A preliminary report from a blue-ribbon space policy panel on Sept. 8, 2009, nudged forward several promises made by Barack Obama during the presidential campaign. One of those was to "expedite" a replacement for the space shuttle.

First, some background on the shuttle. The Bush administration in 2004 decided to wind down the program so that funding allocated to the shuttle could be redirected to building its successor. The shuttle, which first orbited the Earth in 1981, is now slated for retirement in 2010 (though that could slip until 2011). Its successor, known as Constellation, has been behind schedule. In 2005, officials had hoped the successor system would be online by 2012, two years after the shuttle's planned end, but the date has slipped, and now experts are eyeing 2017. That means a gap of perhaps seven years between the end of the shuttle and the launch of the next system.

During that time, the United States plans to contract with Russia to carry astronauts to the International Space Station. But to minimize that gap, space officials have been trying to determine whether it's possible to speed up development of the space shuttle's successor — either the contractor-built Ares I rocket and the Orion capsule, or by having entrepreneurial private space companies modify cargo vehicles currently planned for use in human space flight.

The question of reducing this gap — the longest in the history of U.S. space flight — was addressed at some length in the 12-page summary of findings released on Sept. 8, 2009, by the U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee. This panel is more commonly known as the Augustine Committee, after its chairman, Norman Augustine, the former CEO of Lockheed Martin.

While the panel said that the Constellation design would fit the human space program's needs, it expressed concerns about Orion's recurring costs. "The capsule is considerably larger and more massive than previous capsules ... and there is some indication that a smaller and lighter four-person Orion could reduce operational costs," the committee wrote. "However, a redesign of this magnitude would likely result in over a year of additional development time, and a significant increase in cost, so such a redesign should be considered carefully before being implemented."

Meanwhile, the panel said it was open to commercial alternatives.

"The United States needs a way to launch astronauts to low-Earth orbit, but it does not necessarily have to be provided by the government," the summary said. "As we move from the complex, reusable shuttle back to a simpler, smaller capsule, it is an appropriate time to consider turning this transport service over to the commercial sector. This approach is not without technical and programmatic risks, but it creates the possibility of lower operating costs for the system and potentially accelerates the availability of U.S. access to low-Earth orbit by about a year, to 2016. The committee suggests establishing a new competition for this service, in which both large and small companies could participate."

Officially, the Augustine committee's findings are only options to help guide the Obama administration — and as of this writing, the full report is not even out. In addition, Congress must approve of any major change, and that's far from a certainty. But the panel's deliberations are being taken seriously at NASA, the White House, among lawmakers and within the larger space community, so when it urges a quicker successor to the shuttle and suggests that commercializing human space transport could be a good idea, key players are listening. For this reason, we rate this promise as In the Works.