• PROJECTS
  • Advocacy and Education
  • Extrasolar Planets
  • Innovative Technologies
  • International Mission Participation
  • Mars Exploration
  • Near Earth Objects
  • Search for Extraterrestrial Life
  • Past Projects
• THE PLANETARY REPORT
• PLANETARY RADIO
• WEBLOG
• SOCIETY UPDATES

browse projects: Apophis Mission Design Competition Asteroid Impact Mapping System Catalog of Exoplanets Drive a Mars Rover Extrasolar Planets Transit Search International Lunar Decade LIFE Experiment: Phobos Mars Climate Sounder Team Website Messages from Earth Observing Earth Pioneer Anomaly Planetary Microphones S.O.S: Save Our Science! SETI Optical Telescope SETI Radio Searches SETI@home Shoemaker NEO Grants Solar Sailing Space Advocacy Space Information Stardust@home Target Earth Visions of Mars

browse space topics: 2001 Mars Odyssey Asteroids and Comets Cassini-Huygens Chandra X-Ray Observatory Chandrayaan-1 Chang'e 1 Compare the Planets Dawn Deep Impact Earth Extrasolar Planets Genesis Hayabusa (MUSES-C) Hubble Space Telescope Jupiter Kaguya (SELENE) Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Mars Mars Exploration Rovers Mars Express Mars Global Surveyor Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Mercury MESSENGER Moon Near Earth Objects Neptune New Horizons New Horizons Digital Time Capsule Past Missions Phoenix Planetary Analogs Planetary Exploration Timelines Planetfest 2008 Pluto and Charon Pluto Top Ten Postcards from Venus Private Missions Rosetta Saturn Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence SMART-1 SOHO Space Imaging Spitzer Space Telescope Stardust Trans-Neptunian Objects Ulysses Uranus Venus Venus Express Voyager Weekly Planetary Radio Trivia Contest

Projects: Aim for Mars

Stepping into the Future

A Workshop in Memory of the Columbia Seven

On April 29-30, 2003, The Planetary Society, the Association of Space Explorers, and the American Astronautical Society held a workshop at the George Washington University's Space Policy Institute about the future of human space transportation. The following was presented as a background paper to the workshop.

International Considerations

Reflecting on the Past

The U.S. is the only country that during the Apollo program sent humans beyond low earth orbit and returned them safely to earth. Apollo was a national program born out of cold war competition with the Soviet Union. International participation in the Apollo program - which included lunar sample research - was limited. The Apollo program did lead to the 1975 Apollo-Soyuz mission which demonstrated the potential for future U.S.-Soviet human space flight cooperation.

In pursuing the Space Shuttle program the U.S. welcomed contributions from Canada which provided the Remote Manipulator System (RMS) and from Europe which built the Spacelab facility. These contributions were viewed as augmentations to the Shuttle's capabilities and were formulated after the basic concept for the Shuttle program had been established.

In initiating the Space Station program in 1984, the U.S. pursued a similar approach to international cooperation. It developed the basic space station concept and then invited Canada, Europe and Japan to provide elements to augment the overall capabilities of the facility. The U.S. later agreed to accommodate additional bilateral contributions from Italy and Brazil. With the exception of Canada's robotic servicing system, these elements were considered by the U.S. to be valuable contributions but ones that were not essential to the successful operation of the Station.

In 1993 the U.S. and its partners invited Russia to join the Space Station program and the U.S. initiated a series of Shuttle-Mir flights to prepare for future space station operations. Russia agreed to provide several new elements to augment the previous "Freedom" Station capabilities. Russia also assumed a "critical path" role in the subsequent International Space Station program.

The U.S. has cooperated extensively with other countries on robotic exploration missions over the past three decades.

Assessing the Present

As the U.S. discusses a future human exploration initiative, one could argue that there is no reason to change the 'we'll decide the program and let you know where you can fit in' approach to international participation used in the past. The U.S. has the potential technological, scientific and funding resources to undertake an exploration mission and, if it so chooses, to do so alone. The U.S. currently spends more on civil space than all other countries combined. In addition, pursuing significant international cooperation on human exploration missions would involve major challenges:

• It would add complexity, complicate decision-making and could increase the uncertainty of meeting mission objectives.
• Utilizing foreign systems could stimulate international commercial and technological competition.
• Proliferation and technology transfer concerns could constrain severely any joint undertaking.
• Critical technologies - for example, nuclear power and propulsion - have dual use applications. These technologies might be more difficult to employ in missions with international partners.

