Potentia Tenebras Repellendi

Lift-off!!!

2009-10-29T09:18:00.001-04:00

From this:

To:

Watch the Ares 1-X Launch live

2009-10-27T10:49:00.003-04:00

Live Feed

Currently holding at T-4 minutes. Target launch time of 11:04 EST
The full post goes here

Only When You Can Buy a Ticket

2009-07-20T08:25:00.004-04:00

To the Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Michael Collins Museum will this issue be laid to rest.

Despite all the evidence that anyone with an inkling of technical training can review and accept, there is still a significant section of the population that believes that Mankind's greatest technical achievement was a hoax. A hoax perpetrated by NASA's Cold War political masters in the Arizona desert solely for the sake of beating the Soviets to Moon. With this belief goes the refusal to face the fact that if the Soviets had been able to expose the secret, they would have in a heartbeat. The fact that they didn't says it all.

There are like minded groups out there - Clavius.org being the most comprehensive, along with the Mythbusters, one of the greatest programs on TV, that can and have done a much better job than I can debunking the nay-sayers conspiracy theories, but I'm still going to do my part. For a more complete list of evidence of the Apollo landings, you can see them here.

The Japanese lunar probe Kayuga imaged the Apollo 15 landing site with its Terrain Camera, a stereographic camera. Here is the original image taken from the ground:

And the reconstruction from Kayuga's Terrain camera. Note that the Terrain Camera has a resolution of 10 meters, so there will be some subtle differences.

These images come to us courtesy of the LRO, in orbit as we speak. To those of you with smaller monitors, I apologize for the size of the images, but it is necessary.

For purposes of scale, this is the Eagle:

Apollo 11:

Apollo 14:

Apollo 15:

Apollo 16:

Apollo 17:

And we thank those who gave their lives chasing a dream for all mankind -

-"It isn't that we don't trust you, Joe [Shea], but this time we've decided to go over your head."

LAUNCH COMPLEX 34, Friday, 27 January 1967, 1831 Hours. Dedicated to the living memory of the crew of the Apollo 1: USAF. Lt. Colonel Virgil I. Grissom, USAF. Lt. Colonel Edward H. White, II, U.S.N. Lt. Commander Roger B. Chaffee. They gave their lives in service to their country in the ongoing exploration of humankind's final frontier. Remember them not for how they died but for those ideals for which they lived.

ISS Flyby Series

2009-07-06T10:36:00.002-04:00

Courtesy of the Space Fellowship:

The International Space Station (ISS) is about to make a remarkable series of flybys over the United States. Beginning this 4th of July weekend, the station will appear once, twice, and sometimes three times a day for many days in a row. No matter where you live, you should have at least a few opportunities to see the biggest spaceship ever built.

NASA's ISS Tracker

2009-06-30T09:52:00.003-04:00

Carnival of Space #109 is live.

Besides my own post, I found this one to be particularly interesting.

Google Lunar X PRIZE Fan Map

2009-06-26T14:51:00.004-04:00

Courtesy of Mike Fabio of the X Prize Foundation, we have yet another map for space geeks like us.

View #FFD Google Lunar X PRIZE Fan Map in a larger map

You have to be logged into your google account to edit pins on the map. Have Fun!

And while I have you here, check out the Moon Society's map, also a google map.

View Lunar Development World Map: Brought to you by the Moon Society in a larger map

The End of Kayuga (Part 2)

2009-06-13T08:21:00.001-04:00

Japan's Lunar Probe Kayuga officially ended its mission to our Moon at 1825 GMT.

Launched 14 Sept 2007, Kayuga was a 17 month long exploration of the Moon's surface. Officially named SELENE (SELenological and ENgineering Explorer), Kayuga is the name it was given by the Japanese public. It consisted of a main orbiter flying at 100 km altitude and two small polar satellites - Rstar and Vstar.

Rstar was a small two way relay satellite used to facilitate communications between Kayuga and controllers back at JAXA
. Rstar was also used to measure Doppler shift in the expected orbits of Vstar and the main orbiter. Rstar crashed into the farside on 12 Feb 2009.

Vstar was the other mini satellite used to measure the lunar gravity field. Also known as the VRAD and VLBI (Very Long Baseline Interferometry).

Kayuga has a plethora of instrumentation:
- X-Ray & Gamma Ray Spectrometer for determining the composition of the surface and abundance of certain elements.
- Multi band Imager & Spectral Profiler for the for determining the mineral composition and distribution of the surface.
- Terrain Camera, Lunar Radar Sounder and Laser Altimeter for surface and sub-surface imaging. The Terrain Camera was used to show that there is no surface ice in the permanently shadowed craters of the lunar south pole.
- Several instruments for measuring the Moon's magnetic field and tenuous atmosphere
- The Rstar and Vstar were used to measure the gravitational field of the Moon by measuring the Doppler shift of the Main Orbiter and comparing it to its expected orbit. Vstar was used on the far side where the Doppler shift method did not work.
- The High Definition TV camera was used to take the first HD images of the surface and pretty famous HD video of the Earth rising over the limb of the Moon.

With demise of Kayuga, lunar scientists and enthusiasts turn their focus to NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) and the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS)

The End of Kayuga

2009-06-10T09:12:00.003-04:00

Japan's Lunar Probe Kayuga (Selene) is set to execute the final part of it's mission:

Crashing into the surface of the Moon. Kayuga's orbit is decaying and set to intersect the lunar surface. The crash should take place at a speed of about 6000 km/hr on today 10 June around 1830 UMT (2:30 PM EST). If the Moon is visible at that time (East Asia & Australia), keep your eyes pointed towards the southeastern limb of the Moon. If the 2600 kg probe's crash and resultant explosion are going to be visible, that's where it will be.

Lawmakers Slash NASA Budget Request

2009-06-09T09:00:00.004-04:00

Especially worrying since everyone else is stepping up in the manned spaceflight department - China even has a Mars probe in the pipeline for later this year.

From Space.com:

Move called a ‘time-out’ as White House awaits review of post-shuttle plans.

WASHINGTON - In a move that reflects the uncertainty surrounding NASA's current strategy for replacing the space shuttle and returning astronauts to the moon by 2020, House appropriators slashed by 16 percent the space agency's $4 billion request for manned space exploration in 2010.

The proposed legislation, marked up June 4 by the House Appropriations commerce, justice, science subcommittee, trims $483 million overall from U.S. President Barack Obama's $18.7 billion budget request for NASA next year. The $670 million cut to the 2010 manned exploration request would leave $3.21 billion, which is less than is available for the effort this year.

Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.), the subcommittee's chairman, described the move as a "time-out" in the budget process as the White House awaits the findings of a 10-member panel tasked by the White House to reassess NASA's post-shuttle exploration plans. That panel, led by former Lockheed Martin chief Norm Augustine, is expected to report back with its findings in August.

In his opening statement at the markup hearing, Mollohan said the cut should not be viewed as a diminution of the subcommittee's support for NASA's human spaceflight activities. "Rather, it's a deferral taken without prejudice; it is a pause, a time-out, to allow the president to establish his vision for human space exploration and to commit to realistic future funding levels to realize this vision."

Mollohan told Space News June 4 he is "open to responding to an amended budget request" based on Augustine's review. Mollohan also said he expects the Obama administration to deliver to Congress a "realistic and sustainable" cost assessment of NASA's human spaceflight program in time to amend the 2010 request.

"We invite this report and the administration's response to it, whatever it is," Mollohan said. "We want very much for the funding to be an honest and realistic cost assessment."

Concerns raised
NASA's current human spaceflight plan calls for retiring the space shuttle in 2010 and replacing it with a crew capsule dubbed Orion that would be launched atop a shuttle-derived rocket, the Ares-1, starting in 2015. At the president's request, Augustine's panel is taking a second look at this plan, along with NASA's strategy for returning astronauts to the Moon by 2020, given the likely available budgets over the next several years.

During the hearing, key Republicans expressed concern that the bill would hold NASA's funding next year to 2009 levels. In a June 4 statement Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), said he was joining colleagues "in expressing my strong support for increasing this funding as we continue the Fiscal Year 2010 bill process."

Aderholt specifically named fellow Republican Reps. Jerry Lewis of California, the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee; Frank Wolf of Virginia, the ranking member of the commerce, justice, science subcommittee; and John Culberson of Texas.

Other recommendations contained in the bill include a $77million reduction in NASA's proposed space operations budget, which includes the space shuttle and international space station; a $6 million reduction in science; and a $332 million shift in funds from the Cross Agency Support account to a new budget line-item included in the subcommittee's mark. Dubbed Construction and Environmental Compliance, the new account would be funded at $441 million. Congressional aides said the new line item and accompanying funds are aimed at consolidating NASA's various construction efforts into a single pot of money.

Following the markup, the subcommittee posted on its Web site an exhaustive list of earmarks sought by its members. According to the document, money tapped for NASA earmarks totaled close to $15 million.

While increasing NASA's topline funding figure over 2009, Obama's 2010 funding request included an out-year budget profile for the space agency that is some $3 billion lower than was anticipated at this time last year.

Paul Shawcross, chief of the science and space branch in the White House Office of Management and Budget, said the administration's commitment to NASA was evident in the 2009 stimulus package — which included $1 billion for NASA programs — as well as in its 2010 budget request.

"But after 2010, it's flat to 2013," Shawcross said June 2 during a symposium hosted by the George Washington University here. He attributed the flat funding profile to the recession and anticipated recovery measures. He said the Obama administration is facing a $1.26 trillion deficit in 2010, a figure the president hopes to reduce to about $500 billion by 2014. Consequently, funding for NASA and other discretionary spending will be squeezed in the out-years.

"That fiscal environment is reflected in NASA's topline request," Shawcross said.

Meanwhile, W. Michael Hawes, associate NASA administrator for program analysis and evaluation — who is charged with leading the agency team that will provide technical and analytic support to the Augustine panel — said the blue-ribbon commission's work is under way.

"We're starting to get questions from the panel, and we'll be doing a series of fact-finding telecons, site visits, public meetings," he told the symposium audience. Hawes said one area on which the panel will focus is the role international cooperation plays in U.S. manned spaceflight. He said the panel would hear from four international space station partners as part of the review process.

Damon Wells, senior policy analyst in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, said pursuing international relationships is a key aspect of space policy. "The panel has been explicitly asked to look at international cooperation," Wells told the audience. "It is part of the dialogue."

Hawes told Space News June 2 that the panel would not have time to produce an interim report, though the committee expects to brief the White House on its findings mid-August. The committee's final report is expected at the end of that month. The Augustine panel's first public meeting is slated for June 17.

Other speakers at the symposium questioned whether the Augustine panel has been granted sufficient time to do its work.

Marcia Smith, president of the Space and Technology Policy Group, a consultancy here, said the Augustine panel would provide little more than a snapshot in time given its deadline.

"Not everyone agrees on the mandated timing," she said. "Congress, in particular, wants it not to be constrained."

Jeffery Bingham, a member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee's Republican staff and senior adviser on space and aeronautics, agreed.

"I am worried about the time they have, and the resources they have," he told the audience. "It's going to be dicey."

Bingham expressed concern that Augustine was told to limit the options his panel is to present to the administration.

"We think it prejudges the outcome," he said. "We want to see that it is wide open and that all options are on the table."

Richard Obermann, staff director for the House Science and Technology space and aeronautics subcommittee, said lawmakers are encouraged by the additional funds for NASA programs in the 2009 stimulus package and the 2010 budget request. But Obermann expressed "uncertainty with the new administration's intentions," particularly in the out-years, where NASA's topline funding is flat.

Oberman said increases in other parts of NASA's budget, including aeronautics and Earth science, came at the expense of out-year funding for space exploration. Obermann said he sees NASA's current funding projections for 2010-2014 as a placeholder, and that he expects the Augustine panel's review to influence funding for the space agency's exploration programs in the out-year timeframe. Obermann said he was encouraged by the choice of Augustine to lead the human spaceflight review, noting testimony Augustine gave before the House Science and Technology Committee in 2004, shortly after former President George W. Bush announced plans to replace the space shuttle and return astronauts to the Moon.

At that time Augustine said manned space exploration offered many benefits, but that "it would be a grave mistake to try to pursue a space program on the cheap. To do so is in my opinion an invitation to disaster. There is a tendency in any can-do organization to believe that it can operate with almost any budget that is made available. The fact is that trying to do so is a mistake — particularly when safety is a major consideration."

The Search for the Moon's Mother

2009-04-10T22:42:00.007-04:00

NASA launches the twin STEREO probes in search of remnants of the collision that produced the Moon.

Some scientists believe that the Moon was created when the Earth was hit by a Mars sized object. Theia was conceieved by Edward Belbruno and Richard Gott if Princeton. The Theia Hypothesis is a subset of the Great Impact Theory of lunar formation. Belbruno and Gott believe that the impactor that hit the Earth 4.5 billion years ago came from one the Earth-Sun Langrangian points. Langrangian points are the five places where the gravitational pull of two bodies cancels each other out.

Most people are familiar with Jupiter's Trojan points and the asteroids that reside there. Earth and the Moon also share Lagrangian points. NASA's STEREO probes are going to the two most stable Lagrangian points belonging the Earth-Sun system, L4 and L5. Part of STEREO's mission is to look for planetoids leftover form the formation of Theia. STEREO is primarily a solar observatory mission, similar to the NASA/ESA stalwart SOHO. SOHO has been in orbit around the Sun-Earth L1 Langrangian point since 1996. The STEREO will be passing through the Sun-Earth L4 and L5 points, which are 60 degrees ahead and behind of Earth in its orbit, and they will continue on their paths past both sides of the Sun.

Skylon contact on DRADIS

2009-02-25T09:30:00.007-05:00

On the single stage to orbit (SSTO) development front, British scientist Alan Bond, formerly of the HOTOL concept and now classified RB545 air-breathing rocket engine that was to be mated to the HOTOL, has gotten go-ahead funding from the European Space Agency (ESA) and the government of the United Kingdom to the tune of a million euros.

Bond's company - Reaction Engines LTD - designed the Skylon SSTO as the spiritual successor to the British HOTOL, which was to be Great Britain's answer to the Space Shuttle. The cancellation of HOTOL was due to design issues stemming from the placement of the the RB545 engines.

With its massive engines placed at the rear of the craft, HOTOL's center of gravity was further back than normal airplane designs and it introduced some stability issues. A redesign of the spacecraft reduced the cargo capability of the HOTOL and affected the economics of the launch system. Skylon is the answer to the design issues of the HOTOL.

Placing the new SABRE engines outboard on wings moves the the center of gravity back to the middle of the spacecraft, giving ideal stability and cargo room, as the engines are no longer taking up space in the the main body of the spacecraft. Skylon is big - 82 m long, 6.3 m in diameter and a 25 m wingspan. Its dry weight is estimated at 41,000 kg and can carry 12,000 kg of payload. The heart of the system are the SABRE engines.

On Skylon, the oxidizer used is liquid oxygen (LOX). LOX is very heavy and for a standard hydrogen oxygen reaction, you need two oxygen atoms at 8 times the weight each of hydrogen for every hydrogen atom burned. For comparison, the Space Shuttle carries 106,000 kg of hydrogen at liftoff and 630,000 kg of LOX. 85% percent of the Space Shuttle's fuel weight is oxidizer. The good people at Reaction Engines LTD decided that carrying their own LOX was crazy when Skylon would be flying through it on its way up. The SABRE engine harvests oxidizer from the atmosphere during flight.

The SABRE engine is essentially a closed cycle rocket engine with an additional precooled turbo-compressor to provide a high pressure air supply to the combustion chamber. This allows operation from zero forward speed on the runway and up to Mach 5.5 in air breathing mode during ascent. As the air density falls with altitude the engine eventually switches to a pure rocket propelling Skylon to orbital velocity (around Mach 25).

From Wikipedia:

style="font-weight: bold;">The Precooleran>

As the air enters the engine at supersonic/hypersonic speeds, it becomes very hot due to compression effects. The high temperatures are traditionally dealt with in jet engines by using heavy copper or nickel based materials, and by throttling back the engine at the higher airspeeds to avoid melting. However, for an lass="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20">SSTO craft, such heavy materials are unusable, and maximum thrust is necessary for orbital insertion at the earliest time to minimise gravity losses. Instead, using a gaseous helium coolant loop, SABRE dramatically cools the air from 1000 °C down to -140 °C in a heat exchanger while avoiding liquefaction of the air or blockage from freezing water vapour.

Previous versions of precoolers such as HOTOL put the hydrogen fuel directly through the precooler, but inserting a helium cooling loop between the air and the cold fuel avoids problems with hydrogen embrittlement in the air precooler.

Avoiding liquification improves the efficiency of the engine since less liquid hydrogen is boiled off; even simply cooling the air needs more liquid hydrogen than can be burnt in the engine core, the excess is dumped overboard (through a ramjet.)

However, the dramatic cooling of the air raised a potential problem: it is necessary to prevent blocking the precooler from frozen water vapour and other fractions. A suitable precooler, which rejects condensed water before it freezes has now been experimentally demonstrated.

The Compressor

The cooled air is then passed into a reasonably conventional turbo-compressor, similar in design to those used on a jet engine, but in this case powered by a gas turbine running on the helium loop, rather than off combustion gases as in a conventional jet engine. Thus, the turbo-compressor is powered by waste heat collected by the helium loop.

The Engines

After being launched and brought to speed by a short burst of the rockets, the jets are started, fed by air bled from the shock cone. At this point the precooler/turbo-compressor is not being used. As the craft ascends and the outside air pressure drops, more and more air is passed into the compressor as the effectiveness of the ram compression alone drops. In this fashion the jets are able to operate to a much higher altitude than would normally be possible.

At Mach 5.5 the jets become inefficient and are powered down, and stored liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen is used for the rest of the ascent in the separate rocket engines; the turbopumps are powered by the helium loop from the heat produced by cooling the engine.

The Helium Loop

The 'hot' helium from the air precooler, and cooling the combustion chambers is recycled by cooling it in a heat exchanger with the liquid hydrogen fuel.

The loop forms a self starting Brayton cycle engine, and is used to both cool critical parts of the engine, but also to power turbines and numerous miscellaneous parts of the engine.

The heat passes from the air into the helium. This heat energy is not entirely wasted, it is in fact used to power the various parts of the engine, and the remainder is used to vaporise hydrogen, which is burnt in ramjets.

Performance

The designed thrust/weight ratio of SABRE ends up several times higher—up to 14, compared to about 5 for conventional jet engines, and just 2 for scramjets. This high performance is a combination of the cooled air being denser and hence requiring less compression, but more importantly, of the low air temperatures permitting lighter alloy to be used in much of the engine. Overall performance is much better than the RB545 engine or scramjets.

The engine gives good fuel efficiency peaking at about 2800 seconds within the atmosphere. Typical all-rocket systems are around 450 at best, and even "typical" nuclear thermal rockets only about 900 seconds.

The combination of high fuel efficiency and low mass engines means that a single stage to orbit approach for Skylon can be employed, with air breathing to mach 5.5+ at 26 km altitude, and with the vehicle reaching orbit with more payload mass per take-off mass than just about any non-nuclear launch vehicle ever proposed.

Like the RB545, the precooler idea adds mass and complexity to the system, normally the antithesis of rocket design. The precooler is also the most aggressive and difficult part of the whole SABRE design. The mass of this heat exchanger is an order of magnitude better than has been achieved previously; however, experimental work has proved that this can be achieved. The experimental heat exchanger has achieved heat exchange of almost 1 GW/m³, believed to be a world record. Small sections of a real precooler now exist.

The losses from carrying around a number of engines that will be turned off for some portion of the flight would appear to be heavy, yet the gains in overall efficiency more than make up for this. These losses are greatly offset by the different flight plan. Conventional launch vehicles such as the Space Shuttle usually start a launch by spending around a minute climbing almost vertically at relatively low speeds; this is inefficient, but optimal for pure-rocket vehicles. In contrast, the SABRE engine permits a much slower, shallower climb, air breathing and using wings to support the vehicle, giving far lower fuel usage before lighting the rockets to do the orbital insertion.

