NASA’s Constellation Program is in trouble and it really is no surprise to anyone who knows how NASA or the United States Government operates. When Constellation was announced as a main component of President Bush’s Vision for Space Exploration in 2004, it was to be the “Apollo Program on Steroids” that would return us to the Moon and eventually land humans on Mars. Space advocates cheered for the idea of a new rocket, but honeymoon was pretty much non-existent as the cheers gave way to petty bickering between space travel advocacy groups and scientists over the design, cost, and proposed destination of the new system. In fact, nightShifted Astronomy shares some of the guilt in the petty bickering as we were a contributing member to The Planetary Society until they published a report suggesting that Constellation skip the Moon and go directly to Mars. I do not regret pulling my membership because I feel that they do not truly represent the desires of the people when it comes to space exploration initiatives, but it did happen and we do have to live with being part of the mess.

Now, Constellation is under intense review by the Obama White House and every day it seems that the program is growing closer and closer to joining the oblivion inhabited by so many other NASA projects (see The Countless Many Who Cried Spacewolf and The Sharks are Circling). The Augustine Commission, which was appointed to review the Constellation Program and specifically, its Ares I and V rocket designs, gave very little support to NASA and its program. This does not bode well for an agency competing more and more with commercial rocket companies. There is a huge amount of contempt for the new designs and it has unfortunately put NASA’s future in limbo. Everyone that depends on the United States Space Program for their livelihoods is on high alert as they wait for an announcement from President Obama about the future of the agency. Keith Cowing, the ultimate NASA watchdog has more information at NASAWatch.

I believe that it would be reasonable to cancel the Ares I rocket because I feel that there is enough evidence available to show that it is a gross waste of hardware and is an unnecessary redesign of technology that is already available in mass quantities today. I have spoken before about getting human ratings for Delta rockets and other ICBM-type missiles and I still believe that it would be our best bet. I really like the DIRECT Launcher proposal which takes hardware from the Space Shuttle Program and combines it with the Orion capsule. DIRECT makes perfect sense if the Government decides to cancel the Ares I rocket. However, I think that a full-on cancellation of the Constellation Program would be a blow to our nation’s space program of unfathomable consequences. The U.S. Government and NASA have let us down too many times in the realm of space exploration and there are already very few people listening to what they have to say. Another failure, especially one of this magnitude, would be nothing more than the death rattle of a glorious agency strangled by partisan politics and overburdened by meaningless bureaucracy.

Image Credits: NASA/DIRECT

Regular readers know that I’m not a NASA hater, but it’s difficult to hide the fact that NASA has made human space travel a touchy subject over the past few years. Despite its incredible success with unmanned projects like the Mars Exploration Rovers, Cassini-Huygens to Saturn, the Spitzer Space Telescope, and others, NASA is facing increasingly vocal critics of its Constellation Program as well as its plan to end United States involvement with the International Space Station in 2015. It isn’t as if NASA hasn’t faced criticism for of the program since its inception, but things are starting to get heated both in public discussion and in Congress. I believe that the agency has accomplished some amazing feats through its history, but can we really blame the sharks for circling after NASA has repeatedly failed to produce a successor to the Space Shuttle Program despite spending billions on research and development? Remember how the VentureStar Program and the prototype Lockheed Martin X-33 were destined to be mankind’s gateway to the stars? I’m sure that whatever aerospace museum inherited the prototype models for VentureStar are appreciative of the billions spent on research and development for their exhibit.

The news about NASA and its human space exploration initiatives is not all doom and gloom. The Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program is a somewhat intelligent idea by NASA to get aerospace companies involved with the International Space Station and planetary exploration initiatives. In the COTS program, NASA encourages private companies to development launch and recovery systems with promises to contract those systems for use in International Space Station projects. Some prominent names in the COTS world include Rocketplane Kistler, SpaceX, and the Orbital Sciences Corporation.

While these are all great companies that have built impressive hardware and are making progress toward commercial space operations, there is one company that always gets me excited about the future of space travel and you may have heard of them before: Bigelow Aerospace. Nestled in the heart of the Las Vegas desert, Bigelow Aerospace is a private company that successfully launched two inflatable “Genesis” modules into orbit in 2006 and 2007. These modules were compressed into a lightweight delivery system and sent into orbit aboard Russian Dnepr missiles. Now, a Bigelow representative has approached NASA with a lightweight alternative to the bulky Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle. Orion Lite would be a crew command module similar to the Orion CEV but much lighter and could be launched on top of an Atlas 5 rocket instead of the proposed behemoth Ares V. Bigelow’s capsule is stripped down and designed for low-Earth orbit operations, but could be modified by existing Orion technology to reach the Moon and Mars.

It is possible that Orion Lite’s ability to ride on an Atlas 5 rocket could eliminate the need for Ares V development, but it is not the only proposed alternative launch system. My personal favorite is an initiative called DIRECT. Founded by a former Boeing engineer, DIRECT is a program that aims to build a launch system derived from existing Space Shuttle technology. The launch system would use the exact same solid rocket boosters (SRBs) and external fuel tank, but would place the Orion CEV on the tank’s forward quarter as opposed to the piggyback style configuration o the Space Shuttle. The direct system is an excellent concept design that allows for numerous configurations and future system upgrades. Unfortunately, I don’t think that DIRECT has ever been given any serious consideration as an alternative to Constellation.

Image Credit: The Direct Launcher Group, Bigelow Aerospace, Lockheed Martin