• The cold war is over.
• The U.S. now has considerably more experience in working with international partners on human space flight programs than in the past.
• Other countries have expanded interests and capabilities which could be combined with those of the U.S. in undertaking a human exploration initiative. These interests and capabilities are likely to expand in the years ahead.

The changing situation is well illustrated by the status of the Space Station today. In the wake of the Columbia accident, the Space Station partnership is relying on Russian Progress and Soyuz vehicles to provide critical supplies and crew rotation. If the Shuttle remains grounded until late 2004, Europe's Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) on its first demonstration flight may also be utilized to help keep the Station operating. Without these international capabilities the Station would have to be operated without a crew - a prospect that raises serious technical as well as political questions.

International Interests and Capabilities

Which countries might be capable of participating in a future human exploration initiative? Based on their current interests and plans, the candidates are likely to include Russia, Europe (including the European Space Agency and several of its member states with national program interests), Japan, China, India and Canada.

RUSSIA
Background: The Soviet Union was the first country to launch a human into space and the first country to launch and operate a space station. Today Russia - with its rich history of human space flight programs - would be an obvious potential partner for future exploration initiatives.

At the same time Russia's current space program is financially very constrained. Unless the Russian government decides to increase significantly spending on space in future years, Russia's role in future human exploration initiatives is likely to be a modest one.

Interests: Russia continues to be very interested in robotic and human exploration - particularly in Mars exploration. This interest was documented in an International Science and Technology Center study on Mars Exploration (ISTC 1172) that was initiated in 1999 and completed in 2001. The ISTC - established by the U.S. and European Union in 1992 - provides funding support for non-defense study projects undertaken by former Soviet Union scientists and engineers.

The "1172" Mars Exploration study project involved a number of Russian institutes and industrial organizations. It focused on the design of a future Mars exploration mission. The results of the 1172 study were published in 2001 and provided the impetus for a follow-on study - ISTC 2120 which is now underway - to identify the "key technical means" for a future exploration mission.

In addition, Russian institutes and industrial organizations are pursuing research and development in a number of exploration-related fields including solar dynamic power systems, nuclear power systems and inflatable structures.

Capabilities: With its long experience in human space flight, Russia has many capabilities that could become important in designing, developing and executing future exploration initiatives. This includes:

• Launcher capabilities (and associated launch sites) based on the current Soyuz and Proton launch vehicles and on the Energia heavy lift launch vehicle which was developed and flew in connection with the Buran program.
• Orbital systems capabilities and experience based on the development and operation of the Salyut and Mir stations.
• Use of ground training and human space mission operations facilities.
• Propulsion technology experience.
• Biomedical and long duration human space flight experience.
• Space nuclear power experience.

For the foreseeable future, however, Russia lacks the funding to pursue major human exploration initiatives. In any event Russian organizations could provide support to other countries in designing and developing future human exploration capabilities. Russian space organizations could also serve as an independent source of concepts and technical solutions that might prove valuable in planning and developing future missions.

EUROPE
Background: Europe decided to participate in the Space Shuttle and Space Station programs on a regional basis through the European Space Agency (ESA). For the Space Station ESA is providing the Columbus Laboratory, the Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) and a variety of other smaller elements. ESA plans to launch the ATV on its first demonstration mission in September 2004. The baseline Ariane-5/ATV configuration will be capable of carrying up to 9 metric tons of fuel and cargo to the Station.

ESA's original human space program plans - formulated in the mid-1980s - included the development of a space plane (Hermes, to be launched on a human-rated version of Ariane-5) and a man-tended free flier facility. ESA also anticipated eventual development of a small European human crew operated space station. These plans were dropped in the early 1990s.

ESA plays a leading role in Europe on robotic exploration activities. It will launch the Mars Express mission in June and - in the months ahead - also launch the SMART-1 technology mission to the Moon and the Rosetta small bodies mission. In addition ESA is pursuing robotic missions to Venus (Venus Express) and Mercury (BepiColumbo).

