Theyre going to be talking about International Cooperation in space. So youre asking it in very general terms and, of course, with all these agencies oef here, there are already activities going on in cooperation not only on the International Space station but also in other programs so there are bilateral and multilateral agreements. If you ask concretely about gateway, this is another question. And for that, we are looking we are meeting already since now, since two, three years, at least, working on it, and this is more important than just the agreements. The agreements is something which has to follow us, i hope. Jim . Thats right. So, you know, it starts with those of us up here working together to come up with the concepts that we think would work and then it ultimately ends with us taking it back to the Political Leadership of our countries or our organizations. The European Space agency, for example, has to go to its ministerial. Nasa has to go to the United States congress. And so we are working to make sure that at the end of the day, our programs get funded and were so its 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. And so thats what all of us are working on right now. Oh, hello. Im a writer based in the uk. 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 . 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 b l bill, that 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, 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. 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 spend six months responding to the rfp. Then 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 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. And 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 toward that 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 reusab reusable. 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. Esm3 is in the procurement phase. Were trying to from the european side to deliver as early as possible to make it possible. 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 cut out for him, too. Yeah. You bet. Mr. Werner, first, do you use the gateway to land european ast astroyacnauts 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 pane walk and walk moon, if so, whats the timeline . I think theres lots of room on the homoon. 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 on the moon. I dont think we have to duplicate the descent module. We can Work Together, therefore, were in discuss also with nasa we have european astronauts on the surface of the moon. This is, of course, a european intention. This does not mean were 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 additio addition because we need both at the 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. Yeah. 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 efficient way would be Work Together. We will do some parts of the system ourselves. Something we are planning to do for gateway, 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 human humans 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 our capability. Bridenstine. Obviously it was clear the elephant in the room 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. 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 . 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 an appropriations 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 transparticipatran transparent and everybody sees them. When if cot comes to cooperate the International Space station, our relationship is very, very strong, it has been strong and we want to keep it strong. Of course, we would like to extend it even further. All this i think 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. Hi. Irene with aviation week in space technology. For every for all the agencies aside from the United States, im familiar with our position, but what is the balance between requests to continue funding of iss past 2024 with the desire to move into deep space human exploration . And also for mr. Krikalev, whats the status of the launch of the mlm to the iss . Thanks. Yeah, ill let you start. I will start from there. Mlm is going to be launched at the end of next year and beginning of next year its going to be delivered for final test and preparation. As for compromise between iss and the future exploration, for sure, we are not going to abandon lowearth orbit. Were estimating what is the most efficient way to stay on lowearth orbit . And we had several project like free flier modmodules. We have thoughts about separate russianbuilt station, but finally, looking through all different options we found continue what were using now is most efficient, so iss is a great asset. We spend a lot of efforts in the time and expertise to build it together and actually i think its really a remarkable result we have. Not only technically, but organizationally. We learn how to Work Together. How to deal together. And i think at this point, if were going to stay on lowearth orbit, iss is the most efficient way to do that. So but it doesnt prohibit us from field exploration. We are trying to do exploration as much as possible and as i said, we are trying to determine scale of our participation in exploration, but we are going to participate for sure. So we are proposing to im proposing to the Member States in five weeks time what we call a European Exploration Envelope Program and this Program Covers several areas. It covers the iss as well as the gatewa gateway. We dont see its either or. Exactly what sergey is saying, we need both. We need lowearth orbit, microgravity research, for many purposes and, of course, the iss has a geopolitical value which we should not underestimate and, therefore, we believe we should continue that. There