Ok. Welcome, everybody. Thank you for being here. You heard the statements already, so the floor is yours and you can ask all of the questions you want. Please, raise your hand and tell , andur name and your media if you have a specific speaker he would like to answer your question. Thank you. I would like to start with administrator bridenstine. Everyone talks about the importance of exploration but words get transformed into concrete action like an extension of the iga, bilateral agreements, or something binding that gets the various agencies working together. I try to enter what your asking for. You are asking, in general terms, and with all of these agencies, there are already activities going on in corporations, not only in the International Space station, but also in other programs of the bilateral and multilateral agreements. If you ask concretely about the gateway, this is another question for. That we are looking for is more for this to be more important. The agreement has to follow us, i hope. It starts with those of us working together to come up with concepts we think would work, and it ultimately ends with us taking it back to the Political Leadership of our countryiwa or Organization Countries or organizations. European space agency has to go ough an ministerial through its ministerial. Nasa has to go to the United States congress. So we are working to make sure that at the end of the day, our programs get funded and were so its kind of like a jigsaw puzzle. It takes some time to put it together, but all the pieces will come together. We just have to continue to work on it until they all come together. So thats what all of us working on right now. Oh, hello. Im a writer based in the u. K. My name is rupia singh. I have two questions. The first one for administrator bridenstine. I was so impressed and pleased and surprised to hear the announcement of u. S. Going back to the moon and landing on the surface by 2024. At the time, i thought, thats a tough call. Since then, ive been really impressed with what youve done in engaging the private sector and other International Partners and im a bit more hopeful that that will happen. So, question about how thats progressing, particularly on the funding. Are you getting all the support and the budget at the rate you need to hit that goal . Mr. Bridenstine we are confident that were going to get the resources necessary to achieve the end state. Right now, were operating under a very shortterm continuing resolution, as the house has passed a nasa appropriation bill that is very good, by the way. It increases nasas budget. Now, they passed that bill the same week that nasa announced that we would like to we amended our budget requests so that we could go to the moon in an accelerated fashion. So they passed their bill or they marked it up in committee the very week that we asked for the amended budget request. The senate has now marked up a bill thats very positive for an accelerated path to the moon. Its not everything that we asked for, but what we need to do is we need to get those two bills to agree in what we call conference, and not just agree with each other, but agree at the funding level that is necessary to accomplish the moon landing. So, i think i think we are capable of getting the budget that is necessary. Im confident that it will happen. I would also say that, as you mentioned, you know, one of the challenges with the timeline is not just budgetary. Its also process. And, the historical way by which nasa goes about acquiring these capabilities takes a long time. We put out an rfi. That takes six months. Industry spends six months responding to the rfi. We spend six months putting out an rfp. Industry spends six months responding to the rfp. Then we spend six months doing a source selection and industry spends a couple of years protesting the source selection. And, at the end of the day, we spend three years before we get under contract. I dont know. I mean, you guys can do the math. Its a long time. And when we go fast, what that means is we got to do things differently. So, instead of nasa purchasing, owning and operating the hardware, what were looking at doing is buying the service to get from the gateway down to the surface of the moon then back to the gateway. And, that is what we have put out in what we call a Broad Agency Announcement. A baa. And, right now, were in a blackout period about how those proposals are coming back, but i can tell you this, theres a lot of interest. I think, during the course of this week here at the International Astronautical congress, i think youre going to see a lot of announcements regarding Different Companies and organizations that are interested in going to the surface of the moon. So i think the timeline is still very achievable. I do think that, you know, we need to make sure that the budget is commensurate with the timeline, and were working towardshat every day. And, as we work through it, domestically, were working with our International Partners to get as much International Support as we can, in order to achieve the objective. The goal is to land on the moon within five years, and to be sustainable with by the year 2028. When i say sustainable, thats where the gateway comes in. Its a reusable command module. We want reusable landers that can go back and forth from the surface of the moon to the reusable command module in orbit around the moon, and we need to drive down the cost for the oryan crew capsule, as time goes on, costs will come down. At the end of the day were trying to achieve a sustainable return to the moon where we have People Living and working on another world for long periods of time. Yeah, esm1 is already delivered. Esm2 is in production. Esm3 is in the procurement phase. Were trying to from the european side