NASA's Lori Glaze says at the Planetary Science Advisory Cmte meeting this morning that the FY25 budget proposal is still scheduled for release next Monday. (It will make for an interesting NASA Night at LPSC next Monday evening.)
https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1766176480743027034QuoteNASA Admin Bill Nelson will give his annual State of NASA speech on Monday (Mar 11) at 1:00 pm ET and participate in a media telecon at 2:30 pm ET to discuss the President's FY2025 budget request, which will be submitted that day. Watch on NASA TV etc.
NASA Admin Bill Nelson will give his annual State of NASA speech on Monday (Mar 11) at 1:00 pm ET and participate in a media telecon at 2:30 pm ET to discuss the President's FY2025 budget request, which will be submitted that day. Watch on NASA TV etc.
2024 State of NASA Address from Administrator Bill NelsonQuoteScheduled for Mar 11, 2024NASA Administrator Bill Nelson discusses the agency’s goals for the benefit of humanity during the annual State of NASA address on Monday, March 11. Learn about our plans for promoting U.S. leadership in space exploration, improving life on Earth through innovation, humanity’s return to the Moon under the Artemis campaign, and more. Senior leaders from each of NASA’s mission directorates also will discuss advancements in their areas ranging from aeronautics and science research to space operations. Read more: https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-to-highlight-artemis-us-space-leadership-during-annual-address/
Scheduled for Mar 11, 2024NASA Administrator Bill Nelson discusses the agency’s goals for the benefit of humanity during the annual State of NASA address on Monday, March 11. Learn about our plans for promoting U.S. leadership in space exploration, improving life on Earth through innovation, humanity’s return to the Moon under the Artemis campaign, and more. Senior leaders from each of NASA’s mission directorates also will discuss advancements in their areas ranging from aeronautics and science research to space operations. Read more: https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-to-highlight-artemis-us-space-leadership-during-annual-address/
The FY25 budget documents are out:
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS ANDSPACE ADMINISTRATIONThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is responsible for sending astronauts and robotic missions to explore the solar system, advancing the Nation's understanding of the Earth and space, and developing new technologies and approaches to improve aviation and space activities. The President's 2025 Budget for NASA enables progress toward priority goals including: exploring the Moon with U.S. and international partner astronauts; understanding the Earth system; conducting a broad space science program consisting of multiple exciting missions; and transitioning from a Government-led to commercially-led space stations.The Budget requests $25.4 billion in discretionary budget authority for 2025, a 9.1-percent increase since the start of the Administration, to advance space exploration, improve understanding of the Earth and space, develop and test new aviation and space technologies, and to do this all with increased efficiency, including through the use of tools such as artificial intelligence.The President's 2025 Budget:• Invests in the U.S.-led Artemis Program of Lunar Exploration. The Budget includes $7.8 billion for the Artemis program, which would bring astronauts-including the first wom-en, first people of color, and first international astronauts-to the lunar surface as part of a long-term journey of science and exploration. The Budget invests in new systems to assist lunar surface science and exploration activities, including a small lunar rover and a large cargo lander that would be used to deliver larger rovers and habitats to the surface in the 2030s.• Supports Highly-Efficient and Greener Commercial Airliners. The Budget invests $966 million in NASA's Aeronautics program. Within this topline, the Budget provides a 12-percent increase above the 2023 enacted level for green aviation projects, which would develop hybrid-electric jet engines, lightweight aircraft structures, and a major new flight demonstrator to pave the way for new commercial airliners that would be cheaper to operate and produce less pollution.• Enhances Climate Science and Information. The Budget invests $2.4 billion, $184 million above the 2023 enacted level, in the Earth Science program for missions and activities that advance Earth systems science and also increase accessibility to information to mitigate natural hazards, support climate action, and manage natural resources. This includes $150 million for the next generation of Landsat satellites, ensuring continuity of data that is used for water resource management and climate science. This also includes development of applications and tools to support wildland fire management, provide farmers with information they can use, and better understand greenhouse gas emissions from natural and human-caused sources through the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Center, a multi-agency collaboration to improve data sets and analysis tools.• Advances Exploration of the Solar System and Universe. The Budget provides $5.2 billion for space science, enabling a broad portfolio of missions to explore the solar system and universe. The Budget supports: continued operations of the James Webb Space Telescope; increasing space weather research and applications; and expanding technology maturation efforts at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center to find habitable planets beyond the solar sys-tem. Given that the Mars Sample Return mission is a major part of part of NASA's planetary science budget, the Budget enables NASA's internal assessment of mission architecture options to be completed to address mission cost overruns before providing more details for the $2.7 billion in planetary science budget.• Increases Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Opportunities at Minority-Serving Institutions. The Budget provides $46 million to the Minority University Research and Education Project, to increase competitive awards to Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Tribal Colleges and Universities, and other Minority-Serving Institutions, and recruit and retain underrepresented and underserved students in STEM fields.• Advances U.S. Space Industry Technology Development. The Budget provides $1.2 billion for NASA's Space Technology portfolio to foster innovative technology research and development to meet the needs of NASA, support the expanding U.S. space industry which is creating a growing number of good jobs, and keep America ahead of competitors at the forefront of space innovation. The Budget funds the close-out of the On-orbit Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing mission, freeing up funding to grow early-stage space technology research and development programs, fund additional technology collaboration opportunities between NASA and industry, and fully-fund the Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations nuclear propulsion demonstration project, a cooperative program with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.• Continues the Transition to Commercial Space Stations. The Budget funds continued operation of the International Space Station (ISS), a vehicle to safely de-orbit the space station after it is retired in 2030, and the commercial space stations that NASA would use as soon as they become available. The Budget gradually reduces research and other activities on board the ISS in order to provide the funding necessary for the de-orbit vehicle and commercial space stations. The Administration continues to strongly support the transition to commercial space stations in 2030, which would maintain U.S. leadership in low earth orbit and free up resources to allow NASA to make greater investments in cutting-edge science and exploration activities.