will be an end of iss at a certain point, and we are thinking about that as well. First of all, we need lowearth orbit experiments even afterwar afterwards. At the same time, we also need joint activities because the geopolitical value is so high, so, therefore, at this time, we dont see either or but both, and we are looking to the future to see how it develops. Can i Say Something . I think the International Exploration program is not to abandon iss or not to abandon the deal, region, but to expand the boundary of the humankind activity to from real to the whole earth system. The same kind of discussion is happening right now in japan. Between iss and the exploration. But, anyway, the importance, the value, would not change, so we will have to be at the lowearth orbit, but the players will be might be changed because not only government but also many more private sectors will join us. And the other thing is that the iss and beyond iss, anyway, that area can be used for the innovation for the future exploration on earth. On the moon. And i would say, krikalev, did you have Something Else . I should say sergey. I would just add a little bit that iss is an exploration because we have a lot of activities on iss now that is working for exploration. We do some experiments, some tests and thats part of exploration program. I think one thing that all of us on this stage need to be considering all the time is what comes next because i dont think any of us want to see a day when we dont have humans in lowearth orbit, and right now the International Space station is that capability and all of our nations now working together for almost 20 years and maybe some additional partners in the future, weve been able to keep that going. Heres whats important to note, though, and i think jan mentioned this just a few seconds ago, we know it cant last forever. How long can it last . We still dont know. Its looking good right now but we know it cant last forever. We need to be thinking today about what comes next. I think there are two lines of effort that are going to make a big difference. One is industrialized biomedicine. So right now, we, the United States segment, we are using the International Space station i know our partners are as well to work on two specific lines of effort. One is industrialized biomedici biomedicine. The other is advanced materials. So when it comes to compounding of pharmaceuticals or creating immunizations, these are capabilities that will be tra transformational for humankind here on earth. When we talk about creating, right now were trying to prove we can create human tissue on three dimensions on the International Space station on a way you cannot do in the gravity well of earth because the tissue would just go flat. In other words, were trying to prove we can print in 3d human organs on the International Space station. Again, what were 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 in lowearth orbit. The commercialization of habitation of lowearth orbit. That has to be the goal if were going to keep a 1. 0 presence of human habitation in lowearth orb orbit. In order to achieve in order to achieve that, were going to have to have commercial resupply be successful which it already has been. Were going to have to have commercial crew be successful which its about to be. Knocking on wood. Of course, were going to need commercial habitation. Now, nasa will always have a presence in lowearth orbit, but we want to be the customer. We want to be one customer of many customers and we want to have numerous providers that are competing on cost and innovation. And, of course, we want to be there with International Partners and we want our International Partners to also have commercial capabilities in lowearth orbit aswell. So i think theres a robust marketplace. I think were really about three to seven years away from just one cig cabsignificant breakthr that will result in call flows that will be significant enough to have capability after the International Space station but we got to make sure we dont lose sight of the fact we had a gap here in the United States of america after apollo and before space shuttle, we had a gap in human space flight then we had a gap after the shuttle and now before commercial crew. We had gap in our access to space even though weve been able to partner with russia with their soyuz rocket which has proven to be just an amazing capability. So we got to make sure we dont create those graps in the futur. Thats what were working on on our side. Its been suggested you dont need gateway to do a quick launch to the moon. You could use a strategy using a convert converted have you done any analysis on that . And secondly, could you convert the gateway into an earth station a lowearth orbit station . So the second question is, yes, the gateway could certainly be used in lowearth orbit. Theres no question about that. We could have a dozen of them if we wanted to. So theres capability there, and, of course, one of the reasons that we are interested in our International Partners joining us on gateway is maybe there would be an opportunity there in the future as well. Although im not committing to that. Nor am i asking our International Partners to commit to that at this time. Its just an idea out there. So, the answer there would be yes. When we consider what was your first question . Oh, about going direct to the moon rather than using the gateway. So heres the thing. We have the sls rocket, which is, i would say, its on the 5 yard line about to be punt into the end zone. It will be coming out of the facility here at the end of the year. Were going to green run test it. Then heres the thing. It will be qualified for human space flight on day one. Thats a big