Aviation Week: SpaceX Dragon Cleared For Launch
CAPE CANAVERAL — Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) is awaiting an FAA license to fly its Dragon capsule through the atmosphere, following launch on a Falcon 9 rocket targeted for Nov. 18 from Cape Canaveral AFS, Fla.
The launch license was granted Oct. 15. The pending re-entry license will be the first ever issued by FAA, according to George Nield, FAA’s associate administrator for Commercial Space Transportation.
“As we go forward [with NASA Commercial Crew Development and other programs] we expect to see a lot more of those,” Nield tells AVIATION WEEK.
Building on the Falcon 9’s successful June 4 debut (Aerospace DAILY, June 7), SpaceX plans to put Dragon into a 34.5-deg.-inclination, 300-km. (190-mi.) orbit, where it will remain for less than 4 hr. before re-entering the atmosphere and splashing down in the Pacific Ocean near Southern California.
Demo flight
The mission is a demonstration flight for NASA under its Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program. Both SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corp. have contracts to develop and demonstrate launch vehicles and to fly cargo to the International Space Station.
“While we had an incredibly successful first launch of the Falcon 9, this second launch is still very much a demonstration mission and will be our first attempt to bring a spacecraft from orbit back to Earth,” SpaceX spokeswoman Kirstin Brost says.
“We would like to do more integrated system testing, including another in-depth round of hardware-in-the loop mission simulations to see if we can uncover any corner-case problems. So far, it looks good, but we want to triple-check.”
Test points
Following Dragon’s release from the Falcon’s second-stage engine, the capsule will be used to test operational communications, navigation, maneuvering and re-entry.
“They have a pretty aggressive flight,” says Bill Gerstenmaier, NASA associate administrator for space operations.
“They’ll do, I think, two orbits and then do a re-entry of their capsule. I think that will be a good test to see how things are going in their systems,” he adds.
“It seems simple to just describe two orbits and then the re-entry. That’s still a pretty sophisticated test for them. They have their whole attitude-control system on orbit, which hasn’t been checked out yet. They’ll do some maneuvers on that. They have their entry systems with their parachute system, the heat shield, all that performance to come back, as well as a water recovery off the coast of California.
“They’re taking their time, working through the issues that they’ve got with their vehicle,” Gerstenmaier notes. “They had some software things they wanted to spend a little more time working with. They have hardware integration tests where they check out their hardware with their software; they wanted some additional time to do that, so that’s why they moved from the 8th to the 18th.
“They’re doing all the right things. They’ve got the right attitude of how to get ready for flight. I think it will be interesting to see how this flight goes ... and then they have potentially two more demonstration flights. The third one will actually come to the space station,” Gerstenmaier says.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Space ministers press for co-operation to make exploration a reality
FlightGlobal: Space ministers press for co-operation to make exploration a reality
By Dan Thisdell
Those who are particularly cynical about the justification for spaceflight budgets enjoy an amusing little circular argument. Question: why do we have the International Space Station. Answer: so the Space Shuttle has someplace to fly. Question: then, why do we have the Space Shuttle? Answer: to get to the Space Station, of course.
In these troubled financial times, such games demand more than a cursory brush-off. But, based on presentations to the second international conference on space exploration on 21 October in Brussels, it was easy to conclude that, nobody has much of an idea of what to do with the ISS.
More than 30 countries - including members of the European Space Agency, the European Union, Russia, the USA and other space players ranging from Japan to South Africa - were represented by ministers or their proxies.
Yet while speaker after speaker praised the ISS as a model of successful international collaboration in space and a magnificent orbiting laboratory, none presented a specific vision for the station, beyond the need to agree on its use to test technologies that may support journeys deeper into space.
ESA director general Jean-Jacques Dordain has no time for the cynics. Speaking to Flight International on the conference sidelines, he stressed that ESA, NASA and their international partners have suddenly been presented with a vast new opportunity with the ISS.
A year ago there was intense US space budget competition between the ISS and the return-to-the-Moon Constellation programme, but with Constellation's cancellation and US determination to support maintenance of the station up to 2020 and perhaps beyond, the game has changed.
Now, says Dordain, scientists have a 10-year or longer time horizon to plan for ISS use. That is a period longer than a PhD programme, he notes - long enough to offer exciting opportunities for science.
As the gathering in Brussels made clear, much of that ISS-based science can be directed to developing technologies that will drive exploration of the solar system, by both unmanned and manned missions.
ESA Council chairman Giuseppe Pizza struck a key theme in stressing the need to develop new propulsion and space transport technologies. Critically, he said, breakthrough technologies are needed in human life support systems, which so far cannot operate independently of supplies from Earth.
ALL TOGETHER, NOW
Pizza's opening remarks, underscored by several subsequent speakers, stressed that in the current economic climate, co-operation between spacefaring nations is more important than ever. Indeed, said Pizza, there is no question of achieving ambitious scientific objectives or opening a significant new chapter in space exploration without a global strategy, including the active participation of every European player.
Or, as NASA deputy associate administrator for exploration Laurie Leshin put it, if there is to be a human presence in deep space in a reasonable timeframe, there is no way forward but collaboration. Describing the NASA-ESA relationship as "robust and effective", she added: "Exploration begins with the ISS" and its "huge opportunities" for discovery.
Frank de Winne - Belgian air force brigadier general and the first non-US or Russian astronaut to command an ISS mission and chairman of the technical steering group advising European space ministers - placed a great deal of emphasis on forging a co-operative effort to improve life support system technologies, as well as an international agreement on a common space transport system able to provide what he calls "balanced, sensible access to space".
The Russian delegation called for a co-ordinated, international approach to developing rockets to complement its workhorse Soyuz launchers, ships for interplanetary travel and nuclear propulsion. Co-operative Moon missions should focus on mapping and then rover landings.
Clearly, while the 1960s US-Soviet space race may have made the Apollo Moon landings possible, that sort of competition is no longer a valid approach. But, as the conference also made clear, there are limits on what can be achieved through collaboration. Dordain noted that while co-operation will pay dividends in access to space, Europe needs to establish independent access capability, at least for non-exploration type missions.
De Winne himself may have foretold a thread of tension in a co-operative future by noting that Europe "should be part of exploration because we want to bring our European values to this venture". That means, he said, that the citizen must be the central focus of Europe's thinking about how to approach space exploration and bring benefits in technology to Earth.
De Winne clearly embodies a grander European vision of the future. The astronaut freely admits to having been inspired as a child by the Star Trek vision of "voyages focusing on discoveries and human values [of] universal liberty, equality, justice, diplomacy and co-operation between societies".
For now, specific plans and programmes remain elusive. The ministers meeting in Brussels merely agreed to join forces to develop technologies enabling space exploration, to seek better exploitation of the ISS and to establish a dedicated, high-level inter-government platform to co-ordinate international space exploration efforts.
Italy, in its capacity as ESA president, offered to host the first meeting of this high-level group a year from now in Lucca. It seems likely that Pizza and his colleagues will, as hosts, be looking to wrap up that gathering with some detailed plans - with a European flavour - for this new era of co-operation.
By Dan Thisdell
Those who are particularly cynical about the justification for spaceflight budgets enjoy an amusing little circular argument. Question: why do we have the International Space Station. Answer: so the Space Shuttle has someplace to fly. Question: then, why do we have the Space Shuttle? Answer: to get to the Space Station, of course.
In these troubled financial times, such games demand more than a cursory brush-off. But, based on presentations to the second international conference on space exploration on 21 October in Brussels, it was easy to conclude that, nobody has much of an idea of what to do with the ISS.
More than 30 countries - including members of the European Space Agency, the European Union, Russia, the USA and other space players ranging from Japan to South Africa - were represented by ministers or their proxies.
Yet while speaker after speaker praised the ISS as a model of successful international collaboration in space and a magnificent orbiting laboratory, none presented a specific vision for the station, beyond the need to agree on its use to test technologies that may support journeys deeper into space.
ESA director general Jean-Jacques Dordain has no time for the cynics. Speaking to Flight International on the conference sidelines, he stressed that ESA, NASA and their international partners have suddenly been presented with a vast new opportunity with the ISS.
A year ago there was intense US space budget competition between the ISS and the return-to-the-Moon Constellation programme, but with Constellation's cancellation and US determination to support maintenance of the station up to 2020 and perhaps beyond, the game has changed.
Now, says Dordain, scientists have a 10-year or longer time horizon to plan for ISS use. That is a period longer than a PhD programme, he notes - long enough to offer exciting opportunities for science.
As the gathering in Brussels made clear, much of that ISS-based science can be directed to developing technologies that will drive exploration of the solar system, by both unmanned and manned missions.
ESA Council chairman Giuseppe Pizza struck a key theme in stressing the need to develop new propulsion and space transport technologies. Critically, he said, breakthrough technologies are needed in human life support systems, which so far cannot operate independently of supplies from Earth.
ALL TOGETHER, NOW
Pizza's opening remarks, underscored by several subsequent speakers, stressed that in the current economic climate, co-operation between spacefaring nations is more important than ever. Indeed, said Pizza, there is no question of achieving ambitious scientific objectives or opening a significant new chapter in space exploration without a global strategy, including the active participation of every European player.
Or, as NASA deputy associate administrator for exploration Laurie Leshin put it, if there is to be a human presence in deep space in a reasonable timeframe, there is no way forward but collaboration. Describing the NASA-ESA relationship as "robust and effective", she added: "Exploration begins with the ISS" and its "huge opportunities" for discovery.
Frank de Winne - Belgian air force brigadier general and the first non-US or Russian astronaut to command an ISS mission and chairman of the technical steering group advising European space ministers - placed a great deal of emphasis on forging a co-operative effort to improve life support system technologies, as well as an international agreement on a common space transport system able to provide what he calls "balanced, sensible access to space".
The Russian delegation called for a co-ordinated, international approach to developing rockets to complement its workhorse Soyuz launchers, ships for interplanetary travel and nuclear propulsion. Co-operative Moon missions should focus on mapping and then rover landings.
Clearly, while the 1960s US-Soviet space race may have made the Apollo Moon landings possible, that sort of competition is no longer a valid approach. But, as the conference also made clear, there are limits on what can be achieved through collaboration. Dordain noted that while co-operation will pay dividends in access to space, Europe needs to establish independent access capability, at least for non-exploration type missions.
De Winne himself may have foretold a thread of tension in a co-operative future by noting that Europe "should be part of exploration because we want to bring our European values to this venture". That means, he said, that the citizen must be the central focus of Europe's thinking about how to approach space exploration and bring benefits in technology to Earth.
De Winne clearly embodies a grander European vision of the future. The astronaut freely admits to having been inspired as a child by the Star Trek vision of "voyages focusing on discoveries and human values [of] universal liberty, equality, justice, diplomacy and co-operation between societies".
For now, specific plans and programmes remain elusive. The ministers meeting in Brussels merely agreed to join forces to develop technologies enabling space exploration, to seek better exploitation of the ISS and to establish a dedicated, high-level inter-government platform to co-ordinate international space exploration efforts.
Italy, in its capacity as ESA president, offered to host the first meeting of this high-level group a year from now in Lucca. It seems likely that Pizza and his colleagues will, as hosts, be looking to wrap up that gathering with some detailed plans - with a European flavour - for this new era of co-operation.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
ISS Partners Set Docking Interface Standards
Aviation Week: ISS Partners Set Docking Interface Standards
Designers of future spacecraft that need to dock with each other for crew and cargo transfers are likely to use a new set of interface standards just published by the International Space Station partners in the hope they will simplify human exploration beyond low Earth orbit.
Available to anyone with an Internet connection—including Chinese, Indian and commercial companies—the standards give engineers the information they need to build docking systems for the space station as well as possible lunar excursions, rescue missions and any future “international cooperative demonstration” that brings together spacecraft from different nations.
An industry day next month at Johnson Space Center (JSC) to explain the new standards will be open to international and commercial participants, apparently without restriction. NASA expects the companies vying for a shot at providing commercial crew transportation to the ISS to be present, and it is not ruling out Indian and Chinese participation.
“We’ll have the hardware set up and teams out in place to talk to whomever decides to come,” says Stephen Gaylor, the space shuttle program flight manager who was chairman of the team that drafted the international docking standards.
Chinese participation at the Houston workshop will not be out of the question. Senior Chinese space officials have expressed readiness in discussing docking-interface parameters for human spacecraft (AW&ST April 19, p. 32), and a delegation from the China Manned Space Engineering Office (CMSEO) is due to visit the U.S. next month as part of an exchange set up last year by Presidents Barack Obama and Hu Jintao.
NASA Administrator Charles Bolden visited the Chinese human launch facility at Jiuquan last week as a guest of the CMSEO. Bolden, accompanied in China by astronaut Peggy Whitson and other NASA officials, toured space facilities and met with officials in Beijing, as well.
The interface standards do not cover the actual technology that would operate a docking system. Instead, they give measurements and force loads for engineers to match as they design their own docking system. For example, the diameter of the opening in the mating plane listed in the documents posted at http://www.internationaldockingstandard.com/ is 1,045 mm., but it is up to individual designers to design the mechanisms that will use that opening to guide and lock the two halves together.
The new standard is based on the old Russian androgynous peripheral assembly system (APAS) used to dock the space shuttle to the ISS, according to Caris A. “Skip” Hatfield, the senior NASA engineer assigned to implement the new standard on the station.
The mechanical APAS has been modified with elements of the electromechanical low-impact docking system (LIDS) under development at JSC to create a standard for systems that work like APAS but require less force to drive the two spacecraft together.
“They have a table that extends, that has the soft-capture system that makes first contact,” Hatfield says. “That soft-capture system is what takes out the initial forces and moments from the contact. And then that table is withdrawn, and there’s a hard-capture system, a set of hooks that reach up and bring it together and achieve the pressure seal and the physical interface.”
To date, NASA is closest to having a system based on the new standard. In its active mode, the NASA docking system uses a closed-loop computer control system that senses the forces and moments, and commands electromechanical actuators to dampen them out before drawing the two halves together.
The European Space Agency is at work on a similar system for its proposed Advanced Reentry Vehicle (ARV), a spin-off of its Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) that would be able to return cargo from the ISS (AW&ST Oct. 4, p. 47). Known as the International Berthing Docking Mechanism, it would also be made compatible with the new standard and would allow the ARV to dock at the U.S. end of the ISS, according to Simonetta di Pippo, ESA director of human spaceflight.
The NASA system is likely to be the first to be used in space. Plans call for the two APAS-based systems on the Harmony node to be moved to the Tranquility node in 2014 and replaced with common docking adaptors using the new NASA docking system.
That is where the commercial cargo vehicles being developed with NASA seed money at Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and Orbital Sciences Corp. will dock, as would any commercial or government crew vehicles developed under NASA’s emerging new space policy (AW&ST Oct. 11, p. 32). Russia will continue to use the probe-and-cone docking system in place on its end of the ISS for docking Soyuz and Progress modules and the ATV.
Designers of future spacecraft that need to dock with each other for crew and cargo transfers are likely to use a new set of interface standards just published by the International Space Station partners in the hope they will simplify human exploration beyond low Earth orbit.
Available to anyone with an Internet connection—including Chinese, Indian and commercial companies—the standards give engineers the information they need to build docking systems for the space station as well as possible lunar excursions, rescue missions and any future “international cooperative demonstration” that brings together spacecraft from different nations.
An industry day next month at Johnson Space Center (JSC) to explain the new standards will be open to international and commercial participants, apparently without restriction. NASA expects the companies vying for a shot at providing commercial crew transportation to the ISS to be present, and it is not ruling out Indian and Chinese participation.
“We’ll have the hardware set up and teams out in place to talk to whomever decides to come,” says Stephen Gaylor, the space shuttle program flight manager who was chairman of the team that drafted the international docking standards.
Chinese participation at the Houston workshop will not be out of the question. Senior Chinese space officials have expressed readiness in discussing docking-interface parameters for human spacecraft (AW&ST April 19, p. 32), and a delegation from the China Manned Space Engineering Office (CMSEO) is due to visit the U.S. next month as part of an exchange set up last year by Presidents Barack Obama and Hu Jintao.
NASA Administrator Charles Bolden visited the Chinese human launch facility at Jiuquan last week as a guest of the CMSEO. Bolden, accompanied in China by astronaut Peggy Whitson and other NASA officials, toured space facilities and met with officials in Beijing, as well.
The interface standards do not cover the actual technology that would operate a docking system. Instead, they give measurements and force loads for engineers to match as they design their own docking system. For example, the diameter of the opening in the mating plane listed in the documents posted at http://www.internationaldockingstandard.com/ is 1,045 mm., but it is up to individual designers to design the mechanisms that will use that opening to guide and lock the two halves together.
The new standard is based on the old Russian androgynous peripheral assembly system (APAS) used to dock the space shuttle to the ISS, according to Caris A. “Skip” Hatfield, the senior NASA engineer assigned to implement the new standard on the station.
The mechanical APAS has been modified with elements of the electromechanical low-impact docking system (LIDS) under development at JSC to create a standard for systems that work like APAS but require less force to drive the two spacecraft together.
“They have a table that extends, that has the soft-capture system that makes first contact,” Hatfield says. “That soft-capture system is what takes out the initial forces and moments from the contact. And then that table is withdrawn, and there’s a hard-capture system, a set of hooks that reach up and bring it together and achieve the pressure seal and the physical interface.”
To date, NASA is closest to having a system based on the new standard. In its active mode, the NASA docking system uses a closed-loop computer control system that senses the forces and moments, and commands electromechanical actuators to dampen them out before drawing the two halves together.
The European Space Agency is at work on a similar system for its proposed Advanced Reentry Vehicle (ARV), a spin-off of its Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) that would be able to return cargo from the ISS (AW&ST Oct. 4, p. 47). Known as the International Berthing Docking Mechanism, it would also be made compatible with the new standard and would allow the ARV to dock at the U.S. end of the ISS, according to Simonetta di Pippo, ESA director of human spaceflight.
The NASA system is likely to be the first to be used in space. Plans call for the two APAS-based systems on the Harmony node to be moved to the Tranquility node in 2014 and replaced with common docking adaptors using the new NASA docking system.
That is where the commercial cargo vehicles being developed with NASA seed money at Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and Orbital Sciences Corp. will dock, as would any commercial or government crew vehicles developed under NASA’s emerging new space policy (AW&ST Oct. 11, p. 32). Russia will continue to use the probe-and-cone docking system in place on its end of the ISS for docking Soyuz and Progress modules and the ATV.
Russia marks space accident
NewstalkZB: Russia marks space accident25/10/2010
Russians are marking the 50th anniversary of the worst-ever accident linked to space exploration.
Russians have been marking the 50th anniversary of the worst-ever accident linked to space exploration.
More than 120 people died in a launch pad explosion, which happened in the Soviet Union in 1960.
They were burned alive...some vapourised...when an experimental rocket went wrong.
The Russians kept details of the incident secret until the 1990s.
Russians are marking the 50th anniversary of the worst-ever accident linked to space exploration.
Russians have been marking the 50th anniversary of the worst-ever accident linked to space exploration.