President’s NASA FY 2025 Funding Supports US Space, Climate LeadershipMAR 11, 2024RELEASE 24-037NASA meatball logoNASAThe Biden-Harris Administration Monday released the President’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2025, which includes funding to invest in America and the American people and will allow NASA to continue advancing our understanding of Earth and space while inspiring the world through discovery.“As history has proven, as the present has shown, and as the future will continue to demonstrate, an investment in NASA is an investment in America for the benefit of humanity,” said NASA Administrator Bill Nelson. “President Biden’s budget will fund our nation’s abilities and leadership for the future of space exploration, scientific discovery, cutting-edge technology, climate data, the next generation of aeronautics, and inspiring our future leaders – the Artemis Generation.”The budget allows NASA to launch the Artemis II mission, which will send astronauts around the Moon for the first time in more than 50 years, research Earth’s changing climate, grow commercial markets to serve America’s interests in space, and inspire the Artemis Generation of science, technology, engineering, and math professionals.“This budget shows NASA’s value in contributing to the global leadership of the United States,” said Nelson. “Every dollar supports our ability to continue exploring new cosmic shores and making the impossible possible, all while creating competitive and good-paying jobs in all 50 states.”At NASA, the budget request would:Invest in the U.S.-led Artemis campaign of lunar exploration: The budget includes $7.8 billion for the Artemis campaign, which will bring astronauts – including the first woman, first person of color, and first international astronaut –to the lunar surface starting this decade as part of a long-term journey of science and exploration.Enhance climate science and information: The budget invests $2.4 billion in the Earth science program for missions and activities that advance Earth systems science and increase accessibility to information to mitigate natural hazards, support climate action, and manage natural resources.Advance U.S. space industry technology development: The budget provides $1.2 billion for NASA’s space technology portfolio to foster innovative technology research and development to meet the needs of NASA, support the expanding U.S. space industry, which is creating a growing number of good jobs, and keep America ahead of competitors at the forefront of space innovation.Support highly efficient and greener commercial airliners: The budget invests $966 million in NASA’s aeronautics program, which will develop hybrid-electric jet engines, lightweight aircraft structures, and a major new flight demonstrator to pave the way for new commercial airliners that would be cheaper to operate and produce less pollution.Continue the transition to commercial space stations: The budget funds continued operation of the International Space Station, a vehicle to safely de-orbit the space station after it is retired in 2030, and the commercial space stations that NASA will use as soon as they become available.Increase STEM opportunities at minority-serving institutions: The budget provides $46 million to the Minority University Research and Education Project, to increase competitive awards to Historically Black Colleges and Universities, tribal colleges and universities, and other minority-serving institutions, and recruit and retain underrepresented and underserved students in STEM fields.Following historic progress made since the President took office – with nearly 15 million jobs created and inflation down two-thirds – the budget protects and builds on this progress by lowering costs for working families and reducing the deficit by cracking down on fraud, cutting wasteful spending, and making the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share.For more information on NASA’s fiscal year 2025 budget request, visit:https://www.nasa.gov/budget-end-
NASA says spending caps force “hard choices” for its 2025 budget:https://spacenews.com/nasa-says-spending-caps-force-hard-choices-for-its-2025-budget/
Anyone who knows me can guess what hard choice I think NASA should be making in a era of increased ambitions but capped budgets...(though making that choice probably won't be politically feasible until Starship and New Glenn are regularly flying)...
I hope political feasibility would come a bit sooner than that. It's not like SLS has a high flight rate that Starship and New Glenn need to match. Maybe it would be enough if the most recent Starship flight and the most recent New Glenn flight both deployed their payloads successfully and recovered their boosters. That could occur as soon as New Glenn's maiden flight later this year. One could then argue that these vehicles are crewed-exploration-sized vehicles (cite Augustine report, Artemis landers) following in the partial reuse footsteps of the successful Falcon 9.Political feasibility won't happen before Congress is supposed to pass the FY '25 budget but may come before Congress actually passes the budget in October or later.
