Space Access Update is Space Access Society's when-there's-news publication. Space Access Society's goal is to promote affordable access to space for all, period. We believe in concentrating our limited resources at whatever point looks like yielding maximum progress toward this goal.
For the moment, our main focus is on supporting the government's "SSRT" (Single Stage Rocket Technology) program, DC-X and its recently funded followon, SX-2. Space Access Update is thus for the moment largely about the technology and politics of DC-X and SX-2, though we're increasingly covering the subject of SSTO policy in general.
We anticipate a change of focus soon if all goes well. Once SX-2 startup is (with your help!) assured, we plan to begin working on establishment of a healthy second X-rocket development track at NASA, and on getting development of suitable engines started for the fully reusable orbital transports that should come after SX-2 and NASA's X-rocket.
With luck and hard work, we should see fully reusable SSTO testbeds flying to orbit toward the end of this decade, with production prototypes a- building shortly thereafter. Join us and help us make this happen.
Henry Vanderbilt, Editor, Space Access Update
[For more info on Space Access Society or on the DC-X/SSTO video we have for sale, write us at 4855 E Warner Rd #24-150, Phoenix AZ 85044, or email hvanderbilt@bix.com.
Well, the good news is that after six months of footdragging and obstructionism, the DC-X subscale reusable rocket project finally has gotten the $5 million needed to finish basic flight test. The ARPA comptroller released the funding last Thursday and it actually arrived at BMDO the next day, ending several weeks of rumors about DC-X's check being "in the mail" Real Soon Now.
The following Tuesday, May 3rd, McDonnell-Douglas put out a press release announcing that they in turn received $3.5 million, and that they would immediately begin preparations to get DC-X flying again. McDonnell-Douglas says "by early summer"; we hear that if things go reasonably well, the next flight could take place during June. DC-X has however been stored wrapped in plastic for six months now. There could be surprises, although the craft did pass an electrical function test with flying colors a couple months back. (G.Harry Stine says that White Sands gypsum dust exhibits quantum tunnelling on a macro scale -- it mysteriously migrates across supposedly gastight barriers.)
Part of the preparations will be the detailed planning for the new test series, currently expected to consist of between three and five flights. At some point they plan to demonstrate a high angle-of-attack "rotation maneuver" of some sort. You may recall from last summer that there were several possible methods of transitioning from nose-first reentry to tail-first landing under consideration. Apparently flight experience from last fall and additional analysis has narrowed down the options somewhat -- the colorfully named "death swoop", alas, is right out.
The bad news is that from the time Congress appropriated $40 million to continue this SSTO research project, it took six months to pry loose just $5 million of the total, and as those of you who've been following this know, the process made pulling teeth look easy. The rest of the $40 million, intended to get DC-X's followon underway (the SX-2 almost-orbital reusable rocket) is still in limbo.
[Begin editorial rant]
Now, it seems fairly obvious that building a few X-vehicles to check out reusable Single-Stage-To-Orbit feasibility fast and on the cheap makes sense, right? If SSTO checks out, the upside is enormous: vastly cheaper/quicker/ more reliable space launch, plus a commanding lead for US industry in a whole new international aerospace vehicle market.
The downside risk meanwhile is miniscule: Three to four hundred million over four years. We spend that much on our current launchers in a month.
So why have we been seeing such a virtuoso display of footdragging, obstructionism, and outright bureaucratic sabotage attempts?
Alas, we are not mindreaders, but the most likely reason is the main motive of every "mature" (IE entrenched and stagnant) bureaucracy: Self-preservation via defense of the status quo.
Make no mistake, cheap convenient decentralized space access will make revolutionary changes in the status quo. The massive organizations, military and civilian, that have grown up around expensive centralized space access over the last thirty years will be stood on their heads if we get cheap reusable SSTO space transports flying.
Apparently they know this. The opposition to SSTO has, over the last year, largely dropped the claim that it won't work, switching instead to the position that it could work, but only after being handed over to whatever organization is speaking, for a massive decades-long billions-per-year development project, a project that purely coincidentally would provide decades of job security for the bureaucrats involved.
NASA's recent "Access To Space" report is one example of this, coming out in support of reusable SSTO, but with the assumption that the only way to build one is by giving the usual suspects nearly $40 billion over the next fifteen years. At that point the product may cost, gosh wow, only half as much as Shuttle does to operate! Fortunately we have reason to believe Administrator Goldin doesn't subscribe to this approach, but it looks like he's going to have his hands full bringing his bureaucrats around.
There was another outbreak of SSTO elephantiasis last month, when Edward "Pete" Aldridge, former Air Force Secretary and longtime Spacelifter advocate, told an audience at the US Space Foundation in Colorado Springs that we couldn't possibly afford to have NASA build an SSTO, so we should bring in countries like Russia, China, Japan and France in a multinational SSTO development.
