American Student Moon Orbiter proposed by AMES but with better funding, or the Magnolia lunar orbiter proposed by Stennis, Mississippi State, and Surrey Satellite Technology should be advanced so that a young work force with advanced skills can be brought into the space sectors as the prior generation retires. The SMD budget should reflect a science road map that sends a continuing stream of such small exploration missions across the solar system and that engages a national network in this “third generation” of exploration efforts as a common place and almost “industrial level” of cost effective mission technologies.

These efforts will provide a better national distribution of education, research, and business development resources and assist recruitment of a new generation to pursue the country's space goals.

Note for example the elimination of NASA Advanced Concepts Institute is moving in the wrong direction. NASA should be interested in exploring new approaches and ideas and facilitating their development applications in a distributed fashion based on models such as the astrobiology program and lunar science institutes based at AMES.

A.2 An Expanded Partnership Abroad

The SMD should also look to share the costs of proposed missions with international partners across the full spectrum of proposed missions. Its record of breath taking missions and discoveries should be increased with the participation of many other nations in a global space exploration initiative.

B. Better Alignment of Space Policy Goals and Federal Departments & Programs

NASA has had the problem of having to pursue many goals with inadequate funding. NASA has therefore been accused of “Eating its children” as it focused financial resources on the Constellation Program. NASA critics have especially focused on reductions in Earth observation activities and of exploration activities in the Science Mission Directorate. The shift of Earth Observation responsibilities to NOAA is one way of not confusing and competing priorities within a single agency. Another issue of strategic significance is that, except for the DOD, NASA has been the monopoly provider of space transportation within the Federal government. NASA should not be in the transportation business as a monopoly provider. A vigorous new commercial transportation system is needed for space initiatives.

To criticize only NASA's administrator and management however is to mis-allocate the blame which should be reserved for Congress as the branch of government which disposes of the proposed budget prepared by the Executive branch and which has oversight responsibilities for the execution of Federal programs. This realignment is also a strategy to distribute the strategic consideration of space goals and among additional Congressional committees that more broadly distribute the space policy considerations in the national constituencies of the legislative branch. The Government Accounting Office and Congressional Budget Office must ask tough questions and evaluate both program options and policy choices.

Some Questions for Space Policy Considerations

How can Space Grant Institutions roles be expanded as a means of more widely distributing NASA's/Space Programs political and economic impacts?
How effective are Federal SBIR commercialization initiatives in advancing the technology road maps that will create the Earth Moon econosphere?
What balance between Federal operations and contracts should be budgeted?
What national distribution across 50 states should be sought?
What level of political support is needed to achieve US space goals ?
What impact on University systems, Undergraduate, and graduate recruitment are space educational resources having?
What impact on public awareness is being made?
What impacts on K-16 education are NASA's education budget having?
How can educational expenditures increase US competitiveness in STEM? both from US Department of Education and other Federal Departments relying on such skills such as DOD, DOE, Department Transportation, NASA, NOAA, etc.

B.1 One policy change should include the alignment of space policy goals among the Federal Departments.

One example is moving NASA's Earth observation programs to NOAA. NOAA should have unified responsibility for observing and protecting the Earth's environment including collaboration with other nations in a “system of systems” program.

B.2 NASA shut down its office on space solar power

Yet this initiative offers the solution to both the threat to the Earth's environment from depending on fossil fuels and also of creating the largest growth engine of the global economy. The Department of Energy should be given overall responsibility for space energy initiatives in a division devoted to these goals. A DOE space energy division should develop space based energy supplies including those aspects which involve space solar power, space fission reactors, RTG's for deep space missions, and the development of fusion power technologies applicable to (such as the ITER program). and the potential of Helium 3 fuels, and space propulsion technologies. Glenn Research Center's activities involving space propulsion systems might be transferred to a new space energy division of the DOE. These research goals should also be undertaken with in the context of international partnerships.

The proposed demonstration prototype space solar power program suggested by the National Space Security Office of the Department of Defense should be the responsibility of the DOE. Military applications of this technology should be done in close conjunction with the DOD. Similarly, applications of this proposed technology must be developed as for civilian purposes. The example with provision of power to remote off grid locations refugee populations might be done with US agencies providing international assistance such as Agency for International Development, and the Department of State working with the UN High Commissioner on Refugees. The War on poverty and human desperation in the face of natural disasters and political turmoil must be just as vigorous as deserves as high acommitment as the demand for conventional military capabilities. This commitment is alsoa strong moral message to the international community and a way of organizing international efforts to deal with the enormous problems of recurrent natural disaster and failed states.