More than 120 people died in a launch pad explosion, which happened in the Soviet Union in 1960.
They were burned alive...some vapourised...when an experimental rocket went wrong.
The Russians kept details of the incident secret until the 1990s.
Moon Express Enters the $30 Million Google Lunar X PRIZE Competition
Space Ref: Moon Express Enters the $30 Million Google Lunar X PRIZE Competition
San Francisco, CA (October 26, 2010) - Today, Moon Express Inc., a privately funded lunar transportation and data services company, announced its official entry into the Google Lunar X PRIZE, a $30 million competition that challenges space professionals and engineers from across the globe to build and launch to the Moon a privately funded spacecraft capable of completing a series of exploration and transmission tasks. Team MoonEx, headquartered in San Francisco, CA, is among 24 teams from a dozen countries that are competing for their share of the $30 million prize purse.
Moon Express is also among six U.S. companies award a contract by NASA, the US civil space agency, as part of its $30M Innovative Lunar Demonstration Data (ILDD) program. The ILDD contract is for the purchase of technical data resulting from industry efforts to develop vehicle capabilities and demonstrate end-to-end robotic lunar landing missions. The data from these contracts will inform NASA in the development of future human and robotic lander vehicles and exploration systems.
"The Google Lunar X PRIZE and NASA's Innovative Lunar Demonstration Data program are very exciting competitions that represent the knee in the curve of opportunity for the commercial lunar industry," said Moon Express Team Leader, Dr. Robert (Bob) Richards.
"We are very excited to have Moon Express as one of our Google Lunar X PRIZE teams," remarked William Pomerantz, Senior Director for Space Prizes at the X PRIZE Foundation. "With NASA already signed on as a customer, Moon Express enters the competition on great footing, and promises to be an extremely strong competitor."
For more information about team Moon Express, please visit www.moonexpress.com.
About Moon Express
Moon Express, Inc. (MoonEx) is a privately funded lunar transportation and data services company. We have the experienced people, partners and financial resources to blaze a trail to the Moon and establish new avenues for commercial space activities beyond Earth orbit. Moon Express is planning a media conference to announce its recent NASA contract award, as well as other details of the company. Information on this announcement will be made in the next few weeks. If you'd like more information on this event, please send an email to media@moonexpress.com
About the Google Lunar X PRIZE
The $30 million Google Lunar X PRIZE is an unprecedented international competition that challenges and inspires engineers and entrepreneurs from around the world to develop low-cost methods of robotic space exploration. The $30 million prize purse is segmented into a $20 million Grand Prize, a $5 million Second Prize and $5 million in bonus prizes. To win the Grand Prize, a team must successfully soft land a privately funded spacecraft on the Moon, rove on the lunar surface for a minimum of 500 meters, and transmit a specific set of video, images and data back to the Earth. The Grand Prize is $20 million until December 31st 2012; thereafter it will drop to $15 million until December 31st 2014 at which point the competition will be terminated unless extended by Google and the X PRIZE Foundation. For more information about the Google Lunar X PRIZE, please visit www.googlelunarxprize.org.
About the X PRIZE Foundation
The X PRIZE Foundation is an educational nonprofit prize institute whose mission is to create radical breakthroughs for the benefit of humanity. In 2004, the Foundation captured world headlines when Burt Rutan, backed by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, built and flew the world's first private vehicle to space to win the $10 million Ansari X PRIZE. The Foundation has since launched the $10 million Archon X PRIZE for Genomics, the $30 million Google Lunar X PRIZE, and the $10 million Progressive Insurance Automotive X PRIZE. The Foundation is creating and conducting competitions in four prize groups: Exploration (Space and Oceans), Life Sciences, Energy & Environment, and Education & Global Development. The Foundation is widely recognized as the leader in fostering innovation through competition. For more information, please visit www.xprize.org.
San Francisco, CA (October 26, 2010) - Today, Moon Express Inc., a privately funded lunar transportation and data services company, announced its official entry into the Google Lunar X PRIZE, a $30 million competition that challenges space professionals and engineers from across the globe to build and launch to the Moon a privately funded spacecraft capable of completing a series of exploration and transmission tasks. Team MoonEx, headquartered in San Francisco, CA, is among 24 teams from a dozen countries that are competing for their share of the $30 million prize purse.
Moon Express is also among six U.S. companies award a contract by NASA, the US civil space agency, as part of its $30M Innovative Lunar Demonstration Data (ILDD) program. The ILDD contract is for the purchase of technical data resulting from industry efforts to develop vehicle capabilities and demonstrate end-to-end robotic lunar landing missions. The data from these contracts will inform NASA in the development of future human and robotic lander vehicles and exploration systems.
"The Google Lunar X PRIZE and NASA's Innovative Lunar Demonstration Data program are very exciting competitions that represent the knee in the curve of opportunity for the commercial lunar industry," said Moon Express Team Leader, Dr. Robert (Bob) Richards.
"We are very excited to have Moon Express as one of our Google Lunar X PRIZE teams," remarked William Pomerantz, Senior Director for Space Prizes at the X PRIZE Foundation. "With NASA already signed on as a customer, Moon Express enters the competition on great footing, and promises to be an extremely strong competitor."
For more information about team Moon Express, please visit www.moonexpress.com.
About Moon Express
Moon Express, Inc. (MoonEx) is a privately funded lunar transportation and data services company. We have the experienced people, partners and financial resources to blaze a trail to the Moon and establish new avenues for commercial space activities beyond Earth orbit. Moon Express is planning a media conference to announce its recent NASA contract award, as well as other details of the company. Information on this announcement will be made in the next few weeks. If you'd like more information on this event, please send an email to media@moonexpress.com
About the Google Lunar X PRIZE
The $30 million Google Lunar X PRIZE is an unprecedented international competition that challenges and inspires engineers and entrepreneurs from around the world to develop low-cost methods of robotic space exploration. The $30 million prize purse is segmented into a $20 million Grand Prize, a $5 million Second Prize and $5 million in bonus prizes. To win the Grand Prize, a team must successfully soft land a privately funded spacecraft on the Moon, rove on the lunar surface for a minimum of 500 meters, and transmit a specific set of video, images and data back to the Earth. The Grand Prize is $20 million until December 31st 2012; thereafter it will drop to $15 million until December 31st 2014 at which point the competition will be terminated unless extended by Google and the X PRIZE Foundation. For more information about the Google Lunar X PRIZE, please visit www.googlelunarxprize.org.
About the X PRIZE Foundation
The X PRIZE Foundation is an educational nonprofit prize institute whose mission is to create radical breakthroughs for the benefit of humanity. In 2004, the Foundation captured world headlines when Burt Rutan, backed by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, built and flew the world's first private vehicle to space to win the $10 million Ansari X PRIZE. The Foundation has since launched the $10 million Archon X PRIZE for Genomics, the $30 million Google Lunar X PRIZE, and the $10 million Progressive Insurance Automotive X PRIZE. The Foundation is creating and conducting competitions in four prize groups: Exploration (Space and Oceans), Life Sciences, Energy & Environment, and Education & Global Development. The Foundation is widely recognized as the leader in fostering innovation through competition. For more information, please visit www.xprize.org.
Space Tourism, Climate Change and the Need for Sustainable Space Exploration
World Changing: Space Tourism, Climate Change and the Need for Sustainable Space Exploration
Will space tourism be a major climate change propellant? A new study reported in Nature finds that the impacts of a commercial space industry could be serious, even catastrophic:
[E]missions from 1,000 private rocket launches a year would persist high in the stratosphere, potentially altering global atmospheric circulation and distributions of ozone. The simulations show that the changes to Earth's climate could increase polar surface temperatures by 1 °C, and reduce polar sea ice by 5–15%.
"There are fundamental limits to how much material human beings can put into orbit without having a significant impact," says Martin Ross, an atmospheric scientist...
Given how rapidly the aerospace industry is growing, how much demand for space tourism there seems to be among the very wealthy, and how big these impacts are, these findings seem to demand serious attention.
Indeed, we would seem to need a much greater focus on sustainable space exploration in general. We're serious supporters of space programs as a way to understand and protect the home planet. That said, today's aerospace technologies present many environmental and social equity challenges. I've written before about the need for environmental law in space. Now it seems pressure needs to be exerted on limiting the emissions of rocket tourists.
Perhaps it's time for an advocacy group, Sustainable Space?
Will space tourism be a major climate change propellant? A new study reported in Nature finds that the impacts of a commercial space industry could be serious, even catastrophic:
[E]missions from 1,000 private rocket launches a year would persist high in the stratosphere, potentially altering global atmospheric circulation and distributions of ozone. The simulations show that the changes to Earth's climate could increase polar surface temperatures by 1 °C, and reduce polar sea ice by 5–15%.
"There are fundamental limits to how much material human beings can put into orbit without having a significant impact," says Martin Ross, an atmospheric scientist...
Given how rapidly the aerospace industry is growing, how much demand for space tourism there seems to be among the very wealthy, and how big these impacts are, these findings seem to demand serious attention.
Indeed, we would seem to need a much greater focus on sustainable space exploration in general. We're serious supporters of space programs as a way to understand and protect the home planet. That said, today's aerospace technologies present many environmental and social equity challenges. I've written before about the need for environmental law in space. Now it seems pressure needs to be exerted on limiting the emissions of rocket tourists.
Perhaps it's time for an advocacy group, Sustainable Space?
Monday, October 25, 2010
What Happened in Space News October 25
Venera 10 - USSR Venus Orbiter and Lander - 5,033 kg was launched on June 14, 1975 (7 days after its sister spacecraft, Venera 9).
Venera 10 arrived at Venus on October 25, 1975, three days after its sister spacecraft Venera 9.
Both orbiters photographed the clouds and looked at the upper atmosphere. Differences in cloud layers were discovered at 57-70 kilometers, 52-57 kilometers, and 49-52 kilometers from the surface. The lander arrived on the Venusian surface on November 25, 1975. During a period of 65 minutes, it transmitted black and white images of the planets surface.
Venera 10 arrived at Venus on October 25, 1975, three days after its sister spacecraft Venera 9.
Both orbiters photographed the clouds and looked at the upper atmosphere. Differences in cloud layers were discovered at 57-70 kilometers, 52-57 kilometers, and 49-52 kilometers from the surface. The lander arrived on the Venusian surface on November 25, 1975. During a period of 65 minutes, it transmitted black and white images of the planets surface.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Wall Street Journal: Commercial/residential development of outer space?
Why should we take a risky (physically, financially, environmentally) undertaking as space exploration and development? Look at the condition of the United States now, not to mention the whole world. That is exactly why I believe we should explore outer space and why it is worth such enormous risks. I do not believe for one minute we can stop the financial collapse of the United States, nuclear war, and so one. Contrary to outer space being our next fun playground for hotels and amusement parks, there are more dire reasons for doing this. Does anyone know what companies are more serious about this and which are open to investment?
Would you support the building of a manned moon base?
People on the Wall Street Journal website sharing their opinions on the subject.
Would you support the building of a manned moon base?
People on the Wall Street Journal website sharing their opinions on the subject.
Friday, October 22, 2010
What Happened in Space October 22
Venera 9 - USSR Venus Orbiter and Lander - 4,936 kg had been launched on June 8, 1975.
Venera 9 arrived at Venus on October 22, 1975, three days before its sister spacecraft Venera 10.
Both orbiters photographed the clouds and looked at the upper atmosphere of the planet.
Differences in cloud layers were discovered at 57-70 kilometers, 52-57 kilometers, and 49-52 kilometers from the surface.
The lander arrived on the Venusian surface on November 22, 1975. During a period of 53 minutes, it transmitted the first black and white images of the planets surface. It showed sharp-edged flat rocks and a basaltic terrain. The probe in now in an orbit around Venus.
Venera 9 arrived at Venus on October 22, 1975, three days before its sister spacecraft Venera 10.
Both orbiters photographed the clouds and looked at the upper atmosphere of the planet.
Differences in cloud layers were discovered at 57-70 kilometers, 52-57 kilometers, and 49-52 kilometers from the surface.
The lander arrived on the Venusian surface on November 22, 1975. During a period of 53 minutes, it transmitted the first black and white images of the planets surface. It showed sharp-edged flat rocks and a basaltic terrain. The probe in now in an orbit around Venus.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Space science vocabulary pt 2
Apogee
The point at which a moon or artificial satellite in its orbit is farthest from the objective it is orbiting.
Asteroid
One of the many thousands of minor planets which revolve around the sun, mostly between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.
Astrogation
Navigation in space.
The point at which a moon or artificial satellite in its orbit is farthest from the objective it is orbiting.
Asteroid
One of the many thousands of minor planets which revolve around the sun, mostly between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.
Astrogation
Navigation in space.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
NASA Partners Await Policy Shakeout
Aviation Week: NASA Partners Await Policy Shakeout
By Frank Morring, Jr.
European and Japanese space agencies are awaiting further developments as the U.S. puts the finishing touches on its new policy for exploration, adopting a wait-and-see attitude until Congress funds a compromise space plan and NASA fills in the details.
Speaking at a Washington conference organized by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, representatives of the European Space Agency (ESA), Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), France’s CNES and Germany’s DLR all expressed caution in the face of continued U.S. uncertainty.
“The NASA authorization bill does not provide information on which way we go,” says Andreas Diekmann, head of the ESA Washington office. Diekmann referred to the three-year NASA reauthorization bill President Barack Obama signed Oct. 11, which won’t be funded by an appropriations measure until a “lame-duck” session of Congress after the mid-term elections Nov. 2.
Fresh from a two-day retreat with NASA’s senior managers, Administrator Charles Bolden conceded in a statement distributed to agency employees that “there are still many details that the appropriations process will provide” about the future U.S. space program.
But he says he and his colleagues — including directors of the agency’s field centers — agreed on a broad policy based on the “clear direction” in the authorization language.
The international partner representatives agreed that the call for a heavy-lift launch vehicle is clear, and said they would accept flights for their astronauts in the commercial crew vehicles Bolden said NASA will push under the new law, provided they are safe. If commercial vehicles can close the gap in U.S. access to space after the space shuttle fleet is retired next year, so much the better, Diekmann says.
They also are satisfied with the authorization act’s call for international cooperation on exploration beyond low Earth orbit, and in general say the International Space Station can provide a model for that future cooperation. But beyond that, the message is too blurry for them to make specific recommendations to their agencies and the governments that fund them.
Lunar Plans
Norimitsu Kamimori, director of JAXA’s Washington office, says the Japanese government already has lowered the priority of a planned second lunar orbiter to follow Selene. But it also is going slowly on plans to develop a follow-on to the Hayabusa asteroid sample-return mission, pending greater clarity from the U.S. government.
Juergen Drescher, head of the DLR office in Washington and a surgeon with human spaceflight experience going back to the Shuttle-Mir program of the 1990s, cautions that there is a need for care in opening the ISS to more users. The new NASA plan calls for extending station funding until 2020, and while he urges all of the station partners to move quickly to use the orbiting facility over the next nine years, Drescher says Russia’s Mir station suffered logistics problems and even a potentially disastrous fire because of poor planning.
In the long term, there needs to be a clear understanding of how the international partners can contribute to deep-space exploration. Emmanuel di Lipkowski, space attache and CNES representative at the French Embassy in Washington, says that while “none of us would question the need [for] American leadership in space,” so far it is difficult to see just what that leadership wants its partners to do. “It’s not very clear for us what the message is in this new space policy, and we will have to clarify it.”
By Frank Morring, Jr.
European and Japanese space agencies are awaiting further developments as the U.S. puts the finishing touches on its new policy for exploration, adopting a wait-and-see attitude until Congress funds a compromise space plan and NASA fills in the details.
Speaking at a Washington conference organized by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, representatives of the European Space Agency (ESA), Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), France’s CNES and Germany’s DLR all expressed caution in the face of continued U.S. uncertainty.
“The NASA authorization bill does not provide information on which way we go,” says Andreas Diekmann, head of the ESA Washington office. Diekmann referred to the three-year NASA reauthorization bill President Barack Obama signed Oct. 11, which won’t be funded by an appropriations measure until a “lame-duck” session of Congress after the mid-term elections Nov. 2.
Fresh from a two-day retreat with NASA’s senior managers, Administrator Charles Bolden conceded in a statement distributed to agency employees that “there are still many details that the appropriations process will provide” about the future U.S. space program.
But he says he and his colleagues — including directors of the agency’s field centers — agreed on a broad policy based on the “clear direction” in the authorization language.
The international partner representatives agreed that the call for a heavy-lift launch vehicle is clear, and said they would accept flights for their astronauts in the commercial crew vehicles Bolden said NASA will push under the new law, provided they are safe. If commercial vehicles can close the gap in U.S. access to space after the space shuttle fleet is retired next year, so much the better, Diekmann says.
They also are satisfied with the authorization act’s call for international cooperation on exploration beyond low Earth orbit, and in general say the International Space Station can provide a model for that future cooperation. But beyond that, the message is too blurry for them to make specific recommendations to their agencies and the governments that fund them.
Lunar Plans
Norimitsu Kamimori, director of JAXA’s Washington office, says the Japanese government already has lowered the priority of a planned second lunar orbiter to follow Selene. But it also is going slowly on plans to develop a follow-on to the Hayabusa asteroid sample-return mission, pending greater clarity from the U.S. government.
Juergen Drescher, head of the DLR office in Washington and a surgeon with human spaceflight experience going back to the Shuttle-Mir program of the 1990s, cautions that there is a need for care in opening the ISS to more users. The new NASA plan calls for extending station funding until 2020, and while he urges all of the station partners to move quickly to use the orbiting facility over the next nine years, Drescher says Russia’s Mir station suffered logistics problems and even a potentially disastrous fire because of poor planning.
In the long term, there needs to be a clear understanding of how the international partners can contribute to deep-space exploration. Emmanuel di Lipkowski, space attache and CNES representative at the French Embassy in Washington, says that while “none of us would question the need [for] American leadership in space,” so far it is difficult to see just what that leadership wants its partners to do. “It’s not very clear for us what the message is in this new space policy, and we will have to clarify it.”
What Happened in Space News October 19
Mariner 5 - USA Venus Flyby - 244 kg - had been launched on June 14, 1967.
Mariner 5 arrived at Venus on October 19, 1967, one day after Venera 4. It passed within 3,900 kilometers of the planet's surface.
It studied the Venusian magnetic field and found that its atmosphere was composed of 85-99% carbon dioxide. It is now in a solar orbit.
Mariner 5 arrived at Venus on October 19, 1967, one day after Venera 4. It passed within 3,900 kilometers of the planet's surface.
It studied the Venusian magnetic field and found that its atmosphere was composed of 85-99% carbon dioxide. It is now in a solar orbit.
Monday, October 18, 2010
18 Oct, 2010: NASA authorization boosts Hamilton, Pratt projects
Massachusetts Live: The Republican: NASA authorization boosts Hamilton, Pratt projects
By HOWARD FRENCH
Special to The Republican
WINDSOR LOCKS - The NASA Authorization Act signed into law on Oct. 11 by President Barack Obama is good news for Hamilton Sundstrand, company spokesman Dan Coulom said Tuesday.
