Parabolic Arc

Michael Bloomfield, vice president and program manager for Constellation systems at ATK Space Systems, makes the company’s case for continuing the Ares program on safety grounds:

Ares I was designed from the start with crew safety and mission reliability as key requirements. Multiple studies show that goal was achieved, with Ares I consistently rated tops for safety against any other option by a significant degree. This is no accident. A reduced part count combined with heritage human-space-flight hardware increases crew safety and decreases developmental and programmatic risk. Increased crew safety and mission reliability have the added benefit of reducing overall life-cycle costs. Expenses associated with a reliable human transport are less than for one that suffers intermittent catastrophic failures. That, in turn, facilitates commercialization of human low-Earth orbit transport. This is a rare win-win-win solution.

Though commercial vehicles with a launch abort system may be safer than the shuttle, they still lag behind Ares I safety by a factor of 3 to 5 and do not meet the Columbia investigation’s clear assertion that America should replace the shuttle with a vehicle that is “significantly safer.” Asking start-up companies working to deliver cargo to the International Space Station to take on the task of safely delivering crew to low-Earth orbit is fraught with multiple unknowns, risking significantly increased costs, both monetarily and in human life…

In the proven tradition of aviation safety and to honor those who have given their lives conducting space exploration, the only question to consider is simply, “Which of the options provides the most significant increase in crew safety for traveling to and from low-Earth orbit?” This approach has worked for aviation over the past 100 years; it can work for human space travel over the next 100 years.

Read the full op-ed in The Washington Times.

Be Sociable, Share!

•