In December 1999 Spacehab and RSC Energia announced their plans to develop a commercial module to be called " Enterprise " which would be attached to the Russian segment of the International Space Station (ISS). At the time the module was promoted as being primarily a "broadcast station and a research laboratory in which company-sponsored microgravity experiments targeting new biotech and advanced materials products and processes will be conducted." A new multimedia company, Space Media, was formed to pursue the multimedia aspects of Enterprise marketing. Space Media and Energia have also formed "Entermedia" a company designed to foster commercial activities aboard the Russian segment of the ISS.

More Enterprise images

In the ensuing year and a half, the commercial viability of the Enterprise concept has yet to be fully realized. However, recent decisions by the Bush Administration may breathe new life into the project. John M. 'Mike' Lounge, a former space shuttle astronaut and now Spacehab Senior vice-president for Space Engineering Services told SpaceRef today that he has yet to sign up a single paying customer for any commercial contract. "We have always said part of our business is crew stowage," Lounge said at a status briefing for the Enterprise Commercial Module Project. "The question is if there is a market to provide permanent habitation?"

Budget Problems = Business Opportunity?

Lounge was referring to a recent decision by the Bush Administration whereby NASA was recently directed not to develop a Habitation ("Hab") module for the ISS. Citing this potential market opportunity, Lounge said that Spacehab was in the process of conducting an engineering review that would determine the kinds of modifications to the design of the Enterprise that might be needed if it were to be pressed into service as bedroom or kitchen to station astronauts.

In announcing its proposed FY 2002 budget for NASA, the Bush Administration stated that the station's habitation module, originally under contract to Boeing, would be canceled because of cost overruns with the project. This was a little deceiving inasmuch as all work had already been halted on this module last year - and the ISS program requirement for the Hab module was removed from Boeing's contract. The money NASA had budgeted for the Hab module was also deleted. This was done, with Clinton Administration guidance, to allow a fully commercial Hab module - one based upon JSC's TransHab concept - to be developed. NASA's commercialization czar Dan Tam had originaly planned to use the money that would have gone for the Hab to help facilitate a commercial TransHab deal. Without the seed money to lubricate a possible deal, prospects for a commercial TransHab module dried up.

The Bush Administration's recent efforts to halt consideration of a Hab module preclude NASA from switching budgetary resources back for the development of a Hab module. This was done as part of an overall plan to cut ISS costs (estimated to be as much as $4 billion greater than expected only a few months ago) by focusing US efforts on completing the ISS such that modules and elements built by ESA, CSA, NASDA and other partners can be attached to the ISS. The Bush Administration has not precluded the eventual addition of a Hab module - rather, they have told NASA that to do so would require the agency to use exiting funds. Given the already tight budget environment NASA operates under, such a prospect would appear unlikely.

Without the Hab module, there will only be accommodations aboard the ISS for three astronauts. Given that the original plan for the ISS was to have up to 6 (and perhaps 7) astronauts at completion, this represents more than a 50% decrease in the available crew time. When one considers the fact that the ISS already requires a substantial portion of a three person crew's time for maintenance and operations, the amount of crew time available for science will be dramatically reduced from what had been promised.

Lounge said the current Enterprise review would be completed by the end of May, and that a decision will be made by the end of June as to what new spacecraft systems would be added to the design, if any. "We're going to need a strong signal from NASA fairly soon" if there was serious interest in using Enterprise , Lounge said Tuesday.

In addition to the removal of the Hab module from the ISS program, the Bush Administration also directed NASA to halt further development of the X-38 and its operational Crew Return Vehicle (CRV). The CRV would have provided the ISS with a permanent replacement for the 3 person Soyuz spacecraft currently being used as Interim CRVs. Since the X-38 would carry up to 7 people, it would negate the need for the two Soyuz spacecraft that would be needed to support a 6 person crew - plus provide a net increase of one person over the 6 that use of dual Soyuz spacecraft would support.

In order for Enterprise's possible use for Hab functionality to be of interest to NASA, the ability to support the additional crew with CRV capability would also need to be provided. According to comments made by Lounge, and by Spacehab Vice President for Space Commerce, Philip Mongan at the CATO Institute earlier this month, the provision of a second rescue Soyuz craft would be part of the deal. This Soyuz could be docked to the Nadir (Earth-facing) docking port of Enterprise . Recently released Spacehab drawings of Enterprise show such a docked Soyuz attached to the unit.

More Enterprise images

Progress Thus Far

Lounge said that he had recently returned from Moscow meetings where Spacehab and its Enterprise partner RSC Energia had completed a baseline design review for the module. This review was followed by a formal public endorsement of the space project by the Russian air and space agency Rosaviakosmos. The endorsement followed the signing of a formal agreement whereby Russia gave the Enterprise unit docking and utilization rights in return for use in functions that had been originally planned for a Russian-provided Docking and Stowage Module. As such, Enterprise would be launched and used in place of that Russian component.

