Vision for Space Exploration

Last updated
Cover page of report of Aldridge Commission, Report of the President's Commission on Implementation of United States Space Exploration Policy, 2004 Moon.mars.cover.jpg
Cover page of report of Aldridge Commission, Report of the President's Commission on Implementation of United States Space Exploration Policy, 2004

The Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) was a plan for space exploration announced on January 14, 2004 by President George W. Bush. It was conceived as a response to the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster, the state of human spaceflight at NASA, and as a way to regain public enthusiasm for space exploration. [1]

Contents

The policy outlined by the "Vision for Space Exploration" was replaced first by President Barack Obama's space policy in April 2010, then by President Donald Trump's "National Space Strategy" space policy in March 2018, and finally by President Joe Biden's preliminary space policy proposals in spring 2021.

Outline

The Vision for Space Exploration sought to implement a sustained and affordable human and robotic program to explore the Solar System and beyond; extend human presence across the Solar System, starting with a human return to the Moon by the year 2020, in preparation for human exploration of Mars and other destinations; develop the innovative technologies, knowledge, and infrastructures both to explore and to support decisions about the destinations for human exploration; and to promote international and commercial participation in exploration to further U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests. [2]

In pursuit of these goals, the vision called for the space program to complete the International Space Station by 2010; retire the Space Shuttle by 2010; develop a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (later renamed Orion) by 2008, and conduct its first human spaceflight mission by 2014; explore the Moon with robotic spacecraft missions by 2008 and crewed missions by 2020, and use lunar exploration to develop and test new approaches and technologies useful for supporting sustained exploration of Mars and beyond; explore Mars and other destinations with robotic and crewed missions; pursue commercial transportation to support the International Space Station and missions beyond low Earth orbit. [2] [3]

Outlining some of the advantages, U.S. president George W. Bush addressed the following: [3]

Establishing an extended human presence on the moon could vastly reduce the costs of further space exploration, making possible ever more ambitious missions. Lifting heavy spacecraft and fuel out of the Earth's gravity is expensive. Spacecraft assembled and provisioned on the moon could escape its far lower gravity using far less energy, and thus, far less cost. Also, the moon is home to abundant resources. Its soil contains raw materials that might be harvested and processed into rocket fuel or breathable air. We can use our time on the moon to develop and test new approaches and technologies and systems that will allow us to function in other, more challenging environments.

One of the stated goals for the Constellation program is to gain significant experience in operating away from Earth's environment, [4] as the White House contended, to embody a "sustainable course of long-term exploration." [5] The Ares boosters are a cost-effective approach [6] – entailing the Ares V's enormous, unprecedented cargo-carrying capacity [7] – transporting future space exploration resources to the Moon's [6] weaker gravity field. [8] While simultaneously serving as a proving ground for a wide range of space operations and processes, the Moon may serve as a cost-effective construction, launching and fueling site for future space exploration missions. [9] For example, future Ares V missions could cost-effectively [6] deliver raw materials for future spacecraft and missions to a Moon-based [6] space dock positioned as a counterweight to a Moon-based space elevator. [10]

Two planned configurations for a return to the Moon: heavy lift (left) and crew (right) SDLV rockets.jpg
Two planned configurations for a return to the Moon: heavy lift (left) and crew (right)

NASA has also outlined plans for human missions to the far side of the Moon. [11] All of the Apollo missions have landed on the near side. Unique products may be producible in the nearly extreme vacuum of the lunar surface, and the Moon's remoteness is the ultimate isolation for biologically hazardous experiments. The Moon would also become a proving ground toward the development of In-Situ Resource Utilization, or "living off the land" (i.e., self-sufficiency) for permanent human outposts.

In a position paper issued by the National Space Society (NSS), a return to the Moon should be considered a high priority space program, to begin development of the knowledge and identification of the industries unique to the Moon. The NSS believes that the Moon may be a repository of the history and possible future of Earth, and that the six Apollo landings only scratched the surface of that "treasure". According to NSS, the Moon's far side, permanently shielded from the noisy Earth, is an ideal site for future radio astronomy (for example, signals in the 1–10 MHz range cannot be detected on Earth because of ionosphere interference [12] ).

