Nearly forty stories tall, the rocket stands on a launch pad and launches every six weeks, consuming enough energy to supply New York State with light for more than an hour each time. Bill Nelson, a 78-year-old Floridian, became involved with space in such a narrative of his youth.
On March 19, 2021, President Joe Biden announced the nomination of Nielsen as the new Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The White House statement hailed the former Democratic senator, now an advisor to the NASA Advisory Council, as a “key senator” in advancing the U.S. space industry and praised Nielsen’s nearly four decades of close cooperation with NASA.
During the same period, Biden announced the continuation of the Trump administration’s Artemis Moon program, which would put two astronauts on the moon within a few years and achieve the goal of putting the first female astronaut on the moon. Biden also proposed new ideas, including NASA’s increased investment in climate change, and cooperation with “competitors.
Former NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, an astronaut by trade, noted in an interview with China Newsweek that missions like Artemis are difficult to achieve in the short term, but “the key to NASA’s success is to never stop doing a particular mission because once you fall behind, it’s hard to catching up with the competition”. And between the Biden administration’s priorities and NASA’s ambitious plans, Nielsen has a delicate balance to strike.
Nicknamed “Ballast”
“We can only assume that Nielsen has changed his mind about the suitability of politicians to be NASA administrator.” William Kovacic said. Kovacic, who served as chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, has been involved in establishing commercial space access mechanisms and many other efforts involving the space sector. He told China Newsweek that he did not expect Biden to nominate Nielsen as NASA director, and that there may be “complex trade-offs” behind it.
Some U.S. media reported that Nielsen took the initiative to seek the new job because of his personal friendship with Biden. But four years ago, when Trump nominated Senator Bridenstine as NASA director, Nielsen had fierce opposition, arguing that “it should not be politicians who lead NASA, but scientists and engineers”.
Like Bridenstine, Nielsen has no background in astronautics or flight technology, and entered politics in 1972 when the former U.S. Army officer and University of Virginia J.D. was first elected to the state House of Representatives in his native Florida. That same year, NASA announced the termination of the Apollo moon landing program. At the time, the Cold War had eased and the U.S. government no longer considered human spaceflight a top priority, leaving suppliers on the “Space Coast” such as Florida in a difficult position. Since then, Florida-born members of Congress have been among NASA’s strongest allies in Washington for funding.
When the manned space shuttle was launched in 1981, NASA management wanted to regain the attention of the government and society by carrying a public figure, and Nelson was considered the most suitable person to do so, and in January 1986, he flew into space on the space shuttle Columbia.
Bill Nelson in space
Speaking to China Newsweek, Bolden recalled that Nielsen was “a very efficient crew member” who successfully completed experiments to monitor blood pressure in the human brain during space travel, and experiments on protein crystal production. Bolden also recognized Nelson’s efforts, running four miles a day from 1981 to 1986 to improve his fitness and experiencing G-Force in a fighter jet. “He was able to participate in training with us, did a lot of experiments, and did a great job.”
When Nielsen was nominated as NASA Administrator, his nickname “Ballast” was again brought up in the industry. An aerospace engineer, who did not want to be named, expressed his concern to China Newsweek that Nielsen used to focus too much on Florida’s space industry and human spaceflight projects, and that the only space-themed paper he ever wrote dealt with how the space industry affects Florida’s economy, and lacked knowledge of NASA’s scientific, educational and social functions, which could lead to a shift in focus.
Kovacic told China Newsweek that the controversy surrounding Nielsen actually reflects the difference between “intellectual background” and “technical background. Nelson, a “space junkie,” has an “intellectual background,” meaning he has a full, long-term understanding of NASA and has dealt with NASA management as a politician. He can judge NASA’s policy direction from historical experience, in front of his subordinates also have a credibility base.
But Nielsen lacks a deep technical background. “For NASA leaders, if you’re a scientist or an engineer, you have extra credibility.” Kovacic said, “Like Nielsen, I came from a lawyer’s background and was interested in space and could chat deeply with engineers, but there were always moments when engineers would start a conversation that I couldn’t possibly understand.” Kovacic was concerned that Nielsen could not convince NASA engineers and scientists that they were taking leadership from their peers.