to deliver as early as possible to it to make it possible. Mr. Bridenstine thats right. On day one, the moon mission is international in nature on day one. We want to expand it from here for sure with more International Partners, but were very excited. And, in fact, as we make this sustainable, were going to need more European Service modules. So jan has his work out for him, too. Yeah. Mr. Bridenstine you bet. Yvon couronne of afp. Mr. Werner, first, do you use the gateway to land european astro astroyachtnauts on the moon . Is this part of the discussion . And some question for the other countries, also, for you, mr. Bridenstine, do you want to see other nonu. S. Astronauts use the gateway but also walk onand walk on the moon, and if so, whats the timeline . Mr. Bridenstine i think theres lots of room on the moon. We need all our International Partners to go with us to the moon. Thats the vision. Thats what were trying to achieve. If we can come to agreements on the contributions of all the nations and how theyre going to be a part of the architecture then certainly i would see that thered be no reason we cant have all of our International Partners with us the moon. I think we do not have to duplicate the descent module to the surface of the moon. We can Work Together, therefore, were in discuss also with nasa so that we have european astronauts on the surface of the moon. This is, of course, a european intention. This does not mean were not starting to build our own human lander. This is is not necessary for that, because its important that we have that we are doing it together. As i said, esm is something which brings us together to the gateway, and then, we are discussing right now how to go down to the surface. There is a plan also to have a european lander, but not for humans at this moment. So, therefore, yes, we want to have europeans on the surface of the moon but in cooperation. In addition, were asking Member States in the space, 19 plus, for robotic landing systems in addition because we need both same time. Can i . Its a simple question to me. Jaxa would like to send a japanese astronaut onto the surface of the moon. So thats it. [laughter] mr. Krikalev for russian program, from the very beginning, we said that our primary goal would be the surface. Thats why we were kind of late joining Gateway Program because we were trying to optimize what is the best trajectory to fly and actually there are advantages and disadvantages of gateway trajectory, but we decided that most efficiqt way efficient way would be Work Together. We would do some parts of the system ourselves. Something we are planning to do for gateway, but even Transportation System which we are going to build is going to be a joint system, and the way we do it now for International Space station, we have several opportunities to send cargo. We, at this point, we have one but in the future, well have several opportunities to send humans in space, and we did it before with shuttle. So, we think like the redundant system, Transportation System, and one of the modules for gateway would be our participation in the program, and the way and how we will do this, we will decide a little later. Coming to india, this is a question of priority. As you know, we need to harness certain capability. We already started our program. Obviously, it was cleared and today was china, judging from all questions that were asked including questions coming over the internet. And their absence, of course, was recognized by everybody and is an important absence. To administrator ride and enstine, thed elephant was china, and their absence was recognized by everybody, and it is an important absence. Its also my question, however, is with regard to the formulation of Vice President of talking, the United States taking the lead together with all the freedomloving nations of the world. Obviously, chinas probably not included in that, but there may be other countries that are not included in that, either. And my question is, isnt this a significant change from how the Space Program has been dealt with by the United States, ever since kennedy when his first his first thought was to Work Together with the soviet union to go to the moon. They refused and we went alone, but ever since then, there was an attempt to use space as a means of bringing countries together, not of separating them. But, the formulations of the Vice President today were pretty strident in many peoples ears and i was wondering, is that a shift in policy now, and what would the United States be willing to work with china on . Have we gone a step further from the wolf amendment now . Were not going to work with them at all on space . Or what does that actually mean . Mr. Bridenstine so your point on the wolf amendment is right on. We are prohibited by law from working with china in a bilateral sense on Space Exploration by the wolf amendment, which every year gets reappropriated in a reappropriations bill. As far as cooperation in space, i think space does represent that unique opportunity to bring nations together that historically dont come together. I would tell you im sharing this stage with russia and there is no doubt, we are aware that we have terrestrial disputes that are very clear and transparent and everybody sees them. But, when it comes to cooperation on the International Space station, our relationship is strong, has been strong, and we want to keep it strong. We would like to extend it even further. All of this is whats unique about space. I would also say that, when we think about the future, we do need to be careful about things like the theft of intellectual property. We need to be careful about the, you know, how we go about bringing new partners in that ultimately could be more harmful than helpful in the future. And