The legislation directs NASA to "continue the development of a government-led Space Launch System and leverage the development work done on the Constellation Program's Orion crew capsule and Ares I launch vehicle for human space flight to low earth orbit and beyond," Coulom said.
The Space Launch System includes a Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle and Heavy Lift Launch vehicle that will enable deep space exploration, for which Hamilton will make a variety of environmental and control equipment.
The legislation also directs NASA to continue space suit development activities, Coulom said.
Hamilton Sundstrand is teamed with Lockheed Martin on the Orion crew capsule and is responsible for environmental control and life support, power management and distribution, active thermal control, software development, and space suit life support.
At East Hartford-based Pratt & Whitney, the act is seen as a step forward, according to Pratt spokesman Tyrone Woodyard.
Both Pratt and Hamilton are subsidiaries of United Technologies Corp. Pratt supplies rocket engines for the space shuttle and a host of other NASA programs.
The Houston-based Coalition for Space Exploration called President Obama's signing of the act "another critical step for NASA to achieve a bold and sustainable approach for the future."
Coalition Chairman Glenn Mahone, chairman of the coalition, also said that the new legislation "further acknowledges the interest of the White House and Congress in setting NASA on a clear path to maintain America's leadership in space."
The Coalition for Space Exploration is a group of space industry businesses and advocacy groups that collaborate to lobby for continued advancements in U.S. space exploration.
Part of the reason for the collective sigh of relief on the part of aerospace companies is jobs.
As NASA's space shuttle program winds down toward an expected phase-out in 2011, employees at NASA's suppliers - including Hamilton - are thinking about how to accommodate employees who have worked on the program for decades.
Most of Hamilton's NASA-related activity is in Houston and Windsor Locks, where a combined 1,400 employees are assigned to space systems work, according to company information. About half of those, nearly 700, are in Windsor Locks.
The last shuttle flight is expected by the end of 2011, although the new act could extend the shuttle program
By HOWARD FRENCH
Special to The Republican
WINDSOR LOCKS - The NASA Authorization Act signed into law on Oct. 11 by President Barack Obama is good news for Hamilton Sundstrand, company spokesman Dan Coulom said Tuesday.
The legislation directs NASA to "continue the development of a government-led Space Launch System and leverage the development work done on the Constellation Program's Orion crew capsule and Ares I launch vehicle for human space flight to low earth orbit and beyond," Coulom said.
The Space Launch System includes a Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle and Heavy Lift Launch vehicle that will enable deep space exploration, for which Hamilton will make a variety of environmental and control equipment.
The legislation also directs NASA to continue space suit development activities, Coulom said.
Hamilton Sundstrand is teamed with Lockheed Martin on the Orion crew capsule and is responsible for environmental control and life support, power management and distribution, active thermal control, software development, and space suit life support.
At East Hartford-based Pratt & Whitney, the act is seen as a step forward, according to Pratt spokesman Tyrone Woodyard.
Both Pratt and Hamilton are subsidiaries of United Technologies Corp. Pratt supplies rocket engines for the space shuttle and a host of other NASA programs.
The Houston-based Coalition for Space Exploration called President Obama's signing of the act "another critical step for NASA to achieve a bold and sustainable approach for the future."
Coalition Chairman Glenn Mahone, chairman of the coalition, also said that the new legislation "further acknowledges the interest of the White House and Congress in setting NASA on a clear path to maintain America's leadership in space."
The Coalition for Space Exploration is a group of space industry businesses and advocacy groups that collaborate to lobby for continued advancements in U.S. space exploration.
Part of the reason for the collective sigh of relief on the part of aerospace companies is jobs.
As NASA's space shuttle program winds down toward an expected phase-out in 2011, employees at NASA's suppliers - including Hamilton - are thinking about how to accommodate employees who have worked on the program for decades.
Most of Hamilton's NASA-related activity is in Houston and Windsor Locks, where a combined 1,400 employees are assigned to space systems work, according to company information. About half of those, nearly 700, are in Windsor Locks.
The last shuttle flight is expected by the end of 2011, although the new act could extend the shuttle program
What Happened in Space News October 18
Venera 4 - USSR Venus Atmospheric Probe - 1,104 kg - had been launched on June 12, 1967.
It would arrive at Venus on October 18, 1967.
This was the first probe to be placed directly into the atmosphere and to return atmospheric data. It showed that the atmosphere was 90-95% carbon dioxide. It detected no nitrogen. The surface temperature reading was 500°C and pressure reading was 75 bar. It was crushed by the pressure on Venus before it reached the surface.
It would arrive at Venus on October 18, 1967.
This was the first probe to be placed directly into the atmosphere and to return atmospheric data. It showed that the atmosphere was 90-95% carbon dioxide. It detected no nitrogen. The surface temperature reading was 500°C and pressure reading was 75 bar. It was crushed by the pressure on Venus before it reached the surface.
Space science vocabulary pt 1
Airborne Data
data obtained from space systems during flight.
Ambient
Environmental conditions such as pressure or temperature
Analog computer
A computing machine that works on the principle of measuring, as distinguished from counting, in which the measurements obtained, as voltages, resistances, etc. are translated into desired data.
data obtained from space systems during flight.
Ambient
Environmental conditions such as pressure or temperature
Analog computer
A computing machine that works on the principle of measuring, as distinguished from counting, in which the measurements obtained, as voltages, resistances, etc. are translated into desired data.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
17 Oct, 2010, NASA's Bolden walks tight rope on China trip
Christian Science Monitor: NASA's Bolden walks tight rope on China trip
NASA administrator Bolden's trip to China comes at a time of upheaval in the US human spaceflight program, including doubt about Bolden's future at the space agency's helm.
By Pete Spotts, Staff writer / October 16, 2010
NASA administrator and former astronaut Charles Bolden Jr. travels to China this weekend on what he has described as an "introductory" visit that includes discussions of potential opportunities for future cooperation in human spaceflight.
The trip, at the invitation of Chinese space officials, comes at a time of upheaval in the US human spaceflight program, and amid growing ripples of doubt among observers in Washington about Bolden's future at the space agency's helm.
"He's sort of viewing the trip as a victory lap," says Keith Cowing, editor of the website NASAWatch, as momentum appears to be building to replace him.
On Oct. 11, President Obama signed the space agency's budget-authorization bill for the new fiscal year – a signing at which Bolden was noticeably absent. The measure would begin the process of reshaping the agency's human-spaceflight agenda as the 38-year-old space-shuttle program draws to a close.
NASA would send its smaller cadre of astronauts to and from the International Space Station on rockets operated by private companies. Meanwhile, its human-spaceflight efforts would focus on fostering the technologies and designing a rocket powerful enough to allow astronauts to explore destinations beyond low-Earth orbit.
US will hitch rides with Russia
Until private companies can demonstrate their ability to safely loft humans, the US will rely on Russia to ferry NASA's space-station crew members to and from the orbiting outpost.
Meanwhile, over the past decade China has sent its own taikonauts into orbit, demonstrating an increasingly sophisticated human-spaceflight capability. And it has outlined plans to develop its own space station and perhaps send its taikonauts to the moon.
President Obama has given international cooperation in human spaceflight a lofty spot in his formal space policy, released in June. Indeed, Bolden's trip stems from Obama's visit to China last November. A joint statement that followed the meeting called for an exchange of visits by space agency officials to each others' countries during 2010.
The concept of including China in human-space-exploration projects is based at least as much on realpolitik as it is on any idealistic notion that cooperation is inherently a good thing.
In April, for instance, Bolden told a meeting of NASA's Advisory Council that every other major partner in the International Space Station project is interested in working with China on human spaceflight efforts, including the space station.
As if to underscore the point, in June the European Space Agency's director-general, Jean-Jacques Dordain, told China's Xinahua News Agency, "I am really willing to support the extension of the partnership of the ISS to China and South Korea," although, he added, such a move also would need the approval of other ISS partners.
Skip to next paragraph
Related Stories
* Congressional tug-of-war holds NASA's new direction in the balance
* Human spaceflight: Lawmakers demand NASA documents
The danger, Bolden told the advisory council, is that any insistence at keeping China at arm’s length on projects such as the ISS – in which the US holds one vote out of five in setting policy for the station – could end up isolating the US instead. It's an argument some space-policy specialists outside the government have advanced as well.
Unsettled debate in Congress
Cooperation with China in human spaceflight remains an unsettled debate on Capitol Hill. It's layered atop already strong disagreements among lawmakers over the direction the President is trying to set for the US human spaceflight program.
Earlier this month, Bolden responded to Republican angst about the trip by noting in a letter to Rep. Frank Wolf (R) of Virginia that "my visit is intended to be introductory in nature and will not include consideration of any specific proposals for human space flight cooperation or new cooperation in any other areas of NASA's activities."
Friday, three Republican lawmakers sent a letter to Bolden reiterating their worries about the trip, given deep concerns about the "nature and goals of China's space program."
The trio, which included Rep. John Culbertson of Texas, Rep. Robert Aderholt of Alabama, and Mr. Wolf, noted that Bolden had announced the trip on short notice and with a dearth of information for lawmakers. They sought a "full briefing" on the trip when Bolden returns.
Others have been more supportive. A bipartisan trio of congressmen with the Congressional US-China Working Group observed in a letter to Bolden earlier this month that the trip might provide an opening to talk about stepping stones to deeper cooperation. One might be the development of a common docking mechanism for US, Russian, and Chinese spacecraft, including any space station the Chinese might be planning.
But anything that smacks of an agreement, even if informal, between the two space programs would give the administration's opponents more ammunition to use during an already contentious elections campaign, Mr. Cowing of NASAWatch says.
Tossing political opponents more red meat – even through the space program is not among the election's dominant issue – would be most unwelcomed at the executive end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
NASA administrator Bolden's trip to China comes at a time of upheaval in the US human spaceflight program, including doubt about Bolden's future at the space agency's helm.
By Pete Spotts, Staff writer / October 16, 2010
NASA administrator and former astronaut Charles Bolden Jr. travels to China this weekend on what he has described as an "introductory" visit that includes discussions of potential opportunities for future cooperation in human spaceflight.
The trip, at the invitation of Chinese space officials, comes at a time of upheaval in the US human spaceflight program, and amid growing ripples of doubt among observers in Washington about Bolden's future at the space agency's helm.
"He's sort of viewing the trip as a victory lap," says Keith Cowing, editor of the website NASAWatch, as momentum appears to be building to replace him.
On Oct. 11, President Obama signed the space agency's budget-authorization bill for the new fiscal year – a signing at which Bolden was noticeably absent. The measure would begin the process of reshaping the agency's human-spaceflight agenda as the 38-year-old space-shuttle program draws to a close.
NASA would send its smaller cadre of astronauts to and from the International Space Station on rockets operated by private companies. Meanwhile, its human-spaceflight efforts would focus on fostering the technologies and designing a rocket powerful enough to allow astronauts to explore destinations beyond low-Earth orbit.
US will hitch rides with Russia
Until private companies can demonstrate their ability to safely loft humans, the US will rely on Russia to ferry NASA's space-station crew members to and from the orbiting outpost.
Meanwhile, over the past decade China has sent its own taikonauts into orbit, demonstrating an increasingly sophisticated human-spaceflight capability. And it has outlined plans to develop its own space station and perhaps send its taikonauts to the moon.
President Obama has given international cooperation in human spaceflight a lofty spot in his formal space policy, released in June. Indeed, Bolden's trip stems from Obama's visit to China last November. A joint statement that followed the meeting called for an exchange of visits by space agency officials to each others' countries during 2010.
The concept of including China in human-space-exploration projects is based at least as much on realpolitik as it is on any idealistic notion that cooperation is inherently a good thing.
In April, for instance, Bolden told a meeting of NASA's Advisory Council that every other major partner in the International Space Station project is interested in working with China on human spaceflight efforts, including the space station.
As if to underscore the point, in June the European Space Agency's director-general, Jean-Jacques Dordain, told China's Xinahua News Agency, "I am really willing to support the extension of the partnership of the ISS to China and South Korea," although, he added, such a move also would need the approval of other ISS partners.
Skip to next paragraph
Related Stories
* Congressional tug-of-war holds NASA's new direction in the balance
* Human spaceflight: Lawmakers demand NASA documents
The danger, Bolden told the advisory council, is that any insistence at keeping China at arm’s length on projects such as the ISS – in which the US holds one vote out of five in setting policy for the station – could end up isolating the US instead. It's an argument some space-policy specialists outside the government have advanced as well.
Unsettled debate in Congress
Cooperation with China in human spaceflight remains an unsettled debate on Capitol Hill. It's layered atop already strong disagreements among lawmakers over the direction the President is trying to set for the US human spaceflight program.
Earlier this month, Bolden responded to Republican angst about the trip by noting in a letter to Rep. Frank Wolf (R) of Virginia that "my visit is intended to be introductory in nature and will not include consideration of any specific proposals for human space flight cooperation or new cooperation in any other areas of NASA's activities."
Friday, three Republican lawmakers sent a letter to Bolden reiterating their worries about the trip, given deep concerns about the "nature and goals of China's space program."
The trio, which included Rep. John Culbertson of Texas, Rep. Robert Aderholt of Alabama, and Mr. Wolf, noted that Bolden had announced the trip on short notice and with a dearth of information for lawmakers. They sought a "full briefing" on the trip when Bolden returns.
Others have been more supportive. A bipartisan trio of congressmen with the Congressional US-China Working Group observed in a letter to Bolden earlier this month that the trip might provide an opening to talk about stepping stones to deeper cooperation. One might be the development of a common docking mechanism for US, Russian, and Chinese spacecraft, including any space station the Chinese might be planning.
But anything that smacks of an agreement, even if informal, between the two space programs would give the administration's opponents more ammunition to use during an already contentious elections campaign, Mr. Cowing of NASAWatch says.
Tossing political opponents more red meat – even through the space program is not among the election's dominant issue – would be most unwelcomed at the executive end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Space Station Living, Radiation and Monkeys
Discovery News: Space Station Living, Radiation and Monkeys
Former NASA astronaut Leroy Chiao discusses his personal space radiation experiences and why monkeys shouldn't be our guinea pigs.
THE GIST
Radiation is the single biggest threat to the health of astronauts.
The radiation risk increases when traveling beyond low-Earth orbit.
Ex-NASA astronaut Leroy Chiao believes more work is needed to understand the risks, but monkeys needn't be tested.
In 2009, NASA announced controversial plans to expose 18 to 28 squirrel monkeys to low levels of radiation to understand the effects of space travel.
iStockPhoto
RELATED CONTENT
During his NASA missions, what was Leroy Chiao's favorite space food?
NASA to Start Irradiating Monkeys
NASA Monkey Radiation Study Draws Group's Ire
RELATED TOPICS
Animals
Astronauts
Experiments
So, I was sitting at the sixteenth conference on Solid State Dosimetry (SSD16) in Sydney, thinking about monkeys, radiation and space exploration. Dosimetry is the science of the absorbed dose of ionizing radiation in matter and tissue.
The main purpose of the conference involves neither monkeys nor space exploration. Most of the dosimeter work is focused on medical applications, to advance the state of the art for more precise radiation treatment of cancer patients. But the part I am involved with specifically deals with space exploration applications.
Radiation is the single biggest threat to astronaut health in long duration flight. This is especially true for flights that would occur away from the Van Allen Radiation Belts, which offer significant protection to all of us, safely cocooned in its warm embrace down here on the Earth's surface.
Even in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), astronauts are still protected to a large degree from charged particles. The heavy artillery still gets through (gamma rays, neutrons, some protons), but the electrons and other charged ions are caught in the Earth's geomagnetic field. Astronauts who ventured to the moon were outside of the belts, as would be astronauts who travel to Near Earth Objects (NEOs), Lagrange Points or any other far-off destination (Mars, anyone?). In this case, the radiation from a surprise solar flare could be fatal. NASA worried quite a bit about that possibility during the Apollo program in the 1960's and 70's.
It was announced in the morning's conference session that the previous night we had a solar event. I immediately thought of my friends aboard the International Space Station (ISS); they were a day late to return to Earth, and could be exposed to elevated radiation levels.
We had a solar event during my stint as the Commander of ISS Expedition 10. It was eerie. We got the call from Mission Control, and were advised during specific times when we were to retreat to the "more heavily shielded" portions of the station. More heavily shielded? Uh huh.
For me, that meant the sleep station in the US Segment, which had plastic shielding inserted into the fabric walls. They are supposed to catch a few heavy particles, but they still seemed awfully thin to me.
Flight Engineer Salizhan Sharipov was directed to the middle of the Russian Zvezda core module, where there was more machinery around the middle. After the event had passed, radiation detectors were still registering levels of about ten times above "normal." Great.
Well, what could we do? This was one of the prices we had to pay for the privilege of spaceflight. At least we had detectors, which allowed estimates of the cumulative doses that we received (we were told our health was "all good!" post-flight by the NASA folks).
There are three things we need to figure out radiation-wise in order to explore in a sustained fashion beyond LEO: (1) Detection; (2) Shielding; (3) Treatment.
The Solid State Dosimetry conference deals with the first: detection. There is ongoing work in the other two fields as well.
Shielding is a tricky deal. It would seem that one would simply need to find a pile of lead and hide inside of it. Not so simple. Gamma rays and protons punch into tough material like lead and cause energetic secondary emissions that can be much more harmful to biological entities like us. As for treatment, there are researchers working on drugs and nano-materials that would scoop up free radicals in our blood caused by radiation exposure. Good work in all three, but plenty more to do.
So, where do the monkeys come in? Monkeys and chimpanzees have played an important role in space exploration since the beginning of the Space Age. The first "American" in space was Ham the Chimp, who flew inside of a Mercury capsule before Alan Shepard.
You may have heard about planned monkey radiation experiments, and the recent protests against them. I understand the necessity of animal experiments in developing drugs and treatments, but I must admit that this one has me scratching my head a bit.
I have no doubt that some advances in scientific knowledge would be realized through these planned experiments, but I'm an operational guy (despite my Ph.D.). How would these experiments help us to survive in deep space? I don’t see it. The bottom line is that exposure to high levels of radiation is bad. We need to figure out how to detect, and protect against exposure as well as to treat if exposure occurs.
I'm a big fan of Curious George. Let's leave him alone this time.
Leroy Chiao served as a NASA astronaut from 1990-2005. During his 15-year career, he flew four missions into space, three times on space shuttles and once as the copilot of a Russian Soyuz spacecraft to the International Space Station. On that flight, he served as the commander of Expedition 10, a six-and-a-half-month mission. Dr. Chiao has performed six spacewalks, in both U.S. and Russian spacesuits, and has logged nearly 230 days in space. He was a member of the Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee, and is currently an Executive Vice President of Excaibur Almaz, a private commercial space venture.
Former NASA astronaut Leroy Chiao discusses his personal space radiation experiences and why monkeys shouldn't be our guinea pigs.
THE GIST
Radiation is the single biggest threat to the health of astronauts.