On Jan. 28, 1986, ten days after Nielsen completed his astronaut mission, the space shuttle Challenger exploded just after liftoff, killing all seven astronauts. In the following years, the human space mission all stop, Congress almost lost confidence in NASA for a time. However, Nielsen was an exception.
From 1986 to 1990, when NASA resumed human spaceflight missions, Nielsen was the first leader of all NASA authorization bills in the House of Representatives, sponsoring 31 motions in Congress, 13 of which were directly related to NASA. He not only sought to maintain NASA’s funding levels in a variety of ways, but also called on Congress to restore public confidence in NASA by passing a resolution celebrating the spirit of astronauts and establishing a “Space Exploration Day.
Initially, Nielsen’s motion lacked co-sponsors and was read on the House floor and then died. In 1986 and 1987, NASA’s annual budget hit back-to-back “lowest growth records in the past decade,” but turned around in 1988, when it jumped 20 percent in the next two years, setting a new “highest growth record in two decades. In 1988, NASA’s annual budget was turned around, and in the following two years it was increased by 20 percent, the “highest increase in two decades,” ensuring that the Hubble telescope and human space missions would be restarted in 1990.
In Congress, Democrats are more willing to spend money on scientific research and commercial spaceflight, while Republicans favor heavy-lift launch vehicles and human spaceflight programs. Nielsen has often sided with congressional Republicans, earning him a reputation as a “moderate,” even in the most intense period of bipartisan conflict, he was invited to dinner with his Republican colleagues. As a result, it is widely believed in the U.S. media that Nielsen’s nomination for NASA Administrator will pass the Senate without a doubt, and Trump’s NASA Administrator Bridenstine has already expressed his support for Nielsen.
His work experience in the Senate has also made Nielsen close friends with Senator Biden, who is also a Democratic moderate. Kovacic, who has worked with Biden, believes Biden is eager to work with people he understands and who share his worldview. “I suspect Biden told himself: normally I wouldn’t be interested in appointing a politician to lead NASA, but Nielsen was an exception.” Kovacic said.
Ketchum, chairman of the Florida Space Agency, stressed that Nelson’s nomination is in line with Biden’s overall policy of “uniting the two parties” and shows the importance the Biden administration places on succession and continuity in space policy.
Bolden believes Nielsen has the most important skills to serve as NASA chief. “When I became NASA Administrator, the most difficult thing was learning how politics works in Washington. That’s something Nielsen doesn’t need to worry about.” He told China Newsweek that the most important task of the NASA Administrator is to fight for a budget in Congress, relying on negotiation skills, familiarity with Congress, and getting as much support from the President as possible.
Historically, successful NASA directors have not always been experts with a “technical background,” either; James Webb, who served as NASA director from 1961 to 1968, was a lawyer rather than an engineer. In Bolden’s eyes, Webb was “the greatest of us all, the one who led us to the moon”.
“Mind your children.”
No sooner had Nielsen been nominated than astrophysicist Simon Porter, who was involved in the NASA program, publicly questioned whether Biden might have listened to lobbying from NASA’s new Space Launch System (SLS) contractor.
Nielsen has been the main promoter of the SLS project for the past decade. Early in the Obama administration, then-Vice President Joe Biden insisted in Congress on pushing to cancel the space shuttle and NASA’s plan to build its own large rockets, with commercial space companies such as SpaceX taking on more rocket construction and human spaceflight missions. Biden said this would both help the commercial space industry and free up NASA funds for more necessary technology development.
Nielsen, on the other hand, strongly opposed it along with Republicans. After a few rounds of mutual victory, the shuttle and the “Battlestar Galactica 5” heavy rocket project was terminated, but the thousands of NASA employees and contractors who lost their jobs were then transferred to the new SLS project, which is designed to build the world’s largest launch vehicle, can be directly to the moon in one mission astronauts, and then achieve Mars landing program.
The SLS program reflects a paradigm shift in U.S. space policy. Since its inception in the 1950s, NASA’s position has been torn between “civilian space agency” and “space arms race presenter. Studies by the U.S. Naval War College show that NASA’s strategic choices have thus been characterized by “geostrategic and technological nationalism overriding economic prudence. Projects like the SLS, for example, do not seek a real return on investment, but rather to maintain the U.S. competitive advantage in space against the backdrop of the development of space capabilities in China, Russia and other countries.
