NASA Needs a new “Great White Elephant”: A look at securing the future of space exploration.

Many people, myself no exception, have criticized the Space Shuttle in the past for its legacy of guzzling Billions or dollars from NASAs’ budget to only go in circles around the earth. With the promise of a new space initiative on the horizon that concludes the shuttles legacy, we can take a sober look at the shuttles’ real strength and how we should apply it to the future.

In retrospect the only thing the shuttle did poorly was for one; at $12,000 per lbs to LEO, fail to deliver on cheap access to space. Its’ oft criticism of only going in circles around earth was not a design flaw but a concept flaw. However, what we often fail to appreciate is that for a development cost of $6.75 Billion in 1971 Dollars, the shuttle will have, by the time of its projected retirement, secured over 30 year of regular space excursions. The project was so large, involved so many jobs in so many congressional districts and such a staple of NASA that its was near impossible to cut, even when its existence became a burden to NASA.

We are now embarking on a new era of space exploration, charged with manned space exploration and not manned orbital excursion. Would this not be the regular goal, the gift, and the legacy to secure for the next whole generation to come? For the money, could we not simply build a reusable manned inter planetary excursion vehicle that would satisfy the requirements of the New Space Initiative and be on budget?

The Next Great White Elephant(s)

What should be proposed for the new era of space vehicle is nothing more than a chassis, or shell for space travel throughout the inner solar system. Alone the vehicle would be able to fulfill on the modest requirement of orbital trips to the Moon, Venus, Mars, the Lagrange Points, foot expeditions to near earth asteroids or similar bodies with negligible gravity and no atmosphere. It should also serve to transport specially designed landers to the moon and Mars, provide transport for crew to and from these destinations. It should not be required to travel through any atmosphere with exception to initial launch, or land on any planet itself.

Crew transport to and form could be accomplished via Soyuz or any other method for transport to and from ISS, while fuel and supplies should be provided by ESAs’ ATV or other suitable vehicle. Construction and design should consist of three simple modules: Propulsion, Habitation, and Transport.

The propulsion module should house the Nuclear reactor and Prometheus or other suitable propulsion system, store supplies and fuel. It should be positioned aft of the spacecraft.

The Habitation module should provide, bridge, sleeping quarters, living quarters, galley, head, airlock, docking bay for earth atmospheric entry vehicle, and possibly observation deck/window. Positioned in the middle, special attention should be provided to radiation shielding and other occupational distractions for the long journeys. A communications package could be delivered via a small or medium size booster and attached to the side of the Habitation module.

The forward module or Transportation Module could really be more of a space the front of the spacecraft, or a fairing to attach mission specific components these could include:

Moon Lander / Ascender / Habitation Module
Mars Lander / Ascender / Habitation Module
Robotic arm for construction / recovery of vehicles
Science Packages

- Mapping equipment
- Cameras
- Radars
- Spectral analyzers
- Robotic Landers

Orbital Laser similar to that fitted to Boeing 747 ;-) (Military Version)

Similar to the shuttle we could construct two or three of these and give them names, sexy names like USS Constitution or USS Enterprise. Give them a class, as in “Constitution Class Interplanetary Vessel”.

Learning from ISS we could further solidify the future of these by tangling them with international participation. They could carry and international science packages, international crews, and international funding. International partners in the critical path should not be avoided in the critical path as it also holds us committed to the development up to that critical point. In such a case a naming convention could be used such as ESS (Earth Space Ship) Andromeda.

Conclusion

Such a project could be done on the cheap, involving less modules than the international space station, and utilizing current medium lift vehicles.
While sold as a legitimate and necessary stage in current Space Initiative, it will also be a reusable, in disposable, and a multi-use part that will not only survive if (when) the space initiative changes, but will survive to fill other roles if (when) the space initiative is over or is canceled.

The chassis could be adaptable for space tug applications, military applications, constructions projects and various NEA interceptions as the opportunity arises. Such an vehicle is what is required to secure our next stage in space: Manned planetary exploration.

Justin Kelly