Tim Furniss/LONDON
NASA'S CHOICE of the Rockwell/Lockheed Martin joint venture United Space Alliance to operate the Space Shuttle privately may be logical, but to many observers concerned about safety, the privatisation plan itself is not. Bryan O'Connor, NASA's chief of the Shuttle programme, is the latest high-ranking agency employee to resign over the issue.
The privatisation is being made to cut costs, to streamline the programme, to improve efficiency and to eliminate unnecessary duplication of work between NASA and contractor employees. "It is in the public interest," says NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin, who is under pressure to produce a space programme as vibrant and successful as that of the Apollo programme, but for much less money and with weaker political support.
NASA must respond to White House demands that it cut its annual $14 billion budget by one-third and shed 27,000 contractor and agency personnel - including more than 3,000 Shuttle-related civil servants - by 2001. The $3.2 billion annual Shuttle operations budget must be reduced to $2.5 billion.
Goldin decided that there was no point in going out to tender for the operator's contract. There was only one logical choice. Rockwell is Shuttle prime contractor and Lockheed Martin processes the vehicle at the Kennedy Space Center, Florida. Together, the companies hold 69% of the dollar value of Shuttle support contracts and share 83% of the Shuttle work.
Although the US Congress has criticised Goldin's sole-source contract negotiations with United Space, the most controversial issue is whether operating the Shuttle fleet privately will jeopardise safety. Many politicians, space-industry workers and Shuttle astronauts fear that the plan will lead to the fragmentation of management and create the commercial pressures which contributed to the Challenger accident ten years ago. O'Connor is particularly upset by the movement of Shuttle programme management from Washington DC to the Johnson Space Center in Houston.
While NASA concedes that another accident is possible - privatisation or not - it believes that the fleet would continue to be flown (Flight International, 15-21 November, 1995). Some politicians and many space observers fear, however, that another mishap would ground the Shuttle and end US manned space flight, which is why they are questioning NASA closely about the United Space plan.
Negotiations with United Space, to be completed by September, will include appropriate incentives to maintain flight safety. "With Lockheed Martin and Rockwell," says Goldin, "we have two experienced companies that clearly understand how to operate the Shuttle safely." The plan will be in operation by 1998, and a full hand-over to United Space as flight-operations contractor will occur in 2000, says NASA, which is determined to make the plan work, with safety the major priority.
James Adamson, a former Shuttle mission-specialist astronaut and United Space's chief operating officer, says that safety will not be pitted against profit. The US Government's priorities are to maintain flight safety first, then meet the launch schedule and improve efficiency, in that order. Safety will take precedence over everything, he says, aware that the loss of a Shuttle would probably end United Space's business.
NASA will effectively be taking the back seat - over 3,000 NASA Shuttle jobs will go at the Kennedy Space Center, following thousands already lost - and the "...keys to the Shuttle handed to industry", says one Kennedy engineer. Removing NASA from day-to-day Shuttle operations "...is the biggest threat to flight safety since the Challenger days", he says. Some astronauts and former Shuttle managers are reportedly "not confident about safety".
NASA insists that it will retain oversight and ownership of the Shuttle. Astronauts and flight directors will be NASA employees, and the organisation will be responsible for safety. Many observers have yet to be convinced that major cost savings will be made, and the implications of the plan are still largely unknown.
United Space foresees eventually buying the Shuttle fleet and operating it outside NASA's control. Commercial satellites and passengers could again ride on Orbiters, the company says. The prospect horrifies many, including O'Connor, who led the Shuttle safety-review programme after the accident.
Source: Flight International
