tv NASA Acting Admin. Lightfoot Harrison Schmitt CSPAN3 April 10, 2018 8:49am-10:04am EDT
companies into what we're trying to do from an industry perspective, that's exactly what we want to do. and i think it's important for us to be part of that domestic policy part of strengthening and securing the nation's industrial base. the other thing we do is we address societal challenges. and i think this is what makes us different. if you think about nasa, it stands for national. so this is where we really come into play where we're different from industry or academia. we have a national need to actually take our technologies and give them out. we want to give them away. we want to engage different communities, whether it's academia, industry. we want them engaged in what we're trying to do as a nation. and i think that's a specific piece we play. and i can give you many examples of technologies that have made their way into different places
around the globe we want to develop and give out and inspire or engage the rest of the world in what we're doing. and then the final piece we bring i think is -- and when i say nasa, we, i mean the entire team. it's all of us. it's the nasa team, it's our industry partners, it's the academia, all the folks involved in this. we really are a spotlight for inspiration and leadership. and i think, you know, we just -- i'm going to steal a story. hopefully i'm not stealing jack's story here. but a young man just walked up to jack a minute ago, and goes, i got a photograph signed when i was 10 years old. and he says i'll always remember that of you on the moon and he said it inspired me to be part of this community. those kind of events don't happen often. and the civilization level, discoveries and knowledge we gain is something nasa can bring, i think, to an overall view, not only for the nation, but for the globe. and i go back to when neil
armstrong and buzz landed on the moon. if you go back and look at above the fold when we had newspapers -- we don't have so many newspapers any more. the headlines were "we did it" all over the world. wasn't nasa, wasn't the u.s., it was the globe. it was a global endeavor that we reached. and i think that leadership and inspiration is so important, because, you know, we live in a time when we talk about what we can't do a lot more than what we can do. and yet this is something we can do. this journey of exploration is something we do on a routine basis. so when we brought all those tenets to the administration, they bought into what we were talking about and accepted those tenets and gave us the charge with this 45-day study and come back with a plan to bring us back to the moon. if you go back in time, you'll see we've been talking about a journey to mars for a while. we didn't give up on mars in this plan. we still have our cornerstone of
the international space station -- i talk with my hands, i apologize, this is the earth and this is the moon. so when we talk about the international space station, it's the cornerstone, our jumping off point. whether it's its technologies we need to take humans further into space or what's happening with the human body and how the human body adapts to the environment and what we're going to do from a perspective as we go further out. and we talk about what we're going to do at mars and what we have always said the decade of the 2020s was a little uncertain. we didn't know exactly what missions we wanted to do, weren't sure what we needed to do. we knew we needed to go around the moon at least and practice. make sure the systems were ready to go. learn from the moon. is there something we can use from the moon, you know, the resources that are there. what can we actually depend on. let's see if we can do that, because it's a lot easier to do at the moon than it is at mars and that's the simple truth of it. so what this budget did for us
is filled in the blanks of the decade of the 2020s and allowed us to still keep an eye on mars. so when you look forward to what we're going to be doing, international space station is our cornerstone. we'll continue to stay there through 2024 and we'll work on what that transition plan getting off of the station as we go forward. because we want to take the investment that we have today and the station and we want to actually use that investment to keep going further and see if we can actually turn that tide. as i say lunar space is so important for us and we're going to do it in several ways. the first is a series of more capable landers. the first will be very small. we'll hopefully use our commercial partners in academia to do that to get back to our scouting -- i call them scouts. they're going to scout the area so we know where we want to go. the second set of landers will build off of those, and can we
prospect the resources there. can we actually get the stuff out of there. jason has been very involved since day one in terms of helping us plan that out and the third lander will build off of that and hopefully take humans down. the cool part about this is while we're doing all of that, you've got to look at the whole infrastructure or the whole architecture we're talking about. we're also going to put in a lunar orbiting platform or gateway. that allows us to take landers potentially from the moon to the gateway. i don't have to launch one every time from the u.s., i can do things back and forth from there which makes the architecture a little more resilient and usable from that standpoint and gives us -- the gateway is also movable. we can move it around the moon and change the inclination to whatever we need to do, if we need to tell or robotically operate stuff on the moon, we can do that. it will not be full-time human presence there, it will be human-tended where people can come and go from that platform and use it as a destination to go there. what's really important to the
next step is the platform actually allows us to potentially come and go to mars from there. it's in a pretty good inclination and orbital mechanics. we think it's an important piece. the whole architecture is important. it's going to take our international partners, u.s. industry, academia, getting folks ready, to come to our work force to get ready to participate in this. but that's the plan. that's the overall architecture we're looking at for human spaceflight. but what's probably unique, at least since i've been in nasa, is this is being worked -- the human spaceflight side of our hugh house and science side of our house and now jim rider are like this, right? they are making sure they're synced up. we're not doing a single mission to the moon that doesn't consider technology, science and the human -- what we need from human perspective. that's pretty exciting. it doesn't mean we're always
going to have one that has all three elements. but we're at least considering them before we even launch. and to me, that's the most important thing we have done in a while. we're very integrated from that standpoint and every one of them could give this same talk. that's a pretty exciting time for us. i haven't seen us do that in the agency for a while. so i think that's clear what we're doing. and we're making progress on the systems we need. so i've been talking about this for a while. i've got -- i've kind of got the -- i call them the seven ps. and so i think the first -- when i talk about these ps, this is what allow us to actually have confidence we're going to accomplish this. we're going to get back to the moon, return to the moon. so when i think about the seven ps, it actually comes out of what we learned from the space council. with the space policy directive one. that gave us our purpose. we have a good purpose. it builds off of the transition authorization act of 2017. there are some things that aren't perfectly aligned, but very close. a lot closer than in the past.