Quote from: deltaV on 03/16/2024 02:18 amI hope political feasibility would come a bit sooner than that. It's not like SLS has a high flight rate that Starship and New Glenn need to match. Maybe it would be enough if the most recent Starship flight and the most recent New Glenn flight both deployed their payloads successfully and recovered their boosters. That could occur as soon as New Glenn's maiden flight later this year. One could then argue that these vehicles are crewed-exploration-sized vehicles (cite Augustine report, Artemis landers) following in the partial reuse footsteps of the successful Falcon 9.Political feasibility won't happen before Congress is supposed to pass the FY '25 budget but may come before Congress actually passes the budget in October or later.I think that Congress isn't likely to look at this from the perspective of "what's the approach that gives the best ROI for the people of this country given capped budgets?" and instead will be in "remove all doubt that Starship and/or New Glenn can perform this mission, and only then will we consider abandoning our campaign contributor's cash cow" mode. Though you make a good point, with the election this year, no NASA authorization or appropriation bill is likely to be signed before the end of the year. It'll be the new congress calling the shots, and by that point it's likely that both Starship and New Glenn may have had one or more successful flights. I doubt it will be enough by that point to make the call though. But I could see the FY 26 PBR pushing in that direction.~Jon
The parties already agreed to a certain level of spending for FY25 during the debt deal. This agreement is unlikely to change after the election. Usually, the appropriations bills are so far along that very little changes after the election. Having said that it is possible that the parties will come to an agreement on the FY25 Appropriations bills right after the election in November or December but before the new Congress is in place in January. It seems unlikely to me that the parties will come to an agreement on the various FY25 Appropriations bills before the election.
SLS and Orion (and the BO HLS) are pure pork jobs programs.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 03/16/2024 04:21 pmSLS and Orion (and the BO HLS) are pure pork jobs programs.BO HLS is NOT "pure pork". It provides NASA with redundancy in case SpaceX has trouble with the SpaceX HLS design's many technical risks.
Quote from: deltaV on 03/17/2024 05:28 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 03/16/2024 04:21 pmSLS and Orion (and the BO HLS) are pure pork jobs programs.BO HLS is NOT "pure pork". It provides NASA with redundancy in case SpaceX has trouble with the SpaceX HLS design's many technical risks.It does no such thing. HLS is a lander programme, SLS is a launch vehicle, not a lander. Altair was cancelled two decades ago, and no further development has occurred.
...I supposed of Congress really wanted to keep SLS and something did happen you could source another lead core stage contractor but that seems unlikely....
Quote from: edzieba on 03/17/2024 08:44 amQuote from: deltaV on 03/17/2024 05:28 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 03/16/2024 04:21 pmSLS and Orion (and the BO HLS) are pure pork jobs programs.BO HLS is NOT "pure pork". It provides NASA with redundancy in case SpaceX has trouble with the SpaceX HLS design's many technical risks.It does no such thing. HLS is a lander programme, SLS is a launch vehicle, not a lander. Altair was cancelled two decades ago, and no further development has occurred.The legislative history is very clear: after NASA awarded only one HLS contract (to SpaceX), certain legislators were very upset. They passed new legislation directing NASA to award a second contract with the clear intent that it would go to BO. This is why I think of it as pork. Yes, it can be justified as a contingency design, but that is basically an after-the-fact rationalization. (Note: based the Starliner fiasco I grant that an alternate development effort may be a good idea, but it had nothing whatoever to do with that legislative effort.)If congress is really concerned with contingency risk mitigation, Why is there no push for an alternative to SLS/Orion? I believe the failure risks for SLS/Orion are considerably higher than for Starship HLS, mostly because of the extremely low flight rate. But an SLS/Orion alternative would put the SLS/Orion pork at risk.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration: Provides $25.178 billion for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which is $303.640 million (1%) above the FY24 enacted level and $204.100 million below the President’s Budget Request.
Lunar Discovery and Exploration Program.—The recommendation supports no less than $458,300,000 and up to $533,300,000 for the Lunar Discovery and Exploration Program (LDEP). The Committee urges NASA to ensure LDEP missions remain on schedule and do not cause delay to Artemis. Commercial Lunar Payload Services.—The recommendation includes the request for the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program. The Committee notes the importance of CLPS funding remaining at no less than the fiscal year 2024 enacted level, to grow the space economy and to create lasting, affordable commercial operations on the Moon. The Committee strongly supports NASA’s partnerships and leveraging of the space industry through the CLPS program. The Committee emphasizes the importance of the CLPS program in maintaining American leadership in space, developing a domestic space industrial base for the U.S.’s return to the Moon, and increasing lunar operations.
