An Oversight Committee of the United States Senate has unanimously voted to postpone the retirement of the shuttle fleet. While the argument for making such a move sounds convincing, even practical, it is really a politically motivated effort.
Under the plan, a third shuttle mission would be added to the schedule, flying to the International Space Station in summer or fall of 2011. Along with this virtually all of the shuttle fleet employees would stay on at least until the final shuttle lands just to ensure that another shuttle would be ready to fly if deemed necessary.
Another aspect of the proposal is to reinstate several of the Constellation Program's components that President Obama wants to cancel. This work would lay the foundation for the inevitable replacement of the shuttle fleet.
All of this sounds great, but is it really the right move? First of all, we must examine the political implications. With mid-term elections coming in the fall, the pressure is on for politicians to save jobs. This plan does just that, ensuring that various NASA employees and contractors would stay in business for at least another year.
Of course under Obama's plan must of the new space flight development would take place in private industry. If the funding were secured for such projects -- funding that would be greatly reduced under the Senate's plan -- many new jobs would be created. But it is unclear when and where these jobs would go. So the safe political move is to ensure the survival of the thousands of jobs, rather than cut them in an election year.
So this decision by the Senate has clear political motivation, but does it also make fiscal and scientific sense? On these fronts the plan is less clear. Simply mandating that NASA move in a certain direction -- starting design of new rockets, reviving aspects of the Constellation Program, etc. -- are not guarantees of success. It seems that this new plan would be plagued by the same cost overruns and delays that plagued the Constellation Program in the first place.
Is this new Senate plan just delaying the inevitable? Maybe. Though it does begin to layout a timetable to getting the space program back up and running quickly in the post space shuttle era. Which is in contrast to the Obama plan which delays the development of heavy lift rockets -- a key component of future space exploration -- for another five years.
Clearly this is a complex issue, so come back for continued analysis in the coming weeks. In the meantime, feel free to sound off in the comments section.
Image Credit: NASA
Comments