NASA director on the new Moon plan: "We do it in a way that has never been done before"

NASA's administrator, Jim Bridenstine, is currently the public face of the agency's new lunar initiative, Artemis, which aims to place the first woman on the moon's surface. here 2024. On Monday, he revealed that NASA was claiming an additional $ 1.6 billion for next year. to speed up the project, but questions remain about the ultimate cost of the program and the concrete details of how NASA astronauts will actually go to the lunar surface.

NASA has already outlined how this initiative will take shape, but Bridenstine now has the heavy task of raising funds to kick start this ambitious project. The agency plans to build a space station called Gateway, orbiting the moon, which will serve as an outpost for astronauts. NASA has also developed a rocket called SLS and a crew capsule called Orion, which together will allow astronauts to travel to this new lunar station. From there, humans will ride in a lander from the catwalk to the lunar surface.

All these moving elements mean that a large number of new materials must be developed and tested over the next five years, and that space assembly is absolutely necessary. This week, The edge He spoke with Bridenstine by phone and email to learn more about the new Artemis program and how to convince Congress to add an additional $ 1.6 billion to NASA's coffers. .

This interview was modified slightly for length and clarity.

One thing that many people have noticed is that the demand is rather low. It's certainly not $ 8 billion, as some people thought, and it's also low compared to the Apollo increases in the '60s and' 70s. What do you say to those who think it's not quite high?

We must remember that SLS, Orion and the European Service Module are already well advanced. These are three of the most important elements for bringing humans to the moon, and we are about to be ready with these programs. When we talk about what we need, we need to develop the gateway and develop the landing systems.

That's really what we're focusing on now. If you look at a normal development project, it follows a bell curve. So, as you have correctly identified, the first year is rather low. We turn to the commercial sector to share their thoughts on how to move from the bridge to the surface of the moon. We are essentially buying a service. The commercial industry will provide a service to US astronauts to move from the bridge to the surface of the moon.

Image: NASA

We are looking for industry partners to invest in the LG. We expect them to invest for the purpose of having customers who are not NASA. They could have customers who would be international. They could have customers who would be customers of the industry. We are therefore looking for our partners to invest their own money.

This $ 1 billion gives us a good start to start development with money for key milestones. And then we will look for additional resources in 2021. As I said, it follows a bell curve. So, 2021 will be a little more, 2022 will be more than that, and then it will start going down again.

Representatives Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) and Kendra Horn (D-OK) have already have expressed their first feelings about itand both expressed their concern that there is no complete budget for the years to come. So why not reveal the full five-year budget now?

Well, we do this in a way that has never been done before. Again, we are asking the industry to invest and we want to look at their ideas before making bigger decisions. There are proposals that require only two elements to go from the bridge to the surface of the Moon and then to return to the bridge: a descent module and a module of ascent. There are other ideas that use three elements that include a transfer vehicle.

So there are different concepts, different ideas. Different companies can invest their own money at different levels. Because of the way we are progressing, it is difficult for us to evaluate all options currently. But we look forward to having a lot of great ideas and we can evaluate the future of the 2021 budget based on conventional wisdom.

On Monday, you said that it was difficult to get people phoning about the new budget amendment. Have you been able to talk to more legislators since the publication of this report and do you have more details about their reactions?

Absolutely. I testified in the Senate a few days ago and it was very positive. People are excited about the moon. Last night, senator [Jerry] Moran, chair of the Senate SJC Credit Committee – the main committee that funds NASA – sent out a very explicit tweet:

"Our greatest achievements remain in front of us. And as NASA's chief acquirer, I will work with the President of the United States, Vice President and Jim Bridenstine, to ensure that NASA has the resources to land the first woman on the plane. Moon and build a sustainable infrastructure to support missions on Mars. and beyond."

I did not anticipate that. I was excited to see it and I immediately retweeted it.

And I will say, in talking to senators on the other side of the debate, I think it is widely accepted that this is a topic that arouses the interest of the people. There are a number of senators and members of the House who have asked me: Is that enough? Do you have everything you need about this? And for the year 2020, the answer is yes. So, I think most people on the other side of the aisle are wondering if that is all you need.

I think there is good support on both sides of the aisle.

Also Monday, you said you did not know where the money came from in the federal budget, but it has now been revealed that this came from Pell Grant's surplus, as we suspected . Do you have any concerns about this with regard to the difficulties in selling the mission to Congress?

The way I see it is: it's now part of the overall budget request. And when you look at the entire budget request, there are increasing accounts and others going down. My only direction was to tell them what we thought we should do to get off to a good start in 2020 with a lunar landing at 20:24.

We gave them these numbers. They delivered these numbers. And the rising and falling accounts are above my salary class and out of my control. I will certainly say that NASA has what it needs and that the House and the Senate determine how they want to fund it. And whatever they choose to do, we will respect the law.

You mentioned that this budget is not inspired by NASA, but there is wording in the budget amendment this would give the administrator the power to do it. I would like a little clarity on that.

The President's budget amendment provides no compensation in existing NASA programs to allow US astronauts to return to the moon by 2024, and I have publicly stated that I do not intend to redirect the funding from other NASA programs, including science, in support of the human lunar return effort. The goal of the proposed transfer language is to provide the NASA administrator with maximum flexibility, within the limits of allocated funds, to foster the establishment of a US strategic presence. on the Moon in the most efficient and cost-effective way. The language is not intended to allow the transfer of other funds within the agency towards the lunar effort.