Mars Sample Return.—The Committee remains committed to the prioritization process as set by the Planetary Sciences Decadal Survey. While the Committee supports NASA’s efforts to evaluate additional industry solutions for the Mars Sample Return mission, the Committee remains concerned that the agency’s decisions have led to serious losses to NASA’s high-skilled workforce and leadership in areas critical to planetary sciences as well as future NASA missions. As such, the recommendation includes no less than $650,000,000 to advance the Mars Sample Return mission. In accordance with the Independent Review Board’s conclusions regarding the critical importance of this mission, and considering the existing architecture committed to successfully returning samples to Earth, the Committee directs NASA to ensure that its fiscal year 2026 budget request includes the funding necessary to complete the mission launch no later than 2031. Mars Sample Return Innovation.—The Committee is encouraged by NASA’s recent solicitation for industry proposals on innovative and alternative architectures and elements for the Mars Sample Return mission. Additionally, the Committee is interested in seeing how commercial applicant involvement could change how Science Mission Directorate missions are conducted. The Committee notes the potential for incoming proposals to include lower life-cycle cost, lower annual cost, provide earlier sample return, and lower mission complexity and risk. The Committee notes that NASA has not announced a process by which these proposals will be evaluated and directs NASA to submit a report, no later than 30 days after the enactment of this Act, detailing any criteria it plans to utilize in the assessment of the proposals.
The recommendation includes $1,181,800,000 for Space Technology, which is $81,800,000 above fiscal year 2024 and equal to the request. Lunar Power Systems.—The recommendation includes $120,000,000 for the development of lunar power systems for anticipated surface missions in the mid-2020s. Fission Surface Power.—The recommendation includes $50,000,000 for the advancement of Fission Surface Power, if NASA determines that fission can supply power for ten years in the lunar environment. Nuclear Thermal Propulsion.—Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) is a critical space propulsion technology that will enable a host of exploration, scientific, national security, and commercial applications. The recommendation includes $110,000,000 for the Space Nuclear Propulsion, for the development and demonstration of operational nuclear propulsion systems. Subsequent NASA budget submissions and future year projections should reflect how nuclear propulsion objectives and goals are rated in the shortfall prioritization process. In addition, NASA is directed to provide a detailed spending plan for NTP as well as a plan for the design. Nuclear Electric Propulsion.—The recommendation includes up to $20,000,000 to begin a systematic approach to developing Nuclear Electric Propulsion technologies and systems capable of ferrying astronauts to Mars or deep space science missions. Space Nuclear Propulsion Program Office.—The Committee notes the intent of the Space Technology Mission Directorate to establish a Space Nuclear Propulsion Technology Program Office, to coordinate the development and demonstration of NTP and capabilities. The Committee encourages the Space Technology Mission Directorate to expedite the establishment of this important Program Office.
CAPSTONE Mission Extension.—The Committee notes that the CAPSTONE mission has reduced risk for future spacecraft and the Artemis Program by validating innovative navigation technologies and verifying the dynamics of the Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO). The CAPSTONE mission extension will facilitate additional development of the underlying technologies informed by the mission data and the dissemination of the model to support other missions-of-opportunity programs. Therefore, the Committee directs the Small Spacecraft Technology program to provide mission of opportunity funding for the CAPSTONE mission extension.
Human Landing System.—The recommendation includes no less than $1,864,000,000 for the Human Landing System (HLS). [Note that the President's FY25 request was for $1,896.1M.]
Block 1B Development.—The Committee is supportive of NASA’s plans to fully develop SLS capabilities and directs NASA to continue the simultaneous development of the authorized activities under section 302(c)(1)(a) and (b) of Public Law 111–267. Enabling the evolution of SLS from the vehicle used in Artemis I to the Block 1B variant and eventually the 130 metric ton variant, requires the continued development of the interim Block 1B variation of SLS, including the continued development of Exploration Upper Stage. It also requires modifications to SLS, the continued construction of an ML–2 as a Block 1B compatible mobile launch platform, and development of any additional processing and launch capabilities. To further enable NASA’s goals for the Artemis program, the recommendation includes no less than $235,800,000 and up to $600,000,000 for Block 1B development for Exploration Upper Stage (EUS) engine development and associated stage adapter work from within the amounts provided for SLS.
Exploration Extravehicular Activity Service.—The Committee supports NASA’s efforts to award two task orders to multiple industry providers to advance the development, testing, certification, and mission readiness of next generation extravehicular activity (EVA) spacesuits for the International Space Station (ISS) and future Low Earth Orbit platforms as well as the Artemis III mission and beyond. The Committee believes having two providers funded and providing capability for these missions will ensure continued competition on cost, schedule, and capability while providing NASA with redundancy for Artemis and Mars missions. The recommendation includes no less than $494,900,000 for the Exploration Extravehicular Activity Service (XEVAS) and Human Surface Mobility program in fiscal year 2025 to ensure that all task orders necessary to maintain schedule for the ISS demonstration and missions and Artemis missions to the Moon and later Mars are fulfilled. The Committee directs NASA to support competition and redundancy for future Artemis missions starting with Artemis IV by providing the Committee with a plan, including a task order and funding roadmap, to have both EVA spacesuits developed and certified for lunar surface missions in time for the selection of the EVA spacesuit for the Artemis IV mission. Human Landing System Program Initiative.—The Committee directs NASA to fund the development and crewed demonstration of a second commercial human landing system through the Sustaining Lunar Development Program initiative in the Human Landing System Program initiative. Commercial LEO Destinations.—The Committee is aware that NASA plans two phases for Commercial LEO Destinations (CLD), which is a deviation from the phasing and timelines used successfully in NASA’s Commercial Cargo and Crew Programs. The Committee seeks to understand NASA’s plans to take full advantage of potential CLD providers, while addressing the technical risks of the planned two-phase program compared to alternative approaches. NASA is directed to brief the Committee no later than 90 days after the enactment of this Act on its plans to achieve rapid and cost-effective CLD capabilities. This briefing shall include an assessment of: (i) the benefits of NASA’s CLD requirements being met by a mix of different services from CLD contractor teams instead of requiring nearly identical services from providers; and (ii) the benefits of the CLD program taking incremental steps toward more advanced CLD capabilities over time.