no big major shift. that purpose allows us to say we're going back to the moon and filling in several missions and those missions are going to push us toward ultimately we'll get to the moon and also go to mars. and it's not just human exploration, it's the science, as well. and don't get hung up on the fact that we do -- that it's all lunar science. there's a lot of things you can do from the gateway. a lot of things that aren't lunar science related. and we had a conference in denver that highlighted that. once people start thinking, you get out of the box and start thinking about the capabilities, it's really amazing what can happen. the second p for me is policy. again, we were able to have a policy directive from the president. we were able to have the transition authorization act from congress. again, we continue to see almost a perfect storm of getting those kind of things in place. the next one is progress. we're making a lot of progress.
the international space station continues to be this great jumping off point for us for learning about what's happening to people, what happened to technologies, things we need to do. our commercial partners, are doing -- making great progress on supplying the international space station and hopefully in the next year we'll have our first flights of humans on those commercial capabilities, as well. meantime, space launch system in orion continue to make progress. we're making great progress on our power propulsion element, which is going to be the if first piece of the gateway going forward. so it's really exciting to see the progress that's being made to actually do this. and i think just opening up the appearer tour in terms of what can happen in the decade of the 2020s. the next p for me is our people. and that's you guys in this room as well as our nasa team and your teams at home. the people are ready to do this. they're excited. i can tell you, i haven't seen
morale as high as i've seen it in a long time in the agency. and it's fun to see folks and they love to show you what they're doing, what they're working on. it's just amazing. and i think they will be able to do that. and, again, that synergy between bill, thomas and steve and now jim rider is just amazing to see what they're doing. and they've got their teams psyched up. and so it's not just -- our budget process and everything we do stove pipes us. it just automatically does it the way the money flows. we're having to really mechanically make sure we're not getting stove piped, and so we've done that -- we have tom cremins, who works for me and in the "a" suite and i've given him the job of strategic alignment. but he's done it. he's keeping these guys synced up and it's fun to watch each of them as they go forward. the next p for me is passion.
