tv Space Agency Leaders at Annual International Astronautical Congress CSPAN October 25, 2019 6:37pm-7:33pm EDT
space agency leaders from the u.s., russia, india, europe, and japan, came together recently for the international astronautical congress. held in washington dc. they talked about how the international community is collaborating on a number of space projects. this is just on an hour. [background sounds] student welcome everybody and thank you for being here. i imagine the floor is all pictures you can ask all of the questions you want. please raise your hands and tell us your name and your media and then if you have a specific
question. >> start off with the administrator, everybody seems to be on the same page about the importance of cooperation. what do those words get transformed to the concrete actions like an extension of the iga, bilateral agreements or something firm and finding against the various agencies working together. >> i try to answered what you are staying. you are asking very general. all of these agencies over here, they are already activities going on in cooperation. not only the international space station but also other programs, agreements.
if you asked concretely this is another question. for that we are looking our meeting already since now, two or three years at least. this is more important than that just the agreement. the agreement has to follow up i hope. scenic that's right, it starts with those of us up here working together to come up with a concept that we think it would work. it ultimately ends with those taking it back to the political leadership of our countries are our organizations. the european space agency for example has to go to it its administrative yield. nasa has to go to united states congress and so, we are working to make sure that at the end of the day, our programs funded and it is kind of like a jigsaw puzzle. it takes some time to put it together but all of the pieces
will come together. we just have to continue to work on it until they all come together. so that's what all of us are working on right now. >> my name is copia, from the uk. i have two questions. first one for a design, i was so impressed and pleased and surprised to hear the announcement of the u.s. going back to the moon and lending on the surface by 2024. at the time, i thought wow that's a tough call. since then, i am really impressed with what you have done engaging the private sector on international firms. more helpful that that would happen. so the question about how that is progressing. particularly on the funding. are you getting all of the support of the budget at the rate you need to hit that goal. >> we are confident they were going to get the resources necessary to achieve and state. right now, we are operating on a
very short-term continuing resolution is the house has passed an asset appropriation bill. it is very i'm going by the way. it increases nasa's budget. they passed a bill the same week that nasa announced that we would like and we amended our budget request so that we could go to the moon and accelerated fashion. senate passed the bill, the market up in committee very week we asked for the amended budget request. the senate has now marked of a bill that is very positive for an accelerated path to the moon. it's on everything that we asked for, but what we need to do is we need to get those two bills to agree and what we call conference. and i just agree with each other but to grant the funding loophole that is necessary to accomplish the moon landing. so i think we are capable of
getting the budget that is necessary. i am confident that it will happen. i would also see is you mentioned, one of the challenges is with the timeline it's not just budgetary. in his process. the historical way i wish nasa goes about acquiring these capabilities, takes a long time. we put out an rfi that takes six months. industry spent six month responding to the ir i, and we spent six was putting out an rfp and then industry spent six months responding. and we spent six of us source of election, then industry spent a couple of years protesting the source selection. and at the end of the day, we spent three pictures before we get on contract. you guys can do the math. it is a long time. when we go fast, with the means is we better do things differently. so instead of nasa purchasing and operating the hardware, what we are looking at doing is buying service to get from the gateway and the service of the
moon and back to the gateway. that is what we have put out and what we call a broad agency announcement of daa, right now we're in the blackout. period, that's how those proposals are coming back. i can tell you of this, there is a lot of interest. in the course of this week, at the international astronautical congress, i think you are going to see a lot of announcements regarding different companies and organizations that are interested in going to the service of the moon. so i think the timeline is still very achievable. i do think that we need to make sure that the budget is commensurate with the timeline and we are working towards an everyday. is we work through it, the methods we we're working with our international partners to get is much international support is we can, in order to achieve the objectives. the goal is the land of the moon within five years. enemy sustainable by the year
2028. when i see sustainable, that's for the gateway comes in, is the reusable command module. we want you reusable lenders that can go back and forth from the service to the moon and are met around the moon. we need to drive down the cost for the rocket, and capital is time goes on, cost will come down. but at the end of the day we are trying to achieve is the sustainable return to the moon. all we have people leaving working for long periods of time. >> is already delivered, introduction, and the procurement phase. the european side to deliver is early is possible. excellent day one, the moon mission is international in nature on day one. we want to expand here for share with more international partners. we are very excited and in fact is we make the sustainable, going to need more european service modules. so jan has his work out from him is it too.