i think thats probably what the Vice President was referencing in his speech today. Im irene with aviation space technology. For all of the agencies, aside from the United States, im familiar with our position, but what is the balance between requests to continue funding past 2024 with the desire to move into deep space, human exploration, and whats the status of the launch of the mlm to the iss . Thanks. Mr. Bridenstine i will let you start. Mlm will be launched at the end of next year , and beginning of next year, it will be delivered. Thats for final test and preparations. Compromise between iss and future exploration, for sure, we are not going to abandon that. Is theestimating what most efficient way to stay in orbit, and we have several projects had several projects like free flyer modules, thought about separate russian built stations, but finally, looking through all different options, we found continuing what we are using now is most efficient, so iss is a great asset. We spend a lot of effort and time and expertise to build it together, and i think it is have,able as a result we not only technically but organizationally. We learned how to Work Together, build together, and at this point, if we are going to stay in earths orbit, iss is the most efficient way to do that, but it doesnt permit. Prevent us from exploration we are trying to do prevent us from exploration. Scale ofying to do the our participation and exploration, but we will participate for sure. Im proposing to the Member States of either, what we call european exploration program, and this program coveralls several areas, the iss is the good way as the gateway. We dont see either or. Sergei says we need both. Research for many purposes, and the iss has a geopolitical value, which we should not underestimate. Therefore, we believe we should continue that. There will be an end to the iss at some point and we are thinking about that as well. We need all, experiments afterwards, but at the same time, we need joint activities. Because the geopolitical value is so high. This time, we dont see either or, but both. We are looking to the future to see how it develops. I think the International Exploration program is not to abandon iss or not to abandon the region but extend human whole system. E the same kind of discussion is happening in japan between the iss and exploration, but anyway, the importance, the value not to change. Be at lower thor bits, but the players might be changed because not only government but also many more private sectors will join us. Issother thing is that the and beyond iss anyway, that area can be used for innovation for the future exploration on earth on the moon. Say,ridenstine i would did you have Something Else . Mr. Krikalev i want to add a little bit. Because wexploration have a lot of activities on iss now that are working for exploration. We do some experiments, some tests, as part of the exploration program. Mr. Bridenstine one thing all of us on this stage need to be considering all the time is what comes next. I dont think any of us want to see a day where we dont have humans in low earth orbit. Right now, the iss is that capability, and all of our nations working together for almost 20 years, and may be additional partners in the future, we have been able to keep that going. Here is whats important to someoned i think mentioned that a few minutes ago. It cant last forever. How long it will last, we dont know, but it is looking good right now. We need to be thinking about what comes next. There are two lines of effort that will make a difference, one is industrialized biomedicine. Right now, the United States segment is using the International Space station, and i know our partners are as well, to work on two specific lines of effort. One is industrialized ill medicine and the other is advanced material. When it comes to Compounding Pharmaceuticals or greeting immunizations, these are capabilities that are transformational for humankind on earth. Right now, we are trying to prove we can create human tissue in three dimensions on the International Space station in a way you cant do in the gravity well on earth, because the tissue would go flat. We are trying to prove we can print, in 3d, human organs on the International Space station. What we are trying to do is use the International Space station for those transformational capabilities on earth that ultimately result in capital flows going into habitation in low earth orbit. The commercialization of habitation of low earth orbit, that has to be the goal if we are to keep a 1. 0 presence of human habitation in low earth orbit. In order to achieve that, we will have to have commercial resupply be successful, which it has been. We will have to have commercial crew be successful, which is it it is about to be. Of course, we will need commercial habitation. Nasa will always have a presence in low earth orbit, but we want to be the customer, one customer of many customers, and we want to have numerous providers competing on cost and innovation. We want to be there with International Partners and want our International Partners to have commercial capabilities in lowearth orbit as well. I think there is a robust marketplace, and i think we are about three to seven years away from one significant breakthrough that will result in capital flows that will be agnificant enough to have capability after the International Space station, but we have to make sure we dont lose sight of the fact we had a gap in the United States of america, after apollo and before space shuttle, we had a gap in human spaceflight and then a gap after the shuttle and before commercial crew. We have had a gap in our access to space, even though we have partnered with russia, with their rocket which has proven to be an amazing