90 likes | 381 Views
Welcome to the Symposium on Space Transportation Policy and Market Risks November 16, 2011. Space Policy Institute Elliott School of International Affairs George Washington University 1957 E Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20052. Challenges for Government Initiatives.
E N D
Welcome to the Symposium on Space Transportation Policy and Market Risks November 16, 2011 Space Policy Institute Elliott School of International Affairs George Washington University 1957 E Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20052
Challenges for Government Initiatives • Costs for on-going conflicts • Rise in transfer payments • Aging population/health care costs • Infrastructure recapitalization • Non-State threats: physical, WMD, cyber • Global economic turmoil
Policy, Architecture, and Acquisition Decisions Determine the Space Launch Industrial Base 28 (140%) 12 20 (167%) 12 (100%) 20 (56%) 20 20 (100%) 8 16-20 8 (33%) NASA rate at 4 heavy lift flights per year. Air Force at EELV rate. Green represents known/estimated production at present. 5 National Aeronautics and Space Administration 2009
Agenda • Keynote Presentation – the Space Industrial Base • Panel 1 – Alternative Market Possibilities • Panel 2 – Financial and Market Risks for Space Launch Providers Lunch • Panel 3 – Public/Private Sector Roles and Responsibilities • Panel 4 – Near-term Risks to the Space Launch Industrial Base • Panel 5 – International Customers, Competitors and Partners • Closing and Summaries Reception
National Space Transportation Policy Review • NSC-led policy review currently underway • Possible release by end of 2011 • Some likely issues: • Human space transportation • SLS , MPCV, EELV, New Entrants • Criteria for USG use of new launch vehicles • Space Industrial base – rocket motors • Technology development • Interagency coordination – NASA, AF, NRO • International cooperation – critical paths? • Extension of INKSNA wavier for payments to Russia?
Key Policy Questions • What is the relationship of human space transportation to larger U.S. foreign policy, economic, and national security interests? • Is there is a need for independent U.S. government human access to space, and if not, the identification of those entities upon which we are willing to depend for such access; • Is it in the larger interests of the United States to invite international partnerships in regard to capabilities which are on the so-called “critical path” for common exploration goals; • The degree to and roles in which the U.S. government should foster the development, and embrace the capabilities, of “commercial space” in the furtherance of national goals; • The proper role of NASA in the human expansion into space, and in particular NASA’s disparate functions as 'innovator and technology developer' vs. ‘designer/developer/smart buyer’ of new systems, and ‘system operator’ vs. ‘service customer’.