NASA's advertising could mark a paradigm shift for far-space travel

NASA is now considering the idea of ​​using commercial rockets to launch a critical mission around the moon next year instead of using the gigantic rocket built by the agency for a decade. Such a radical change could not only lessen the mission's flight plans, but could also have far-reaching consequences for the way in which space travel programs are ambitious.

The impetus for this new commercial orientation is to maintain the agency's launch schedule. The NASA rocket, the Space Launch System, or SLS, takes much longer than expected and will probably not be ready to fly by the scheduled launch date, June 2020, while other commercial vehicles already in the market are ready to fly. now.

Doing this review would not be a simple exchange. NASA would not need a commercial rocket, but two for the mission to take place. The agency will also need to develop new technologies and determine how to assemble certain vehicles in space to ensure that its mission can reach the Moon.

It's a process that will take a lot of time and effort, and there is no guarantee that it will be possible next year. But if NASA manages to achieve this monumental shift to commercial vehicles, the agency could simply demonstrate a new method of moving in space requiring multiple launches of smaller vehicles and not necessarily requiring rockets massive. This could ultimately allow NASA to save a lot of time and money by freeing up funds to accomplish more ambitious tasks.

Space tugs

For this upcoming mission, NASA wishes to send two heavy spacecraft during a three-week trip around the moon next year: an empty crew capsule called Orion and a hardware item. cylindrical which feeds and supports the capsule, the European service module. . Together, both vehicles need a lot of fuel to free themselves from Earth's gravity and reach the extreme distance of the Moon. The SLS is so powerful that it will be able to send the pair up to that distance in a single launch.

But if NASA decides to fly commercial, there is no vehicle for the moment powerful enough to send Orion and its module in the vicinity of the Moon. The two most powerful commercial rockets in the US include the SpaceX Falcon Heavy and the United Launch Alliance's Delta IV Heavy. Although both vehicles are impressive, none can compete with what the SLS will do when it is finished.

This is why two rockets would be needed. A rocket would launch Orion and the European service module together on Earth orbit, where they would essentially remain "parked" a bit. Another rocket would launch what is called a space tug, which is essentially another rocket with its own fuel and engine. The tug and Orion would connect to orbit and the tug motor would come on, propelling the vehicles to the moon. "It's a bit like a tractor on a farm towing trailers or farm equipment," said Dallas Bienhoff, founder of the Cislunar Space Development Company, specializing in building infrastructure in far-flung spaces. The edge. "It's a propulsion unit."

This concept of using space tugs for travel in deep space has been touted for decades. NASA began studying the concept in the 1960s and 1970s, and a NASA official described it as necessary to "communicate speeds to other bodies in the space." In the end, the upper parts of the rockets can be considered as space tugs, as these vehicles push payloads into their intended orbits. However, space tugs can be launched alone and remain in the space so they can be attached to other vehicles and propelled where they need to go.

Space tugs could change the way NASA has been performing its human missions in deep space for decades. "One of the problems we face as a space industry, which has led us to the space launch system, is that we insist that the whole mass of a ship be launched," said Bienhoff, who said also studied the technologies needed for space. Tugs in Boeing. Launching all your gear in this way can become tedious. The gravitational pull of the Earth being quite strong, sending heavy equipment away from our planet requires a lot of extra power, and therefore a lot of fuel. To send all this fuel in space, you need a big rocket. The larger your rocket, the more fuel you need to lift the rocket and payload from the Earth. The cycle continues: more and more goods require larger rockets for the deepest spaces.

As the rockets get bigger they become more complex and costly to launch. And spending has certainly become a problem for the SLS. It is estimated that NASA has spent $ 14 billion over the last decade to develop the rocket and that the vehicle is still not completed. Once completed, it should only be launched once or twice a year for around $ 1 billion per flight. In comparison, the Delta IV Heavy costs about 350 million dollars per launch, while the Falcon Heavy starts at just under $ 100 million. Two launches of either of these vehicles cost well under the launch of the SLS.