deal. Qualified, every component every subcomponent. Same with the oryan crew capsule. Qualified for human space flight on day one. The oryan space capsule is now complete. European Service Module is now complete. They are mated and heading up to the Glen Research sensor for testing. So remember what the goal is. The goal is to get humans to the moon in five years. In order to achieve that we need to take advantage of the opportunities that currently exist. Oryan are those capabilities. Now heres the challenge. With the sls rocket, the European Service module, we do not have enough delta v to get into lowlunar orbit and out of lowlunar orbit. We need to find more delta v. We find that at the gateway which is why we accelerated the development of the gateway. The gateway is a command module, a command and Service Module, in orbit around the moon permanently, and what we call a near rectolineal halo orbit, it can stay forever, almost forever, without much power required. Now, that is a distant orbit from the surface of the moon. That means we have to be able to transfer from that distant orbit where its balanced between earths gravity well and the moons gravity well, we have to transfer from the near rectolinear halo orbit to low lunar orbit and land on the move and have to have an assecent module that goes from the surface of the moon back to the gateway. Now, if were going to go fast we need to take advantage of the capabilities that exist and capabilities that are about to exist. Having a humanrated rocket and humanrated spacecraft that can spend 21 days in orbit around the moon, those are unique to the sls rocket and oryan crew capsule. That being said, its also true the gateway brings so much more value than just speed. The key is speed. We need to get there within five years. The gateway is the quickest way to get there. Now, i would argue also that it brings so much more value than that because it has solar electric propulsion. Its maneuverable. It can go to the north pole. It can go to the south pole. It can it can its open architecture. So that International Partners can build on it themselveses with their own landing systems, in fact, astrophysics or other experiments they want to go on the gateway, itself, and the gateway is evolve bl for the eventual mission to mars. All of that is on the gateway. Now, i would also say the open architecture capability is what is an enabler. It is the enabler for commercial and it is the enabler for International Partners that allows all of us to do more than any one of us could do alone. Now, if we were to go and say, hire a private company to go direct to the moon, and that was it, then it would be a closed system for which other partners could not 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. Do we want to go fast . Yes. If it gets us there quickest, can we use it . Yes. In fact, we put that in the Broad Agency Announcement. Its actually in there. The question is, we need it by 2026, we need whatever gets developed to be compatible with the gateway. And thats in the Broad Agency Announcement as well. I will tell you, what we are working on is what is in the interest of the United States of america and the coalition of nations that we are leading, and that is the open architecture system that is the gateway. Aaa systems manager, as well as nasa emeritus, space and rocket center. Were also running a u. S. , canadian, russian, collaborative project on the iss, progress nost prognosis for astronauts. Also were running a okay. Its all about collaboration. We make a distinction between collaboration and cooperation. When partners working together and have the same goal. So my question is a few years ago dr. Steve mcclain, a former canadian astronaut, and thenpresident of the Canadian Space agency, resigned from his position. I was privileged to be a part of his team and would help him and his team to work on the First Canadian russian International Space bilateral Space Exploration treaty to make the International Cooperation true. Having contributed many years, my question is about my question is about what is the current status of the treaty . Tcurrent the current status treaty . [ inaudible ] okay. Yeah. So im not the current status of the treaty between russia and canada . [ inaudible ] okay. Yeah. Im not sure. Okay. Im not sure, either. Okay. Well get back to you on that. Good afternoon. Im from nort. Im also cofounder of the london space network. My question is around with the apol apollo 50th anniversary, the profile of artemis, missions back to the moon, Public Interest has grown vastly. Many and how can citizen startups in deep tech and other such organizations come together to discuss the ethical side of returning to the moon and other areas such as industrialscale manufacturing of this is a wonderful conversation. This conference is amazing. We bring so many people across deep technology and science together, but the ethical side of this conversation is sometimes lacking. Id love to know how we can engage a wider audience around that. Thank you. Thats a good question. So, so heres, i think, the important thing. You mentioned the enthusiasm for artemis. Believe me, i can feel it everywhere i go. The apollo 50th anniversary was off the charts. Who knew how many i was not alive for the apollo 11 moon landing. I wasnt alive for, you know, apollo 17, either, so i dont have any memory of those days. Ive seen the videos and i love them, but ill tell you this. This generation, the new generation that didnt grow up with that is so excited about going back to the moon and now going under the name of apollos twin sister in greek mythology who is the goddess of the moon, now we go with a very diversed highly qualified Astronaut Corps that includes women. Talk