not only are people ready to do it, they've got a passion about what they want to do. and i think everybody around here has a passion. and i think there's a huge -- a swell of that. just look at this. just look at this conference, right? i mean, jeff was telling me just this morning, people were wanting to come in here and talk about the return to the moon. i think people are excited about this for a lot of reefbls. first of all, it's not just the moon, it's the next step. we still have the work we're going to do for mars. and when you look at mars, we have some long poles we have to work on. landing, life support systems, radiation protection. we're still going to be working on those, right? we have to be working on those so we can take those next steps. and i've got teams that are well-lined up to do that. wi somewhere deep down inside i'm still an engineer. i guess you could call me a bureaucrat now. but i'm still an engineer and a propulsion guy. and i'm watching things like
additive manufacturing. we're building parts with additive manufacturing and testing them at ridiculous pressures and temperatures and they're surviving. and they're doing great stuff. and these are the kind of game -- i know additive is not new. but the application of it and some of the environments we never would have thought about before is important going forward. the sixth p is -- i think i'm on six. i hope i couldn't lose count here. is partnerships. we are not going to do this by ourselves, right? everything we're going to do from here on out is public/private partnerships. partnerships with academia. it's too big of a job to not have that, and nasa has been at the forefront of how we're going to do partnerships. we've been doing this for a long time. this isn't new to us, but i'm very excited about that as we move forward. the last p, of course, for me is performance. so we've got -- so i like to say the plate is set. right? there's food on that plate. time for us to eat. so we've got to perform, right? we've got to eat the food there in front of us. and we've got to prove we can
perform as an agency and community. i think we've got the support now of the administration, we've got the support of congress. and if we can show we're -- that we can do this, i think we'll have support for a long time. and that's tough when you're in this one-year environment. when you're trying to do multidecadal programs like we're talking about here. but i do think we're okay. can we do this? i absolutely believe we can do this as a team. but the bar is not low. we have set the bar pretty high for what we want to go do. but when i think about it, you know, the reward, you know, that pot of gold at the end of that rainbow is pretty awesome. and something that i think our team is ready to go do. so it's going to be a team of teams, and, you know, it's going to work out just fine. and i think leadership at nasa is ready to jump on this. we're ready to stand on the shoulders of folks like harrison schmitt who got people like me involved in this business. and hopefully inspire the next generation to come on and take
this great mission of explore ration. so thank you for being part of this and thank you for being part of what we want to do as a nation, and frankly as an international community. thanks very much for your time. [ applause ] >> thank you so much, robert. we have about five minutes. and we can take maybe a couple of quick questions, if there are any. and there are a couple of our students with microphones. so if you have any, please raise your hand. yeah. wait a minute. >> i was wondering if you could address a little bit more -- how to ensure the continuity of this project over the next year, the next decade.
>> so from our perspective, the best way to ensure continuity is to have a consistent message and try not to change plans too much. also we need to perform. i think as long as we're performing and making the milestones we say each year and not just focusing on 2028, 2029, i need to focus on 2018, 2019, and '28 and '29 will come. so it's that performance aspect of this. the other piece is just keeping our stakeholders informed of what we're doing and how that plays. so that's our plan going forward. what i found is the performance and hardware beats just about everything else. as long as you're building it and doing it on time, it will be okay. that's what we're trying to do. >> [ inaudible question ]. >> absolutely off the table. we're visiting one next year,
right? >> this year. >> yeah, thank you, jim. i mean, i think right now, yes, we're not planning on taking a human to an asteroid or bringing an asteroid back. but you never know what it's going to do. as i love to say, every one of our science missions, all it does -- while it might answer one question, it opens 20 more. and we'll be in that debate in terms of what we're going to do. i think binu will be a good teaser for us to see if that's something we want to focus on in the future. >> given the usr a's posting here, could you say a word about not only inspiring our next generation, but actively involving, especially the university communities, in plans you see --
>> yeah, we have several efforts we do inside the agency. science has -- i'm going to butcher the name of it, but i know science sponsors several activities. the space technology guys have their research -- research graduate program is probably not the right title so don't get mad at me. and i think in aero naught particulars, throughout the university system, as well. the challenge for us is maintaining that budget as we go through. on the education side, the office continues to try to work with the space grant process. that's the way we try to do that. that gets challenged every year, as you see, but also put back in every year. i'm confident even the hill and the administration recognizes the value of those programs to get the next generation moving. we also frankly depend a lot on our industry partners to help us with this. they are fantastic with what they sponsor at universities and it's important for them, too. they need that work force, just
like we do going forward. so i think that's just -- just keeping the programs going forward and how we can expand them is something we're continually looking at, always trying to do that. one of the things we're really focusing now is trying to make sure our education activities are really aligned with this direction. because if you think, from a nasa perspective, we can have a pretty wide aperture of what we want to do so we're trying to focus it so we get the s.t.e.m. work ready for us in the areas we think we're going to need going forward. that's what we're trying to do. >> thank you so much. >> thank you. [ applause ] thank you. next on the agenda, as those of you saw an earlier version on veteran nor, director general of the international space agency. he's had -- unfortunately for us, in paris busy this week.
volunteered to do a short video of introduction. but he went one better and invited dave parker, who is head of robotics and the human exploration for isa to -- and who is here, as opposed to in paris, to join us and give remarks this morning. they began with british aerospace as a guidance, navigation and control engineer. he was head of that guidance control navigation at mat mattra space, worked with the uk trade and industry for the international space center. continued to lead the uk delegation to isa under his present appointment. and dave graduated from the university of southampton with degrees in aeronautics and
astronautics, including a phd and we welcome you to the podium. [ applause ] >> well, good afternoon, everyone. and, yes, thank you for the invitation to speak. it's great to be here. just before christmas, i was also asked to replace yand's speech at the space policy institute, a dinner event, and immediately beforehand, yand decided he was coming. so i'm just checking he's not going to walk through the door at any moment. [ laughter ] but anyway, i send greetings from him. and let me start with a clear personal statement. sustained human surface exploration will start on the moon. this is personally something i've never had a doubt about. and let me offer you some background and rationale, assisted by the odd slide or two. and that the slides can entertain you if you're not interested in my words so much.