When the vision was announced in January 2004, the U.S. Congress and the scientific community gave it a mix of positive and negative reviews. For example, U.S. representative Dave Weldon (Republican–Florida) said, "I think this is the best thing that has happened to the space program in decades." Though physicist and outspoken crewed spaceflight opponent Robert L. Park stated that robotic spacecraft "are doing so well it's going to be hard to justify sending a human," [5] the vision announced by the president states that "robotic missions will serve as trailblazers—the advanced guard to the unknown." [3] Others, such as the Mars Society, have argued that it makes more sense to avoid going back to the Moon and instead focus on going to Mars first. [13]

Throughout much of 2004, it was unclear whether the U.S. Congress would be willing to approve and fund the Vision for Space Exploration. However, in November 2004, Congress passed a spending bill which gave NASA the $16.2 billion that President Bush had sought to kick-start the vision. According to then-NASA chief Sean O'Keefe, that spending bill "was as strong an endorsement of the space exploration vision, as any of us could have imagined." [14] In 2005, Congress passed S.1281, the NASA Authorization Act of 2005, which explicitly endorsed the vision. [15]

Former NASA administrator Michael Griffin is a supporter of the vision, but modified it somewhat, saying that he wants to reduce the four-year gap between the retirement of the Space Shuttle and the first crewed mission of the Crew Exploration Vehicle. [16]

Lunar Architecture

NASA's "Lunar Architecture" forms a key part of its Global Exploration Strategy, also known as the Vision for Space Exploration. The first part of the Lunar Architecture is the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, which launched in June 2009 on board an Atlas V. The preliminary design review was completed in February 2006 and the critical design review was completed in November 2006. An important function of the orbiter will be to look for further evidence that the increased concentrations of hydrogen discovered at the Moon's poles is in the form of lunar ice. After this the lunar flights will make use of the new Ares I and Ares V rockets. [17]

Critical perspectives

NASA's 2004 budget projections for the Vision for Space Exploration NASA-Main budget chart 14-01-2004.svg
NASA's 2004 budget projections for the Vision for Space Exploration

In December 2003, Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin voiced criticism for NASA's vision and objectives, stating that the goal of sending astronauts back to the Moon was "more like reaching for past glory than striving for new triumphs". [18]

In February 2009, the Aerospace Technology Working Group released an in-depth report asserting that the vision had several fundamental problems with regard to politics, financing, and general space policy issues and that the initiative should be rectified or replaced. [19]

Another concern noted is that funding for VSE could instead be harnessed to advance science and technology, such as in aeronautics, commercial spacecraft and launch vehicle technology, environmental monitoring, and biomedical sciences. [20] However, VSE itself is poised to propel a host of beneficial Moon science activities, including lunar telescopes, selenological studies and solar energy beams.

With or without VSE, human spaceflight will be made sustainable. However, without VSE, more funds could be directed toward reducing human spaceflight costs sufficiently for the betterment of low Earth orbit research, business, and tourism. [20] Alternatively, VSE could afford advances in other scientific research (astronomy, selenology), in-situ lunar business industries, and lunar-space tourism.

The VSE budget required termination the Space Shuttle by 2010 and of any US role in the International Space Station by 2017. This would have required, even in the most optimistic plans, a period of years without human spaceflight capability from the US. Termination of the Space Shuttle program, without any planned alternatives, in 2011 ended virtually all US capability for reusable launch vehicles. This severely limited any future of low Earth orbit or deep space exploration. Ultimately, the lack of proper funding caused the VSE to fall short of its original goals, leaving many projects behind schedule as President George W. Bush's term in office ended.

Keith Cowan wrote in 2014, "The damage done to America and the rest of the world by unsustainable deficits is real, and any lack of zeal in facing this problem would be a mistake. In that context, this would be a good time for Congress to look again at Bush's plans for NASA to re-establish a human presence in deep space. The outgoing Republican Congress gave its Republican president too much benefit of the doubt on this undertaking. The new Congress must, at the very least, articulate more convincing reasons than have yet been heard for such a colossal expenditure." [21]

"A large portion of the scientific community" concurs that NASA is not "expanding our scientific understanding of the universe" in "the most effective or cost-efficient way." [Tumlinson 1] Proponents for VSE argue that a permanent settlement on the moon would drastically reduce costs for further space exploration missions. President George W. Bush voiced this sentiment when the vision was first announced (see quote above), and the United States Senate has re-entered testimony [Tumlinson 1] by Space Frontier Foundation founder Rick Tumlinson offered previously to the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation advocating this particular perspective. [Tumlinson 1] The reason that the National Space Society regards a return to the Moon as a high space program priority is to begin development of the knowledge and identification of the industries unique to the Moon, because "such industries can provide economic leverage and support for NASA activities, saving the government millions." [Tumlinson 2]