A Sun Sat Corporation has been proposed that would model the Com Sat corporation in its historical development of communications satellites. This collaboration between the US government, other national governments, and private commercial partners is a strong precedent on for pioneering a global space “infrastructures.” Even though transportation costs at present place a purely commercial business case for space solar power satellites out of reach, the Research & Development efforts of a Sun Sat Corporation should move forward as an organized, energetic, and determined international initiative. The transforming great promise and global demand for clean energy supplies make a clean space based energy progrm a national and international initiative of the highest priority.

B.3. The Department of Transportation should have the responsibility for development of commercial space transportation services.

Its jurisdiction should includes the new state spaceports as well as Federal launch facilities to create a vigorous competitive space transportation industry which is well positioned to provide contracted services to both the US government and its various “space agencies” as well as private commercial space activities.

It should take charge of a variety of space transportation initiatives including the COTS programs serving the ISS, the “responsive space launch initiatives needed by military space agencies for small satellites, the development of high flight rate low cost reusable heavy lift systems.

The Department of Transportation must be responsible for the development of space transportation infrastructure including refueling capabilities and “space port” facilities and setting up agreements with international partners in LEO. It must also set the stage to move outward beyond LEO to GEO, L1, LLO, and the lunar surface, and Mars.

This will enable a variety of future initiatives that will make the Earth/Moon econosphere a reality and further multiply the $139 Billion commercial space economy.

B.4 NASA has also cut back and significantly reduced its efforts in research and personnel development for Closed Environment Life Support Systems (CELSS) and Controlled Environment Agricultural systems.

The Department of Agriculture should be the lead agency in this area and the “spin-off” of this research should be a high priority for improving the energy water utilization, and recycling, and waste management capacity of urban domestic systems. The “relevance” of space derived technologies is most critical in improving the ability of the human population “to live downwind and downstream of itself” on Earth.

Approaches to both protect and preserve the natural environment by engineering improved agricultural and “urban systems cannot be ignored or out of the mainstream missions of the Department of Agriculture or of Housing and Urban Development.

The relationships between “space and the environment” must also be a component of the educational and public missions of Department of Agriculture, and NOAA, and the Department of the Interior and HUD. These must not be the diminished priorities of NASA butthe high priorities of all these Departments.

Section III: Preparing for the Human Advance Beyond LEO

Reappraising The Constellation Program

NASA was charged in the President's VSE with creating a new system based on shuttle heritage technology and existing infrastructure assets but has managed to ignore this direction, overprice, and under perform this task and in the process created a gap in US manned access to space. Pouring yet more money into what would create another monopolistic, limi and overly expensive system also stunts the promising development of new commercial providers.

NASA's Constellation Program should be reviewed because the constellation architecture also continues to saddle the US with a low flight frequency high cost structure. Rather than retreat with few lessons learned from the existing STS architecture we should demand an architecture that does deliver a high flight rate, lower cost, greater safety and essential re usability. The Space Frontier Foundation's report “Unfordable and Unsustainable” has provided a detailed critique of the ESAS architecture and this writer would refer the interested reader to this resource for a more detailed critique of the ESAS history. The historic chance to create an improved next generation transportation system is being squandered.

Federal Funds should rather be used to support new initiatives and new employment for the next generation of American engineers and space scientists rather than propping up the old systems and a highly flawed Constellation program.

a. Clean Boosters
The ARES I and ARES V rockets will use solid rocket boosters that perpetuate the use of heavily polluting fuels. These old boosters should be replaced by newly designed reusable LOX/Hydrogen fueled boosters that are consistent with protecting the atmosphere and whose use can be defended in a high flight rate mode. New clean boosters are needed improve heavy lift capacity of existing launch systems.

b. Competitive Frequent Manned Access to LEO
The Ares I will likely come on line 2-4 years behind the Falcon 9 manned system. It will also face likely competition from vehicles from China, India, and Russian concurrent with its introduction. Within 5 to 8 years of the Ares I debut, Japan and ESA should also produce manned vehicles based on the foundations of existing launch and cargo delivery systems. Ares I must be assessed in terms of its competitiveness with other systems in development and its cost effectiveness.

c. HLLV Development.
Even the “Gold Cadillac” STS Shuttle program, which failed to meet its promised cost, flight rate, or flight safety goals was designed as a reusable space transportation infrastructure. The Shuttle has been characterized as too expensive at $ 500 million per launch and too infrequent at a rate of 6 to 8 launches per year. The Constellation lunar program envisioned would typically launch two manned missions per year and one unmanned mission and cost $ 2 Billion per mission.

