NASA Budget Lays Out CEV Spiral Development

AviationNow ^ | 2/4/04 | Jefferson Morris

[Brett66]

NASA Budget Lays Out CEV Spiral Development

By Jefferson Morris

February 4, 2004

NASA's fiscal year 2005 budget request lays out the agency's spiral development plan for the proposed Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), which would be produced in three production blocks with accompanying demonstration flights starting in 2008.

Drawing on the work performed in the agency's terminated Orbital Space Plane (OSP) program, the CEV is to launch atop an expendable rocket and carry human beings to the moon, Mars, and other destinations beyond low-Earth orbit. NASA plans to develop the vehicle under the name "Project Constellation," and is requesting $428 million for the effort in FY '05.

The CEV will be produced three development blocks: prototype test vehicles, an unmanned Block 1 configuration, and a manned Block II version. Formulation concept studies will take place in FY '04, with preliminary design in FY '05 and FY '06, according to NASA.

A system design review is set for FY '05, with a preliminary design review to take place the following year. The decision to proceed with full-scale development will occur at the end of FY '06, following the completion of a non-advocate review and an independent cost review, according to NASA.

The first prototype flight of the CEV will take place in 2008, with an unmanned Block 1 demo flight in 2011, and a Block II demo flight in 2013. The CEV is to be carrying humans to low-Earth orbit by 2014, and is scheduled to take astronauts on a return to the moon no later than 2020.

NASA plans to decide whether it will need a new Saturn V-class heavy-lift rocket to boost the CEV in 2008-2009. Such a rocket could be derived from the space shuttle's launch stack, according to NASA.

Exploration systems

Development of the CEV falls under NASA's new Exploration Systems enterprise, which was formed in response to the Bush Administration's new vision for space exploration (DAILY, Jan. 15.) The FY '05 budget request allocates $1.646 billion for Exploration Systems, which includes Human & Robotic Technology (HRT) and Transportation Systems (TS). The Exploration Systems budget is projected to grow to $3.313 billion in FY '09.

The budget request for HRT in FY '05 is $1.09 billion (see budget chart on Page 8). HRT is responsible for developing technologies to enable sustainable exploration of the solar system, according to NASA. It includes five sub-programs: Centennial Challenges, Project Prometheus, Technology Maturation, Advanced Space Technology, and Innovative Technology Transfer Partnerships.

Funded at $20 million in FY '05, Centennial Challenges will establish a series of annual prizes for "revolutionary, breakthrough accomplishments that advance exploration of the solar system and beyond and other NASA goals," according to NASA budget documents. The effort is modeled on successful 19th century navigation prizes and early 20th century aviation prizes, NASA says.

Transportation Systems will provide crew transfer and other NASA-unique space transportation capabilities, including the CEV. Its FY '05 budget request is $688.8 million.

Shuttle, station

Meanwhile, the International Space Station (ISS) and space shuttle programs would receive a boost in the FY '05 budget request. The ISS would go from $1.498 billion enacted in FY '04 to $1.863 billion in FY '05, and the shuttle's budget is projected to rise from $3.945 billion in FY '04 to $4.319 billion in FY '05.

The shuttle is scheduled to be retired in 2010 after completing the ISS, a task that will require another 25 to 30 flights. The FY '05 budget request will allow NASA to meet the necessary flight rates while preparing for the vehicle's retirement, according to the agency. Savings from shuttle retirement will begin to accrue towards the end of the decade, according to NASA comptroller Steve Isakowitz.

Before the development of the administration's new vision, NASA was facing a White House-mandated spending freeze that would have leveled the agency's annual topline budget at roughly $15 billion until at least FY '09, according to Administrator Sean O'Keefe. Armed with its new mandate, NASA's budget now is projected to grow steadily from $16.2 billion in FY '05 to roughly $18 billion in FY '09.

[Brett66]

Let me know if you want on or off the space-ping list.

[Brett66]

Just posted this before I added you to the ping list.