Apophis Reconnaissance Mission.—The Committee notes the importance of the OSIRIS–APEX mission and is concerned that NASA may miss a unique opportunity presented by the asteroid Apophis’s close approach to the Earth in 2029. The recommendation includes $5,000,000 for NASA to develop a plan for a public-private partnership reconnaissance mission to Apophis prior to its 2029 flyby. No later than 120 days after the enactment of this Act, the Committee directs NASA to provide a briefing on how the agency’s investments in the New Frontiers program will advance this mission, including NASA’s plans to execute the funds, key milestones, and deliverables. The Committee directs NASA that this briefing shall include updates on any partnerships formed, technological innovations employed, scientific findings generated, and the impact of this mission on advancing U.S. asteroid research and planetary defense capabilities. The Committee emphasizes the importance of prioritizing resources effectively to ensure the success of this mission and encourages NASA to explore funding mechanisms that balance the need for scientific exploration with budgetary constraints, including new and innovative approaches that leverage the expertise of small companies, non-traditional partners, and private sector resource exploration potential benefits.
House Appropriators Boost Mars Sample Return While Cutting Science Overall:https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/house-appropriators-boost-mars-sample-return-while-cutting-science-overall/https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1810517333674213486
Quote from: yg1968 on 07/09/2024 03:35 amHouse Appropriators Boost Mars Sample Return While Cutting Science Overall:https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/house-appropriators-boost-mars-sample-return-while-cutting-science-overall/https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1810517333674213486The headline should have been "House Appropriators Boost Pork, Cut Science". The house doesn't care about MSR, they're just chasing pork.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA): The bill provides $25.4 billion for NASA, which is a $559 million increase above fiscal year 2024. The bill includes significant resources to enable the goal of returning Americans to the Moon, providing $7.65 billion for Exploration, which is $30 million above the President’s budget request. The bill supports progress on the Artemis Campaign Development, including funding for NASA to meet all contractual obligations for both Human Landing Systems in fiscal year 2025.Within NASA Science, the Near-Earth Object Surveyor mission to find potentially dangerous asteroids and comets receives $236 million, $26 million above fiscal year 2024. The bill also provides $1.58 billion for Astrophysics, including $187 million to operate the James Webb Space Telescope. Further, the bill includes $812 million for Heliophysics, which is $7 million above fiscal year 2024.Aeronautics is supported at $966 million to ensure continued U.S. leadership in aviation and to invest in sustainable aviation technologies. Key NASA Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Engagement total $144 million. This includes Space Grant ($58.5 million), the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Technology ($26 million), the Minority University Research and Education Project ($45.5 million).
The Committee provides not less than the request level for the Space Launch System [SLS], Orion multi-purpose crew vehicle [Orion] and Exploration Ground Systems [EGS]. These funding levels ensure the earliest possible crewed launch of SLS, as well as prepare for the development of future science and crewed missions. However, NASA must effectively manage the cost and schedule of the agency’s highest priority missions, especially in light of a constrained fiscal environment. The Committee is concerned that cost overruns for flagship missions, including those in the Exploration Directorate are affecting programs across the agency and that, in the long term, NASA must drive down launch costs to ensure the long-term success of the Artemis campaign. The Committee acknowledges the OIG’s findings in IG–24–001 that the lack of competition for heavy-lift services are impeding the ability to drive down exploration launch costs. Therefore, not later than 90 days after enactment of this act, NASA shall provide the Committee with a report outlining how the agency is planning on reducing launch costs beginning with Artemis V. The report should include progress on implementing the recommendations in IG–24–001 and an analysis of how commercial launch options could be part of the agency’s long-term strategy.Human Landing System [HLS].—The Committee recognizes the national importance of America’s return to the Moon and provides $1,896,100,000 to achieve the contracted HLS Option A, Option B, and Sustaining Lander Development missions, as well as development of cargo landing services derived from these crewed landers to support the development of sustainable human exploration of the Moon and Mars. Competition between industry partners will drive long-term affordability for the HLS program. The Committee directs NASA to utilize a competitive process for contracting cargo landing missions and crewed landing missions within the purview of the HLS program that have not yet been awarded.Exploration Extravehicular Activity [xEVA] Spacesuits. —The Committee provides not less than $434,200,000 for the xEVA and Human Surface Mobility program to maintain schedule for the International Space Station and Artemis missions. NASA shall only procure EVA spacesuits and services for NASA and international partner astronauts for Low Earth Orbit, Artemis and deep space missions that meet the strict safety and mission criteria required under the xEVA program. Further, the Committee expects that the HLS, Gateway, and Lunar Terrain Vehicle development teams are coordinating with the xEVA program to ensure compatibility. Commercial Crew and Cargo.—The Committee strongly supports continued, regular access to the ISS and notes that this access supports national capabilities in Earth orbit and is vital to retaining U.S. leadership in space. NASA is directed to maintain the high skilled workforce supporting ISS operations, which in turn will have impacts on the safety and operations of our sustained human presence and mission in LEO. NASA shall maintain a regular cadence of not less than two crew rotation missions per year and five cargo missions per year on U.S. vehicle systems while the ISS is operational.Commercial Crew Vehicles.—The Committee believes NASA should consider establishing a reliable crew vehicle program to ensure uninterrupted access to the ISS and future commercial LEO platforms. In doing so, NASA is urged to consider dissimilar redundancy, while leveraging current Federal and private investment in cargo to benefit crew. The Committee directs NASA to provide a report, no later than 180 days after enactment of this act, on what steps are required to modify currently available cargo vehicles to a crewed variant, including vehicular modifications, cost, and timing.
