Human spaceflight is NASA鈥檚 top priority and must take precedence over science in the agency鈥檚 budget, NASA chief Mike Griffin told a US congressional committee on Thursday.
Griffin defended the agency鈥檚 2007 budget proposal, announced on 6 February, at a hearing before the US House of Representatives鈥� science committee. The $16.8 billion budget includes $5.3 billion for science in 2007 but calls for $3.1 billion in cuts to science programmes by 2010 compared to projections made in the 2006 budget request.
The cuts were made to fund $3 billion to $5 billion in cost overruns to fly the space shuttles until they are retired in 2010. The funding shortfall means several key science missions will be delayed indefinitely.
Advertisement
Science committee chairman Sherwood Boehlert said he was 鈥渆xtremely uneasy鈥� about the budget. 鈥淚t basically cuts or de-emphasises every forward-looking, truly futuristic programme聟to enable us to do what we are already doing or have done before,鈥� he said. 鈥淚f science becomes secondary, if scientists leave the agency, if new missions don鈥檛 keep young researchers going, then it will be hard to leave this pattern.鈥�
Last resort
Griffin countered that the same loss of expertise threatened NASA鈥檚 human spaceflight programme, which had served to define the US as a world 鈥渟uperpower鈥�. He said NASA lost a substantial fraction of skilled engineers during a six-year gap between the end of the Apollo programme in 1975 and the first space shuttle flight in 1981. Letting the human spaceflight programme 鈥渁trophy鈥� after Apollo damaged the agency for three decades, he said.
To prevent similar losses and maintain US leadership in space, he originally set out to minimise the planned gap between the shuttle鈥檚 retirement in 2010 and the launch of its replacement, the Crew Exploration Vehicle in 2014. But cost constraints mean the CEV鈥檚 maiden flight can be brought forward by no more than a year, Griffin said.
鈥淲hen I got to the point that we had taken all the delays we could reasonably take, I delayed some science missions. That was my last alternative,鈥� Griffin said. 鈥淚 believe the human spaceflight portion of our portfolio is the one most in need of nurturing and care right now.鈥�
During the hearing, science committee member Bart Gordon expressed concern over human spaceflight 鈥渃annibalising鈥� other NASA missions in this way. But Griffin pointed out that science had grown from 24% to 32% of NASA鈥檚 overall budget over the last 15 years, carving its extra funding from the human spaceflight programme: 鈥淲hen that was happening, no one complained, though human spaceflight was suffering.鈥� That prompted Gordon to interrupt, emphasising: 鈥淣o one complained.鈥�
鈥淭ouch茅,鈥� Griffin responded. 鈥淚鈥檓 complaining now.鈥�
Race to the Moon
Committee members acknowledged that the $16.8 billion proposed for the space agency by the White House is simply not enough to achieve all of NASA鈥檚 goals. Several said they would consider voting to give the agency more money.
鈥淚鈥檇 be willing to support that as long as any additional money went to the unmanned side of the programme, and as long as the money didn鈥檛 come from other science agencies,鈥� said Boehlert. 鈥淏ut money is not exactly growing on trees around here.鈥�
Alternatively, Gordon suggested delaying some of NASA鈥檚 goals 鈥� such as reaching the Moon by as early as 2018 鈥� to allow it to pursue a broader range of programmes. But other committee members worried that China would then leapfrog ahead of the US in space. 鈥淐hina鈥檚 going to be on the Moon in 2017 鈥� I think that鈥檚 something we ought to be concerned about,鈥� said committee member Ken Calvert. 鈥淭he US must maintain its global position.鈥�
Thursday鈥檚 hearing was probably the first of several that Griffin will attend with the House Science Committee, which will advise the House of Representatives on the president鈥檚 budget request for NASA. Both the House and the Senate must approve the budget request and can change the amount of funding appropriated to NASA or its programmes. Negotiations over the budget are expected to take several months.