If Europe participates in a future human exploration initiative, it is likely to do so through ESA. With this in mind ESA has established the Aurora program to plan future robotic and human exploration missions - both European led and in cooperation with other partners.

At the same time France, Italy, Germany and other European countries maintain bilateral interests that could provide additional opportunities for cooperation in preparing for and conducting future exploration programs.

Interests: The objective of the Aurora program is to formulate and implement a long-term European plan for robotic and human exploration. For ESA and its member states Mars is the primary interest. The Moon continues to be an attractive additional destination. The prospective missions under study by ESA under Aurora include:

• A human mission to Mars undertaken in the 2025-2030 time frame.
• A robotic outpost at the Moon or a possible human mission to the Moon undertaken in the 2020-2025 time frame.
• One or more Mars Sample Return missions undertaken in the 2011-2017 time frame.

Aurora is currently a study program funded at the level of approximately $4 million per year through 2004. ESA hopes its member states will significantly increase Aurora program funding in 2005 and thereafter so that ESA can pursue a series of robotic precursor missions. Some of these missions would be ESA-led; others would involve European participation in international missions.

The ultimate goal of Aurora is to position Europe to play a "prominent role" in an international scenario of human exploration of the Moon and Mars "consistent with Europe's traditions and ambitions." While this could lead to one or more European-led exploration missions, most ESA and ESA member state officials assume that the major human exploration initiatives will be pursued in partnership with the U.S. and/or other countries. Aurora is intended to develop European capabilities for such initiatives.

Capabilities: Based on Europe's launcher, space science, Spacelab and Space Station experience, ESA and its member states could contribute to a future exploration initiative through:

• Provision of launcher capabilities (and associated launch sites) for robotic and future human missions to low earth orbit, to the various Lagrangian points, to the Moon and to Mars. ESA's plans call for development an upgraded Ariane-5 launcher with new main stage engine (Vinci) and a re-startable cryogenic upper stage (ESC-B) which would be capable of launching the ATV with more than ten tons of cargo to low earth orbit. ESA and the Russian Aviation and Space Agency are also studying the possible use of Europe's Kourou launch site for future human-rated Soyuz missions.
• Development of robotic satellite systems, science payloads, rendezvous and docking systems and human space flight infrastructure elements.
• Use of ground facilities including Europe's new deep space tracking station in Australia.
• Under the Aurora program Europe is also studying possible future technology investments in robotics, entry, descent and landing, alternative power generation and micro-avionics.

Europe is also planning to embark on an RLV technology program which could result in new capabilities of potential value to a future exploration initiative.

JAPAN
Background: Through the National Space Development Agency (NASDA) Japan has been an active participant in the International Space Station program. NASDA is developing several major Space Station elements including the "Kibo" Japanese Experiment Module (JEM), a centrifuge rotor and Centrifuge Accommodation Module (CAM) and the H-2 Transfer Vehicle (HTV). The HTV will utilize NASDA's H-2A launch vehicle to transport equipment and supplies to the Station. The HTV is scheduled to make its first demonstration flight in November 2007 and, using an augmented version of the H-2A launcher, will be capable of carrying approximately 6 tons of cargo to low earth orbit.

Through the Institute of Space and Aeronautical Science (ISAS), Japan is also actively pursuing robotic scientific exploration activities including missions to the Moon, Mars and Venus launched on ISAS' M-V launch vehicle. In 1998 ISAS launched the Nozomi mission which is scheduled to be inserted into orbit around Mars in 2004. In May 2003 ISAS will launch the MUSES-C asteroid sample return mission.

Japan's National Aerospace Laboratory (NAL) and NASDA are working together on several reusable launch vehicle and advanced space transportation technology projects. The two agencies earlier pursued development of an un-piloted H-II Orbiting Plane-Experimental (HOPE-X) but have since scaled back their plans in favor of a High Speed Flight Demonstration (HSFD) project. HSFD is intended to validate autonomous approach and landing technologies and investigate the transonic aerodynamic characteristics of a winged re-entry vehicle.