>> afp. does your opponent use the gateway to land european astronauts on the moon. is this part of the discussion. do you want to see other non-us and surveillance, also on the moon. if so, what is the timeline. >> there is lots of room on the moon and we need all of our international partners to go with us to the moon. that is a vision. that is what we are trying to achieve. if we can come to an agreement on the contribution of all of the nations health they're going to be part of the architecture then certainly i would see that there would be no reason we can't have all of our international partners on the moon with us. >> we do not have to duplicate the dis- modules. we can work really together.
we are in discussion also with nasa so that we have european astronauts on the surface of the moon. europeans intention. but this does not mean that we are starting to build our own human planner. this it's not necessary. it is important that we are doing it together. it can bring us together to the gateway. there is a plan also to have european land but not for a few months at this moment. so yes we want to have your pans on the surface of the moon but incorporation in addition, we are asking our members in the state, for robotic systems in addition. we need both. >> is very simple question for me because the japanese astronauts onto the surface of the moon. [laughter]
>> from the very beginning we said, our school would be the service. that's why we are joining the gateway program because we we're trying to optimize that objective to apply. we decided the most efficient way would be to walk together. systems ourselves, something we are planning to do for gateway but transportation system. we are going to build and is going to be a joy system. the way we do it, for international expectations. we have several opportunities to expand. at this., we have one but in the future several. and then we can send a few months into space.
so we think that another system transportation system, and a lot of modules for gateway, would be our participation in the program. in the way and how we do this, we can do and see for later. >> coming to india, a priority, we need to have the capability. we already have the human spaceflight program. meantime, for the moon, the long term plan to sustain the moon exploration has already been taken up. to alleviate, a question of priority. there is an opportunity for us.
>> obviously it was clear that the elephant in the room today was china. judging from all of the questions that we're asking, including questions coming over the internet. they're asking, recognized by everybody is an important absence. it is also my question, regarding the formulation of vice president, talking united states taking the lead together with all of the freedom loving nations of the world. obviously china is probably not included in that. there may be other countries not included in that either. is this significant change from how the space program has been dealt with by the united states ever since kennedy, when his first thought was to work together with the soviet union go to the moon and they refused. and we went alone. but ever since then, there was an attempt to use space has a
means of bringing countries together. not of separating them. so the formulations of the vice president today we're pretty strident in monday people his ears. i was wondering is that a shift in policy now and what would the united states be wheeling to work with china on. have we gone a step further from that now. or we're not going to work with them at all in space or what does this actually mean. >> your.on the local amendment is right on. we are prohibited by law from working with china in a bilateral sense. on space exploration by the wolf amendment. every year it gets reappropriated. in the reappropriated appropriations bill. is far is cooperation is space, i think that space does represent that unique opportunity to bring states together that normally don't come together. i would tell you that i am sharing the stage with russia. there is no doubt that we are aware that we have terrestrial
disputes and are very clear and transparent. everybody sees them. when it comes to cooperation on the international space station, our relationship is very strong. it has been strong and we want to keep it strong. and of course we would like to extend it even further. so all of this i think is what unique about space. i would also see that when we think about the future, we do need to be careful about things like the theft of intellectual property. we need to be careful about the and how we go about bringing in new partners and that ultimately could be more harmful than helpful in the future. and i think that is probably what the vice president was references in his speech today. >> broadly, i'm vaguely familiar
with the decision. what is the balance between requests to continued funding of iss. pass the 2024 with the desire to then go into deep space. human exploration and also for the status of getting launch of the mln to the iss. thanks. >> emma l will be launched next year. the ba and year will be delivered. therefore, compromise between iss and future expiration. for sure we are not going to abandon. we are estimating what is the
