House Approves Space Technology and Commercial Space Bills
WASHINGTON (House Science Committee PR) – Today, the U.S House of Representatives approved two bipartisan space bills that promote the Nation’s leadership in rocket propulsion development and provide licenses for commercial space support vehicles and flights. These bills will ensure America remains a leader in space exploration and development.
The American Leadership in Space Technology and Advanced Rocketry Act, or the ALSTAR Act, (H.R. 5345) was introduced by Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.), vice chairman of the Space Subcommittee. The Commercial Space Support Vehicle Act (H.R. 5346) was introduced by Rep. Bill Posey (R-Fla.), a member of the Space Subcommittee.
H.R. 5345, the American Leadership in Space Technology and Advanced Rocketry Act (ALSTAR Act), designates Marshall Space Flight Center as NASA’s lead center for rocket propulsion and establishes it as essential to sustaining and promoting U.S. leadership in rocket propulsion and supporting the development of next generation rocket propulsion capabilities.
H.R. 5346, the Commercial Space Support Vehicle Act, provides a fair, open, and accessible process for Department of Transportation licenses and experimental permits for commercial space support vehicles.
[House Science Committee] Chairman [Lamar] Smith: “The passage of H.R. 5345 and H.R. 5346 reaffirms our commitment to keeping America the global leader in the growing space economy. These bills will ensure that America stays at the forefront of rocket propulsion technology and assure commercial space support licenses are fairly and transparently available. It is vital we continue to support NASA and our commercial space sector so that we maintain a vibrant space program to inspire generations to come. I thank Vice Chairman Brooks and Rep. Posey for their leadership on these important issues.”
Vice Chairman Brooks: “The Tennessee Valley has a rich history of supporting the space industry and NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, which is why I’m proud to have sponsored the American Leadership in Space Technology and Advanced Rocketry Act (ALSTAR Act). This bill will ensure the long-term stability of the rocket propulsion industry through better coordination and collaboration between all relevant stakeholders. With Marshall leading the charge to explore and develop new rocket propulsion technology in conjunction with its partners, NASA can inspire the next generation to look to the stars and aspire to do the impossible.”
Rep. Posey: “Companies would like to utilize space support vehicles to train crews and spaceflight participants by exposing them to the physiological effects encountered in spaceflight or conduct research in reduced gravity environments. This legislation creates a foundation for more companies to engage in human space flight activities and support commercial space operations. I would like to thank Chairman Lamar Smith, Subcommittee Chairman Brian Babin and my Florida colleague Rep. Al Lawson for their support of this important, bipartisan legislation.”
103 responses to “House Approves Space Technology and Commercial Space Bills”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
What does “essential” mean for Alstar?
For humankind to expand into the solar system Super Heavy Lift Vehicles are required. The “launch it all in little pieces” NewSpace approach has been discredited, even by Musk. Sadly, this small rocket fad, popularized by SpaceX fans and all about promoting the hobby rocket, has wasted years of time and resources besides misinforming the public. The problem is very large engines, which are not suitable for launching satellites, are needed.
Hopefully ALSTAR will identify and address this missing piece of technology.
Alstar just labels Marshall as “essential” it isn’t enforceable
GOODBYE! Leave me alone…..make your own comment.
I did,
>The “launch it all in little pieces” NewSpace approach has been discredited, even by Musk.
The pieces are not so little anymore, but otherwise this is wrong. BFR Mars plan calls for 20-40+ launches for every Mars transfer window, including refueling flights. So Musk has doubled down on “launch it in pieces” paradigm, and correctly so. Distributed lift is the only way to efficiently launch a lot of mass, and you need a lot of mass in orbit (thousands of tons per year) if you want to expand humankind into solar system.
Actually, SHLV’s are the “only” way to efficiently lift a lot of mass. Going to Mars is stupid to start with. Going with chemical energy is a farce. Completely ridiculous.