but i'm going to start with an extended quote, or maybe at the end i would like you to think about where the quote comes from and how long ago it was written. so it starts like this. one of the most fundamental human characteristics is a relentless curiosity that drives us to investigate the unknown. throughout our history, we have looked beyond our boundaries to the mysteries that lie beyond. compelled to explore, to understand the news, the world in which we find ourselves, we have spread across continents and oceans, the frozen poles, the deep oceans, the high atmosphere. and with intent determination, we are resolved to explore the moon, mars and maybe beyond. our goal is not a few quick visits, but rather sustained and ultimately self-sufficient human presence. robust science and technology efforts such as the pursuit of
space exploration helps to define nations and their place in the world. the number of countries involved in space exploration is continually growing, and we are interesting a new era of historic significance, in which we will extend human presence beyond us all, but physically and culturally. and the moon will be the first place where humans learn to live and on another celestial body. as a repository of 4 billion years of solar system history and place to observe the earth and its universe, it has great potential. exploration will reveal whether it will allow humans to live off the land. we can test technologies needed for human missions to mars and beyond. now, lunar scientific exploration, and this is a research seminar this afternoon, to some extent, will involve three types of investigations.
science of the moon, science from the moon, science on the moon. science of the moon will help us understand the history of the moon. current theory suggests the moon was created when a body the size of mars struck the young earth, throwing vaporized rock into the target, but theory it is not proof and we need proof. the moon is also an invaluable witness. it has recorded this history more clearly than any other planetary body. for example, did the comets contain the building blocks of life? the answer may be preserved in the pristine surface of the moon. and to make sense of the data of encoded on the moon, we need row
battic exploration and by humans of high skisk interest. science from the moon will take advantage of its radio quiet environment to provide a stable platform for observing the universe. for example, they are interested to see billions of stars billions of years ago. and to do that along high energy astrophysics observatories will be a powerful set of tools for affidav astronomers to the next generation. exposure on the lunar service to low gravity, radiation, dust, micro meteorites and wide ranges in temperature will pose numerous challenges for the engineering scientists. understanding these effects will also enable engineers to develop
materials and design systems for long-term by humans in this hostile environment. to sustain human presence beyond earth, we must learn from science on the moon how to live and work on other celestial bodies. a critical step will be to determine whether we can use the moon's resources. for example, the ability to ex trap material from the lunar soil might provide not only drinkable water and breathable air, but maybe materials and perhaps even raw materials for fuel support spacecraft. another priority will be to build on the experience from the international space station to develop efficient recycling systems, to reduce the use of consumer boards and what we have to take, the logistic supply chain. heir, power, water, so on. this may well bring humanity back here on earth.
and it's incumbent upon us to consider the lunar environment is both fragile and special. we must protect and preserve it even as we explore and use it. and this will be a challenge. but the moon as our claes yost natural space station is the veal place to develop the capability to journey to mars and beyond. compared with a minimum six months for mars, the communications of ten seconds as opposed to minutes. and the development of life support and habitation systems and advanced robots can all be attempted before they go further away. human supporters will use the moon to develop their skills and learn how to prepare their bodies and their minds for the long journey ahead. now, the thing about the moon is it as a strong place in the culture of the people's around the world.
you'll find it represented one way or another. it's the only celestial body familiar with humanity as a place, and in the just a point of light. it's a place moreover that more humans we spoep will as fire to visit in the future. so just as the landings 50 years ago, i believe that lunar exploration in the years to come will continue toin support and enthusiasm and create irrelevant among future generations around this globe. but compared with the early days of lunar exploration, the more sophisticated media -- yes, even the social media of today, will create novel means to relate the interration journey to our people. in this case, children will become the supporters of the huge, as scientists, engineers, teachers.