The radiation risk increases when traveling beyond low-Earth orbit.
Ex-NASA astronaut Leroy Chiao believes more work is needed to understand the risks, but monkeys needn't be tested.
In 2009, NASA announced controversial plans to expose 18 to 28 squirrel monkeys to low levels of radiation to understand the effects of space travel.
iStockPhoto
RELATED CONTENT
During his NASA missions, what was Leroy Chiao's favorite space food?
NASA to Start Irradiating Monkeys
NASA Monkey Radiation Study Draws Group's Ire
RELATED TOPICS
Animals
Astronauts
Experiments
So, I was sitting at the sixteenth conference on Solid State Dosimetry (SSD16) in Sydney, thinking about monkeys, radiation and space exploration. Dosimetry is the science of the absorbed dose of ionizing radiation in matter and tissue.
The main purpose of the conference involves neither monkeys nor space exploration. Most of the dosimeter work is focused on medical applications, to advance the state of the art for more precise radiation treatment of cancer patients. But the part I am involved with specifically deals with space exploration applications.
Radiation is the single biggest threat to astronaut health in long duration flight. This is especially true for flights that would occur away from the Van Allen Radiation Belts, which offer significant protection to all of us, safely cocooned in its warm embrace down here on the Earth's surface.
Even in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), astronauts are still protected to a large degree from charged particles. The heavy artillery still gets through (gamma rays, neutrons, some protons), but the electrons and other charged ions are caught in the Earth's geomagnetic field. Astronauts who ventured to the moon were outside of the belts, as would be astronauts who travel to Near Earth Objects (NEOs), Lagrange Points or any other far-off destination (Mars, anyone?). In this case, the radiation from a surprise solar flare could be fatal. NASA worried quite a bit about that possibility during the Apollo program in the 1960's and 70's.
It was announced in the morning's conference session that the previous night we had a solar event. I immediately thought of my friends aboard the International Space Station (ISS); they were a day late to return to Earth, and could be exposed to elevated radiation levels.
We had a solar event during my stint as the Commander of ISS Expedition 10. It was eerie. We got the call from Mission Control, and were advised during specific times when we were to retreat to the "more heavily shielded" portions of the station. More heavily shielded? Uh huh.
For me, that meant the sleep station in the US Segment, which had plastic shielding inserted into the fabric walls. They are supposed to catch a few heavy particles, but they still seemed awfully thin to me.
Flight Engineer Salizhan Sharipov was directed to the middle of the Russian Zvezda core module, where there was more machinery around the middle. After the event had passed, radiation detectors were still registering levels of about ten times above "normal." Great.
Well, what could we do? This was one of the prices we had to pay for the privilege of spaceflight. At least we had detectors, which allowed estimates of the cumulative doses that we received (we were told our health was "all good!" post-flight by the NASA folks).
There are three things we need to figure out radiation-wise in order to explore in a sustained fashion beyond LEO: (1) Detection; (2) Shielding; (3) Treatment.
The Solid State Dosimetry conference deals with the first: detection. There is ongoing work in the other two fields as well.
Shielding is a tricky deal. It would seem that one would simply need to find a pile of lead and hide inside of it. Not so simple. Gamma rays and protons punch into tough material like lead and cause energetic secondary emissions that can be much more harmful to biological entities like us. As for treatment, there are researchers working on drugs and nano-materials that would scoop up free radicals in our blood caused by radiation exposure. Good work in all three, but plenty more to do.
So, where do the monkeys come in? Monkeys and chimpanzees have played an important role in space exploration since the beginning of the Space Age. The first "American" in space was Ham the Chimp, who flew inside of a Mercury capsule before Alan Shepard.
You may have heard about planned monkey radiation experiments, and the recent protests against them. I understand the necessity of animal experiments in developing drugs and treatments, but I must admit that this one has me scratching my head a bit.
I have no doubt that some advances in scientific knowledge would be realized through these planned experiments, but I'm an operational guy (despite my Ph.D.). How would these experiments help us to survive in deep space? I don’t see it. The bottom line is that exposure to high levels of radiation is bad. We need to figure out how to detect, and protect against exposure as well as to treat if exposure occurs.
I'm a big fan of Curious George. Let's leave him alone this time.
Leroy Chiao served as a NASA astronaut from 1990-2005. During his 15-year career, he flew four missions into space, three times on space shuttles and once as the copilot of a Russian Soyuz spacecraft to the International Space Station. On that flight, he served as the commander of Expedition 10, a six-and-a-half-month mission. Dr. Chiao has performed six spacewalks, in both U.S. and Russian spacesuits, and has logged nearly 230 days in space. He was a member of the Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee, and is currently an Executive Vice President of Excaibur Almaz, a private commercial space venture.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Etsy and NASA Announce Space Craft Contest
Etsy and NASA Announce Space Craft Contest
In an unlikely partnership, Etsy and NASA (the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration) are running a contest to honor NASA's Space Shuttle program and celebrate its accomplishments. Etsy is calling for designs inspired by NASA, its programs and the wonders of space exploration; winning designs may be flown on the space shuttle.
There are three categories: 2D Original Art (painting, drawing, hand-pulled print, mixed media or flat collage); 2D Art Reproduction (photographic or computer-generated print); and 3D Art. Vintage items are not eligible. The Grand Prize winner will receive a $500 Etsy shopping spree and an all-expenses-paid trip with a guest to attend the shuttle launch at Kennedy Space Center in Cocoa, Florida in February as NASA's VIP guests, including a VIP tour. Three Best in Category Winners will receive $250 and swag from Etsy and NASA.
The deadline to enter is November 2, 2010. For information on how to enter, judging criteria, official Rules and Regulations, etc., go to the NASA Space Craft Contest site. (The contest is limited to United States residents only, 18 years and older.)
In an unlikely partnership, Etsy and NASA (the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration) are running a contest to honor NASA's Space Shuttle program and celebrate its accomplishments. Etsy is calling for designs inspired by NASA, its programs and the wonders of space exploration; winning designs may be flown on the space shuttle.
There are three categories: 2D Original Art (painting, drawing, hand-pulled print, mixed media or flat collage); 2D Art Reproduction (photographic or computer-generated print); and 3D Art. Vintage items are not eligible. The Grand Prize winner will receive a $500 Etsy shopping spree and an all-expenses-paid trip with a guest to attend the shuttle launch at Kennedy Space Center in Cocoa, Florida in February as NASA's VIP guests, including a VIP tour. Three Best in Category Winners will receive $250 and swag from Etsy and NASA.
The deadline to enter is November 2, 2010. For information on how to enter, judging criteria, official Rules and Regulations, etc., go to the NASA Space Craft Contest site. (The contest is limited to United States residents only, 18 years and older.)
What Happened in Space News October 14
Venera 16 - USSR Venus Orbiter - 5,000 kg was launched on June 7, 1983.
Venera 16 arrived at Venus on October 14, 1983.
Its high-resolution imaging system produced images at 1-2 kilometers in resolution.
Venera 15 and 16 produced a map of the northern hemisphere from the pole to 30°N. They found several hot spots, possibly caused by volcanic activity.
Venera 16 arrived at Venus on October 14, 1983.
Its high-resolution imaging system produced images at 1-2 kilometers in resolution.
Venera 15 and 16 produced a map of the northern hemisphere from the pole to 30°N. They found several hot spots, possibly caused by volcanic activity.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Global Times: China has no desire for new space race
China has no desire for new space race
Editor's Note:
In the 21st century, the eyes of the world are turning to space again. New programs to explore space's resources are being launched in many countries, including China. Is there a new space race? Why are so many countries keen on lunar exploration? What benefits can the quest for space bring? Global Times reporter Yu Jincui (GT) talked to Ouyang Ziyuan (Ouyang), a senior consultant at China's lunar exploration program, on these issues.
GT: Why did China initiate its lunar exploration program? What influence will the program have on China's devel-opment?
Ouyang: Strictly speaking, China is a developing country. Some people argue that rather than explore the moon, we should concentrate on dealing with problems on Earth. It is understandable.
However, from a broader development perspective, we should not only be engaged in lunar exploration, but also step up our pace.
The lunar exploration program covers many high-tech fields. It is very scientifically demanding, which stimulates the technological upgrades and innovations.
Lunar exploration is a threshold for exploring deep space and remote space, and it could provide the basic experience for eventually exploring other planets. There are unimaginable abundant natural resources on the moon, such as rare earths, or uranium and titanium ores. The titanium ore reserve on the moon is the same size as the whole of China.
Although we are not able to exploit these resources due to the extremely high cost and technological limitations, as scientists, we have the responsibility to prove the existence of these resources and inform the people.
The moon has a very huge energy reserve. Japanese scientists recently came up with a design idea that if humanity could build a moon belt for solar power generation and transmitting energy back to the earth, human energy needs could be permanently satisfied.
Since the 1990s, a total of nine lunar probes have been launched into space, two from China (including the newly launched Chang'e-2 satellite), three from the US, one from Europe, two from Japan, and one from India.
The world is witnessing the climax of the second round of lunar exploration. All the countries involved are expecting to discover more comprehensive and concrete knowledge about the moon.
If China doesn't explore the moon, we will have no say in international lunar exploration and can't safeguard our proper rights and interests.
The contribution of the Apollo project of the US is amazing. According to one calculation, the input-output ratio is 1:14. It drove the development of high-tech worldwide and made the US a leader in the high-tech field for almost 20 years.
China's lunar exploration program is nowhere near as big as Apollo project in size, but it could also make great contributions in promoting technological improvements, scientific progress and talents cultivation.
China should not stay in the cradle of the Earth forever. The Chinese people should make contributions to the human development in the field of space exploration.
GT: Is there a new space race?
Ouyang: I am strongly against seeing lunar exploration as a race. The second round of lunar exploration is quite different from the first one conducted by the US and the former Soviet Union, which was a struggle for hegemony in space.
Every competent country will certainly take part in space exploration out of self-development and for technological and scientific progress. These countries are working together to contribute to the sum of human knowledge and development.
Those who highlight China's alleged ambitions for control may have different agendas and motivations.
GT: How is China's space program by international standards?
Ouyang: Different countries have different advantages and disadvantages.
Japan has better equipment and India has the advantage over China in computer software.
In the final round of a marathon, several groups form. We could use this analogy to describe the current situation in the field of lunar exploration. The US and Russia belong to the leading group with the strongest strength.
Although China is the only other country to have performed a space walk, we still lag far behind these two countries. The second group refers to those that have launched lunar probes, such as India, Europe, and Japan. That's where China is.
Of course, there is a third group covering all the countries that are preparing to get involved in the field. Out of the needs for their own national development, more countries are expected to join the team in the future.
GT: The US has suspended its Constellation program at the beginning of 2010, and India is determined to realize manned lunar exploration in 2020. Will these affect China's plan?
Ouyang: I have been paying attention on the space policy of the US. I think the Obama administration generally agree with George W. Bush's space plan, since it is necessary to maintain the US space leadership, control the future energy sources and safeguard the US military strategy.
However, the US suffered great trauma from the financial crisis. Due to the slow economic recovery, the US couldn't afford a huge lunar exploration plan with a total investment of $108 billion. But it is noticeable that although the US suspended the Constellation program, it didn't give up rocket or spaceship research.
I have communicated with other countries' chief scientists for lunar exploration and they all expressed that their country would stick to their original plans. So will China. Although US lunar exploration has slowed down, it will not affect the global lunar exploration process.
India has always taken China as a competitor in this regard. It is determined to realize manned lunar exploration by 2020. We need to understand India. As a large country, it needs lunar exploration to spur technological development and invigorate the national spirit.
GT: Will China land on the moon?
Ouyang: The precondition for manned lunar exploration is that we must assure the safe return of the astronaut to the Earth. Any unnecessary risk is not allowed. Therefore, China is very cautious and moves forward step by step according to our own capability.
There is still not a definite timetable for China's manned lunar exploration. The former director of NASA once said that if China were willing, it would send its astronaut to the moon by 2020. Some domestic scientists have suggested 2025 as a proper time and some have suggested 2030.
We scientists have conducted relevant research on manned lunar exploration, and are trying to realize the national dream of landing on the moon as soon as possible.
GT: What's your attitude on international cooperation on lunar exploration?
Ouyang: China has been sticking to peaceful space exploration and objects to any form of space militarization. China welcomes international coopera-tion and has been constantly seeking international cooperation.
We always hope to learn from others' experiences and purchase advanced equipment from them.
Editor's Note:
In the 21st century, the eyes of the world are turning to space again. New programs to explore space's resources are being launched in many countries, including China. Is there a new space race? Why are so many countries keen on lunar exploration? What benefits can the quest for space bring? Global Times reporter Yu Jincui (GT) talked to Ouyang Ziyuan (Ouyang), a senior consultant at China's lunar exploration program, on these issues.
GT: Why did China initiate its lunar exploration program? What influence will the program have on China's devel-opment?
Ouyang: Strictly speaking, China is a developing country. Some people argue that rather than explore the moon, we should concentrate on dealing with problems on Earth. It is understandable.
However, from a broader development perspective, we should not only be engaged in lunar exploration, but also step up our pace.
The lunar exploration program covers many high-tech fields. It is very scientifically demanding, which stimulates the technological upgrades and innovations.
Lunar exploration is a threshold for exploring deep space and remote space, and it could provide the basic experience for eventually exploring other planets. There are unimaginable abundant natural resources on the moon, such as rare earths, or uranium and titanium ores. The titanium ore reserve on the moon is the same size as the whole of China.
Although we are not able to exploit these resources due to the extremely high cost and technological limitations, as scientists, we have the responsibility to prove the existence of these resources and inform the people.
The moon has a very huge energy reserve. Japanese scientists recently came up with a design idea that if humanity could build a moon belt for solar power generation and transmitting energy back to the earth, human energy needs could be permanently satisfied.
Since the 1990s, a total of nine lunar probes have been launched into space, two from China (including the newly launched Chang'e-2 satellite), three from the US, one from Europe, two from Japan, and one from India.
The world is witnessing the climax of the second round of lunar exploration. All the countries involved are expecting to discover more comprehensive and concrete knowledge about the moon.
If China doesn't explore the moon, we will have no say in international lunar exploration and can't safeguard our proper rights and interests.
The contribution of the Apollo project of the US is amazing. According to one calculation, the input-output ratio is 1:14. It drove the development of high-tech worldwide and made the US a leader in the high-tech field for almost 20 years.
China's lunar exploration program is nowhere near as big as Apollo project in size, but it could also make great contributions in promoting technological improvements, scientific progress and talents cultivation.
China should not stay in the cradle of the Earth forever. The Chinese people should make contributions to the human development in the field of space exploration.
GT: Is there a new space race?
Ouyang: I am strongly against seeing lunar exploration as a race. The second round of lunar exploration is quite different from the first one conducted by the US and the former Soviet Union, which was a struggle for hegemony in space.
Every competent country will certainly take part in space exploration out of self-development and for technological and scientific progress. These countries are working together to contribute to the sum of human knowledge and development.
Those who highlight China's alleged ambitions for control may have different agendas and motivations.
GT: How is China's space program by international standards?
Ouyang: Different countries have different advantages and disadvantages.
Japan has better equipment and India has the advantage over China in computer software.
In the final round of a marathon, several groups form. We could use this analogy to describe the current situation in the field of lunar exploration. The US and Russia belong to the leading group with the strongest strength.
Although China is the only other country to have performed a space walk, we still lag far behind these two countries. The second group refers to those that have launched lunar probes, such as India, Europe, and Japan. That's where China is.
Of course, there is a third group covering all the countries that are preparing to get involved in the field. Out of the needs for their own national development, more countries are expected to join the team in the future.
GT: The US has suspended its Constellation program at the beginning of 2010, and India is determined to realize manned lunar exploration in 2020. Will these affect China's plan?
Ouyang: I have been paying attention on the space policy of the US. I think the Obama administration generally agree with George W. Bush's space plan, since it is necessary to maintain the US space leadership, control the future energy sources and safeguard the US military strategy.
However, the US suffered great trauma from the financial crisis. Due to the slow economic recovery, the US couldn't afford a huge lunar exploration plan with a total investment of $108 billion. But it is noticeable that although the US suspended the Constellation program, it didn't give up rocket or spaceship research.
I have communicated with other countries' chief scientists for lunar exploration and they all expressed that their country would stick to their original plans. So will China. Although US lunar exploration has slowed down, it will not affect the global lunar exploration process.
India has always taken China as a competitor in this regard. It is determined to realize manned lunar exploration by 2020. We need to understand India. As a large country, it needs lunar exploration to spur technological development and invigorate the national spirit.
GT: Will China land on the moon?
Ouyang: The precondition for manned lunar exploration is that we must assure the safe return of the astronaut to the Earth. Any unnecessary risk is not allowed. Therefore, China is very cautious and moves forward step by step according to our own capability.
There is still not a definite timetable for China's manned lunar exploration. The former director of NASA once said that if China were willing, it would send its astronaut to the moon by 2020. Some domestic scientists have suggested 2025 as a proper time and some have suggested 2030.
We scientists have conducted relevant research on manned lunar exploration, and are trying to realize the national dream of landing on the moon as soon as possible.
GT: What's your attitude on international cooperation on lunar exploration?
Ouyang: China has been sticking to peaceful space exploration and objects to any form of space militarization. China welcomes international coopera-tion and has been constantly seeking international cooperation.
We always hope to learn from others' experiences and purchase advanced equipment from them.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Discovery News: The Space Station as a Deep Space Exploration Platform?
The Space Station as a Deep Space Exploration Platform?
It's the bread and butter of sci-fi movies: A spaceport in Earth orbit acting as a spaceship construction facility or an assembly point for astronauts to resupply before flying into deep space. Now there are some low-level discussions about turning the International Space Station (ISS) into that functioning spaceport.
According to letters exchanged by the Russian, European and US space agencies, it would appear there is renewed interest in further development of the space station's purpose.
The ISS is outfitted with a hi-tech suite of laboratories largely intended to study the microgravity effects on Earth biology. If these new ideas ever reach fruition, we could see a reinvigorated station with deep space aspirations. The research carried out on the station could then be used to understand how to grow food on Mars, or develop advanced life support systems for example.
According to the ideas being bandied around, the ISS could become a spaceship construction yard of sorts, building vehicles to make trips to the moon (for what purpose, it's not yet clear) and eventually form the backbone of a deep space exploration research infrastructure.
"We need the courage of starting a new era," Simonetta Di Pippo, Europe's director of human spaceflight, said in an interview with BBC News.
"The idea is to ascend to the space station the various elements of the mission, and then try to assemble the spacecraft at the ISS, and go from the orbit of the space station to the Moon."
This is fundamentally a sound idea. Getting stuff into space isn't easy; to get anything sizable into orbit is expensive and resource-heavy. If you can have a construction platform already in orbit you can send up the smaller components piece-by-piece to build large spacecraft outside of Earth's restrictive gravitational field. The size of the finished product is no longer a problem.