The heavy lift Falcon 9 vehicle is projected to cost $ 78 million dollars per launch as an mostly expendable launch system. We must ask if the Constellation architecture using a combined Ares I & V launch could accomplish as much as twenty five Falcon 9 launches sending people and equipment to the Moon.

d. Manned Vehicles

Some aspects of the Constellation program already funded and advanced in development should be completed ed such as the work on the CEV and the Altair vehicles.

Plans for an Altair ascent vehicle which preclude refueling with Hydrogen/Lox (and future lunar in situ produced fuels) demonstrate a short sighted vision dead end design. This design would makes future evolution more difficult. A reusable refueled LOX/Hydrogen Altair should be capable of many trips between LLO and the surface as has been suggested in the NASA/ESA comparative architecture study . It should also be designed to make multiple sorties to the entire lunar globe a key design objective enabling science and exploration objectives.

e. Planning for Mars

The Ares V vehicle design is one that is justified as meeting both lunar return requirements as well as future humans to Mars requirements. This later point sounds like a justification of prudent foresight that will prevent the need for another expensive and protracted super heavy lift vehicle development effort in twenty years. Yet it shackles our efforts over the next thirty years to a high cost and low flight frequency system.

An argument for the Ares V model presumes that what might make sense now will make sense twenty five to thirty years from now. An Ares V approach to Mars exploration may well be as “quaint” in another 35 years as a Jules Verne model of lunar exploration looks now. The global growth of space capabilities, and technologies, and the expansion of the Earth/Moon econosphere to more than a $100 Trillion may more reliably solve the needs of Mars exploration than a “back to the future” Ares V.

A “New Constellation” of Approaches

f. A Collaborative “open architecture” transportation system.

It is more likely that the ability to create “modular lunar stacks” involving common interfaces will permit frequent multi-national collaboration in creating supply chains in cislunar space. We must be able to put together systems that are multi-modal. A transportation system that can meet many purposes, servicing many locations is the principal goal. We must think about a serving a multiplicity of locations including LEO, GEO, L-1, lunar, and Mars missions .

g. Gas Tanks

Tanks for “expendable” orbital systems should be routinely “retired to orbit” so that they become reusable in orbit as part of constructing a refueling architecture. This transportation system “building” must be part of a global cooperative effort so that the transportation system created provides a leveraging of international space assets.

h. COTS

While the COTS initiative of the Griffin/Bush era must be applauded it amounts to not even 1 shuttle launch equivalent of NASA's funds. A strategic budget commitment to commercial space development should further accelerate commercial providers which can deliver high flight rate, lower cost, reusable, and safe man rated heavy lift transportation systems.

The award of a ISS supply contracts by NASA to Space X is applauded as a follow on to the development of new launcher systems under COTS and a demonstration to NASA's critics the the COTS initiative is a viable shift in NASA's historical monopoly of operations. The award of contracts to Roscosmos for manned access to ISS during the gap is also part of what should be a new “purchase” market paradigm which supports several competitive providers. Orbital Sciences COTS system should also have a contract award.

B. An Expanded Partnership Abroad

1. The US should make an international Moon Program a key space priority.

It's messages to other nations should be “Let's Go to the Moon Together”

The US is the preeminent space power in the world. NASA's budget alone is more than the combined total of the rest of the world's civilian space program. Yet other nations of the world are expanding the resources devoted to space programs, accelerating their efforts, and emerging as competitors. The Bush administration's VSE and its renewed emphasis on a human return to the Moon has been met by many responses and that is not an inconsiderable measure of its success.

The declarations of China, and Russia, that they too will place humans on the Moon are indications of strong international competition . The Japanese have also indicated that theyplan to place humans on the Moon in a cooperative international effort. The European Space Agency is also moving in this directions with plans for a lunar cargo lander and a European capacity to send humans into orbit. The Indian Space Research Organization has signed a 10 year agreement with Russians on lunar mission development and cooperation. It also is committed to an independent manned orbital capacity and new heavy lift launchers.