most efficient way to stay in orbit. we had several projects. preflight modules, separate russian built stations but finally we are looking through all different options. we found that continuing what we are using now is most efficient. we spent a lot of effort and time and expertise to build together. actually i think is remarkable development we have. not only technically but we have learned to look to get work together and i think at this., and if we are going to stay in orbit, this is the most efficient way to do that. it doesn't prohibit us from exploration, we are trying to do exploration is much is possible. we are trying to determine the
participation in exploration but we are going to participate for sure. >> i am proposing in five weeks time, and what we call an extermination envelop program. it covers the iss and gateway. we don't see that a desired third or grade is in executive, see we need both. we need the micro research on monday surfaces in the iss is the geopolitical value. therefore we believe we should continue that. there will be an end of iss. we are thinking about that as well. first of all we need, at the same time we need joint activities because the geopolitical is so high. therefore this time we don't see either or but it most, we are
looking to the future to see how it develops. >> i think the internationals base program it's not not abandoned, but to expand the band rio, pine activity from leo to the whole system. the same time, the discussion is happening in japan. it's between iss and expiration. anyway, the importance, will not change. we will have to be at the lower orbit. the players will be changed. or might be changed. not only the government, but also monday more private sectors will join us. and the other thing is that iss
and beyond iss anyway, that area can be used for innovations for the future exploration on the moon. >> i would see, i want to add a little bit in exploration. it is working for exploration. we are doing some experiments on that. >> i think one of us should be considering what comes next. i don't think any of us wants to be a day where we don't have a few months and lower over it. right now the international space station is that capability and all of our nations not working together from our almost 20 years. maybe some additional partners in the future, we have been able to keep that going. here's what's important to note though. was mentioned a few seconds ago.
we know it can't last forever. how long can last. we still don't know. it is looking i'm going right now. but we know it can't last forever. so we need to be thinking today about what comes next. i think there are two lines of efforts that are going to make a big difference. one is industrialized biomedicine. so right now, we the united states segment yard using the international space station, and our partners are as well, to work on two specific lines of effort. one is industrialized biomedicine and the other one is advanced materials. so when it comes to compounding of pharmaceuticals, or creating immunizations, these are capabilities that will transformational for humankind here on earth. when we talk about creating right now, we are trying to prove that we can continue create human tissue in three dimensions on the international space station in a way you cannot do in the gravity on earth. it tissue would just go flat. in other words we are trying to prove that we can continue print
and three d human organs on the international space station. and what we are trying to do is use the international space station for those transformational capabilities here on earth that ultimately result in capital flows going into habitation lower over it. the commercialization of habitations of lowers orbit. that has to be the goal if we are going to give a 1.0 presence of human habitation. in order to achieve that, we're going to have commercial resupply to be successful which it already has been. it is about to be, knocking on wood. in about commercial habitation. now nasdaq, will always have a present and lower orbit but we want to be the customer. we want to be one customer of monday customers. and we want him numerous providers that are competing on cost and innovation. of course want to be there with international partners. and we want them to also have
commercial capabilities and lowers orbit as well. so i think there is a robust market place and i think we are really about three to seven years away. from just one significant breakthrough that will result in capital flows that will be significant enough to have a capability after the an international space station. but we gotta make sure that we don't lose sight of the fact, have a gap year in the united states of america. after apollo into before space shuttle, medigap and human spaceflight. and we had a gap after now before commercial group, medigap in our access to space even though we been able to partner with russia with their rocket, which has proven to be a just an amazing capability. we've got to make sure that we don't create those gaps in the future. that is what we are working on on our side. >> thank you. is you suggested, you do need