There is one huge issue with re-purposing the ISS, however. It was never designed to be a low-Earth orbit construction facility. Building space vehicles down here on Earth is hard enough; in microgravity the challenges multiply. Therefore, most of the fabrication would need to be done on Earth, then each piece sent up in turn -- very much like the construction of the modular ISS itself.
There's also the looming retirement of the space shuttle fleet. How would we get spaceship components to the space station for construction?
The space station has been the focus of much criticism over the years. At best, the ISS partners admit that the space station in its current form hasn't lived up to its scientific promise (yet). At worst, critics think it's a disproportionately expensive means of keeping humans in space with minimal benefit to mankind.
But we now have a near-completed space station with six crew members able to carry out around 70 hours of science per week. Construction has taken a decade, the scientific benefits of having this orbital outpost may take some time to see the light of day.
This isn't the first time the space station's purpose has been re-examined. Memorably, in 2008, a Washington Post article suggested that the ISS should be retrofitted with rockets and sent to Mars. Sure, this was a fanciful idea by a commenter who had obvious frustrations with the project, but it excited the public and science media alike.
Now there's some discussion with the ISS partners to turn the space station into a spaceport, does this mean an opportunity has been spotted to use the ISS as a viable platform to mount deep space manned missions?
We'll have to wait and see.
It's the bread and butter of sci-fi movies: A spaceport in Earth orbit acting as a spaceship construction facility or an assembly point for astronauts to resupply before flying into deep space. Now there are some low-level discussions about turning the International Space Station (ISS) into that functioning spaceport.
According to letters exchanged by the Russian, European and US space agencies, it would appear there is renewed interest in further development of the space station's purpose.
The ISS is outfitted with a hi-tech suite of laboratories largely intended to study the microgravity effects on Earth biology. If these new ideas ever reach fruition, we could see a reinvigorated station with deep space aspirations. The research carried out on the station could then be used to understand how to grow food on Mars, or develop advanced life support systems for example.
According to the ideas being bandied around, the ISS could become a spaceship construction yard of sorts, building vehicles to make trips to the moon (for what purpose, it's not yet clear) and eventually form the backbone of a deep space exploration research infrastructure.
"We need the courage of starting a new era," Simonetta Di Pippo, Europe's director of human spaceflight, said in an interview with BBC News.
"The idea is to ascend to the space station the various elements of the mission, and then try to assemble the spacecraft at the ISS, and go from the orbit of the space station to the Moon."
This is fundamentally a sound idea. Getting stuff into space isn't easy; to get anything sizable into orbit is expensive and resource-heavy. If you can have a construction platform already in orbit you can send up the smaller components piece-by-piece to build large spacecraft outside of Earth's restrictive gravitational field. The size of the finished product is no longer a problem.
There is one huge issue with re-purposing the ISS, however. It was never designed to be a low-Earth orbit construction facility. Building space vehicles down here on Earth is hard enough; in microgravity the challenges multiply. Therefore, most of the fabrication would need to be done on Earth, then each piece sent up in turn -- very much like the construction of the modular ISS itself.
There's also the looming retirement of the space shuttle fleet. How would we get spaceship components to the space station for construction?
The space station has been the focus of much criticism over the years. At best, the ISS partners admit that the space station in its current form hasn't lived up to its scientific promise (yet). At worst, critics think it's a disproportionately expensive means of keeping humans in space with minimal benefit to mankind.
But we now have a near-completed space station with six crew members able to carry out around 70 hours of science per week. Construction has taken a decade, the scientific benefits of having this orbital outpost may take some time to see the light of day.
This isn't the first time the space station's purpose has been re-examined. Memorably, in 2008, a Washington Post article suggested that the ISS should be retrofitted with rockets and sent to Mars. Sure, this was a fanciful idea by a commenter who had obvious frustrations with the project, but it excited the public and science media alike.
Now there's some discussion with the ISS partners to turn the space station into a spaceport, does this mean an opportunity has been spotted to use the ISS as a viable platform to mount deep space manned missions?
We'll have to wait and see.
Fox News: President Obama Signs NASA Space Exploration Act Into Law
President Obama Signs NASA Space Exploration Act Into Law
President Obama signed a major NASA act today (Oct. 11) that turns his vision for U.S. space exploration of asteroids and Mars into law.
The signing makes official a NASA authorization act that scraps the space agency's previous moon-oriented goal and paves the way for a mannedmission to an asteroidby 2025. A manned mission to Mars is envisioned for some time in the 2030s.
The bill also calls for a budget of $19 billion for NASA in 2011, adding one extra space shuttle flight before the fleet retires next year, and the extension of the International Space Station through at least 2020. [Poll: Weigh in on NASA's New Direction]
"Today's vote of confidence from the president ensuresAmerica's space programwill remain at the forefront of a bright future for our nation," NASA chief Charles Bolden said in a teleconference today.
YOU MIGHT ALSO BE
INTERESTED IN
Gordon Ramsay 'Kitchen Nightmares' Chef Commits Suicide Ten Worst Places to Live Police: Indiana Mom Locked Kids in Closet for 10 Hours, Returned to Find 2 Dead Suspect in Killing of N.C. Police Chief's Daughter Arrested in New York UPDATE: New Drug-Resistant Superbugs Found in 3 States President Obama's signing of the NASA act comes after Congress approved the bill for the act on Oct. 6. It is now awaiting an appropriations review, which is expected when Congress resumes work in mid-November for a lame duck session.
"There's still a long way to go as we direct our attention to the 2011 appropriations process," Bolden said.
NASA transition ahead
NASA's new space exploration plancancels the agency's moon-oriented Constellation program established during the administration of former president George W. Bush to return astronauts to the moon by 2020.
The Constellation program was developing new rockets, Ares I and Ares V, and theOrion space capsuleto replace the retiring shuttle fleet. Obama later revived the Orion capsule to serve as an escape craft for the space station and possibly as a deep space vehicle.
A review committee appointed by the Obama administration last year found the Constellation program to be underfunded and unsustainable.
"I think that we're all excited about the new path," said former astronaut Sally Ride during the teleconference. Ride was the first American woman in space and served on the Obama administration's human spaceflight review committee.
The new space plan calls on NASA to retire its three-shuttle fleet in 2010 and begin work on a new heavy-lift rocket, which will be required to launch big components of future deep space missions. It also sets the stage for the rise of commercial spacecraft.
"We will foster a growingcommercial space transportation industrythat will allow NASA to focus our efforts on executing [the] direction in the act to start work on a heavy-lift architecture to take astronauts beyond low-Earth orbit, and to develop a multipurpose crew vehicle for use with our new space launch systems," Bolden said.
Commercial spacecraft reliance
Under Obama's space plan, NASA will rely on Russian, European and Japanese spacecraft for its space station cargo and crew transportation needs in the near term, and then use American, privately built spacecraft to ferry astronauts to the International Space Station once they become available.
"That would help free NASA to do the more exciting and challenging things that we all believe NASA can and should be doing," Ride said. "That's getting astronauts out beyond low-Earth orbit."
The dependence on foreign spacecraft, as well as commercial vehicles, has drawn sharp criticism from some lawmakers due to the looming gap in U.S. access to space caused by the 2011 retirement of the space shuttle fleet. Some lawmakers, as well as seasoned NASA astronauts like Neil Armstrong, Gene Cernan and Jim Lovell, have publically decried the plan because of safety concerns using private spacecraft.
But NASA deputy chief Lori Garver assured reporters today that private spaceflight companies will be held to strict safety guidelines. The field competing for NASA contracts also includes current space shuttle contractors, such as Boeing, that are no strangers to the safety needs of human spaceflight, she added.
President Obama signed a major NASA act today (Oct. 11) that turns his vision for U.S. space exploration of asteroids and Mars into law.
The signing makes official a NASA authorization act that scraps the space agency's previous moon-oriented goal and paves the way for a mannedmission to an asteroidby 2025. A manned mission to Mars is envisioned for some time in the 2030s.
The bill also calls for a budget of $19 billion for NASA in 2011, adding one extra space shuttle flight before the fleet retires next year, and the extension of the International Space Station through at least 2020. [Poll: Weigh in on NASA's New Direction]
"Today's vote of confidence from the president ensuresAmerica's space programwill remain at the forefront of a bright future for our nation," NASA chief Charles Bolden said in a teleconference today.
YOU MIGHT ALSO BE
INTERESTED IN
Gordon Ramsay 'Kitchen Nightmares' Chef Commits Suicide Ten Worst Places to Live Police: Indiana Mom Locked Kids in Closet for 10 Hours, Returned to Find 2 Dead Suspect in Killing of N.C. Police Chief's Daughter Arrested in New York UPDATE: New Drug-Resistant Superbugs Found in 3 States President Obama's signing of the NASA act comes after Congress approved the bill for the act on Oct. 6. It is now awaiting an appropriations review, which is expected when Congress resumes work in mid-November for a lame duck session.
"There's still a long way to go as we direct our attention to the 2011 appropriations process," Bolden said.
NASA transition ahead
NASA's new space exploration plancancels the agency's moon-oriented Constellation program established during the administration of former president George W. Bush to return astronauts to the moon by 2020.
The Constellation program was developing new rockets, Ares I and Ares V, and theOrion space capsuleto replace the retiring shuttle fleet. Obama later revived the Orion capsule to serve as an escape craft for the space station and possibly as a deep space vehicle.
A review committee appointed by the Obama administration last year found the Constellation program to be underfunded and unsustainable.
"I think that we're all excited about the new path," said former astronaut Sally Ride during the teleconference. Ride was the first American woman in space and served on the Obama administration's human spaceflight review committee.
The new space plan calls on NASA to retire its three-shuttle fleet in 2010 and begin work on a new heavy-lift rocket, which will be required to launch big components of future deep space missions. It also sets the stage for the rise of commercial spacecraft.
"We will foster a growingcommercial space transportation industrythat will allow NASA to focus our efforts on executing [the] direction in the act to start work on a heavy-lift architecture to take astronauts beyond low-Earth orbit, and to develop a multipurpose crew vehicle for use with our new space launch systems," Bolden said.
Commercial spacecraft reliance
Under Obama's space plan, NASA will rely on Russian, European and Japanese spacecraft for its space station cargo and crew transportation needs in the near term, and then use American, privately built spacecraft to ferry astronauts to the International Space Station once they become available.
"That would help free NASA to do the more exciting and challenging things that we all believe NASA can and should be doing," Ride said. "That's getting astronauts out beyond low-Earth orbit."
The dependence on foreign spacecraft, as well as commercial vehicles, has drawn sharp criticism from some lawmakers due to the looming gap in U.S. access to space caused by the 2011 retirement of the space shuttle fleet. Some lawmakers, as well as seasoned NASA astronauts like Neil Armstrong, Gene Cernan and Jim Lovell, have publically decried the plan because of safety concerns using private spacecraft.
But NASA deputy chief Lori Garver assured reporters today that private spaceflight companies will be held to strict safety guidelines. The field competing for NASA contracts also includes current space shuttle contractors, such as Boeing, that are no strangers to the safety needs of human spaceflight, she added.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Chinese scientists dream of man on the moon
Global News: Chinese scientists dream of man on the moon
Editor's Note:
The Chang'e-2 satellite, China's second lunar probe, was launched on October 1. China's space program began much later than other nations, but has made rapid progress. What's the significance of the launch of the Chang'e-2 satellite? How should China develop its space exploration? People's Daily Online (PO) talked to Yu Dengyun (Yu), deputy chief designer of Chinese lunar exploration program, on these issues.
PO: What's the role and significance of the Chang'e-2 satellite in China's lunar exploration program?
Yu: The Chang'e-2 satellite is a pioneer satellite for the second phase of the Lunar Exploration Program. The program has three phases: orbital mission, soft landing and automated sample return.
The first phase of the exploration program was mainly aimed at observing the global lunar surface and acquiring photos of the whole lunar surface, which has been successfully achieved by the Chang'e-1 satellite.
The second phase is to ensure a soft landing for the lunar prob
e and deploy moon rovers for lunar surface exploration. The objective is designed to be realized by the Chang'e-3 satellite or Chang'e-4 satellite.
In the third phase of the exploration program, a lunar sample return mission will be undertaken. Our unmanned lunar probe will take lunar samples back to the Earth for our scientists to conduct relevant scientific research.
Each phase of the exploration program is closely linked to the others and the success of the one is needed for the implementation of the next.
Therefore, besides further deepening our exploration of the lunar environment, the Chang'e-2 satellite plays an important role in the key technical experiments for the Chang'e-3 satellite's soft-landing mission and will take high-definition videos of the Chang'e-3 satellite's planned landing area.
The Chang'e-2 satellite is the pioneer satellite for the second phase of the lunar exploration program and serves as a link between the first and second phase.
PO: The Chang'e-2 satellite is the sister satellite of the Chang'e-1. Compared to the Chang'e-1, what technological improvement and innovation does Chang'e-2 have?
Yu: The Chang'e-2 satellite is the pioneer satellite for the second phase of our lunar exploration program and backup of the Chang'e-1.
When developing the satellite, in order to save money, we inherited and made full use of all the products and technologies of the Chang'e-1. However, there are still obvious technological differences between the two satellites.
We adjusted the satellite's orbit. The Chang'e-2 was directly sent to the earth-moon transfer orbit by rocket without orbiting the Earth first. By doing so, we greatly reduced the fuel use of the satellite and shortened the time it will spend reaching the moon.
We made adjustments and improvements on the Chang'e-2's payloads. A high-resolution CCD stereo camera has been added to the satellite and the optical resolution of the camera has been updated to less than 10 meters from 120 meters.
Other payloads, including exploration equipment such as altimeter, Σ-ray spectrometers, and x-ray spectrometers, have also been greatly improved. The purpose is to improve the adaptability and anti-interference ability of these payloads to better detect the lunar soil.
We added a technical experiment analysis chart which includes an X-band compact land camera and a surveillance camera. Once the technological system proves a success, it will be a good verification for the X-band monitoring and controlling system and some of the small low-power design techniques.
Besides, we will make full use of the land camera and surveillance camera to take photos on some key events in the process of the satellite flying to the moon. Therefore, we can not only accumulate more experimental data, but also increase the quality of the images for people watching the launch on TV.
Of course, these cameras are also being used to take photos of both the Earth and the moon.
As long as the pictures are transmitted back to the ground, our people will get a vivid image of the Earth and the moon during the flight of the satellite.
We improved the adaptability of other analytical tools. For example, the radiation and heat on the lunar surface are huge, so we fully designed the thermal control system to ensure the normal operation of the equipment.
We have also increased the transmission speed for the satellite to send information back to Earth. The goal is to transfer the scientific exploration data back to the ground more quickly and effectively, so we can improve our detection efficiency and get more scientific data.
All in all, all these technological changes and innovations are designed to better meet our common scientific goals.
PO: How long did it take to achieve these innovations? How much of the intellectual property rights belong to China?
Yu: After the success of the Chang'e-1 satellite, we received more support from the government and the public. We have tried our best to seek greater development in space exploration.
We made modifications and improvements to the backup satellite of the Chang'e-1, so the intellectual property rights of the Chang'e-2 completely belong to China.
And it didn't take us a long time to achieve this. It has been less than three years since the launch of the Chang'e-1 satellite.
PO: The world's second round of space exploration is approaching. Compared to the US and Japan, what advantages do we have? Will their exploration plans affect ours?
Yu: China started lunar exploration at a comparatively late date. The US and the former Soviet Union launched the first round of lunar exploration.
In the 21st century, the world's enthusiasm for lunar exploration is heating up and many countries have been inspired to explore space, such as the US, the European Space Agency, and our neighbors Japan and India.
They are not only carrying out lunar exploration, but deep space exploration. Japan has made great progress in space exploration. It has launched lunar probes, Mars probes, asteroid probes and Venus probes.
How should we develop our space exploration? I think our space development plan should be based on our national situation. Of course, we need to take other countries' development conditions into consideration, but our national situation is more important. We should take an independent way to explore the moon and space.
PO: When can we send our astronauts to the moon?
Yu: Our manned space flight has made great achievements and certainly all the people in our country are expecting our astronauts not only to walk in space but also land on the moon. As scientists, we hope we could send our astronauts to the moon as soon as possible.
But as far as I know, there is not a definite plan. For our scientists, for the love of the space and out of longing for deep space exploration, we will actively research this area.
Editor's Note:
The Chang'e-2 satellite, China's second lunar probe, was launched on October 1. China's space program began much later than other nations, but has made rapid progress. What's the significance of the launch of the Chang'e-2 satellite? How should China develop its space exploration? People's Daily Online (PO) talked to Yu Dengyun (Yu), deputy chief designer of Chinese lunar exploration program, on these issues.
PO: What's the role and significance of the Chang'e-2 satellite in China's lunar exploration program?
Yu: The Chang'e-2 satellite is a pioneer satellite for the second phase of the Lunar Exploration Program. The program has three phases: orbital mission, soft landing and automated sample return.
The first phase of the exploration program was mainly aimed at observing the global lunar surface and acquiring photos of the whole lunar surface, which has been successfully achieved by the Chang'e-1 satellite.
The second phase is to ensure a soft landing for the lunar prob
e and deploy moon rovers for lunar surface exploration. The objective is designed to be realized by the Chang'e-3 satellite or Chang'e-4 satellite.
In the third phase of the exploration program, a lunar sample return mission will be undertaken. Our unmanned lunar probe will take lunar samples back to the Earth for our scientists to conduct relevant scientific research.
Each phase of the exploration program is closely linked to the others and the success of the one is needed for the implementation of the next.
Therefore, besides further deepening our exploration of the lunar environment, the Chang'e-2 satellite plays an important role in the key technical experiments for the Chang'e-3 satellite's soft-landing mission and will take high-definition videos of the Chang'e-3 satellite's planned landing area.
The Chang'e-2 satellite is the pioneer satellite for the second phase of the lunar exploration program and serves as a link between the first and second phase.
PO: The Chang'e-2 satellite is the sister satellite of the Chang'e-1. Compared to the Chang'e-1, what technological improvement and innovation does Chang'e-2 have?
Yu: The Chang'e-2 satellite is the pioneer satellite for the second phase of our lunar exploration program and backup of the Chang'e-1.
When developing the satellite, in order to save money, we inherited and made full use of all the products and technologies of the Chang'e-1. However, there are still obvious technological differences between the two satellites.
We adjusted the satellite's orbit. The Chang'e-2 was directly sent to the earth-moon transfer orbit by rocket without orbiting the Earth first. By doing so, we greatly reduced the fuel use of the satellite and shortened the time it will spend reaching the moon.
We made adjustments and improvements on the Chang'e-2's payloads. A high-resolution CCD stereo camera has been added to the satellite and the optical resolution of the camera has been updated to less than 10 meters from 120 meters.
Other payloads, including exploration equipment such as altimeter, Σ-ray spectrometers, and x-ray spectrometers, have also been greatly improved. The purpose is to improve the adaptability and anti-interference ability of these payloads to better detect the lunar soil.
We added a technical experiment analysis chart which includes an X-band compact land camera and a surveillance camera. Once the technological system proves a success, it will be a good verification for the X-band monitoring and controlling system and some of the small low-power design techniques.