through virtual presence technologies. people will expect high-definition, 3-d, even holographic tele presence. end of quote. [ laughter ] most of the words i've just spoken were written by team space agency colleagueses around the world. towards the end of 2006. and they form the basis of sustainable expiration, being a challenged no nation could do on its own. it's why the 14 agencies at that time developed the framework for coordination. it's still on the nasa website if you want to go and find it. it focused on explorations within the solar system where we may one day live and work. to elaborate, in an action plan to share the strategies, an effort of individual sensations
so that all can achieve their expirations more effectively and safely. this framework did not propose a single program, but rather recommended a voluntary nonbinding forum which became the nation group. and the third edition, robot, has been published. so go ahead and take a look at that on the website. but about when i was involved in writing the framework, i would have been disappointed we're not already closer to achieving vision but the vision is still there and let's focus on the future. so this is supposed to be an international perspective, so i'll bring an inter perspective from europe. on our side, the first a strategy endorsed at the council administrators at the end of 2014. and the second step has been to
merge the various different human and robot speakerration programs within isa into a single program. so called envelope program. so this we call cunningly the european expiration develop program or e 3-p, and this was agreed at the end of 2016. it's not about moon versus bars or robots versus human eye vision. we aim to maximize the synergies and benefits for science, for society, for the economy and international relations. basically, we have been trying to get our house in order so we can contribute to the original vision of 2007 and the reenergized vision we heard presented by robert lightfoot earlier today. the time feels like it's right. so what's in our own program back in isa? i'm not going to go into great detail. but it has various elements that
are under way. and the key thing is everything we do is an international cooperation and there is no stronger or more important cooperation than the one we have with the united states with nasa. so, of course, we're continuing to work aboard the space station. we continue to do science aboard the space station. the next european contribution, a new instrument to study the upper atmosphere, will be launched by a nasa vehicle next monday on easter monday. so that cooperation continues. we are hard at work, and i should have put a picture showing the latest status of the european service module that will provide the power and propulsion for the orion vehicle to propel it into deep space. we're working on a search for life on mars, so on. but as we are planning our future projects, i want to just mention the ones that are related to the moon as i come towards the end. we're working with our russian
partners on a sequence of missions starting in 2020 with lunar globe and in 2023 with the lunar resource lander. this will use a european precision navigation system, and a european drill and sample analysis system to get below the surface of the south polar regions. and international cooperation. we would hoping to engage and participate in the lunar orbital platform. it's an idea that was developed in the international partnership, and it has great benefits as a way of preparing to reach back down to the surface of the moon with robots and later with humans. again, it has great scientific potential. we had a scientific workshop in europe call for ideas at the end of 2017. a workshop and produced a report with ideas coming out of that. literally 100 ideas put forward by the scientific community.
we're also interested in novel commercial partnerships for lunar exploration, so we have a european ideas in terms of transportation and a phone home service, if you want to get your pay load or our cube sat to lunar orbit. idea is beyond that looking forwards in-city resource utilization. but in this occasion, we again to stimulate the commercial exploration world, isa is interested in buying a ticket to the lunar surface for our pay load rather than building a lander. and also ideas we're working on with japanese and canadian partners on a human lunar precursor, a regional rover that could deploy to the surface of the moon and return samples up to the deep space gateway to create a programmatic linkage between robotic and human exploration. these are all solid projects and concepts we're working on for the future. all of this makes sense in an
international context. so a word about international cooperation. it's in the dna of the european agency, beginning with our founding organizations back in 1962. we have 22 member states, a formal partnership with canada, and bilateral relationships with agencies all around the world. and so how to work an international partnership is something we can bring to the table, i think. and we want to maximize the cooperation between all of the actors that were mentioned in the objective of this workshop this afternoon. government industry, the research community and the international dimension, as well. but also, even private citizens. no one has a unique advantage of knowledge, capability and insight. frankly, there's too much to be done in exploring the moon and beyond for anyone to be excluded. it would be a self-defeating goal. it's the logic why my boss
conceived this notion of the moon village. an open concept to encourage everyone with an interest to contribute their ideas, capabilities and ambitions to the sustainable exploration of the moon. now, some people have misunderstood this, and as i say quite often, i see on news coverage on this side of the olympic as a specific project to build a moon base. it is not. it is not. that's not to say that in my organization the lunar architects have ideas for lunar base. yes, of course, we do. how to use the lunar regular ligament. how to build a lunar facility. but this is not moon village. and i take the opportunity -- it's not as grand either than this 1970s vision. anyone recognize this? does that help? this is not what moon village is
about. moon village is a way of working together. it's exchanging ideas to contribute to a global project, bringing stakeholders together, to share ideas, needs and offers. it's an open concept. it's a concept where the -- everyone could contribute in the -- whatever way is appropriate. it may be a university. it may be a single citizen, as well as space agencies. and i can kind of give you the flavor of what it means by a simple example. yeah. which is suppose different organizations could make contributions to lunar exploration. and equally other organizations have requests, ideas, things they want to do. think of this as a kind of brokering activity. and this is exactly what has happened. there are dozens and dozens of organizations that are now participating in contributing their ideas, their ambitions,
working together. and there is even a moon village association. this initiative should be understood as existing over and above the classical projects carried out by isa. it's not something we spend money on. it's a role of the space agency to bring different players, actors, organizations together. it's the kind of out of the box thinking, which could contribute to the overall goal of lunar exploration and hope something you can take count of in the further deliberations this afternoon. and i say you only need to see the open sessions hosted by the iec to see how this galvanizes creativity in especially young people. and i'm convinced this type of grass roots engagement is something -- is one element, just one element, of what we need to sustain a long-term endeavor, including the return to the moon.
