In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Albert 0. Wheelon 1986 was an especially discouraging year for the U.S. space program. It began with the loss of seven brave Americans, followed in quick succession by the failure of a Titan 34D and a Delta. These losses have frustrated every part of the U.S. space program : satellite programs that need to launch can get no clear indication of when they will fly; satellite users are concerned about continuity of service and some are reluctant to begin new programs; the teams that develop space systems face an idle and uncertain future; and U.S. government agencies must now use much of their limited space budget to restore launch systems, with the result that they will have considerably less to invest in satellites themselves. Last year, no sane person would have forecast the state of affairs which exists today. No one would have imagined the blow to public confidence that has resulted from the Challenger explosion. No one would have anticipated the problem for national security created by successive launch failures and our inability to replenish existing systems. No one would have suggested that our few remaining planetary programs would be on indefinite hold. No one would have conceived that our communication satellite industry would face extinction because the government has denied it access to the launch vehicles that only it supplies. On the other hand, this difficult time may offer an extraordinary opportunity to rethink our space program. I believe that great good can come from a serious reexamination. If we think hard about this problem and debate the issues openly, an American space program can emerge which is both stronger and more responsive to our needs than the course we were pursuing last year. In this essay, I will look ahead to suggest how that new program might look. I believe that a major realignment of space and agency priority is required. We must do things that we are not now doing and revise policies that are now hampering our space program. The author would like to thank Cicely Evans Wheelon and John Koehler for valuable discussions of this topic. Albert D. Wheelon is Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Huglies Aircraft Company, Los Angeles, California. International Securzty, Spring 1987(Vol. 11, No. 4) 0 1987by Albert D. Wheelon. 142 "Born Again" Space Program I 143 Launch Vehicles Of necessity, a national debate on space policy must begin with launch vehicles. For more than a decade, we have pursued a national policy of exclusive reliance on the Space Shuttle. NASA insisted that all payloads move to the Shuttle and closed down the production lines for alternative launch vehicles. This exclusive commitment was foolish because it was inevitable that the Shuttle would suffer an accident and when it did, all Shuttles would be grounded for a long time. That inevitability is now upon us. The "Shuttle-only" policy was partially reversed almost three years ago. The U.S. Air Force insisted on developing a larger version of the Titan which would be compatible with the Shuttle. The first of these complimentary expendable launch vehicles (CELVs) will be available in 1988, just as our present Titan inventory is exhausted. Had we not begun the CELV program, our national security program would now be in dire jeopardy. The Air Force took another important step in 1984. It decided to refurbish the Titan 2s that were being removed from ICBM silos and use them to launch small satellites into low earth orbit. Once one moves away from the proposition that the Shuttle should do everything, one is forced to think how best to use it. Since the basic problem is to decide how best to use the reduced fleet, it is necessary to think hard about what the Shuttle does best and what it does uniquely well. The most important application of the Shuttle is to fly missions that cannot be performed by other vehicles. Because it carries people, it can do things no other launch vehicle can do. The capture and return of two communication satellites in 1984 is one example; the repair and restart of Leasat in 1985 is another. We shall find other unique...

pdf

Share