Besides, we will make full use of the land camera and surveillance camera to take photos on some key events in the process of the satellite flying to the moon. Therefore, we can not only accumulate more experimental data, but also increase the quality of the images for people watching the launch on TV.
Of course, these cameras are also being used to take photos of both the Earth and the moon.
As long as the pictures are transmitted back to the ground, our people will get a vivid image of the Earth and the moon during the flight of the satellite.
We improved the adaptability of other analytical tools. For example, the radiation and heat on the lunar surface are huge, so we fully designed the thermal control system to ensure the normal operation of the equipment.
We have also increased the transmission speed for the satellite to send information back to Earth. The goal is to transfer the scientific exploration data back to the ground more quickly and effectively, so we can improve our detection efficiency and get more scientific data.
All in all, all these technological changes and innovations are designed to better meet our common scientific goals.
PO: How long did it take to achieve these innovations? How much of the intellectual property rights belong to China?
Yu: After the success of the Chang'e-1 satellite, we received more support from the government and the public. We have tried our best to seek greater development in space exploration.
We made modifications and improvements to the backup satellite of the Chang'e-1, so the intellectual property rights of the Chang'e-2 completely belong to China.
And it didn't take us a long time to achieve this. It has been less than three years since the launch of the Chang'e-1 satellite.
PO: The world's second round of space exploration is approaching. Compared to the US and Japan, what advantages do we have? Will their exploration plans affect ours?
Yu: China started lunar exploration at a comparatively late date. The US and the former Soviet Union launched the first round of lunar exploration.
In the 21st century, the world's enthusiasm for lunar exploration is heating up and many countries have been inspired to explore space, such as the US, the European Space Agency, and our neighbors Japan and India.
They are not only carrying out lunar exploration, but deep space exploration. Japan has made great progress in space exploration. It has launched lunar probes, Mars probes, asteroid probes and Venus probes.
How should we develop our space exploration? I think our space development plan should be based on our national situation. Of course, we need to take other countries' development conditions into consideration, but our national situation is more important. We should take an independent way to explore the moon and space.
PO: When can we send our astronauts to the moon?
Yu: Our manned space flight has made great achievements and certainly all the people in our country are expecting our astronauts not only to walk in space but also land on the moon. As scientists, we hope we could send our astronauts to the moon as soon as possible.
But as far as I know, there is not a definite plan. For our scientists, for the love of the space and out of longing for deep space exploration, we will actively research this area.
What Happened in Space News October 10
Venera 15 - USSR Venus Orbiter - 5,000 kg was launched on June 2, 1983.
Venera 15 arrived at Venus on October 10, 1983. Its high-resolution imaging system produced images at 1-2 kilometers in resolution. Venera 15 and 16 produced a map of the northern hemisphere from the pole to 30°N.
Several hot spots were found, possibly caused by volcanic activity.
Venera 15 arrived at Venus on October 10, 1983. Its high-resolution imaging system produced images at 1-2 kilometers in resolution. Venera 15 and 16 produced a map of the northern hemisphere from the pole to 30°N.
Several hot spots were found, possibly caused by volcanic activity.
Friday, October 8, 2010
Bill ensures Houston has future in space flight
Bill ensures Houston has future in space flight
By U.S. SEN. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON
HOUSTON CHRONICLE
Members of the Houston NASA Community:
For more than 40 years, the United States has led the world in human space flight and the critical research and technology development that supports both exploration and scientific study. Each of you has worked tirelessly to maintain this leadership and to inspire the nation and the world to improve our understanding of the universe. We do not often pause to publicly acknowledge the critical work you do.
I want to thank you for your dedication, professionalism and commitment through this very difficult period of uncertainty.
Earlier this year, the outlook for NASA was grim as we confronted a budget environment that would not support the continued human space flight activities of the agency without some significant changes. At the same time, the administration's proposal would have canceled the Constellation program and put off a decision on a heavy-lift launch vehicle for up to five years. In my judgment, such a proposal would have led to the rapid and catastrophic loss of personnel and skills needed to develop a new launch system, and it would have effectively ended the era of U.S. dominance in space exploration while threatening our utilization of and investment in the International Space Station. The president's original proposal endangered the missions that are the lifeblood of the Johnson Space Center, and crippling job losses seemed inevitable. NASA's skilled work force in other states feared similar consequences.
On Sept. 29, Congress passed an authorization bill for NASA that will go a long way toward preserving the future of human space flight in America. Some members of Congress disagreed on several aspects of the legislation, but the realities of the federal budget forced us to downsize our approach even as we maintained our ambition. The president is expected to sign this measure into law. I believe the new law provides a robust mission for NASA with significant increases in funding for scientific research and technology development and a continuing commitment to exploration. I am extremely pleased that the Houston delegation, including Reps. Pete Olson, Gene Green, John Culberson, Kevin Brady, Al Green, Sheila Jackson Lee and Ted Poe, worked together to help protect this city's proud heritage of space exploration and scientific excellence.
The crux of the new approach is simple — we will build one launch vehicle and crew exploration vehicle instead of the multiple vehicles and development phases provided for under the Constellation program. We will use as many of the skills, parts and resources we already have on hand as possible to lower development costs without compromising capability or performance. Ensuring there is a launch system and exploration vehicle under development preserves the key missions of the Johnson Space Center. There will be an enduring need for Mission Control and astronaut training. We have also added an extra shuttle flight, which will allow for the delivery of additional supplies to ensure the viability, extension and use of the space station, another key function of the Johnson Space Center. This extra flight will also preserve critical skills and work force, much of which can be transitioned to the new program.
I fought for this legislation because it was the right solution to the extraordinary challenge we were presented. But, I want to be very clear - this is not the end of our struggle. The new law is a foundation upon which to build as we move forward toward a sustainable American space program with a robust mission for the Johnson Space Center and a bright future for its brain trust. But, we are not there yet.
As a community, we should brace ourselves for challenges as the work forces of Johnson Space Center and NASA contractors are calibrated to the new mission. There are some who have already lost their jobs, and others may follow; but the core of our mission and the vast majority of our talented scientists, engineers and technicians will remain. Undoubtedly, in the months ahead, more questions will be raised about NASA funding and the feasibility of the approach laid out in the new law. Houston, I know the enormity of this task, and I promise that my work to advance the future of human space flight and to preserve the critical role of the Johnson Space Center will continue.
I want to personally thank the Houston community for swiftly offering assistance to displaced NASA employees and contractors. I hope businesses within the aerospace industry will take advantage of the world-class skills these workers possess and will work together with community leaders to identify further opportunities. I will continue my efforts to ensure full and faithful implementation of the new law.
The challenges are not behind us, and it will take the coordinated efforts of this community to sustain the losses we may still yet face and those that have already befallen some. I hope we will all be mindful, however, of the good news - Houston, we have a future.
Hutchison, a Republican, is the senior U.S. senator from Texas.
By U.S. SEN. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON
HOUSTON CHRONICLE
Members of the Houston NASA Community:
For more than 40 years, the United States has led the world in human space flight and the critical research and technology development that supports both exploration and scientific study. Each of you has worked tirelessly to maintain this leadership and to inspire the nation and the world to improve our understanding of the universe. We do not often pause to publicly acknowledge the critical work you do.
I want to thank you for your dedication, professionalism and commitment through this very difficult period of uncertainty.
Earlier this year, the outlook for NASA was grim as we confronted a budget environment that would not support the continued human space flight activities of the agency without some significant changes. At the same time, the administration's proposal would have canceled the Constellation program and put off a decision on a heavy-lift launch vehicle for up to five years. In my judgment, such a proposal would have led to the rapid and catastrophic loss of personnel and skills needed to develop a new launch system, and it would have effectively ended the era of U.S. dominance in space exploration while threatening our utilization of and investment in the International Space Station. The president's original proposal endangered the missions that are the lifeblood of the Johnson Space Center, and crippling job losses seemed inevitable. NASA's skilled work force in other states feared similar consequences.
On Sept. 29, Congress passed an authorization bill for NASA that will go a long way toward preserving the future of human space flight in America. Some members of Congress disagreed on several aspects of the legislation, but the realities of the federal budget forced us to downsize our approach even as we maintained our ambition. The president is expected to sign this measure into law. I believe the new law provides a robust mission for NASA with significant increases in funding for scientific research and technology development and a continuing commitment to exploration. I am extremely pleased that the Houston delegation, including Reps. Pete Olson, Gene Green, John Culberson, Kevin Brady, Al Green, Sheila Jackson Lee and Ted Poe, worked together to help protect this city's proud heritage of space exploration and scientific excellence.
The crux of the new approach is simple — we will build one launch vehicle and crew exploration vehicle instead of the multiple vehicles and development phases provided for under the Constellation program. We will use as many of the skills, parts and resources we already have on hand as possible to lower development costs without compromising capability or performance. Ensuring there is a launch system and exploration vehicle under development preserves the key missions of the Johnson Space Center. There will be an enduring need for Mission Control and astronaut training. We have also added an extra shuttle flight, which will allow for the delivery of additional supplies to ensure the viability, extension and use of the space station, another key function of the Johnson Space Center. This extra flight will also preserve critical skills and work force, much of which can be transitioned to the new program.
I fought for this legislation because it was the right solution to the extraordinary challenge we were presented. But, I want to be very clear - this is not the end of our struggle. The new law is a foundation upon which to build as we move forward toward a sustainable American space program with a robust mission for the Johnson Space Center and a bright future for its brain trust. But, we are not there yet.
As a community, we should brace ourselves for challenges as the work forces of Johnson Space Center and NASA contractors are calibrated to the new mission. There are some who have already lost their jobs, and others may follow; but the core of our mission and the vast majority of our talented scientists, engineers and technicians will remain. Undoubtedly, in the months ahead, more questions will be raised about NASA funding and the feasibility of the approach laid out in the new law. Houston, I know the enormity of this task, and I promise that my work to advance the future of human space flight and to preserve the critical role of the Johnson Space Center will continue.
I want to personally thank the Houston community for swiftly offering assistance to displaced NASA employees and contractors. I hope businesses within the aerospace industry will take advantage of the world-class skills these workers possess and will work together with community leaders to identify further opportunities. I will continue my efforts to ensure full and faithful implementation of the new law.
The challenges are not behind us, and it will take the coordinated efforts of this community to sustain the losses we may still yet face and those that have already befallen some. I hope we will all be mindful, however, of the good news - Houston, we have a future.
Hutchison, a Republican, is the senior U.S. senator from Texas.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Soyuz Rocket Launches New Crew Toward Space Station
Soyuz Rocket Launches New Crew Toward Space Station
A trio of spaceflyers, including one American astronaut and two Russian cosmonauts, blasted off for the International Space Station tonight (Oct. 7) onboard a Russian Soyuz spacecraft.
The crew launched at 7:10 p.m. EDT (2310 GMT) from Kazakhstan's Baikonur Cosmodrome, soaring spaceward from the same historic launch pad where the first artificial satellite – Sputnik – lifted off 53 years ago this week.
Riding atop the Soyuz rocket were NASA astronaut Scott Kelly and cosmonauts Alexander Kaleri and Oleg Skripochka. They are flying aboard a new TMA-01M model of the Soyuz spacecraft, which features improved guidance, navigation, control, and data processing systems, in addition to an improved cooling device for the electronics.
The men are beginning a months-long mission on the International Space Station, and will make up half of the station's six-person crew.
Kelly, Kaleri and Skripochka are expected to dock at the station's rooftop Poisk module on Saturday at 8:02 p.m. EDT (0002 GMT Sunday), where they will join the orbiting outpost's Expedition 25 crew – station commander Doug Wheelock and flight engineer Shannon Walker, both of NASA, and Russian flight engineer Fyodor Yurchikhin.
Astronaut twin blasts off
Kelly – whose twin brother Mark is also an astronaut – will assume command of the space station in November, when half of the ISS crew will journey back to Earth. This change will also mark the beginning of Expedition 26.
In a unique family affair, Kelly's brother, Mark, is due to fly aboard the Space Shuttle Endeavour on the STS-134 mission in February. [Video: NASA's Identical Twin Astronauts]
"It's actually the first time that two blood relatives have ever been in space together," Scott Kelly said in a NASA preflight interview. "It's exciting. I've obviously known my brother a really long time, and we're great friends and it's a real privilege to share the experience with someone you're so close to, the experience of being an astronaut, being able to talk about things that we experience and have a common framework to discuss it."
As part of their mission, Kelly, Kaleri and Skripochka will participate in scientific experiments and research in a range of fields, including physics, biology, medicine and geophysics. They will also be involved in some educational outreach.
Skripochka is making his first spaceflight , but Kelly and Kaleri are both veteran spaceflyers – Kelly flew on two space shuttle missions and Kaleri has traveled into space four times before.
Busy spaceflight
During their stay aboard the station, the crew is scheduled to oversee visits from two shuttles and two unmanned cargo ships — one from Europe and one from Japan. In November, the space shuttle Discovery will fly to the station, followed by the February 2011 flight of Endeavour.
The overlap of Endeavour's flight and the Expedition 26 mission means that the Kelly astronaut twins will likely rendezvous in space.
Mark Kelly's shuttle flight is currently the last scheduled shuttle mission, though Congress recently passed a bill to approve one more flight before the fleet is retired.
"The space shuttle program no doubt has been very important in building the [International Space Station]," Skripochka said in a preflight interview. "It's a very interesting program that demonstrated the capabilities, possibly both advantage and disadvantages of a multi-use transportation system. This program has existed for almost 30 years and it has contributed greatly to the development of the space research."
A trio of spaceflyers, including one American astronaut and two Russian cosmonauts, blasted off for the International Space Station tonight (Oct. 7) onboard a Russian Soyuz spacecraft.
The crew launched at 7:10 p.m. EDT (2310 GMT) from Kazakhstan's Baikonur Cosmodrome, soaring spaceward from the same historic launch pad where the first artificial satellite – Sputnik – lifted off 53 years ago this week.
Riding atop the Soyuz rocket were NASA astronaut Scott Kelly and cosmonauts Alexander Kaleri and Oleg Skripochka. They are flying aboard a new TMA-01M model of the Soyuz spacecraft, which features improved guidance, navigation, control, and data processing systems, in addition to an improved cooling device for the electronics.
The men are beginning a months-long mission on the International Space Station, and will make up half of the station's six-person crew.
Kelly, Kaleri and Skripochka are expected to dock at the station's rooftop Poisk module on Saturday at 8:02 p.m. EDT (0002 GMT Sunday), where they will join the orbiting outpost's Expedition 25 crew – station commander Doug Wheelock and flight engineer Shannon Walker, both of NASA, and Russian flight engineer Fyodor Yurchikhin.
Astronaut twin blasts off
Kelly – whose twin brother Mark is also an astronaut – will assume command of the space station in November, when half of the ISS crew will journey back to Earth. This change will also mark the beginning of Expedition 26.
In a unique family affair, Kelly's brother, Mark, is due to fly aboard the Space Shuttle Endeavour on the STS-134 mission in February. [Video: NASA's Identical Twin Astronauts]
"It's actually the first time that two blood relatives have ever been in space together," Scott Kelly said in a NASA preflight interview. "It's exciting. I've obviously known my brother a really long time, and we're great friends and it's a real privilege to share the experience with someone you're so close to, the experience of being an astronaut, being able to talk about things that we experience and have a common framework to discuss it."
As part of their mission, Kelly, Kaleri and Skripochka will participate in scientific experiments and research in a range of fields, including physics, biology, medicine and geophysics. They will also be involved in some educational outreach.
Skripochka is making his first spaceflight , but Kelly and Kaleri are both veteran spaceflyers – Kelly flew on two space shuttle missions and Kaleri has traveled into space four times before.
Busy spaceflight
During their stay aboard the station, the crew is scheduled to oversee visits from two shuttles and two unmanned cargo ships — one from Europe and one from Japan. In November, the space shuttle Discovery will fly to the station, followed by the February 2011 flight of Endeavour.
The overlap of Endeavour's flight and the Expedition 26 mission means that the Kelly astronaut twins will likely rendezvous in space.
Mark Kelly's shuttle flight is currently the last scheduled shuttle mission, though Congress recently passed a bill to approve one more flight before the fleet is retired.
"The space shuttle program no doubt has been very important in building the [International Space Station]," Skripochka said in a preflight interview. "It's a very interesting program that demonstrated the capabilities, possibly both advantage and disadvantages of a multi-use transportation system. This program has existed for almost 30 years and it has contributed greatly to the development of the space research."
Lunar probe, space exploration is China's duty to mankind : chief designer
Lunar probe, space exploration is China's duty to mankind : chief designer
BEIJING, Oct. 6 (Xinhua) -- A chief designer with China's second lunar probe project has said that the country's lunar pursuit, while lagging behind Russia and the United States for more than 40 years, is still important because space exploration is part of the country's responsibility towards mankind.
"The most fundamental task for human beings' space exploration is to research on human origins and find a way for mankind to live and develop sustainably," said Qian Weiping, chief designer of the Chang'e-2 mission's tracking and control system.
Chang'e-2 blasted off on a Long-March-3C carrier rocket from the Xichang Satellite Launch Center, in southwest China's Sichuan province, at about 7 p.m. Friday.
"As a major country, China has the responsibility to participate in the activities of outer space for peaceful use and make its own contributions," Qian said.
Chang'e-2 is China's first unmanned spacecraft to be boosted from the launch site directly to the earth-moon transfer orbit, vastly reducing the journey time from that of its predecessor, Chang'e-1.
To acquire more detailed moon data, Chang'e-2 will enter a lower lunar orbit about 100 km above the surface, compared with the 200-km altitude of Chang'e-1, according to the control center.
Qian pointed out that China's pursuit of lunar probes and manned space flights was more out of a sense of responsibility than the need to follow in the footsteps of other countries.
"Once our mind is made up, we will do it no matter how many years later," Qian said. "However, we can never go beyond scientific rules and find a shortcut."
"What we're doing now is what some others already did 40 years ago. But that doesn't necessarily mean that we're lagging behind by 40 years," Qian said, adding that the country's levels of telecommunication, networks and scientific understanding, based on the progress in science and technology, were much more advanced than what they were decades ago.
"And we will shorten the gap fast," he added.
Some 40 years ago, Russia and the United States were the only countries to have sent people into space. During the U.S. Apollo 11 mission in 1969, Neil Armstrong became the first person to walk on the moon.
Qian said that China's space talents were outstanding and young. The average age of the design team for the country's manned project and lunar probe project was just a little over 30 years old, he added.
China launched its first lunar probe, Chang'e-1, in October 2007, marking a milestone in the country's space exploration journey.
Qian noted that a lunar probe was only the first step in China's quest for deep space exploration.
"We will walk on this road step by step -- scientifically and gradually," he added.
BEIJING, Oct. 6 (Xinhua) -- A chief designer with China's second lunar probe project has said that the country's lunar pursuit, while lagging behind Russia and the United States for more than 40 years, is still important because space exploration is part of the country's responsibility towards mankind.