so thank you for your attention. and i look forward to the discussion. [ applause ] again, i think we are -- we have time for a couple of quick questions. and please raise your hand and let our students know, and if you have any. >> stunned them. >> you did. but you clarified a lot of things with the explanation. ah, yes. >> how does brexit affect -- [ inaudible ] [ laughter ] >> you noticed i have an english accent, perhaps, is that it? [ laughter ] important, european space stations and the organization it's like nato or oecd. so the uk continues to be and
will continue to be a strong member of the european space agency, and, in fact, increased contributions to esa. >> thank you so much. >> okay. thank you. [ applause ] thank you, dave. my next job is to introduce somebody who really doesn't need an introduction to this audience. harrison schmitt, who is, of course, a former astronaut on apollo 17. his distinguished career spanned many decades in different positions. geologist, astronaut, a u.s. senator. and a professor. began his career with usgs, as
an astro geologist in arizona. and participated in photo and telescopic mapping of the moon. also he instructed nasa astronauts during their geological field trips. dr. schmitt was selected later as a scientist-astronaut by nasa in 1965 and backup lunar module pilot for apollo 15, and was the module pilot on apollo 17, the last apollo mission. in his first journey into space, in 1972, he was accompanied on that mission by eugene sernin and ronald evans. 1974, he assumed additional duties as nasa's chief of scientist astronauts. subsequently was nasa's assistant administrator for energy programs. and after he left nasa in 1976, was elected to the united states senate from his home state of new mexico and served in the
senate for six years. in 1994, he was appointed as an adjunct professor of engineering at the university of wisconsin and chairman and president of the annapolis center for environmental quality. >> great pleasure and honor. we're very, very happy to have you here, to have harrison schmitt lecture. [ applause ] >> thank you. >> you've attracted quite a crowd. finally get to see everybody. it's a great pleasure to be with you today. let's have a little fun first with the usual -- you've got to be fast. marty -- oh, marty! these are little moon souvenirs.
liam, where are you? oh, i don't know whether i can get it over there or not. whoa! ah! well, anyway. well, i want to first congratulate robert lightfoot, and, of course, the entire nasa team that he has led so well in recent years. i want to remind everybody that that team kept alive the foundations for this return to the moon that we're talking about today. and a remarkable accomplishment, given the political environment that existed during that period of time. but what i would like to do is focus on how we get the job done
now that president trump and vice president pence have provided us with the policy directive in which the united states will, and i quote, will lead the return of humans to the moon for long-term exploration and utilization followed by missions to mars. that's a tall order. implementation of this policy for this country and i think for the free world is geopolitically crucial. it's critical that this be accomplished this geopolitical imperative reaches at least to the national security level for the free world and for the units that forced rapid implementation of apollo. implementation will require a
concentrated focus by the implementers. nasa's current plate of activities i personally am afraid prevents such a complete and unaltered focus. the question then arises, should nasa be radically reorganized or should a new national space exploration agency be created? i prefer the former. either way, the responsible agency should have the sole objective of implementation of the president's space policy directive. the essential ingredients of imitation have been defined i think by the success of apollo after considerable initial difficulties. what was the recipe for this success? there was, of course, the
geopolitical imperative. space leadership by america and the forces of freedom. there was a single-minded focus by nasa. a reservoir of young engineers and still workers. who seemingly worked 16 hour days as near as i can tell, that's what we were doing. there was a necessary base of technology that arose from world war ii from the cold war, and, of course, from many remarkable innovations by nasa and its industrial partners. there was presidential support through four administrations. particularly beginning with the eisenhower administration and bipartisan support of the congress. kennedy provided the articulate leadership to get things started. johnson carried that on.
