Trump-Musk Row nourishes the largest crisis in NASA

The order between Donald Trump and Elon Musk over the main cost bill has increased uncertainty about the future of NASA’s budget, which is facing deep cuts.

The Space Agency publishes its budget request to Congress, which will see funding for scientific projects, shortened by nearly a half.

Forty scientific missions that are already in the process of developing or in space are on line that must be stood.

The president has threatened to withdraw the federal treaties with Musk’s company, Space X. NASA relies on the Falcon 9 fleet of the company to deliver the International Space Station with crew and delivery. The space agency also expects to use its Starship rocket to send astronauts to the moon and eventually to Mars after it has been developed.

Dr. Simeon Barber, a space scientist from an open university, said that uncertainty had a “freezing impact” on the space space space program.

“The amazing exchanges, the decisions for the quick and you have turned, to which we have witnessed in the last week, undermine the very foundations on which we build our ambitions.

“Space science and research relies on long -term planning and cooperation between government, companies and academic institutions.”

In addition to the feud between the President and Musk, there is also concern about the deep cuts requested by the White House for NASA’s budget.

All sectors are intended for savings, except for efforts to send astronauts to Mars, which has received a boost of $ 100 million (£ 74 million).

According to Casey Dr., Chief of Space Policy for Planetary Society, based in Pasadena, which promotes space study, potential redundancies represent “the largest crisis ever faced with the US space program.”

NASA said his request to reduce its overall budget by almost a quarter of “science and technology portfolios in accordance (its) to missions that are essential to the moon and Mars exploration.”

Dr. Adam Baker, a space analyst at the University of Cranfield, told the BBC News that if these proposals were approved by Congress, it would mainly displace the agency’s focus.

“President Trump has reconstructed NASA for two things: to land astronauts of the moon in front of the Chinese and make astronauts plant a US flag on Mars. Everything else is secondary.”

Those who support the proposals say that the White House budget has given a clear purpose to NASA, for the first time from the days of the Moon of Apollo from the 60 and 70s, when the aim was to defeat the Soviet Union to the moon. NASA critics say that since then the space agency has become an inflated, unfinished bureaucracy that routine exceeds massively over the budget in its space missions and taxpayers’ moneyS

One of the most relevant examples of this is NASA’s new rocket for his plans to return American astronauts to the moon, the space system launch system (SLS). Its development was delayed and the costs stopped to cost $ 4.1 billion (£ 3.3 billion) for each launch. In contrast, the equivalent SpaceX rocket system, Starship, is estimated at about $ 100 million (80 million pounds) at the start as it is designed to be repeated. Jeff Bezos’s blue space company promises similar savings for his new Glenn rocket.

For no surprise, SLS will be terminated according to the White House suggestions in the hope that Starship and New Glenn can take their place. But the three Starship startups were unsuccessful and Blue Origin had just recently started testing its lunar rocket.

“The worries are that NASA can pop out of the pan, in the fire,” says Dr. Barber.

“The development of these SLS alternatives is based on Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos.

“If they lose their appetite for this endeavor, and SpaceX or Blue Origin say they need more money to develop their systems, Congress will have to give it to them,” says Dr. Barber.

Out of greater concern, says Dr. Barber, is the potential loss of 40 missions to study other planets and to monitor the impact of climate change on land from space, many of which include cooperation with international partners.

“I think it’s very sad that what took so long can be demolished with a destructive ball so quickly without a plan to restore it afterwards.”

The projects facing the ax include dozens of planetary missions that are already in the space for which the bigger part of the development and launch costs have already been paid, with relatively small savings offered for their operating costs.

Two collaborations with the European Space Agency are also under threat: an ambitious plan to return Martian rocks, gathered by Nasa Rover’s perseverance back to Earth and mission to send Europe Rosalind Franklin Rover to the Red Planet to seek past signs.

Prof. Sir Martin Swing, Head of the British Space Company Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd, and co -author of A Royal Society report on the future of space He says that while development was “unwanted”, there may be Europe up, as it is more responsible for its own space exploration program.

“We may be too relying on the big NASA player to carry a lot of emphasis in space,” he told BBC News.

“This is an opportunity to think about how Europe wants to achieve a better balance in its space activities.”

But in the short term, there is much more disadvantage for Europe. In addition to the return of the samples from Mars and its Rover, ESA risks reducing access to the International Space Station if it is completed, and budget cuts cancel NASA’s extensive contribution to its successor, the lunar portal, a multinational space station planned for orbit.

In the recently published ESA strategy He stated that he “would strive to build a more avenue space capacity and to continue to be a reliable, strong and desirable partner with space agencies around the world” with the consequences that it would do it with or without NASA.

Also facing redundancies are numerous current and proposed Earth monitoring programs according to Dr. Baker.

“These Earth observation programs are our canar in the coal mine,” he told the BBC News.

“Our ability to predict the impact of climate change and to mitigate it can be drastically reduced. If we exclude this early warning system, it is a frightening perspective.”

Budget proposals have not yet been approved by Congress. Casey Dr. at the planetary society told the BBC News that many Republicans have told lobbyists privately that they are ready to vote against the abbreviations.

But D -Dreyer is worried that the political block is likely to mean that a budget will not be a budget. It is likely that the reduced budget of the White House should be introduced as an intermediate measure, which can then be easily reversed, since after space missions are excluded, it is difficult, if not impossible, to start them again.