ãbwe have the sls rocket which i would say is alma five yard line about to be punched into the end zone coming out of the chute at the facility at the end of the year. we will green run tested and then it will be qualify for human spaceflight on day one. that's a big deal. qualified every component every subcomponent it will be a qualified rocket for human space on day one. same with the orion crew capsule will be qualified for human space flight on day one. european service module is complete they've made it and heading up to the glenn research center for testing. remember what the goal is, the goal is to get humans to the moon within five years. in order to achieve that we need to take advantage of the capability of the current sls and orion are the capabilities. here's the challenge, with the sls rocket european service
module we do not have enough delta v to get into low lunar orbit and out of low lunar orbit.we need to find more energy. where do we find that? we find that at the gateway which is why we've accelerated the development of the gateway. the gateway is a command module a command service module in orbit around the moon permanently and what we call a near rectilinear orbit where can stay forever almost forever without much power required. that's a distant orbit from the surface of the moon. that means we have to be able to transfer from the distant orbit where it's balance between earth's gravity and the moon to transfer from the neural rectilinear orbit to the low lunar orbit. we have to land of the moon and then be able to have an ascent module to go from the service of the moon if we are going to go fast we need to take advantage of the capability that clergy don't currently assist in the capabilities of optics us.
having a human rate of rocket and human rate of spacecraft that can spend 21 days in orbit around the moon all those are capabilities unique to the crew capsule. that being said, it's also true that the gateway brings so much more value than just speed. the key is the speed. we need to get there within five years the gateway is the quickest way to get there. i would argue also that it brings so much more value than that because it has a solar electric propulsion is maneuverable it can go to the north poet can go to the south pole its open architecture so that international partners would build on it themselves with their own planning systems and then even astrophysics missions or other experiments they want to do on the gateway itself and the gateway is available for the eventual mission to mars. all of that of course is resident on the gateway.
the open archer capability is once an enabler.it's enabler for commercial or and enabler for international partners that allow all of us to do more than anyone of us could do alone. if we were to go and say hire a private company to go directly to the moon and that was it then it would be closed system for which other partners cannot join, it would be proprietary and it would not be in the interest of the united states or our international partners. can it be done? yes. if it gets there quickest can we use it? yes. we put that in the broad agency announcement. the question is, we needed by 2026, whatever gets developed to be compatible with the gateway. that's in the broad agency announcement as well. what we are working on is what's in the interest of the united states of america and the coalition of nations we are
leading. that's the open architecture system that is the gateway. [indiscernable] we are running the trust on the u.s. canadian russian collaborative project. also we are running a session on x ieee space conference. it's all about collaboration. we make a distinguish between collaboration. but have the same goals. my question is, sorry, two years ago doctors ãclaim
former canadian astronaut and then president of the canadian space agency resigned from his position. i was privileged to be a part of his team and would help him in his team to welcome the first canadian russian state international space bilateral state coalition treaty to make the ãtrue. my question is about what is the current status of the treaty? >> the current status of what treaty? the current status of the treaty between russian and canada? i'm not sure.
we will get back to you on that. >> good afternoon, my name is ã and from north and also the cofounder of the limited space network. my question is, with the 50th anniversary the profile of artist and gender missions back public interest is ãbwhere and how can citizens start in deepak and other organizations come together to discuss the ethical side of returning to the moon and other areas such as industrial skilled manufacturing. it's a wonderful conversation this conference is amazing. we bring so many people across deep technology and science together that the ethical side of the conversation is sometimes lacking. i love to engage a wide audience around that. >> here's what i think the important thing is, you mentioned the enthusiasm for the. i can feel it everywhere i go.
