Humberto Gallego
Over the last decade and a half, the United States has once again put itself at the forefront of space exploration and development, and for good reason. The government recognizes that a strong presence in space is necessary to maintain a resilient society and to keep the U.S. safe. But as things stand now, the government is doing a poor job of building its own space launch vehicle to service this mission, all the while crippling private launch providers with needless red tape.
The American space industry is one of the country’s fastest-growing sectors, encompassing many fields. Communications and weather satellites, GPS, military and intelligence hardware, and even the food that we eat rely on satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). Critical scientific and technological breakthroughs, like disease research and drug developments, are facilitated by NASA’s space exploration. To put it plainly, there are few major functions of the public and private sectors that do not benefit from a continued American space presence.
However, NASA has not led this American resurgence in space as it has since the 1960s. Rather, a great deal of the resurgence in America’s spacefaring ability can be attributed to private players pouring billions into developing more efficient and affordable rockets than ever before.
After the Obama Administration ended the Space Shuttle program in 2011, money was redirected from the Shuttle’s successor, now the Space Launch System (SLS), to commercial programs. The commercialization of the space industry stems from the idea that private players would generate cheaper and more diverse launch vehicles, allowing NASA to focus on space exploration rather than spending resources on getting to space in the first place. The Obama Administration recognized that, as with many of the agency’s projects, a new NASA launch system would arrive wildly over budget and behind schedule and, as a result, hamper NASA’s function.
The program was eventually restarted under the name Artemis, and as predicted, it is now massively over budget and behind schedule. For example, a contract to build the new Mobile Launcher 2 (ML-2) tower, necessary for launching SLS, was awarded to Bechtel National in 2019 for $383 million, with delivery slated for 2023. This time and budget estimate has slipped several times since, and despite NASA’s promise to keep Bechtel accountable, it was announced in August that the project’s budget would balloon to $2.7 billion and that ML-2 would not be ready until at least 2029.
This self-imposed inconvenience has slowed NASA at a time when the U.S. and China are locked in a heated race back to the moon, which the U.S. is in real danger of losing. Beyond national embarrassment, losing to China could mean that the U.S. government terminates further funding for space exploration, stalling innovation and research opportunities that China would now benefit from instead.
Because Congress dictates NASA’s budget, and each Member of Congress is eager to bring jobs to their district, creating a working, efficient, and safe launch vehicle is often secondary to driving industry growth. The Department of Defense declined to join the SLS program as a cost-sharing partner primarily because SLS is too complex and expensive. NASA has admitted that SLS is a jobs program. And while it does employ thousands, it is also a formidable tax burden.
The U.S. should not sacrifice its effectiveness in the space launch sector for the sake of creating more jobs. Even if job creation is this important, there are other Congresses that would be better served funneling resources into. Right now, there is simply too much at stake for NASA and the nation to voluntarily forfeit its hard-won lead in space.
Simultaneously, companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin, among others, are quickly developing heavy-lift vehicles like Starship and New Glenn that will bring capabilities similar to SLS but are reusable and much more affordable. The issue these companies face, however, is that launches are currently overseen by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which routinely delays rocket development due to the complexities of launch license issuing.
The FAA is already tasked with overseeing the busiest airspace in the world. American airspace is crowded with satellites, debris, and space stations. This, in conjunction with the uptick in space launches, which also fall under the FAA’s sphere of administration, has caused the organization to become overwhelmed and inefficient. Private companies like SpaceX are experiencing long delays in their rocket launches – launches that are used to develop the Starship spacecraft necessary to land the Artemis III crew on the lunar surface. One recent launch delay related to SpaceX’s failure to discuss the impact of a sonic boom on local wildlife, something the company deemed “superfluous environmental analysis.”
Granting these launch licenses is a complicated affair that requires a great deal of time and effort for the FAA. A recent report states that managing SpaceX's launches takes up a staggering 80% of the FAA’s space workers’ overtime. As SpaceX continues increasing its launch cadence and other companies like Blue Origin bring their new launch platforms online, these companies will increasingly experience regulatory bottlenecks that will limit development and hamper the field.
In order to continue succeeding in space, the United States must seriously consider overhauling the regulatory framework supporting rocket launches, perhaps by creating a new regulatory agency that could oversee launches rather than stretching the capabilities of the FAA to cover such a complex field. Additionally, it is essential for Congress to step in and draft legislation that would empower regulatory bodies to eliminate unnecessary red tape and allow these companies to flourish. Lastly, NASA must ensure it reigns in spending and sticks to budget and timeline targets while delivering effective products and services. Otherwise, it risks losing the race back to the moon and Mars and sacrifices America’s advantage in space.
Comments