That so many have been taken in by Musk’s game is a sad commentary on the intelligence of Americans. So wrong.
Efficient SHLVs are the only way to lift a lot of mass efficiently. Too bad SLS is not efficient.
Your definition of efficient, as in cheap, is a fantasy. SpaceX is the oldest con game of all: the appeal to basic human greed. You think you are getting something for next to nothing. You are going to end up with nothing.
Efficient as in ability to get work done with available budgetary resources
Stop spamming me7.
you done yet? because nothing I’ve commented qualifies as spam, this on the other hand…
Stop spamming me8.
SHLVs with high launch rate are the *only* way to lift a lot of mass. SLS does not cut it at all. We will not even match the accomplishments of Apollo, much less exceed them, with such an inefficient rocket.
Chemical is certainly sufficient for cislunar and Mars. Trip times are on the order of few months, which is not an issue. Outer solar system would require much larger spaceships and also nuclear propulsion, but that kind of stuff is many decades away, if not a century.
The SLS is hated and demonized by NewSpace because it competes with the flagship company for tax dollars. Most understand this and the whole death-to-SLS chanting is a waste of breath on me- and maybe now a few others if they have actually been deceived by the propaganda and are reading this. The SLS is just a space shuttle in a different form and will fly for the next 30 years even better than it did the last.
Chemical is actually required in the magnetosphere, which is also cislunar space. But going to Mars with it is not going to work because of dosing and debilitation and other problems. No reason to go to that rock anyway. It is a scam built on childish wish fulfillment. No shortage of that in the NewSpace crowd. Nuclear propulsion is not decades away; Only a few years after a decision. You just wish it so.
No ots hated because it costs more than a system that could do the same job even with DIVH, SpaceX just makes it embarrassing
Stop spamming me6.
Unfortunately, we have a lot more work to do before we can expand into the solar system. Bigger rockets and more launches and even advanced propulsion are not the whole answer. We have to figure out how we are going to live and what we are going to do when we get there. That’s the kind of stuff they’ve been doing on the ISS for years and could probably do for 20 years more. People denigrate the system and the work it does because it only occurs in LEO and it isn’t flashy like a trip to Mars. Just my opinion but I think that anybody foolish enough to book a one way trip to Mars (using anybody’s launcher) would probably end up dead within a few years – or crazy.
I agree. Technologies like closed loop life support systems and mature ISRU will be crucial in any space colony. And you dont even need to go to LEO to develop most of it, it can be done here on Earth. There could even be many applications of the technology here on Earth. The fact that NASA still does not have such programs is quite a disgrace, IMHO.
Yeah, NASA is a disgrace, but SpaceX is all things good.
Typical Musk mob garbage of the worst kind. Congrats.
You have to go to the Moon for the ice and other resources if you want to have a space colony that is self-supporting. Nothing is “unfortunate” or decades away. You just wish it so.
Well apparently you don’t need fully closed loop, however for aquaponics you will need simulated gravity for the trip, only a few microgravity experiments have been done with fish, and evidently they are very sensitive to microgravity, of course that sensitivity could make them useful for extrapolation of the effects of low gravity, though fortunately based on how quickly animals seem to adapt going from microgravity to normal gravity, it is probable almost any amount will be sufficient.
“We have to figure out how we are going to live and what we are going to do when we get there.”
Terry, it is usually up to the emigrants to study up on available knowledge before they settle elsewhere, and we can expect that on Mars. Any family that can pony up Musk’s price of $500,000 for transportation will be doing that for years before they ever leave. Many will do quite well on a frontier, as did the Scotch Irish here, but like the Scotch Irish, they will have a higher percentage of crazies who cannot hack it in the end, and they will provide us our first deaders on Mars, most likely.
BTW, since Musk has to get his BFS ships back to Earth anyway, he has announced that desired return flights will be free. So, no one is buying a one way ticket.