the apollo 50th anniversary was off the charts. who knew how many, the new generation, i was not alive for the apollo 11 moon landing. i wasn't alive for apollo 17 either. i don't have any memory of those days. i've seen the videos and i love them. but this generation the new generation i didn't grow up with that is so excited about going back to the moon and now going under the name of apollo's twin sister in greek mythology who is the goddess of the moon and now we go with the very diverse highly qualified astronaut corps that includes women. talk about enthusiasm. there is no shortage of it now and we are thrilled about all the enthusiasm we are getting. as far as forums where you can go, i would encourage you to ã
>> we have hundreds of reports here. we are more technical people. i know that some other technical issue can be discussed on the field of this conference. >> thanks. >> marcia smith, ãbi'd like to turn to robotic space exploration. i was wondering if esa ãcould give an update on the mission and the likelihood it would launch in 2020. and since all the countries have mars projects, spacecraft or planning to send spacecraft, do you, and if so, how do you coordinate amongst yourself to see that you're not duplicating each other and all working together to advance our knowledge of mars? >> i start with the very sometimes duplication is good for redundancy but this is not what you're asking for. sometimes it's good. sometimes it's good for
redundancy. it's a good opportunity to give a very special message concerning ãbwe forgot about it but i would like to recall it. you are rally was not 100% successful we did not reach the surface of mars in a soft way. we reached the surface rather hard. this was a very special experience for us also in europe because i got a lot of complaints from public media. it was the penetration experiment. >> yes. when elon musk tried to land on a platform in the sea and it was a failure, he said, ãon schedule the assembly.
should minor remains exciting day. can you imagine what i said what would have happened after schiaparelli. on schedule disassembly. no repairs are fighting days. i would be fired. there is some truth in what i'm saying, we need to do some risky things because otherwise we cannot go beyond borders and this is what we are doing. we got all the data from schiaparelli and using it also for the next year for landing on the surface of mars. the first mission is ãb working perfectly. we got all the information about ãand exchanging data with some naga concerning the management of measuring on the surface. this is already not duplicating but it's using two measurements to see what's happening with ã on mars because this is one of the biggest questions
concerning life on mars. we are working on the 2020 mission. which would be launched in the summer of next year. we know there is nothing but to drill into the surface of mars and measure its investigate in about the deaths of two meters. as a complementary activity to other activities, which happened within side curiosity. yes we are exchanging on the scientific basis we are exchanging what is done worldwide in order not to do unnecessary duplication. sometimes it's good to have duplications. the plan together is our russian colleagues and novice part of the smaller country.
it's a challenge but we are working really hard and still my full hope is that we will have launch in the middle of 2020 and then get some great results afterwards. >> would you like to ask something? >> i would say marcia, pretty much every mission that nasa does on the robotic side on the science mission directorate side is always with international partners. we almost don't ever at this point to anything alone. that's very positive and we do that because we work with partners on what would be in their interest to achieve as we work on what's in our interest to achieve but also like dion said, regardless, we share all the date of this is scientific knowledge on another world, namely mars.we share it for free. >> also sharing knowledge
because we had some issue with the power shoot and therefore we have very clear and open interaction with ãpeople to clarify this issue. this is more than just data exchanges also knowledge exchange. >> i would also like to, he mentioned the rapid unplanned disassembly, which i think is a great way of framing it. that's the unique capability that spacex brings. it's unique in the sense that that's not the way nasa traditionally operates. the idea that you can rapidly innovate the way they do things at spacex they fly, test and sit. who they do it over and over again until they get to a limited solution. whereas the way nasa traditionally does things is
more slower and deliberate where we qualify every subcomponent and component and putting it together and then by the time the rocket is complete it's a fully qualified vehicle. that's a different approach, neither one of them is right, neither one is wrong but i think what spacex has done is not just forced esa to think differently and maybe europe to think differently. they forced the united states of america to think differently in a very positive way. i'm not saying that one is right and what is wrong but the approach is very different. it's much more of a silicon valley approach, less of a government approach. yet it works and we are seeing that now with commercial resupply and very shortly i think we will see with commercial crew. [inaudible question] >> the scientists are doing this. they are their own community