Quote from: pages 163 to 165 of the Senate CJS Appropriations ReportThe Committee directs NASA to provide a report, no later than 180 days after enactment of this act, on what steps are required to modify currently available cargo vehicles to a crewed variant, including vehicular modifications, cost, and timing.https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/FY25%20CJS%20Senate%20Report.pdf
The Committee directs NASA to provide a report, no later than 180 days after enactment of this act, on what steps are required to modify currently available cargo vehicles to a crewed variant, including vehicular modifications, cost, and timing.
Quote from: deltaV on 07/09/2024 03:42 amQuote from: yg1968 on 07/09/2024 03:35 amHouse Appropriators Boost Mars Sample Return While Cutting Science Overall:https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/house-appropriators-boost-mars-sample-return-while-cutting-science-overall/https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1810517333674213486The headline should have been "House Appropriators Boost Pork, Cut Science". The house doesn't care about MSR, they're just chasing pork.Well your comment has already aged badly considering a certain rock just discovered on Mars and looks even more ill informed than the first time you made it.
Quote from: Star One on 07/26/2024 10:19 amQuote from: deltaV on 07/09/2024 03:42 amQuote from: yg1968 on 07/09/2024 03:35 amHouse Appropriators Boost Mars Sample Return While Cutting Science Overall:https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/house-appropriators-boost-mars-sample-return-while-cutting-science-overall/https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1810517333674213486The headline should have been "House Appropriators Boost Pork, Cut Science". The house doesn't care about MSR, they're just chasing pork.Well your comment has already aged badly considering a certain rock just discovered on Mars and looks even more ill informed than the first time you made it.The 'certain rock' (presumably the 'Snow Lake' elemental Sulphur containing rock) was not sampled and Perseverance has since moved on, making that 'certain rock' irrelevant to future MSR funding.
The rock — the rover’s 22nd rock core sample — was collected on July 21, as the rover explored the northern edge of Neretva Vallis, an ancient river valley measuring a quarter-mile (400 meters) wide that was carved by water rushing into Jezero Crater long ago.
Quote from: edzieba on 07/26/2024 10:28 amQuote from: Star One on 07/26/2024 10:19 amQuote from: deltaV on 07/09/2024 03:42 amQuote from: yg1968 on 07/09/2024 03:35 amHouse Appropriators Boost Mars Sample Return While Cutting Science Overall:https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/house-appropriators-boost-mars-sample-return-while-cutting-science-overall/https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1810517333674213486The headline should have been "House Appropriators Boost Pork, Cut Science". The house doesn't care about MSR, they're just chasing pork.Well your comment has already aged badly considering a certain rock just discovered on Mars and looks even more ill informed than the first time you made it.The 'certain rock' (presumably the 'Snow Lake' elemental Sulphur containing rock) was not sampled and Perseverance has since moved on, making that 'certain rock' irrelevant to future MSR funding.You were saying. If you’re going to comment about a mission at least keep up to date with it.QuoteThe rock — the rover’s 22nd rock core sample — was collected on July 21, as the rover explored the northern edge of Neretva Vallis, an ancient river valley measuring a quarter-mile (400 meters) wide that was carved by water rushing into Jezero Crater long ago.https://www.jpl.. nasa.gov/news/nasas-perseverance-rover-scienti"sts-find-intriguing-mars-rock
Quote from: yg1968 on 07/26/2024 03:18 amQuote from: pages 163 to 165 of the Senate CJS Appropriations ReportThe Committee directs NASA to provide a report, no later than 180 days after enactment of this act, on what steps are required to modify currently available cargo vehicles to a crewed variant, including vehicular modifications, cost, and timing.https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/FY25%20CJS%20Senate%20Report.pdf1. I guess the Senate is probably asking about alternative LEO crew vehicles because they are worried that Starliner won't be an option.2. Dragon is already available in a crew version so I assume Congress means crewed versions of Cygnus and Dream Chaser. 3. Making Cygnus crewed sounds not much easier than building a new crewed vehicle from scratch since Cygnus does not return to Earth intact and that obviously would need to change to carry crew, which would probably require a dramatically different capsule-shaped outer mold line.4. Making Dream Chaser crewed sounds likely to be easier since it does return to Earth intact and Sierra Space has been planning a crewed version for a long time.5. NASA and Congress should also consider other crewed vehicles that NASA wouldn't have to pay all the costs for, such as the one Blue Origin is likely already developing (https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/03/blue-origin-staffing-up-to-build-a-human-spacecraft/).
