Parabolic Arc

With U.S.-Russian relations continuing to deteriorate over the conflict in Georgia and other issues, American officials seem to have finally woken up to the potential nightmare that the Russian government could cut off U.S. access to the International Space Station.

The Russian Soyuz vehicle would be the only way to access the station if NASA goes ahead with its plan to end shuttle flights in 2010. The shuttle’s successor, Orion, might not be available for 5 years. Complicating matters even further, NASA needs a waiver from Congress in order to purchase additional Soyuz flights. A 2000 law bars U.S. agencies from signing contracts with countries like Russia that are providing support to Iran.

Florida Senator Bill Nelson says that any waiver is dead for now. “In an election year, it was going to be very difficult to get that waiver to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to an increasingly aggressive Russia,” Nelson told AFP. “Now, I’d say it’s almost impossible.”

Vincent Sabathier, a human space exploration expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, noted that Russia suddenly reduced the flow of oil to the Czech Republic after that country signed an agreement to host an American missile defense tracking radar facility on its soil.

“If recent Russian actions are any indicator, a technical excuse to completely block US access to the ISS for geopolitical reasons would fit nicely into the Kremlin toolkit,” Sabathier told the news agency.

Russia officials have railed against the missile defense plans, threatening retaliation against Poland and other countries cooperating with the U.S. plan. They see the system as a threat; they don’t buy the American explanation that it is designed to protect against launches from Iran and other nations.

Russia literally has Europe over a barrel, being a major supplier of gas and oil to the continent. With fuel supplies tightening and prices rising, Europe is vulnerable to any cutoffs or reductions in fuel.

As for ISS access, the United States has a number of options – none of which are very appealing. One would be to continue flying the aging, vulnerable shuttles until the Orion vehicle and its Ares launch vehicles are ready to go. However, that would be an expensive proposition; a key reason for ending shuttle flights is to free up funding for the successor vehicle.

Another option – to provide NASA with billions in additional funding to “close the gap” – has been endorsed by both major presidential candidates. However, it’s unclear how much money the next administration could provide to the space agency considering the financial hole the Bush Administration has dug. And, given the technical problems and budget overruns Ares and Orion have experienced, no one is sure how much the extra money would speed things up. It might be needed just to keep the program on track.

The other option is COTS – a program under which NASA is providing SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corp. with funding to develop commercial transportation to ISS. SpaceX is developing both robotic and crewed versions of its vehicle; so far, Orbital has committed to a robotic freighter but is exploring man-rating its Taurus II rocket.

SpaceX’s Elon Musk has made the bold claim that his company’s Dragon spacecraft could carry crews to ISS by 2011 – if he’s given more funding, of course. However, SpaceX has yet to launch anything into orbit; just three weeks ago, the company’s Falcon 1 launcher dropped multiple payloads into the Pacific. Dragon – a completely untested vehicle – would fly aboard SpaceX’s much larger Falcon 9 launcher, which has yet to fly.

Musk has lost some credibility in the wake of this latest failure, with observers beginning to doubt whether SpaceX can make good on its lofty promises. It needs successful launch of both launchers while simultaneously building a human spacecraft that must meet a strict set of safety and reliability standards.

Orbital Sciences is a much larger, more experienced rocket company with a better track record. Some experts believe that it could leapfrog SpaceX’s effort. Even so, it’s unlikely that Orbital could provide a fast solution to NASA’s space access problems.

NASA Administrator Mike Griffin has expressed “great concern” over the situation his agency finds itself in without seeming to take any responsibility for his role in putting it there. He admits that if anything goes wrong with Soyuz, it will be impossible to get to a space station largely built with American taxpayer’s money.

Griffin has been urging Europe to get into the human spaceflight business. The European Space Agency – fresh off the inaugural launch of its ATV freighter to ISS – has been exploring different options. The agency could reach a decision at a ministerial meeting in November. However, any new spacecraft could take many years to develop and certify; it won’t be ready in two or three years. This is a big expenditure for an agency that is much smaller than NASA.

Ironically enough, one of the options that ESA is exploring is to build a Soyuz replacement with the Russians. On the surface, it would seem to be a good pairing of European technology and funding with Russian spaceflight experience. Practically speaking, it could still leave Europe largely dependent on a Russia that is cutting off its gas supplies and threatening its nations. Politically, that could be a very tough sell.

Of course, all these concerns could be moot. It’s possible that the Georgia crisis will pass and that relations between and the West will improve (or at least not get any worse). In which case, the “gap” won’t be a major concern. Let’s hope so.

Similar Posts:

• Europe, Canada Eye Additional Soyuz Flights as Russia Ramps Up Production
• Griffin: We’re Screwed No Matter What We Do
• Griffin Urges Europe to Pursue Human Spaceflight; Vehicle Could Fly on Russian Rocket
• Russia Wants to Jack Up the Price of a Soyuz Ride to ISS
• SpaceX Applauds Senate Bill as “Breakthrough”