and exchange this information. >> we just provide solutions. [laughter] >> and a working level those conversations are being had all the time. in fact, they are being had at this conference and we will be seeing the reports of it here. >> every scientific and robotic mission is international. >> caitlin with the university of maryland, my question is, given the discussion of this conference about how there's gonna be a lot of space agencies moving toward the moon and mars, is there any discussion of the international agreement. >> for example, genocide right now is planning a mission not to mars itself but to him martian moon. ãb
that's a sample return mission so that we have to abide by the rule of planetary protection. just recently we have submitted the idea to make a new rule about the production from mars the martian moon. the form for that is because bird which is the international forum for scientific of science and that kind of discussion is going on right now. >> i would add to that. the outer space treaty, which we all on this panel have agreed to says that none of us are going to harmfully contaminate another world or celestial body. we do want to absolutely prevent the harmful
contamination of other worlds. it's also true when we go to mars with humans, which we intend to do. when we go to mars with humans by demolition there will be contamination. we as humans we will leave our microbe behind and some people would say that that's harmful contamination and what we need to figure out ultimately is what contamination is harmful and what contamination is not harmful. i think that's the definition we have to work through as each of our agencies put together plans to go to mars because ultimately we all want to go to mars and that would be a significant achievement in the history of humankind. >>. [indiscernable] >> i just want to ask whether you are discussing possible government financing of our international space station beyond 2024?
thank you. >> as far as the united states of america goes, i know there is a bill in the u.s. house and a bill in the united states senate that would extend the iaf as to the year 2030. i think there is support for both of those bills. whether or not they pass, i don't know, it's above my pay grade but i could tell you there's differently interest in the house and the senate here in the united states. >> on the russian side, we also work with technical ãto see that the extension of lifetime ãbwe work with the government to have approval for future financing for the program. the same everyone finance each side themselves. we of course are working in
agreement to extend lifetime of the station. [inaudible question] things are going extremely well for the ãmission. but what about the human lender? do you have a timeline for the maiden flight and you consider other options like ã >> our goal is to have humans landed on the surface of the moon within five years. we are looking at a date of 2024, that is the objective. what we have done is put out a broad agency announcement to american industry to have them ãbhistory says that nasa would create thousands and thousands and thousands of requirements, design 's base
craft by requirement and have industry propose how they can achieve that design. that is not how we are doing at this time we are leaving at industry to share with us how they would like to do it. we would be interested in what their investment level would be because we would like to see a day when they have customers that are not nasa. right now we are in a blackout period on the broad agency announcement as far as who is proposing what. i would say that there is a lot of interest and depending on what comes back from industry, there may be on crude launches to the moon that ãbi should say letters that go to the moon on crude of the head of the 2024 date. i will be honest, i don't know. the key is, what our objectives is is to land the next man in the first woman on the south
pole of the moon in 2024, that's the objective. we are sticking to that unless the budgets don't materialize but i think they will materialize. >> last question. >> i will answer later. >> thank you very much ãbmy question is for ãbhe talked earlier about the development of new crude vehicles for future cooperation with the other countries as well as for your own nationals base session. i wondering where the next generation of vehicle is as well as for israel. >> we are currently in the design stage. we keep adding crew.
[indiscernable] we already completed the study, we also completed ãbcurrently the manufacturing option is being studied. we are also looking at the radius collaboration and cooperation with other identities to acquire other technical aspects of it and also large-scale testing is planned. we will be conducting radius aboard missions reducing the rocket which is currently being ready to conduct four of those aboard missions. we are planning to have the first unmanned mission by december january 2020. using the market.