Interests: Japan's near-term exploration interests are focused on the Moon as the closest and most familiar celestial body and a logical first step for future exploration activities. Japan is currently pursuing two lunar missions:

• The LUNAR-A scientific orbiter - which will also carry two instrumented penetrators - to be launched by ISAS later this year.
• The SELENE science and engineering orbiter to study the Moon's origin and evolution and to develop technologies for future lunar exploitation. SELENE is a joint NASDA/ISAS project scheduled for launching in 2005. NASDA and ISAS envision launching additional SELENE missions that could include sample return capabilities.

In the mid-1990s the Japanese Government elaborated a long-term vision which included development of a lunar base and participation in future international human space missions. Since that time no specific initiatives have been proposed. This may in part be due to Japan's current difficult economic situation and associated limitations on government spending.

A new national space, aeronautics, research and development organization - merging the activities of NASDA, ISAS and NAL will - when it is formed in October 2003 - combine Japan's space exploration capabilities and interests. This new organization will be in a good position to pursue future Japanese exploration interests.

Capabilities: Based on its launch vehicle, space science and Space Station experience, Japan could contribute to a future exploration initiative through:

• Provision of launcher capabilities (and associated launch sites) for robotic - and, perhaps in the future, human - transportation to low earth orbit, to the various Lagrangian points, to the Moon and to Mars. These capabilities could utilize and/or evolve from Japan's current M-V and H-2A launcher systems.
• Utilization of rendezvous and docking capabilities demonstrated during NASDA's ETS-7 mission and sample return capabilities to be demonstrated during ISAS' MUSES-C mission.
• Development of robotic satellite systems and human infrastructure elements.
• Ground systems including use of Japanese deep space tracking facilities.

Japan's reusable launch vehicle and space plane technology programs may also result in capabilities of potential value to future international human exploration initiatives.

CHINA
Background: China has embarked on a program to launch a human into low earth orbit and eventually to develop a low earth orbit space station. China's human space flight activities have thus far included four Shenzhou orbital missions launched without human crew members in November 1999, January 2001, March 2002 and December 2002. China's reportedly plans to launch its fifth mission -- Shenzhou V -- with an astronaut on board in late 2003.

Interests: During a January 2003 international space symposium Chinese space officials announced that they are formulating plans to conduct a human mission to the Moon. Chinese scientists have also expressed interest in other exploration activities including participation in future robotic and human Mars missions.

Capabilities: Though China has not yet launched its first human mission, the Chinese space program has developed - and presumably will continue to develop - capabilities that could contribute to future human exploration initiatives. These capabilities might include:

• Provision of launcher capabilities (and associated launch sites) based on the Long March 2F launcher currently used to launch the Shenzhou missions. Chinese officials have also stated their intention to develop a heavy lift launcher capable of carrying a 25 metric ton payload to low earth orbit.
• Orbital systems based on China's plans to develop a low earth orbital facility.
• Ground facilities for tracking and perhaps other support.

INDIA
Background: While India has no current human space flight program plans, the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) has pursued development of expendable launch vehicles that could contribute to future exploration initiatives. ISRO's Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) is capable of carrying 3,700 kilos to low earth orbit. ISRO conducted a demonstration flight of a Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV, capable of carrying a 2,000 kilo satellite to GTO) in April 2001.

Interests: With regard to exploration beyond low earth orbit, India's near-term attention is focused on the Moon. ISRO is currently developing plans to launch a lunar orbiter mission as early as 2007 using a modified version of the PSLV. The lunar orbiter would carry several scientific instruments to measure the Moon's surface composition, structure and radiation environment. ISRO is also studying a follow-on lunar mission with landed science capabilities as well as future planetary mission.

Capabilities: Based on its current capabilities India could contribute to future exploration missions through the launch of equipment and supplies to low earth orbit and possibly to the various Lagrangian points and the Moon. India might also provide scientific instruments and terrestrial research facilities to support future exploration activities.

CANADA
Background: Though its budget is modest Canada's civil space program covers all the major space disciplines except access to space. Canada participates in both the Space Shuttle program through the provision of the Canadarm1 remote manipulator system and to the Space Station through provision of the Mobile Servicing System which includes the Canadarm2 and a Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM).

In 1999 the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) expanded its activities with the establishment of a Space Exploration Program to pursue Canadian scientific and technological participation in the robotic and human exploration programs being planned by NASA and ESA.