about enthusiasm. There is no shortage of it right now, and were thrilled about all of the enthusiasm that were getting. As far as forums where you can go, i would i would encourage you to, i dont know here. Here. Yeah. Youre here. Thats a good point. This is a pretty big forum and we have hundreds of reports here. So we are more technical people, but i know that some other than technical can be discussed on the field of this conference. Thank you. Marcia smith, spacepolicyonline. Com. Id like to turn to robotic Space Exploration and i was wondering if esa and roscosmos could give an update on the Exomars Mission and the likelihood it will launch in 2020, and more broadly, since all the countries have mars projects, either you have spacecraft there or youre planning to send spacecraft, do you and if so how do you coordinate amongst yourselves to see that youre not duplicating each other and youre all working together to advance our knowledge of mars . Sometimes duplication is good for redundancy purpose but this is not what youre asking for, but sometimes its good, sometimes its good, duplication for redundancy as we said it before, lots of our transportation. So its a Good Opportunity to give out a very special message concerning exomars. We forgot about it, but i would like of mars in a soft way. We reached the surface, but 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 a penetration experiment. Yes, it was a penetration experiment, but when elon musk had a trial to land on a platform in the sea and he had some it was and also a failure he said, report unscheduled disassembly, ship is fine, minor repairs, exciting day. Can you imagine what happened when i would have said, rapid unscheduled disassembly. Mars is fine. No repairs. Exciting day. I would be fired. Now, theres truth in what im saying. We need to do risky things. Otherwise we cant go beyond borders. This is what were doing. We got all the data from scaparelli and using it also for the next year for landing a rover on the surface of mars. Exomars has two missions. As you know, the first one is an orbiter, its working perfectly. We get all the information about methane and were exchanging data, for instance, concerning measurement of methane on the surface, so this is already it is not duplicating but its using two measurements to see what is happening with the methane on mars because this is one of the Big Questions concerning life on mars so were now planning to not only planning were working on the exomars 2020 mission which would be launched in summer of next year. Wed like to see if theres life existing on mars and not on the surface because we know there snois nothing, but well drill into the surface of mars and measure, investigate, in about deep depth of about two meters. And, again, this is as a complementary activity to other activities which happened also, inside, curiosity and so on. Yes, were exchanging on a scientific basis. Were exchanging what is done worldwide in order not to do unnecessary duplication, and i really insist on unnecessary duplications because sometimes its good to have duplications. So, and the plan together with our russian colleagues and also nasa is part of exomars with a smaller contribution, brut its a challenge but we are working very hard and still my full hope is that we will have launch in the middle of 2020 and that we get some Great Results afterwards. Sergey, would you like to add something . No, its i would say, marcia i would say, marcia, that pretty much every mission that nasa does on the robotic side, on the Science Mission director side, its always with International Partners. We almost dont ever at this point do anything alone, and thats very positive. We only do that because we work with our partners on what would be in their interests to achieve as we work on whats in our interest to achieve. But also like johann said, regardless, we share all the data. This is scientific knowledge on another world, namely mars. We share it and we share it for free. Yeah. I can even Say Something, also sharing knowledge because we had some issues with the power as you might know, therefore, we have now very clear and open interaction with nasa people to see to clarify this issue. Is this is more than just data exchange. Its also knowledge exchange. Absolutely. And i would also like to you know, he mentioned the rapid unplanned disassembly which i think is a great way of framing it. Thats a unique capability that spacex brings, and its not its unique in a sense that thats not the way nasa traditionally operates. And so the idea that you can rapidly iterate test, basically, the way they do things at spacex, they fly, they test, and they fix. Fly, test, fix. Fly, test, fix. Fly, test, fix. They do it over and over again until they get to a really good solution. Whereas, the way nasa traditionally does things is much slower and more deliberate where we are qualifying every step component and then every component and then putting it together and then by the time the rocket is complete, it is a fully qualified vehicle. Thats a different approach. Neither one of them is right, neither one of them is wrong, but i think what spacex has done is they have not just forced esa to think differently, maybe europe to think differently, they have forced the United States of america to think differently. In a very positive way. Now, again, im not saying that one is right and one is wrong, but the approach is very different. Its much more of a Silicon Valley approach, less of a government approach. And, yet, it works. And were seeing that now with commercial resupply and very shortly i think well see it with commercial crew. What i was trying to get at was, india, the u. S. , japan, russia, europe, sit down