|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 1
On the Space Station Freedom Program (1992)
On the Space Station Freedom Program
On March 30, 1992, Space Studies Board Chair Louis J. Lanzerotti sent
the following letter to Mr. Arnold D. Aldrich, Associate Administrator for Space
Systems Development.
At its February 26-28, 1991, meeting at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the
Space Studies Board was briefed by officials of the Space Station Freedom
program on the results of the congressionally mandated restructuring activity.
The restructured plan and design described at that briefing presented several
areas of significant concern for research utilization of the space station. The
Board articulated these concerns in a letter and attached statement addressed to
Administrator Richard Truly on March 14, 1991. A copy of this letter and
enclosure are appended for your convenient reference.
A year later, at its meeting on February 27, 1992, in Washington, D.C.,
the Board was given an update briefing by Mr. Richard Kohrs and other members
of the Freedom program management team. The Board compared progress in
the program to its previous advice and has summarized its assessment in the
enclosed statement. The life sciences research program envisioned for Space
Station Freedom is essential to achieving an understanding of the performance of
ASSESSMENT
humans in long-duration spaceflight. The enclosed statement notes that the
inclusion of provisions for the centrifuge and related life sciences equipment in
the baseline plan is a welcome development. The statement goes on, however,
to elucidate several areas of continuing concern.
This past year has been marked by clear improvement in communications
between the Space Station Freedom program and the Board; we look forward to
continuing and expanding this dialogue in the coming year.
Assessment
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/freedom92ltr.htm (1 of 2) [6/18/2004 11:24:16 AM]
OCR for page 2
On the Space Station Freedom Program (1992)--Assessment
On the Space Station Freedom Program
Space Studies Board Assessment
of the Space Station Freedom Program
The Space Studies Board was briefed by representatives of the Space
Station Freedom program on February 27, 1992. This briefing and subsequent
discussion focused on space station planning and design for science utilization.
In March 1991, the Board issued a statement1 questioning the cost-
effectiveness of the reconfigured Space Station Freedom for microgravity
research and its adequacy for life sciences research. The statement recognized
that there are national considerations other than scientific research for building a
space station. It also noted, however, that a properly equipped and configured
space station is pivotal to the conduct of the life sciences research needed in
advance of long-duration human spaceflight. The Board is gratified that resources
and planning for a 2.5-meter centrifuge and supporting equipment are now
included in the Freedom baseline. According to this baseline, the centrifuge will
be launched in an integrated node in late 1999. The Board was also pleased to
learn that a life scientist, Dr. Robert Phillips, has been appointed as the next chief
scientist of the Freedom program.
LETTER
Both the Space Science Board2 and the Advisory Committee on the
Future of the U.S. Space Program3 have recommended that life sciences
research should be the primary scientific use for an Earth-orbiting space station.
In this regard, the Board notes several areas of continuing concern. These
include the following:
As articulated in the Board's March 1991 statement: the small crew
size at Permanently Manned Capability (four members, of which only two will be
available to conduct research); uncertain adequacy of power, supporting
equipment, and space; and the delay until the early 2000s in accomplishing life
sciences research that is essential prior to long-duration human spaceflight;
The vulnerability of the schedule for installation of the centrifuge and
for the life sciences research enabled by it. Freedom system design and
assembly planning should give higher priority to making the most direct and rapid
progress possible toward establishing capability for life sciences
research—essential to human space exploration goals—including installation of
the 2.5-meter centrifuge, rather than to maintaining the schedule for station first
element launch and subsequent Man-Tended Capability; and
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/freedom92report.htm (1 of 3) [6/18/2004 11:24:46 AM]
OCR for page 3
On the Space Station Freedom Program (1992)--Assessment
The tenuous programmatic linkage between Freedom program
planning and human space exploration requirements, particularly in the area of
life sciences research. NASA should establish a clear, long-term plan for
Freedom's utilization for life sciences research. This planning should address the
impact of microgravity and of psychosocial factors on humans in transit between
Earth and Mars; the design, test, and critical evaluation of applicable mitigation
measures; and the consequences of fractional gravity as a working environment
both in transit and on the surfaces of the Moon and Mars.
1"SpaceStudies Board Position on Proposed Redesign of Space Station
Freedom," Space Studies Board, Washington, D.C., March 14, 1991.
2"Space Science Board Assessment of the Scientific Value of a Space Station"
and letter to NASA Administrator James Beggs, Space Science Board,
Washington, D.C., September 9, 1983. See also: Space Studies Board,
testimony to U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space,
May 10, 1990; and Toward a New Era in Space—Realigning Policies to New
Realities—Recommendations for President-Elect George Bush, Committee on
Space Policy of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of
Engineering, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1988.
3Report of the Advisory Committee on the Future of the U.S. Space Program,
Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,
December 1990.
Letter
Last update 8/22/00 at 11:42 am
Site managed by Anne Simmons, Space Studies Board
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/freedom92report.htm (2 of 3) [6/18/2004 11:24:46 AM]
