Habitation use may rescue struggling commercial module project
 |
WASHINGTON – A project to build, launch and dock a purely In December 1999 Spacehab and RSC Energia announced their plans to develop Budget Problems = Business Opportunity? Lounge was referring to a recent decision by the Bush Administration In announcing its proposed FY 2002 budget for NASA, the Bush Administration The Bush Administration’s recent efforts to halt consideration of a Hab Without the Hab module, there will only be accommodations aboard the ISS Lounge said the current Enterprise review would be completed by the In addition to the removal of the Hab module from the ISS program, the Bush In order for Enterprise’s possible use for Hab functionality to be As part of the overall arrangement, Energia would also be providing Construction of the spacecraft by Energia has already begun [images]. The spacecraft Lounge said that the business model for revenue from the Enterprise According to Lounge, his company had raised about ten percent of a Roadblocks One major potential stumbling block in the path of any U.S deal with Spacehab and Energia for the use of Enterprise is the fact that NASA doesn’t have any money to spare – either for its own Hab module – or to lease service on one provided by someone else. Enterprise is supposed to replace the functionality of the Docking and Stowage Module (something Russia was supposed to provide to the ISS program). As such, bartering arrangements with Russia (via Enterprise as a proxy) and the U.S. might offset some of the costs. None the less the hundreds of millions of dollars required for leased space on Enterprise is still going to be rather hard for NASA to find. There is also the issue of providing power for Enterprise. The Science Power Platform (SPP) is supposed to be provided by Russia. Its status is rather uncertain at this point. The U.S. is talking about delaying its flight. The Russians don’t seem to have the money to build it. In addition to providing the power required for the further build out of the Russian segment of the ISS, (Enterprise would be such an expansion) the SPP also provides a variety of life support and guidance capabilities as well. According to NASA planning charts, the absence of the SPP “Continues the need for USOS [U.S. Operated Segment of the ISS] to transfer Avg. 3 to 4.5 kW throughout life of ISS to RS [Russian Segment]”. This would be power that is not available to experiments on the US portion of the ISS as well as NASDA and ESA lab modules. As such, the presence of the Enterprise on the ISS – and its ability to function, is a function of if/when the SPP flies. The SPP was originally slated for launch on mission ISS-9A.1 in October 2002. According to NASA planning briefings “With the delay or absence of SPP, the ISS can continue the build out of the US, Canadian, Japanese, and European segments. With the delay or absence of SPP, the ISS cannot continue the build out of the Russian Segment.” This would result in “Impacts due to the delay or absence of SPP and subsequent RS Elements.”
commercial unit to the International Space Station may find its major use
as temporary living quarters, Spacehab Inc. said Tuesday. And while the
module might house two, three or four astronauts or provide other station
logistical needs, its originally proposed use for scientific research or
broadcasting will continue to be pursued.
a commercial module to be called “ Enterprise ” which would be
attached to the Russian segment of the International Space Station (ISS).
At the time the module was promoted as being primarily a “broadcast station
and a research laboratory in which company-sponsored microgravity
experiments targeting new biotech and advanced materials products and
processes will be conducted.” A new multimedia company, Space Media, was
formed to pursue the multimedia aspects of Enterprise marketing.
Space Media and Energia have also formed “Entermedia” a company designed to
foster commercial activities aboard the Russian segment of the ISS.
In the ensuing year and a half, the commercial viability of the
Enterprise concept has yet to be fully realized. However, recent
decisions by the Bush Administration may breathe new life into the project.
John M. ‘Mike’ Lounge, a former space shuttle astronaut and now Spacehab
Senior vice-president for Space Engineering Services told SpaceRef today
that he has yet to sign up a single paying customer for any commercial
contract. “We have always said part of our business is crew stowage,”
Lounge said at a status briefing for the Enterprise Commercial
Module Project. “The question is if there is a market to provide permanent
habitation?”
whereby NASA was recently directed not to develop a Habitation (“Hab”)
module for the ISS. Citing this potential market opportunity, Lounge said
that Spacehab was in the process of conducting an engineering review that
would determine the kinds of modifications to the design of the
Enterprise that might be needed if it were to be pressed into
service as bedroom or kitchen to station astronauts.
stated that the station’s habitation module, originally under contract to
Boeing, would be canceled because of cost overruns with the project. This
was a little deceiving inasmuch as all work had already been halted on this
module last year – and the ISS program requirement for the Hab module was
removed from Boeing’s contract. The money NASA had budgeted for the Hab
module was also deleted. This was done, with Clinton Administration
guidance, to allow a fully commercial Hab module – one based upon JSC’s
TransHab concept – to be developed. NASA’s commercialization czar Dan Tam
had originaly planned to use the money that would have gone for the Hab to
help facilitate a commercial TransHab deal. Without the seed money to
lubricate a possible deal, prospects for a commercial TransHab module dried
up.
module preclude NASA from switching budgetary resources back for the
development of a Hab module. This was done as part of an overall plan to
cut ISS costs (estimated to be as much as $4 billion greater than expected
only a few months ago) by focusing US efforts on completing the ISS such
that modules and elements built by ESA, CSA, NASDA and other partners can be
attached to the ISS. The Bush Administration has not precluded the
eventual addition of a Hab module – rather, they have told NASA that to do
so would require the agency to use exiting funds. Given the already tight
budget
environment NASA operates under, such a prospect would appear unlikely.
for three astronauts. Given that the original plan for the ISS was to have
up to 6 (and perhaps 7) astronauts at completion, this represents more than
a 50% decrease in the available crew time. When one considers the fact that
the ISS already requires a substantial portion of a three person crew’s
time for maintenance and operations, the amount of crew time available for
science will be dramatically
reduced from what had been promised.
end of May, and that a decision will be made by the end of June as to what
new spacecraft systems would be added to the design, if any. “We’re going
to need a strong signal from NASA fairly soon” if there was serious
interest in using Enterprise , Lounge said Tuesday.
