by Keith Cowing ©copyright 1996, Reston Communications

Over the past several days, there have been several senior level White House briefings by NASA personnel regarding problems with Russian participation in the ISS program. Previous discussions of these issues have led to lots of murky guidance - but no firm decisions - by the White House, much to the frustration of NASA officials.

The recent set of meetings began Monday night, 16 December, with Leon Firth, VP Gore's science advisor. Firth apparently didn't buy off on the proposals made by NASA. NASA representatives met with Firth again Tuesday night, 17 December, to pursue further options. The rumors which have reached RIF Watch regarding these most recent discussions are in accordance with what we've reported earlier, and go something like this: In fixing the Russian problem, NASA will not be allowed to exceed the annual $2.1 Billion cap for ISS development; FEL (First Element Launch) will not be delayed (something George Abbey has apparently been adamant about in discussions with the Russians) , and NASA will not try to "buyout" the Russians by converting their participation (or parts thereof) into a contractual relationship. Nor is there going to be any large scale new development program such as the new US propulsion module -- the "Interim Control Module." (ICM) -- proposed by MSFC as a replacement for the Russian Service Module.

So how will all of this get fixed? It seems that interim, low cost measures will be stressed - ones that both allow Russia to catch up and yet keep all US milestones on schedule. One of the primary problems with the late delivery of the Russian Service Module is reboost of ISS. The White House is reportedly pushing some lower cost interim options on NASA instead of the more costly ICM. These low cost options include some solutions developed by the DoD's Clementine program which may or may not overlap with earlier consideration about the possible use of an MX 4th stage for reboost.

Even if FEL is maintained, there will certainly be some manifest changes. Stretching out the man-tended phase somewhat may be part of the plan. The question, as always, when you tweak these schedules, is what effect this will have on the real purpose behind this space station: science. The jury is still out on this. Based upon previous trends, we don't predict good news.

Whatever the final solution, someone (we hope you're paying attention White House) needs to start making these decisions now. Following political agendas is fine when you have the time to sit around and discuss things, but FEL is only 49 weeks away.

Check the Assembly Sequence for yourself - but don't go looking for it at NASA ... the most recent version they have online is 2 years old.