that's the plan. >> ã [indiscernable] we have some joint work with russian industry and russian industry providing some support with technical decisions. we will see how it goes. >> one last question. >> thank you. my question is for mr. bridenstine, mr. bridenstine, when do you expect spacex to be ready to fly americans to the iss. if that does not happen in the coming months, will you plan a
new contract with russia? and is it possible no american astronauts will be present next year because the absence of both contract and u.s. spaceships. the second part will you discuss this contract during this? >> a couple of things, the first question is, i do believe that in the first part of next year both commercial crew providers will have a successful launch to the international space station. i would say that what we are doing now is being very careful to not set a date for it because if we set the date we want to make sure we can achieve the date but there's a lot of testing that has to be done. there's a big difference between operations, when you think about ãbit's been in
operation for a long time. it's been modified and a lot of advancements have been made to the rocket.it is a rocket that's been tested, it's been proven and the launch aboard capabilities have been demonstrated to be very very successful. those of the capabilities that you have when you have an operational program. what we are doing with commercial crew is still under development. there is a number of tests coming up for both contractors boeing and spacex. for boeing we have a ãbtest coming up and of course we have parachute tests that need to be done. and of course we have an on crude test to the international space station that we currently have on the books for december 17. if all that is successful and everything operates within the margins that we have set, and i would say that in the first
part of next year boeing solution should be ready. that will be an atlas 5 rocket with star liner crew capsule. atlas 5 of course being ul a rocket which is been very well proven over time. on the spacex side we still have antistatic fire test we have a high altitude abort test and they've actually flown to the international space station one time crude. of course they have a number of tests for the parachute system as well. we are going to learn as you go through these tests what the outcomes are and whether or not they are meeting the margins we've all agreed to on safety. as we go through these tests for boeing and spacex, if they are successful i would say in the first part of next year we will be ready to launch american astronauts on these rockets at the first part of next year. remember what the goal is? this is important for us to
remember we want to always have an american astronaut on the international space station in russia always wants to have a russian astronaut on the international space station, what that means is that even when we are successful with commercial crew, we want to see the partnership continue where american astronauts continue to launch on russian rockets and russian cosmonauts can launch on commercial crew rockets here in the united states. that's how we maintain a russian presence and american presence on the international space station. even in the case of failure. that's right. the partnership, we are very hopeful the partnership will continue. if commercial crew is not ready in the first part of next year our american astronaut would end up coming home in october. october of next year. so we have not had the discussion yet but people that work in our organization who had the discussion about what it would mean if we are not
ready and how would we have access to an additional ãb it's something we are definitely interested in. at that point it's going to be over to russia to help us negotiate how we are going to achieve the outcome because they have a schedule they need to maintain as well. the goal acting for both nations is to keep permanent presence of our nationals on the international space station. >> the focus is to keep the stations flying. as for previous contract it was extended. this way until mid of next year until october. and we hold the commercial vehicle to fly at that time because after that we are planning to go back to three russian crewmembers to assemble the station. if something goes wrong then we
will negotiate. >> okay. thank you very much. we reached our time. thank you all for coming and thank you for being here.>> thank you. [applause] >> live tonight, two candidates challenging president trump for the republican nomination. c-span host the conversation with former massachusetts governor bill weld and former south carolina governor and congressman mark sanford. to talk about their plans strategies and why they are running against the president. he will be taking calls tweets and facebook comments part of c-span campaign 2020 coverage live tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.
>> if am a socialist, and really not caring too much about popular opinion or pleasing a consumer. when we socialize things like healthcare, they just say, everybody is going to get it. no longer bankrupt or bills but you have to have rationing. >> monday at 9:00 p.m. eastern on "after words" in his latest book the case against socialism kentucky republican senator rand paul talks about the history of socialism and argues that there is a new threat of socialist thinking on the rise in america. >> is interviewed by republican congressman gates of florida.
>> it seems you are making the argument that a country that's more socialist becomes more selfish. >> i think that's true. it's an irony because they would profess to be everything for someone else to yet in the end. >> secretary of state my pump is ministration in his words inherited a mass in syria. speaking at the heritage foundation secretary pompeo talked about the administration foreign policy in syria, china and iran. >> thank you all. good morning