Home on Lagrange

2009-02-18T10:09:00.001-05:00

--Home on Lagrange (The L5 Song)
© 1978 by William S. Higgins and Barry D. Gehm

CHORUS: Home, home on LaGrange,
Where the space debris always collects,
We possess, so it seems, two of Man's greatest dreams:
Solar power and zero-gee sex.

Oh, give me a locus where the gravitons focus
Where the three-body problem is solved,
Where the microwaves play down at three degrees K,
And the cold virus never evolved. (chorus)
We eat algea pie, our vacuum is high,
Our ball bearings are perfectly round.
Our horizon is curved, our warheads are MIRVed,
And a kilogram weighs half a pound. (chorus)
If we run out of space for our burgeoning race
No more Lebensraum left for the Mensch
When we're ready to start, we can take Mars apart,
If we just find a big enough wrench. (chorus)
I'm sick of this place, it's just McDonald's in space,
And living up here is a bore.
Tell the shiggies, "Don't cry," they can kiss me goodbye
'Cause I'm moving next week to L4! (chorus)

Carnival of Space #88 is live

2009-02-03T11:14:00.002-05:00

Carnival of Space #88 is live.

Of interest is this link to a electric space drive simulator.

A little history for you here outlining a lunar lander mission proposed right after the 1st anniversary of the Apollo 1 fire.

Chandrayaan-1 Takes First X-Rays of the Moon

2009-01-26T11:49:00.003-05:00

The C1XS X-ray camera, jointly developed by the UK's STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory and the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), has successfully detected its first X-ray signature from the Moon.

Credit: RAL/Brunel

The C1XS camera is a Compact Imaging X-ray Spectrometer that uses x-rays to map the composition of the lunar surface and in doing so, will offer up clues as to the origin of the Moon. The C1XS X-ray spectrometer was constructed at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, UK, in collaboration with colleagues at ISRO, who designed and constructed the main Chandrayaan-1 lunar probe. The instrument is a technology development of the D-C1XS instrument which successfully conducted science operations at the Moon aboard ESA's SMART-1 mission between 2003 to 2006.

C1XS will provide high resolution coverage of the lunar surface in X-rays, and will provide an absolute measurement of the elemental abundances of the rock forming elements Mg, Al and Si under normal solar conditions and several other elements during solar flare events. This first measurement was three minutes of observation taken in the vicinity of the Apollo landing sites during a solar flare. The is measurement is also noteworthy because C1XS collected data from a source that was reportedly 20 times below its minimum effective detection threshold.

Geochemical data will allow for advances in several areas of lunar science, including a detailed study of the nature of the crust. In combination with information to be obtained by the other instruments on Chandrayaan-1 and the data already provided by the Smart-1, Clementine and Lunar Prospector missions, this information will provide a more detailed look at some of the fundamental questions that remain regarding the origin and evolution of the Moon.

Credit: ISRO

From: Space Daily

2009-01-23T20:28:00.004-05:00

Carnival of Space #87 is live.

Of interest is this summary of the recent confirmation of the existence of methane on Mars and what it means to the search for extraterrestrial life.

Even more intriguing is the theory being put forward about the holographic properties of the universe. I don't completely understand it, but it reminds me of something I've seen in sci-fi: One spot in normal space corresponds to another spot in hyperspace, except the distances are shorter in hyperspace. It'll be interesting if this pans out.

Lunar rover

2009-01-21T12:05:00.010-05:00

Though I missed it live on TV, I understand NASA's new lunar rover made an appearance during the parade. Take a look at those tweels. They were tested here.

NASA's Chariot rover was showing off its 360 degree steering ability for the President and VP. As seen here, the Chariot is in its Small Pressurized Rover configuration. The SPR allows the astronauts to explore the lunar surface without having to wear a full spacesuit.

Here is a link to a video of the Chariot in action.

The Chariot consists of the Mobility chassis and the removable SPR cabin unit. Chariot gives astronauts three options for riding. Without the SPR in suits in rotating turrets is probably the option the system got its name from - Chariot. The next option is to ride without suits inside the SPR - car mode. The final option is a combination of both - the SPR is mounted to the chassis, and astronauts ride in a turret - ideal for transporting large, unstable loads.

The suits are intergated into airlocks called suitports the allow quick ingress/egress with a minimum of air waste.

Chariot masses 1000 kg and has a top speed of 10 kph. It can carry a payload of 3000 kg, which matches the weight of the SPR. It's 4.5 m long, 1.3 m high and has a 4 m wheelbase. The SPR gives Chariot a potential range of 240 km, compared to 10 km for Apollo's rover. In addition, the suitport airlock is rated for 72 hours storm shelter protection from a solar particle event, or solar flare. The lock is lined with 2.5 cm of water ice, one of the best natural radiation shields known.

Download Small Pressurized Rover Fact Sheet (3.7 MB PDF)
http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/esmd/home/black_point.html

SpaceX's Falcon 9 on the Pad

2009-01-13T09:16:00.003-05:00

SpaceX has completed integration of their Falcon 9 vehicle at Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral and have raised it to a vertical position in preparation for a demonstration flight. See pictures below.

ISS Contruction Video

2008-12-05T11:57:00.001-05:00

Courtesy of the AP

Just a quick link.

Notes

2008-12-03T09:07:00.003-05:00

Just so that all interested parties know, I have not let the blog die. I took thanksgiving week off and I have finals this week and the next. I will try to post small updates here and there, so try to stop by every now and then.

Thank you for reading, and Potentia will be back to normal very soon.

Stumble It!

On Orbit XIV

2008-11-25T10:09:00.001-05:00

In this episode of On Orbit we have Space Based Solar Power (SPSP), Great Britain's lunar probe, a status update on the Dawn probe, SpaceX at it again,

In the Space Review, we have the 1st argument for SBSP that I have seen coming from the military side of things. Pakistan can and has closed access to the nearest port, Karachi, to American forces and can do so at any time. Coalition troops fighting in Afghanistan are dependent on over-land convoys from Karachi for supplies. With SBSP, isolated areas like Afghanistan, Diego Garcia and innumerable land locked countries can have independent access to electrical power. There are some detractors though and they bring up good points.

MoonLITE, is the next lunar probe in the the pipeline. The 100 million pound (pound sterling, not pound weight) probe is set to investigate the cause of the mysterious moonquakes.

JPL's Dawn spacecraft shut down its ion propulsion system as scheduled. The spacecraft is now gliding toward a Mars flyby in February of next year. "Dawn has completed the thrusting it needs to use Mars for a gravity assist to help get us to Vesta," said Marc Rayman, Dawn's chief engineer, of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. "Dawn will now coast in its orbit around the sun for the next half a year before we again fire up the ion propulsion system to continue our journey to the asteroid belt."

SpaceX is showing off yet again, by completing a full mission-length firing of the Falcon 9's 1st stage. It was a static test and it lasted 178 seconds.

As an added bonus, we have a couple NASA related articles by Alan Stern - NASA's Black Hole Budgets and Imagine Reconnecting NASA.

Stumble It!

The Space Show

2008-11-24T15:19:00.001-05:00

Bulletin: Please visit www.thespaceshow.com/newsletterfinal.htm for complete information for this week's Space Show programs, contact information, listener participation instructions, future Space Show programs, special events, announcements, and more. The e- mail version of the newsletter has been abbreviated to save subscribers time and avoid some spam filter problems.

The Monday Space Show is live 2-3:30:30 PM Pacific. The Tuesday program is 7-8:30 PM Pacific, the Friday program is always 9:30-11:30 AM Pacific Time and the Sunday Space Show is live 12-1:30 PM Pacific Time. If you believe you are getting this newsletter in error, send a note to drspace@thespaceshow.com to be immediately removed from the mailing list. The Space Show does not support spam mailings of any type and will quickly address your complaint.

Programming For The Week Of November 24, 2008:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. Monday, Nov. 24, 2008, 2-3:30 PM PT: We welcome back Dr. Barrett Caldwell, Director of Space Grant Indiana.

2. Tuesday, Nov. 25, 2008, 7-8:30 PM PT: We welcome Jerry Carr, Skylab astronaut, to the show.

3. Wednesday, November 26, 2008: This show plays as an archived program. The first segment features Jim Lewis of Communication Concepts in Florida talking about his new documentary now being shown on the documentary channel, "One Giant Leap - 50 Years of the American Space Program." The second segment is a waling tour of the Falcon 9 pad under construction at the Cape, hosted by Brian Mosdell, Director of Florida Launch Operations for Space X. .

4. Friday, Nov. 28 2008; 9:30-11:30 AM PT: We welcome back Jane Reifert, President of Incredible Adventures.

5 . Sunday, Nov. 30, 2008, 12-1:30 PM PT: We welcome back Dr. Robert Richards of the Odyssey Moon team. This team is one of the contestants in the Google Lunar X-Prize.

Carnival of Space #80

2008-11-24T13:43:00.003-05:00

The newest carnival is live.

Of interest:

Another article about the Hyperion mini-Nuclear Reactor

Kayuga (Selene)

2008-11-20T08:23:00.001-05:00

From the Planetary Society Blog

JAXA (Japanese Space Agency) has completed the primary mission of the lunar probe Kayuga. Since the craft is still operational, JAXA plans to continue operating it, much like with any other probe.

For its primary mission, Kaguya circled the Moon in a polar orbit at 100 km above the lunar surface, the same as Chandrayaan-1. The extended mission entails reducing the altitude by half to 50 km. Then in May of next year, it will shift into an highly elliptical orbit. Apogee, or apolune when talking about the Moon will be back at 100 km. Perilune, the closest point of approach, will be an eye-popping 20 km. This will take place over the south polar feature Aitken Basin, a target for outpost locations. Normally, an orbital height of 20 km wouldn't matter for an airless body like the Moon, but because the Moon has an irregular gravity field, due mostly to Mascons, a 20 km orbit is unstable and Kayuga is expected to crash into the Moon.

NASA Tests Lunar Rovers And Oxygen Production Technology

2008-11-19T08:00:00.008-05:00

Lunar Analog Field Demonstrations of In-Situ Resource Utilization & Human Robotic Systems hosted by PISCES, the Pacific International Space Center for Exploration Systems, a joint U.S. - Japan venture based in Hilo, Hawai'i, concluded this week. The tests focused on lunar production of oxygen for life support.

Life support for a four (4) to six (6) person outpost would require about two (2) metric tons of oxygen per year according to NASA. The tests featured several experiments:

There were three (3) rovers:

Cratos
Bucketdrum
CMU's SCARAB (Selectively Compliant Articulated Robot Arm Rover)

And four (4) independent experiments

Lockheed's PILOT (Precursor ISRU Lunar Oxygen Testbed)
Lockheed's ROxygen
RESOLVE (Regolith and Environment Science and Oxygen and Lunar Volatile Extraction)
Michelin Lunar Wheel

Scarab was the testbed for both the RESOLVE drilling science package and the Michelin Lunar Wheel, developed by Clemson University for Michelin. RESOLVE featured a core sample drill developed by NORCAT (Northern Centre for Advanced Technology), a Canadian Space Agency contractor. The Bucketdrum rover was used to feed simulated regolith into the PILOT plant and Cratos delivered material into the ROxygen plant.

However, these were just the big name projects at the test. The were numerous smaller projects going on - testing of other gear from Canada and Germany took place during the near two-week project.

The main objective for the two week program was to get the experiements working in the field. This allows operation in non-ideal conditions similar to those that we would face on the Moon and allows us to account for them before we land. Hilo was chosen because volcanic soil closely mimics the regolith found on the lunar surface.

ASTRODAY.NET has the largest collection of pictures from the event and even a movie. Make sure you check them out.

Responses to Schmitt's Email to The Planetary Society

2008-11-18T12:16:00.004-05:00

Schmitt's comments have sparked dialogue and he's not the only one that feels the way he does about the Planetary Society's position. This will be updated as I see more responses.

I wrote a reply on this page

Here is the text below:

I wholeheartedly agree with Harrison's views in this matter. Attempting
to bypass Luna on the way to Mars is a mistake. There are several
reasons why:

1. Luna is interesting and valuable by itself. No matter how much more
interesting and valuable Mars maybe, the fact remains that Luna is the
best place in the Solar System to study the System's formation; it's an
abundant source of high-value metals such as titanium and aluminium; is
also an abundant source of helium-3, the best known fuel for nuclear
fusion; will be a preferable tourist destination for most Earthlings,
tourism already having been identified as the industry most likely to
initiate and drive a space colonisation effort; and will be the perfect
place to set up large deep space telescope arrays.

2. Practice for Mars. You don't sail to the Americas using brand-new
untested technology when you haven't even been to Ireland. Luna is the
perfect place to test a wide range of colonisation technologies before
taking them to Mars, with the distinctly significant advantage that if
anything goes wrong, the astronauts will be only a couple of days from
Earth and not 6-9 months. On Luna we will need technology for
non-fossil-fuel energy production; water mining, recycling and
purificiation; air production and recycling; production of steel, glass,
cement and other materials; dust mitigation; environment control; food
production; transportation; communications; etc., etc. While there will
be variations between the equipment developed for the two worlds, many
of the same problems exist, and developing the tools for Luna first will
be a much safer approach and will save time and decrease risk when we do
go to Mars. Apollo is the most successful space mission ever, yet the
first 10 missions did not descend to the lunar surface; their function
was to test every aspect of the technology and the mission before
putting it all together. We need to take the same safe, step-by-step
approach when colonising Mars.

To bypass Luna is short-sighted, impatient and dangerous.

I too will no longer support the Planetary Society. Like Schmitt, I am also Geologist who
shares many of the same views and vision for future space exploration. It is unfortunate
the society has lost focus, but I am glad Dr. Schmitt brought these issues to light.

Xxx X. Xxxx
UHH Geology graduate

Tire/Wheel Analogue Developed for Lunar Rover

2008-11-18T11:28:00.005-05:00

Michelin, tire manufacturer and developer of the TWEEL has modified the tweel for use on NASA's lunar rover.

Michelin also provides NASA with the tires for the Space Shuttle. The MICHELIN Lunar Wheel is reportedly 3.3 times more efficient in load capacity than the wheels on the previous lunar rovers. The tweel was specifically designed for low temperature, low rolling resistance applications. It was field tested by Carnegie Mellon University's Scarab Rover. The Scarab was a participant in the Lunar Analog Field Demonstrations of In-Situ Resource Utilization & Human Robotic Systems hosted by PISCES, the Pacific International Space Center for Exploration Systems, a joint U.S. - Japan venture based in Hilo, Hawai'i.

The Michelin Lunar wheel is partially funded by NASA's Innovative Partnership Program.

On Orbit XIII

2008-11-17T22:17:00.000-05:00

The tri-color Indian flag joins the the red, white and blue of the US and the red and gold of the old Soviet Union on the lunar surface via the Moon Impact Probe (MIP). The flag was painted on the sides of MIP.

NASA's New Ares Rocket Engine Passes Review

NASA's newest high-performance rocket engine, the J-2X, successfully completed its critical design review Thursday at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala.

Chandrayaan-1 to Search for Lunar Ice

The U.S. Navy's Synthetic Aperture Radar instrument will use an computer designed by British firm SSTL to look to for water ice on the surface of the Moon. The Japanese probe Selene failed to find any evidence of it but there is still hope that it is there in the permanently shadowed craters of the lunar poles.

First Cemetery on the the Moon?

Celestis, a business that launches cremated remains into orbit, is expanding its business to landing capsules on the Moon.

Harrison H. Schmitt leaves NAC and The Planetary Society

2008-11-17T10:30:00.011-05:00

Beyond the Moon: A New Roadmap for Human Space Exploration. The Planetary Society's new approach to space exploration in the future. And the reason for Harrison H. Schmitt's leaving his post as Chairman of the NASA Advisory Council and the withdrawal of his support for The Planetary Society.

With Beyond the Moon, The Planetary Society has stated these goals:

Focusing on Mars as the driving goal of human spaceflight
Deferring humans landing on the Moon until the costs of the interplanetary transportation system and shuttle replacement are largely paid
Accelerating research into global climate change through more comprehensive Earth observations
Achieving a step-by-step approach of new achievements in interplanetary flight, including a human mission to a near-Earth object

Most notable is a de-emphasis on returning to the Moon and the emphasis on Mars as the eventual target of the space program. You can download the entire report from the Planetary Society's website as a 2.9 MB pdf.

This is Schmitt's email to the Planetary Society:

From: Harrison H. Schmitt
To: tps@planetary.org
Cc: [multiple members of the media]
Sent: Fri Nov 14 14:18:13 2008
Subject: Resignation from Society

Dear Lou, Jim and Scott

I am sorry, but I can no longer support the society in its goals as they seem to have gone back to being more political than rational. I want humankind on Mars more than most, but I, at least, feel obligated to look at this goal rationally. Specifically, relative to your bullet points:

TPS Statement * focusing on Mars as the driving goal of human spaceflight

---Having been deeply involved in this issue for many years, and having led several objective studies related to it, it is clear to me, and many other knowledgeable people, that returning to the Moon is the fastest and most cost effective path to Mars for the following reasons:

1. We need generations of engineers to relearn how to operate in deep space at and for long durations on a location that is more accessible than a trajectory to Mars or on Mars itself.

2. We have no clear technology approach for landing large payloads (40MT+) on Mars. Developing entry, descent and landing (EDL) concepts and testing those concepts in the Earth's upper atmosphere will be a major program in and of itself with uncertain cost and duration.

3. Knowing whether 1/6th g triggers human re-adaptation from the adverse consequences of 0g is critical to the design and mass of both Mars transportation systems and Mars surface operations.

4. Many concepts that will be required for operations on Mars need testing in a real-world deep space environment before committing to using those concepts in Mars exploration, including autonomous crew operations during entry, decent, landing and real-time exploration without communications support from Earth.

5. We need a heavy lift launch infrastructure that can support the assembly of large interplanetary spacecraft in Earth orbit, and the requirements to return to the Moon support the development of that infrastructure.

6. We need to develop an interplanetary propulsion system that allows continuous acceleration and deceleration so the travel time to Mars can be cut significantly. That also constitutes a program of uncertain duration and cost.

7. Depending on future understanding of several unknowns already mentioned above, access to lunar-derived consumables after leaving Earth-orbit may be necessary to reduce the launch mass of an interplanetary spacecraft to a feasible amount.

8. We need to certify sample collection and protection protocols on the Moon with exposure to lunar dust and polar volatiles as surrogates for micro-organisms or the planetary protection lobby will make sample return from Mars impossible.

9. We need to use robotic drilling and definitive testing on Mars to penetrate what is probably the only potential biogenesis and evolutionary environment on Mars that has been stable for >3.8 billion years, namely, the cryosphere-hydrosphere interface below the surface.

10. Extremely strong scientific reasons for further lunar exploration exist as have been documented by a large fraction of the lunar and planetary research community at the NASA Advisory Council's 2007 Tempe Workshop and by the National Research Council's recent study.

11. Returning to the Moon has a far better chance of sustained political support than does a far, far more costly, start from scratch Mars program.

Absent sustained and increased budgetary support for the Vision for Space Exploration by the incoming Administration and Congress, any deep space initiative will be in doubt.

12. Finally, becoming a deep space-faring nation again constitutes a mult-generational endeavor, particularly if Mars is in the mix. Unfortunately, the government-run, politicized K-12 school system will not currently support such an endeavor. It has totally failed several generations of young people, not just in STEM subjects but in history, language and economics. This problem has to be solve first. The people requirements for a return to the Moon should help jump start that process, although it will take a much more grassroots effort to be successful.

