Back to news

June 5, 2018 | International, Aerospace

NASA’s new administrator says he’s talking to companies to take over the International Space Station

NASA is talking to several international companies about forming a consortium that would take over operation of the International Space Station and run it as a commercial space lab, NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine said in an interview.

“We're in a position now where there are people out there that can do commercial management of the International Space Station,” Bridenstine said in his first extensive interview since being sworn in as NASA administrator in April. “I've talked to many large corporations that are interested in getting involved in that through a consortium, if you will.”

The White House touched off a heated discussion about the future of the orbiting laboratory earlier this year when it said it planned to end direct government funding of the station by 2025, while working on a transition plan to turn the station over to the private sector.

Some members of Congress said they would vigorously oppose any plan that ends the station's life prematurely. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said the decision to end funding for it was the result of “numskulls” at the Office of Management and Budget.

And it was unclear, who, if anyone, would want to take over operations of the station, which costs NASA about $3 billion to $4 billion a year and is run by an international partnership that includes the United States, Russia, Japan, Canada and the European Space Agency. An orbiting laboratory that flies some 250 miles above the Earth's surface, it has been continuously inhabited by astronauts since 2000.

In unveiling its plan to commercialize the station earlier this year, the White House offered few details of how exactly it would work. As it prepares a transition plan, the White House said it “will request market analysis and business plans from the commercial sector and solicit plans from commercial industry.”

The international nature of the station could make it tricky, though perhaps there could be an international commercial partnership with some sort of a government role, said Frank Slazer, the vice president of space systems for the Aerospace Industries Association.

“It will be very hard to turn ISS into a truly commercial outpost because of the international agreements that the United States is involved in,” he said. “It's inherently always going to be an international construct that requires U.S. government involvement and multinational cooperation.”

Bridenstine declined to name the companies that have expressed interest in managing the station, and said he was aware that companies may find it “hard to close the business case.” But he said there was still seven years to plan for the future of the station, and with the White House's budget request “we have forced the conversation.”

A former congressman from Oklahoma, Bridenstine, was confirmed by the Senate by a narrow 50-to-49 votethis spring, after the post had remained vacant for 15 months. Democrats had rallied against his nomination, saying he lacked the managerial and scientific background for the job.

Many had labeled him a climate-change denier over controversial comments Bridenstine, a conservative Republican, had made in the past.

But during a Senate hearing last month, he said his views had evolved, and that he believes human activity is the leading cause of climate change. That earned him plaudits from Democrats, such as Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) who had opposed his nomination.

“I have come to the conclusion that this is a true evolution,” Schatz said. “That you respect people with whom you work, you respect the science, you want their respect.”

In the interview, Bridenstine said there was no single event that cause him to change his thinking. As chairman of the Environment subcommittee, he said he “listened to a lot of testimony. I heard a lot of experts, and I read a lot. I came to the conclusion myself that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that we've put a lot of it into the atmosphere and therefore we have contributed to the global warming that we've seen. And we've done it in really significant ways.”

In the wide-ranging interview, Bridenstine also listed a return to the moon and the restoration of human spaceflight from United States soil as two of his top priorities. NASA has proposed building an outpost in the vicinity of the moon that could be inhabited by humans from time to time, with landers that could ferry supplies to the lunar surface.

Known as the Lunar Orbiting Platform Gateway, the system would be built by NASA in partnership with industry and its international partners, he said.

“I've met with a lot of leaders of space agencies from around the world,” he said. “There is a lot of interest in the Gateway in the lunar outpost because a lot of countries want to have access to the surface of the moon. And this can help them as well and they can help us. It helps expand the partnership that we've seen in low Earth orbit with the International Space Station.”

But the first element of the system wouldn't be launched until 2021 or 2022, he said.

Perhaps as early as this year, Boeing and SpaceX, the companies hired by NASA to fly its astronauts to the space station, could see their first test flights with people on board, though it's possible they could be delayed to next year.

Since the space shuttle was retired in 2011, Russia has flown NASA's astronauts to the station, charging hundreds of millions of dollars over that time. Bridenstine said that it is “a big objective is to once again launch American astronauts on American rockets from American soil.”

Both Boeing and SpaceX have had delays and setbacks in their programs. Government watchdogs have said they were concerned about an issue with Boeing's abort system that may cause its spacecraft to “tumble,” posing a threat to the crew's safety. Boeing has said it has fixed that problem, as well as a concern with the heat shield that the Government Accountability Office said last year could disconnect “and damage the parachute system.”