and nixon did not cancel it as we saw in the previous administration. there were adequate management reserves. literally 100%. some of you know that story. james webb, the second administrator of nasa, asked his engineers, george lowe and chris kraft and others, to give him an estimate of what it would take to put a man on the moon and return him safely to earth. those estimates came in, and those are your dollars. around $8 billion. so jim in his infinite wisdom doubled that when he talked to congress. that gave us the 100% reserve. we didn't know how to do this job at that time, but we at least knew we had the reserve to take care of those unknown unknowns that always arise. and either are taken care of at the time oh are you slipped
schedule. in fact, the space shuttle almost didn't get to first launch as a consequence of that problem. but that's another story, one which i dealt with in the united states senate for a while. we will has tough, confident, discipline and management basically at all levels. that was able to keep going through the apollo 1 fire. the apollo 13 crisis and all the apolitical affairs. there was a minimally layered decision-making process to correct a problem or enhance a mission, to move rapidly to a decision. and i in my own experience saw that happen overnight on many occasions. it was a strong car of nasa engineering expertise.
doug remembers what that was like. that engineering expertise gave billers at least two options to consider when problems arose. one from industry and one from their own car of engineers. there were strong, capable, commercial contractor and supplier teams. but very important qualification, nasa controlled development and manufacture of all items in the critical path to success. and i emphasize that. in the critical path to success. international participation in those early days was encouraged. but only for science experiments and lunar sample analysis there was a working environment of liberty. you can't measure its importance, but i think it was extraordinary importance. no one with whom i worked feltin
hinted in speaking up at any time from preliminary design revaus to critical design reviews, to tests, simulation and flight operations. because this new presidential initiative will span future generations, there are, however, several necessary additions beyond apollo to the management environment that will be required to implement the new directive. the agency must be maintain an average of less than about 30. you will note some ages will about 30. at the time of apollo 13, cries geez -- jean krans investigated the average age of those in
mission control, and this extends to the 450,000 americans and others working on apollo. the average age was about 26 years. anyone in here than 26 we go. well, when i talk to students in universities i remind them that they're just about at that age and they better get to work. now the military, such as the nuclear navy, which is a good example, maintains that low age -- average age so modification of civil service rules for national security programs has a long precedent. realistic cost estimates with a significant management reserve probably of about 30% is also going to be needed. i say 30% rather than 100% because i think we're a little bit smarter. but those reserves should be carried at least through critical design review.
and they need to be provided in the implementation budget. nothing destroys schedules more than an unknown unknown without a reserve to take care of it. these protect the milestones from unanticipated hardware and software challenges and those unknown unknowns, the unk-unks that always appear. now, the space council, the omb and congress must advocate and protect those reserves. they are essential if we're going to continue political support for a program such has been proposed. the traditional roles of the private sector in deep space exploration should continue. these are the roles of independent study and as prime contractors and suppliers of computational and hardware capabilities. they must meet the risk
management requirements demanded by a national program but without undo emphasis on the potential adverse consequences of going forward. a new role of truly commercial entities -- and i say truly commercial entities -- would be to shoulder the load of space activities that are not directly related to a political commitment to deep space exploration. in addition to traditional roles in commercial satellite communications, these new activities would include, i think, terrestrial science, environmental monitoring and space station supply and i think the space station supply should continue indefinitely, we'll just see how that goes. special and private entities also may lead to planetary pioneering, planetary base supply and space resource production at settlement.