As Tumlinson additionally notes, the goal is to "open space ... to human settlement ... to create ways to harvest the resources ... not only saving this precious planet, but also ... assuring our survival." [Tumlinson 3] Regarding "the Moon, NASA should support early exploration now. ... " [Tumlinson 4]

Mars vision

Interplanetary human transport

A human-spaceflight interplanetary spacecraft arrives near planet Mars. Jsc2004e18862.jpg
A human-spaceflight interplanetary spacecraft arrives near planet Mars.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mars Direct</span> Proposal for a crewed Mars mission

Mars Direct is a proposal for a human mission to Mars which purports to be both cost-effective and possible with current technology. It was originally detailed in a research paper by Martin Marietta engineers Robert Zubrin and David Baker in 1990, and later expanded upon in Zubrin's 1996 book The Case for Mars. It now serves as a staple of Zubrin's speaking engagements and general advocacy as head of the Mars Society, an organization devoted to the colonization of Mars.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Space exploration</span> Exploration of space, planets, and moons

Space exploration is the use of astronomy and space technology to explore outer space. While the exploration of space is currently carried out mainly by astronomers with telescopes, its physical exploration is conducted both by uncrewed robotic space probes and human spaceflight. Space exploration, like its classical form astronomy, is one of the main sources for space science.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constellation program</span> Cancelled 2005–2010 NASA human spaceflight program

The Constellation program was a crewed spaceflight program developed by NASA, the space agency of the United States, from 2005 to 2009. The major goals of the program were "completion of the International Space Station" and a "return to the Moon no later than 2020" with a crewed flight to the planet Mars as the ultimate goal. The program's logo reflected the three stages of the program: the Earth (ISS), the Moon, and finally Mars—while the Mars goal also found expression in the name given to the program's booster rockets: Ares. The technological aims of the program included the regaining of significant astronaut experience beyond low Earth orbit and the development of technologies necessary to enable sustained human presence on other planetary bodies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shuttle-derived vehicle</span> Launch vehicle built from Space Shuttle components

Shuttle-derived vehicles (SDV) are space launch vehicles and spacecraft that use components, technology, and infrastructure originally developed for the Space Shuttle program.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Exploration Systems Architecture Study</span> NASA study

The Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) is the official title of a large-scale, system level study released by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in November 2005 of his goal of returning astronauts to the Moon and eventually Mars—known as the Vision for Space Exploration. The Constellation Program was cancelled in 2010 by the Obama Administration and replaced with the Space Launch System, later renamed as the Artemis Program in 2017 under the Trump Administration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ares V</span> Canceled NASA rocket key to Project Constellation

The Ares V was the planned cargo launch component of the cancelled NASA Constellation program, which was to have replaced the Space Shuttle after its retirement in 2011. Ares V was also planned to carry supplies for a human presence on Mars. Ares V and the smaller Ares I were named after Ares, the Greek god of war.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ares I</span> Canceled NASA rocket key to the Constellation program

Ares I was the crew launch vehicle that was being developed by NASA as part of the Constellation program. The name "Ares" refers to the Greek deity Ares, who is identified with the Roman god Mars. Ares I was originally known as the "Crew Launch Vehicle" (CLV).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Crew Exploration Vehicle</span> Planned orbiter component of NASAs cancelled Project Constellation; became Orion crew vehicle

The Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) was a component of the U.S. NASA Vision for Space Exploration plan. A competition was held to design a spacecraft that could carry humans to the destinations envisioned by the plan. The winning design was the Orion spacecraft.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">NASA Authorization Act of 2005</span> Act of the United States Congress

The NASA Authorization Act of 2005 is an act of the United States Congress that requires NASA to carry out a balanced set of programs in human spaceflight, in aeronautics research and development and in scientific research. It was signed by the then President George W. Bush and became Public Law 109-155 on December 30, 2005.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Outline of space exploration</span> Overview of and topical guide to space exploration

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to space exploration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">NASA lunar outpost concepts</span> Concepts for extended human presence on the Moon