together and say what we really need to know about mars is this. Yes. Science exists we can do this the scientists are doing it. The scientists are really their own community, they exchange this information. We just yes. At a working level those conversations are being held all the time. In fact, theyre being held here at this conference. Well be seeing the reports of it here. Every scientific and Robotic Mission is international. Anyway. Thank you. Hi. Kaitlyn with the university of maryland. My question is given the discussion at this conference about how basically theres going to be a lot of space agencies moving toward the moon and mars in the next decade, is there any discussion of an International Agreement or collaboration of some sort that might establish a clear planetary protection standard for spacefaring nations such as the ones on this panel . Please. Please. Can i . Well, for example, jaxa is right now planning a mission not to mars, itself, but to martian moon. And, i mean and that is a Sample Return Mission so that we have to abide by the rule of planetary protection and just recently, we have submitted an idea to clear or make a new rule about the planetary protection from mars martian moon and the forum for that is cosper which is International Forum for scientific i would say of science and that kind of discussion is going on right now. I would add to that, you know, 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, and so we do want to absolutely prevent the harmful contamination of other contamination of other worlds. Its true when we go to mars with humans which we intend to do, when we go mars with humans by definition, there will be contamination. We as humans, well leave our microbes behind. Some people say thats harmful contamination and what we need to figure out ultimately is what contamination is harmful and what contamination is not harmful and i think thats a defending that were going to 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. Hi. I wanted to ask you whether you are discussing possible government financing of the International Space station beyond 2024 . Thank you. Stars 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 iss to the year 2030. And i think theres support for both of those bills. And so now, you know, whether or not they pass, i dont know. Its above my pay grade but i can tell you theres definitely interest in the house and in the senate here in the United States. And the russian side, we also work with technical to see that extension of lifetime of iss is possible on one hand and secondly we work with our government to have approval for future financing of this program. So the same, everyone finance each side themselves. But we, of course, working in agreement to extend the lifetime of the station. One question. Things are going extremely well for the first mission. But what about the human element. Do you have a timeline for the maiden flight and do you consider other option . So, our goal is to have humans landing on the surface of the moon within five years. And so were looking at a date of 2024. That is the objective. And what we have done is weve put out a Broad Agency Announcement to american industry to have them so were not history says that nasa would create thousands and thousands and thousands of requirements, basically design the spacecraft by requirement, and then have industry propose how they are going to achieve that design. That is not how were doing it this time. Were leaving it to industry to share with us how they would like to do it. And we would be interested in what their investment level would be, because we would like the to see a day when they have customers that are not nasa. And so right now were in a black out period on the Broad Agency Announcement as far as who is proposing what but i would say that theres a lot of interest and depending on what comes back from industry, there may be uncrew launches to the moon that would, i should say landers that go to the moon uncrew ahead of the 2024 date. Ill be honest, i dont know. But the key is what our objective is, is to land, you know, the next man and the first woman on the south pole of the moon in 2024. Thats the objective. And until, until, until we so were sticking to that, unless the budgets dont materialize but i think they will materialize. Last question. Ill answer later. Thank you very much. My question is, you touched earlier on the development of nuclear vehicles for future cooperation with the other countries here as well as for your own National Space agencies and im curious where that next generation crew vehicle is in development for cosmos as well as for israel for your first astronauts. Thank you. Me . Yeah. On the crew vehicle, were currently in the design phase. Were capable of carrying three crew. Then bring back, with the landing in the sea. Thats the design. We already completed a study and completed the crew escape. Currently the one which is a compartment manufacturing option is being studied. And were also looking at radius collaboration with other agencies about southeast technical aspects of it and testing is also planned. Test flights for both conditions are scheduled next year. So well be conducting various on board missions using the new rocket. Its currently being readied to conduct four of those missions. Were planning to have the first Unmanned Mission by january december january 2020. So thats the plan for the crew. Thats it. I think, i dont know what you want to know how this operation is going. Its going. We have some joint work with russian industry. And russian industry provide some support for technical decision, so well see how it goes. Okay. One last question and then were done. Thank you. My question is, when do