Tom, you cannot seriously compare rich adventurers with immigrants to any place on Earth. Your Scotch-Irish emigrated to a young country with air to breathe. a temperate climate, arable land, game to hunt and fish to catch, and the beginnings of a civilization. Those who go to Mars will have none of that. They will have to create their own air, find and filter their own water, learn to grow enough food in sterile soil for an entire colony (I recommend potatoes since they will make lots of fertilizer,) develop manufacturing, and become their own doctors. Anybody capable of paying half a million dollars for the trip will most likely be doing just fine on Earth and have little to no interest in migrating to Mars to get away from the mess of Earth.
actually a lot would be done first but a lot of the goal will be getting the cost down significantly, one could write off most of it as an advertisement expense however… It wouldn’t exactly be the craziest advertisement scheme ever, maybe the most out of this world, but you’d be surprised
I would agree that a lot would be done first but a “sufficient amount” pushes the horizon for a “Jamestown” on Mars as opposed to a “Roanoke” on Mars back by decades, not years. That, IMO, is the flaw in Musk’s plan to colonize Mars. He may build the best, most useful rocket, but all that solves is the transportation issue. He, like everyone else, needs to wait on advances in radiation shielding, agriculture, habitat construction and probably a few things I haven’t thought of yet. Much can be tested on Earth but the real test will come on the Moon. The Moon obviously is different than Mars but if things work in the airless vacuum of Luna, they should work on Mars.
As for writing off the cost of a Mars ticket as a business expense, I think the IRS may have something to say about that when the business gets audited.
radiation shielding is dirt, habitat is underground, agriculture his brother is doing,
So you’re going to create Martian mole-people. That’s a hell of an incentive to buy a ticket. “Hi Mom! everything is fine here in the bunker.” 🙂
Well underground and regolith bricks, people would go to be a part of history, there are also product placement opportunities to finance it. Using planter walls for food and aesthetics may help it look less like a bunker
The amount you would do first and what I consider relatively sufficient would be water, inflatable/expandable hab, power, basic sewage (arc waste recycling most likely) air, limited manufacturing (varying levels of ISRU some not at all depending on materials processing requirements) and low maintenance farming. Possibly foundation for fuel production, so your basics, though you would need to bring food initially for a while.
” Those who go to Mars will have none of that.”
They will know that, and plan for it, …or die.
“Anybody capable of paying half a million dollars for the trip will most
likely be doing just fine on Earth and have little to no interest in
migrating to Mars to get away from the mess of Earth.”
Actually, that’s what most middle class family’s could raise by selling all their assets. The question of whether they would be interested will be known within 20 years. Economic poverty is *not* the sole motivator for emigration.
So, you are agreeing with me that Martian colonies are at least 2 decades away and that anybody who went there to live in the next 10 years or so would probably not prosper?
No. I’m saying that we will know whether the first settlers have prospered by then.
Those future Martians better get to work now. I don’t see the Mars Society having classes on home aquaponics, 100% off grid self energy production, or how to maintain and operate your own means of production. I also don’t see amateur mining and foundry societies. It’s a great concept, but Americans today ain’t the Americans of yesteryear.
I doubt that the Americans of yesteryear would fare any better. Sometimes you just have to wait for science (or progress) to “march on.”
Of course Mars is far far far more toxic than de-populated, re-forested, and run wild with rivers and animals North America. God, guns, and guts are not enough for Mars.
Actually seattlement technology will be the next big thing in New Space as the farmers, miners and factory experts replace the rocketeers ?
Even SLS is just “launch it in lots of slightly bigger pieces”. There are no plans for single-launch missions with SLS. The LOP-G will require many missions to build.
Orbital refueling and replenishment are required for a robust exploration program. Lower launch costs are required for a sustainable exploration program.
SLS does neither.
The fuel depot myth (another piece of significant NewSpace scamming) has already hit the wall of reality. Transferring and storing cryogenic propellants in space is a nightmare. Especially the one NewSpace always uses as the example- hydrogen.