Because of this historic “lunar alignment” of the major space faring powers a constructive initiative on the part of the US to share both the costs, risks, and benefits of space development with other nations must be advanced. An international lunar program should also be balanced with other cooperative international efforts.

In reality this is one area where NASA has been effective but little noticed during the Bush/Griffin years as measured by the” Global Exploration Agreement, The ILN network, and The work of the Working Groups on Mars, ILEWG, OSEWG .

This sound foundation must be expanded and is the basis for future cooperation such as the comparative NASA/ESA architecture studies completed in 2008 and those anticipated with other space faring nations such as ISRO are completed in 2009.

Lets Build on a Two Generations of Peaceful International Cooperation:

Apollo: We Come in Peace for All Mankind (1969)
Apollo -Soyuz – A Peaceful Cooperative Gesture in the midst of a “Cold War.” (1975)
International Lunar Exploration working Group (1994)
International Space Station (1999)
Global Space Exploration Agreement 2007
International Lunar Network Agreement 2008
OSEWG (2008)
and a variety of International Working Groups such as ILEWG, MWG

To the extant that international cooperation will permit, a Moon then Mars program commitment should be sought with common/ shared standards of architecture like refueling capacity and supporting systems, common docking and rescue, and communication and telerobotic operations standards, mapping, and provision for use of in situ resources. Where competition and duplicative efforts prevail even these can be hopefully be used in a collaborative manner toward the commonly held goals of lunar exploration, human settlement, and commercial development, and to create “fail safe” capacities.

First, An “Inflationary” Moon Base

A human return to the Moon should be a cooperative effort to develop an international “inflationary lunar base” advancing a global exploration program serving the goals of scientific understanding and also advancing the use and commercial development of Earth's “Eight Continent”. The goal of creating a lunar outpost should not be an anemic limited “science only” colony but one that is designed for rapid expansion, commercialized, and replication. The Moon is not a side show on the way to Mars but an anchor tenancy in cislunar space. The exploration and utilization of the Moon will enable the construction of an Earth Moon economy that rescues human society from the constraints of the Earth's environmental system.

Then Mars

2.The future objective of the human exploration and settlement of Mars should be advanced by what is learned from the push to the Moon. A continued international robotic preparation for this great advance must parallel the efforts to create a lunar beachhead.

Mars is a challenge that deserves a different approach than the footprints and flags model of Apollo. Apollo was unsustainable and cost two generations delay in follow-up. Mars demands a sustained effort and a global partnership. The prize to be won at Mars is a third planet but this will be “reeled” in by patient collaborative work. The analogy of the careful build up and planning for the Normandy invasion is to my mind a better analogy for Mars than the flashy “lunar dashes” of Apollo.

A “Larger LEO”

3. The US should continue its commitment to the ISS but expand this partnership to include both the Chinese National Space Agency and the Indian Space research Organization and other nations as they develop space faring capabilities. Studies of its useful life extension must also be undertaken in support of the invitation for broader participation.

Security in/from Space

4. The US should work to create an international regime space faring nations that guarantees access to space to all nations that pursue a peaceful use of space but a denial of access to nations that attempt to militarize space. This extends the tradition of “the freedom of the seas” and addresses the national security needs of all peaceful space faring nations. It would also address issues such as “international technical means” to re mediate space debris and the attempt of any nation to deny space access and space operational capabilities by generating space debris or other offensive efforts.

A system of sanctions to reinforce such guarantees should also be developed to prevent and deter space terror tactics. This space access issue was high lighted by the former President of India Dr. Abdul Kalam during his term of office and is of strategic importance for all of the current space faring powers.

This objective can prevent a militarization of space and sends a clear message to nations developing both missile and nuclear technology that a peaceful global norm for space operations has been established by all major space faring nations. Both the national security of the United States and the creation and enforcement of recognized international norms are appropriate roles for the US space agencies and organizations involved in national security.

Beachheads in GEO

5. An international project to develop a prototype a next generation GEO platform should be initiated. The finite and limited number of GEO orbital slots demands that a more capable platforms be created to meet the inevitable demands of the 21s century for communications and precision Earth observation services. This initiative should involve both the government space agencies as well as commercial partnerships. Future global demand will mean that many such platforms will be needed in what can emerge as a major expansion of commercial space activities, revenues, and capital investment.