capability. We have to make sure we dont create those gaps in the future, and that is what we are working on on our side. Suggested you dont need gateway to do a quick lunch launch. You could use a two launch strategy. Have you done the analysis of that . Could you converse convert the gateway into a lowearth orbit station. Mr. Bridenstine the second question is yes, they gateway could be used in lowearth orbit, there is no question. We could have a dozen of them if we wanted to. Theres capability there, and one of the reasons we are interested in our International Partners joining us on gateway is may there would be an opportunity there in the future as well. Although im not committing to that, nor am i asking our partners to commit at this time. It is just an idea out there. The answer would be yes. When we consider what was your first question oh, about going direct to the moon rather than using the gateway. We have the sls rocket, which i would say it is about to be punched into the end zone. It will be coming out of the Assembly Facility here at the end of the year. We will green run test it, and it will be qualified for human spaceflight on day one. Thats a big deal. Every component, subcomponents, it will be a qualified rocket for human spaceflight on day one. Same with the oryan crew capsule. It will be qualified for human spaceflight on day one. European Service Module is compete thats complete, and they are heading up to the Glenn Research center for testing. Complete and they are to the Glenn Research center for testing. Here is the challenge, with the sls rocket, European Service model, we dont have enough delta v to get into low lunar , so we have to find more energy. We find that at the gateway, which is why we have accelerated the development of the gateway. The gateway is a command module, a command and Service Module around the moon permanently in a near rector lineal halo orbit where it can stay almost forever without much power required. That is a distant orbit from the surface of the moon, meaning we have to transfer from that distant orbit where it is balance between first gravity well earths gravity well in the moons gravity well. We have to go down to low lunar orbit and have to land on the moon, and then have an ascent module going from the surface of the moon back to the gateway. If we are going to go fast, we need to take advantage of the capabilities that current exist currently exist and are about to exist. And, having a human rated rocket and human rated spacecraft that can spend 21 days in orbit around the moon, all of those are capabilities unique to the sls rocket and oryan crew capsule. It is also true the gateway brings so much more value than just speed. We need to get there within five years. The gateway is the quickest way. That itargue also brings so much more value than that, because it has solar electric propulsion, is maneuverable, can go to the th or south pole, it can it is open architecture so International Partners can build on it themselves with their own evenng systems, with astrophysics missions or other experiments they want to do on the gateway itself. The gateway is evolve old evolvable for the trip to mars. Say the open architecture capability is the enabler. It is the enabler for commercial and enabler for International Partners that allow all of us to do more than anyone of us could do alone. Say hire ato go and private a company to go direct to the moon and that was it, then it would be a it, then forould be a closed system which other partners could not join. And itd be proprietary, would not be in the interests of the United States or our International Partners. Can it be done . Yes. Is it the fastest . Yes. Can, do weom want to use it . Yes. By 2026, we need whatever is developed to be compatible with a gateway. That is in the reef as well. What we are working on is in the interests of the United States of america and the coalition of and thate are leading, is the open architecture system that is the gateway. A systems [inaudible] are also running this on the u. S. Canadianrussian project, pragmatics and Health Management for us. We are also running a session at iterospace conference is all about collaboration. [inaudible] when partners are working together and have the same goals. Sorry a a former canadian astronaut and then president of the Canadian Space agency resigned from his position. I was privileged to be a part of his team and would help him and his team to work on the canadianrussian international treaty. About what is the current status of the treaty . Mr. Bridenstine the current status of what treaty . The treaty between russia and canada. Mr. Bridenstine ok, yeah. [inaudible] mr. Bridenstine ok, so the current status of the treaty between russia and canada . [inaudible] mr. Bridenstine ok, i am not sure. Ok. [laughter] mr. Bridenstine we will get back to you on that. Im theafternoon, cofounder of the london space network. My question is around with the apollo 50th anniversary, the missions back to the moon, Public Interest is growing vastly. Citizens,how can staff, and deep tech and other organizations come together to discuss the ethical side of returning to the moon and other areas, such as industrial scale manufacturing on earth . This is a wonderful conversation. This conference is amazing. We bring so many people across deep technology and science together, but the ethical conversation is sometimes lacking. I would love to know how we could engage the majority on that. Mr. Bridenstine so here is, i think, the important thing. You mentioned the enthusiasm for artemis. Believe me, i can feel it everywhere i go. The apollo 50th anniversary was off the charts. The new knew generation i was not alive for the apollo 11 moon landing. I was not alive for apollo 17 either, so i