John Mulholland, Boeing's commercial crew program manager, told Congress earlier this year that the company's "analyses show that we exceed our requirements for crew safety."

As administrator, Bridenstine and his staff will also have to sign off on SpaceX's decision to fuel its Falcon 9 rocket after the crews are on board -- which some have said could put astronauts at risk. But during a recent NASA safety advisory panel, some members said they thought the procedure could be a “viable option” if adequate safety controls are in place.

SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk told reporters last month that he did not think the fueling process "presents a safety issue for astronauts. But we can adjust our operational procedures to load propellant before the astronauts board. But I really think this is an overblown issue.”

In the interview, Bridenstine said no decision had been made yet about the fueling procedures. “I haven't signed off on anything at this point,” he said. “We're going to make sure we test it every which way you can possibly imagine. And that's underway right now. We're not going to put anybody in any undue risk.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/06/05/nasas-new-administrator-says-hes-talking-to-companies-to-take-over-the-international-space-station/

On the same subject

  • U.S. Navy Commissions Littoral Combat Ship 15 (Billings)

    August 5, 2019 | International, Naval

    U.S. Navy Commissions Littoral Combat Ship 15 (Billings)

    KEY WEST, Fla., Aug. 3, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- The U.S. Navy commissioned USS Billings (LCS 15) – the nation's eighth Freedom-variant Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) – in Key West, Florida. This milestone places the ship, built by the Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) -led team into active service. "Billings was designed to operate and adapt to a rapidly changing environment," said Joe DePietro, vice president of Small Combatants and Ship Systems at Lockheed Martin. "She is equipped and ready for today's threats and easily modifiable to meet the threats we may not even be aware of yet. Our team is confident Billings will be what the Navy needs when the fleet needs it." Unique among combat ships, LCS is designed to complete close-to-shore missions and is a growing and relevant part of the Navy's fleet. It is fast — capable of speeds in excess of 40 knots. It is automated — with the most efficient staffing of any combat ship. It is lethal — standard equipped with Rolling Airframe Missiles (RAM) and a Mark 110 gun, capable of firing 220 rounds per minute. It is flexible — with 40 percent of the hull easily reconfigurable, integrating capabilities like the Longbow Hellfire Missiles, 30mm guns, and manned and unmanned vehicles targeted to meet today's and tomorrow's missions. "Having now commanded two freedom class LCS variants, I would like to report that these ships are truly impressive and will fit well in the niche they have been designed for," said LCS 15's Commanding Officer, Commander Nathan Rowan. "They are fast, maneuverable, and their weapon systems are some of the most accurate I've witnessed on any platform of which I've previously served." There are seven ships in various stages of production and test at Fincantieri Marinette Marine in Wisconsin, where the Freedom-variant LCS is built. The next Freedom-variant in the class is LCS 17, the future USS Indianapolis, which was delivered in late July. "On behalf of the proud 2,000 men and women who transform flat steel into a fast, agile surface combatant," said Jan Allman, CEO of Fincantieri Marinette Marine, "we are honored to support the U.S. Navy, and we congratulate the outstanding crew of the USS Billings." Multimedia assets are available here: Social media video: https://vimeo.com/351803068 B-roll: https://vimeo.com/351805414 Photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143371902@N04/albums/72157710070352016 For more information, visit www.lockheedmartin.com/lcs. https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2019-08-03-U-S-Navy-Commissions-Littoral-Combat-Ship-15-Billings

  • Aerospace & Defense Industry to See Greatest Impact from Artificial Intelligence Compared to Other Key Emerging Technologies, Accenture Report Finds

    June 13, 2019 | International, Aerospace, Security, Other Defence

    Aerospace & Defense Industry to See Greatest Impact from Artificial Intelligence Compared to Other Key Emerging Technologies, Accenture Report Finds

    NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The aerospace and defense (A&D) industry will be more affected by artificial intelligence (AI) than by any other major emerging technology over the next three years, according to Aerospace & Defense Technology Vision 2019, the annual report from Accenture (NYSE: ACN) that predicts key technology trends likely to redefine business. The study also underscores the growing importance of reskilling programs as a competitive lever. AI, comprising technologies that range from machine learning to natural language processing, enables machines to sense, comprehend, act and learn in order to extend human capabilities. One-third (33%) of A&D executives surveyed cited AI as the technology that will have the greatest impact on their organization over the next three years — more than quantum computing, distributed ledger or extended reality. In fact, two-thirds (67%) of A&D executives said they have either adopted AI within their business or are piloting the technology. Benefits of AI for the industry include enabling predictive analytics for maintenance; facilitating smart manufacturing with connected devices that provide real-time information to workers on the shop floor; providing advanced automation that enables the workforce to offload repetitive tasks; and enhancing real-time responses to customer issues and complaints, among others. “AI has the potential to be a major growth driver for the A&D industry,” said John Schmidt, global leader of Accenture's Aerospace & Defense practice. “However, AI technology is advancing faster than the pace at which many companies are adopting it. A&D executives need to find ways to accelerate their adoption of broader AI solutions that can deliver breakthrough outcomes by focusing not just on the technology but also on how they want to transform their workforce and capabilities.” Workforce Reskilling The importance of reskilling the A&D workforce to ensure success within companies is a prominent theme in the report. More than two-thirds (69%) of A&D executives believe that the speed at which members of the workforce move between roles and organizations has increased the need for reskilling in their organization. In addition, two-thirds (67%) of A&D executives believe that more than 40% of their workforce will move into new roles requiring substantial reskilling within three years. AI is both a cause for and a solution to workforce reskilling. For instance, aerospace specialists can now work alongside AI-assisted design technology to quickly cycle through countless design options and test configurations, with intelligent software learning and improving with each iteration. AI will also play a key role in identifying workers' hidden and adjacent skills and will help them reskill and retain displaced workers. “The rapid adoption of AI has triggered urgent calls for reskilling to prepare for a different way of working,” Schmidt said. “The majority of jobs will be reconfigured as people and intelligent machines collaborate. A&D leaders must reimagine the very nature of work and then build the right training to meet that vision.” Data & The Customer The report also notes the growing role of digital data and demographics and their role in the A&D industry. Nearly all (95%) of the A&D executives surveyed expect the amount of data their organization manages about their operators' digital demographics to increase over the next two years, with nearly three-quarters (74%) expecting it to increase either “significantly” or “exponentially.” The increase in available data could prove beneficial for A&D companies. For example, three-quarters (76%) of executives said that digital demographics give their organizations a new way to identify market opportunities for unmet customer needs. “Insights from digital demographics data allow A&D companies to create a new generation of offerings that foster an ongoing, trustworthy relationship with operators,” said Jeff Wheless, research lead for Accenture's Aerospace & Defense practice. “Maintenance solutions can be fine-tuned to an aircraft operator's specific operating environment or enhanced flight planning, which can maximize fuel savings and minimize greenhouse emissions.” About the Methodology Accenture's Aerospace & Defense Technology Vision 2019 report is based on responses from 113 aerospace and defense executives surveyed as part of the Accenture Technology Vision 2019. The research process for Accenture Technology Vision 2019, which is developed annually by the Accenture Labs and Accenture Research, included gathering input from the Technology Vision External Advisory Board, a group comprising more than two dozen experienced individuals from the public and private sectors, academia, venture capital firms and entrepreneurial companies. In addition, the Technology Vision team conducted interviews with technology luminaries and industry experts, as well as with nearly 100 Accenture business leaders. In parallel, Accenture Research conducted a global online survey of 6,672 business and IT executives to capture insights into the adoption of emerging technologies. The survey helped identify the key issues and priorities for technology adoption and investment. Respondents were C-level executives and directors at companies across 27 countries and 20 industries, with the majority having annual revenues greater than US$6 billion. About Accenture Accenture is a leading global professional services company, providing a broad range of services and solutions in strategy, consulting, digital, technology and operations. Combining unmatched experience and specialized skills across more than 40 industries and all business functions — underpinned by the world's largest delivery network — Accenture works at the intersection of business and technology to help clients improve their performance and create sustainable value for their stakeholders. With 477,000 people serving clients in more than 120 countries, Accenture drives innovation to improve the way the world works and lives. Visit us at www.accenture.com. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190613005051/en