Kovacic recalled to China Newsweek that NASA has shown a strong spirit of innovation in projects such as the Apollo program in order to achieve technological leadership. But after the Challenger and Columbia tragedies, NASA took the path of “making sure no more mistakes are made.
The aforementioned aerospace engineer who did not want to be named pointed out to “China Newsweek”, compared to SpaceX’s technology is still immature Falcon heavy rocket project, SLS’s biggest advantage is the maturity, safety, and progressive improvement based on the previous heavy rocket technology. But on the other hand, SLS is difficult to appear SpaceX proposed “recoverable rocket” such as innovation.
Compared with the projects of commercial organizations such as SpaceX, SLS has adopted the highest technical safety audit standards, so “the price of each chip is higher than commercial procurement”. The question is whether such vetting processes are all necessary, and whether the products of commercial organizations are really unreliable or have safety risks. The lagging standards and blurred boundaries have led commercial organizations to complain that they are not being treated fairly in NASA’s bidding.
The “traditional path” chosen by SLS also faces the significant disadvantage of high costs. According to NASA’s submission to Congress, SLS costs about $2 billion for a single launch, while its upfront development costs have exceeded $20 billion, not counting the cost of ground system development and the thousands of permanent support team personnel. Industry estimates suggest that these costs were evenly spread, with the first ten SLS launches, the actual cost was more than $5 billion each.
Bolden introduced, NASA has since gradually formed a new model of integration and cooperation: NASA and commercial agencies to jointly invest funds, NASA to provide the basic concept and ideas, commercial agencies accordingly to provide design solutions, NASA to select the most consistent with their goals, and then let by commercial companies to complete.
In 2020, SpaceX sent NASA astronauts into space. “This symbolizes not only the success of SpaceX, but also the innovation and success of NASA, giving NASA’s reputation and image a boost, and the American public is taking an interest in NASA again as a result.” Kovacic said, “It’s unrealistic to say ‘no’ in the face of such a successful model of innovation.”
Ketchum, vice president of the Florida Space Agency, who knows Nielsen well, recalls that Nielsen’s satisfaction with commercial companies has increased as commercial space activities have excelled in terms of cost, efficiency, sustainability and safety. In Congress, he gradually shifted from defending the traditional model to finding a balance between maintaining tradition and embracing innovation.
Four years after ULA was established, Nielsen pushed hard for passage of the authorization bill that would allow commercial companies to participate in NASA programs, in exchange for NASA focusing more funds on traditional programs like SLS.
To radical reformers, however, Nielsen remained conservative. After SpaceX announced that it was developing a heavy rocket that would compete with NASA, Nielsen asked NASA officials to “control your children. If Nielsen really led NASA the way he did, “there would be no commercial spaceflight in the United States,” he reminded.
Roger Handberg, a leading space policy expert and professor at the University of Central Florida, told China Newsweek that even if Nielsen remains on the fence, Congress, which has already tasted the “sweet spot” of the innovation model, will no longer fund the traditional “all-NASA The “all-NASA” space program.
Handberg pointed out that Biden is ready to re-form the government space commission led by the vice president, Nielsen’s personal decision-making power will be more limited. “Biden wants Nielsen to play more of a role of bridging Congress, the administration and industry, rather than leaving the space business entirely in his hands.”
“From a scientist’s point of view, of course, it’s all about solutions.” The aforementioned aerospace engineer told China Newsweek that NASA’s successful forecasting of solar storms was a solution provided by a semi-retired radio engineer from rural New Hampshire. “However, Nielsen was thinking more about politics and security.”
Kovacic believes that regardless of Nielsen’s personal views, the U.S. space industry in the Biden era will still move toward more commercial innovation and commercial competition, “which will test Nielsen’s management skills.” Biden has nominated a number of experts who oppose the monopoly of technology giants, such as Lena Khan and Timothy Wu, to the government and to carry out anti-trust and anti-unfair competition judicial measures against Google and Facebook.
At the time of Nelson’s nomination, Biden-appointed transitional NASA executive Bavia Lal told the press that the Biden administration would review the established moon landing program and identify more “areas where commercial companies can participate,” not even ruling out the use of “proven commercial launch vehicles” when SLS capacity is insufficient. In the event of a shortage of SLS capacity, even “proven commercial launch vehicles” will be used to fill the gap.
Recent Comments