[vannrox]

Project Prometheus
(formerly the Nuclear Systems Initiative)

In Greek mythology, Prometheus was the wisest of the Titans, and he gave the gift of fire to humanity. The name Prometheus means 'forethought.'

For NASA, the name ?Prometheus? is indicative of our hope to establish a new tool for understanding nature and for expanding our exploration capabilities. The gift of fire to humans was a powerful gift. We believe that the knowledge that will be enabled by the technologies developed by Project Prometheus will also be a powerful gift. NASA intends that Project Prometheus will be a true gift that will enable the peaceful exploration of the Solar System and our ability to answer important questions about the origin of life in the universe. The Nuclear Systems Initiative was a useful title for the proposed program in that it was clear, concise and easily identifiable. As we move forward with the program, we believe that a name that also contains meanings related to our goals should be used, therefore, we have changed the name to ?Project Prometheus.?

Project Prometheus will develop the means to efficiently increase power for spacecraft, thereby fundamentally increasing our capability for Solar System exploration. Increased power for spacecraft means not only traveling farther or faster, but it also means exploring more efficiently with enormously greater scientific return. High levels of sustained power would permit a new era of Solar System missions designed for agility, longevity, flexibility, and comprehensive scientific exploration. Some possibilities we envision are:

• We could conduct comprehensive and detailed investigations creating comparative data sets of the outer planets-Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune-and all their moons and associated objects. The knowledge we gain with these data sets would be vital to understanding other planetary systems recently discovered (we?ve discovered more gas giants than Earth-like planets to date).
• The surfaces and interiors of comets could be comprehensively explored, and we could even return samples to better understand the building blocks of the universe.
• At Mars, we could dramatically expand our capabilities for surface, on-orbit exploration and sample return.
• At the edge of the Solar System, if we?re not limited by power, there is important knowledge about the origins of the Solar System to be gained from understanding Pluto and the Kuiper Belt.

Today, only nuclear power can enable these scientifically vital, but incredibly challenging missions.

Technology Focus

Pending approval by Congress, NASA?s Project Prometheus would develop the technologies needed to enable the above vision for the future. There are two basic types of technology under consideration for this program: (1) radioisotope-based systems and (2) nuclear fission-based systems.

Radioisotope Power System (RPS) development would focus on two technologies, the Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (MMRTG) and the Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG), that are expected to improve the efficiency and utility of systems that NASA has been using for 30 years. These essential improvements on our current technology would enable an ?all weather, anywhere, anytime? exploration of planetary surfaces.

The fission power and propulsion research would focus on developing the nuclear systems needed for revolutionary new capabilities in space exploration. Project Prometheus would include research on reactors, advanced heat-to-power conversion, and power management and distribution technologies to provide spacecraft flexibility, long-mission durations, and orders of magnitude more power for science instruments. See the NASA Fact Sheet on Space Fission Reactor Power Systems for additional information.

Programmatic Focus

Project Prometheus will be a NASA program with substantial involvement of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). NASA would define the science requirements for future exploration missions and manage the RPS and fission-based programs, as well as the spacecraft systems engineering. A substantial portion of Project Prometheus research and development will be competitively awarded. The DOE will manage work awarded in the nuclear area, while NASA centers (Glenn Research Center and Marshall Space Flight Center) and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory will manage work awarded in the non-nuclear area.

The initial activity for the fission power and propulsion program will focus on defining the near-term technology research goals, and on identifying planetary science missions uniquely enabled by nuclear fission electric power and propulsion. The RPS program will concentrate on developing the MMRTG and SRG systems (either of which could be of potential use on the Mars Smart Lander Mission to be launched in 2009). The program has also identified a planetary science mission that will be uniquely enabled by nuclear fission electric power and propulsion: the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter. The Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter would be an ambitious mission to orbit three planet-sized moons of Jupiter -- Callisto, Ganymede and Europa -- which may harbor vast oceans beneath their icy surfaces. The mission would orbit each of these moons for extensive investigations of their makeup, their history and their potential for sustaining life.