Space tugs could also help reduce costs in the future by simply remaining in space once towing is complete. For example, a tug dragging equipment on the moon could then return to low Earth orbit and wait for a recharge. Another rocket could then bring the thruster of the Earth, anchor with the tug and refuel. This would allow the space tug to drag another object into space, which it can accomplish over and over again, saving on additional launches.

Assembly in the space

Of course, another capacity necessary for the proper functioning of all this is the ability to dock with these tugs. NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine acknowledged that the Orion crew capsule, as it is designed now, does not have the ability to make an appointment and dock with a tug. "By June 2020, we will have to make it a reality," he said at a Senate hearing, citing the mooring.

However, this type of mooring in the space is not a new practice. The Russian Soyuz capsule has long been automatically moored to the International Space Station, bringing the crews to the laboratory in orbit. SpaceX's Crew Dragon has also demonstrated its ability to moor with the ISS during a recent test flight without crew intervention, using a series of sensors and lasers to approach and project slowly. on a port outside the station. "The LIDAR and artificial vision systems used by Crew Dragon to anchor autonomously with the station are some of the sensors that you can use to perform manufacturing and assembling in the space", said Andrew Rush, CEO of Made In Space, a company developing 3D printing and building in space, tells The edge.

Assembling critical parts in the space also allows engineers to bypass large rockets. Rather than sending everything in one block, you can cast smaller pieces and then connect the material together once in orbit. This way, you do not have to build your ground spacecraft first. This is a problem for some complex missions, such as NASA's future space observatory, the James Webb Space Telescope, which does not fit exactly into the rocket on which it is launched. The spacecraft is so large and complex that it has to be launched into the folded space and deployed in two weeks. If the process fails, the telescope may not work properly in space, ending a mission of more than $ 9.66 billion.

But with assembly in space or the manufacture of additives in space, it is not necessary to build the entirety of a vehicle on Earth. "By spreading the material across multiple launches, and then using manufacturing and assembly in space, we can actually achieve this much more cost-effectively than if we launch this type of monolithic spacecraft," Rush explains.

The risks

All of these changes come at a price, however. Mooring and assembly in the space are considered risky maneuvers, according to Bridenstine. "Mooring crewed vehicles into Earth orbit to get to the moon adds to the complexity and undesirable risks," he wrote in a note to NASA employees. In addition, the launch of material in pieces means that several rockets would be needed for a mission in space, which does not suit some people. Some experts and lawmakers argue that more launches are more risky because one of the launches could fail and compromise the mission. "The committee's perspective is to leave, and go forward … instead of being piecemeal," said Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK) this week at a scientific committee hearing from the room.

The use of commercial launchers will not be easy for this mission either. Currently, engineers are checking Orion for this upcoming launch, running simulations based on the SLS design. To switch to commercial vehicles, they should put everything in suspense and start running new simulations based on data from new vehicles. This would also completely change the flight profile, which would require additional work to prepare. "If the profile of the mission changes, which seems inevitable given the lower capacity of all other vehicles compared to SLS, much of this work is no longer useful," said Lockheed Martin employee in Orion, who did not want to speak publicly in case of reprisals, tells The edge. So, meeting the June 2020 launch date seems unlikely.

Then there is a political opposition that will certainly prevent this change. Congressional lawmakers, particularly those in Alabama where the SLS is under construction, are likely to fight to keep the Orion vehicle in NASA's huge rocket. And since Congress finally approves NASA's budget and dictates how the agency can use federal funds, lawmakers might require Orion to stay on the SLS.

By making this change, NASA has the opportunity to demonstrate an entirely new kind of approach to sending humans into deep space – an approach never used before. Although piece-casting is more complex, it could save time and money, two things that NASA does not have in abundance. Perhaps NASA's future mission to the moon will not rely on massive rockets, but on smaller vehicles that launch more frequently and perform the same tasks.