CAPE CANAVERAL—Scott Pace, a respected space policy expert who served during President Donald Trump’s first administration, is calling for a review of heavy-lift launch options for lunar surface and deep space missions after the upcoming Artemis II and III flights using the Space Launch System (SLS).

As the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) prepares for the next missions, Pace believes that assessing alternative options now will ensure that future missions are cost-effective, efficient, and technologically advanced. This evaluation comes at a critical time as the space agency aims to maintain America’s leadership in space exploration and technology.

“The need for a robust and affordable heavy-lift launch capability is undeniable,” said Pace, who served as executive secretary of Trump’s National Space Council from July 2017 to January 2021. “However, a careful assessment of all available options, including both traditional launch vehicles and emerging technologies, is crucial to ensure our continued success in space exploration.”

The Space Launch System has been a cornerstone of NASA’s deep space exploration plans, with its massive lifting capacity designed to transport astronauts and cargo to the Moon and beyond. However, its development has faced significant delays and cost overruns, prompting high-level discussions within the space community.

Eleanor Simmons, a prominent aerospace engineer and former NASA contractor, echoed Pace’s sentiments. “The delay and cost overruns associated with the SLS program have not gone unnoticed,” she explained. “It’s time to explore alternatives that could provide the same or greater capabilities at a lower cost. This doesn’t mean abandoning SLS entirely, but rather considering a more diverse and flexible launch portfolio.”

The Case for Alternative Launch Systems

Pace and other experts argue that in addition to the SLS and the Artemis programme, SpaceX’s Starship and Super Heavy launch systems, as well as possible partnerships with other emerging private space companies, offer viable and cost-effective alternatives. These systems could potentially deliver significant cost savings and more frequent launch schedules, making lunar and deep space missions more feasible and sustainable in the long term. SpaceX has already demonstrated the ability to develop and launch cutting-edge technology on a rapid schedule and with substantial cost savings in its commercial space endeavors, building relationships with NASA since 2006.

The Artemis II and III missions, slated for 2024 and 2025 respectively, are pivotal tests of the SLS and Orion spacecraft. The success of these missions will be crucial in determining NASA’s course for future deep space exploration. A reevaluation of the agency’s launch capabilities following these missions could lead to a more nuanced and balanced approach to space exploration.

Cost Effeciency & Future Space Leadership

Considering the rapid advancements in the private aerospace industry, lawmakers and policymakers should look at leveraging partnerships with private firms, not merely to reduce costs, but to foster technological innovation. By diversifying the launch portfolio, the United States can maintain its leadership in lunar and deep space exploration and ensure the long-term sustainability of space missions. Dominance of space is being challenged by private enterprises, a lesson the USSR must have learned when IBM built the PC in the 1980’s outsourcing innovation and jobs.

The private sector has proven adept at quickly developing advanced systems, as seen with SpaceX’s breakthroughs in reusable rocket technology. These technologies could revolutionize the way NASA conducts its missions, making deep-space exploration more accessible and affordable for future generations.

As policymakers and scientists consider these alternatives, it’s essential to weigh their impact on job markets. The decision could potentially boost jobs in emerging aerospace technologies and keep NASA and aerospace related jobs in the country for many decades, rather than relying heavily on one system and risking delays and budget overruns. This brings freshness and benefits to the domestic economy through co-development and novel IP.