TPS Statement * deferring humans landing on the Moon until the costs of the interplanetary transportation system and shuttle replacement are largely paid

---This strategy would leave deep space activities, exploration and resources to others, i.e., China, India, maybe Russia, for the indefinite future. I believe that would be major step in initiating the decline of America's global influence for freedom and the improvement the human condition. Although I wrote the book "Return to the Moon" as an illustration of how it makes financial and national sense for private investors to provide the Earth with the benefits of lunar helium-3 fusion power, having NASA develop the initial Earth-Moon infrastructure may hasten the time when that alternative to fossil fuels and non-economic other alternatives becomes available.

TPS Statement * accelerating research into global climate change through more comprehensive Earth observations

---As a geologist, I love Earth observations. But, it is ridiculous to tie this objective to a "consensus" that humans are causing global warming in when human experience, geologic data and history, and current cooling can argue otherwise. "Consensus", as many have said, merely represents the absence of definitive science. You know as well as I, the "global warming scare" is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making. It has no place in the Society's activities.

TPS Statement * achieving a step-by-step approach of new achievements in interplanetary flight, including a human mission to a near-Earth object

---Returning to the Moon achieves "step-by-step approach of new achievements in interplanetary flight" far better than not doing so, as I have indicated in my list above. Not going by way of the Moon will make the Mars objective far more difficult and more costly to achieve.

---Also, returning to the Moon enables a mission to a near-Earth object if such a mission can be justified scientifically, operationally, or resource-wise. I remain a skeptic on all three but am willing to debate the point.

---Returning to the Moon further enables, in a much more timely fashion and would a Mars initiative, the capability to do something about diverting an asteroid on a collision course with the Earth. We had this capability once, but lost it when the Saturn V assembly line was shut down in the early 1970s.

TPS Statement "In short, the Roadmap calls for "A new and flexible program, based on a series of important first-time achievements and an international commitment to exploration and discovery." International cooperation is strongly recommended both to reduce costs for any one nation and to increase public interest and support."

---I see that the Society has gone back to its roots on "international cooperation." If that phrase means "international management" of the critical path items in a Mars Program, then you clearly do not want to go to Mars. Nothing will prevent success with more certainty than to try this. The rest of the world will want a "one-nation, one vote" management regime for which history shows only a record of abject failure.

Many of the Society's members are good friends, but I just cannot support you in this effort.

Best regards, Jack

Draw your conclusions.

Carnival of Space #79

2008-11-17T10:14:00.004-05:00

The newest carnival is live.

Of interest:

Space Cynics and the Hyperion mini- Nuclear Reactor
Orbital Hub's article on using landing lasers on the Moon
One that I missed, another exo-planet photographed

The Space Show

2008-11-17T09:19:00.002-05:00

Bulletin: Please visit www.thespaceshow.com/newsletterfinal.htm for complete information for this week's Space Show programs, contact information, listener participation instructions, future Space Show programs, special events, announcements, and more. The e- mail version of the newsletter has been abbreviated to save subscribers time and avoid some spam filter problems.

The Monday Space Show is live 2-3:30:30 PM Pacific. The Tuesday program is 7-8:30 PM Pacific, the Friday program is always 9:30-11:30 AM Pacific Time and the Sunday Space Show is live 12-1:30 PM Pacific Time. Check each week for added programming to this regular schedule. If you believe you are getting this newsletter in error, send a note to drspace@thespaceshow.com to be immediately removed from the mailing list. The Space Show does not support spam mailings of any type and will quickly address your complaint.

Programming For The Week Of November 17, 2008 :
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. Monday, November 17, 2008, 2-3:30 PM Pacific: As I am still at the Cape, this will be a special taped show describing what its like to see a Space Shuttle launch. I will also include how one can get VIP tickets to see the launch plus other viewing options. When its posted on the archives, you can hear the show as any archived program.

2. SPECIAL TIME: Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2008, 5- 6:30 PM This is a very special hard hitting two hour taped interview with Ross Tierney who heads up the Direct 2 team which has an alternative program to Ares and Constellation. Don't miss it. As soon as its listed on the website, you can hear it as any archived program.

3. Friday, Nov. 21 2008, We are back live with Leonard David, senior writer for Space.com.

4. Sunday, November 23, 2008, 12-1:130 PM Pacific. Greg Zsidisin returns for a space policy election analysis program.

On Orbit XII

2008-11-14T14:14:00.004-05:00

Phase 1 of China's Lunar Probe Project is complete according to Chinese scientists. The mapping of the lunar surface by the probe Chang'e-1 was performed over the course of a year. As of yet, the Chinese government hasn't release the maps to the general public. There is another probe in the pipeline, Chang'e-2 and a rover scheduled for a 2012 launch as phase two for the China lunar program. Around 2017, sample return rover is scheduled as the third stage.

India's lunar probe Chandrayaan-1 has reached its final lunar orbit. Orbiting at about a height of 100 km above the surface, Chandrayaan-1 takes about two (2) hours complete an orbit of the Moon. Chandrayaan-1 is projected to have a life cycle of two (2) years. The next thing to look forward to is the release of the Moon Impact Probe (MIP)

The MIP has a mass of 35 kg and will be release at some point in the future while Chandrayaan-1 is in its current orbit. Flight time is expected to be about 25 minutes from launch to impact. The primary objective is to demonstrate the technologies required for landing the probe at a desired location on the Moon and to qualify some of the technologies related to future soft landing missions. Chandrayaan-2 has been scheduled for no later 2012. The ISRO has long term plans to send probes to both Mars and Venus.

Hubble Announcement

2008-11-13T17:26:00.005-05:00

A historic first for the recently down on its luck Hubble Space Telescope. The HST has taken the very first visible light pictures of a planet orbiting a distant star.

Taken with the Advanced Camera for Surveys, the image is of the planet this is known as Fomalhaut b. Formalhaut b orbits 10.7 billion miles from its primary Formalhaut, about two-thirds again farther from its sun than Pluto. It's calculated to have an orbital period of 872 years. Formalhaut b has upper limit of three (3) Jupiter masses set for it, because were it any larger, it would destroy the dust ring surrounding the star.

The white dot is the star Formalhaut. NASA and ESA scientists blocked the bright glare of Formalhaut so they could capture the planet Fomalhaut b, which is 1 billion times fainter than its star. The red dot at lower left is a background star.

The Fomalhaut system is 25 light-years away in the constellation Piscis Australis. It is white 1st magnitude star, with a mass of about 2.3 times that of our Sun and believed to be a young star. The Dusty disc is thought to be a proto-planetary disc and is offset from the center of the system by about 15 AU.

The existence of the planet was postulated because something was gravitationally modifying the bright inner edge of the dust ring that we can see here.

The planet does raise some interesting questions. It was much brighter than expected, leading some to speculate the existence of Saturn-like rings. The Formalhaut system is thought to be young, only about 200 million years old, versus 4.5 billion years for our Sun and it is expected to last only 1 billion years. Since the planet is so young, it should very hot due to gravitational contraction and very bright in the infra-red spectrum. As of today however, it cannot be picked up by any infra-red instrument pointed at it.

Those of you that live in the southern hemisphere or have access to Google Sky can see Formalhaut for yourselves, weather permitting.

They're Made Out of Meat

2008-11-12T09:33:00.002-05:00

I found this here while stumbling along the 'net. It's a pretty good story by Terry Bisson

THEY'RE MADE OUT OF MEAT

by Terry Bisson

"They're made out of meat."

"Meat?"

"Meat. They're made out of meat."

"Meat?"

"There's no doubt about it. We picked up several from different parts of the planet, took them aboard our recon vessels, and probed them all the way through. They're completely meat."

"That's impossible. What about the radio signals? The messages to the stars?"

"They use the radio waves to talk, but the signals don't come from them. The signals come from machines."

"So who made the machines? That's who we want to contact."

"They made the machines. That's what I'm trying to tell you. Meat made the machines."

"That's ridiculous. How can meat make a machine? You're asking me to believe in sentient meat."

"I'm not asking you, I'm telling you. These creatures are the only sentient race in that sector and they're made out of meat."

"Maybe they're like the orfolei. You know, a carbon-based intelligence that goes through a meat stage."

"Nope. They're born meat and they die meat. We studied them for several of their life spans, which didn't take long. Do you have any idea what's the life span of meat?"

"Spare me. Okay, maybe they're only part meat. You know, like the weddilei. A meat head with an electron plasma brain inside."

"Nope. We thought of that, since they do have meat heads, like the weddilei. But I told you, we probed them. They're meat all the way through."

"No brain?"

"Oh, there's a brain all right. It's just that the brain is made out of meat! That's what I've been trying to tell you."

"So ... what does the thinking?"

"You're not understanding, are you? You're refusing to deal with what I'm telling you. The brain does the thinking. The meat."

"Thinking meat! You're asking me to believe in thinking meat!"

"Yes, thinking meat! Conscious meat! Loving meat. Dreaming meat. The meat is the whole deal! Are you beginning to get the picture or do I have to start all over?"

"Omigod. You're serious then. They're made out of meat."

"Thank you. Finally. Yes. They are indeed made out of meat. And they've been trying to get in touch with us for almost a hundred of their years."

"Omigod. So what does this meat have in mind?"

"First it wants to talk to us. Then I imagine it wants to explore the Universe, contact other sentiences, swap ideas and information. The usual."

"We're supposed to talk to meat."

"That's the idea. That's the message they're sending out by radio. 'Hello. Anyone out there. Anybody home.' That sort of thing."

"They actually do talk, then. They use words, ideas, concepts?" "Oh, yes. Except they do it with meat."

"I thought you just told me they used radio."

"They do, but what do you think is on the radio? Meat sounds. You know how when you slap or flap meat, it makes a noise? They talk by flapping their meat at each other. They can even sing by squirting air through their meat."

"Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much. So what do you advise?"

"Officially or unofficially?"

"Both."

"Officially, we are required to contact, welcome and log in any and all sentient races or multibeings in this quadrant of the Universe, without prejudice, fear or favor. Unofficially, I advise that we erase the records and forget the whole thing."

"I was hoping you would say that."

"It seems harsh, but there is a limit. Do we really want to make contact with meat?"

"I agree one hundred percent. What's there to say? 'Hello, meat. How's it going?' But will this work? How many planets are we dealing with here?"

"Just one. They can travel to other planets in special meat containers, but they can't live on them. And being meat, they can only travel through C space. Which limits them to the speed of light and makes the possibility of their ever making contact pretty slim. Infinitesimal, in fact."

"So we just pretend there's no one home in the Universe."

"That's it."

"Cruel. But you said it yourself, who wants to meet meat? And the ones who have been aboard our vessels, the ones you probed? You're sure they won't remember?"

"They'll be considered crackpots if they do. We went into their heads and smoothed out their meat so that we're just a dream to them."

"A dream to meat! How strangely appropriate, that we should be meat's dream."

"And we marked the entire sector unoccupied."

"Good. Agreed, officially and unofficially. Case closed. Any others? Anyone interesting on that side of the galaxy?"

"Yes, a rather shy but sweet hydrogen core cluster intelligence in a class nine star in G445 zone. Was in contact two galactic rotations ago, wants to be friendly again."

"They always come around."

"And why not? Imagine how unbearably, how unutterably cold the Universe would be if one were all alone ..."

the end

On Orbit XI

2008-11-11T09:17:00.001-05:00

The newest Carnival of Space is out.

India's space agency - ISRO, recently successfully launched their first lunar probe, Chandrayaan-1. Chandrayaan-1 reached lunar orbit this past Saturday, 8 November. According to ISRO Director S. Satish, Chandrayaan-1 fired its motors for orbital insertion at 1145 GMT for 805 seconds to enter lunar orbit. India is looking not to miss the boat on this newest space race that China and Japan have begun. National prestige is not the only thing at stake. India is also looking to join the commercial launch industry. India and China are not the only new players in the new space race. The Ukraine and Indonesia have signed a cooperation agreement and Brazil is developing its own launcher the VLS-1.

As of 9 November 2008, the ISRO began circularizing Chandrayaan-1's orbit around the Moon.

Major Hubble Telescope Announcement Coming

2008-11-11T06:55:00.002-05:00

From Spaceref.com and Nasa.gov

On Thursday 13 November at 2:30 PM EST, NASA will be holding a Science Update press conference to announce a major discovery concerning extra-solar planets. The discovery is big enough to merit being published in the Nov. 14th issue of Science .

The discovery was made with Hubble's Advance Camera for Surveys. Keep posted for more news.

The Space Show

2008-11-10T14:55:00.003-05:00

Bulletin: Please visit www.thespaceshow.com/newsletterfinal.htm for complete information for this week's Space Show programs, contact information, listener participation instructions, future Space Show programs, special events, announcements, and more. The e- mail version of the newsletter has been abbreviated to save subscribers time and avoid some spam filter problems.

The Monday Space Show is live 2-3:30:30 PM Pacific. The Tuesday program is 7-8:30 PM Pacific, the Friday program is always 9:30-11:30 AM Pacific Time and the Sunday Space Show is live 12-1:30 PM Pacific Time. Check each week for added programming to this regular schedule. If you believe you are getting this newsletter in error, send a note to drspace@thespaceshow.com to be immediately removed from the mailing list. The Space Show does not support spam mailings of any type and will quickly address your complaint.

Programming For The Week Of November 10, 2008 :
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. Monday, November 10, 2008, 2-3:30 PM Pacific: We welcome Dr. Jim Cartreine and Dr. Jay Buckey to discuss the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI) interactive, multi-media program that will assist astronauts in recognizing and effectively managing depression and other psychosocial problems, which can pose a substantial threat to crew safety and mission operations during long-duration spaceflights.

2. SPECIAL TIME: Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2008, 5- 6:30 PM Pacific: Marianne Dyson is with us about space education, the shuttle OFT program: call it "Fire in Mission Control and Other Untold Stories of the Shuttle Flight Test Program," and more.

3. Friday, Nov. 14 2008, As I am at the Cape to see STS 126, this program is a replay from early 2005 featuring two back to back interviews with Al Zaehringer. As soon as you see it available as an archived program on the website, its available as it will play as does any archived program. There is no actual start time for a replay.

4. SPECIAL TIME: Sunday, November 16, 2008, 9- 10:30 AM Pacific. As I am still at the Cape, this show is airing earlier than our regular Sunday program. It features David Hook from Planehook Aviation Services. We will discuss proposed new safety and security rules for general aviation flying services and more.

On Orbit X

2008-11-06T22:57:00.004-05:00

SpaceX DragonLab, a free-flying, fully-recoverable, reusable spacecraft capable of hosting pressurized and unpressurized payloads

Chandrayaan-1 Enters Lunar Transfer Trajectory

German CESAR rover takes top prize in ESA's lunar rover challenge

KSC takes delivery of the first components of the Ares 1-X

Emergence of the Chinese space industry

Raise shields!

2008-11-04T09:37:00.006-05:00

Coming to you today from Universe Today, who publishes the excellent Carnival of Space, an interesting story with an almost sci-fi twist.

Ion Shield for Interplanetary Spaceships Now a Reality

British scientists have overcome what is probably the biggest danger facing astronauts on the job: solar and cosmic radiation. There have been many different shielding solutions developed. One is building it into the spacecraft, at a huge mass penalty. Another is to build less into the structure of the craft and to have a "storm cellar" in the spacecraft where water is stored. Water is one the best passive radiation shielding materials in existence. With the work of researchers from Rutherford Appleton Laboratory and the universities of York and Strathclyde, a magnetic shield has been developed that offers almost total protection against charged particles. As Professor Bob Bingham of the University of Strathclyde described it, "solar storms or winds are one of the greatest dangers of deep space travel. If you got hit by one not only would it take out the electronics of a ship but the astronauts would soon take on the appearance of an overcooked pizza."

"It would be a bit like being near the Hiroshima blast. Your skin would blister, hair and teeth fall out and before long your internal organs would fail. It is not a very nice way to go."

Professor's Bingham's team is patenting their device and could have a full size prototype operational in five (5) years. Their mini-magnetosphere generator is about the size of a playground roundabout
and uses about as much power as an electric kettle. If viable, it will see its biggest use in protecting astronauts from solar flares and coronal mass ejections (CME's). Earth's magnetosphere protects us from both here on the ground.

A CME is so powerful that when one hits the Earth, it will disrupt the Earth's magnetosphere, compressing it on the day side and extending the night-side tail.

When the magnetosphere reconnects on the nightside, it creates trillions of watts of power which is directed back toward the Earth's upper atmosphere. This process can cause particularly strong aurora also known as the Northern Lights, or aurora borealis (in the Northern Hemisphere), and the Southern Lights, or aurora australis (in the Southern Hemisphere). CME events, along with solar flares, can disrupt radio transmissions, cause power outages (blackouts), and cause damage to satellites and electrical transmission lines.

The designed system uses two (2) outrider satellites that can be switched on and off as needed. The only thing left is to figure out how to stop the radiation that doesn't have an inherent electric charge.

NASA Serves as Contractor for Odyssey Moon

2008-11-03T10:28:00.004-05:00

Odyssey Moon, a NewSpace venture located on the Isle of Man, has contracted NASA to build a lunar lander for use in the Google Lunar X-prize.

The Google Lunar X PRIZE is a $30 million international competition to safely land a robot on the surface of the Moon, travel 500 meters over the lunar surface, and send images and data back to the Earth. Teams must be at least 90% privately funded and must be registered to compete by December 31, 2010. The first team to land on the Moon and complete the mission objectives will be awarded $20 million; the full first prize is available until December 31, 2012. After that date, the first prize will drop to $15 million. The second team to do so will be awarded $5 million. Another $5 million will awarded in bonus prizes. The final deadline for winning the prize is December 31, 2014.

Go fill out an application.

Carnival of Space #77

2008-10-31T15:04:00.001-04:00

Courtesy of Tomorrow is Here, we have the newest Carnival of Space!

Solar Power on the Moon

2008-10-29T07:49:00.001-04:00

A new type of solar cell that doesn't use silicon in their construction has been developed. According to New Scientist, the new design is dye based and sprayed onto a substrate of titanium dioxide. Titanium dioxide (TiO2) is found on the lunar surface. It is concentrated in the maria. Aside from free samples of TiO2 in the maria, it is locked up in ilmenite - TiO3. This is significant because ilmenite is a major source of lunar oxygen. Hydrogen reduction of ilmenite is one of the simplest processes for in-situ production of oxygen for fuel and life support.

FeTiO3+H2 ---->Fe+TiO2+H2O

The reduction produces free iron, titanium dioxide and water. The water can be cracked into its constituents through electrolysis.

The dye is used to coat TiO2 grains, which sit in an electrolyte in the solar cells. The whole mixture is sandwiched between two electrodes; a transparent glass sheet doped with tin oxide to make it conducting and an opaque rear panel. This allows a current to flow when the cell is placed in sunlight

But the efficiency of dye-sensitised solar cells designed for outdoor conditions is currently about 6%. That's light years from the 42.8% efficiency reached by some silicon solar cells and well below the 15% standard for many silicon designs.

Michael Grätzel of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne, Switzerland – who co-invented dye sensitised solar cells in 1991 – had thought it may be possible to double the efficiency of his low-cost cells simply by designing one that collects light from both sides simultaneously.

Now Grätzel's team, working with Seigo Ito of the University of Hyogo, Japan, has done just that. Their new dye-sensitised solar cell is almost as efficient at converting light into energy when it strikes the rear side as when it strikes the front.

To achieve the trick, Grätzel's team first replaced the opaque back panel with a second sheet of glass, making the entire device transparent.

The new panel is also coated with tin oxide and acts as the second electrode, donating electrons back to the electrolyte to complete the circuit. But because it is transparent, it lets light into the system from the rear.

