Transcripts For CSPAN Space Agency Leaders At Annual Interna

Transcripts For CSPAN Space Agency Leaders At Annual International Astronautical Congress 20240713

Ok. Welcome, everybody. Thank you for being here. You heard the statements already, so the floor is yours and you can ask all of the questions you want. Please, raise your hand and tell , andur name and your media if you have a specific speaker he would like to answer your question. Thank you. I would like to start with administrator bridenstine. Everyone talks about the importance of exploration but words get transformed into concrete action like an extension of the iga, bilateral agreements, or something binding that gets the various agencies working together. I try to enter what your asking for. You are asking, in general terms, and with all of these agencies, there are already activities going on in corporations, not only in the International Space station, but also in other programs of the bilateral and multilateral agreements. If you ask concretely about the gateway, this is another question for. That we are looking for is more for this to be more important. The agreement has to follow us, i hope. It starts with those of us working together to come up with concepts we think would work, and it ultimately ends with us taking it back to the Political Leadership of our countryiwa or Organization Countries or organizations. European space agency has to go ough an ministerial through its ministerial. Nasa has to go to the United States congress. So we are working to make sure that at the end of the day, our programs get funded and were so its kind of like a jigsaw puzzle. It takes some time to put it together, but all the pieces will come together. We just have to continue to work on it until they all come together. So thats what all of us working on right now. Oh, hello. Im a writer based in the u. K. My name is rupia singh. I have two questions. The first one for administrator bridenstine. I was so impressed and pleased and surprised to hear the announcement of u. S. Going back to the moon and landing on the surface by 2024. At the time, i thought, thats a tough call. Since then, ive been really impressed with what youve done in engaging the private sector and other International Partners and im a bit more hopeful that that will happen. So, question about how thats progressing, particularly on the funding. Are you getting all the support and the budget at the rate you need to hit that goal . Mr. Bridenstine we are confident that were going to get the resources necessary to achieve the end state. Right now, were operating under a very shortterm continuing resolution, as the house has passed a nasa appropriation bill that is very good, by the way. It increases nasas budget. Now, they passed that bill the same week that nasa announced that we would like to we amended our budget requests so that we could go to the moon in an accelerated fashion. So they passed their bill or they marked it up in committee the very week that we asked for the amended budget request. The senate has now marked up a bill thats very positive for an accelerated path to the moon. Its not everything that we asked for, but what we need to do is we need to get those two bills to agree in what we call conference, and not just agree with each other, but agree at the funding level that is necessary to accomplish the moon landing. So, i think i think we are capable of getting the budget that is necessary. Im confident that it will happen. I would also say that, as you mentioned, you know, one of the challenges with the timeline is not just budgetary. Its also process. And, the historical way by which nasa goes about acquiring these capabilities takes a long time. We put out an rfi. That takes six months. Industry spends six months responding to the rfi. We spend six months putting out an rfp. Industry spends six months responding to the rfp. Then we spend six months doing a source selection and industry spends a couple of years protesting the source selection. And, at the end of the day, we spend three years before we get under contract. I dont know. I mean, you guys can do the math. Its a long time. And when we go fast, what that means is we got to do things differently. So, instead of nasa purchasing, owning and operating the hardware, what were looking at doing is buying the service to get from the gateway down to the surface of the moon then back to the gateway. And, that is what we have put out in what we call a Broad Agency Announcement. A baa. And, right now, were in a blackout period about how those proposals are coming back, but i can tell you this, theres a lot of interest. I think, during the course of this week here at the International Astronautical congress, i think youre going to see a lot of announcements regarding Different Companies and organizations that are interested in going to the surface of the moon. So i think the timeline is still very achievable. I do think that, you know, we need to make sure that the budget is commensurate with the timeline, and were working towardshat every day. And, as we work through it, domestically, were working with our International Partners to get as much International Support as we can, in order to achieve the objective. The goal is to land on the moon within five years, and to be sustainable with by the year 2028. When i say sustainable, thats where the gateway comes in. Its a reusable command module. We want reusable landers that can go back and forth from the surface of the moon to the reusable command module in orbit around the moon, and we need to drive down the cost for the oryan crew capsule, as time goes on, costs will come down. At the end of the day were trying to achieve a sustainable