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has proposed several concept moonbases for achieving a permanent presence of humans on the Moon since the late 1950s. Research and exploration of the Moon have been a large focus of the organization since the Apollo program. NASA's peak budget was in 1964–1965, when it comprised 4% of all federal spending in service of the Apollo Moon landing project. Though lunar landings since the conclusion of the Apollo program in 1972 have ceased, interest in establishing a permanent habitation on the lunar surface or beyond low Earth orbit has remained steady. Recently, renewed interest in lunar landing has led to increased funding and project planning. NASA requested an increase in the 2020 budget of $1.6 billion, in order to make another crewed mission to the Moon under the Artemis program by 2025, followed by a sustained presence on the Moon by 2028. A crew was selected for the planned crewed mission, Artemis II, in April 2023.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Space Exploration Initiative</span> 1989-1993 program outlining NASAs long-term vision for crewed interplanetary missions

The Space Exploration Initiative was a 1989–1993 space public policy initiative of the George H. W. Bush administration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">NASA</span> American space and aeronautics agency

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is an independent agency of the U.S. federal government responsible for the civil space program, aeronautics research, and space research. Established in 1958, it succeeded the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) to give the U.S. space development effort a distinct civilian orientation, emphasizing peaceful applications in space science. It has since led most of America's space exploration programs, including Project Mercury, Project Gemini, the 1968–1972 Apollo Moon landing missions, the Skylab space station, and the Space Shuttle. Currently, NASA supports the International Space Station (ISS) along with the Commercial Crew Program, and oversees the development of the Orion spacecraft and the Space Launch System for the lunar Artemis program.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee</span> NASA group established by the Obama administration to clarify US aerospaces future

The Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee, better known as the HSF Committee, Augustine Commission, or Augustine Committee, was a group convened by NASA at the request of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), to review the nation's human spaceflight plans to ensure "a vigorous and sustainable path to achieving its boldest aspirations in space." The review was announced by the OSTP on May 7, 2009. It covered human spaceflight options after the time NASA had planned to retire the Space Shuttle. A summary report was provided to the OSTP Director John Holdren, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and NASA Administrator on September 8, 2009. The estimated cost associated with the review was expected to be US$3 million. The committee was scheduled to be active for 180 days; the report was released on October 22, 2009.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">DIRECT & Jupiter Rocket Family</span> Proposed family of US super heavy-lift launch vehicles

DIRECT was a late-2000s proposed alternative super heavy lift launch vehicle architecture supporting NASA's Vision for Space Exploration that would replace the space agency's planned Ares I and Ares V rockets with a family of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles named "Jupiter". It was intended to be the alternative to the Ares I and Ares V rockets which were under development for the Constellation program, intended to develop the Orion spacecraft for use in Earth orbit, the Moon, and Mars.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Space policy of the Barack Obama administration</span> US federal plans for NASA post-2010

The space policy of the Barack Obama administration was announced by U.S. President Barack Obama on April 15, 2010, at a major space policy speech at Kennedy Space Center. He committed to increasing NASA funding by $6 billion over five years and completing the design of a new heavy-lift launch vehicle by 2015 and to begin construction thereafter. He also predicted a U.S.-crewed orbital Mars mission by the mid-2030s, preceded by the Asteroid Redirect Mission by 2025. In response to concerns over job losses, Obama promised a $40 million effort to help Space Coast workers affected by the cancellation of the Space Shuttle program and Constellation program.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Space Shuttle retirement</span> End of NASA Space Shuttle program in 2011

The retirement of NASA's Space Shuttle fleet took place from March to July 2011. Discovery was the first of the three active Space Shuttles to be retired, completing its final mission on March 9, 2011; Endeavour did so on June 1. The final shuttle mission was completed with the landing of Atlantis on July 21, 2011, closing the 30-year Space Shuttle program.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Space policy of the United States</span>

The space policy of the United States includes both the making of space policy through the legislative process, and the implementation of that policy in the United States' civilian and military space programs through regulatory agencies. The early history of United States space policy is linked to the US–Soviet Space Race of the 1960s, which gave way to the Space Shuttle program. At the moment, the US space policy is aimed at the exploration of the Moon and the subsequent colonization of Mars.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Orion (spacecraft)</span> American–European spacecraft class for the Artemis program

Orion is a partially reusable crewed spacecraft used in NASA's Artemis program. The spacecraft consists of a Crew Module (CM) space capsule designed by Lockheed Martin and the European Service Module (ESM) manufactured by Airbus Defence and Space. Capable of supporting a crew of four beyond low Earth orbit, Orion can last up to 21 days undocked and up to six months docked. It is equipped with solar panels, an automated docking system, and glass cockpit interfaces. A single AJ10 engine provides the spacecraft's primary propulsion, while eight R-4D-11 engines, and six pods of custom reaction control system engines developed by Airbus, provide the spacecraft's secondary propulsion. Orion is intended to be launched atop a Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, with a tower launch escape system.