Space Based Energy Supply

6. An international initiative to develop prototype clean space solar power technologies should be started. A path to developing a clean global solar power supply must offer both hope and an opportunity for participation by not only the developed and space faring nations but include the energy needs of the emerging economies. A SBSP road map might include several steps.

First, the ISS could be a starting testbed for some aspects of this project. Other aspects of this project might be part of a GEO platform project as a significant second step. Yet other aspects of this might include a third stage free flying independent platform. and the test of designated ground based rectennas as reserved test beds area in a variety of partner countries.

A Collaborative “open architecture” transportation system.

7.An international space transportation infrastructure should be developed so that the above initiatives are both technically and financial viable. Investments must be made in high flight rate and low cost launcher systems and refueling capabilities. This last goal will do more than anything else to encourage private investments in new commercial nodes of growth ranging from private research facilities, space tourism, space manufacturing. Traditional commercial space activities in the profitable, broadcast, broadband, navigation and positioning, and telecommunications, and Earth observations markets can also expect strong growth.

The Earth First

8. NOAA should pursue its Mission for planet Earth with its system of systems partnership with other nations so that the capacity to understand and monitors, and protect the Earth's unique environment is enhanced by the efforts of the international space community. It should also have a strong educational initiative with other Departments such as Agriculture, Interior, and Housing and Urban Development, and Education where the connections between space and the environments must be understood by both the next generation and the public at large.

The collapse of the Earth's climate and environmental systems by the “mindless expansion” of the human economy must be stopped. We must vigorously pursue a mindful expansion of human society while we protect, preserve, and restore the beautiful Earth with equal vigor with the resources that space development can bring. This is our species survival test. This test demands an intelligence and self transforming discipline no less than many others
homo sapiens has faced in its history.

A Commercial Space Culture
9. Commercial activities in space should be encouraged and supported with efforts to expand communications, begin space manufacturing, construct large structures, supporting research and development activities, supply “space port services”, and enable privately funded human space flight.

Going for the GAS

10. Delivery of main tanks to LEO and the creation of a refueling infrastructure in orbit must be mandated for the US launchers and hopefully coordinated with other nations so that a robust commercially open, and international transportation infrastructure is created on the way to GEO, the Moon, Mars, and the rest of the solar system. New space faring members can expand the market for these services as they develop the financial resources and the technologies to support space operations.

New Agreements

11. The Uited Nations ineffective Moon Treaty should be rescinded as it is not accepted by most of the major space faring powers. New protocols among the major space faring powers for utilization of the lunar surface should be structured with a more pragmatic model of “inclusion by participation” and the understanding that open international access to lunar derived resources will provided through commercial development rather than by claims of national dominance.

Conclusions for Generation 3.0 US Space Policies

The current global economic contraction may require cooperative programs of economic stimulus. Cooperative space policy is an area where mutual benefits can be established. The potential for both investment paybacks and economic growth from the US space program are areas where the Obama administration can deliver important national and international leadership. While the domestic recommendations above shift many of NASA's competing responsibilities to other departments, this set of recommendations recognizes and reinforces that NASA's primary mission is in pioneering technology, and the scientific and manned exploration of the solar system.

NASA is one of many agencies of the US government that uses space transportation assets but its special mission should be to test the untried and seek the unknown. The Department of Transportation among others should have broad responsibilities for Low earth orbit operations, space based communications, transportation systems development, construction, and commercial operations. Other Departments have 21st Century technology and responsibilities. The Department of Energy must advance the promise of global clean energy supplies from space which provide the only adequate answer to both the Earth's demand for additional clean energy and growth. NOAA must be the agency with both the mission and the means to monitor the Earth's damaged environment.

Our US leadership in space should be a special strength of our foreign policy. and a way of building both bridges and peaceful economic relationships with the community of nations as an Earth-Moon economy is created beyond LEO, in GEO and beyond in L-1, LLO, and the Lunar surface. The exploration, settlement and economic development of the Moon, and then the human exploration of Mars must advance as shared national and international objectives. The inclusion of planetary protection, global communications and commerce from GEO, and new global infrastructures in education and health are the foundation planks of a expanded, Earth/Moon ionosphere benefiting all countries.

C onclusions for Generation 3.0 US Space Policies

Conclusions for Generation 3.0 US Space Policies

finis