NASA will work with the appropriation committees to ensure that this transfer authorization is clearly limited to the overall funding of the lunar effort.

Let's talk about the real mission. Representative Horn told me one thing, it was that she wanted more details on the plan. We know the basics: SLS will take Orion to the bridge and from there, people will travel in a lander to the moon. But do you have a more detailed road map of all launches and tests that need to be done by then, or is it still underway?

Yes, you have identified a number of parts and all of these parts need to be tested. In terms of launches, we have to make sure that the first elements of the gateway are launched: the power and propulsion element and what we call the use module, which is a very small habitat. Each of these parts will be launched commercially, so there are two launches.

And then we have to group the LG at the bridge. And this lander could have two or three pieces. And we will review the industry's proposals on this issue to determine the best approach. We certainly do a more detailed analysis.

Do you have an understanding of the amount what launches or missions you will need, including the launch of the gateway components, including launching test flights for Orion, landing gear, etc.?

We have SLS, which will launch EM-1. We will now call it Artemis 1. But Artemis 1 will be a non-armed launch around the Moon. Artemis 2 will be a crew launch around the Moon. Artemis 3 will transport the next humans who will land on the Moon. Each of these launches is an SLS rocket with an Orion crew capsule and a European service module.

Now, for Artemis 3 which carries our crew to the bridge, we must have the crew access to a lander. This means that at Gateway, we will have the power and propulsion element, which will be launched commercially, the module of use, which will be commercially, then we will have an undercarriage. And there are two or three elements in the lander, depending on his industry – the way he wants to solve the problem of crossing the bridge to the surface of the moon. And if there are two elements, there will be two commercial launches. If there are three elements, there will probably be three commercial launches.

Based on my quick calculations, it looks like you were targeting about seven to eight launches.

Gateway is two things, it's two launches. You have an undercarriage – we'll say there are three launches for the undercarriage, so there are five. And in fact, we want to have two unique solutions for the LG, so there are six, seven and eight. Then you have three SLS launches, so nine, ten and eleven. So, up to eleven launches.

At present, this is largely based on an architecture that has been in development for about a decade, such as SLS and Orion, and as you have said, the programs have suffered setbacks and delays. Meanwhile, Vice President Pence spoke urgently and if our current contractors can not reduce it, we will have new subcontractors. What happens if these programs are delayed again, and is there enough money to keep them on schedule?

I think we have what we need at the moment. The most likely way to allow the next man and the first woman on the Moon's surface in 2024 is to move as fast as possible with SLS and Orion. So we think that is achievable. We must make sure that there are no mistakes or setbacks.

I would like to hear your thoughts on the recent launches that have been made publicly for lunar landers. Lockheed made a speech in April and I'm sure you saw Jeff Bezos unveiling Blue Moon last week. What do you think about these proposals and could they be integrated into NASA's plan?

We are very excited about them. We wish to have two very different landing abilities, so that if one of them has a setback, the other can advance. And there are others in addition to the two that you just mentioned that are going on. Each of these areas represents an opportunity for NASA to obtain unique perspectives from highly capable service providers. We are eager to evaluate and analyze what they plan to do, what they think it will cost and what they will do. are ready to invest in the program.

Image: blue origin

Obviously, the delay is very close. Have you started thinking about a training plan for astronauts and what that would entail?

Absolutely. The training plan is in progress. We have a very qualified and diverse astronaut body, with extensive experience of the International Space Station. We did not select the frame that will be the first crew that will travel in 2022 around the Moon, then in 2024 at the Gateway, and then on the surface. We did not choose what this frame looked like, but we are very confident of having the right people. And we are eager to prepare them.

There has been a lot of talk about space suits and the possibility that they are not ready. You pointed out that they will, but I would like more details about them. I know there is already money in this year's application, but do you intend to sign new contracts or use existing contracts?

Here's the thing: we know what it takes to build a spacesuit. It's a priority for us. It's not an easy thing to do. But certainly, we will not go to the moon without a space suit, so we are doing it.

Artemis is all about putting women on the moon. Will she be the one to take the first step on the moon?

The direction we are taking now is that the next man and the first woman will be Americans and we will land on the South Pole of the Moon in 2024. Beyond that, we have not made any specific decisions, but I will say C & # 39 is a subject that interests us all and I think that there are many girls all over the country, and even around the world, who are wondering who will be this first woman.

Given all that we've talked about, do you have a great deal of concern about making this plan a reality? What are the biggest challenges for you and how do you plan to overcome these obstacles?

You have identified the biggest risk, which is political. And that's why we are not on the moon yet. This is actually why we are not on Mars yet. We go back to 1972, it was the last time we had a person on the surface of the moon. And since 1972, many efforts have been made to return to the moon and they have all failed. And they did not fail because of NASA; they have not failed because of the technological capabilities of this agency. They failed because of the fancy budgets of the politicians.

This is one of the reasons why it is so important to speed up this program. As the program grows, priorities change, budgets, administrations, and each of these elements create additional political risk.

We have already experienced this before. If we want to succeed, we must eliminate the political risk, which means that we must accelerate the plan to get to the moon, and we need a strong bipartisan consensus to say that it is the right thing to do for our country. I think we are here. I think a lot of people understand that this is a unique opportunity.