References

  1. ↑ "President Bush Announces New Vision for Space Exploration Program". NASA. 20 January 2004. Retrieved 14 October 2021.
  2. 1 2 "The Vision for Space Exploration" (PDF). NASA. February 2004. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 25, 2004. Retrieved December 5, 2009.
  3. 1 2 3 "President Bush Announces New Vision for Space Exploration Program". NASA. January 14, 2004. Retrieved June 17, 2009.
  4. ↑ Connolly, John F. (October 2006). "Constellation Program Overview" (PDF). Constellation Program Office. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 10, 2007. Retrieved May 8, 2013.
  5. 1 2 "FAQ: Bush's New Space Vision". space.com. 19 September 2005. Retrieved February 7, 2008.
  6. 1 2 3 4 "Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle". NASA. April 29, 2009. Archived from the original on November 5, 2008. Retrieved May 13, 2009.
  7. ↑ Creech, Steve and Phil Sumrall. "Ares V: Refining a New Heavy Lift Capability". NASA.
  8. ↑ Williams, Dr. David R. (February 2, 2006). "Moon Fact Sheet". NASA (National Space Science Data Center). Retrieved December 31, 2008.
  9. ↑ Van Susante, P. J.; Imhof, B.; S. Mohanty; H.J. Rombaut; J. Volp (December 1, 2002). Highlights on Lunar Base Designs (PDF) (Report). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 4, 2010. Retrieved February 16, 2010.
  10. ↑ Pearson, Jerome; Eugene Levin; John Oldson & Harry Wykes (2005). "Lunar Space Elevators for Cislunar Space Development Phase I Final Technical Report" (PDF).
  11. ↑ Leake, Jonathan (March 19, 2006). "Nasa to put man on far side of moon". Times Online . Times Newspapers. Archived from the original on February 8, 2007. Retrieved February 16, 2010.
  12. ↑ LIFE on Moon, Archived 2010-03-25 at the Wayback Machine .
  13. ↑ "The Mars Society Frequently Asked Questions". marssociety.org. Archived from the original on January 26, 2008. Retrieved February 7, 2008.
  14. ↑ "Congress Grants $16.2 Billion Budget for NASA". space.com. Archived from the original on September 13, 2005. Retrieved February 7, 2008.
  15. ↑ "NASA Authorization Act" (PDF). gpo.gov. Retrieved February 7, 2008.
  16. ↑ "A Message From Administrator Michael Griffin". nasa.gov. Archived from the original on September 13, 2005. Retrieved February 7, 2008.
  17. ↑ "NASA Unveils Global Exploration Strategy and Lunar Architecture". NASA. 2006. Archived from the original on 2007-08-23.
  18. ↑ Aldrin, Buzz (December 5, 2003). "Fly Me To L1". The New York Times . Archived from the original on July 23, 2009. Retrieved November 14, 2009.
  19. ↑ Hsu, Feng; Cox, Ken (February 20, 2009). "Sustainable Space Exploration and Space Development – A Unified Strategic Vision". Aerospace Technology Working Group. Retrieved October 9, 2009.
  20. 1 2 Woodard, Daniel (2009). "Practical Benefits for America" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on October 28, 2009. Retrieved November 28, 2009.
  21. ↑ Cowing, Keith (16 November 2006). "Nature of Funding the VSE". NASA Watch. Retrieved 2014-04-24.
  22. ↑ "Photo-jsc2004e18853". spaceflight.nasa.gov. Archived from the original on 17 November 2004. Retrieved 13 January 2022.
  23. ↑ "Photo-jsc2004e18859". spaceflight.nasa.gov. Archived from the original on 18 November 2004. Retrieved 13 January 2022.
  1. 1 2 3 p. 8.
  2. ↑ p. 13.
  3. ↑ pp. 6–7.
  4. ↑ p. 14.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.