Robert Hertzberg, chairman and co-founder of G24 Innovations, a company based in Cardiff in the UK that manufactures dye-sensitised solar products. "This technology allows you to capture power in low light, even rainy conditions," he says. "Silicon cells only allow you to capture power during a short window [when light is intense]." That means the cells give a better performance over the whole day even if they are less efficient under ideal conditions.

On Orbit IX

2008-10-29T01:43:00.000-04:00

More design flaws found in Ares I rocket

ESA's Lunar Robotics Challenge: A tough task for the student teams

From The Space Review: Why the majority of the work in colonizing the space frontier will come from amateur effort

Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge

2008-10-28T08:12:00.003-04:00

Armadillo Aerospace has won the Level One portion of the Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge! The flew at Las Cruces International Airport on October 25, 2008, and earned the $350,000 in prize money. While they made an attempt to win Level Two on the 26, they weren't able to pull off a double victory, leaving $1.65 million worth of prize money on the table. Check out some highlights from the first day of competition.

Seven seconds prevented Armadillo Aerospace from winning the second year of competition in the two million dollar Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge. Over two days, Armadillo Aerospace attempted four times to achieve the two flights necessary to win the $350,000 Level I competition. Officials expected them to compete in both the Level I and Level II competitions this weekend, worth $1,350,000 in total first place prize purses.

“They nearly made it in their second attempt,” said Dr. Peter H. Diamandis, CEO and Chairman of the X PRIZE Foundation. “There were more than 85,000 spectators willing them to succeed, as well as the officials and people working on the other teams. The persistence Armadillo has shown is impressive and deserving of recognition. I want to thank the team for their enthusiastic participation and I hope they will continue their important work!”

Armadillo used the MOD-1 vehicle for all four launch windows in the Level I competition, with each window requiring two successful flights. None of the four prize winning attempts were successful, and having reached the maximum number of attempts for Level I, Armadillo ruled out any attempts for Level II.

Saturday morning’s attempt did not leave the ground due to an igniter problem caused by contamination in the feed lines. Saturday afternoon’s first flight, however, was perfect. The igniter problem reappeared in the return flight and blew a hole in the side of the chamber, preventing it from hovering the required 90 seconds. The landing was aborted with seven seconds left as a safety precaution, disqualifying the flight.

Sunday morning’s first flight was again perfect. The second flight left the ground briefly but was also aborted by the team for safety reasons related to earlier problems.

The team continued to experience problems during the last attempt of Sunday afternoon. The engine exploded on ignition, resulting in a small fire and the flight was aborted. The team followed emergency procedures and fire engines were called in, however no one was hurt.

“This weekend, we’ve had more problems than we’ve had in the last six months. We know what went wrong, but not why,” said Neil Milburn, Vice President, Armadillo Aerospace. “The Cup has given us an opportunity to show what we can do in front of multiple audiences, which we would not have been able to do otherwise. We know we’ll be back again, and we’ll nail it next time.”

Armadillo Aerospace is led by John Carmack, who is widely recognized in the video game industry for the creation of games like Doom and Quake. He started Armadillo in 2000 to compete for the Ansari X PRIZE, which was later won by Scaled Composites and SpaceShipOne. Armadillo made a smooth transition from suborbital flight to lunar landers when the Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge was announced as one of NASA’s Centennial Challenges. In 2006, Armadillo’s “Pixel” was the only craft to fly at the X PRIZE Cup, and narrowly missed the winning the Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge due to broken landing gear.

“This was a weekend of outstanding competition,” said Dr. William Gaubatz, Chief Judge of the Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge. “We believe Armadillo set some records in terms of reusability. We hope they carry on and inspire other teams to shoot for the prize and new records.”

The third annual X PRIZE Cup was held at Holloman Air Force Base on October 27 and 28, 2007. It was the first space expo ever in which aircraft and rockets flew at the same event, and is the result of a unique partnership between Holloman Air Force Base, the State of New Mexico and the X PRIZE Foundation. In addition to the Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge, the 85,000 people in attendance were able to see a state of the art air show with F-117s, F-22s, the Wings of Blue Jump team, acres of static aircraft and space displays, and much, much more.

Update to DIY Lunar Concrete

2008-10-27T13:42:00.003-04:00

I'd like to issue a correction.

When news of Dr Houssam Toutanji's development of sulfur based concrete was released, I, in my infinite knowledge panned the innovation as too expensive due to low levels of sulfur. I stated that sulfur was found in the regolith at levels of 400-1300 ppm. However Peter Kokh, current president of the Moon Society, corrected me on the Moon Society's Yahoo discussion group. I just want to say thank you to Peter for the correction. He pointed me to this article here, and a little digging of my own led to this and this and if it doesn't take you to the right page, it's page 450. From the paper USES OF LUNAR SULFUR by D. Vaniman, D. Pettit, and G. Heiken: Although sulfur is not so abundant that it is available without effort, it does rank eleventh in weight abundance among the elements in average lunar mare rocks. Gibson and M¢_re ( 1974 ) found that the high-Ti mare basalts, in particular, have high sulfur contents, in the range of 0.16% to 0.27% by weight. These authors also make the important point that lunar basalts actually have more sulfur than terrestrial basalts.

Sulfur is best found in mare basalts, specifically basalts that are high in titanium. Given that NASA is looking at processing ilmenite for oxygen, the same regolith that we'd be processing for oxygen can be use to extract sulfur for construction.

Altair VI, a fellow space blog pointed me in the direction of a treasure trove for lunar enthusiasts.

I present the single paper "Uses of Lunar Sulfur" from the National Space Society's website and the "The Second Conference on Lunar Bases and Space Activities of the 21st Century, volumes 1 and 2" from the Harvard web-servers.

Arizona site of Lunar Rover Tests

2008-10-27T12:52:00.002-04:00

NASA is testing its Small Pressurized Rover in the Arizona desert (large image). At the 11th annual Desert RATS (Research and Technology Studies), two rover configurations were tested.

One configuration leaves the crew members free to get on and off the rover whenever they like, but they must wear spacesuits at all times to protect them from the lunar environment. The second configuration -- called the Small Pressurized Rover, or SPR -- adds a module on top of the rover’s chassis that the crew can sit inside as they drive the vehicle, donning spacesuits whenever they want to get out.

The Space Show

2008-10-27T11:00:00.002-04:00

Thought I would help spread the word.

www.thespaceshow.com/newsletterfinal.htm

Programming For The Week Of October 27, 2008 :
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. Monday, October 27, 2008, 2-3:30 PM PDT: Louise Riofrio joins us regarding her positive pressure spacesuit and cosmology theories (http://riofriospacetime.blogspot.com/). < /b>

2. Tuesday, October 28 2008, 7-8:30 PM PDT: Dr. Gregory Berns returns as our guest to discuss his new book, "iconoclast" and more.

3. Friday, October 31, 2008, 9:30-11:30 AM PDT: Brian Hanley returns to discuss the topic of bioterrorism as we go beyond the subject of space development for this special program.

4. Sunday, November 2, 2008, 12-1:30 PM PDT: We welcome back noted economist, space advocate and SpaceShot founder, Dr. Sam Dinkin.

Selene Holds onto Her Secrets

2008-10-24T08:13:00.001-04:00

Japanese lunar probe Kayuga (Selene) has tempered hope for large ice fields in the permanently shadowed crater floor of the Moon's polar regions as reported by New Scientist.

Shackelton Crater, one of NASA's targets for a future lunar outpost, was imaged by Kayuga using a camera specifically designed for low light uses. The floor of Shackelton Crater is in permanent shadow, making it impossible to photograph using normal techniques. Kayuga's Terrain Camera, a special stereographic imager, used scattered light to capture the floor of Shackleton Crater. During a short time frame in the lunar summer, sunlight scatters off of the rim of the crater and allowed Kayuga to directly image the floor of Shackleton. The results were telling in what was not found, rather than what was found.

The absence of clean water ice in the images is sure to discourage advocates of a return to the Moon. However, all the findings indicate is that there is no frozen lake of ice at the bottom of Shakleton. Ice may be buried under the regolith or even mixed into the hard, glassy lunar soil. Another possibility is that the hydrogen that Lunar Prospector detected is from another source. Frozen methane would be a boon to the outpost, giving astronauts access to both hydrogen a carbon which are both exceedingly rare on the Moon.

On Orbit VIII

2008-10-23T13:10:00.003-04:00

Russia looking at consolidating aerospace industry assets into state agency. Decision to be made in 2009.

NASA Goddard CIO joins the blogosphere:Goddard CIO Blog

NASA JSC Advanced Planning Office Blog: JSC Advanced Planning Office Blog

Official NASA blogs

SpaceDev to be acquired by the Sierra Nevada Corp: SpaceRef.com

Chandrayaan-1 Lift-off!!!

2008-10-22T09:12:00.007-04:00

In what is being touted as the 'Asian Space Race' ISRO's Chandrayaan-1 lifted off without a hitch for a two (2) year jaunt around the Moon. Launching at 0052 GMT into an overcast sky, Chandrayaan-1 reached its orbit in nineteen (19) minutes. It will be taking the leisurely route to lunar orbit and is expected to arrive in fifteen (15) days. Chandrayaan-1 is primarily a mapping mission, with instruments from several nations aboard, including two from NASA. The Moon Mineralogy Mapper will assess mineral resources, and the Miniature Synthetic Aperture Radar, or Mini-SAR, will map the polar regions and look for ice deposits. This launch comes on the heels of rival China's first spacewalk. Also in the Asian space race are Japan and South Korea. China, Japan, India, Russia and the US are the only countries with active plans for a manned lunar landing.

Mini-SAR is particularly important for NASA's future plans. NASA has announced that it plans to place America's first lunar outpost near the poles to take advantage of two rare resources in the Moon - ice and constant sunlight. The Moon has a minimal atmosphere and any volatiles, water included, boil off into space. At the poles, deep crater floor never receive any sunlight and because of that, the temperatures have remained at cryogenic temperatures, allowing ice to remain in the shadows. As a direct consequence of having crater floors, in permanent shadow, there are peaks of eternal light at the poles. These mountains have a constant view of the sun, allowing them to bypass the bi-weekly day-night cycle of the moon and use constant solar power. Constant solar power is not a viable option for outposts anywhere else on the Moon because during the two (2) week long night, outposts would have to switch to battery power stored during the day or some other form of power like nuclear. Or even lunar thorium powered reactors.

Also getting into the satellite launching business is Brazil, with their own domestic launcher, the VLS-1, developed by the Brazilian Space Agency and Air Force with Russian help.

Chandrayaan-1 Live Webcast

2008-10-21T09:20:00.002-04:00

Catch the launch of Chandrayaan-1 live on the Indian Space Agency's (ISRO) website.

2008 Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge

2008-10-20T11:45:00.000-04:00

October 24th and 25th, Las Cruces International Airport in New Mexico will host the 2008 Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander Challenge. Teams will compete for a $2 million prize. The contest is managed by the x-prize foundation and the prize is provided by NASA. The field has been narrowed from nine teams to two - Armadillo Aerospace and TrueZer0. Another team I thought was going to make but had to pull out recently was Unreasonable Rocket.

The Competition is divided into two levels. Level 1 requires a rocket to take off from a designated launch area, rocket up to 150 feet (50 meters) altitude, then hover for 90 seconds while landing precisely on a landing pad 50 meters away. The flight must then be repeated in reverse—and both flights, along with all of the necessary preparation for each, must take place within a two and a half hour period.

The more difficult course, Level 2, requires the rocket to hover for twice as long before landing precisely on a simulated lunar surface, packed with craters and boulders to mimic actual lunar terrain. The hover times are calculated so that the Level 2 mission closely simulates the power needed to perform a real lunar mission.

In the 2007 competition, held as part of the X PRIZE Cup, there were nine competitors total. However, despite the best efforts of all of the teams, only one of them, Armadillo Aerospace, was ready to fly. They missed winning Level 1 by 7 seconds.

The Challenge is closed to public for obvious reasons but will be webcast live here: http://space.xprize.org/webcast

Chandrayaan-1 Almost Ready to Go

2008-10-20T09:25:00.003-04:00

Chandrayaan-1, the Indian space program's first lunar probe is set to begin its 52 hour pre-launch countdown this morning at 0400 hours (eastern standard, GMT, Indian time?) Launch is set for 22 October, at 0620 hours.

2008-10-18T23:06:00.002-04:00

Carnival of Space is live

DIY Lunar Concrete

2008-10-18T12:01:00.005-04:00

An update to this article has been posted here.

Normal concrete is cement + aggregates + water = concrete. On the moon, this present a problem. For all intents and purposes, water is non-existent. Portland cement is carbon intensive like water, carbon is almost non-existent (5-280 ppm in the regolith).

Dr Houssam Toutanji, a civil engineer at the University of Alabama-Huntsville has developed a new process for making concrete on the Moon. Dr. Toutanji proposes plain regolith be used as the aggregate and sulfur baked out of the regolith be used as the binding agent. The sulfur needs to be in a liquid or semi-liquid state, so it needs to heated to between 130 and 140 °C. To strip the sulphur out of the regolith will require a solar oven capable of heating the regolith to very high temperatures to extract the sulfur, which is only present in regolith around levels of 400-1300 ppm.

This new lunar concrete cures in hours, versus 7 to 28 days for normal concrete. NASA's Marshall Spaceflight Center tested the new process using a lunar simulant. Mixing 35 grams of pure sulfur to every 100 grams of simulant into 5 cm, the blocks were cured and then subjected to thermal stresses before their compressive strength was meaured. Plain lunar concrete withstood 17 MPa. Silica, which is also present on the Moon, can be added for strength and that boosted the number 20 MPa.

As Milton Friedman said, there is no free lunch. In order to get enough sulfur for the process, tons and tons of regolith will have to be processed. Now if a full blown bootstrapping operation is going on, this is no problem, just one more step. But if not, that is alot of expense to go through for just concrete. It's another reason to make sure when we get up to the Moon we bootstrap to keep costs down.

Another NASA researcher, Peter Chen, came up with using epoxy as a binding agent. However, epoxy cannot be made on the Moon and must be shipped up from Earth. With current launch prices hovering around $10,000 per pound, it seems a long shot.

NASA Authorization Bill Enacted

2008-10-18T10:48:00.002-04:00

HR 6063, aka the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2008, was signed into law by President Bush on Friday, 17 October 2008. HR 6063 is not a full appropriations bill. Rather it is a statement of declared intentions for NASA and sets upper limits for FY 2009, to the tune of $20.2 billion. However, Congress is not likely to award this full amount. The bill includes an additional $1 billion to speed Ares development.

Notable parts of the bill include a "Reaffirmation of Exploration Policy," which sets out for the next Administration Congress's support for the VSE. Also, the section entitled "Stepping Stone Approach to Exploration" mandates that future Administrators are to consider future use in exploring other celestial bodies when designing lunar architecture.

Congress also mandates that "The Administrator shall take all necessary steps to ensure that the International Space Station remains a viable and productive facility capable of potential United States utilization through at least 2020 and shall take no steps that would preclude its continued operation and utilization by the United States after 2015."

Addressing the life of the Space Shuttle, NASA is required to fly its established schedule plus one flight to life the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer to the ISS. NASA is also prohibited from taking any actions that would make it impossible to fly the Shuttle after 2010 if the new President decides he wants to extend the Program, but Congress also states that by having that sections, they are not endorsing an extension of the program. NASA has 120 from enactment of the bill to provide Congress with a report that "outlin[es] options, impacts, and associated costs of ensuring the safe and effective operation of the Space Shuttle at the minimum rate necessary to support International Space Station operations and resupply."

On Orbit VII

2008-10-17T10:46:00.000-04:00

Rosetta spacecraft has close encounter with E-class asteroid

Rescue Shuttle Atlantis getting ready to roll back

NASA's Pluto probe hits 1000 days in space

Carnegie Mellon to test robotic lunar prospector in Hawaii

British X-ray camera set to launch on India's Chandrayaan-1

Argentina joinsVenezuela in reaching out to Russia for Space Program assistance

ESA looking to develop independentcrew return vehicle

Hubble status report:

Darpa Cancels Blackswift

2008-10-16T08:10:00.000-04:00

From Flightglobal:

The fiscal 2009 defence budget approved last month slashes requested spending for the Mach 6-capable Blackswift Test Bed project from $120 million to $10 million.

The combined-cycle Blackswift demonstrator was scheduled to complete first flight in 2012. It should have reached a top speed of Mach 6 using a combination of a turbojet and a supersonic combustion ramjet (scramjet). As a reusable aircraft, it should have been able to land and be ready to fly again after refuelling.

The original request included a $70 million contribution from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and $50 million from the US Air Force.

Blackswift was championed by former USAF chief of staff Gen Michael Moseley, who was fired by Secretary of Defense Bob Gates in June.

In a statement, DARPA said it would "not be possible" to continue the solicitation process with the available funding. Boeing and ATK and teamed up with Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works team to submit a bid. Northrop Grumman had not confirmed whether it intended to submit a competing offer.

"Obviously, we are disappointed that we will not have the appropriated funds to move forward with the Blackswift flight test program," said Steven Walker, DARPA programme manager.

"A significant effort was put forward over the last several years to develop the propulsion technology required and to build a national government and industry team capable of developing and flying a reusable hypersonic testbed," Walker added.

The focus of hypersonics research will shift to focusing on supporting existing programmes.

The DARPA/USAF Falcon programme awarded to Lockheed will proceed with fabricating hypersonic technology vehicles that will begin flight tests in 2009.

See the DARPA/Lockheed hypersonic Falcon video:

Meanwhile, a Boeing/Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne team is aiming to fly the airbreathing X-51 Waverider hypersonic cruise missile in late 2009 and early 2010.

That programme is sponsored by DARPA, the air force research laboratory and NASA.The Boeing hypersonic HyFly programme has also been extended.

See DARPA's video:

DARPA and the Office of Naval Research agreed last month to provide funds to conduct a third test flight after the first two attempts failed for causes unrelated to hypersonic technology.

The Blackswift Test Bed, meanwhile, will remain on DARPA’s shelf of discarded technologies, but Walker is still hopeful that it could re-emerge.

Walker also hinted that competition from a rival power could eventually re-awaken interest in Blackswift."It was a good idea and good ideas have a way of coming back and getting done eventually," he said.

"Hopefully, the US will do it first, but there are no guarantees."

On Orbit VI

2008-10-14T13:45:00.002-04:00

Japan Maps Lunar Far Side Gravity Field

ISS crew might not be expanded

Space Adventures Client, Private Astronaut Richard Garriott, Successfully Launches to the
International Space Station

Ben Bova's Letter to the President

2008-10-14T12:49:00.001-04:00

An Energy Fix Written in the Stars

You're heading into some rough times as you move into the White House, Mr. Future President, what with the economy in recession, financial markets in turmoil, global warming, terrorism, war and soaring energy prices. But I can offer you a tip for dealing with that last issue, at least: Look to the stars.

That's right. You can use the powerful technology we've forged over a half-century of space exploration to solve one major down-to-Earth problem -- and become the most popular president since John F. Kennedy in the process.

Right now, the United States is shelling out about $700 billion a year for foreign oil. With world demand for energy increasing, gas prices will head toward $10 per gallon during your administration -- unless you make some meaningful changes. That's where space technology can help -- and create new jobs, even whole new industries, at the same time.

You'll have to make some hard choices on energy. Nuclear power doesn't emit greenhouse gases, but it has radioactive wastes. Hydrogen fuels burn cleanly, but hydrogen is expensive to produce and hard to distribute by pipeline. Wind power works in special locations, but most people don't want huge, noisy wind turbines in their backyards.

Solar energy is a favorite of environmentalists, but it works only when the sun is shining. But that's the trick. There is a place where the sun never sets, and a way to use solar energy for power generation 24 hours a day, 365 days a year: Put the solar cells in space, in high orbits where they'd be in sunshine all the time.

