Dr. Louis Friedman Senate Testimony, January 28

http://www.senate.gov/~commerce/hearings/witnesslist.cfm?id=1021

http://www.senate.gov/~commerce/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1021&wit_id=2907

Given at a Full Committee Hearing:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Future Space Mission
Wednesday, January 28 2004 - 9:30 AM - SR-253

The Testimony of
Dr. Louis Friedman
Executive Director, The Planetary Society

Chairman McCain, Senator Hollings, and Members of the Committee:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the National Space Policy
Directive issued two weeks ago by President Bush. Both its title, "A
Renewed Spirit of Discovery," and its stated goal to "extend human
presence across the solar system," capture a spirit that we at The
Planetary Society have long advocated. The new Policy Directive states
clearly that the human space program will no longer flounder without a
compelling goal, and will finally set its sights on other worlds.
Understanding and extending life beyond Earth is the only purpose that
justifies the cost and risk of human space flight.

In the past much has been made of "manned" vs. "unmanned" programs -
creating a sense of animosity between the human and robotic aspects of
exploration. This is absurd - exploration requires sophisticated robots, no
matter where the humans are, and, as humans, we are not satisfied with
robots being our emissaries forever - especially when asking for popular
support from a taxpaying public. We welcome the Policy Directive's up-front
statement that the goal of the American space program is to "Implement a
sustained and affordable human and robotic program to explore the solar
system and beyond" (emphasis, mine).

Restoring exploration as the raison d'etre of the space program is a
welcome development to those of us motivated by science and exploration.

The goal and vision are terrific. Setting goals and providing a broad
vision are the President's job, and that of you and your colleagues. The
challenge and question now is its implementation. Other space visions have
turned out to be counter-productive to advancing space exploration, even
with some noble aims: the shuttle, the space station, the 1989 Moon-Mars
Initiative, for example. A great deal of public, political and
international constituency building will be required.

Cost and rationale are key to the constituency building, and these have not
yet been adequately explained. Unfortunately, the Administration space
policy study was conducted in secret; now there should be a period of
public interaction. There is adequate time for this - the Administration's
proposed first steps in the new policy are overdue and needed in any case
to save our human space program.

Those welcome first steps in the implementation include:

Retire the shuttle quickly after completing assembly of the International
Space Station -- 2010 is mentioned as a target year. Redirecting the U.S.
role in the space station to focus on "supporting the space exploration
goal;"

Separating crew and cargo, not just in launch vehicles but for
"transportation to the International Space Station and for launching
exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit;"

Building a new crew vehicle that would "provide crew transportation for
missions beyond low Earth orbit." Previous Orbital Space Plane
requirements did not mention such missions.

"Conduct robotic exploration across the solar system for scientific
purposes and to support human exploration." This is particularly welcome -
the policy is not limited to the moon and Mars, and supports science, even
to understand the history of the solar system.

The Planetary Society has previously advocated all of these.

These are the first steps - the ones that have to be funded and carried out
in the five-year budget projections that the President will submit to
Congress in a few days. We believe they are affordable and reasonable, and
that worthy programs in space science would need not be cut to permit their
accomplishment.

The questions and concerns about the Policy Directive are longer-term,
beyond the five-year period. There are many open technical questions: the
launch vehicles to be used for human flights to the Moon and Mars, the
on-orbit assembly and propulsion requirements, the design of the
interplanetary crew vehicle and dealing with weightless flight and the
dangers of high radiation levels, setting up Mars infrastructure support
robotically, and the crew activity planning for Mars exploration. The
program set out in the Policy Directive allow proper time for answering
these questions, while at the same time accomplishing the first steps to
redirect the program.

Funds for vehicles and human missions beyond Earth orbit are not yet
allocated. The projected NASA budget may be inadequate for dealing with all
the technical challenges and conducting human missions on the Moon or
sending humans to Mars. But, ways to lessen the cost of human exploration
of Mars, including from international partnerships, should also be learnt
during this period. The Planetary Society urges that a Mars Outpost be set
up robotically at a potential human landing site for emplacing robotic
infrastructure that can increase reliability and safety and lower cost for
the human mission. A Mars Outpost is an appropriate goal for international
robotic Mars programs in the next decade.