As part of the overall arrangement, Energia would also be providing launching services, although Lounge said a specific launch date had not yet been selected. "We are planning for a launch sometime in the summer of 2003," he explained.

Construction of the spacecraft by Energia has already begun [images]. The spacecraft is based upon the current Progress design which has been stretched and enlarged to provide the internal equipment and passage volume required for its dual function. Depending on the course of discussions with NASA, subsystems such as modified environmental and life support systems might be added for support of habitation use. Otherwise, the basic design of the module was set and construction the space unit's primary structure is now underway.

Lounge said that the business model for revenue from the Enterprise unit was projected as 50 percent from ISS services such as habitation, 25 percent from research such as microgravity experiments, and the balance from 'other' uses such as media broadcasts. The emphasis on more traditional space services in place of an the project's earlier emphasis on broadcasting was prompted by customers- or the lack thereof. "We haven't seen any (media interest) step forward in the beginning," Lounge commented. "While the cost of fully outfitting a full-up media studio is considerable."

According to Lounge, his company had raised about ten percent of a projected $50 to $100 million to build and fly Enterprise . Spacehab would need to generate "about $30 to $40 million" each year in revenue from the unit, and be raising 30 percent of the financing each year before launch in 2003. "We'll need to get into full scale production this summer" if the module would make its construction and launching schedules.

Roadblocks

One major potential stumbling block in the path of any U.S deal with Spacehab and Energia for the use of Enterprise is the fact that NASA doesn’t have any money to spare - either for its own Hab module - or to lease service on one provided by someone else. Enterprise is supposed to replace the functionality of the Docking and Stowage Module (something Russia was supposed to provide to the ISS program). As such, bartering arrangements with Russia (via Enterprise as a proxy) and the U.S. might offset some of the costs. None the less the hundreds of millions of dollars required for leased space on Enterprise is still going to be rather hard for NASA to find.

There is also the issue of providing power for Enterprise. The Science Power Platform (SPP) is supposed to be provided by Russia. Its status is rather uncertain at this point. The U.S. is talking about delaying its flight. The Russians don’t seem to have the money to build it. In addition to providing the power required for the further build out of the Russian segment of the ISS, (Enterprise would be such an expansion) the SPP also provides a variety of life support and guidance capabilities as well. According to NASA planning charts, the absence of the SPP "Continues the need for USOS [U.S. Operated Segment of the ISS] to transfer Avg. 3 to 4.5 kW throughout life of ISS to RS [Russian Segment]". This would be power that is not available to experiments on the US portion of the ISS as well as NASDA and ESA lab modules.

As such, the presence of the Enterprise on the ISS - and its ability to function, is a function of if/when the SPP flies. The SPP was originally slated for launch on mission ISS-9A.1 in October 2002. According to NASA planning briefings "With the delay or absence of SPP, the ISS can continue the build out of the US, Canadian, Japanese, and European segments. With the delay or absence of SPP, the ISS cannot continue the build out of the Russian Segment." This would result in "Impacts due to the delay or absence of SPP and subsequent RS Elements."

Larger image

There is also the possibility that the Hab module's functionality could be supplied by another ISS element. One such concept is the so called "Stretched" Node 3 concept. Node 3 is being provided by ASI, the Italian space agency in exchange for a portion of ISS utilization resources. According to internal NASA briefings, "If Hab deleted, extended Node 3 is best option considered. Does not replace Hab, but approximates functionality". The decision date for this option is approaching fast. Node 3 is already under assembly and modifications need to be incorporated soon. According to NASA "Need Program Direction ASAP to minimize Node 3 - Critical date is Sep. 2001-- Alenia welds second endcone to structure."

It is also important to note that the DSM (or Enterprise) would extend downward (Earthward) placing a docking port lower than the position of the port on the FGB. If Node 3 is docked before the arrival of Enterprise this will block - and therefore prevent - the use of the nadir (Earth facing) docking port on the FGB where Enterprise would be docked.

Suffice it to say, the deletion of the ability (at least near term) for NASA to provide a Hab module certainly does present Spacehab and Energia with a potential market opportunity. However the same cost cutting measures also present significant roadblocks as well.

The Path Ahead

The U.S. is not the only possible customer for crew habitation services. Customers could also come from other ISS partners. Given the interest in flying tourists such as Dennis Tito and contest winners such as proposed by the creator of the "Survivor" TV series, wholly commercial customers may also appear. Whether this potential market develops will depend upon whether Mr. Tito actually flies and how arduous the whole process of ironing out the current disagreement over his flight becomes.

Lounge said that regardless of whether Enterprise is eventually used as a habitat, he was determined to set aside a fixed block of the unit's rack space for experiment use.

But while the fate of the station's Hab module might serve to help create a customer for Enterprise , it was still a tough road ahead for the program. "We must convince the other (station) partners that Enterprise is not a detriment to their operations," Lounge said. And as compared to the 1988 challenge of his STS-26 Discovery space mission that returned the U.S. to human spaceflight following the Challenger accident? "Well, some days its chicken-and some days its feathers," Lounge joked.

Related Links