[ad_1]
WASHINGTON – NASA is looking at ways to stretch the budget for its Human Landing System program in case there are further delays on a final appropriations bill while it still seeks full funding for the program in 2021.
Funding for the HLS program, which supports the development of commercial landers to transport astronauts to and from the lunar surface, has turned into a major uncertainty in the ability of NASA’s Artemis program to achieve the goal of bringing humans to the moon by 2024. NASA requested $ 3.2 billion for the program in its budget proposal for fiscal year 2021. However, a House bill passed in July provided only about $ 600 million, while the Senate it has yet to publish its version of a spending bill.
HLS, like the rest of NASA and other federal agencies, is operating under an ongoing resolution (CR) that funds it at 2020 levels since fiscal 2021 began on October 1. That CR runs through December 11, with the expectation that Congress will take on an overhead bill for the entire year 2021 after the November 3 general election. The outcome of the election, and its timing, could affect what type of spending bill Congress would consider and when.
That uncertainty does not affect ongoing work with the HLS program, with three companies – Blue Origin, Dynetics and SpaceX – working on lunar lander designs under 10-month “base period” awards that NASA awarded in April. Those three awards have a combined value of $ 967 million.
“Right now, our base period runs through February 28 and we are funded to complete all of the base period milestones,” said Lisa Watson-Morgan, HLS program manager at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, during a October 26 session of American Astronautical magazine. Wernher von Braun Memorial Symposium of the Society.
However, the picture is less clear if the 2021 spending is not resolved by then. Watson-Morgan said the program planned “some interesting methods” that could buy the program for a month or so. He did not elaborate on those methods, but noted that they take advantage of the fact that the HLS awards were awarded under a broad announcement from the agency through the Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) initiative.
Beyond that, he said, “we could delay month to month,” but cautioned that the agency risked losing some of the program’s companies. “These industry partners that you see here have other work that they will have to do and that will be paid to do,” he said. “It is important that we combine both funding and work to ensure that we can continue this progress.”
She did not explicitly state what would happen to the HLS program if the House funding level of about $ 600 million were included in the final spending bill, but reiterated comments from other NASA members, including Administrator Jim. Bridenstine, that NASA needs the entire $ 3.2 billion to keep a 2024 landing on track. “We are certainly also planning to get additional funding so that we can achieve the moon landing in 2024.”
Watson-Morgan appeared on a panel with representatives from the three HLS companies. They mainly offered overviews of their proposed landers, with few updates on the progress they have been making on their designs since winning the initial HLS awards in April.
NASA announced on October 22 that all three companies had completed certification baseline reviews, where NASA and each company confirmed lander development plans and agreed to standards that will guide work on the lander. NASA also said it is executing an “active federal acquisition” for HLS Option A, where the agency will award contracts to up to two companies to work on landers that could support a landing in 2024.
The certification baseline reviews were “incredibly successful,” Watson-Morgan said, “and we are now preparing for the follow-up reviews,” where NASA will select the two companies to continue lander development. on a large scale.
He said it was important to keep two companies on the program after follow-up reviews. “Having two US industry partners competing for that top spot to go to the moon will get us there faster,” he said, due to competition.
However, that competition may be the reason why companies were reluctant to share many details about their work. “Since we are still in a competitive mode, there is only a limited amount of information publicly available, because we want this to be as fair and honest competition as possible,” he said. “Next spring we should be wide open, ready to tell everything, share everything.”
