May 17NSF Small Satellite Workshop 1 Student Space Experiment Access - A National Imperative David Yoel & Gil Moore Vanguard 1 launched in ’58 (50 th anniversary in ‘08) Starshine Spacecraft NSF Small Satellite Workshop 2007 May 17

May 17NSF Small Satellite Workshop 2 Background From 1973 to 2001 NASA provided free or low-cost rides into orbit for hundreds of high school and university student payloads –Skylab Student Experiment Program –Shuttle Student Involvement Project –Get Away Special Program –Hitchhiker Project These programs helped attract young engineers and scientists to aerospace during the recovery from the ’70’s crash Many of those former students now occupy responsible positions throughout the space industry and the scientific community

May 17NSF Small Satellite Workshop 3 The Impending Workforce Gap Industry leaders decry the magnitude of the problem –Dozens of reports, little action Rising Above The Gathering Storm, Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future, This time it’s different –Demographics (aging population) –Declining K-12 STEM interest & skills –Off-shoring not an option in aerospace industry Our response? –Terminate programs that have inspired the best & brightest students

May 17NSF Small Satellite Workshop 4 Current Realities All Shuttle secondary payloads de-manifested after Columbia accident –Full cost accounting another major factor Dozens of university space experiment programs have been terminated –Many students interested in space have moved on Attempt to fly on NASA ELVs terminated last year Student Zero-G aircraft access now facing termination CubeSat and NanoSat Programs

May 17NSF Small Satellite Workshop 5 Informal Coalition of Aerospace Scientists & Engineers Recommendations to date –There’s no substitute for hands-on approach Many ways to accomplish this –U.S. launch vehicle companies add provision for secondary educational payloads to all their vehicles –Investigate use of tax credits to reimburse launch vehicle providers for the cost of integrating each payload they fly –Encourage DoD to increase funding and launch rate for the University NanoSat program

May 17NSF Small Satellite Workshop 6 Informal Coalition of Aerospace Scientists & Engineers Recommendations (cont.) –Encourage NASA and industry to include accommodations for student payloads on all new launch vehicles –Encourage spacecraft manufacturers to donate surplus and prototype flight hardware and make test facilities available to student experimenters –Create bridges between university-level space experiment programs and K-12 STEM initiatives across the country

May 17NSF Small Satellite Workshop 7 Informal Coalition of Aerospace Scientists & Engineers Universal Space Networks –Has offered to work with student spaceflight programs to downlink data and uplink commands on a capacity-available basis Tax Credits –Credits more valuable than deductions –Informal assessment is positive Working to obtain formal expert opinion

May 17NSF Small Satellite Workshop 8 Observations Focus on students –Compatible with priority NSF places on education –Help find a way to provide access in U.S. –Don’t make empty promises to students Attached payloads can have value –Don’t necessarily have to deploy a spacecraft –Reduces cost, integration complexity, mission risk

May 17NSF Small Satellite Workshop 9 Issues Excess capacity exists –Issue is marginal cost of integration (at no mission risk) Cost of developing Secondary payload accommodations –Robust accommodations –“Auxiliary” not “Secondary” –Cost is trivial if averaged over multiple missions –Non-recurring expense “has” to be paid by 1 st customer(s)

May 17NSF Small Satellite Workshop 10 Collaboration Auxiliary access a shared problem across the industry –No organization can afford the solution alone Consider Prizes/Cups/Prizes (E.g., “The Vanguard Cup”) –DARPA Challenge, Solar Challenge, FIRST Robotics… –The prize is not access, it’s based on what’s done in space Untapped resources –Industry –Student space “alumni” An organization capable of aggregating and channeling resources could break the bottleneck –Focus on student access and student programs –Leverage –Be sure it’s not a “sticky” organization – money flows through