Cost is determined by requirements. The technical steps cited above, and
the emplacement of a robotic Mars Outpost, can reduce the cost of sending
the humans to Mars. Conversely, Martian exploration will be more expensive
if it includes extensive lunar objectives, prohibitively so if they include
developing permanent lunar bases or open-ended exploration for speculative
lunar resources.

Much rhetoric and even some of the official statements accompanying the
Directive have been confused or misleading on this subject. One even called
for launching spacecraft from the Moon into the solar system. There is
probably no more expensive way that could be devised to reach Mars.

Fortunately, the President's policy itself does not call for these things.
It says only that we should "Undertake lunar exploration activities to
enable sustained human and robotic exploration of Mars and more distant
destinations in the solar system" and "Use lunar exploration activities
to further science, and to develop and test new approaches, technologies,
and systems, including use of lunar and other space resources, to support
sustained human space exploration to Mars and other destinations." The
underlined phrases clearly specify that lunar activities should be directed
to enable Mars exploration, and not be an end in and of themselves.

Use of lunar resources for supporting exploration beyond the moon is
proposed in a White House Fact Sheet that accompanied the release of the
Policy Directive. The costs for any proposed use (e.g. extracting oxygen
from lunar rocks) must be estimated and compared with alternatives (e.g.
bringing the oxygen from Earth.) The topic must be subject to economic
analysis before any commitment to such a program is made. Twelve Americans
have walked on the moon (15 more have flown around it) and some 70 robotic
spacecraft have been there - we must carefully consider what we already
have done there before planning new missions. The moon, as stated in the
Policy Directive, shall only be to prepare for and support future human
exploration activities. We cannot afford to get bogged down on the Moon as
we have in Earth orbit the past three decades.

While the United States and Russia have been to the Moon many times, it is
a target of international interest. Currently:

The European Space Agency has a mission, SMART-1, on the way to the Moon

Japan is developing two lunar missions: Lunar A, which may launch in the
next year, and SELENE, now scheduled for 2006.

India is developing a mission, Chadrayan-1, for a 2008 launch

There are reports from China they will conduct robotic lunar orbiter and
landing missions in this decade, and perhaps that they have a 2020 human
landing mission goal.

International cooperation is supported in the Policy Directive, and there
is a need to build international partnerships for the grand goal of humans
to Mars. Working with international partners can help us greatly to lower
the cost of realizing our objectives at the Moon and in achieving the
required set of missions faster. The Planetary Society urges the United
States and other space-faring nations to cooperate and coordinate their
robotic lunar missions. This could pave the way for an international human
crewed mission to the Moon and be a solid step in building the team for the
Martian expeditions.

Engineers can work out the details of interim technical milestones for a
human mission to Mars. Various national and international studies have
considered interim human destinations near Earth and at points where Sun
and Earth gravity produce dynamical stability, or at asteroids, which
provide interesting targets in their own right. These steps might also be
investigated as interim milestones for human flight to Mars.

The Planetary Society cofounder, Carl Sagan wrote, "There's plenty of
housework to be done here on Earth and our commitment to it must be
steadfast. But we're the kind of species that needs a frontier - for
fundamental biological reasons. Every time humanity stretches itself and
turns a new corner, it receives a jolt of productive vitality that can
carry it for centuries. There is a new world next door. And we know how to
get there."

Only at Mars will we begin to learn whether humankind is limited to a
single planet; only at Mars will humans be able to investigate the
questions of other life. These are the great human purposes for which we
send humans to space. The lure of Mars is dramatically revealed by the
enormous public interest and excitement that attended the landings of Mars
rovers this past month and the presence of five robot emissaries from
planet Earth now explorating that alien world. Imagine if those robots were
us.