"The most fundamental task for human beings' space exploration is to research on human origins and find a way for mankind to live and develop sustainably," said Qian Weiping, chief designer of the Chang'e-2 mission's tracking and control system.
Chang'e-2 blasted off on a Long-March-3C carrier rocket from the Xichang Satellite Launch Center, in southwest China's Sichuan province, at about 7 p.m. Friday.
"As a major country, China has the responsibility to participate in the activities of outer space for peaceful use and make its own contributions," Qian said.
Chang'e-2 is China's first unmanned spacecraft to be boosted from the launch site directly to the earth-moon transfer orbit, vastly reducing the journey time from that of its predecessor, Chang'e-1.
To acquire more detailed moon data, Chang'e-2 will enter a lower lunar orbit about 100 km above the surface, compared with the 200-km altitude of Chang'e-1, according to the control center.
Qian pointed out that China's pursuit of lunar probes and manned space flights was more out of a sense of responsibility than the need to follow in the footsteps of other countries.
"Once our mind is made up, we will do it no matter how many years later," Qian said. "However, we can never go beyond scientific rules and find a shortcut."
"What we're doing now is what some others already did 40 years ago. But that doesn't necessarily mean that we're lagging behind by 40 years," Qian said, adding that the country's levels of telecommunication, networks and scientific understanding, based on the progress in science and technology, were much more advanced than what they were decades ago.
"And we will shorten the gap fast," he added.
Some 40 years ago, Russia and the United States were the only countries to have sent people into space. During the U.S. Apollo 11 mission in 1969, Neil Armstrong became the first person to walk on the moon.
Qian said that China's space talents were outstanding and young. The average age of the design team for the country's manned project and lunar probe project was just a little over 30 years old, he added.
China launched its first lunar probe, Chang'e-1, in October 2007, marking a milestone in the country's space exploration journey.
Qian noted that a lunar probe was only the first step in China's quest for deep space exploration.
"We will walk on this road step by step -- scientifically and gradually," he added.
Hayabusa Sample Chamber May Contain Alien Dust
Softpedia: Hayabusa Sample Chamber May Contain Alien Dust
Experts at JAXA announced that they have recovered a series of small particles from the sample chamber of the battered Hayabusa mission, which returned to Earth this June.
They say that some of these small particles, which are invisible to the naked eye, may very well be extraterrestrial dust. If so, then the mission was completely worth it.
The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has been taking care of the damaged Hayabusa space probe for nearly seven years, before its sample container was finally ejected back to Earth a few months ago.
This was a momentous occasion for the space agency, and for humankind's goals of space exploration, as it represented the first time a sample-return mission to a near-Earth object (NEO) was successful.
Due to some mishaps that took place as Hayabusa was meeting up with its target, asteroid Itokawa, the spacecraft was unable to collect dust samples from the space rock in the manner originally intended.
However, JAXA experts said that the sample chamber could have collected some dust particles regardless, and decided to try and bring the probe home in either case.
After the sample capsule reentered Earth's atmosphere, and landed in the Australian Outback, Japanese researchers retrieved it, and began investigating its content. A few fine particles is all they found.
Originally, of these particles, most were believed to be debris, that made it into the chamber when Hayabusa was assembled in Japan, so many years ado.
Of the “catch” the orbiter brought one, researchers say that 100 fine particles were discovered in the sample catcher, the portion of the sample chamber that was supposed to contain the cosmic dust.
The investigations team says that these particles are smaller than 0,001 millimeters in size, and hypothesize that some of them might very well be extraterrestrial dust.
Scientists opened the container in the most sterile conditions possible, and used a special Teflon spatula to collect the fine particles. The grains are invisible to the unaided eye
The spatula that helped JAXA experts collect the contents of the sample catcher was about 6 millimeters long and 3 millimeters wide, and was designed specifically for this purpose.
Now, JAXA plans to conduct additional studies into the structure of the recovered particles. Studies will be carried out at the large-scale synchrotron radiation facility called Spring 8, in the Hyogo Prefecture.
“We cannot yet tell (whether the particles are from Itokawa) from their external features, but we have found many particles and there is a chance (that they are extraterrestrial),” explains Munetaka Ueno.
The expert is a research scientist at the JAXA Institute of Space and Astronautical Science. He adds that alien dust could give us a better understanding of how the solar system formed, The Mainichi Daily News reports.
Experts at JAXA announced that they have recovered a series of small particles from the sample chamber of the battered Hayabusa mission, which returned to Earth this June.
They say that some of these small particles, which are invisible to the naked eye, may very well be extraterrestrial dust. If so, then the mission was completely worth it.
The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has been taking care of the damaged Hayabusa space probe for nearly seven years, before its sample container was finally ejected back to Earth a few months ago.
This was a momentous occasion for the space agency, and for humankind's goals of space exploration, as it represented the first time a sample-return mission to a near-Earth object (NEO) was successful.
Due to some mishaps that took place as Hayabusa was meeting up with its target, asteroid Itokawa, the spacecraft was unable to collect dust samples from the space rock in the manner originally intended.
However, JAXA experts said that the sample chamber could have collected some dust particles regardless, and decided to try and bring the probe home in either case.
After the sample capsule reentered Earth's atmosphere, and landed in the Australian Outback, Japanese researchers retrieved it, and began investigating its content. A few fine particles is all they found.
Originally, of these particles, most were believed to be debris, that made it into the chamber when Hayabusa was assembled in Japan, so many years ado.
Of the “catch” the orbiter brought one, researchers say that 100 fine particles were discovered in the sample catcher, the portion of the sample chamber that was supposed to contain the cosmic dust.
The investigations team says that these particles are smaller than 0,001 millimeters in size, and hypothesize that some of them might very well be extraterrestrial dust.
Scientists opened the container in the most sterile conditions possible, and used a special Teflon spatula to collect the fine particles. The grains are invisible to the unaided eye
The spatula that helped JAXA experts collect the contents of the sample catcher was about 6 millimeters long and 3 millimeters wide, and was designed specifically for this purpose.
Now, JAXA plans to conduct additional studies into the structure of the recovered particles. Studies will be carried out at the large-scale synchrotron radiation facility called Spring 8, in the Hyogo Prefecture.
“We cannot yet tell (whether the particles are from Itokawa) from their external features, but we have found many particles and there is a chance (that they are extraterrestrial),” explains Munetaka Ueno.
The expert is a research scientist at the JAXA Institute of Space and Astronautical Science. He adds that alien dust could give us a better understanding of how the solar system formed, The Mainichi Daily News reports.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Sci-Tech: NASA Says the Moon Still Matters
NASA Says the Moon Still Matters
The moon still has a role to play in the new space exploration plan set by President Barack Obama and approved by Congress, NASA says. The moon is a symbol of inspiration for many in part because of NASA's manned lunar landings of the late 1960s and early '70s, and the moon is also the most visible off-world destination to the public.
NASA's new direction of sending astronauts to the asteroids or Mars doesn't mean a return to the moon is out of the question, the U.S. agency's deputy head says.
NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver said the moon has a role to play in the new space exploration plan set by President Barack Obama and approved by Congress this week.
"Lunar science and lunar exploration is alive and well in NASA," Garver told SPACE.com.
Obama's plan cancels NASA's moon-oriented Constellation program, initiated by former President George W. Bush, which sought to return astronauts to the moon by 2020.
But the moon is a symbol of inspiration for many people in part because of NASA's manned lunar landings of the late 1960s and early 1970s, and the moon is also the most visible of off-world destinations to the public, Garver said.
"I just won't agree that this ends the moon as a destination," Garver said. "We look up in the night sky and see the moon and it is an inspiration to us all.'"
The NASA authorization bill approved by Congress outlines the need for the United States "to sustain a human presence in space," Garver said.
"And the moon is part of any long-term sustainable presence in space," Garver said.
The moon still has a role to play in the new space exploration plan set by President Barack Obama and approved by Congress, NASA says. The moon is a symbol of inspiration for many in part because of NASA's manned lunar landings of the late 1960s and early '70s, and the moon is also the most visible off-world destination to the public.
NASA's new direction of sending astronauts to the asteroids or Mars doesn't mean a return to the moon is out of the question, the U.S. agency's deputy head says.
NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver said the moon has a role to play in the new space exploration plan set by President Barack Obama and approved by Congress this week.
"Lunar science and lunar exploration is alive and well in NASA," Garver told SPACE.com.
Obama's plan cancels NASA's moon-oriented Constellation program, initiated by former President George W. Bush, which sought to return astronauts to the moon by 2020.
But the moon is a symbol of inspiration for many people in part because of NASA's manned lunar landings of the late 1960s and early 1970s, and the moon is also the most visible of off-world destinations to the public, Garver said.
"I just won't agree that this ends the moon as a destination," Garver said. "We look up in the night sky and see the moon and it is an inspiration to us all.'"
The NASA authorization bill approved by Congress outlines the need for the United States "to sustain a human presence in space," Garver said.
"And the moon is part of any long-term sustainable presence in space," Garver said.
Monday, October 4, 2010
4 Oct, 2010: The Space Review -- Milestones and Transitions
Milestones and transitions
by Jeff Foust
If the Space Age has a birthday, then today would be it. Fifty-three years ago today—October 4, 1957—an R-7 rocket lifted off from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in present-day Kazakhstan and placed the first satellite, Sputnik, into orbit. That launch also triggered a space race between the United States and the Soviet Union, a frenzied, hyperkinetic period of firsts that culminated nearly 12 years later with the Apollo 11 landing on the Moon.
Since then, it seems, space advocates have been attempting to recapture the magic of that era, with little success. The latest effort has been the Vision for Space Exploration, the program announced by President George W. Bush in January 2004 to return humans to the Moon by 2020 as a prelude for human missions to Mars and beyond. Last week, though, the Vision died quietly on Capitol Hill with the passage of a NASA authorization bill that charts yet another new direction for the space agency. Another effort to harness the energy and enthusiasm—and funding—first tapped 53 years ago had failed.
The Vision fades to black
To be certain, the Vision’s prospects had not looked good for at least a year, when the Augustine Committee concluded that the so-called “program of record”—the Constellation program, NASA’s effort to implement the Vision—could not be executed on effectively any timescale, let alone the schedule laid out by President Bush in 2004, on its current budget. Constellation, and the goal of returning to the Moon by 2020 (something that Barack Obama had endorsed as a candidate for president in 2008) were effectively sentenced to death by the administration in its fiscal year 2011 budget request in February, replaced by an approach that followed most closely the Augustine Committee’s “Flexible Path” option that eschews an immediate return to the Moon in favor of human missions to near Earth asteroids and Lagrange points.
Last week, though, the Vision died quietly on Capitol Hill. Another effort to harness the energy and enthusiasm—and funding—first tapped 53 years ago had failed.
It wasn’t enough, though, for the President to simply proclaim that the Vision was dead. The Vision was quite literally the law of the land, enshrined in NASA authorization bills passed by Congress in 2005 and again in 2008. If the administration really wanted to replace the Vision for Space Exploration with its own vision for human spaceflight beyond LEO, it would have to win over members of Congress who were skeptical at best—and openly hostile at worst—to the new approach, in part because of the fumbled, low-key rollout of the new plan. What followed was months of debate in Congressional hearings about the merits (or lack thereof) of the administration’s proposal versus the status quo.
The most likely way for Congress to endorse or reject the administration’s plans would be through another authorization bill. Such bills, to the layperson, can be a bit obscure. While they authorize the expenditure of funds for various programs, they don’t provide the funding themselves; that comes from separate appropriations bills, with no guarantee that appropriators will provide the same level of funding that authorizers had approved. More importantly, though, such bills set policy and provide direction—often very specific direction—to agencies like NASA.
For the last two months, the House and Senate had, in effect, been playing a game of chicken about NASA. In early August the Senate passed its version of a NASA authorization bill by unanimous consent (a process that allows for the expedited passage of non-controversial bills, provided no senator objects.) The bill supported many elements of the administration’s plan, including commercial crew development and exploration technology programs, although at lower funding levels than in the original White house budget proposal. A key difference was regarding development of a heavy-lift launch vehicle (HLV): while the White House proposed deferring a decision on an HLV until as late as 2015, the Senate called for immediate development of a HLV using shuttle-derived approach.
The Senate version, though, stood in sharp contrast to what the House Science and Technology Committee had approved a couple weeks earlier. That bill could be best described as Constellation’s last stand: it called for the development of a launch system that could initially be used to launch crews, then extended to an HLV, much like the Ares 1/Ares 5 approach. The House bill provided little funding for commercial crew development and virtually nothing for exploration technology (although fully funding more generic space technology work).
Ordinarily, the full House would have taken up and passed its version of the bill, leaving it up to a House-Senate conference committee to iron out differences between the two bills. However, with the limited time remaining in the current Congress, plus a full plate of other legislative priorities still left to do, insiders warned that there would be no time for that conventional approach. Instead, there were efforts to “preconference”: come up with a compromise version of the bill that the House could approve and still win support in the Senate. Those efforts failed, though, as did the release on September 23 of a “compromise” version of the bill by the House Science and Technology Committee that was much closer, but not identical, to the Senate bill.
Last Monday, the House effectively threw in the towel, with House Science and Technology Committee chairman Bart Gordon announcing that the full House would vote on the Senate’s bill, rather than either the original or compromise House bill. “It has become clear that there is not time remaining to pass a compromise bill through the House and the Senate,” Gordon said in a statement. “For the sake of providing certainty, stability, and clarity to the NASA workforce and larger space community, I felt it was better to consider a flawed bill than no bill at all as the new fiscal year begins.”
“I see no realistic choice but to take the Senate bill because doing so would be preferable than taking no action at all,” said Rep. Ralph Hall.
The full House took up this “flawed” bill Wednesday night under a procedure known as “suspension of the rules” that limits debate and prohibits amendments, ensuring that if the bill passed, it would be identical to the Senate version and thus could go directly to the President for his signature. The catch is that bills considered under suspension of the rules require a two-thirds majority for passage instead of a simple majority. Going into Wednesday night, it wasn’t clear if there would be sufficient support for the Senate bill to meet that requirement.
During the floor debate, Gordon and other members expressed their support for the bill, if only reluctantly. “I see no realistic choice but to take the Senate bill because doing so would be preferable than taking no action at all,” Rep. Ralph Hall, (R-TX), ranking member of the House Science and Technology Committee, said. “While the bill before us today is far from perfect, it offers clear direction to an agency that is floundering and sets us up on the path towards maintaining America’s leadership in space.”
Others warned in dire—if hyperbolic—terms of the consequences of not passing the Senate bill. “If we do not pass this NASA authorization bill tonight, the Obama Administration will succeed in shutting down America’s manned space program by the end of the year,” claimed Rep. John Culberson (R-TX).
One exception to the debate was the Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), the chairperson of the space subcommittee of the House Science and Technology Committee. In an extended floor speech she spoke out forcefully against the bill. “In contrast to the supporters of the Senate bill who say that today they reluctantly support the Senate bill because it is better than doing nothing, I have no reluctance in telling you that this is a bad bill,” she said. “It will do damage to NASA if enacted and it should be voted down tonight.”
She was critical of several provisions of the Senate bill, including its HLV language, which calls for a vehicle with an initial capacity of 70 to 100 tons to LEO. “This bill contains provisions that will force NASA to build a rocket designed by senators and not by engineers,” she said. That rocket “will be too large to economically serve as a backup to commercial crew transport to the space station, and may also prove to be too small effectively undertake human missions beyond low Earth orbit.”
She criticized funding for “would-be” commercial crew and cargo providers authorized in the bill, and addressed concerns that without an authorization, massive layoffs would follow. “You will not be doing anything to stop layoffs tonight by voting for this Senate bill,” she said, noting that layoffs would be tied to funding provided in separate legislation.
In the end, though, her arguments were not persuasive enough to win over enough of her fellow legislators. The House passed the bill by a 304–118 margin, more than the two-thirds needed for passage. With the administration previously expressing support for the Senate bill, President Obama is expected to sign it into law within days. The Vision for Space Exploration, then, effectively died on the floor of the House when the vote on the NASA authorization bill closed at 11:36 pm Eastern time on September 29, 2010.
Transition to an uncertain future
In the days following the House vote, members of Congress, companies, and organizations all expressed support, to varying degrees, of the Senate bill, although different people saw different things in the bill. Utah’s congressional delegation, for example, saw the bill as a lifeline for ATK, the company that builds solid rocket motors in the state. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said the bill “takes Utah’s solid rocket industry off life support” since the HLV language in the bill “can only be realistically met through the use of solid rocket motors”. (In fact, the report accompanying the Senate bill explicitly calls for the use of shuttle-derived solid rocket motors for the HLV.) Companies like SpaceX, though, endorsed the bill’s support for commercial crew development. “Investing in commercial crew will build on NASA’s proud record of innovation and will encourage competition that will improve reliability, increase safety, and reduce costs,” SpaceX CEO and CTO Elon Musk said in a statement.
“We’re thrilled to have this three-year authorization bill for NASA,” Garver said. “It’s certainly been a year that, in a time of transition, has been challenging.”
NASA leadership also endorsed the legislation, with administrator Charles Bolden taking the unusual step of issuing statements both before and after the bill’s passage in the House. In the statement issued the day of the vote, he said he was “hopeful” the bill “will receive strong support in the House and be sent onto the President for his signature”; in a similar statement the following day, he said he was “grateful” the bill made it through the House.
In a teleconference with reporters the day after the House vote, NASA deputy administrator Lori Garver also expressed gratitude, and relief, that the bill had passed. “We’re thrilled to have this three-year authorization bill for NASA,” she said. “It’s certainly been a year that, in a time of transition, has been challenging.”
Passage of the authorization act, though, doesn’t mark the end of that time of transition, but only the end of the beginning phase. The next major milestone will come later this year, when appropriators follow up on the authorization bill with actual funding for NASA in fiscal year 2011. That fiscal year actually started on Friday, but as has been the case in recent years, Congress didn’t complete an appropriations bill in time and instead passed a “continuing resolution”, or CR, funding NASA—and the rest of the federal government—at 2010 levels through at least early December.
The CR constrains what NASA can do to implement elements of the plan enacted in the authorization bill. A provision of the final 2010 appropriations bill prevents NASA from cancelling any element of the Constellation program or starting a new one until a succeeding appropriations bill, with appropriate language, is passed; the CR doesn’t change that. “We are still living under the appropriations language that we will not be terminating any contracts and, of course, can’t have any entirely new starts,” Garver said in Thursday’s telecon. “Those changes will have to wait until an approved appropriations bill.”
The Republican Party’s proposal in its “Pledge to America” to roll back spending could cut the next NASA budget by up to $2 billion.
That appropriations bill—which won’t be taken up until after Congress returns in mid-November, after the midterm elections—offers an opportunity for legislators to potentially change some elements of just-passed authorization. In his statement conceding to the Senate version of the authorization bill, Gordon said he would continue to push for changes he sought in the bill, including funding for an additional shuttle mission and “overly prescriptive” language about the design of an HLV, with appropriators.