Quote from: deltaV on 07/26/2024 04:58 amQuote from: yg1968 on 07/26/2024 03:18 amQuote from: pages 163 to 165 of the Senate CJS Appropriations ReportThe Committee directs NASA to provide a report, no later than 180 days after enactment of this act, on what steps are required to modify currently available cargo vehicles to a crewed variant, including vehicular modifications, cost, and timing.https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/FY25%20CJS%20Senate%20Report.pdf1. I guess the Senate is probably asking about alternative LEO crew vehicles because they are worried that Starliner won't be an option.2. Dragon is already available in a crew version so I assume Congress means crewed versions of Cygnus and Dream Chaser. 3. Making Cygnus crewed sounds not much easier than building a new crewed vehicle from scratch since Cygnus does not return to Earth intact and that obviously would need to change to carry crew, which would probably require a dramatically different capsule-shaped outer mold line.4. Making Dream Chaser crewed sounds likely to be easier since it does return to Earth intact and Sierra Space has been planning a crewed version for a long time.5. NASA and Congress should also consider other crewed vehicles that NASA wouldn't have to pay all the costs for, such as the one Blue Origin is likely already developing (https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/03/blue-origin-staffing-up-to-build-a-human-spacecraft/).Yes, I agree with you. The language seems to favor crewed Dream Chaser. NASA has said that it would prefer if Commercial LEO Destinations (CLD) providers had dissimilar redundant commercial crew transportation systems but it isn't entire clear how they will achieve that since it would be at the discretion of the CLD provider what commercial crew provider is actually used. It's still not clear to me if NASA should combine CLD and commercial crew into one program as they are trying to do now or have them as separate programs. Ideally, NASA should have seperate funding for certifying new transportation systems.
Yes, I agree with you. The language seems to favor crewed Dream Chaser. NASA has said that it would prefer if Commercial LEO Destinations (CLD) providers had dissimilar redundant commercial crew transportation systems but it isn't entire clear how they will achieve that since it would be at the discretion of the CLD provider what commercial crew provider is actually used. It's still not clear to me if NASA should combine CLD and commercial crew into one program as they are trying to do now or have them as separate programs. Ideally, NASA should have seperate funding for certifying new transportation systems.
Quote from: yg1968 on 07/26/2024 02:34 pmQuote from: deltaV on 07/26/2024 04:58 amQuote from: yg1968 on 07/26/2024 03:18 amQuote from: pages 163 to 165 of the Senate CJS Appropriations ReportThe Committee directs NASA to provide a report, no later than 180 days after enactment of this act, on what steps are required to modify currently available cargo vehicles to a crewed variant, including vehicular modifications, cost, and timing.https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/FY25%20CJS%20Senate%20Report.pdf1. I guess the Senate is probably asking about alternative LEO crew vehicles because they are worried that Starliner won't be an option.2. Dragon is already available in a crew version so I assume Congress means crewed versions of Cygnus and Dream Chaser. 3. Making Cygnus crewed sounds not much easier than building a new crewed vehicle from scratch since Cygnus does not return to Earth intact and that obviously would need to change to carry crew, which would probably require a dramatically different capsule-shaped outer mold line.4. Making Dream Chaser crewed sounds likely to be easier since it does return to Earth intact and Sierra Space has been planning a crewed version for a long time.5. NASA and Congress should also consider other crewed vehicles that NASA wouldn't have to pay all the costs for, such as the one Blue Origin is likely already developing (https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/03/blue-origin-staffing-up-to-build-a-human-spacecraft/).Yes, I agree with you. The language seems to favor crewed Dream Chaser. NASA has said that it would prefer if Commercial LEO Destinations (CLD) providers had dissimilar redundant commercial crew transportation systems but it isn't entire clear how they will achieve that since it would be at the discretion of the CLD provider what commercial crew provider is actually used. It's still not clear to me if NASA should combine CLD and commercial crew into one program as they are trying to do now or have them as separate programs. Ideally, NASA should have seperate funding for certifying new transportation systems.Crewed EDL Starship may (or may not) be ready before crewed Dream Chaser. If so, SpaceX would have dissimilar systems. They could then spin off Falcon 9 and Dragon to provide the specialty Dragon service as a separate provider. By that point in its life, Falcon 9 would have very few other customers.Yes, there are any number of exciting ways that the Starship program could fail, just as Starliner or Dream Chaser could fail.