you expect spacex and boeing be ready to fly american astronauts to the iss and if that does not happen in the coming months, will you sign a new agreement, new contract with russia to do that . And is it possible that no american astronauts will be present on the iss next year because of the absence of both contracts and u. S. Spaceships and second part, will you discuss this contract during this congress . Thank you. So, 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. So, i would say that what were doing right now is were 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 theres a lot of testing that has to be done. There is a big difference between operations, when you think about the soyuz rocket, for example its a been in operations for a long time. Its been modified and, of course, a lot of advancements have been made to the soyuz rocket but its a rocket thats been tested, its brent proven and the the launch aboard capabilities have been demonstrated to be very, very successful. And so those are the capabilities that you have when you have an operational program. What were doing with commercial crew is still under development. So theres a number of tests coming up for both contractors boeing and spacex. For boeing we have a test coming up and we have some parachute tests that need to be done and then, of course, we have an uncrewed test to the International Space station that we currently have on the books for december 17th. Now, if all of that is successful, and everything operates within the margins that we have set, then i would say in the first part of next year the boeing solution should be ready. Now that will be an atlas 5 rocket with a star liner crew capsule. Atlas 5 of course being a ula rocket which has proven over time. On the spacex side we still have a static fire test, we have a High Altitude abort test and theyve flown to the International Space station once uncrewed. Of course, they have a number of test for their parachute system as well. So, again, well learn as we go through these tests what the outcomes are and whether or not they are meeting the margins that weve all agreed to on safety. Now as we go through these tests for both boeing and spacex, if they are successful, i would say that in the first part of next year we would be ready to launch american astronauts on these rockets at the first part of next year. Remember what the goal, though, is and i think its important for us to remember. We want to always have an american astronaut on the International Space station, and russia always wants to have a russian cosmonaut 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 soyuz rockets and russian cosmonauts can launching on commercial crew rocket here in the United States. Thats how we maintain a russian presence and an american presence on the International Space station. Even in the case of failure. Thats right. Even in the case of failure. So the partnership, were very hopeful the partnership will continue. Now if commercial crew is not ready in the first part of next year, our american astronaut would end up coming home in october of next year. So, yes, we have not had the discussion yet but people that work in our organizations, have had the discussion about what it would mean if were not ready and how would we have an access to an additional soyuz. Its something were definitely interested in but at that point its over to russia to help us negotiate how were going to achieve that outcome because they have a schedule that they need to maintain as well. But the goal, i think, for both nations is to keep permanent presence of our nationals on the International Space station. To keep station flying. We need both astronauts on both sides of the station to be operational. As important previous contract, previous contract was extended and thats why its already covered until, until midof next year. Until october actually. We hope commercial vehicle will fly at that time because after that we were planning to go back to three russian crew members aboard the station. But if something goes wrong then well see. Okay. Well thank you very much. We finished our time. So thank you all for coming and thanks for being here. Thank you. Thank you. [ applause ] at 5 30 eastern the role of congress in National Security and foreign affairs. Three representatives join the conversation hosted by the nyu school of law. Can you watch that live here on cspan 3 and live online at cspan. Org or listen for free on the cspan radio app. The new cspan survey on voting in elections found 60 of americans want to amend the u. S. Constitution and elect the president by popular vote rather than the electoral college. 38 want to keep the current system. While only a third of republicans support the change, 84 of democrats and nearly twothirds of independents favor the popular vote for president. Americans do not want to change the way votes are counted in most states and localities where the person with the most votes wins even if they do not receive a majority of the votes. This winner takes all system still has the support of 61 of americans. Only 37 want to change to a rank choice system. Such as the one recently introduced in maine in which voters second choice candidates are taken into account if no candidates gates majority of the votes. Support for rank choice systems is strongest amongst independents but still under half among that group. Can you read the full results on these issues and others such as americans views on voting discrimination and voter fraud at cspan. Org. Justice Department Inspector general Michael Horowitz talked about the role of inspector general. He was interviewed by bob woodward at american university
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.