This would be an improvement? Words fail us; we are left guessing that either Aldridge, having finally accepted that Spacelifter is dead as a doornail, is indulging in black humor, or that he simply wants to muddy the waters for SSTO even further. The record of large international space project consortiums is not one of saving money for anyone involved...
Multinational or US only, this is the sort of aerospace porkbarrel we know all too well from recent decades. Aside from the fact that the US simply doesn't have the bucks for such a project right now, chances are that the ships resulting would be captives of the bureaucracy that built them, neither cheap nor convenient nor decentralized. Preserving bureaucratic white-collar jobs by strangling in its cradle an industry that could employ many times more is short-sightedness the US can no longer afford.
There are other motives behind the slow going for SSTO done right. One of the less rational ones seems to be knee-jerk opposition by some to anything that came out of "Star Wars" -- BMDO, the former Strategic Defense Initiative Organization, DC-X's original sponsor.
DC-X and SX-2 apparently bear the taint of SDIO origins and get less White House support than they might. (Another space project out of "Star Wars" also seems to suffer from this, also despite its spectacular better-faster-cheaper success. Support for a followon to, or even for continued operation of the Clementine Lunar/asteroid probe is lackluster at best.)
If Apollo went to the Moon with a rocket team that learned its trade building missiles for the Nazis, surely we can tolerate making space exploration affordable with engineers who learned their trade building missile defenses for the United States?
Development teams that actually produce results are rare and precious. Don't punish success by scattering these teams and handing their projects over to unproven unknowns -- reward success by giving them bigger tougher projects to tackle.
[End editorial rant. We feel much better now...]
Back to the practical problems of getting SX-2 underway.
There's a good chance that the intent behind finally releasing the $5 million for DC-X was was to hand a lollipop to all of us noisy build-SSTO- before-we-die-of-old-age types, to shut us up while the powers that be get back to business as usual. Our proper response, of course, is to take the lollipop and keep right on after the rest of what we want.
Go-ahead for SX-2 is still in theory waiting on release of two Congressionally-mandated future US space launch studies: The Defense Department's "Moorman Report", and the White House OSTP's (Office of Science and Technology Policy) "National Space Transportation Strategy". Both documents are considerably overdue.
We understand the Moorman Report is in the process of circulating at the Pentagon to see if everyone can live with it. We hear it is on the whole SSTO friendly, providing a reasonable level of funding for SSTO demonstrator testbeds under all its options. The last hurdle is a final review by Deputy Secretary of Defense John Deutch (less than supportive of SSTO to date) who will then deliver the (hopefully still SSTO friendly) report to Congress.
The OSTP launch policy paper is something else again. The early draft we got hold of a month ago had two unacceptable clauses:
You may recall we asked you to raise a fuss about these points last month. We understand the fuss was heard at OSTP -- but the new draft policy we just got hold of still contains both unacceptable clauses. It's beginning to look like someone in the Administration really means it: No new SSTO flight demonstrator start for at least two years, and then only with NASA in charge.
The practical effect of this would be to disperse the DC-X team, to diffuse the current momentum down a practical SSTO development path (allowing the existing bureaucracies time to capture and neuter SSTO), all while avoiding any commitment to do anything at all until after the '96 elections.
It is still not clear how high up in the Administration this originates; there might well be an interesting story for someone here, if any members of the print media are interested in digging.
Meanwhile, waiting for the Moorman and OSTP reports may soon become moot. You probably remember that a couple months back, there was an unsuccessful attempt to rescind the $40 million Congress appropriated for SSTO development. In effect, the Administration said they don't want to spend that $40 million, but Congress came back and said they have to.
It seems that when an Administration keeps on refusing to spend money appropriated by Congress even after Congress turns down a rescission request, there's a law that says once 45 legislative days pass, that Administration is committing "impoundment" and can be sued to force release of the funds.
We understand that if all else fails, Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R CA) has a suit charging impoundment ready to go. 45 legislative days since Congress disapproved the SSTO funding rescission comes to roughly the end of next week, Friday May 13th.
(Impoundment, by the way, was one of the charges in the Articles of Impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon just before he resigned back in '74. That's probably a historical parallel worth avoiding.)
Among other considerations, an anti-impoundment suit would render the SSTO- related clauses of the OSTP draft policy moot, as they would then be clearly in violation of the law. We can hope that everyone concerned will quietly get together to arrange release of SX-2 startup funding in the next couple of weeks, rather than end up in a messy court fight.
Theoretically, of course, the funds could be released but misallocated in a way that would derail further SSTO tech development from the track the Congress has mandated. This would probably be a mistake - the text of a letter we've obtained (attached to the end of this Update) makes it clear Congress knows what they want here, and the 31 signatures make it clear this has broad bipartisan support. (We hear that John Murtha in his capacity as Chair of the House Appropriations Committee, Defense Subcommittee has also written Secretary of Defense Perry, urging him to avoid further delay in release of the FY'94 SSTO funding.)
