Talk to Congress about Commercial Human Spaceflight

(David Gump) wrote in message . com...

What's not safe: enforceable medical standards and any "other"
standard that might appear to be a good idea to the fine professionals
at the FAA, whom I admire.

You appear to be assuming that it will be FAA setting the medical and
other standards. It's a reasonable assumption. But the language
doesn't support it. The standards are specified in the license. But
the license essentially consists of the license application plus a
cover letter signed by the Licensing and Safety Division Manager of
AST. In essence, the applicant writes the license, and AST says yea
or nay. So the standards specified in the license are the standards
the applicant sets.

Surely, then, AST would deny the license application if they didn't
approve of the medical and other standards set therein? No; they
can't. They don't have the authority. The Commercial Space Launch
Act of 1984 requires the Secretary of Transportation to issue a launch
license if the proposed launch is consistent with the public health
and safety, safety of property, and national security and foreign
policy interests of the United States. Nothing in passenger medical
or other standards has any influence over any of those. Therefore
medical or other standards, or lack thereof, cannot be used to deny a
launch license.

What HR 3245 says is that the launch licensee: must have medical and
other standards for spaceflight participants; must specify those
standards in its launch license; and must comply with those standards.
It says nothing about AST adopting any medical or other standards.
Considering that the physical environments will be quite different
from one vehicle architecture to the next - compare Xerus and Black
Armadillo, for example - the appropriate medical standards will be
equally varied, and AST would have great difficulty adopting a uniform
medical standard. HR 3245 quite wisely leaves the development of
these standards to the vehicle developer.

So, to answer your question:

So what standards will the FAA adopt?

Yours.


Randall Clague
Government Liaison
XCOR Aerospace

wrote in message . com...
(David Gump) wrote in message . com...

You appear to be assuming that it will be FAA setting the medical and
other standards. But... the standards are specified in the license. ... In essence, the applicant writes the license, and AST says yea
or nay. So the standards specified in the license are the standards
the applicant sets.

So, to answer your question:

So what standards will the FAA adopt?

Yours.


Randall Clague
Government Liaison
XCOR Aerospace


Launch firms submit license applications that respond to very specific
requirements laid down by AST. For example, AST is extremely specific
about what numerical standards must be met for risk to the public for
overflights of populated areas. The applicant has *zero* leeway to
offer a different standard. So, you are right that launch companies
can sumbit a license with any content they dream up, but
non-conforming applications will be quickly rejected.

We don't want AST to start down the path of establishing similar
standards for medical and any "other" thing that might seem a good
idea. We want AST to do something very useful, which is get access to
the NASA and IMBP data bases on previous travelers, and to gather
stats on passengers taking the new vehicles, and make them available
to all space transportation companies in ways that protect privacy
while revealing issues and countermeasures that we ought to know
about. Passengers and their doctors then can use this background
information considering what it means to the specific passenger, and
whether to sign the informed consent forms that acknowledge that
orbital space travel will have risks unlike taking a vacation in
Bermuda.

(David Gump) wrote in message . com...

We don't want AST to start down the path of establishing similar
standards for medical and any "other" thing that might seem a good
idea. We want AST to do something very useful, which is get access to
the NASA and IMBP data bases on previous travelers, and to gather
stats on passengers taking the new vehicles, and make them available
to all space transportation companies in ways that protect privacy
while revealing issues and countermeasures that we ought to know
about. Passengers and their doctors then can use this background
information considering what it means to the specific passenger, and
whether to sign the informed consent forms that acknowledge that
orbital space travel will have risks unlike taking a vacation in
Bermuda.

I think there's going to be more to it than that, David. A spaceflight
operator will have to know that a passenger is compatible with the
vehicle systems, just like any other component. Things as simple as
fitting into an ejection seat, for example. Whether you call these
medical standards or human factors, an operator is going to have set
some limits on who they can accept. It can't just be left up to a
passenger and his doctor because certain conditions could endanger the
vehicle. I think operators could do this without AST involvement, but
if AST wants to see those standards as part of the license
application, I can live with that, as long as AST evaluates them in a
reasonable manner. Having those standards written into the license
might even provide some protection against nuisance suits, when an
operator has to turn someone down for medical reasons.