Interests: Canada has expressed strong interest in NASA's robotic Mars exploration program. Canadian scientists - supported by CSA - hope to participate in NASA's 2007 scientific "Scout" mission. In addition CSA is interested in providing robotic sample acquisition/sample processing as well as lidar landing/collision avoidance/navigation and science payload capabilities for NASA's Mars Science Laboratory mission though funding for this contribution has not yet been secured. Canada is also participating in the study phase of ESA's Aurora program. Canada's scientific interests in these missions include planetary atmospheres and geology. In the longer term, CSA hopes to participate in future human exploration missions beyond low earth orbit. In this context Canada's life science program is focusing on bone and muscle loss, cardiovascular and metabolic science, radiation, neuroscience and the isolation/multi-cultural psychology aspects of long duration human space missions.

Capabilities: Based on its robotic contributions to the Shuttle and Space Station programs and the evolution of these technologies as well as its science and science-payloads expertise, Canada is well positioned to play a role in future robotic and human exploration missions.

The above list of countries/regions is intended to illustrate that there are potential partners for the U.S. who could make a variety of contributions to future exploration initiatives. Other countries - for example Australia and Brazil - may in the coming years also develop exploration interests and potential capabilities.

Future contributions from these prospective partners can come in many forms. Some might involve development of new space and ground systems. Others could involve using 'existing' capabilities to provide redundancy in:

• Provision of launch and return sites.
• Ferrying cargo - and humans -to low earth orbit, to the various Lagrangian points, to the Moon and to Mars.
• Tracking and communications support.
• Conducting terrestrial research and development activities.

• Will be interested in participating in a future exploration initiative.
• Will be prepared to commit sufficient funding and other resources to play a significant role.
• Will be an attractive potential partner for the U.S. at the time an initiative is formulated.

One also cannot assume that the U.S. will be prepared to commit sufficient funding and other resources to pursue a future human exploration initiative.

Planning for the Future

Should the U.S. plan its own national exploration initiative and accommodate international cooperation on a complementary basis? Or should the U.S. make international cooperation an integral, perhaps even critical, part of its future exploration plans?

The national exploration initiative approach is likely to be the 'default' choice. This would follow past practice and be consistent with current U.S. space policy.

On the other hand, the U.S. could build on its robotic and human space flight cooperation experience and seek significant international participation in future exploration activities. If other countries are sufficiently interested and prepared to commit significant resources, the U.S. could (though it is not likely to do so) become one of several major, roughly equal partners who agree to pursue an internationally planned and managed exploration initiative or series of initiatives.

Another (more likely) scenario might involve the U.S. making the largest contribution and playing the leading role but doing so in conjunction with several international partners that also play important roles. This approach is similar to that followed in the Space Station program. One key difference might involve the U.S. recognizing at the outset the potential for partners to play critical roles in the initiative. In the Space Station program (despite Canada's critical robotic contribution), this recognition came only when Russia was invited to join the partnership.

Whatever scenario is pursued, the potential challenges and benefits of significant international participation must be carefully considered. The potential challenges were listed earlier in this paper. The potential benefits of cooperation include:

• It can enrich the scientific and technological character of the initiative.
• Contributions by other countries can help spread the cost of the undertaking though they also increase the total program cost.
• International participation is likely to add robustness and redundancy through the development and use of parallel space transportation and orbital systems.
• International partners can provide access to launch sites, facilities and capabilities that might not otherwise be available to the U.S. if it proceeds alone.
• The participation of other countries can increase the global political legitimacy of the venture. An international partnership could, for example, help encourage widespread acceptance of the planetary protection procedures utilized for the return of samples and humans to earth.