  • SECNAV: Ford Issues Due To Cost Cap, Explains Timeline

    November 4, 2019 | International, Naval

    SECNAV: Ford Issues Due To Cost Cap, Explains Timeline

    By Rich Abott | The Secretary of the Navy today said the cost cap on the first Ford-class aircraft carrier helped lead to problems resulting in delays to the advanced weapons elevators (AWEs) and explained the government's issues and changing strategy with the shipbuilder. Secretary of the Navy Richard Spencer said on Wednesday at a Heritage Foundation press roundtable that the Navy and shipbuilder/AWE builder Huntington Ingalls Industries [HII] planned to build a test elevator site, similar to the electromagnetic advanced landing system (EMALS) located in Lakehurst, N.J. The Navy has used Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst to test the General Atomics advanced arresting gear (AAG) and EMALS hundreds of times before testing them on the first new carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78). “Then we had the cost cap come in. And as [HII president and CEO] Mike Petters can say, you know fine, the cost cap comes in and no one builds the land site elevator. We had to cut costs somewhere. Sometimes we're our own worst enemy,” Spencer said. In February, the Navy said it would start building the AWE land-based test site, after the fact, in Philadelphia (Defense Daily, Feb. 20). Spencer said he thinks about it and wonders if anyone was expecting there to be second and third order effects of a cost cap. “You don't get anything for free and you're not going to drive quality by cost cap. We have to start thinking differently when we go to cost control.” Spencer also further illuminated the Navy's work with HII on the elevators. Last week, he strongly criticized the company after delays on the AWEs, saying the Navy's faith and confidence with HII senior management on the project were very low (Defense Daily, Oct. 25). On Monday, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition James Geurts said the Navy-HII team's output on the elevators has been much better in the last few months and he was cautiously optimistic on progress of the Ford elevators (Defense Daily, Oct. 29). Spencer said in fall 2018 the Navy was finalizing the HII elevator plan. The company gave him a chart that said all 11 AWEs would be tested and certified by the end of the planned post-shakedown availability (PSA), which was then planned for July 15. He said HII management reported high confidence of this timeline while Naval Reactors told him due to throttle and bearing issues the PSA would likely be pushed into September or October, “so I had more margin there. Did I feel confident? Completely confident.” Then, in January, Spencer said he made a bet with President Trump that the AWEs would be finished with the PSA or he could be fired (Defense Daily, Jan. 8). Spencer explained this was meant to rally the shipbuilders. “What we weren't seeing down there was the spring in the step of the people on the waterfront, to be very frank with you. It was business as usual. So we said ok, here's a rally point, we're going to commit to this.” However, in May 2019 he said HII management “goes oops, here we are, elevators aren't going to be ready until the end of 2020, possibly 2021. And that's when I went, do they really know what they're doing?” Spencer called that a moment of inflection and called Thomas Fargo, chairman of the board of HII, asking if the board knew what was going on with management “because out trust and confidence on this specific project of the elevators has eroded significantly.” While Spencer said Fargo said yes, there were continued frustrations on the government side. “That's when Hondo [Geurts] and I said let's get a tiger team down there and let's take this over as the general contractor and HII can sub to us. And that's basically what's happened this last 3 months.” Spencer said he went to the president and, after explaining the situation, was told “it's a complex system, keep knocking down the dragons.” When asked if these lessons would apply to future ships, Spencer said the Navy wants to avoid a cost cap for the lead ship in a new class like upcoming guided-missile future frigate, FFG(X). “We have to have an open discussion on first of class. Now, these are proven designs so it's going to be a little different, but we are adjusting it here and there and yes we should expect some hiccups,” he continued. “Expectation management, I think, is key.” Going forward, Spencer argued perhaps the Navy should make requirements for ships more flexible. He compared the Navy's process to the airline industry, which requires an airplane that can fit a certain number of people to transport them a certain amount of miles and has few change orders, then examines the options. However, the government has shrunk the competitive base so far that contractors agree to following requirements but only if the government takes 60 to 100 percent of the risk. “In some cases, you'd love to say should we change requirements to requests? Because if in fact you're a shipbuilder, why should I definitively lock you in if you have better ideas? Where is the flow to say if you want to get here you might want to consider this, which his 80 percent of the solution versus I will drive to 100% of your solution but the cost is going to be up here?” Spencer said he understands it is difficult to change requirements because they serve a definite purpose but wondered at what cost and percent mission capability can the government make a compromise compared to the current inflexibility. Relatedly, Spencer said he has “medium confidence” that a recent $197 million reprogramming request to Congress to fund more Ford fixes will be enough, simply because “first of classes is tough.” “I'd be remiss if I said that was the last, to be very frank. I'd rather have the option to say we're going to come for more than saying no we're capped off now. I feel good on what we're finally learning on the end of this birthing process,” Spencer said. https://www.defensedaily.com/secnav-ford-issues-due-cost-cap-might-need-money/navy-usmc/

All news