Prior to the announcement of a permanent NASA Administrator, the Obama Administration has announced an independent review of human spaceflight activities.  The review will be lead by Norman Augustine, former CEO of Lockheed Martin, and apparently the go-to person for leading big-time reviews (he was the head of the study group that saddled us with Rising Above the Gathering Storm).  According to the initial announcement, the review must be completed quickly.

“The “Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans” is to examine ongoing and planned National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) development activities, as well as potential alternatives, and present options for advancing a safe, innovative, affordable, and sustainable human space flight program in the years following Space Shuttle retirement.  The panel will work closely with NASA and will seek input from Congress, the White House, the public, industry, and international partners as it develops its options. It is to present its results in time to support an Administration decision on the way forward by August 2009.”

The lack of a NASA Administrator is one of the two biggest empty chairs in science and technology policy right now.  While I understand the interest of any new administration to review where things are, doing this without a permanent Administrator runs the risk of having someone at the helm who isn’t bought in to whatever the report concludes.  I’m also reminded of the last administration’s efforts to push NASA forward, and how badly they’ve unfolded.  That bold plan relied on cost savings for future expense of the program, yet failed to commit the attention to the program required to make those savings happen.

The intentions behind the review seem thorough:

The review panel will assess a number of architecture options, taking into account such objectives as: 1) expediting a new U.S. capability to support use of the International Space Station; 2) supporting missions to the Moon and other destinations beyond low Earth orbit; 3) stimulating commercial space flight capabilities; and 4) fitting within the current budget profile for NASA exploration activities.   Among the parameters to be considered in the course of its review are crew and mission safety, life-cycle costs, development time, national space industrial base impacts, potential to spur innovation and encourage competition, and the implications and impacts of transitioning from current human space flight systems.  The review will consider the appropriate amounts of R&D and complementary robotic activity necessary to support various human space flight activities, as well as the capabilities that are likely to be enabled by each of the potential architectures under consideration. It will also explore options for extending International Space Station operations beyond 2016.

My experience following space policy suggests that item number 4 makes it likely that any new initiative coming from this review will be stillborn.  Understanding the need for risk mitigation and safety measures, the human spaceflight part of the space program seems incapable of making the adjustments the robotic programs did during Dan Goldin’s tenure in the 1990s.  I don’t mean they tried and failed, I mean they didn’t even try.  Two suggestions: name an Administrator in the next 2 weeks or elevate acting Administrator Scolese; and greater contracting discipline within NASA and its contractors.  Those engaged in building new space projects lack any significant risk for failure.  Once they have the contract, there appears to be no incentive to come in time or on budget.  To those who claim these companies are too big to fail, I suggest they are too incompetent to succeed.