The Moon is the place to go to build and launch true nuclear propelled spaceships. Everything else is just a waste of time. It will take SHLVs and they ain’t cheap.
Transferring and storing hydrogen in space is a solvable problem, as shown by ACES. But it is a pain in the ass to handle. Which is why methane makes more sense, IMHO. Either way, without fuel depots and routine orbital refueling, humanity will never expand into space.
ACES does not exist yet and does not actually transfer propellants in it’s proposed form if I am not mistaken. You don’t know much about what you are talking about. Going to the Moon is not only “solvable”, it is solved. And nuclear propulsion is what you leave the Moon with to go other places. Depots are a scam devised to make the evil SHLV unnecessary from the days when SpaceX was pushing it’s hobby rocket as being able to do everything.
You’re thinking Centaur 5
You are not thinking at all so why don’t you stop posting spam.
Just correcting you, no form of ACES doesn’t transfer fuel, Centaur 5 its intermittent precursor however doesn’t
I don’t think so. Depots are mentioned only as “variants” of the IVF equipped basic design. You did not correct anyone but you keep spamming me.
Make your own comments.
I do make my own comments
Stop spamming me.
Actually NASA studies have constantly verified its the most affordable way to go
Stop spamming me3.
There’s a currently operational shlv for under 300m (fully expendable configuration) but a fully reusable one under development that will be far cheaper,
Stop spamming me2.
define spamming? because I dont think that means what you think it does
Stop spamming me5.
see now you’re the one thats spamming
Stop spamming me9.
What you really mean is “Stop disagreeing with me.”
pretty much I have also been asking him very pointed questions that he doesn’t like answering
The same old troll dogpile. Shame on you both.
More like “stop citing facts that disprove my opinions”.
Since when has SpaceX used storage of hydrogen as an example? ULA are the ones proposing hydrogen storage, and they are as Old Space as it gets.
NewSpace fans always used ideal numbers like the Isp of hydrogen and oxygen when arguing how great depots were. The BFR will use methane which, while easier to store and transfer than hydrogen, is also far less dense than kerosene. Now the fans have switched to methane as the ideal propellant though for years they screamed only kerosene was any good and hydrogen was hopelessly inferior. It is whatever talking point they want to beat someone over the head with. That is what they do.
This approach works well as exemplified by the construction of the ISS. To do it on a bigger scale will require manned construction stations, shipyards, if you will, either in LEO or a higher orbit.
I disagree completely. The way to build anything is with wet workshops sent to lunar orbit to be loaded with cosmic ray water shielding brought up from the poles. LEO, like Mars, is a dead end.
Why go all the way to lunar orbit, when you can save fuel going to LEO
Why do you keep spamming me?
I’m not just correcting you
Stop spamming me.
I am not constantly repeating myself, which would be spam, I am not providing scam links which would also be spam, so how am I spamming you?
Stop spamming me4.
You haven’t contradicted anything I said. You are just being argumentative. A higher orbit could also be a lunar orbit.
You said LEO. I said LEO is a dead end. I think there is a contradiction there. Yes I am arguing against wasting time and resources on LEO. I would say lunar orbit is not a higher orbit. It is not Earth orbit- it is lunar orbit. Going in circles around the Moon is not really going in circles around the Earth. Just for the sake of argument.
the moon orbits the earth and it takes more energy to get to lunar orbit, therefore its a higher orbit. relative to LEO, how is LEO a dead end though?
I warned you ten times to stop. Now you have graduated to cyberstalking. You see my name DO NOT REPLY. Make your own comment. Or Messier is going to ban you for harassing me. You are insufferable.
I suspect it is you who are likely to get banned.
Insulted, troll branded, and someone replying to every single comment I make with inane harassment. And I am likely to get banned. I suspect you think the NewSpace mob is entitled to treat those who disagree with them any way they please. Disgusting.