You do it with the solar power satellite (SPS), a concept invented by Peter Glaser in 1968. The idea is simple: You build large assemblages of solar cells in space, where they convert sunlight into electricity and beam it to receiving stations on the ground.

The solar power satellite is the ultimate clean energy source. It doesn't burn an ounce of fuel. And a single SPS could deliver five to 10 gigawatts of energy to the ground continually. Consider that the total electrical-generation capacity of the entire state of California is 4.4 gigawatts.

Conservative estimates have shown that an SPS could deliver electricity at a cost to the consumer of eight to 10 cents per kilowatt hour. That's about the same as costs associated with conventional power generation stations. And operating costs would drop as more orbital platforms are constructed and the price of components, such as solar voltaic cells, is reduced. Solar power satellites could lower the average taxpayer's electric bills while providing vastly more electricity.

They would be big -- a mile or more across. Building them in space would be a challenge, but not an insurmountable one: We already know how to construct the International Space Station, which is about the size of a football field. And the SPS doesn't require any new inventions. We have the technology at hand.

Basically, an SPS needs solar voltaic cells to convert sunlight into electricity and microwave transmitters to beam the energy to the ground. We've been using solar cells to power spacecraft since the 1950s. Solar cells are in our pocket calculators, wristwatches and other everyday gadgetry. You can buy them over the Internet. Microwave transmitters are also a well-developed technology. There's one in almost every kitchen in the nation, in the heart of our microwave ovens.

Some people worry about beaming gigawatts of microwave energy to the ground. But the microwave beams would be spread over a wide area, so they wouldn't be intense enough to harm anyone. Birds could fly through the thinly spread beams without harm. Nevertheless, it would be best for the receiving stations to be set up in unpopulated areas. The deserts of the American Southwest would be an ideal location. You could gain votes in Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada and California!

It's ironic, but when solar power satellites become commonplace, the desert wastes of the Sahara and the Middle East could become important energy centers even after the last drop of oil has been pumped out of them. SPS receiving stations could also be built on platforms at sea; Japan has already looked into that possibility.

I admit, solar power satellites won't be cheap. Constructing one would cost about as much as building a nuclear power plant: on the order of $1 billion. That money, though, needn't come from the taxpayers; it could be raised by the private capital market. Oil companies invest that kind of money every year in exploring for new oil fields. But the risk involved in building an SPS, as with any space operation, is considerable, and it could be many years or even decades before an investment begins to pay off. So how can we get private investors to put their money into solar power satellites?

This nation tackled a similar situation about a century ago, when faced with building big hydroelectric dams. Those dams were on the cutting edge of technology at the time, and they were risky endeavors that required hefty funding. The Hoover Dam, the Grand Coulee Dam and others were built with private investment -- backed by long-term, low-interest loans guaranteed by the U.S. government. They changed the face of the American West, providing irrigation water and electrical power that stimulated enormous economic growth. Phoenix and Las Vegas wouldn't be on the map except for those dams.

Solar power satellites could be funded through the same sort of government-backed loans. Washington has made such loan guarantees in the past to help troubled corporations such as Chrysler and Lockheed. Why not use the same technique to encourage private investment in solar power satellites? If we can bail out Wall Street, why not spend a fraction of that money to light up Main Street?

What's more, a vigorous SPS program would provide a viable market for private companies, such as SpaceX and Virgin Galactic, that are developing rocket launchers. Like most new industries, these companies are caught in a conundrum: They need a market that offers a payoff, but no market will materialize until they can prove that their product works. The fledgling aircraft industry faced this dilemma in the 1920s. The federal government helped provide a market by giving it contracts to deliver mail by air, which eventually led to today's commercial airline industry.

A vigorous SPS program could provide the market that the newborn private space-launch industry needs. And remember, a rocket launcher that can put people and payloads into orbit profitably can also fly people and cargo across the Earth at hypersonic speed. Anywhere on Earth can be less than an hour's flight away. That's a market worth trillions of dollars a year.

It will take foresight and leadership to start a solar power satellite program. That's why, Mr. Future President, I believe that you should make it NASA's primary goal to build and operate a demonstration model SPS, sized to deliver a reasonably impressive amount of electrical power -- say, 10 to 100 megawatts -- before the end of your second term. Such a demonstration would prove that full-scale solar power satellites are achievable. With federal loan guarantees, private financing could then take over and build satellites that would deliver the gigawatts we need to lower our imports of foreign oil and begin to move away from fossil fuels.

I know that scientists and academics will howl in protest. They want to explore the universe and don't care about oil prices or building new industries. But remember, they howled against the Apollo program, too. They wanted the money for their projects, not to send a handful of fighter jocks to the moon. What they failed to see was that Apollo produced the technology and the trained teams of people that have allowed us to reach every planet in the solar system.

A vigorous SPS program will also produce the infrastructure that will send human explorers back to the moon and on to Mars and beyond. It could also spur young students' interest in space, science and cutting-edge technology.

Americans are a frontier people at heart. We have a frontier that begins a scant hundred miles overhead and contains more riches of energy and raw materials than the entire Earth can provide. Mr. Future President, if we use these resources wisely, we can assure prosperity and peace for the world -- and you have the opportunity to write your name in capital letters across the skies.

Ben Bova is president emeritus of the National Space Society and the author of nearly 120 nonfiction books and futuristic novels, including "Powersat," a novel about building the first solar power satellite.

From the Washington Post

RIP Jim Benson

2008-10-13T14:35:00.002-04:00

Jim Benson, founder of SpaceDev, has succumbed to a glioblastoma multiforme brain tumor early Sunday morning in his home. He was 63.

NASA Science Mission Directorate Cost Overrun Coverup

2008-10-12T14:27:00.002-04:00

Freom Spaceref.com:

Last year, before Ed Weiler came back to NASA Headquarters to be the Associate Administrator for NASA's Science Mission Directorate, an internal cost study was done to see how much SMD overruns every year on its various projects and missions. That study showed $5.4 billion of cost increases over a 4 year period. The goal posts for this study involved measuring costs starting from either the cost contained in the FY 2005 budget or, if the project started later, from its Phase B cost. The costing period then extended forward to the amount that it had increased to for the FY 2009 budget submission.

This large lump of overruns did not sit well with Ed Weiler, so he decided to order folks to make it go away. How to do it? Simple: just move the goal posts. In so doing, you use Congressional guidance (Nunn-McCurdy) as a smoke screen to hide the true magnitude of cost increases.

According to sources inside SMD at NASA Headquarters, Weiler's approach was to forget the numbers that NASA and the scientific community originally bought into when missions were agreed to. Instead, Weiler directed that SMD now use the numbers that arose down the road - after a mission had reached Phases C/D - and then to look at cost growth from that point forward to FY 2009 budget. In other words, Weiler decided to pick numbers that were "more mature" as a starting point.

Of course, this approach resulted in a smaller number since the growth from buy-in to Phase C/D was "forgotten". Weiler also ignored additional costs that were incurred to enhance scientific return and other factors deemed beyond the scope of NASA's responsibility. The new number? Only $1.5 billion in cost increases over 4 years as opposed to the earlier $5.4 billion figure.

Sounds much better that way, right? Alas, this is simply another example whereby NASA cooked the books to make a bad situation look less bad.

Of course, in his defense, Weiler will say that he used metrics and thresholds specified by Nunn-McCurdy. Congress may direct NASA to look at numbers and cost growth that way, but this approach simply does not cover the actual cost growth that has occurred from the original number NASA bought into to start with.

One example is the game being played with real cost of the Mars Science Laboratory. MSL's cost has gone from an inital $650 million (recommended in the Decadal Survey as a "medium cost category" mission) up to the current estimate of over $2 billion. If you use the Nunn-McCurdy goal posts you do not start to track cost increases at the initial $650 million buy-in figure, but rather you start counting at the level that $650 million grew to i.e. $1.4 billion.

When you move the goal posts to this new point, $750 million in cost growth just disappears. This way, NASA can cite Nunn-Mcurdy and say "it is a 30% increase from $1.4 billion up to $2 billion". NASA can now ignore the cost growth from $650 million up to $1.4 billion as if it never happened.

But things have been getting so bad on MSL that even this approach cannot completely hide a serious (and growing) cost problem - one that threatens the vitality of NASA's entire planetary exploration program.

In the end, the process of sweeping these cost increases under the rug means that the taxpayers get cheated out of the full story as to how the cost grew on this mission. The truth is obvious: NASA does not want them to know.

Editor's update: in a telecon with reporters today, a telecon that was supposed to discuss “technical and budget issues” on MSL, NASA personnel more or less avoided providing any specific budget news and tried to shift the discussion back to technical issues.

Ed Weiler stated that his team had a third meeting with NASA Administrator Griffin to discuss MSL. We said that NASA has "made significant technical progress since the May meeting" and "we are heading toward a March 2009 launch".

When asked to come up with a cost impact for current issues, Weiler said "we do not have exact numbers" and that NASA has "no exact estimate from JPL. We are going our own analysis." When pressed for exact numbers, Weiler said "I am not at liberty to pass out numbers."

The MSL cost increase was described as being from an estimate of $1.6 billion in August 2006 to an estimated $1.9 billion today.

When asked if funds will be needed and where they would come form, Weiler said "When we know the final cost in 2009 we'll first look within the Mars program and then outside the program." He noted that there are some cost phasing techniques that can allow resources to be freed up.

When asked again to described what the final cost for MSL would be, Weiler said that "those numbers are being developed. We'll work with OMB and Capitol Hill. It is clear that funding is needed if we go in 2009."

When asked to comment on why an initial MSL cost number of $1.6 billion was used as a basis to calculate cost overruns and not the original $650 million buy in figure, Weiler said "the way NASA accounts to Congress - the cost that NASA commits to - is the cost that NASA buys into - is at Phase C. You do not understand the cost of a mission until Phase C and that is what we have to report to Congress and that is What Doug is correctly quoting."

P.S. If you want to see another example of where NASA constantly changes the cost of a mission, but never admits the true cost, have a look at these posts regarding the Mars Phoenix Mission. Not only did the cost change virtually every time NASA talked about it, they only admitted $100 million that had not been included this year when I pushed the issue. NASA then continued to use an old and inaccurate cost whenever they talked about the mission. Why should anyone believe any cost numbers coming out of NASA?

Why Does The Official Cost of Mars Phoenix Keep Changing?

The Actual Cost of Mars Phoenix is $520 Million

NASA Glenn Releases Results of NIOSH Findings Related to Health Concerns

2008-10-10T10:12:00.002-04:00

From The Cleveland Leader:

Due to health concerns at NASA's Glenn's Research Center, the results of a recent inspection by the Ohio Department of Health and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) were released this past Wednesday.

In an interesting twist, one government agency (NIOSH) found that two buildings owned by the other government agency (NASA) did not cause cancer in 65 (!) past and present employees.

Carnival of Space #74

2008-10-10T09:52:00.002-04:00

Carnival of Space #74 is live!

Next Big Future's post about 20 ton Nuclear plant is my favorite, though this week, I had nothing to contribute.

Newton Shows Lunar Scientists How to Make Telescope

2008-10-09T09:58:00.004-04:00

Imagine if you will, a scientific outpost on the far side of the Moon. No light pollution, no radio interference, nothing to block your magnificent view of the heavens. You need a telescope and you intend to do some serious imaging, so you want it to be as large as possible. How do you get it? You could ship it up from Earth, at a cost of thousands of dollars a pound. If lunar industry is developed enough, one of the near-side factories could gather up a few tons of regolith, separate the glass out and melt and grind a lens for you. Or,build your mirror out of a spinning liquid. On Earth, the largest liquid mirror is the Large Zenith Telescope operated by the University of British Columbia in Canada. It's 6 meters across, 20% larger than the world famous Palomar reflector in California. However the Large Zenith Telescope didn't even cost $1 million to construct - only 1/6 of the cost to build Palomar in 1948 dollars. Today, $1 million is only a few percent of the cost to construct a normal 6 meter telescope.

Another benefit of the liquid mirror is that it's technically simple. It needs only remain horizontal to local gravity, and to spin smoothly to maintain a smooth reflecting surface. On the Earth's surface, the edge of a 4 meter telescope spins at 3 miles per hour. With gravity on the Moon 1/6 that of Earth, the required spin rate would be even lower. The mirror can only point straight up, so no need for heavy and complicated systems for moving the mirror. It's aim can be adjusted by using some of the same techniques as the Arecibo radio telescope in Puerto Rico. If the telescope is place in polar crater that never receives any direct sunlight, you would not need to cool the mirror, which makes it ideal for infra-red astronomy.

From NASA Science News

32,000th Floor Please

2008-10-08T08:01:00.000-04:00

American and Japanese scientists say that the manufacturing techniques and materials for building a space elevator should be ready around 2020 or so. Currently, the stronget material available - carbon nanotubes - have only about a quarter of the strength needed.

Japan, unlike the United States, is prepared to spend $10 billion to develop the technology. A space elevator would reduce the cost of putting an object in orbit to just the electricity needed to climb the elevator. Electricity is much cheaper than rocket fuel.

On Orbit V

2008-10-07T15:25:00.001-04:00

From Colony Worlds, China draws on its vast manned spaceflight experience and offers to train other countries astronauts.

Update: India's Chandrayaan-1 lunar probe is scheduled to liftoff on 22 October with the launch window open until the 26th.

NASA's Cassini probe is scheduled for close flybys of Saturn's moon Enceladus on 9 October and 31 October at a height of 25 km (16 miles!) and 196 km (122 mi) respectively. Cassini will be sampling Enceladus's many geysers because water vapor and organic compounds have been detected and scientists suspect the existence of underground oceans of water.

China looks forward to its first space station Tiangong 1 to be launched in 2010 or 2011. Automated flights Shenzhou 8 and 9 will dock with Tiangong 1, a feat made easier given China's demonstrated ability to rendevous spacecraft in space. The manned flight Shenzhou 10 will bring Tiangong 1's three man crew. Things are moving quickly in the Middle Kingdom. Can we keep up?

Breaking News!

2008-10-07T09:07:00.004-04:00

Edit: Whoops! A day late. As a consolation prize,

http://spaceweather.com/submissions/large_image_popup.php?image_name=Eric-Allen-Allen1_1223348248.jpg

Asteroid 2008 TC3 will become meteor 2008 TC3 when it hits the Earth's atmosphere.

However, 2008 TC3 is only a few meter across and will burn up in the atmosphere, creating an impressive fireball. It's expected to enter the atmosphere at quarter to three in the morning GMT over Sudan.

As an added comfort, 2008 TC3 was only discovered less than 24 hours ago, not even enough time to send up roughnecks with mining equipment and secret space shuttles.

Carnival of Space

2008-10-02T16:47:00.001-04:00

Newest Carnival is live. Checkout what everyone else has to say.

Happy Golden Anniversary NASA

2008-10-01T13:23:00.003-04:00

Welcome to our readers from Carnivals of Space.

I want to wish a happy 50th birthday to everyone at NASA.

Born out of the desire to prove American technical superiority, today's NASA has to struggle to prove to necessity of existence. There are those that believe the paltry amount spent on NASA would be better used building smart bombs or funding the federal education bureaucracy.

Currently, NASA is struggling to maintain an aging shuttle fleet, provide American access to the ISS and develop the next-gen launch system Constellation. The specter of being dependent on long time rival Russia for access to the ISS looms large with the presidential mandate to retire the Shuttle fleet in 2010. NASA has a rough road ahead but with the right leadership, budget and motivation (Russian and Chinese lunar outposts), NASA can regain its past position of pre-emininence.

Per Aspera, Ad Adstra

On Orbit IV

2008-10-01T07:57:00.001-04:00

NASA admin Michael Griffin states that given a choice, NASA would always buy launch services to the ISS from a private company. Here's your chance SpaceX. Griffin also affirms that "human populations must diversify if it wishes to survive."

The Space Foundation has published "ITAR and the U.S. Space Industry." The report proposes steps to modernize ITAR, enabling the regulations to accomplish their original purpose of protecting important security technologies while allowing more U.S. space companies to compete successfully in the global economy. Interesting because John Goff over at Selenian Boondocks posted about the problems domestic space companies have with ITAR.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran has stated that Iran will be launching a domestic rocket capable of putting 700 kg into orbit. The satellite Omid (Hope) will be used for natural disaster management and telecommunications.

NASA to announce new student contest to design tools an instruments to be used on the moon.

SpaceX's Falcon 1 finally makes orbit

2008-09-30T12:01:00.002-04:00

On the fourth attempt, Elon Musk and SpaceX finally get it right.

"Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) announces that Flight 4 of the Falcon 1 launch
vehicle has successfully launched and achieved Earth orbit. With this key milestone, Falcon 1
becomes the first privately developed liquid fuel rocket to orbit the Earth. Source: Space
Exploration Technologies Corp."

China Sets Sights on the Moon

2008-09-30T11:23:00.004-04:00

With the completion of China's third manned orbital flight and first spacewalk, the Middle Kingdom is not content to sit on its laurels. China has announced plans to build a manned space station and send people to the Moon. They plan to have the station by 2020 but were vague on the dates for the lunar visit. NASA administrator Michael Griffin is rumored to be "convinced" that China has the technical capability to land men on the Moon by 2017, a full two years before the planned US landings. If that doesn't motivate you, what will?

Asteroid Protection Program

2008-09-28T08:22:00.001-04:00

As I noted before, the NEO (Near Earth Object) 99942 Apophis is going to be passing through cis-lunar space twice within the next 30 years. Now the Association of Space Explorers's Committee on Near-Earth Objects (!!) has spent two years to complete a proposal to encourage the world to establish guidelines for dealing with future asteroid impacts. Their proposal, The Executive Summary of Asteroid Threats: A Call for Global Response, was released on 25 September 2008.

In short, the study recommends that the UN should

Create an information, analysis and warning network.
Create a mission planning and operations group.
Create a UN controlled oversight organization.

From Spaceref.com

On Orbit III

2008-09-27T14:53:00.005-04:00

I was hoping for a bit more news before I posted another one of these, but it seems to be a slow news day. Anyway, here we go and welcome to any new readers from the Carnival of Space.

Links to live streaming audio between astronauts on the ISS and mission controllers can be found here: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=26549

Congrats to China on the sucessuful return of her taikonauts: Spacewalkers Return

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter

2008-09-27T12:43:00.002-04:00

The guys over at Orbithub.com have a pretty good article on NASAs upcoming Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO).

Carnival of Space!

2008-09-26T14:22:00.001-04:00

Twisted Physics has the newest Carnival up.

Ares PDR not as peachy as reported

2008-09-26T06:19:00.003-04:00

From Space Ref.com:

In the interest of disclosure, according to comments on the original posting, the author of this piece, Keith Cowing, was recently fired from NASA.

That said:

Despite glowing comments about the success of the review and the smoothness with which it operated, many of the participants seem to have a different point of view:

"Too many people involved in the planning phase, meetings were too large"; "The integrated vechicle review did not present the element design issues (RIDs) so it was difficult to know if the parts added up to a rocket that will fly"; "The review occurred to close to the element PDRs, This did not allow for some of the element level rids to addressed or predeclared in documents"; "Much of the documentation presented for PDR was not mature enough for PDR. This limited an effective of these documents and left the impression that the PDR was rushed."; "The RID screening rules and procedures seemed to change from day to day, like we were making it up as we went along."; "Insufficient time was allotted to review the documents."; "Not allowing RIDs to be written against the SRD and declaring it a finished document prior to the PDR was just arrogant and wrong. This was further evidenced and confused by the introduction of two version of the SRD, showing that it was in fact being changed behind the scenes." etc.

Below are verbatim commments provided to an online review website by the actual PDR recipients. The deadline for adding comments was today (23 September 2008).

Ideas: What did we intend to do, and did we do it?

1. Execute an effective PDR for all phases

2. We intended to deliver a well planned and execution of the PDR Kick Off and DDP, with all technical issues worked behind the scenes, invisible to the customer.

