Exploring the Unknown - NASA's History Office

316
rity and foreign policy implications.
The AS&T proposal raises the following additional foreign policy and national
security concerns: (a) Possible assumption of U.S. foreign policy obligations by a private
firm; and (b) Data distribution in a nondiscriminatory manner to all customers.
C. Space Services Incorporated of America (SSI)
SSI is developing launch services for space activities and is not interested in the
ownership or operation of Landsat, related data acquisition or data distribution. SSI
believes land and weather satellites should not be considered simultaneously for transfer
to private industry, and further that weather systems should not be commercialized at this
time. SSI states that any transfer to private industry should not create a monopoly, but
allow opportunity to compete in the free marketplace.
[15] NOTE: SSI has been working in conjunction with AS&T in planning the launch
of AS&T remote sensing satellites as early as 1984.
(1) Responsiveness to Federal Needs:
Not specifically addressed.
(2) Continuity of Service:
See AS&T proposal.
OBSERVING THE EARTH FROM SPACE
(3) Feasibility:
This proposal states an intent to launch private sensors as early as 1984 which
would “complement” or “overlap” existing Landsat capabilities. The development
and acquisition of free-flying space remote sensors typically take six to eight years.
However, disregarding government delays and procedures, and assuming state-ofthe-art
technology, the fabrication, test, integration and launch might take three
to five years given the most optimistic estimate. In addition, the inclusion of
cooled focal planes aboard the sensor, which are important in geology and other
space applications, are unlikely to be achieved in this time frame, thereby eliminating
the majority of federal and other sophisticated users of thermal data.
Lastly, SSI has not demonstrated a capability to launch a 1000–2000 Kg payload
into orbit, nor does SSI appear to have the capability to command and control the
spacecraft, check out on-board systems, or process sensor data. SSI makes the
statement that it “supports the concept of allowing the private sector to use government
facilities and equipment already in place.” However, existing facilities
and equipment can only be used by expert, experienced personnel with access to
a very broad range of resources to solve problems, maintain system capabilities
and provide continuity. SSI does not appear to possess these attributes
[16] (4) National Security and Foreign Policy Concerns:
SSI recognizes government responsibilities to authorize and supervise private
remote sensing activities in accordance with the 1967 Outer Space Treaty and
national security interests. However, there is concern whether further commercial
space launch services, from within the U.S., be permitted until a well-defined
national policy and regulatory framework dealing with such activities have been
established and approved.
[17] 3. CATEGORY THREE - Those favoring government retention of the existing system,
at least for the immediate future.
The University of Massachusetts, RCA, Hughes Aircraft, General Electric and Ocean
Routes Inc., support continued government operation and ownership of the remote sens-