Of course, the main reason all this Congressional firepower is being brought to bear is that the policy makes sense in the first place. With luck, any misunderstandings about just what Congress wants will soon be cleared up and we'll see SX-2 finally get underway.
Meanwhile, the Fiscal Year '95 SSTO funding process is due to get underway tomorrow morning at 9 am, when the House Armed Services Committee Research and Technology Subcommittee (HASC R&T) meets to mark up the R&T portion of the Administration's FY'95 DOD funding request. If all goes well, $100 million for SSTO will be inserted as part of this early stage of next year's DOD funding process.
In theory, the key Congresspersons involved already support SSTO and are aware of the need to insert this funding, so we haven't called for any major effort to let them know we all still care about this. It'd be wonderful if next year's SSTO funding sails through without a single constituent fax or letter being needed, wouldn't it? We'll see.
For the moment, public pressure doesn't seem to be what we need, either in Congress or at OSTP. On the other hand, we have a list of 31 SSTO supporters in Congress, the signers of the letter appended to this Update. Brief notes of thanks for their support for the SX-2 SSTO experimental flight vehicle program, via mail, would be a good way to reinforce their support. Everyone should thank John Murtha, Pat Schroeder, and George Brown, as well as any other signers whose district is in your state.
If you don't have the actual office number and building handy, an address that should work is:
Representative [name]Odds are we will get the cheap reusable space transports we're looking for, in large part because there's still nobody else offering a practical way out of the current launch mess. It will nevertheless be a long time before there's any shortage of people ready to rain on our parade, because our practical way out of the current launch mess depends for its practicality on bypassing the massive existing space launch establishment. Hey, we knew the job was dangerous when we took it.
Henry Vanderbilt "Reach low orbit and you're halfway to anywhere Space Access Society in the Solar System." 4855 E Warner Rd #24-150 - Robert A. Heinlein Phoenix, AZ 85044 602 431-9283 voice/fax "You can't get there from here." (hvanderbilt@bix.com) - Anonymous -- Permission granted to redistribute the full and unaltered text of this -- -- piece, including the copyright and this notice. All other rights -- -- reserved. In other words, intact crossposting is strongly encouraged. --<begin letter text>
The Honorable William J. Perry Secretary of Defense [Pentagon, Washington DC] Dear Dr. Perry; We are writing to strongly urge the Department of Defense to finally initiate development of the SX-2 Advanced Technology Demonstration (ATD) vehicle, as provided for by Congress in its FY'94 DoD appropriation. This program, which has wide bipartisan Congressional support, was placed on the President's proposed list of FY'94 program recisions. Then on February 11, Congress rejected the proposed recision of the SX-2 when it adopted the conference report on H.R. 3759, after removing this recision from the Senate version. With fully a third of the fiscal year having elapsed already we think it is more than time for DoD to finally get started. DoD should, therefore, proceed immediately with the next competitive phase to develop SSTO technology; a suborbital ATD - the SX-2. We would like to emphasize that we are not interested in initiating an expensive acquisition program, but rather a low cost technology demonstration that can eventually attract private investment. The best way to keep the cost low is to manage the SX-2 in the same way as the highly successful DC-X1 - as a small fast-track program. We have found strong interest within the Air force to do just that. With the Congress' clarification of the question of FY'94 funding, the current program monies are to be made available to the Advanced research projects Agency (ARPA). We encourage you and ARPA to provide early funding stability and to execute this program through the Air Force laboratory structure. As the primary end user of systems developed from these technologies, the Air Force must be involved in both their development and eventual funding. The air Force is the logical executing agent both because of their interest in the program and because they have the necessary technical expertise to effectively manage such an effort. Thank you for your leadership and assistance concerning the continuation of the development of this valuable and revolutionary space launch technology. [signatures] Dave McCurdy D OK Patricia Schroeder D CO George S. Brown D CA Ralph Hall D TX Tom Lewis R FL Steven Schiff R NM Bill Baker R CA Ed Royce R CA Jim Kolbe R AZ Jerrold Nadler D NY Jane Harman D CA Norman Dicks D WA Joe McDade R PA Floyd Spence R SC Sam Johnson R TX Ken Calvert R CA Bud Cramer D AL Tom DeLay R TX Jim Bacchus D FL Roscoe Bartlett D FL Joe Skeen R NM Lamar Smith R TX Newt Gingrich R GA Ron Packard R CA Bill Richardson D NM Charles Wilson D TX Michael Andrews D TX Jan Meyers R KS James Traficant D OH Dana Rohrabacher R CA Robert Dornan R CA<end letter text>