3. To train the participants so that they would be able to function effectively. I thihnk we earned a 7 out of 10 on did we do it

4. The intent was to make sure all DDP participants knew what was expected from them with respect to presetation content, time allowed and presentation format. I would term this partially successful

5. The PDR followed the NASA PDR criteria but the presentation of the design documentation made it difficult to evalaute the Preliminary Design.

6. I thought it went very well.

7. The best was to address this is how effective we are in addressing and resoving the issues raised during the PDR by CDR.

8. 1. Training was a joke. we had 40 people in a conference room that held 20 + about 13 in the hall way.

9. 2.Who was the customer? NASA HQ, ARES PO, the elements. Invisiable from who????

10. The PDR team did not execute the plan that they somewhat trained the participants in. Their failure to adequately inform the participants of the changes in the plan damaged the adequacy and credibility of the review.

11. We intended to judge the preliminary design against the requirements. We ended up doing a reqts review for the most part.

12. The focus on most of the above comments seems to be on process rather than purpose. This also seemed to be the mindset of the PDR planning goup: Rid Training, RID processing, Kick off logistics, design presentations, team processes, etc. etc. The real purpose, evaluating the preliminary design against requirements, seems to have been lost in the minutiae of RID processing without a comprehensive evaluation of design against requirements.

13. What should have been doing is correcting design and concept defects; instead we worked very hard to kill RIDs. I guess it's not a defect if the RID is rejected for missing or incomplete "from/to" language.

14. Because of the short review time for RID review and dispostion, RIDs were rejected based on technicalities and the underlying issue described in the RID was not addressed.

15. The process was well thought-out, however, this design review as in others is made up of participants that are not familiar with the process at all. I recommend two things to preceed any training: 1. Clear definition of roles (a list of all the roles, what does each role entail), and 2. A list of the steps from pre-RID to RID to closure. My document was effectively reviewed; just not efficiently.

16. From a Board perspective, the review went well. The Exec overview during the kickoff served is purpose. The board meeting was reasonably crisp and offered ample airing of the issues that surfaced. However, as was presented, and as shows in the comments, there were several disruptions and missteps along the way. These took extra-ordinary effort to deal with. So, from my perspective, it would be very important to review these lessons learned and incorporate corrective action in future similar reviews.

17. We intended to confirm that the design process had matured sufficiently in addressing the requirements commensurate with the Preliminary Design Review criteria. We only confirmed where we are in the design process and captured the shortcomings through stoplight metrics and actions.

Ideas: What worked well, and why?

1. Kickoff worked well, because the Project Office had staff that was experienced in conducting the kickoffs

2. The DDP worked well, because the Project Office had staff that was experienced in conducting kickoffs, and this was very similar to the kickoff.

3. Things went well because the Project office AND Engineering worked together as a team!!

4. Many of the team tabletop activities went well. The most successful ones were the ones who had a plan of how to conduct their team meetings and a schedule for getting through their activity, and also had the better facilities in building 4205.

5. The wiki site was a great source of information

6. The wiki sit helped me find the information quickly.

7. In my opinion, that is the only way the PDR could be successful.

8. The invidividual reviews were performed in a very efficient and organized manner.

9. The teams performed well, especially given the timetable and changes of course during the review.

10. Free coffee. Many thanks to the occupants of 4205 for their generosity

11. The Ares1 Project Coordinators saved the day despite the verbal abuse, neglect (the RID coordinator generally could not be found), constant change and near 100% lack of direction from the two people tasked to lead the work. If not for the professionalism of these Project Coordinators, the PDR review would have been a disaster. It would be a welcome change if they could be rewarded/acknowledged for the herculean efforts to make this review a success despite the actions of the two people tasked with organizing and running it.

12. The Kickoff was great. A large auditorium with actual space between seats and a well organized presentation. The agenda was followed. Gray Research is nice for smaller events, but could not handle the PDR

13. The commuications with the board went very well. The Wiki, the exec overview, and the board meeting communications through e-mail all met their purpose and made serving easy

14. Opportunities for stakeholders to have insight and input in the process is important and we did a good job of making those opportunities available to all.

Ideas: Based on what went well, identify what we should keep doing. Please prioritize your list. (Be sure to include which Phase and Area of that Phase you are referring to when you enter your responses)

1. Wiki

2. Face to Face Tabletops

3. Sequestering teams away from their normal work sites

4. RID Tool "Reporting"

5. 1. Face - to Face meetings

6. 1. Face-toface meetings2. WIki Page

7. sequestering, face to face meetings

8. Continue the open face to face forums, and pursue better meeting space on site.

Ideas: What didn't work well and why?

1. Need more than one person that understands the ENTIRE process and can help with answering questions, emails, phone calls, etc.

2. Too many people involved in the planning phase, meetings were too large

3. Internal communication was not integrated

4. Internal communication was not integrated

5. The RID tool access was too limited to allow everyone who needed access to the system. Many cases only a few people were able to enter rids for an entire branch.

6. Too many people involved in the planning phase, meetings were too large

7. Need more than one person that understands the ENTIRE process and can help with answering questions, emails, phone calls, etc.

8. RID tool was cumbersome and still is as we try to address the RIDs.

9. The presenation of the design was not well laid out. A Product Breakdown Structure (PBS) may help.

10. The integrated vechicle review did not present the element design issues (RIDs) so it was difficult to know if the parts added up to a rocket that will fly

11. The review occurred to close to the element PDRs, This did not allow for some of the element level rids to addressed or predeclared in documents.

12. The table tops seemed to have no agenda and were always full of people who seemed to just be observing the meeting, making it impossible for people with technical issues to attend.

13. Time was limited for the book-mangers to work RIDs with the initiators

14. Comments made by the "screening" team, when returned to the review team, were more often than not confusing to a point that the question was often raised as to the background of the screening team and did they understand the issue being discussed on the RID. This may have been a problem with the way the RID tool was being used/implemented.

15. People assigned to perform document reviews were also assigned to the screening team, leaving no time to actually review the documentation.

16. The text fields in the MSFC RIDS tool only allow 2 or three lines of text in a narrow window to be shown. This made it difficult to review RIDs in the screening team with a projector. The RIDS tool should be modifed to allow showing all the text in any field, not just a small slice of text.

17. Building 4205 was a very inconvienent place to hold the RID screening tabletop meetings. The Gallery room in 4205 is an echo chamber and it is impossible to conduct an effective meeting there. Parking around 4205 is limited, and the Marshall cops were giving parking tickets to people for parking on the grass or on the roadways. Most people had to park at the 4200 complex and walk over to 4205. The people normally resident in 4205 were resentful of the PDR visitors and got upset when we used the copiers, coffee machines, vending machines, etc. The building has limited restroom facilities. For a major review such as the Ares I PDR, the project needs to find a better venue in Huntsville that provides adequate parking, excellent wireless access, multiple meeting rooms, well-stocked vending machines, and access to restaraunts. The Von Braun Center downtown or the Jacobs Conference Center are possibilities.

18. Building 4205 was a very inconvienent place to hold the RID screening tabletop meetings. The Gallery room in 4205 is an echo chamber and it is impossible to conduct an effective meeting there. Parking around 4205 is limited, and the Marshall cops were giving parking tickets to people for parking on the grass or on the roadways. Most people had to park at the 4200 complex and walk over to 4205. The people normally resident in 4205 were resentful of the PDR visitors and got upset when we used the copiers, coffee machines, vending machines, etc. The building has limited restroom facilities. For a major review such as the Ares I PDR, the project needs to find a better venue in Huntsville that provides adequate parking, excellent wireless access, multiple meeting rooms, well-stocked vending machines, and access to restaraunts. The Von Braun Center downtown or the Jacobs Conference Center are possibilities.

19. Much of the documentation presented for PDR was not mature enough for PDR. This limited an effective of these documents and left the impression that the PDR was rushed.

20. The RID screening rules and procedures seemed to change from day to day, like we were making it up as we went along.

21. The CSRT detailed design presentations were missing major content such as graphs and tables, probably because they were generated on a Macintosh computer and the PowerPoint files were incompatible with the Windows versions. All presenters should have used Windows versions of Powerpoint to produce their slides.

22. The RID tool does NOT have a capability to retrive RIDs lost for nay reason.

23. RID training was conducted in an incompetent fashion. We had 40+ people in a room designed to hold 15-20. We had 10-15 people sitting in the hallway outside listening in.

24. The RID tool can not recover issues lost for any reason. A daily backup would be of great benefit. One full day of work entering RIDs (by multiple people) was lost and had to be repeated.

25. Insufficient time was allotted to review the documents.

26. Bldg 4205 was a very bad choice. That building was not designed to handle such an event/meetings. The selection and use of 4205 reduced the effectiveness of the review. People who made this selection did not understand what was expected or needed by the review teams.

27. Single point failures in communication and planning impacted the effectiveness of the PDR.

28. Several presenters did not know what was in there charts or had not seen them prior to presenting

29. Definition of "Editorial Issues" not consistent between teams.

30. Developer of wiki page was not given credit for his work (see source code of actual developers name). Credit was given to someone else. Not ethical.

31. Meeting room facility needs and request ignored.

32. Request to have room cleaned ignored.

33. Planning and notices of "overbooking" of kick-off and detailed design review had effect of discouraging people to participate in PDR.

34. Informal notice that people who might be admitted to kick off could be asked to leave to make room for VIPs discouraged attendance.

35. RID tool passwords and usernames shared with others (beyond RID tool account holder) by RID coordinator. RID tool usernames/passwords not secure.

36. RID tool passwords and usernames shared with others (beyond RID tool account holder) by RID coordinator. RID tool usernames/passwords not secure.

37. ABUSIVE STAFF LEADERS

38. NO ONE WOLD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR GETTING THINGS SETUP AND PROBLEMS WORKED. CRITICAL NEEDS IGNORED.

39. MANY OTHERS DID PDR PLANNING WORK ADN SUPPORT, BUT CERDIT FOR WORK COMPLETED WAS TAKEN BY SOMEONE ELSE.

40. STAFF OVERWORKED, NO DIRECTION, SOME EMAIL FROM rid CONDINATOR VERY ABUSIVE TO TEAM MEMBERS

41. Restrictive invitations to PDR presentation and RID participation greatly reduced the capability of potential participants to provide a review of the vehicle design.

42. Not allowing RIDs to be written against the SRD and declaring it a finished document prior to the PDR was just arrogant and wrong. This was further evidenced and confused by the introduction of two version of the SRD, showing that it was in fact being changed behind the scenes.

43. This one goes to both this team and those above them. It is impossible to have adequate review of parts or the integrated vehicle if the schedules for other Elements does not allow for participation.

44. Allow adequate time for issues raised in Element or sub-system reviews to be addressed and brought forward. If we are actually building an integrated vehicle, then we need to pay attention to all the parts. We were directly told in training that the results of the US and Avionics reviews didn't matter to this review.

45. Not enough actual design documentation was available for review, many of the products were in poor shape for a pdr. Not enough actual design documentation was available for review, many of the products were in poor shape for a pdr.

46. Facility was inadequate/noisy. No place to sit quietly and review documents.

47. Documents were printed out for reviewers use but were not clearly marked-took a long time to find what you wanted and this could have been alleviated easily by labeling the notebooks with doc names.

48. I don't care who at NASA the RID coordinator is/was sleeping with personal abuse of team members is wrong!

49. My overriding concern with the PDR is the lack of ethics displayed by the contractor RID coordinator and two NASA managers. The contractor RID coordinator was given tasks by NASA and did not do them, when timing was critical she passed the work onto others, then had the finished work sent back to her. She then uploaded the products as her own taking full credit work she did not do. This was known by the NASA PDR lead. Nothing was done due to the sexual relationship between the RID coordinator and a Sr. NASA manager. The lack of ethics and standards, the dishonesty and overt favoritism is damaging this project and will if left unchecked endanger the Ares 1 program (as it will spread) and one day Astronauts. We need to get back to building rockets, not hiring girlfriends. 1.

50. Need to define exactly what should be done/completed prior to tabletop meetings during PDR. Book managers needed to already have worked issues/comments/editorials with reviewers prior to attending PDR tabletop with the sequestered team. They needed to already have worked whether they accepted/rejected their comments before entering. They needed to check the RID tool themselves for their documents to see if any RIDs had been entered against their document. The tabletop meetings were not meant to work issues, unless a sequestered participant had a question/comment about a RID.

51. I do not believe the sequestering of the review teams worked well for non-local people supporting other projects. Complaints were voiced about lack of Orion support of the Ares PDR, imagine the outcry if Orion would have requested 3 contiguous weeks of sequestered Ares support a month or two before the Ares PDR. It was just not realistic.

52. The option to print a full RID report in the RID tool should only be available to certain users and not everyone registered to use the tool.

Ideas: Based on what did not go well, identify what we should do differently. Please prioritize your list. (Be sure to include which Phase and Area of the Phase you are referring to when you enter your responses.)

1. Individual review period was not long enough for those review team members who had to prepare charts then rework them ad naseum for the DDP

2. Not enough time was provided for a complete review of the technical design

3. Logistics and requirements should be well defined for the Review's needs

4. There are many good leaders in this group, but one person needs to be empowered with assigning/delegating the tasks needed for successful execution...this person should be assigned my NASA management, and given the authority to act as a supervisor during this process

5. Need to define exactly what should be done/completed prior to tabletop meetings during PDR. Book managers needed to already have worked issues/comments/editorials with reviewers prior to attending PDR tabletop with the sequestered team. They needed to already have worked whether they accepted/rejected their comments before entering. They needed to check the RID tool themselves for their documents to see if any RIDs had been entered against their document. The tabletop meetings were not meant to work issues, unless a sequestered participant had a question/comment about a RID.

6. 1. Present the Integrated (all the Element) RID Story so that it is easy to follow and so that it can be referenced while reviewing VI products

7. Rework the RID tool so that it supports the RID process used (instead of driving the process). Also improve the reports.

8. Have a drawing Layout Room for CDR. There will be more drawiongs and we will need to see them.

9. Obviously the location for the RID review was undersized for the number of reviewers. Network capacity was a problem and should have been anticipated. Room location for some put review teams into areas that were not supportive of the review. Consider a larger location next time with the appropriate network capacity.

10. Since a lot of the PDR documentation was not mature enough to be considered for PDR, limiting the value of a review of these documents, the PDR entry critieria should be reconsidered. Possibly restricting documentation addressed in the PDR to 60% maturity with no TBDs or TBRs.

11. Consider using the large auditorium at the Davidson Center not just for the kickoff presentations but also for the Detailed Design Presentations. Provide good wireless network access in the Davidson Center and breakout rooms for splinter meetings.

12. The conduct of this review begs a question: was it designed to review technical content or just pass a program milestone?

13. PEOPLE RUNNING THE PDR HAD NEVER CONDUCTED A REVIEW OF THIS TYPE (OR ANY OTHER ACTUALY). NO EXPERIENCE WAS EVIDNET. PDR LEFT TO RUN IT'S SELF AS BEST TEAM MEMBERS COULD SET UP.

14. Plan and execute and open PDR of the design, not just the delivered documentation. Make every facet of the design RIDable and accept that you have invited the discipline experts to CRITICALLY review your design.

15. Plan for days or hours of fully training participants or participant leaders in the review processes and tools. One 30 minutes session and a pointer to the locations was essentially a hand-wave at what was really needed.

16. Product readiness needs to be addressed/assessed. In general, this program changes direction so much that we spend all of our time reacting instead of working on a quality product. this review was no different. Groundrules were changed during the review-i.e., how we were to handle editorials. in that case, book managers would contact a reviewer and tell them how they were going to handle their editorial comment and by mid week that was no longer true. changing the review plan during the review is just inexcusable and shows poor planning-and my example was one of the least destructive changes.

17. (Type here to submit an idea.)

18. Organizing the review teams by WBS prevented any team from obtaining a system level overview of what was going on. The result was a completely stovepiped review. The prime purpose of the review was to demonstrate that the preliminary design met requirements. In order to properly demonstate this, a review team should be given the requirements for some subset of the total design and the preliminary design soulution against these requirements. The team should be tasked to examine the adequacy of the design subset through manufacturing, assembly, test, ground operations, launch and flight. This is the only way to completely validate the preliminary design against requirments.

19. The PDR was essentially a bean counting activity driven by RIDs, the RID tool, and RID tool problems. Instead of being the focus of the review, RIDs should only be used as input problem flags to an SE&I/Operations Research activity that determines root causes and identifies and documents the larger real issues. Focus on finding the problems rather than closing RIDS.

20. The answer is obvious -- Pass a MIlestone with minimum damage

21. 19. is the answer to 11.

22. Regularly scheduled Data Drops and Basic Metric by the RID Coordination Team available for all who where participating in the review might have cut down on the number of times people where performing the system stalling Data Extracts from the RID Tool

23. A clearly defined, user friendly and consistently implemented Reclama Process to insure that Issues brought up by Initiators where addressed through out the review process. Initiaors informed when their RIDs were dispositioned at all phases of the review process and given the opportunity to Reclama.

24. To accomodate participants that are not familiar with the process at all, I recommend two things to preceed any training: 1. Clear definition of roles (a list of ALL the roles, what does EACH role entail), and 2. A list of the STEPS from pre-RID to RID to closure.

NASA clears hurdle on Soyuz

2008-09-25T17:00:00.002-04:00

From The Write Stuff:

WASHINGTON - NASA Administrator Michael Griffin on Tuesday won the approval of a key Senate committee in his battle to buy Russian spacecraft as a four-year replacement for the space shuttle.

But the fight is far from over. And Griffin has less than two weeks to persuade the rest of Congress to allow the use of Soyuz spacecraft to take U.S. astronauts to the international space station after the space shuttle's planned retirement in 2010.

"This is just the first step in the process," said U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, the Florida Democrat who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which approved the NASA request. "I think we can get it moving, but any one person in the Senate can hold it up."

NASA is seeking a waiver from an arms-control law that forbids the Soyuz purchase because Russia sells nuclear material to Iran.

NASA's current waiver expires in 2011, but an American replacement for the shuttle won't be ready until at least 2015. In the interim, Soyuz capsules are the only proven way to both get astronauts to the station and serve as onboard lifeboats.

The measure's one announced opponent -- U.S. Rep. Dave Weldon, R-Indiana -- is urging that Congress provide money to extend the shuttle program, an option that has won tentative endorsements from both presidential candidates, Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama.

Both have also expressed concern about Russia's recent invasion of neighboring Georgia. But neither has said he will oppose purchasing the Soyuz capsules.

As yet, Weldon hasn't found a senator willing to object -- which would kill the waiver by holding it up past Congress' scheduled adjournment, either this week or next. But he has also promised to fight the waiver in the House.

"It's totally up in the air," said Weldon spokesman Derek Baker. He said the retiring Space Coast congressman is pushing a compromise that would couple a short-term extension of the waiver with more shuttle flights after 2010.

Griffin has told Congress that the shuttle is too expensive -- and dangerous -- to keep flying past 2010 and that he needs the waiver now because it takes the Russians three years to build new spacecraft. NASA officials already are negotiating with the Russians over terms of the deal.

Follow up:

WASHINGTON -- It could be the most important sentence for NASA this year, one line in a U.S. House spending bill that would allow NASA to circumvent an arms-control law and purchase Russian spacecraft after the space shuttle is retired in 2010.

But for NASA Administrator Michael Griffin, it might be enough. Today, the US House voted 370-58 to fund federal agencies at current levels through next March. The $630-billion plus measure also includes a provision that allows NASA to purchase Russian Soyuz spacecraft until July 2016, a four-year extension.

Now it's up to the Senate, where a key panel approved the same waiver request on Tuesday.

Without that waiver, NASA would be unable to purchase Russian Soyuz spacecraft after 2011. Griffin has told lawmakers that the Soyuz is the only reliable way that American astronauts can access the International Space Station once the space shuttle is retired, now set for 2010.