In addition, a range of technologies and system designs will be explored that may be prudent for NASA and DOE to invest in over the next several years, beyond the specific technologies already under consideration. NASA and DOE would also identify and recommend additional strategic technology investments to potentially enable future human exploration of the Solar System.

In keeping with NASA goals of openness and transparency, Project Prometheus would seek to ensure open, inclusive dialogue and engagement with the public, media, educators, legislators, and others; foster technology education and outreach programs; and make appropriate materials available on the Internet.

Focus on Safety

Project Prometheus would continue to emphasize the safe way we operate and design missions. For NASA, the key word in this sentence is ?safe? -- safety is the primary operating principle for Project Prometheus. NASA has over 30 years? experience in the successful management and operation of RPS missions. Working with the DOE, NASA will extend that safety experience to the design, manufacture, and flight of a fission reactor-based mission. The reactor will have multiple safety features including a design that will prevent criticality while the vehicle is still near Earth. Also, Project Prometheus will continue to engage expertise in continuous risk management and risk assessment and will fully comply with environmental and nuclear safety launch approval processes. For further information, see the NASA Fact Sheets on RPS safety and fission reactor power system safety.

Focus on the Future

Project Prometheus would enable the fulfillment of NASA?s most challenging scientific goals, and will provide the essential ability to answer our most intriguing questions: Is there life elsewhere in the Solar System? How was the Solar System created and what is its future? These questions can be answered when we are able to explore--with enough time and power-enabled by the ability to change course in mid-mission to take advantage of the opportunities presented by new discoveries. Providing these important capabilities is the focus of Project Prometheus.

[vannrox]

Centennial Challenges

"[This] request includes funding to establish a series of annual prizes for revolutionary, breakthrough accomplishments that advance exploration of the solar system and beyond and other NASA goals. Some of the most difficult technical challenges to exploration will require very novel solutions from non-traditional sources of innovation. By making awards based on actual achievements instead of proposals, NASA will tap innovators in academia, industry, and the public who do not normally work on NASA issues. Centential Challenges will be modeled on past successes, including 19th century navigation prizes, early 20th century aviation prizes, and more recent prizes offered by the U.S. government and private sector. Examples of potential Centennial Challenges include very-low-cost space missions, contests to demonstrate highly mobile, capable, and survivable robotic systems, and fundamental advances in technical areas like lander navigation, spacecraft power systems, life detection sensors, and nano-materials."

Isn't it revealing how tax-subsidized NASA only "aspires" to allocate about 1/1000 of its (frequently-growing) 2005 budget to competitive prize offerings, though?

Previously, NASA made at least a token reference to finally offering competitive prizes within its FY 2003 budget request in the 3rd paragraph of page 18 (of 21) at http://ifmp.nasa.gov/codeb/budget2003/02-Agency_Summary.pdf :

"Funds for announced prizes otherwize authorized shall remain available, without fiscal year limitation, until the prize is claimed or the offer is withdrawn."

Meanwhile, in September of 2002, NASA Deputy Chief-of-Staff Dr. Scott Pace gave a formal presentation on NASA commercialization possibilities which included a somewhat detailed discussion of the publicly funded competitive prizes option. One can find at least part of the prizes discussion on page 13 of the following Power Point presentation:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codez/nac/NACPresentations/PaceNAC091102.ppt.

Simultaneously, NASA's badly needed competitor, DARPA is now offering a million dollar prize for a scientific breakthrough pertaining to transportation & artificial intelligence. [Grand Challenge website; Seattle Times article].

[anymouse]

I dunno, but spiral and space vehicles are words that don't usually go together with good results. Spirals usually imply a lack of control - whether it be guidance or budget costs.

[unibrowshift9b20]

So what is Spiral the name of?

And is the CEV going to be called the CEV in the future, or "Constellation"? Wouldn't that be cool: "constellation 1" or "concap 1".

Isn't there a Russian air to air missile that NATO calls Spiral?