|
LA Times, January 17, 2003 By Peter Pae, Times Staff Writer Hoping
to pave the way for human exploration of Mars within the next
decade, NASA is expected to announce that developing a nuclear-powered
rocket is its top research priority.
The space agency is expected to request "significant
resources and funding" to design a nuclear-powered propulsion
system to triple the speed of space travel, theoretically making
it possible for humans to reach Mars in a two-month voyage.
The Bush administration has signed off on the ambitious
nuclear-rocket project -- though not specifically for the
Mars landing -- and the president may officially launch the initiative
during his State of the Union address on Jan. 28, NASA Administrator
Sean O'Keefe said in an interview with The Times. The project,
dubbed Project Prometheus, would greatly expand the nuclear propulsion
plans that NASA quietly announced last year when it said it may
spend $1 billion over the next five years to design a nuclear
rocket. NASA and the Bush administration are keeping the lid
on the details, including how much more the agency expects to
request from Congress, but O'Keefe said the funding increase
will be "very significant."
"We're talking about doing something on a very aggressive
schedule to not only develop the capabilities for nuclear propulsion
and power generation but to have a mission using the new technology
within this decade," O'Keefe said.
If approved, the nuclear-powered rocket project would provide
a significant boost to the Southland's aerospace industry. Caltech's
Jet Propulsion Laboratory would take a major role in development
of the system, and NASA is expected to ask several local aerospace
concerns, including Boeing Co.'s Rocketdyne unit in Canoga Park,
to help design and build the rockets.
How Congress and the public will respond to the proposal isn't
clear. In 1989, President George H.W. Bush tried to generate
backing for a nuclear rocket and Mars landing initiative but
was derailed by congressional opposition and a lack of public
support.
Some analysts question whether the president would even mention
NASA in his State of the Union address, given the nation's budget
woes and the potential war in Iraq.
Also, critics have long argued against the dangers of using
nuclear technology in space. And NASA's plans for its new rocket
system are still vague. One possibility would be to launch a
spacecraft using a conventional hydrogen-chemical combustion
rocket and then turn on a nuclear propulsion system once the
craft is in orbit. Another suggestion is that astronauts would
assemble the nuclear system in space before embarking on a long
mission.
Developing a new propulsion system has been talked about for
decades as perhaps the only means by which humans can truly explore
the solar system. NASA spent 13 years and more than $10 billion
trying to develop nuclear rocket technology in the 1950s and
1960s, but the idea was abandoned in the face of technological
and political barriers.
NASA scientists believe that advances in nuclear reactors
and rocket propulsion systems as well as lessons learned from
past failures will give the quest for a nuclear rocket new life.
Howard McCurdy, a public affairs professor at American who wrote
a book about O'Keefe's predecessor, Daniel S. Goldin, said it
was not unusual for presidents to launch bold NASA initiatives
during a time of crisis. One of the nation's biggest space programs,
the space shuttle, was launched by President Nixon during a recession
as a way to jump-start California's economy. However, Nixon also
rejected NASA's proposal to land men on Mars.
The new rocket proposal also represents a significant change
at the agency, which has typically been driven by quests to get
somewhere such as the moon, Mars or the outer planets and then
developed the technologies to do so.
Instead, O'Keefe has begun shifting the agency's focus to
developing so-called enabling technologies to carry out missions,
whatever they may be.
"The laws of physics are the only things controlling
how fast we go anywhere, what we do and whether we can survive
the experience," O'Keefe said. "So until we beat the
technical limitations ... you basically end up arguing about
fantasy missions."
O'Keefe said NASA's goal will be to build a rocket three times
faster than the current generation of spacecraft, which travel
18,000 mph. The new spaceships would have small nuclear reactors,
which would give the engines greater thrust and virtually unlimited
fuel supply.
If the designs succeed, spacecrafts could reach Mars in two
months, compared with six to seven months using current rocket
systems.
"We've been restricted to the same speed for 40 years,"
O'Keefe said. "With the new technology, where we go next
will only be limited by our imagination."
Last year, NASA officials did not encounter the kind of political
resistance they expected when they announced the initial idea
for developing a nuclear rocket, which emboldened them to propose
a broader initiative that might muster widespread public support.
"I've been told OMB [the Office of Management and Budget]
treated NASA quite well," said John Logsdon, a space policy
expert at George Washington University.
NASA will also propose boosting its research to protect astronauts
from adverse conditions in space. Space station astronauts are
returning to Earth with a 30% decrease in muscle mass as well
as a 10% loss of bone mass. They are also subjected to harmful
radiation, roughly equivalent to getting eight chest X-rays a
day.
"For any long-duration human flight, we need to find
a way to mitigate or shield against these effects," O'Keefe
said.
One reason President Bush may support the nuclear-rocket initiative
is because there is significant concern that the nation is running
short on scientists and engineers, analysts said. The number
of students studying science and engineering has been steadily
eroding while engineers and scientists who pioneered much of
the world's most advanced aerospace technologies have retired,
creating a gap in the nation's technological know-how and competitiveness.
Bush "may see this as a way to propel more students to
go into science," McCurdy said. |