Read my comment it wasnt to you specifically it was just pointing out logical fallacies in your idea I frequent these forums, you dont
Orwellian. Not to me specifically but a direct reply to the comment by me supposedly “pointing out logical fallacies”……would be pissing down my back and telling me it is raining. You and I are the same here and I am telling you to stop replying to every single one of my comments- it is harassment. Stop replying to any of my comments. Make your own comments.
I only reply to the ones that are plain false or on illogical premises.
Tell it to Messier.
I respond the same way to anyone trying to spread false information, it isn’t personal, just dont want it to spread
You are harassing me by incessantly replying to all my comments and calling it false information, illogical, etc.
Anybody can see the game you are playing. Disgusting.
Small launchers were never intended for humans to go on them in the first place, they are for smallsats.
So “Mo” Brooks is attempting to legislate more pork for his home state and Posey is actually being a little vague about what his bill does.
Aww, it feels like 2014 again in this comment section. I almost missed the old coot.
The “old coot” would happily give you a boxing lesson if you had the guts- you could even use your real name you sniveling coward.
Don’t encourage the trolls. please.
Troll branding me? Puh-leez.
Not a troll? I rode my bike right by you under the overpass this AM on the ride into work.
That is blatant harassment. Nothing to do with the subject matter and infringing on my privacy. You just messed up.
“Chemical is certainly sufficient for cislunar and Mars. Trip times are on the order of few months, which is not an issue.”
Have to throw the B.S. flag on that one. It is more than “a few months” to Mars and certainly an issue. A huge issue.
Chemical energy is not going to work for human interplanetary travel. Period.
Only nuclear energy will take us Beyond Earth and Lunar Orbit (BELO).
https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
Travel times to Mars are between 90 and 150 days, assuming refueling and aerobraking. This is manageable both when it comes to GCR exposure and weightlessness. Nuclear propulsion would help but is not required for initial expansion of humanity into space. In the long term nuclear or fusion propulsion will probably win, tough.
Mars is not a second home for humankind. We require 1G. This is why Gerard K. O’Neill ruled out any natural bodies for space colonization back in the 70’s. Miles in diameter artificial spinning hollow moons are the solution. Mars is a complete dead end. Whether the bizarro entrepreneur is actually serious is anyone’s guess. As for getting to Mars in 90 days with humans- I am throwing the B.S. flag on that one. All human chemical mission profiles run at least 6 months- unless you are going to piece together even larger battlestar galacticas than these profiles require.
Nobody really knows whether we require 1G or not. 38% G may be enough, possibly with shortened life. However, even if Mars is not a second home to humankind, it will still be crucial to learn to live and build lots of industry on worlds such as Mars and worse. Your artificial spinning moons inevitably must be build near such a surface base in order to have access to resources. You cannot colonize a vacuum.
Also, good luck building giant rotating space stations without very cheap lift. SLS will never allow us to build anything like that.
Several million years of evolution is a good indicator. Artificial moons can be built by sending material to the construction site (O’Neill proposed a lunar mass driver, a kind of rail gun) or near a body and then pushed into a solar orbit. Or….built in multi-thousand tons slices and lifted off the surface of the Moon with nuclear devices (bombs). Bernal Spheres are also candidates for star travel to nearby stars by using beam propulsion to send them on their way at some percentage of the speed of light and after a century or two arriving and using bombs to slow down. The SLS is the first of a long line of SHLV iterations that will first allow for wet workshops and a cislunar infrastructure.
Luck is not a factor, only the decision to do so is what matters. The profit motive is a dead end in this regard. The whole NewSpace agenda is a farce. Only state sponsorship can succeed.
It is arguably several billion years of evolution. Life in general never knew anything else than 1G. However, evolution has not stopped. Martian colonists may very well adapt to lower gravity over time, maybe helped by genetic engineering and medication in the future. It is certainly more realistic in foreseeable future than your multi thousand tons orbital constructions flying all over the solar system (which are not happening without both cheap lift and mature planetary colonization technology anyway).