return to the moon where we have People Living and working on another world for long periods of time. Yeah, esm1 is already delivered. Esm2 is in production. Esm3 is in the procurement phase. Were trying to from the european side to deliver as early as possible to it to make it possible. Mr. Bridenstine thats right. On day one, the moon mission is international in nature on day one. We want to expand it from here for sure with more International Partners, but were very excited. And, in fact, as we make this sustainable, were going to need more European Service modules. So jan has his work out for him, too. Yeah. Mr. Bridenstine you bet. Yvon couronne of afp. Mr. Werner, first, do you use the gateway to land european astro astroyachtnauts on the moon . Is this part of the discussion . And some question for the other countries, also, for you, mr. Bridenstine, do you want to see other nonu. S. Astronauts use the gateway but also walk onand walk on the moon, and if so, whats the timeline . Mr. Bridenstine i think theres lots of room on the moon. We need all our International Partners to go with us to the moon. Thats the vision. Thats what were trying to achieve. If we can come to agreements on the contributions of all the nations and how theyre going to be a part of the architecture then certainly i would see that thered be no reason we cant have all of our International Partners with us the moon. I think we do not have to duplicate the descent module to the surface of the moon. We can Work Together, therefore, were in discuss also with nasa so that we have european astronauts on the surface of the moon. This is, of course, a european intention. This does not mean were not starting to build our own human lander. This is is not necessary for that, because its important that we have that we are doing it together. As i said, esm is something which brings us together to the gateway, and then, we are discussing right now how to go down to the surface. There is a plan also to have a european lander, but not for humans at this moment. So, therefore, yes, we want to have europeans on the surface of the moon but in cooperation. In addition, were asking Member States in the space, 19 plus, for robotic landing systems in addition because we need both same time. Can i . Its a simple question to me. Jaxa would like to send a japanese astronaut onto the surface of the moon. So thats it. [laughter] mr. Krikalev for russian program, from the very beginning, we said that our primary goal would be the surface. Thats why we were kind of late joining Gateway Program because we were trying to optimize what is the best trajectory to fly and actually there are advantages and disadvantages of gateway trajectory, but we decided that most efficiqt way efficient way would be Work Together. We would do some parts of the system ourselves. Something we are planning to do for gateway, but even Transportation System which we are going to build is going to be a joint system, and the way we do it now for International Space station, we have several opportunities to send cargo. We, at this point, we have one but in the future, well have several opportunities to send humans in space, and we did it before with shuttle. So, we think like the redundant system, Transportation System, and one of the modules for gateway would be our participation in the program, and the way and how we will do this, we will decide a little later. Coming to india, this is a question of priority. As you know, we need to harness certain capability. We already started our program. Obviously, it was cleared and today was china, judging from all questions that were asked including questions coming over the internet. And their absence, of course, was recognized by everybody and is an important absence. To administrator ride and enstine, thed elephant was china, and their absence was recognized by everybody, and it is an important absence. Its also my question, however, is with regard to the formulation of Vice President of talking, the United States taking the lead together with all the freedomloving nations of the world. Obviously, chinas probably not included in that, but there may be other countries that are not included in that, either. And my question is, isnt this a significant change from how the Space Program has been dealt with by the United States, ever since kennedy when his first his first thought was to Work Together with the soviet union to go to the moon. They refused and we went alone, but ever since then, there was an attempt to use space as a means of bringing countries together, not of separating them. But, the formulations of the Vice President today were pretty strident in many peoples ears and i was wondering, is that a shift in policy now, and what would the United States be willing to work with china on . Have we gone a step further from the wolf amendment now . Were not going to work with them at all on space . Or what does that actually mean . Mr. Bridenstine so your point on the wolf amendment is right on. We are prohibited by law from working with china in a bilateral sense on Space Exploration by the wolf amendment, which every year gets reappropriated in a reappropriations bill. As far as cooperation in space, i think space does represent that unique opportunity to bring nations together that historically dont come together. I would tell you im sharing this stage with russia and there is no doubt, we are aware that we have terrestrial disputes that are very clear and transparent and everybody sees them. But, when it comes to cooperation on the International Space station, our relationship is strong, has been strong, and we want to keep it strong. We would like to extend it even further. All of this is