Space

DATE=05/02/02

TYPE=BACKGROUND REPORT

TITLE=SON OF SHUTTLE

NUMBER=5-51540

BYLINE=DAVID McALARY

DATELINE=WASHINGTON

CONTENT=

INTERNET=

VOICED AT:

INTRO: The U-S space agency NASA is developing a successor to the space shuttle, which it wants to retire in 10 years. It killed an effort to design a revolutionary space rocket last year and is now examining more evolutionary concepts that it hopes can be ready by the year 2012. David McAlary reports.

TEXT: NASA spent six years pursuing a dream rocket whose design ultimately became a wingless, wedge-shaped craft made of non-metal composite materials. Unlike the shuttle, the so-called X-33 would have shot to orbit in a single stage without booster rockets and returned to Earth ready for another mission within days.

The X-33 was supposed to be ready for flight by 2006, but NASA discontinue development last year after technical difficulties involving the engine, fuel tanks, and other components. Legislative auditors also accused NASA of unrealistically low cost estimates.

The head of a private U-S space advocacy group, Pat Dasch (DASH) of the National Space Society, says the X-33 relied on too many untested technologies.

/// DASCH ACT ///

I think they tried to do the impossible. They tried to go from the shuttle we have today to a new vehicle, ultimately which involved leapfrog technology. With hindsight, the discussion is now about what will the second-generation shuttle be? It's not going to be revolutionary technology. It's going to be derived technology.

/// END ACT ///

NASA is now working with several U-S aerospace companies to come up with a different shuttle successor. Rather than focusing on a single design like the X-33, the new project is developing generic technology and operational concepts. These are presently embraced in 15 spacecraft plans that, like the shuttle, would reach orbit in two stages instead of one and have conventional metal skin, not composite.

The NASA official in charge of the program, Dennis Smith, says the 15 designs will be narrowed to three by November, two by the end of next year, and one by 2006.

/// SMITH ACT 1 ///

We really feel we're on our way to enabling development of a second generation reusable launch vehicle. We are developing the capabilities required to do that with a system that can be far safer, reliable, and more affordable.

/// END ACT ///

In NASA's view, more affordable means dropping the cost of lifting loads by 90 per cent. Safer means cutting the risk of catastrophe from the current one-in-250 flights with the shuttle to one-in-10-thousand.

But an independent advisory panel to NASA says the project lacks credibility. It calls its cost-reduction and safety objectives unrealistic. And panel member Gerard Elverum (EL-ver-rum) told a House of Representatives space subcommittee recently that NASA will not meet its 2012 operations schedule if it does not pick a specific design sooner than 2006.

/// ELVERUM ACT ///

Making a decision in 2006 to incorporate a brand new vehicle with lots of new technology is not going to be qualified to replace the shuttle by 2012. If we have basically, I think, defaulted that decision for 2012, then you're stuck with going ahead and making sure we can fly the shuttle until 2020.

/// END ACT ///

/// OPT /// The prospect of extending the life of the shuttle fleet is troubling to many, such as a former safety advisor to NASA, Robert Blomberg. He told Congress that budget cuts put the future of the aging fleet, now 21 years old, in jeopardy.

/// OPT BLOMBERG ACT ///

I have never been as worried about space shuttle safety as I am right now. All of my instincts suggest that the current approach is planting the seeds for danger.

/// END ACT ///

/// OPT /// The NASA safety advisory panel Mr. Blomberg headed until recently has cited several causes for worry -- the elimination or deferral of safety improvements, a diminished shuttle workforce, and an aging launch infrastructure. /// END OPT ///

One member of Congress, Bart Gordon, says he fears the shuttle fleet will become obsolete before it can be replaced, leaving the international space station stranded.

/// GORDON ACT ///

The tread on the tires is getting very thin. The very likely problem is unless there's a change, we have a space station with no way to service it.

/// END ACT ///

NASA's Dennis Smith notes that the space agency has not allocated much money for the shuttle replacement vehicle beyond 2006. But he says if the country can afford it and will allow NASA to fund it, the new shuttle will be ready on time.

/// SMITH ACT 2 ///

We went to the moon in nine years and we developed the shuttle in eight years. Here we are 10 years away and it really comes down to a commitment to get behind the new system.

/// END ACT ///

Mr. Smith concedes, however, that political support for a new U-S launch vehicle depends on his team's ability to deliver hardware within budget.

/// OPT SMITH ACT 3 ///

That's an area we really have to improve on being able to demonstrate that we can do thins at an affordable cost.

/// END ACT /// /// END OPT ///

(SIGNED)

NEB/DEM/RH