An American replacement wouldn't be ready until 2015 at the earliest.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

On Orbit II

2008-09-25T12:25:00.002-04:00

Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Readies World's First Hypersonic Hydrocarbon-Fueled and -Cooled Scramjet for Flight

It Takes A Nation To Build A Rocket

Chinese Claim Em Drive Works

2008-09-25T11:10:00.005-04:00

From wired.com:

The EM Drive is a reactionless drive originally developed by a man named Roger Shawyer. He to use a magnetron to create and bounce microwaves around a chamber. The thrust comes from an imbalance in the resultant forces coming from the reflections due to relativistic effects. The EmDrive has been panned by the scientific community and there has been no independent peer review.

With that said, after the original British and then American interest fell through, the Chinese picked it up. They now claim to have developed an experimental simulation that confirms the validity of Shawyer's drive. The thrust produced is comparable to ion drives but the main differences are that there is no reaction mass and weight. The Em Drive weighs 7 kilos and produces 85 mN (milli-Newtons) of thrust. NASA's NSTAR ion thruster weighs upwards of 30 kilos, uses four times more power, consumes 10 grams of fuels per hour and produces 92 mN of thrust. I have not been able to confirm the weight of the NSTAR but according to space.com, NSTAR uses just over 4 grams of fuel per hour. A bit of an overstatement.

The EmDrive is something that I would need to see to believe until then, its a perpetual motion machine.

Why Go to Space Pt V

2008-09-24T09:14:00.004-04:00

Continued From Part IV

I have often had to justify why going into space is a good idea and use of resources when we have so many other problems. Here are some reasons.

But first, a matter of scale. The estimated federal budget for FY 2007 was 2.7 trillion dollars. Trillion, as in 1000 billion. The estimated NASA budget adjusted for inflation $17.2 billion. For that year, NASA consumed 0.6% of the Federal budget. Not even a whole percentage point for the national agency directed to lead us into the next stage of human technological development.

In exchange for 0.6% of the federal budget, you get a space program, national pride, economic stimulation, and a slew of inventions that you get to use and no royalties are charged!

Mechanical teats Increasing farm efficiency through high technology.
Orbital crop management by way of Landsat keeps an eye on crop yields and fish harvesting.
Crop dusting performance improvements.

Coming up next, NASA at the mall (sort of).

Get It from the Source

2008-09-23T10:36:00.004-04:00

Now according to some research, to get to LEO, you'd need a delta v of about 10. From there to the Moon is another 6 km/s delta v. From LEO to the know NEOs (Near Earth Objects), the closest are just under 4 km/s delta v. Departing delta v from the NEO is miniscule b/c of its low gravity. This brings up an interesting option. If you're intending to go the Moon, and you need things from the asteroids (volatiles), wouldn't it be wise to set up a concurrent base on an NEO? They are easier to reach from Earth, have things we need on both Earth and the Moon and are very easy to ship from. No need to launch lunar iron to construction sites in orbit if you can get it from the asteroids. No need to haul water from earth to the Moon if you can extract it from a carbonaceous chondrite nearby. Initial capital costs would be higher but how long would it take for that initial investment to pay off?

NASA NEO database

Cosmic link to precious metals: study

Rare, precious metals may owe their presence in Earth's upper crust to a bombardment of the infant planet by asteroids billions of years ago, according to a study unveiled on Monday.

Gerhard Schmidt from the University of Mainz, western Germany, carried out a 12-year investigation into impact sites left by meteorites, analysing the soil for traces of these precious metals, which are called highly siderophile elements (HSE).

Metals in the HSE group include gold, platinum, palladium, iridium and ruthenium.

Schmidt compared these with samples from Earth's mantle and crust; from Martian meteorites that have been found on Earth; and from analysis of HSE-rich rocks, brought back by the Apollo missions, found at impact sites on the Moon.

The startling similarities point to a "cosmochemical source" for terrestrial HSE, he said in a press release.

He calculates that around 160 large, metal-rich asteroids in the order of 20 kilometers (12 miles) in diameter would have been enough to provide the concentrations of HSE we see today.

Schmidt was scheduled to present his work at the European Planetary Science Congress, taking place this week in the German town of Muenster.

From Space Daily

On Orbit I

2008-09-22T10:04:00.005-04:00

On Orbit, our news dump.

Shenzhou 7 set to fly China third manned spaceflight. Unlike Shanzhou 6, -7 will carry three taikonauts (definitely the best sounding astronaut title) into orbit, with the first taking place in 2003. Sent aloft on the Long March II-F, it will be the 109th launch of a Long March rocket. Additionally, Chinese authorities report that the Long March series has a 100% success rate. Once in orbit, one of the taikonauts will perform a spacewalk.

From Space Daily

Update: Russia Looks to Take Lead in Commercial Launch Services

Now with pictures. Can anyone tell me how they plan to recover the RD-191?

Update: India's Moon Mission May Lift Off October 19

If India misses it October launch window for Chandrayaan-I, cyclone season would prevent a launch until December.

NASA Eyes Nuclear Power for Moon Base

2008-09-21T11:28:00.000-04:00

NASA is considering the use of a nuclear plant to power their lunar outpost. The main benefit that nuclear has over solar is the ability to generate power during the long lunar night (~14 days). Unless based in orbit, solar power would require the outpost to be designed with both:

enough extra generating capacity to provide power during the two week long night
massive, bulky batteries to store energy during the night

The length of day can addressed by siting the outpost near the poles but there is are trade offs to doing that. The terrain is much, much rougher in the terrae (highlands) that covers the poles. Placing an outpost near the poles limits the terrain easily available for exploration. The poles are covered almost exclusively by lunar terrae. The maria are located on the near side in the lower latitudes. The maria has the mineral that most easily provides oxygen: ilmenite. It also contains the highest concentration of KREEP, a source of potassium and phosphorus. But building an outpost near a polar mountain that has access to nearly continuous light also has benefits. High mountains give larger larger line of sight communication range, which is important because there is no lunar ionosphere to bounce radio waves. There are craters that are likely to be permanently shaded, from which we can postulate the very rare and necessary volatile might be found because they wouldn't have evaporated.

If there is manufacturing base established on the Moon, the solar option might be the easiest to implement. Thorium based nuclear power can be done using lunar materials, but it is orders of magnitude more complicated.

The most likely possibility is the there is no manufacturing capability on site, so everything has to be lifted directly from Earth, which is a Very Bad Thing in terms of cost. Silicon solar panels have none of the political stigma that a uranium nuclear power plant has in the case of a catastrophic explosion. Solar panels are also much lighter. Add in the fact that NASA's outpost is likely going to placed near the poles and solar seems to be the best short term option for the lunar base. NASA may be showing some long term strategic planning in its desire to explore the nuclear option. Good news all around.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/080917-tw-fission-moon.html

Carnival of Space is Live

2008-09-20T13:44:00.001-04:00

Go Here

Of particular interest is this post about gas driven lunar drilling on Colony Worlds.

Russia May Help Cuba Build Space Centre

2008-09-20T04:25:00.000-04:00

From a purely objective standpoint point, this is a good move for Roskosmos. Their main launch center at Baikonur is in another country (Kazakhstan) and their military launch center Plestek Cosmodrome is too far north to be truly useful except for orbits with high inclinations. A center in Cuba gives them access to equatorial orbits and the added momentum boost that comes from being launched closer to the equator.

I can't imagine Washington being happy about a Russian facility in Cuba presumably capable of launching ICBMs into the heart of the US.

Russia may help Cuba build space centre

16:50 17 September 2008
NewScientist.com news service
New Scientist Space and Reuters

Moscow is ready to help Cuba develop its own space centre, Russia's space agency chief said on Wednesday after talks in Caracas with Venezuelan and Cuban officials, Russia's Itar-Tass news agency reported.

Russia has stepped up efforts to develop closer links with both countries, which are ideological enemies of Washington, including sending Russian strategic bombers on a mission to Venezuela this month.

"We have held preliminary discussions about the possibility of creating a space centre in Cuba with our help," Anatoly Perminov, the chief of Russia's Federal Space Agency, was quoted as saying in Caracas by Itar-Tass.

"With our Cuban colleagues, we discussed the possibilities of joint use of space equipment . . . and the joint use of space communications systems," Perminov said.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin visited Cuba this week and, together with representatives from several Russian ministries and large Russian companies, looked at ways to help Cuba recover from hurricanes Gustav and Ike.

Recently, tensions have grown between the US and Russia over the conflict in Georgia.

This has led to worries over how the US will send astronauts into space after the space shuttles are set to retire in 2010, since the White House had planned to purchase space flights from Russia until the shuttles' replacements begin flying in 2015.

Renewed Russian links to the Caribbean island will stir memories in Washington of the 1962 Cuban missile crisis when the US and Soviet Union almost went to war over Soviet missile bases on Cuba, which is 145 km (90 miles) from US shores.

Russian officials have said they want to renew Cuban ties that were neglected after the Soviet Union's collapse.

http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn14752-russia-may-help-cuba-build-space-centre.html?feedId=online-news_rss20

India's Moon Mission May Lift Off October 19

2008-09-19T23:59:00.003-04:00

Follow up from a previous article on the ISRO's upcoming lunar probe Chandrayaan-1.

Tentatively scheduled for 19 October 2008, Chandrayaan-1 is set for liftoff from Satish Dhawan Space Centre in Sriharikota in Andhra Pradesh. Chandrayaan-1 weighs 590 kg (1298 lbs) and will be carrying 11 science packages to lunar orbit.

Chandrayaan-1 will beam back digital elevation maps of the moon and its mineral concentration, as also carry out environmental studies and measure radioactivity on the lunar surface.

It will try to find the traces of atomic elements such as Radon, Uranium and Thorium.

Solar Power Satellite Proof of Concept

2008-09-19T20:14:00.004-04:00

Discovery Communications, parent company to the Discovery Channel, sponsored the first demonstration of wireless power transmission.

Wireless power transmission is the cornerstone of Space Based Power Satellites, an objective used by proponents of heavy industry in space. The thought is that by building giant solar power farms in orbit and then beaming the resulting power down to antenna farms on Earth, we'd have the ultimate in "green" power. You'd minimize the emissions from coal, natural gas and oil plants here on earth and trade that for costs of launching enough material and people into orbit to manufacture the satellites.

The project leader is former NASA executive John C. Mankins and his contact email is jmankins@managedenergytech.com.

The experiment used solid state phased array transmitter on Maui. Two different sets of receivers were set up. One was airborne and the other on the big island of Hawai'i. The amount transmitted to the receivers was 20 watts, a miniscule amount. My biggest question was what was the transmission efficiency and according to Mankins, extremely low, though this was by budgetary design. Mankins claims that he should be able to achieve 64% efficiency. With a larger budget, we could get an experiment that would test the actual power transmission capabilities of the system. There are also rumors of mounting a similar setup on the ISS.

Live Science.com

Wired Science.com

For more information, head over the NSS website devoted to Space Based Power : http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/

Michael Griffin Speech

2008-09-19T00:45:00.001-04:00

Los Angeles Air Force Base, El Segundo, California

14 September 2008

I want to thank Congresswoman Jane Harman for giving me the excuse I deeply desired to escape Washington for southern California, "God's country", and one of my former homes, with sunny weather and beautiful beaches. It is a great place for aerospace engineers to ponder the fluid dynamics of the waves as well, as well as those to be found in the Manhattan Beach Brewery. And I want to thank the Air Force for hosting us here tonight in a place commonly referred to as the Hollywood Air Force Base.

Tom Sheriden, the commander of the Space & Missile System Center, walks in the footsteps of giants in our business. One of my former mentors and personal heroes was General Bernard ("Benny") Schriever, who came to Los Angeles in 1954 with a small, elite group of officers who built the Thor, Atlas, Titan, and Minuteman missiles, the foundation for all future aerospace systems launched into orbit. General Schriever also helped NASA in the early days of the space program and Project Mercury, the subject of Tom Wolfe's elegant book The Right Stuff. For that, NASA's and our nation's success in space exploration is due in part to the men and women of the Air Force Space & Missile Systems Center.

Since this evening's discussion is about seeking "The Right Stuff", I consulted Tom Wolfe's book to remind me of that unique author's definition of it:

"As to just what this ineffable quality was. . .well, it obviously involved bravery. But it was not bravery in the simple sense of being willing to risk your life... any fool could do that... No, the idea... seemed to be that a man should have the ability to go up in a hurtling piece of machinery and put his hide on the line and then have the moxie, the reflexes, the experience, the coolness, to pull back in the last yawning moment - and then to go up again the next day, and the next day, and every next day... There was ... a seemingly infinite series of tests. ... a dizzy progression of steps and ledges, a ziggurat, a pyramid extraordinarily high and steep; and the idea was to prove at every foot of the way up that pyramid that you were one of the elected and anointed ones who had the right stuff and could move higher and higher and even - ultimately, God willing, one day - that you might be able to join that special few at the very top, that elite who had the capacity to bring tears to men's eyes, the very Brotherhood of the Right Stuff itself."

This definition works well for our pilot astronauts; it doesn't do much for the scientists and engineers we hire, however. But that's not really the point. Tom Wolfe is a wonderful writer, who conveys to the reader a sense of intimacy with any subject about which he chooses to write. His prose speaks to us in ways that are poetic, timeless and inspirational. And, as I've said in several speeches, at a fundamental level, NASA is in the inspiration business. Space exploration inspires the questioning child in each of us to "explore strange new worlds, to seek new life and new civilizations, and to boldly go where no one has gone before." I believe that we will, one day, find a civilization on Mars. Ours. The stuff of science fiction slowly turns into reality. The communicators and tricorders from Star Trek become the cell phones and PDAs that each of us have today. The computing power of the one in my pocket dwarfs the computing power of anything available during the Apollo era - and it's not even the best you can buy.

I recently read an essay written a few years ago by Michael Crichton, the author of many popular science fiction books, including Jurassic Park and The Andromeda Strain. In that article, Crichton highlighted the work of a privately- funded foundation called Space Camp, an intensive program for kids and adults to be exposed to the physics and engineering of space flight. Last year, after 25 years of operation, Space Camp graduated its 500,000th camper. In his essay, Crichton tells the story of a ten year-old boy who was interviewed on TV after graduating from Space Camp. "Asked about the future, he spoke of colonies on the Moon, and trips to Mars. The reporter said, 'How are you going to get the Congress to pay for it?'" To which the young boy replied, "Maybe your Congress won't, but mine will." With your help, Congresswoman Harman, we are slowly turning dreams into reality, and science fiction into fact. We are re-writing the text books as well as the history books.

So I ask, why not dare to do the great things, the hard things, the meaningful things which makes our country great? It is a choice, a choice of strategic importance for how we as a small group of people in this room tonight and as a nation choose to spend our time, resources, and energy. Do we choose to spend our time on things which will have lasting meaning and improve the lives of current and future generations, or do we choose to waste our time with trivial pursuits?

In 1962, when President Kennedy chose to go to the moon and do other things "not because they are easy, but because they are hard", NASA had less than ten hours of experience in human spaceflight under its belt in the Mercury program. But we had The Right Stuff.

President Kennedy fully recognized that "that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win". It was a bold challenge to put service and sacrifice above self. It was what we could do for our country. However, at that time NASA had little experience and many, many naysayers in and around Washington. Not much different than today, actually. But NASA had The Right Stuff then, and still does, even though there seem to be even more pundits today who question the audacity of our mission or our credibility to carry it out.

When President Ronald Reagan proposed to the Congress in 1984 that NASA build a space station, he said, "We can follow our dreams to distant stars, living and working in space for peaceful economic and scientific gain." In November, we will mark eight years of continuous human presence in space aboard the International Space Station. President Reagan's dream became a reality.

Tonight, California native son and astronaut Greg Chamitoff is living and working onboard the International Space Station that President Reagan proposed. Greg grew up in Silicon Valley, and earned his bachelors degree in electrical engineering from Cal Poly the same year that Reagan first proposed that our nation build the Space Station. He taught lab courses in circuit design and had summer internships at Four Phase Systems, Atari Computers, Northern Telecom, and IBM. Greg then received his master's degree in aeronautical engineering at Cal Tech, and while there, he became good friends with Rick Gilbrech, who now heads NASA's Exploration Systems efforts, building the Ares rockets and Orion crew vehicles so that astronauts who will follow in Greg's footsteps will be able to take the next "giant leap for mankind" beyond the shores of low Earth orbit - to the Moon, near-Earth asteroids, and Mars.

This will be the greatest challenge NASA has ever faced, but with current budget projections, I believe that it is eminently doable over the next fifty years. But we must not lose focus, defer future possibilities, or wander in the desert of indecision and lost opportunities, as happened in the 1970s following our success with the Apollo moon landings. Even in retrospect, it is hard to credit that only three-and-a-half years after the historic voyage of Apollo 11, Gene Cernan and Jack Schmitt flew the last lunar landing mission on Apollo 17, because our nation and its elected leaders chose to curtail our nation's space program. The planned Apollo 20 mission was cancelled a few weeks after the Apollo 11 landing, and Apollo 18 and 19 were cancelled some months later. With those actions, the space program as we knew it in the 1960s was over, finished, and done. NASA is often blamed for its so-called lack of vision after the apotheosis of the Apollo years, but frankly, after those decisions, it didn't matter what NASA did, or didn't do. Our elected leaders had lost the vision and sense of purpose for our nation in space, and we retreated to low-Earth orbit.

The abandonment of the capability our nation purchased at such great price during the Apollo years was a mistake of strategic proportions. NASA's spending declined from a high of 4.2 percent of our nation's federal budget to just under 0.6 percent today. The termination of the Apollo program, the failure to sustain America's journey beyond low-Earth orbit, the destruction of the industrial capability to produce the Saturn V rocket and Apollo spacecraft, and the loss of the future our nation could have had in space, was a policy decision perpetrated by the Nixon Administration and ratified by the Congress of that time, essentially without debate. Our nation was distracted by other pressing issues, and our future on the space frontier suffered as a result.

And look where this has taken us. Last year, just prior to a Space Shuttle launch, I sat down for an interview with CNN just as one of their producers informed me that they had to cut away from their coverage of the Shuttle launch. There was breaking news of vital national importance from Los Angeles: Paris Hilton was going to jail. That was the moment when I realized how tough the NASA Administrator's job really is. NASA could not compete for the American people's attention against Paris Hilton.

During the opening ceremonies for the Beijing Olympics last month, I was struck by the athletes' creed: "The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well." And the camera turned to the faces of many, many American athletes who kept repeating that memorable phrase: "It's the not the triumph but the struggle. It's not the triumph but the struggle." That is The Right Stuff. Next month, we plan to launch Space Shuttle Atlantis on the final servicing mission to the Hubble Space Telescope, one of the greatest machines NASA has ever built. The story of this scientific and engineering marvel is one of bold vision, imagination, and audacious risk-taking, but also perseverance and ingenuity when, as sometimes happens, not all risks are successfully negotiated. It is a story that transcends science.

One of the astronauts on that mission is taking a small part of the Olympics with him. About one year ago, Mike Massimino was talking to his 13-year old son Daniel who is a swimmer. When Mike asked his son what special personal items he would like him to carry with him on the Space Shuttle, Daniel glanced over at a poster of Michael Phelps on his bedroom wall and asked, "why don't you take one of Michael Phelps' swim caps?" So, the Massimino family contacted Deborah Phelps, Michael's mother who is also a principal at Windsor Middle School in Baltimore, Maryland. The two families became friends, and next month the crew of the Space Shuttle Atlantis will carry with them into space a small USA swim cap autographed by Michael Phelps. After the mission, the astronauts will return it and spend some time with the students of Deborah Phelps' school. In this way, NASA is in the inspiration business. One thing about astronauts, they can capture the attention of teenagers for at least 5 minutes... which is more than I know how to do.