whats unique about space. I would also say 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, you know, how we go about bringing new partners in that ultimately could be more harmful than helpful in the future. And i think thats probably what the Vice President was referencing in his speech today. Im irene with aviation space technology. For all of the agencies, aside from the United States, im familiar with our position, but what is the balance between requests to continue funding past 2024 with the desire to move into deep space, human exploration, and whats the status of the launch of the mlm to the iss . Thanks. Mr. Bridenstine i will let you start. Mlm will be launched at the end of next year , and beginning of next year, it will be delivered. Thats for final test and preparations. Compromise between iss and future exploration, for sure, we are not going to abandon that. Is theestimating what most efficient way to stay in orbit, and we have several projects had several projects like free flyer modules, thought about separate russian built stations, but finally, looking through all different options, we found continuing what we are using now is most efficient, so iss is a great asset. We spend a lot of effort and time and expertise to build it together, and i think it is have,able as a result we not only technically but organizationally. We learned how to Work Together, build together, and at this point, if we are going to stay in earths orbit, iss is the most efficient way to do that, but it doesnt permit. Prevent us from exploration we are trying to do prevent us from exploration. Scale ofying to do the our participation and exploration, but we will participate for sure. Im proposing to the Member States of either, what we call european exploration program, and this program coveralls several areas, the iss is the good way as the gateway. We dont see either or. Sergei says we need both. Research for many purposes, and the iss has a geopolitical value, which we should not underestimate. Therefore, we believe we should continue that. There will be an end to the iss at some point and we are thinking about that as well. We need all, experiments afterwards, but at the same time, we need joint activities. Because the geopolitical value is so high. This time, we dont see either or, but both. We are looking to the future to see how it develops. I think the International Exploration program is not to abandon iss or not to abandon the region but extend human whole system. E the same kind of discussion is happening in japan between the iss and exploration, but anyway, the importance, the value not to change. Be at lower thor bits, but the players might be changed because not only government but also many more private sectors will join us. Issother thing is that the and beyond iss anyway, that area can be used for innovation for the future exploration on earth on the moon. Say,ridenstine i would did you have Something Else . Mr. Krikalev i want to add a little bit. Because wexploration have a lot of activities on iss now that are working for exploration. We do some experiments, some tests, as part of the exploration program. Mr. Bridenstine one thing all of us on this stage need to be considering all the time is what comes next. I dont think any of us want to see a day where we dont have humans in low earth orbit. Right now, the iss is that capability, and all of our nations working together for almost 20 years, and may be additional partners in the future, we have been able to keep that going. Here is whats important to someoned i think mentioned that a few minutes ago. It cant last forever. How long it will last, we dont know, but it is looking good right now. We need to be thinking about what comes next. There are two lines of effort that will make a difference, one is industrialized biomedicine. Right now, the United States segment is using the International Space station, and i know our partners are as well, to work on two specific lines of effort. One is industrialized ill medicine and the other is advanced material. When it comes to Compounding Pharmaceuticals or greeting immunizations, these are capabilities that are transformational for humankind on earth. Right now, we are trying to prove we can create human tissue in three dimensions on the International Space station in a way you cant do in the gravity well on earth, because the tissue would go flat. We are trying to prove we can print, in 3d, human organs on the International Space station. What we are trying to do is use the International Space station for those transformational capabilities on earth that ultimately result in capital flows going into habitation in low earth orbit. The commercialization of habitation of low earth orbit, that has to be the goal if we are to keep a 1. 0 presence of human habitation in low earth orbit. In order to achieve that, we will have to have commercial resupply be successful, which it has been. We will have to have commercial crew be successful, which is it it is about to be. Of course, we will need commercial habitation. Nasa will always have a presence in low earth orbit, but we want to be the customer, one customer of many customers, and we want to have numerous providers competing on cost and innovation. We want to be there with International Partners and want our International Partners to have commercial capabilities in lowearth orbit as well. I think there is a robust marketplace, and i think we are about three to seven years away from one significant breakthrough that will result in capital flows that will be agnificant enough to have capability after the International Space station, but we have to make sure we dont lose sight of the fact we had a ga

© 2025 Vimarsana