Administration also directed NASA to halt further development of the X-38
and its operational Crew Return Vehicle (CRV). The CRV would have provided
the ISS with a permanent replacement for the 3 person Soyuz spacecraft
currently being used as Interim CRVs. Since the X-38 would carry up to 7
people, it would negate the need for the two Soyuz spacecraft that would be
needed to support a 6 person crew – plus provide a net increase of one
person over the 6 that use of dual Soyuz spacecraft would support.
of interest to NASA, the ability to support the additional crew with CRV
capability would also need to be provided. According to comments made by
Lounge, and by Spacehab Vice President for Space Commerce, Philip Mongan at
the CATO Institute earlier this month, the provision of a second rescue
Soyuz craft would be part of the deal. This Soyuz could be docked to the
Nadir (Earth-facing) docking port of Enterprise . Recently released
Spacehab drawings of Enterprise show such a docked Soyuz attached to the unit.
Progress Thus Far
Lounge said that he had recently returned from Moscow meetings where
Spacehab and its Enterprise partner RSC Energia had completed a
baseline design review for the module. This review was followed by a
formal public endorsement of the space project by the Russian air and space
agency Rosaviakosmos. The endorsement followed the signing of a formal
agreement whereby Russia gave the Enterprise unit docking and
utilization rights in return for use in functions that had been originally
planned for a Russian-provided Docking and Stowage Module. As such,
Enterprise would be launched and used in place of that Russian
component.
launching services, although Lounge said a specific launch date had not yet
been selected. “We are planning for a launch sometime in the summer of
2003,” he explained.
is based upon the current Progress design which has been stretched and
enlarged to provide the internal equipment and passage volume required for
its dual function. Depending on the course of discussions with NASA,
subsystems such as modified environmental and life support systems might be
added for support of habitation use. Otherwise, the basic design of the
module was set and construction the space unit’s primary structure is now
underway.
unit was projected as 50 percent from ISS services such as habitation, 25
percent from research such as microgravity experiments, and the balance
from ‘other’ uses such as media broadcasts. The emphasis on more
traditional space services in place of an the project’s earlier emphasis on
broadcasting was prompted by customers- or the lack thereof. “We haven’t
seen any (media interest) step forward in the beginning,” Lounge commented.
“While the cost of fully outfitting a full-up media studio is
considerable.”
projected $50 to $100 million to build and fly Enterprise . Spacehab
would need to generate “about $30 to $40 million” each year in revenue from
the unit, and be raising 30 percent of the financing each year before
launch in 2003. “We’ll need to get into full scale production this summer”
if the module would make its construction and launching schedules.
There is also the possibility that the Hab module’s functionality could be supplied by another ISS element. One such concept is the so called “Stretched” Node 3 concept. Node 3 is being provided by ASI, the Italian space agency in exchange for a portion of ISS utilization resources. According to internal NASA briefings, “If Hab deleted, extended Node 3 is best option considered. Does not replace Hab, but approximates functionality”. The decision date for this option is approaching fast. Node 3 is already under assembly and modifications need to be incorporated soon. According to NASA “Need Program Direction ASAP to minimize Node 3 – Critical date is Sep. 2001– Alenia welds second endcone to structure.”
It is also important to note that the DSM (or Enterprise) would extend downward (Earthward) placing a docking port lower than the position of the port on the FGB. If Node 3 is docked before the arrival of Enterprise this will block – and therefore prevent – the use of the nadir (Earth facing) docking port on the FGB where Enterprise would be docked.
Suffice it to say, the deletion of the ability (at least near term) for NASA to provide a Hab module certainly does present Spacehab and Energia with a potential market opportunity. However the same cost cutting measures also present significant roadblocks as well.
The Path Ahead
The U.S. is not the only possible customer for crew habitation services.
Customers could also come from other ISS partners. Given the interest in
flying tourists such as Dennis Tito and contest winners such as proposed by
the creator of the “Survivor” TV series, wholly commercial customers may
also appear. Whether this potential market develops will depend upon
whether Mr. Tito actually flies and how arduous the whole process of
ironing out the current disagreement over his flight becomes.
Lounge said that regardless of whether Enterprise is eventually used
as a habitat, he was determined to set aside a fixed block of the unit’s
rack space for experiment use.
But while the fate of the station’s Hab module might serve to help create a
customer for Enterprise , it was still a tough road ahead for the
program. “We must convince the other (station) partners that
Enterprise is not a detriment to their operations,” Lounge said. And
as compared to the 1988 challenge of his STS-26 Discovery space mission
that returned the U.S. to human spaceflight following the Challenger
accident? “Well, some days its chicken-and some days its feathers,” Lounge
joked.
Related Links
Background Information
