NASA MULLING NEW FLEET `LIFEBOATS' EVENTUALLY WOULD BECOME FERRIES.

Byline: Jim Skeen Staff Writer

EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE - NASA officials are considering building a small fleet of spacecraft that would at first serve as lifeboats for the International Space Station, but would later evolve to include the ability to take astronauts to the station.

In an exchange of correspondence with Rep. Ralph Hall, D-Texas, NASA disclosed it was strongly looking at the idea of a fleet of three crew transfer vehicles, or CTVs, to serve the space station. The initial use would be to attach such a spacecraft to the station for use as a lifeboat in case the crew has to make a quick return to Earth.

Eventually, the vehicle would be enhanced to allow it to take astronauts to the space station. The vehicle would be launched atop an expendable rocket.

``NASA clearly sees a requirement for the capability to provide crew rescue for all crew onboard the ISS, and is seeking to pursue a multipurpose vehicle to satisfy this requirement,'' O'Keefe wrote to Hall.

By starting off with a crew return vehicle, or lifeboat function, NASA would be able to expedite the use of the vehicle by not having to worry about having a booster rocket certified for human spaceflight. The earliest use for the vehicle is 2010, O'Keefe said.

Eventually, NASA would have to develop a booster rocket or some other type of launch system certified for human spaceflight.

Concepts for a crew transfer vehicle are a throwback to the 1960s when NASA and the Air Force were testing lifting body aircraft at Edwards Air Force Base. Lifting body aircraft were blunt-nosed, wingless aircraft that were tested by being taken aloft by another aircraft and released.

In the 1960s, much like the consideration going on today, NASA had a concept for taking astronauts to a space station by launching them in a lifting-body spaceship attached to a booster rocket.

In the early 1990s, NASA commissioned an engineering mock-up of such a vehicle, the HL-20. The mock-up was designed and built by Lockheed Martin's Skunk Works unit.

If such a vehicle were to be developed, Edwards Air Force Base would be a major candidate for flight tests. In fact, the base is working to better position itself for future spacecraft testing by conducting an environmental impact report of approach and landing operations for such craft.

The environmental assessment is not being conducted for any specific spacecraft but rather for a generic one. The generic vehicle in the study resembles the X-24 lifting body tested at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center during the late 1960s and early 1970s.

``Edwards AFB has historically been selected as a primary testing site for new aircraft and space vehicles because of the remote surroundings and viable landing options,'' a draft of the report said. ``The hard surface runways and the hard flat surface of the Rosamond and Rogers dry lake beds have proven ideal for parachute/parasail landings and normal aircraft landings.

Preliminary studies are looking at the development and operation of three vehicles, O'Keefe said. The concept calls for each spacecraft to be able to stay attached to the space station for a minimum of six months at a time.

O'Keefe said the specific number of such spacecraft and their in-orbit stay times are subject to the results of ongoing studies.

O'Keefe said there was an opportunity for NASA and the Defense Department to work together on technologies for the crew transfer vehicle.

``A common booster stage that serves both NASA and DoD (Department of Defense) is a potentially attractive option,'' O'Keefe wrote.

No cost estimates were given on the development of a crew transfer vehicle.

The trade publication Aviation Week and Space Technology reported NASA is looking at paying for the CTV development by using more than half of the $4.6 billion planned for the Space Launch Initiative, an effort aimed creating a next-generation reusable launch vehicle to replace the space shuttle.

Aviation Week and Space Technology, quoting an unnamed source with access to NASA budget planning documents, reported that NASA plans to begin the effort by reprogramming $296 million from SLI in this year's budget.

A NASA spokesman said the agency was evaluating a number of potential strategies for addressing the agency's requirement for a multipurpose vehicle for crew return and transportation capability. Once those evaluations are completed, the agency would then be able to provide more information.

The exchange between Hall, the top Democrat on the House of Representative's Science Committee, and O'Keefe was triggered by NASA's decision last spring to cancel the X-38/crew return vehicle program. The X-38, which was being tested at Edwards, was being used to develop technologies for a space station lifeboat.

In his response to Hall, O'Keefe disclosed a massive increase in the program's total cost, rising from initial projections of $1.3 billion to $3 billion.

``It is important to note that the latest cost estimates for X-38 were still highly uncertain, and a vehicle would have been available no earlier than 2008,'' O'Keefe wrote. ``Given that a multipurpose vehicle could possibly be available in approximately the same time frame, the agency determined that pursuit of a single purpose vehicle of this investment magnitude was not the best use of NASA resources at this time.''

Hall questions the $3 billion price tag, noting that NASA officials repeatedly told Congress the program would cost between $1.3 billion and $1.4 billion. Hall also noted that NASA's projections of the crew return vehicle not being ready until 2008 instead of the original plan of 2006 was the result of the agency deferring work because of space station budget woes, and not from technical or management issues.

``It seems clear to me that the new cost and schedule estimates for the CRV are not based on a thorough technical analysis, but rather on a desire to portray CTV development in a more favorable light,'' Hall said.