I actually agree that in the long term orbital colonies are much more promising than planetary ones. But they are not the first step. And you still must locate them near a well developed base located on a planet, moon or large asteroid, as any such colony will require a stream of resources during its entire existence.
State sponsorship can help kickstart a new industry doing basic research and this is an important role. But it can not make it affordable for the masses. Private industry is best suited for that. This applies to basically any new technology and spaceflight is no exception. We will never settle space without private industry playing a crucial role in reducing costs. Without private industry, manned spaceflight is a mere stunt.
Also, the next iteration of SHLV is well under development. It is called BFR. SLS is already obsolete.
In my view it is much easier to build miles in diameter hollow spheres using lunar resources than…..trying to engineer humans thriving on Mars. That “stream of resources” is the same for Mars. Except sending the stuff to Mars is orders of magnitude more difficult than moving it around cislunar space. I don’t find your arguments convincing at all. Especially the “affordable for the masses” line. Really?
You must have a well developed base on the Moon before you even begin to think about building any miles long constructions from lunar resources. Hence why developing technology for planetary bases is the very first step in sustainable human expansion in space. Again, you cannot colonize a vacuum. This is enough to keep us busy for decades. And Mars is in many important ways easier that the Moon, however there are good arguments for both, and ideally we will settle both Moon and Mars (and Martian moons and maybe NEOs) once cheap lift is available. Even Musk is in favor of a lunar base and I would not be surprised if BFR is used for this purpose before any Mars missions.
Yes, affordable for the masses, in this case masses meaning at least upper class in developed world. You need this for actual space colonization to happen. This is the ultimate goal. Otherwise manned spaceflight will remain a mere stunt and there is no deeper point to it.
“Again, you cannot colonize a vacuum. This is enough to keep us busy for decades. And Mars is in many important ways easier than the
Moon-“
You are not making any sense at all now. Mars is not easier than the Moon in any way. Try breathing on Mars.
Throwing the B.S. flag on that one.
“Planetary bases is the very first step”? Really. Your ultimate goal is space colonization for the upper classes- or manned spaceflight will remain a stunt. Unbelievable.
The NewSpace agenda is….bizarre and the worst thing that has ever happened to space exploration.
Try breathing on Mars? What an argument, lol. Try breathing anywhere in space.
I am not really a Mars first guy, more like lunar poles first, but there are important reasons in favor of Mars. Namely, it has much more abundant volatiles such as water and sources of carbon, it has over twice the gravity of the Moon which may yet turn out to be important, it has atmosphere that is useful for aerobraking, shielding against solar flares, dust erosion and possibly even wind power, day-night cycle similar to Earth, and I could go on. Mars is definitely among the best places to set up an initial off-world settlement, if not the best.
Spirit rover launch date: June 10, 2003, landing date: January 4, 2004, now let’s see if you can count how many months it took for the rover to get to Mars…
More than a few.
H.R. 5345 strikes me as whistling past the graveyard. “We are too still relevant, dammit, and we ain’t going anywhere!” Or to put it in Monty Python terminology, “I’m not dead yet. I’m feeling much better…”
If I recall correctly, H.R. 5346 allows companies that do air launches to take their customers on joy rides in the air launch support vehicle as a way to pass the time as the years drift by, no one goes to space, and the customers slowly grow older. Let’s call it “training.” So this is a Virgin Galactic specific bill, I guess. Good luck to them.
I’ve banned Gary Church again from this website.
Sorry it took so long this time. Hopefully this is the last time I have to do this.
Doug, unfortunately, Gary can’t help himself, he’s a pathological troll. Such a shame. If he could just dial it down a notch or two, he’d be fun, and, for site hosts, such as yourself, a boon to the amount of commentary. Regards, Paul.