A Bad Example of "One NASA"

As former Chief of the Shuttle Small Payloads Project at Goddard Space Flight Center, accountable for all the Hitchhiker and GAS payloads I can tell you that I had our office look at a number of ways in which our existing cross bay structures, and payload carrier integration expertise, might serve ISS logistics and payload needs.

Indeed, our Hitchhiker cross bays structures, what we called MPESS bridges (originally developed by MSFC by the way) could easily accommodate carrying two FRAM adapters and ORU's on top. We studied replacing the MPESS lower Shuttle keel with one that could would work in the Shuttle and the ISS PAS attachment point on ISS.

We studied numerous alternatives to the above configuration for non FRAM based payloads in which our MPESS would be hauled up in a STS, removed and installed on a PAS site.

Hitchhiker on Station we called it.

Unfortunately, at the time we were looking at these low cost plans to service payload needs on ISS, the ISS program already had commitment from the Brazilians to develop the Express Carriers that would mount to the PAS attach sites; so there was ostensibly 'no more room at the inn' for our ideas.

We also studied as well developing a generic carrier system that would attach to the JEM EF slots (External payloads on the NASDA external facility), that could go up either in the Shuttle on an MPESS, or an HTV rocket, and would accommodate science or technology payloads. This carrier would be designed to easily accommodate our existing STS base of experimenters, enabling the Agency to provide a low cost path to migrate our STS customer base to ISS (something SOMD is pushing hard on right now BTW...i.e to develop customers for the ISS now that it will be around till 2020)

Way back when, we approached the JSC Payloads Office, OZ, about using our own funding (via the Carrier Program Office) to develop the JEM EF carrier systems, integrating customers to the carrier, and mission operations in exchange for being that offices 'go to partner' for NASA JEM EF payload customers.

I left JSC/OZ with an agreement to do that, but JSC reversed their intentions a month later.

Our Office certainly has the expertise to modify existing hardware that would have save the tax payer plenty of money. However, our Office, and our program office, the Carrier Program Office at KSC, were not part of the ISS program, making it difficult for us to bring our expertise to bear in the ISS arena.

Certainly the Express Logistic Carriers now being developed by Goddard can haul up more ORU's and payloads on one of their carriers than an existing Hitchhiker MPESS.

In the end, the Columbia accident shut down our Office , and along with it, any chance to migrate our customers, and philosophy for flying small science and technology payloads to the ISS.

Including our FREESTAR payload on Columbia, we flew 76 Hitchhiker style experiments on 26 different Hitchhiker payloads (a collection of HH experiments and carrier avionics and structure) on 25 shuttle flights between 1986 and 2003. And we flew over 250 Get Away Special experiments from 1981 to 2003.

It was a great run of success.

Gerry Daelemans