Incoming: Decisions about Artemis the new NASA Administrator will face

Decisions about Artemis the new NASA Administrator will face

by Dr. Charlie Camarda

and

Homer Hickam

 

 

On Wednesday, April 9, 2025, the Senate will begin its deliberations on the nomination of Jared Isaacman for NASA Administrator, a job for which he is superbly qualified. Not only is he a solid, successful businessman, he has flown twice into space, performed the first extravehicular activity in space by a non-professional astronaut, and pilots a fleet of his own advanced jet aircraft. He definitely knows his way around aerospace. That said, however, Mr. Isaacman will be challenged at the beginning of his tenure by tough decisions concerning the Artemis program meant to send astronauts to the moon and beyond.

 

To take the first step back to the moon with a crew aboard, NASA is presently stacking its second Space Launch System (SLS). a rocket that has a history of long schedule slips and big cost overruns. Besides money and schedule, Artemis now has another problem. During its first and only flight two and a half years ago, the protective heat shield on its Orion capsule unexpectedly lost over 100 large chunks during its fiery plunge into the atmosphere.

 

Orion Heat Shield After Artemis I

 Although a redesign might have been expected, NASA instead sought and gained waivers similar to those that preceded the Challenger and Columbia disasters. Without any further testing or review by external subject matter experts, NASA's plan is to change the reentry profile for Artemis II in the expectation it will avoid a repeat of the heat shield damage. This represents the first of Isaacman's difficult Artemis decisions: (1) to go along with the present plan with crossed fingers or (2) to proceed cautiously by requiring more uncrewed tests or (3) admit that SLS/Orion is no longer viable in the age of DOGE and redesign Artemis to take advantage of the recent advances in both technology and management made in the commercial space industry. We recommend the third choice.

 

Proposing a redesign of Artemis immediately runs into the sunk cost fallacy, a psychological bias to stay the course because so much money and time has already been spent. The new Administrator will surely hear that the crew is well along in training, is willing to fly even with a defective heat shield, and that there is an actual rocket being put together at Kennedy Space Center. To disassemble everything at this juncture, the argument will likely go, would destroy the morale of the entire agency while also tossing aside all the resources already expended. It will be understandably tempting for the new Administrator to continue along the path already mapped out but our recommendation is that he take a different course, one that will, to paraphrase President Kennedy, organize and measure the best of our energies and skills rather than perpetuate the way things were done in the past. This means utilizing the advanced technology and methods of such "new space" companies as SpaceX, Blue Origin, and others. We hope Mr. Isaacman will ask for advice from CEOs Gwynne Shotwell of SpaceX and Dave Limp of Blue Origin and other leaders of up and coming space companies on how their systems might better fulfill the goal of Artemis. That goal, however, is also another decision that needs to be made with more precision.

 

Given the assignment to send astronauts back to the moon late in the first Trump administration and across the Biden administration, neither of which gave it much attention or priority, NASA has fumbled its way into a convoluted lunar landing plan which includes SLS, the Orion capsule, a space station out beyond the moon called Gateway, giant SpaceX Starships that require multiple launches to refuel in space (something never done), and exchanges of the crew from one spacecraft to another and then another. Without a concise Apollo-like goal, Artemis has become a logistical, absurdly expensive, and dangerous nightmare of a plan.

 

We propose instead that the goal be simply this: a small Lunar outpost, much like our South Pole Station, which would provide an anchor for our astronauts and others willing to pay us to stay there to venture forth to explore, accomplish science, and gain resources for the world. It would be designed, constructed, and operated by commercial companies utilizing "new space" assets under the guidance and administration of NASA or a consortium of private and government entities.

 

These are the bold decisions we hope to see from our new Administrator to keep the United States not only a leader in spaceflight but, as the President might appreciate, an efficient developer of off-world real estate to bring prosperity to our country as well as all nations.

 

Dr. Charles Camarda, retired NASA Astronaut, former Director of Engineering at Johnson Spaceflight Center, and author of Mission Out of Control: An Astronaut's Odyssey to fix High-Risk Organizations

 

Homer Hickam, retired NASA Astronaut training manager. best-selling author of Rocket Boys/October Sky, Back to the Moon, and many other books, and now publisher of Homer Hickam Books, an imprint of Headline Books, Inc. www.homerhickam.com