|
House Science and Technology Subcommittee on Space & Aeronautics Hearing
Nov 23, 2009 (Congressional Documents and Publications/ContentWorks via COMTEX) --
INTRODUCTION
Good morning Chairwoman Giffords, Ranking Member Olson, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. My name is Marty Hauser and I am Vice President for Research and Analysis, Washington Operations for the Space Foundation. On behalf of myself and Space Foundation CEO, Elliot Holokauahi Pulham, I want to thank the subcommittee for providing the Space Foundation the honor to sit before you today to talk about the trends we are seeing in non-U.S. space programs.
The Space Age is now over fifty years old. Early on space was the province of only the Soviet Union and the U.S. . By the 1970s, many of our allies had developed nascent space capabilities and modestly, yet steadily invested in their capabilities. Today we have an International Space Station and there are thirteen nations with active space programs. Space is getting more crowded with not only more nations being more active in space, but we also expect to see the growth in commercial space activities.
Just as the oceans and the air in earlier times were frontiers that had first seen tentative and occasional forays by man, then to becoming transformed into mediums through which trade and travel are routine and everyday occurrences, space is evolving in a similar fashion. Space is the most challenging and demanding environment thus, space activity is still expensive and time consuming. That said, other nations clearly see the value in space systems for a variety of reasons and as such are devoting scarce resources into space capabilities.
WHAT SPACE CAPABILTIES EXIST OUTSIDE THE U.S. AND ARE THERE ANY SIGNIFIGANT TRENDS IN THAT REGARD?
Canada, China, much of Europe, including impressive French and German programs, the United Kingdom, Iran, Israel, India, Japan, Russia and South Korea all have space programs. Of course some are more capable than others.
Europe, Japan, Russian India and China have first rate launch capabilities. Europe, Israel, and India have very robust remote sensing capabilities. Canada has a wide range of niche specialties, most notably in robotics. Of particular note over the past decade, is the emergence of China's human spaceflight capabilities.
Presently there are only three nations with human space flight capabilities, the U.S., Russia and now China. Once we retire the Space Shuttles, that "club" will be just Russia and China for many years. I would also like to add that India has also been working on their own human spaceflight program as well.
In this past September, a delegation led by the Space Foundation visited China and toured a number of previously-secret space facilities. It was a stunning experience. Not only are China's facilities newer than ours, they are state-of-art and in some ways, downright luxurious compared to ours.
In this past summer, a Space Foundation team member visit the European launch facilities in French Guiana. This ultra modern and very active launch site can teach us many things about how to improve our launch infrastructure. Additionally, the large number of young twenty/thirty-something men and women doing engineering and technical work in French Guiana should make us sit-up and realize how we need to better engage young Americans into the space industry. I should add that China has a lot of young people working on their space program.
WHY DOES THE GROWTH OF NON-U.S. SPACE CAPABILITIES MATTER TO THE U.S.?
Space provides all kinds of strategic, economic, scientific and geopolitical benefits. Other nations "get it" and as such are spending time and resources on it.
From a very pragmatic viewpoint, the more actors in space, the greater the chances of collisions between spacecraft, increased lethal debris and associated traffic management problems, especially in low earth orbit. This poses a problem for the U.S. since we have the largest number of space assets on orbit and the United States Air Force is charged with cataloging and tracking all active and inactive space objects. The U.S. should take a leadership role and encourage other space faring nations to agree to "rules of the road" for responsible action in space. If not, the more at-risk our space systems become, the greater chances of us being denied access to those vital capabilities.
From competitiveness viewpoint, having a strong technical workforce is essential for a nation to be a serious competitor in the global economy. Space is a potent lure for talented young minds. Competency in space activities translates very easily into other high-tech sectors of the economy.
WHAT ISSUES DOES THE GROWTH OF NON-U.S. SPACE CAPABILITIES RAISE FOR CONGRESS AS IT ASSESSES THE FUTURE DIRECTION AND FUNDING OF THE U.S. SPACE PROGRAM?
Congress must decide, along with the administration, if America will continue to lead in space. Period.
Earlier in my testimony I highlighted the wonderful assets and facilities our European colleagues have in French Guiana. They should be commended for the intelligent and pragmatic investments they have and continue to make in their launch site. The irony is of course not that they are spending vast sums of money on their space facilities. They are not outspending us, but they are certainly getting more out of their investments. While the funding amounts and budgetary processes of China's investment in space capabilities are hazy at best, I would still posit confidently to the subcommittee that they are not outspending us either.
If would be foolhardy for us to assume we know best for any and all things space related. I would suggest we take a hard look at our space capabilities and see where we have gaps and other failings. See where other nations are doing better in those areas and take some lessons learned. In areas where no one else is able to lead, the U.S. should stand up and lead.
I've stated that other nations clearly and easily understand the value in investing in space systems. In the U.S., we seem to perpetually ask ourselves if we should continue to invest in space systems. We currently lead the world in space, but that leadership position is not a birthright. We must choose to continue to lead. If we do not, another will eventually supplant us the premier space faring nation. To that nation will then accrue all the benefits that space systems provide.
I stand ready to answer any questions.
Thank you.
#DAL1234#
[ Satellite Spotlight's Homepage ]
|