do not have any memory of those days. I have seen the videos and i love them, but i will tell you this. This generation, the new generation that didnt grow up with that is so excited about going back to the moon, and now going under the name of apollos twin sister in greek mythology, who is the goddess of the moon, now we go with the diverse, highly qualified Astronaut Corps that includes women. Talk about enthusiasm. It rightno shortage of now and we are thrilled about all the enthusiasm that we are getting. As far as forums where we can go, i would encourage you to, i dont know here. Mr. Bridenstine yes, here. We have hundreds of reports we are more difficult people, but i know other than technical issues, they can be discussed on the field of this conference. Thank you. Smith, i would like to turn to robotic Space Exploration and i was wondering if you could give an update on the xo mars mission and the likelihood that it will launch in 2020. And more broadly, since all the countries have mars projects, spacecraft there or you are planning to send spacecraft, do you and if so, how do you cordon it amongst yourselves to see that you are not duplicating each other and you are all working together to advance our knowledge of mars . Mr. Krikalev sometimes duplication is gun for redundancy good for redundancy purpose, but this is not what you are asking. Sometimes it is good to have duplication for redundancy. It is a Good Opportunity to give our very special message concerning this. I wouldt about it, but like to recall it. Not 100 that it was successful. We did not reach the surface of mars in a soft way. We reached the surface, but rather hard. A very special experience for us in europe, because i got a lot of complaints from public media. It was a penetration experiment. Mr. Woerner yes, it was a penetration experiment. When elon musk was able to land sea, platform in the the failure, he said, an unscheduled disassembly. An exciting day. Can you imagine what i would have said after schiaparelli . Mars is fine, no repairs, exciting day . I would be fired. [laughter] mr. Woerner there is some truth in what i am saying. We need to do some risky things, because otherwise we cannot go beyond borders. This is what we are doing. All of the data from schiaparelli, we are using it in for landing a rover on the surface of mars. As far as the missions, as you know, the first one is working perfectly. We got all the information about methane and we are exchanging instance, concerning the measurement of methane on the surface. , but it isuplicating using two measurements to see what is happening with the methane on mars. This is one of the Big Questions concerning life on mars. Not onlylanning planning, we are working on the xo mars 2020 mission, which would be launched in the summer of next year, and we would like to see whether there is some life still existing on mars and not on the surface, because we know there is nothing. But we will drill into the surface of mars and measure its investigate depths of about two meters. Again, as a complementary activity to our other activities, which happened also and so on. We are exchanging on a scientific basis, we are exchanging what is done worldwide in order to not do unnecessary duplication and i insist on the word of unnecessary duplication, because sometimes it is good to have duplications. The plan is with our russian colleagues and another part of xo mars, a smaller contribution, but it is a challenge. We are working very hard, and my full hope is that we will have 2020 and the middle of that we get some Great Results afterwards. Would you like to add something . I would say, marcia, that pretty much every mission that nasa does on the robotics side, the Science Mission directors side, it is always with International Partners. We do not almost, if ever, at this point do anything alone. It is positive, because we work with our partners on what would be in their interests to achieve, but also like johann said, regardless, we share all the data. This is scientific knowledge on another world, namely mars. We share it and we share it for free. Even sayer i can something, we are also sharing knowledge because we have some issues with the power suit, as you might know, and we now have a very clear and open interaction with other people to clarify this issue. Datais more than just exchange, it is also knowledge exchange. Mr. Bridenstine absolutely. He mentioned the rapid unplanned disassembly, which i think is a great way of framing it. That is a unique capability that it is unique, and in the sense that it is not the way nasa traditionally operates. So the idea that you can rapidly iterate tasks, basically the way they do things that spacex, at spacex, they fly, they test, they fix. Fly, test, fix. Fly, test, fix. They do it until they get to a good solution. Nasa does things were deliberately leak, we are qualifying every component and subcomponent and putting it together. By the time the rocket is complete it is a fully qualified vehicle. It is a different approach, neither one of them is right, neither one of them is wrong, but what spacex has done is not to think thinkently or europe to it really, they have forced the United States to think differently in a very positive way. I am not saying one is right, one is wrong, but the approach is very different. It is more of a Silicon Valley approach, less of a government approach, but it works. We are seeing that now with commercial resupply and i think we will see it with commercial crew. [inaudible] good india, the u. S. , japan, russia, europe, is sit down together and say, what we really need to do is [inaudible] the scientists are doing this. They are their own community. [laughter] workingenstine at a level, those conversations are being had all the time. They