If, on the other hand, the U.S. is interested in keeping its options open with respect to international cooperation on a future exploration initiative, then a different strategy can be considered. This need not involve a radical shift in current policy. But it would acknowledge the possibility that the U.S. may wish to join with a number of partners in forging an international exploration program. This more proactive approach might involve a series of steps that help identify potential partner capabilities and that validate opportunities for future cooperation. In the near-term such steps could include the following:

• Seek significant international participation in future U.S. robotic exploration missions. In preparing for cooperation on future human exploration initiatives, the U.S. should consider extensive cooperation with international partners on robotic exploration missions. NASA is planning an impressive array of robotic missions during the 2010-2020 time frame. This includes sample return, deep drilling, surface roving and "scout" missions to Mars as well as the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter. International partners can help share the cost and increase the robustness of these efforts. International participation would also encourage shared interest in the scientific aspects of further exploration initiatives. NASA has cooperated extensively with its international partners on earlier planetary missions - for example with Germany on Galileo and with ESA and Italy on Cassini. Currently, however, no significant new planetary mission cooperation is being considered. This is due in part to changes in the program and funding priorities of NASA's international partners. But the current situation also appears to reflect a preference for "stand alone" U.S. planetary missions and an attempt to pursue 'cooperation' through 'coordination' of U.S. missions with those planned by other countries to minimize duplication.
  
  
• Utilize existing mechanisms or create new ones to exchange information on both robotic and human exploration mission activities and plans. The International Mars Exploration Working Group was established for this purpose in 1988. Since then IMEWG has served effectively as an information exchange forum on robotic Mars programs. Though some countries have expressed interest in expanding its charter, IMEWG has thus far not played a similar role on human exploration activities and plans. With the appointment of NASA's Space Architect, the establishment of ESA's Aurora program and growing interest in other countries, perhaps the time has come to expand IMEWG or create a new forum to exchange information on human exploration plans. Such exchanges would necessarily be general in character to avoid ITAR concerns. But they would provide a low key opportunity for those pursuing future exploration activities to meet their counterparts and learn directly about each other's plans.
  
  
• Pursue opportunities for new exploration-related cooperation with Japan. In October 2003 Japan will establish a new national space, aeronautics, research and development agency that will combine Japanese exploration interests and capabilities in a single organization. In preparing for the work of the new agency Japan's Space Activities Commission is currently drafting a new long term space plan. These developments provide an opportunity to begin a new Japanese-U.S. dialogue on future prospects for cooperation in robotic and human exploration.
  
  
• Consider mutual exploration interests with India. In November 2001 President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee issued a joint statement that (among other things) encourages increased space cooperation between the two countries. Since then the U.S. and India have held preliminary discussions on possible new cooperative projects. In this connection perhaps NASA should explore opportunities to work with ISRO on lunar and planetary research. For example, NASA could offer to provide tracking and communications support for ISRO's planned lunar mission in exchange for U.S. science participation. Such activities could prepare the way for more extensive collaboration on future exploration projects.
  
  
• Establish standard interfaces for designated flight elements so they can be launched on more than one launch vehicle. This was one of the original design goals for Europe's Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) which, at this point, can only be launched on an Ariane-5. Perhaps this should be reconsidered to determine whether the ATV could become compatible with the Atlas-5, Delta-4 and the H-2A. Similar standard interfaces could be established for the crew return version of the Orbital Space Plane so it can be launched not only on the Atlas-5 and Delta-4 but also on the Ariane-5 and the H-2A. These steps would add redundancy to the current Space Station program. They would also set an important precedent for the future.
  
  
• Establish preliminary human space flight relationships with China. U.S. Government policy, based in part on non-proliferation concerns, currently restricts pursuing U.S.-Chinese human space flight cooperation. With China reportedly preparing to launch its first human orbital mission later this year, perhaps it is time to consider taking a few small steps that - while maintaining the U.S. policy position with regard to cooperation - demonstrate good will to another country planning to launch humans into space. For example, the U.S. could offer to provide China with emergency tracking and communications support for the Shenzhou V mission. The 1968 Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts - which the U.S. and China have both signed - provides that countries which "receive information or discover that personnel of a spacecraft have suffered accident or are experiencing conditions of distress" shall notify the launching state. If an emergency on Shenzhou V were to occur and if the U.S. discovered it, presumably the U.S. would notify China and offer assistance. This process would be facilitated if the U.S. were to express its willingness to provide emergency communications and tracking support prior to the Shenzhou V launch. The U.S. might also offer to provide China with orbital debris impact assessments in connection with the upcoming Shenzhou flight. While modest in nature, these steps would also lay the groundwork for human space flight cooperation if the U.S.-China policy relationship improves.