Lunar Discovery and Exploration.—The recommendation includes up to the request level for Lunar Discovery and Exploration, including $22,100,000 to continue the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and not less than the request level for Commercial Lunar Payload Services. The Committee supports NASA’s commitment to utilizing public-private partnerships to advance its lunar science and exploration agenda and encourages the agency to leverage the resources and expertise of both private industry and universities in pursuit of these goals. Developing an industrial base of new space companies is paramount for the United States to be a leader in returning to the Moon and increasing cislunar operations. The Committee directs the Lunar Discovery and Exploration program to adhere to the lunar science priorities established by decadal surveys and the National Research Council’s consensus report titled ‘‘Scientific Context for the Exploration of the Moon.’’ Activities funded within the program should meet both lunar science and human exploration needs.
Commercial LEO Development.—The Committee supports maintaining the ISS as long as it can be operated safely. However, it is anticipated that current commercial efforts to develop viable alternatives will allow NASA to meet anticipated mission requirements using free-flying space stations in LEO before the end of the decade. The recommendation provides not less than the budget request of $169,600,000 for Commercial LEO activities to allow for continued opportunities for LEO commercialization that are not primarily dependent on continual NASA funding. This funding should be primarily focused on solving supply rather than demand problems. NASA’s goal should be to buy services to meet its needs and grow promising research across all industries rather than to fund one-time novelty events, which are not indicators of future sustainable expansion of commercial activity in LEO. NASA shall not use funds provided in this or any other act to subsidize the cost of any project that is primarily intended for marketing, advertising, or entertainment. Within 90 days of enactment of this act, NASA shall brief the Committee on current plans for rapid and cost-effective Commercial LEO Destination [CLD] capabilities. This briefing should include an assessment of the potential benefits of NASA’s CLD requirements being met by a mix of different services from CLD teams instead of requiring nearly identical services from providers and of NASA taking incremental steps towards more advanced CLD capabilities over time.
Quote from: pages 163 to 165 of the Senate CJS Appropriations ReportThe Committee provides not less than the request level for the Space Launch System [SLS], Orion multi-purpose crew vehicle [Orion] and Exploration Ground Systems [EGS]. These funding levels ensure the earliest possible crewed launch of SLS, as well as prepare for the development of future science and crewed missions. However, NASA must effectively manage the cost and schedule of the agency’s highest priority missions, especially in light of a constrained fiscal environment. The Committee is concerned that cost overruns for flagship missions, including those in the Exploration Directorate are affecting programs across the agency and that, in the long term, NASA must drive down launch costs to ensure the long-term success of the Artemis campaign. The Committee acknowledges the OIG’s findings in IG–24–001 that the lack of competition for heavy-lift services are impeding the ability to drive down exploration launch costs. Therefore, not later than 90 days after enactment of this act, NASA shall provide the Committee with a report outlining how the agency is planning on reducing launch costs beginning with Artemis V. The report should include progress on implementing the recommendations in IG–24–001 and an analysis of how commercial launch options could be part of the agency’s long-term strategy.https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/FY25%20CJS%20Senate%20Report.pdf
The Committee provides not less than the request level for the Space Launch System [SLS], Orion multi-purpose crew vehicle [Orion] and Exploration Ground Systems [EGS]. These funding levels ensure the earliest possible crewed launch of SLS, as well as prepare for the development of future science and crewed missions. However, NASA must effectively manage the cost and schedule of the agency’s highest priority missions, especially in light of a constrained fiscal environment. The Committee is concerned that cost overruns for flagship missions, including those in the Exploration Directorate are affecting programs across the agency and that, in the long term, NASA must drive down launch costs to ensure the long-term success of the Artemis campaign. The Committee acknowledges the OIG’s findings in IG–24–001 that the lack of competition for heavy-lift services are impeding the ability to drive down exploration launch costs. Therefore, not later than 90 days after enactment of this act, NASA shall provide the Committee with a report outlining how the agency is planning on reducing launch costs beginning with Artemis V. The report should include progress on implementing the recommendations in IG–24–001 and an analysis of how commercial launch options could be part of the agency’s long-term strategy.
House Republicans on Friday unveiled their highly anticipated plan to avert a government shutdown that is sure to upset Democrats and has already drawn skepticism from some in the GOP. The 46-page plan would keep the government funded into March 2025 [...].And Rep. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said in a statement this week that a “continuing resolution that ends in December—rather than one that lasts a half year—is better for our national security and military readiness, veterans and their families, victims recovering from natural disasters, and all hardworking American taxpayers.”
U.S. House leaders unveiled a bipartisan funding agreement on Sunday to avoid a government shutdown. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced the legislation to fund the government until December 20.
https://twitter.com/joroulette/status/1856425532797399393
Quote from: yg1968 on 11/12/2024 06:56 pmhttps://twitter.com/joroulette/status/1856425532797399393So, a question about JPL budget. Do the LVs come directly out of their budget or from a separate line in the Science Division's budget? It would seem that transitioning from ULA launchers to SpaceX launchers would save a considerable amount of money if that is part of JPL's own budget. But if that savings comes from a completely different place.........too bad......so sad! I have a feeling JPL's budget is for the probes only.