NASA also might seek some wiggle room in how it would develop an HLV. “I think the trade space continues to be open on what type of vehicle we will have,” she said, adding that they may get “some additional guidance” from appropriators. “There’s still a lot of ability on the part of NASA to work with our stakeholders on what exactly is included in our new heavy lift launch vehicle.”
Interestingly, one person in Congress who might support such an effort is Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), who had been one of the sharpest critics of the administration’s new direction for NASA. “I remain concerned with the limiting direction set forth on the heavy lift rocket’s design. NASA must not deliver a rocket that is simply a shuttle without wings,” he said in a statement after the House passage of the authorization bill. “This would not represent a step forward for innovation or for the future of our space program.”
Beyond that, though, much bigger questions remain about the agency’s future. While there’s been very little argument about overall funding levels for NASA for 2011, with wide acceptance of the administration’s overall, or “topline”, proposal of exactly $19 billion, there’s still debate about whether this amount, and the modest growth in both the authorization bill and the administration’s proposal, is sufficient to support these programs going forward. The Augustine Committee, for example, sought an even larger increase (up to $3 billion a year) in its proposals. That may be a particular issue for an HLV, which will be constrained not just by budget but also by the design language in the bill as well as a goal of having the vehicle ready by the end of 2016.
Worse, that funding could be difficult to retain in the coming years as a climate of fiscal restraint (relatively speaking, at least) returns to Washington. With Republicans holding a good chance of taking control of the House after November’s elections, GOP House leadership unveiled a “Pledge to America” last month that calls for, among other items, plans to “roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels” with only a few exceptions, none of which would include NASA. If enacted, that could slash NASA’s projected 2012 topline funding from just under $19.5 billion to as little as $17.4 billion, the agency’s budget in FY 2008.
That presages an even bigger long-term challenge: maintaining momentum for the plan for more than a few years. Recall that the Vision for Space Exploration got off to a strong start, winning congressional support without the same level of contentious debate as this latest plan. And, in fact, the Vision was, in the short term, a success: the near-term goals of the plan included completing the International Space Station by 2010 and then retiring the Space Shuttle. Now, in October 2010, the ISS is effectively complete and only two shuttle missions remain on the manifest (although the new authorization bill will allow NASA to fly one additional, final mission in mid-2011).
Should this latest effort fail, and given an increasingly-constrained fiscal environment the country likely faces over the long term, would NASA would get another chance for human spaceflight beyond low Earth orbit?
That short-term momentum could not be sustained, though. The conventional wisdom is that Constellation was underfunded and behind schedule, and thus unlikely to meet the goals of the Vision. But another factor, perhaps, is that the Vision’s mid-range plans—what NASA would do after completing the ISS but before returning to the Moon—seemed vague and not that interesting: sure, we’d be doing something to get ready to return to the Moon, besides operating the station (and even then perhaps only to 2015), but there was certainly an enthusiasm gap between NASA’s plans and popular interest.
The new plan faces the same problem, although in a different form. In the near term the agency has some direction for developing an HLV, supporting the creation of commercial crew transportation capabilities, and other technology development and robotic precursor missions. But there’s still that gap between the middle of the decade, when those initial problems are scheduled to be complete, and President Obama’s stated goal of a human mission to a near Earth asteroid by 2025. What will sustain that interest—and funding—over the next 15 years?
“The fact is that we have been trying to relive Apollo for the last 40 years,” Garver said in a speech earlier this year. “We have not been able to recreate that since, and I am not even sure that we would want to, given even that did not provide us with a sustained presence in space.” That assessment is accurate, as the record of failed efforts to recreate it—to which can now be added the Vision for Space Exploration and Constellation, unironically called “Apollo on steroids” by then-administrator Mike Griffin—demonstrates. The circumstances that led to Apollo, starting with the events of 53 years ago today, will likely never be recreated (much to the chagrin of those who have been trying to build up China as a Soviet-like competitor to the US in space; China, it seems, shows little interest in a sprint to the Moon, having just launched only its second robotic orbiter there, three years after the first.)
The administration sought a sharp break from the past with a new program that emphasized capabilities over destinations, but got a sharp rebuke from Congress. The result is an authorization bill that is a compromise: some support for commercial crew and technology development, but also for an HLV to be developed in the near-term rather than later, as originally proposed. Will that be sufficient to break the cycle of past failures, or is the agency’s new plan just as prone to the problems of lack of interest and funding that doomed previous human space exploration initiatives? Only time will tell for certain, but one wonders: should this latest effort fail, and given an increasingly-constrained fiscal environment the country likely faces over the long term, would NASA would get another chance for human spaceflight beyond low Earth orbit?
by Jeff Foust
If the Space Age has a birthday, then today would be it. Fifty-three years ago today—October 4, 1957—an R-7 rocket lifted off from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in present-day Kazakhstan and placed the first satellite, Sputnik, into orbit. That launch also triggered a space race between the United States and the Soviet Union, a frenzied, hyperkinetic period of firsts that culminated nearly 12 years later with the Apollo 11 landing on the Moon.
Since then, it seems, space advocates have been attempting to recapture the magic of that era, with little success. The latest effort has been the Vision for Space Exploration, the program announced by President George W. Bush in January 2004 to return humans to the Moon by 2020 as a prelude for human missions to Mars and beyond. Last week, though, the Vision died quietly on Capitol Hill with the passage of a NASA authorization bill that charts yet another new direction for the space agency. Another effort to harness the energy and enthusiasm—and funding—first tapped 53 years ago had failed.
The Vision fades to black
To be certain, the Vision’s prospects had not looked good for at least a year, when the Augustine Committee concluded that the so-called “program of record”—the Constellation program, NASA’s effort to implement the Vision—could not be executed on effectively any timescale, let alone the schedule laid out by President Bush in 2004, on its current budget. Constellation, and the goal of returning to the Moon by 2020 (something that Barack Obama had endorsed as a candidate for president in 2008) were effectively sentenced to death by the administration in its fiscal year 2011 budget request in February, replaced by an approach that followed most closely the Augustine Committee’s “Flexible Path” option that eschews an immediate return to the Moon in favor of human missions to near Earth asteroids and Lagrange points.
Last week, though, the Vision died quietly on Capitol Hill. Another effort to harness the energy and enthusiasm—and funding—first tapped 53 years ago had failed.
It wasn’t enough, though, for the President to simply proclaim that the Vision was dead. The Vision was quite literally the law of the land, enshrined in NASA authorization bills passed by Congress in 2005 and again in 2008. If the administration really wanted to replace the Vision for Space Exploration with its own vision for human spaceflight beyond LEO, it would have to win over members of Congress who were skeptical at best—and openly hostile at worst—to the new approach, in part because of the fumbled, low-key rollout of the new plan. What followed was months of debate in Congressional hearings about the merits (or lack thereof) of the administration’s proposal versus the status quo.
The most likely way for Congress to endorse or reject the administration’s plans would be through another authorization bill. Such bills, to the layperson, can be a bit obscure. While they authorize the expenditure of funds for various programs, they don’t provide the funding themselves; that comes from separate appropriations bills, with no guarantee that appropriators will provide the same level of funding that authorizers had approved. More importantly, though, such bills set policy and provide direction—often very specific direction—to agencies like NASA.
For the last two months, the House and Senate had, in effect, been playing a game of chicken about NASA. In early August the Senate passed its version of a NASA authorization bill by unanimous consent (a process that allows for the expedited passage of non-controversial bills, provided no senator objects.) The bill supported many elements of the administration’s plan, including commercial crew development and exploration technology programs, although at lower funding levels than in the original White house budget proposal. A key difference was regarding development of a heavy-lift launch vehicle (HLV): while the White House proposed deferring a decision on an HLV until as late as 2015, the Senate called for immediate development of a HLV using shuttle-derived approach.
The Senate version, though, stood in sharp contrast to what the House Science and Technology Committee had approved a couple weeks earlier. That bill could be best described as Constellation’s last stand: it called for the development of a launch system that could initially be used to launch crews, then extended to an HLV, much like the Ares 1/Ares 5 approach. The House bill provided little funding for commercial crew development and virtually nothing for exploration technology (although fully funding more generic space technology work).
Ordinarily, the full House would have taken up and passed its version of the bill, leaving it up to a House-Senate conference committee to iron out differences between the two bills. However, with the limited time remaining in the current Congress, plus a full plate of other legislative priorities still left to do, insiders warned that there would be no time for that conventional approach. Instead, there were efforts to “preconference”: come up with a compromise version of the bill that the House could approve and still win support in the Senate. Those efforts failed, though, as did the release on September 23 of a “compromise” version of the bill by the House Science and Technology Committee that was much closer, but not identical, to the Senate bill.
Last Monday, the House effectively threw in the towel, with House Science and Technology Committee chairman Bart Gordon announcing that the full House would vote on the Senate’s bill, rather than either the original or compromise House bill. “It has become clear that there is not time remaining to pass a compromise bill through the House and the Senate,” Gordon said in a statement. “For the sake of providing certainty, stability, and clarity to the NASA workforce and larger space community, I felt it was better to consider a flawed bill than no bill at all as the new fiscal year begins.”
“I see no realistic choice but to take the Senate bill because doing so would be preferable than taking no action at all,” said Rep. Ralph Hall.
The full House took up this “flawed” bill Wednesday night under a procedure known as “suspension of the rules” that limits debate and prohibits amendments, ensuring that if the bill passed, it would be identical to the Senate version and thus could go directly to the President for his signature. The catch is that bills considered under suspension of the rules require a two-thirds majority for passage instead of a simple majority. Going into Wednesday night, it wasn’t clear if there would be sufficient support for the Senate bill to meet that requirement.
During the floor debate, Gordon and other members expressed their support for the bill, if only reluctantly. “I see no realistic choice but to take the Senate bill because doing so would be preferable than taking no action at all,” Rep. Ralph Hall, (R-TX), ranking member of the House Science and Technology Committee, said. “While the bill before us today is far from perfect, it offers clear direction to an agency that is floundering and sets us up on the path towards maintaining America’s leadership in space.”
Others warned in dire—if hyperbolic—terms of the consequences of not passing the Senate bill. “If we do not pass this NASA authorization bill tonight, the Obama Administration will succeed in shutting down America’s manned space program by the end of the year,” claimed Rep. John Culberson (R-TX).
One exception to the debate was the Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), the chairperson of the space subcommittee of the House Science and Technology Committee. In an extended floor speech she spoke out forcefully against the bill. “In contrast to the supporters of the Senate bill who say that today they reluctantly support the Senate bill because it is better than doing nothing, I have no reluctance in telling you that this is a bad bill,” she said. “It will do damage to NASA if enacted and it should be voted down tonight.”
She was critical of several provisions of the Senate bill, including its HLV language, which calls for a vehicle with an initial capacity of 70 to 100 tons to LEO. “This bill contains provisions that will force NASA to build a rocket designed by senators and not by engineers,” she said. That rocket “will be too large to economically serve as a backup to commercial crew transport to the space station, and may also prove to be too small effectively undertake human missions beyond low Earth orbit.”
She criticized funding for “would-be” commercial crew and cargo providers authorized in the bill, and addressed concerns that without an authorization, massive layoffs would follow. “You will not be doing anything to stop layoffs tonight by voting for this Senate bill,” she said, noting that layoffs would be tied to funding provided in separate legislation.
In the end, though, her arguments were not persuasive enough to win over enough of her fellow legislators. The House passed the bill by a 304–118 margin, more than the two-thirds needed for passage. With the administration previously expressing support for the Senate bill, President Obama is expected to sign it into law within days. The Vision for Space Exploration, then, effectively died on the floor of the House when the vote on the NASA authorization bill closed at 11:36 pm Eastern time on September 29, 2010.
Transition to an uncertain future
In the days following the House vote, members of Congress, companies, and organizations all expressed support, to varying degrees, of the Senate bill, although different people saw different things in the bill. Utah’s congressional delegation, for example, saw the bill as a lifeline for ATK, the company that builds solid rocket motors in the state. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said the bill “takes Utah’s solid rocket industry off life support” since the HLV language in the bill “can only be realistically met through the use of solid rocket motors”. (In fact, the report accompanying the Senate bill explicitly calls for the use of shuttle-derived solid rocket motors for the HLV.) Companies like SpaceX, though, endorsed the bill’s support for commercial crew development. “Investing in commercial crew will build on NASA’s proud record of innovation and will encourage competition that will improve reliability, increase safety, and reduce costs,” SpaceX CEO and CTO Elon Musk said in a statement.
“We’re thrilled to have this three-year authorization bill for NASA,” Garver said. “It’s certainly been a year that, in a time of transition, has been challenging.”
NASA leadership also endorsed the legislation, with administrator Charles Bolden taking the unusual step of issuing statements both before and after the bill’s passage in the House. In the statement issued the day of the vote, he said he was “hopeful” the bill “will receive strong support in the House and be sent onto the President for his signature”; in a similar statement the following day, he said he was “grateful” the bill made it through the House.
In a teleconference with reporters the day after the House vote, NASA deputy administrator Lori Garver also expressed gratitude, and relief, that the bill had passed. “We’re thrilled to have this three-year authorization bill for NASA,” she said. “It’s certainly been a year that, in a time of transition, has been challenging.”
Passage of the authorization act, though, doesn’t mark the end of that time of transition, but only the end of the beginning phase. The next major milestone will come later this year, when appropriators follow up on the authorization bill with actual funding for NASA in fiscal year 2011. That fiscal year actually started on Friday, but as has been the case in recent years, Congress didn’t complete an appropriations bill in time and instead passed a “continuing resolution”, or CR, funding NASA—and the rest of the federal government—at 2010 levels through at least early December.
The CR constrains what NASA can do to implement elements of the plan enacted in the authorization bill. A provision of the final 2010 appropriations bill prevents NASA from cancelling any element of the Constellation program or starting a new one until a succeeding appropriations bill, with appropriate language, is passed; the CR doesn’t change that. “We are still living under the appropriations language that we will not be terminating any contracts and, of course, can’t have any entirely new starts,” Garver said in Thursday’s telecon. “Those changes will have to wait until an approved appropriations bill.”
The Republican Party’s proposal in its “Pledge to America” to roll back spending could cut the next NASA budget by up to $2 billion.
That appropriations bill—which won’t be taken up until after Congress returns in mid-November, after the midterm elections—offers an opportunity for legislators to potentially change some elements of just-passed authorization. In his statement conceding to the Senate version of the authorization bill, Gordon said he would continue to push for changes he sought in the bill, including funding for an additional shuttle mission and “overly prescriptive” language about the design of an HLV, with appropriators.
NASA also might seek some wiggle room in how it would develop an HLV. “I think the trade space continues to be open on what type of vehicle we will have,” she said, adding that they may get “some additional guidance” from appropriators. “There’s still a lot of ability on the part of NASA to work with our stakeholders on what exactly is included in our new heavy lift launch vehicle.”
Interestingly, one person in Congress who might support such an effort is Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), who had been one of the sharpest critics of the administration’s new direction for NASA. “I remain concerned with the limiting direction set forth on the heavy lift rocket’s design. NASA must not deliver a rocket that is simply a shuttle without wings,” he said in a statement after the House passage of the authorization bill. “This would not represent a step forward for innovation or for the future of our space program.”
Beyond that, though, much bigger questions remain about the agency’s future. While there’s been very little argument about overall funding levels for NASA for 2011, with wide acceptance of the administration’s overall, or “topline”, proposal of exactly $19 billion, there’s still debate about whether this amount, and the modest growth in both the authorization bill and the administration’s proposal, is sufficient to support these programs going forward. The Augustine Committee, for example, sought an even larger increase (up to $3 billion a year) in its proposals. That may be a particular issue for an HLV, which will be constrained not just by budget but also by the design language in the bill as well as a goal of having the vehicle ready by the end of 2016.
Worse, that funding could be difficult to retain in the coming years as a climate of fiscal restraint (relatively speaking, at least) returns to Washington. With Republicans holding a good chance of taking control of the House after November’s elections, GOP House leadership unveiled a “Pledge to America” last month that calls for, among other items, plans to “roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels” with only a few exceptions, none of which would include NASA. If enacted, that could slash NASA’s projected 2012 topline funding from just under $19.5 billion to as little as $17.4 billion, the agency’s budget in FY 2008.
That presages an even bigger long-term challenge: maintaining momentum for the plan for more than a few years. Recall that the Vision for Space Exploration got off to a strong start, winning congressional support without the same level of contentious debate as this latest plan. And, in fact, the Vision was, in the short term, a success: the near-term goals of the plan included completing the International Space Station by 2010 and then retiring the Space Shuttle. Now, in October 2010, the ISS is effectively complete and only two shuttle missions remain on the manifest (although the new authorization bill will allow NASA to fly one additional, final mission in mid-2011).
Should this latest effort fail, and given an increasingly-constrained fiscal environment the country likely faces over the long term, would NASA would get another chance for human spaceflight beyond low Earth orbit?
That short-term momentum could not be sustained, though. The conventional wisdom is that Constellation was underfunded and behind schedule, and thus unlikely to meet the goals of the Vision. But another factor, perhaps, is that the Vision’s mid-range plans—what NASA would do after completing the ISS but before returning to the Moon—seemed vague and not that interesting: sure, we’d be doing something to get ready to return to the Moon, besides operating the station (and even then perhaps only to 2015), but there was certainly an enthusiasm gap between NASA’s plans and popular interest.
The new plan faces the same problem, although in a different form. In the near term the agency has some direction for developing an HLV, supporting the creation of commercial crew transportation capabilities, and other technology development and robotic precursor missions. But there’s still that gap between the middle of the decade, when those initial problems are scheduled to be complete, and President Obama’s stated goal of a human mission to a near Earth asteroid by 2025. What will sustain that interest—and funding—over the next 15 years?
“The fact is that we have been trying to relive Apollo for the last 40 years,” Garver said in a speech earlier this year. “We have not been able to recreate that since, and I am not even sure that we would want to, given even that did not provide us with a sustained presence in space.” That assessment is accurate, as the record of failed efforts to recreate it—to which can now be added the Vision for Space Exploration and Constellation, unironically called “Apollo on steroids” by then-administrator Mike Griffin—demonstrates. The circumstances that led to Apollo, starting with the events of 53 years ago today, will likely never be recreated (much to the chagrin of those who have been trying to build up China as a Soviet-like competitor to the US in space; China, it seems, shows little interest in a sprint to the Moon, having just launched only its second robotic orbiter there, three years after the first.)
The administration sought a sharp break from the past with a new program that emphasized capabilities over destinations, but got a sharp rebuke from Congress. The result is an authorization bill that is a compromise: some support for commercial crew and technology development, but also for an HLV to be developed in the near-term rather than later, as originally proposed. Will that be sufficient to break the cycle of past failures, or is the agency’s new plan just as prone to the problems of lack of interest and funding that doomed previous human space exploration initiatives? Only time will tell for certain, but one wonders: should this latest effort fail, and given an increasingly-constrained fiscal environment the country likely faces over the long term, would NASA would get another chance for human spaceflight beyond low Earth orbit?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