are being had at this conference and we will be seeing the reports of it here. Mr. Woerner every scientific and Robotic Mission is international anyway. Caitlyn sing with the university of maryland. My question is given the discussion of this conference about how basically a lot of space agencies are moving towards the move and mars in the , is there any discussion of International Agreements or collaboration of some sort that might establish a forr protection standard spacefaring nations, such as the ones on this panel . Please, can i for example, we are planning a mission not to mars itself, but the martian moon. Is a sample return simple return mission, so we ofe to abide by the rule planetary protection. Have submittedwe an idea to make a new rule about planetary protection from mars, the martian moon. The forum for that is the International Forum for. Ntific that discussion is going long right now. I would add to that, the outer space treaty, which all of us on this panel have agreed to, said that none of us are going to harmfully contaminate another world or celestial body. So we do want to absolutely prevent the harmful contamination of other worlds. It is also true when we go to mars with humans, which we marsd to do, when we go to with humans, by definition, there will be contamination. Humans, will leave our microbes behind. Harmfulld say that is contamination, and what we need to figure out, ultimately, is what contamination is harmful and what contamination is not harmful . That is the definition we are going to have to work through as each of our agencies put plans to go to mars, because ultimately we all want to go to mars. That would be a significant achievement in the history of humankind. Hello, im with the russian news agency. I just wanted to ask if you are discussing possible government financing of the International Space station beyond 2024 . Thank you. Far as thetine as United States of america goes, i know there is a bill in the u. S. House and a bill in the United States senate that would extend the iss to the year 2030. I think there is support for both of those bills, and now, you know, whether or not they pass, i do not know. It is above my pay grade, but i can tell you there is definitely interest in a house and in the senate in the united date. In the house and in the senate in the United States. Mr. Krikalev on the russian side, we work with the whole ofld to ensure the extension the lifetime of iss is possible. Second, we work with our governments to have approval for our future financing for this program. So if everyone financed each side themselves, but we are working in agreement, to an extent, for the lifetime of the station. Question for mr. Right in stein mr. Briden stine. Things are going well for the mission, but what about the human lender . Do we have a timeline for the maiden flight, and do you consider other options . Our goal is to have humans landing on surfaces of the moon within five years. We are looking at a date within 2024, that is the objective. We have put out a Broad Agency Announcement to american industry the history says that nasa would create thousands and thousands and thousands of requirements, basically designed the spacecraft by requirements, and have industry propose how they are going to achieve the design. That is not how we are doing at this time. We are leaving it to industry to share with us how they would like to do it, and we would be interested in what their investment level would be. We would like to see a day when they have customers that are not nasa. Right now we are in a blackout period on the Broad Agency Announcement as far as who is proposing what, but i would say there is a lot of interest and depending on what comes back from industry, there may be on crude launches to the moon uncrewed launches to go to the moon, ahead of the day, i do not know. We are on it. Is to landjective is the next man or first woman on the south pole of the moon in 2024. That is our objective. So we are sticking to that, unless the budgets do not materialize, but i do think they will materialize. Ok, last question . Mr. Bridenstine i will answer later. Much,. Com. Very my question is for space. Com. My question is for mr. Krikale and the gentleman from israel. You touched on new crew vehicles for cooperation as well as International Space issues. I am interested in where that nextgeneration crew firste is for your astronaut. Thank you. We are currently in the design phase. It is capable of carrying three crew and bring it back by lending in the sea landing in the sea. [inaudible] optionsy, manufacturing are being studied and we are also looking at various collaborations and collaborations with other agencies to see some of the technical aspects of it. Largescale testing is also planned. Forsetting up test flights onboard conditions. We will be conducting various aboard missions with the new rocket, because this rocket is currently being readied to conduct those missions. We are planning to have the first Unmanned Mission by january, december, january of 2020. We are using the model three rocket. Mr. Krikalev i dont know what to add. You want to know how construction is going . Its going. We have a joint work with the russian industry, russian industry has provided some support for technical decisions. We will see how it goes. Ok, one last question and then we are done. For mr. Estion is bridenstine and mr. Krikalev. Bridenstine, we do you expect spacex and bowing to get ready to fly american astronauts to the iss . In the does not happen coming months, will you sign a new agreement, new contract with russia to do that . It possible that no american astronauts will be present on the iss next Year Contract for u. S. Spaceships and certain parties. Will you discuss this contract during