international participation should be encouraged relative to science and engineering payloads and experiments, however no international hardware in my opinion, software or approvals should be in a critical path to success. what needs to happen to guarantee the implementation of the president's space policy directive? well, we either transfer all unrelated nasa programs and projects to other agencies and recreate the management efficiency, the management environment of the "apollo" program or we create a new agency to do that. model after nasa of 1969. as a note of proof that focus brings results, between september of 196 and november of 1969, that's "apollo" 7 through
"apollo" 12 beginning 50 years ago this year, nasa and its contractors and suppliers and 450,000 young men and women, mostly in their 20s launched a saturn 5 class mission every two months. thank you, i'd be happy to take any questions. >> we have again a few minutes for questions and. >> reporter: the current age of civil servants in the agency is 47 to 48 so my question to you is. [ inaudible question ]
how does nasa or another agency recruit and retain young people that seem to want to seek gratificati gratification. >> well, i guess my first thought is that you won't have any problem doing that if you push forward and get this program going. my experience in the universities and the high schools is that the jung people will flock to nasa. nasa -- talk to a -- to bob cabana about hiring people. he has young people clamoring to work for nasa. i asked him that specific question. how do you compete with spacex and blue origin and others, he said, i don't have a problem. as long as we're doing things, i don't have a problem and as long as we're doing things successfully i don't have a problem. so i don't think that's an issue. there will be some young people who go off and do other things, but the reservoir of talent and
enthusiasm and motivation i don't think has changed very much over time. at least in the engineering community and the scientific communities that i've been working with over the last 45 years. any other questions? >> doctor schmih schmitt, do yo there's any chance of china with its aggressive moon mission program by a possible geopolitical focus or do you think they'll become an international partner and thank you very much, sir, for your service and your missions. >> well, thank you, and that is the geopolitical imperative about which i speak. primarily china. everything that i'm aware of -- and i hope there are people in this town aware of a lot more than i'm aware of -- indicates
that the situation right now is very comparable to the one that we faced in 1960 and '61. by the way, i don't know how many of you are aware, and the reason i included eisenhower in this is because he was president at the time of the formation of nasa with great bipartisan support from lyndon johnson in the senate and mccormick in the house and others. he also in january of 1960, over a year before the kennedy challenge was issues he wrote to the administrator of nasa at the time a personal memo or letter ordering the accelerated development of a superbooster. that became the saturn 5. that gave us over a year lead on the absolute critical enabling
technology for doing what we did in that period of time and ike deserves all the credit in the world for having gotten that program started. >> reporter: how tolerant do you think society is today of this compared to the way it was 50 years ago? >> well, there are indications it's less tolerant. the political world is less tolerance, i think. i think that's safe to say but again i think it has to do with implementation and that if you're being successful, the tolerance for risk increases. that's absolutely i think clear. now we saw with the apollo on fire which some of us inside call the 204 fire with the apollo one fire, with the apollo 13 crisis we saw an erosion of
risk tolerance in the congress and certainly in the white house of that time so we begin to see cancellation of the later missions. three of the apollo originally planned missions were not flown. however, i don't think that was as critical as the fact that beginning in the johnson administration no less, even before neil landed on the moon we limited the buy of saturn 5s to 15. that was a mistake. this future program has to keep the sls or whatever launch vehicle is being planned for the implementation of this program as a long-term indefinite production. one that can be modernized and upgraded with time as new technologies come on, but you need to have that capability in the country, in the world, really, to continue these kinds of activities. one thing i would remind you of,
that during the apollo period, say from about late 1968 through 1972 we did have the cape ability for planetary protection. it was called the saturn 5. and if you want to have that capability indefinitely you need to maintain the industrial base to build these very lorj rockets, capable of 50 to 100 metric tons to translunar injectio injection. >> are we planning to live on the moon? >> oh, i hope we're planning to live on the moon. all the resources are there to do that and as far as i can see, and i've been looking at this for a long time you and your colleagues can certainly anticipate that this is possible
now, whether or not we make it possible is our problem right now but keeping the pressure on us is your problem. [ laughter ] >> thank you, i have one quick question. >> surely. >> the reserves and congress. congress is different, it's organized differently than it was when you served. do you think that with congress and the police ctical establish, that they can be provided to put the money into those reserves if we really move forward with a program such as what you've described? >> well, i think the congress is part of the issue but i think it's also a major issue within the administration. the economy i think does respond to leadership. leadership of the -- and
particularly leadership in the white house and if the -- this program is to be implemented the white house, the president and the vice president as well as the office of management and budget are going to have to realize that the success of the programs are dependent upon having management reserves. the political success as well as the technical success. and so i personally think that it's possible to do that but you have to have the leadership. if you go back to the days of the constellation program, one of the primary failures of constellation was, as bob lightfoot has talked about was the failure to build the momentum so it could survive the change of administration and that happened because of approximately $11 billion being cut from the original requirements for the kops lags program and you could not maintain schedules when you have those kind of cuts. that was a negative reserve
happening so it accelerated the failure of meeting milestones and so that experience should tell this administration, i hope it tell this is administration, scott, faith, are you still here? they wills this administration that the pressure has to be to avoid the tach ral tnatural ten the omb to cut the budgets and to take out those reserves as a way of improving your efficiency ratings or whatever they give in the office of management and budget. that is critical. if you don't have those reserves, this program is going to fail because we know there will be things we don't expect. that much we know. we don't know what they are but we know they will be there. and the only way you handle it is to have these reserves ready for use and implementation. thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. [ applause ] >> we're live on capitol hill as the senate environment and