Scott J. Ferrell | Getty Images
Nearly two years ago, then-NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine made a remarkable appearance before a Senate committee to discuss U.S. leadership in space. He feels the pressure to meet deadlines – something NASA is struggling to do, given the scale and complexity of its projects. Bridenstine’s thoughts were to stay on track for the launch of an unmanned Orion spacecraft to the Moon in June 2020.
“I think we need to stick to our commitment as an agency,” he told a handful of senators during the committee meeting. “If we tell you and others that we’re going to launch around the Moon in June 2020, I think we should start around the Moon in June 2020.” Then, referring to the commercial space industry, he added: “We have an amazing ability that we can currently use to achieve that goal.”
It may not sound too dramatic, but in the area of space policy and congressional hearings it was heresy. Congress created the Space Launch System rocket in 2011 and forced it on a reluctant White House. Now they were told that the space agency did not actually need the big rocket to fly the tasks for which it was created. Days later, Bridenstine took this heresy further when he suggested that SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket could elevate humans to the moon.
Shortly afterwards, Bridenstine is called to a meeting with Richard Shelby, the senior senator from Alabama, who chaired the powerful Senate credit committee. Effectively, eight-year-old Shelby controlled NASA’s budget. In addition, the SLS rocket is being operated in its state, at the Marshall Space Flight Center. The program was worth thousands of works. Shelby was alive. In his southern trek, he told Bridenstine he should resign.
NASA administrators are appointed by the White House, and Bridenstine has finally received support from Vice President Mike Pence in this showdown with Shelby. But never during the nearly two years that were left in his tenure, Bridenstine talked about launching the Orion spacecraft on something other than an SLS rocket. Weeks later, during a hearing before Shelby’s award committee, Bridenstine was particularly exuberant. Only the SLS rocket can provide according to NASA’s needs.
Shelby exercised this kind of power over NASA’s human space program for most of a decade as he built up power and seniority in the U.S. Senate. But now he is in the minority after the Democrats took control of the Senate. And this week, Shelby announced that he will not be eligible for re-election in 2022. What does all this mean for NASA and space policy?
“Death March”
Shelby has a legacy of exaggerated rhetoric as well as protecting contractors who contributed to his campaign and did business in Alabama. He began to expand his power more than a decade ago.
In 2009, the Obama administration convened a panel of blue ribbons, led by Norm Augustine, to consider NASA’s future spaceflight. In early 2010, they returned with their verdict: the agency’s plan, which includes building a very large rocket, was unsustainable. This led to the Obama administration canceling this Ares V-rocket, which was driven in Alabama.
Shelby emerged as the most important bulwark for the protection of Marshall Space Flight Center. After all, this was where the Saturn V and spacecraft amplifiers were designed. NASA’s ability to explore deep space “has been and always will be through Marshall Space Flight Center,” he said at the time.
When the Obama administration suggested that NASA should rely more on the commercial launch industry, the Alabama senator sharpened his rhetoric directed at Obama and NASA’s Deputy Administrator Lori Garver. “The president’s proposed NASA budget begins with the death march for the future of American human spaceflight,” he said. “Congress cannot and does not want to sit back and watch the reckless omission of sound principles, a proven track record, a steady path to success and the destruction of our human spaceflight program.”
In retaliation, Shelby not only helped the Senate’s effort to develop the Space Launch System rocket to replace the Ares V, but also funded the Commercial Crew program to use private rockets and spacecraft to take astronauts to the International Space Station to transport, actively opposed.
A decade later, of course, the Commercial Crew program began to deliver despite years of funding. Meanwhile, the SLS program is still having problems, and after spending $ 20 billion, NASA is likely to have at least another year of a test flight for the vehicle – that for a rocket that was originally scheduled to launch in 2016. While Shelby undoubtedly delivered for his constituents. , he hampered the space agency.
What’s next?
Garver, who left NASA in September 2013, said she believes Shelby’s departure could open the door to more space policy deals with Congress.
“Senator Shelby’s strong advocacy for NASA programs based in his home state of Alabama immeasurably shaped human spaceflight. This has led residents to oppose Commercial Crew funding in favor of increases for SLS,” he said. she said in an email to Ars. “If the last of the four senators who fought Commercial Crew and demanded that NASA build its own rocket, its departure could open up new areas for cooperation between the government and the Hill.”
The world has changed a lot in the last decade. While big contractors like Boeing built the SLS for NASA, new space competitors like SpaceX and Blue Origin emerged with big competing rockets. SpaceX has already unveiled its own, privately developed Falcon Heavy booster, and is launching prototypes of its next-generation Starship vehicle.
It seems likely that the departure of Shelby will make it easier for the Biden White House to cancel the SLS rocket program if it encounters technical issues, such as the failed nuclear phase fire test. It will also make the end of the program all the more inevitable if SpaceX manages to send Starship into orbit on its Super Heavy rocket. Without a powerful rear stop like Shelby, the reality of a heavy lift rocket that costs significantly less than SLS, greater lifting capacity and capable of multiple reuse, is impossible to ignore.