this congress . Thank you. Mr. Bridenstine a couple of things. The first question is, i do believe that in the first part of next year, both commercial crew providers are going to both aan successful launch to the International Space station. What we are doing right now is to be very careful to not set a date for it. If we set a date, we want to make sure we can achieve the date. There is a lot of testing that has to be done. There is a big difference between operations when you think about the rocket, for example, it has beenthere is a e between in operation for a long time. It has been modified and advancements have been made, but it is a rocket that has been tested. It has been proven and the launch capabilities have been demonstrated to be very, very successful. So those are the capabilities that you have when you have an operational program. What we are doing with commercial crew is still under development. There are a number of tests coming up with both contractors, boeing and spacex. Have a test that is coming up and some parachute tests that needs to be done. We have an uncrewed test to the International Space station that we currently have on the books for december 17. Now, if all of that is successful and everything operates within the margins that we have set, then i would say that in the first part of next year, the boeing solution should be ready. That will be an atlas five rocket with a star liner crew capsule. Atlas five, of course, being a rocket, which has been well proven over time. On the space ship side, we have a velocity test, a highaltitude work test, and they have flown to the space station once uncrewed. We will learn as we go through these tests what the outcomes are and whether or not they are leading the margins that we all agreed to on safety. As we go through the tests for both boeing and spacex, if they are successful, i would say in the first part of next year we would be ready to launch american astronauts on these rockets in the first part of next year. Goal is, and ihe think this is important for us to remember. We want to always have an american astronaut on the internationals a station, and assia always wants to have russian cosmonaut on the International Space station. Means, even when we are successful with commercial crew, we want to see a partnership continue on russian rockets and russian cosmonauts can launch on commercial crew rockets in the United States. That is how we maintain a russian presence and an american presence on the International Space station. Mr. Krikalev even in the case of failure. Mr. Bridenstine thats absolutely right, even in the case of failure. We are very hopeful the partnership will continue. If the commercial crew was not ready in the first part of next year, our american astronaut would end up coming home in october of next year. So we have not had the discussion yet, but people who worked in our organizations who had the discussion about what it would mean if we are not ready and how would we have access to solution, that is something we are interested in. At that point, it will be over to russia to help us negotiate how we are going to achieve that outcome, because they have a schedule they need to maintain as well. Goal for both nations is to keep a permanent presence of our nationals on the internationals a station. The purpose is to keep the station flying, and we need both astronauts on both eyes of the station to be upper both sides of the station to be operational. The previous contract was untiled, and that is why the middle of next year, until october, actually, and we hope that commercial vehicles will fly at this time, because after that we were planning to move back to three crew members aboard the station. If something goes wrong, we will negotiate. Ok. Thank you very much, we are out of time, said thank you all for coming and thank you all for being here. Thank you. Thank you. [applause] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] if im a socialist, i am really not carrying too much about caring too much about popular opinion or pleasing a consumer. When we socialize things like health care, they just say well, yeah. Everyone is going to get it. No one will worry about your bills but you have to have rationing. Sunday at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on afterwards, in his latest book the case against socialism, kentucky senator rand paul talks about the history of socialism and argues there is a new thread of socialist thinking on the rise in america. He is interviewed by republican congressman matt gaetz of florida. It seems as though as you are making the argument that a country becomes more socialist becomes more selfish. I think that is true. It is in irony and a way, because they would profess to be it is for the other man. Everything is for someone else. In the end, it is driven by shelf business selfishness. Booktch afterwards on tv, at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan two. Representative jerry nadler the lead sponsor of the pregnant workers fairness act, a bill requiring employers to make accommodations for pregnant workers. He testified to the house education and labor subcommittee along with michelle durham, a former emt worker in alabama. Ms. Durham testified about how she could not take another position at her job and had to take an unpaid leave of absence due to her pregnancy. The committee on education and labor will come to order. Welcome, everyone. \ note that a quorum is present. The committees meeting in a legislative hearing to hear 2694, theon hr pregnant workers fairness act. I note for the subcommittee that ms. Mcbath of georgia, mr. Underwood of illinois, and mr. Cohen of tennessee are permitted to participate in todays hearing
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.