While I make light of this, the lesson here is that our media and nation are not focusing on what matters most. Thus, I believe it is necessary for us - all of us - to take the time to discuss openly the founding principles that led us our nation to embrace space exploration fifty years ago, when it mattered to the whole nation that we overcome our slow start and become the world's preeminent spacefaring nation. We need to reverse the alarming trends in our nation's science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce. While the vast majority of our nation's workforce is neither scientists nor engineers, the four percent who are create most of the goods and services, solve real-world problems, and produce new discoveries and insights about our planet and our universe.

We have become inured to what should be recognized as alarming trends, the subject of a recent hearing before the House of Representatives Science & Technology Committee. There are half as many bachelor's degrees in physics awarded today in the United States than when Sputnik was launched in 1957. The number of engineers graduating with bachelor's degrees declined by over 20% in the last two decades prior to a recent up-tick - but that up-tick is primarily due to an increase in the number of foreign students, who are increasingly returning to their home countries. In 2004, China graduated approximately 500,000 engineers while India graduated 200,000 and the United States graduated 70,000. In 2005, the United States produced more undergraduates in sports exercise than in electrical engineering. In 2006, only 15% of college graduates in the United States received a diploma in engineering or the natural sciences, compared to 38% in South Korea, 47% in France, and 67% in Singapore. The number of PhDs in engineering awarded by U.S. universities to U.S. citizens declined 34% in a single decade. Two-thirds of U.S. engineering PhDs are awarded to foreign nationals. In some surveys, U.S. public schools consistently rank near the bottom in mathematics and science as compared to their global counterparts. We are surpassed by, among others, Azerbaijan, Latvia and Macao.

If we do not reverse these trends, other countries will surpass the United States in scientific and technical acumen. This will affect our country in arenas well beyond space exploration. It will undermine our ability to compete in the global marketplace.

These trends did not happen overnight, and they will not be fixed overnight. We face a critical shortage of people skilled in technical professions. NASA is not immune to the demographic trends of a retiring baby boom generation and a declining educational system. Many of the people who built the Space Shuttle, the Hubble Space Telescope, the International Space Station, and the Mars rovers are retiring. Who will replace them to build the space systems of tomorrow?

Perhaps we as a nation can learn something from China's play book with their strategic, multi-faceted approach. At their fantastic opening ceremonies for the Olympic games, they celebrated their nation's space program and their future in space exploration, with images of the planets of our solar system projected on the rim of the bird's nest stadium, and taikonauts dancing around a yellow sun and new-age planet in a spectacular display of acrobatics. China's opening ceremonies for the Olympic Games, costing a reported $300 million, were compared in the media to America's Apollo 11 moon landing, as their statement to the world that they intend to be regarded as a superpower. According a recent report by the RAND Corporation, a few years ago China initiated a fifteen-year "Medium-to Long-Term Plan for the Development of Science and Technology" which clearly stated their nation's goals and means to achieve it. It stated that China aims to become an "innovation-oriented society" by 2020 and a world leader in science and technology by 2050, develop indigenous innovation capabilities, leap-frog into leading positions in new science-based industries, increase R&D expenditures to 2.5 percent of GDP by 2020 (from 1.34 percent in 2005), increase the contribution to economic growth from technological advances to 60%, limit dependence on imported technology to 30%, and become one of the top five countries in the world in the number of patents granted.

China is investing heavily in building space capability because they understand the value of these activities, both as a driver for innovation and a source of national pride in being a member of the world's most exclusive club. They understand what it means for a society to be pushing the human frontier. China today not only flies its own taikonauts, but also has plans to launch about a hundred satellites over the next five to eight years. It should be no surprise, especially to those who have read Tom Friedman's book "The World is Flat" or John Kao's "Innovation Nation", that this environment in China is breeding thousands of high-tech start-ups.

The Chinese adapted the design of the Russian Soyuz to create their Shenzhou spacecraft. However, the similarity between the two ends at the outer mould line; the Shenzhou spacecraft is both more spacious and more capable. They plan to conduct their first spacewalks and orbital rendezvous operations, and to build their own space station - admittedly simpler than ours - in the coming years. While they have not stated an intention to do so, the Chinese could send a mission around the Moon with the Shenzhou spacecraft, as the United States did with the inspiring Apollo 8 mission back in 1968. China could easily execute such a mission with their planned Long March V rocket, currently under development and reportedly rivaling the capabilities of any expendable rocket in the world today. After visiting their facilities and talking to their engineers two years ago, I have no doubt that they will have it in use, as they plan, by around 2013. I've also visited India, and seen their space infrastructure. I was equally impressed.

I am not making these points to engender a new space race with China, or for that matter with India or anyone else. I am saying that I respect the way these countries are approaching the development of their nation's space capabilities, and I am concerned that our own nation is not nearly as focused as we should be on the strategic implications of what is happening.

NASA is simply one element of our own nation's multi-faceted approach to technological innovation. There are many other government organizations and programs, and our nation properly leverages the private sector's investments in innovation. We ourselves are also leveraging the emerging commercial space sector, from commercial imagery satellites and launch vehicles like SpaceX's Falcon rockets, the Zero-G Corporation's Boeing 727 for parabolic flights which produce 30 seconds of weightlessness, reusable suborbital spacecraft like Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic Company's SpaceShipTwo, and the Commercial Orbital Transportation System to support the International Space Station.

History shows that nations that shrink from the frontiers of their time, shrink also in their influence on the world stage. Yet we see that Americans today do not feel the urgency for preeminence on the space frontier that we felt in the 1950s and '60s. Sometimes I wonder if we are a bit tired, or distracted by other urgent crises, to recognize what it is that preeminence means for America.

As we are seeing, other nations seem to realize the importance of space exploration. This is an enterprise in which we can afford to be a leader, and one in which we cannot afford to be a follower. Whether America takes part or not, human exploration of space will go forward in this century. It is only a question of who those explorers are, what languages they speak, and what values they hold. Make no mistake, those who explore space in the coming decades will have The Right Stuff. I only hope that Americans will be among them.

Thank you.

Russia Looks to Take Lead in Commercial Launch Services

2008-09-18T08:17:00.005-04:00

http://www.space-travel.com/reports/New_Impulse_To_Russian_Rockets_999.html

Russia's new RD-191 developed by NPO Energomash for use in the future Angara rocket system is an acheivement that rocket scientists have been working on for years. The RD-191 is a RE-USEABLE liquid rocket motor that is versatile enough to be used on the 1st or 2nd stage. Fueled by kerosene and LOX, the engine features four combustion chambers fed by a single turbopump. NPO Energomash reports that the RD-191 is ready for mass production.

Take the Sarah Palin!!

2008-09-17T15:35:00.005-04:00

New Scientist.com

The Vatican's Cultural Minister Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi reinforced on Tuesday (16 Sept 2008) the Catholic Church's position (starting with Pope Pius XII in 1950) that the theory of evolution was compatible with the Bible and the development of Man. Furthermore, in keeping with the doctrine of Theistic Evolution, current Pope Benedict XVI affirms that the conflict between evolutionists and creationists is absurd.

“They are presented as alternatives that exclude each other,” the pope said. “This clash is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such.”

Creationists, Intelligent Designers, get out our my science classrooms. You belong in religious ed.

NASA Conducts First Test On New Motor For The Ares I Rocket

2008-09-17T09:37:00.004-04:00

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=26407

Nasa completed the first successful test of the ullage settling motor this past week. The ullage settling motor is a small solid rocket that does exactly what the name implies. After 1st stage separation, the rest of the vehicle, including the fuel for the 2nd stage motors, is in free fall. Before ignition of the 2nd stage motors, the ullage settling motor fires, giving a comparatively slight acceleration that forces the fuel in the tanks to settle at the bottom and creates a proper ullage space. Pushing the fuel down before main ignition has a major benefit: it prevents fuel vapor from being sucked into the rocket motor. This can cause uneven combustion in the motor and cavitation damage to the turbopump impellers. The first Ares I test flight, called Ares I-X, is scheduled for 2009.

Carnival of Space

2008-09-11T17:01:00.002-04:00

Carnival of Space #70 is a go.

Dock here.

He can't really be that dumb can he?

2008-09-11T13:22:00.006-04:00

Doesn't remember/care about the lessons from Cuba does he? Keep in mind this is coming from Al Jazeera.

Russian bombers arrive in Venezuela

Russia has flown two long-range bombers to Venezuela for military exercises, a move likely to cause concern in Washington.

Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president, said on Wednesday that the Tu-160 strategic bombers had arrived to strengthen military ties and to counter US regional influence.

"They go around saying Chavez has brought the Cold War to Venezuela," he said.

"What's coming is a multipolar world in which Venezuela is a free country, that's what's coming," Chavez said in a televised speech.

The planes arrived days after the two nations announced plans to hold joint naval exercises in the Caribbean later this year involving a nuclear-powered Russian battleship.

Al Jazeera's Mariana Sanchez in Caracas said the move also sent a message to Venezuela's opposition, who have been critical of Chavez in recent days, over the power of the president.

Poor relations

The Russian defence ministry said the bombers flew to Venezuela on a training mission and would conduct training flights over neutral waters in the next few days before returning, according to Russian media reports.

Russia remains angry at the US for its support for Georgia during the recent conflict over the region of South Ossetia, when US military vessels delivered aid to Georgia.

Alexander Konovalov, head of the Institute for Strategic Assessment in Moscow, said the deployment would lead to a further deterioration in relations between the US and Russia.

"It's a demonstration of Russia's ability to do things nasty: you send warships to the Black Sea and we send bombers next to your door," Konovalov said.

"It will have a negative impact on global stability."

Planned operation

Chavez has strongly backed Russia's stance on the Georgian conflict and recently visited Moscow to seal a series of defence and economic agreements.

He denied that Russia's plans for naval exercises to be held later this year are related, saying the Russian navy's visit had been planned for more than a year.

Chavez, a former paratrooper, also said he would fly one of the aircraft himself.

"What's more, I'm going to take the controls of one of these monsters," he said.

The planes, huge supersonic combat aircraft that can fly long missions with a heavy payload, are capable of carrying nuclear or conventional bombs.

The End of OPEC!

2008-09-11T09:48:00.003-04:00

In probably the best news of the month (year?), Saudi Arabia, home of the majority of the funding for terrorist schools across the world, is pushing back from the table. The House of Saud will not honor OPEC's decision to cut production in response to dropping crude prices. The Saudis are the world's largest exporter of oil. In even better news, Brazil has announced the discovery of another substantial off-shore oil deposit to go with the1st oil deposit announced earlier this year. Oil will be coming back down for at least little while before the winter.

McCain & Obama's Positions on Space Exploration

2008-09-10T13:33:00.003-04:00

A bit of a long read. McCain goes first because his is much shorter.

As President, John McCain will –

Ensure that space exploration is top priority and that the U.S. remains a leader;
Commit to funding the NASA Constellation program to ensure it has the resources it needs to begin a new era of human space exploration.
Review and explore all options to ensure U.S. access to space by minimizing the gap between the termination of the Space Shuttle and the availability of its replacement vehicle;
Ensure the national space workforce is maintained and fully utilized; Complete construction of the ISS National Laboratory;
Seek to maximize the research capability and commercialization possibilities of the ISS National Laboratory;
Maintain infrastructure investments in Earth-monitoring satellites and support systems;
Seek to maintain the nation's space infrastructure;
Prevent wasteful earmarks from diverting precious resources from critical scientific research;
Ensure adequate investments in aeronautics research.

As President, Barack Obama will –

Re-establish the National Aeronautics and Space Council (NASC) to oversee and coordinate civilian, military, commercial and national security space activities.
Retaining Options for Additional Shuttle Flights: Barack Obama supports Congressional efforts to add at least one additional Space Shuttle flight to fly a valuable mission and to keep the workforce engaged. He will work to ensure there is adequate funding to support that additional flight so that it does not interfere with developing the Shuttle's successor.
Speeding the Next-Generation Vehicle: Obama will expedite the development of the Shuttle's successor systems for carrying Americans to space so we can minimize the gap. This will be difficult; underfunding by the Bush administration has left NASA with limited flexibility to accelerate the development of the new systems.
Using the Private Sector: Obama will stimulate efforts within the private sector to develop and demonstrate spaceflight capabilities. NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation Services is a good model of government/industry collaboration.
Working with International Allies: Obama will enlist international partners to provide International Space Station (ISS) cargo re-supply and eventually alternate means for sending crews to the ISS.
Partnering to Enhance the Potential of the ISS: Barack Obama will enlist other Federal agencies, industry and academia to develop innovative scientific and technological research projects on the ISS.
Enabling Human Exploration: Obama will use the ISS for fundamental biological and physical research to understand the effects of long-term space travel on human health and to test emerging technologies to enable such travel.
Enhancing International Cooperation: The ISS has been a model for international cooperation to achieve peaceful objectives in space, helping develop positive relations with Russia during the 1990s. America must take the next step and use the ISS as a strategic tool in diplomatic relations with non traditional partners.
Retaining Options for Extended Operations: Barack Obama will consider options to extend ISS operations beyond 2016. After investing so much in developing the ISS, it would be a shame not to utilize it to the fullest possible extent.
Continuing Research and Development Investments to Support Future Missions: Barack Obama will support a robust research and technology development program that addresses the long-term needs for future human and robotic missions. He supports a funding goal that maintains at least 10 percent of the total exploration systems budget for research and development.
Drawing in International Partners: Obama will encourage a cooperative framework for the conduct of a long-term and sustainable international exploration initiative. This will enable the United States to leverage its resources and to use space exploration as a tool of global diplomacy. As this framework is developed, Obama will continue NASA's architecture studies and advanced planning to ensure the American space workforce remains engaged and that America can lead the world to long-term exploration of the Moon, Mars, and beyond, in a collaborative and cost-effective way.
Partner to Improve Basic Capabilities: Obama will evaluate whether the private sector can safely and effectively fulfill some of NASA's need for lower earth orbit cargo transport.
Leveraging Robotic Capabilities to Explore the Solar System: Obama supports increased investment in research, data analysis, and technology development across the full suite of exploration missions including the Mars Sample Return mission and future missions to the Moon, asteroids, Lagrange points, the outer Solar System, and other destinations.
Supporting Space-Based Observatories: Platforms like the Hubble Space Telescope, the Chandra X- Ray Observatory, the Gamma Ray Observatory, and the Spitzer Space Telescope have yielded some of the greatest scientific discoveries of the last century. Obama is committed to a bold new set of such platforms and programs to expand our knowledge of the cosmos.
Stopping Political Interference: Barack Obama will strengthen baseline climate observations and climate data records to ensure that there are long-term and accurate climate records. He will not use climate change research data for political objectives.
Supporting Global Food and Water Needs: The Global Precipitation Measurement mission is an international effort to improve climate, weather, and hydrological predictions through more accurate and more frequent precipitation measurements. Obama will work to launch this mission without further delay.
Enhancing Earth Mapping: Obama will continue support for the Landsat Data Continuity Mission, which allows study of the earth's land surfaces and provides valuable data for agricultural, educational, scientific, and government use.
Supporting Fundamental Research: Barack Obama will pursue more long-term fundamental research to reduce the risk associated with advancing the state of the art.
Advancing Future Transportation Needs: The Obama administration will support aeronautics research to address aviation safety, air traffic control, and noise reduction.
Promoting Fuel Efficiency: Rising oil prices not only impact motorists at the pump, they are also squeezing airlines and even the U.S. Air Force, which spent $5.8 billion on fuel in 2006, up from $2.8 billion in 2004. Advanced aeronautical research at NASA could dramatically improve the fuel efficiency of military and civilian aircraft, reducing costs for passengers and taxpayers alike. Barack Obama will support such research.
Collaborating on Exploration: The United States needs to fully involve international partners in future exploration plans to help reduce costs and to continue close ties with our ISS partners. NASA has been working with 13 other space agencies to develop a globally coordinated approach to space exploration; Barack Obama will not only continue but intensify this effort. Human exploration beyond low-earth orbit should be a long-term goal and investment for all space faring countries, with America in the lead.
Collaborating on Climate Change Research: Barack Obama will expand and deepen American collaboration with international partners on climate research, both to increase understanding of climate challenges and to demonstrate American leadership in this arena.
Negotiating Agreements on "Rules of the Road": Barack Obama will work with other nations to develop "rules of the road" for space to ensure all nations have a common understanding of acceptable behavior.
Opposing Weaponization of Space: Space assets are increasingly important to our national security and our economy, but they are also extremely vulnerable. China's successful test of an anti-satellite missile in January 2007 signaled the beginning of a potential new arms race in space. Barack Obama opposes the stationing of weapons in space and the development of anti-satellite weapons. He believes the United States must show leadership by engaging other nations in discussions of how best to stop the slow slide towards a new battlefield.
Protecting America's Space Assets: Recognizing their vulnerability, Obama will work to protect our assets in space by pursuing new technologies and capabilities that allow us to avoid attacks and recover from them quickly. The Operationally Responsive Space program, which uses smaller, more nimble space assets to make US systems more robust and less vulnerable is a way to invest in this capability.
Enhancing the Role of NASA as a Premier Institution of Innovation: Engineers and scientists at NASA have developed state-of-the-art innovations across the technological spectrum in areas ranging from solar cells and imaging to communications and aeronautics. Barack Obama will renew NASA's commitment to innovation-driving basic research that the private sector can use to develop new products for American consumers.
Increasing Commercialization Benefits: Obama will promote cost sharing initiatives between government and industry to increase the state of the art in various technical areas, such as micro- electromechanical systems, nanotechnology, and biotechnology. Obama will establish multi-agency programs that focus on rapid maturation of advanced concepts and transfer to industry for commercialization.
Jumpstarting Consumer Technology: Obama will expand the use of prizes for revolutionary technical achievements that can benefit society, and funds for joint industry/government rapid-to-the- consumer technology advances.
Supporting Commercial Access to Space: Obama will stimulate the commercial use of space and private sector utilization of the International Space Station. He will establish new processes and procurement goals to promote the use of government facilities. We must unleash the genius of private enterprise to secure the United States' leadership in space.
Revising Regulations for Aerospace Export Control: Some sections of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) have unduly hampered the competitiveness of domestic aerospace industry. Outdated restrictions have cost billions of dollars to American satellite and space hardware manufacturers as customers have decided to purchase equipment from European suppliers. While protecting our national security interests, Barack Obama will direct a review of the ITAR to reevaluate restrictions imposed on American companies, with a special focus on space hardware that is currently restricted from commercial export. He will also direct revisions to the licensing process to ensure that American suppliers are competitive in the international aerospace markets, without jeopardizing American national security.
Expanding the American Skill Base in Science and Engineering: Barack Obama fully supports efforts to advance new frontiers in technical areas, such as advanced structures, power generation, communication and navigation systems, and biomedical systems. These efforts address the requirements for exploration, but also have high potential for technological benefits in the private sector as well as in training the next generation of scientists and engineers.

McCain

Obama

NASA Teams With Lewis Center and Students Worldwide to Assist With Mission to Moon

2008-09-10T09:59:00.005-04:00

Lewis Center for Educational Research

Students at the Lewis Center will become Mission Control from a facility on their campus for the upcoming NASA LCROSS lunar probe scheduled for 2009. I've seen some post on USENET talking about how the USA is falling behind in the hard sciences. Initiatives like this are how you re-ignite the spark. This almost makes me with I was back in school. Almost.

Spaceref.com

Bush Administration's jihad to Retire the Shuttle

2008-09-10T09:25:00.002-04:00

This is a "leaked" email from NASA Grand Poobah Michael Griffin to Lynn Cline, Deputy Associate Administrator for Space Operations, provided by the Aero-News Network. Sabotage the ISS?

From: Griffin, Michael D. (HQ-AA000)
Sent: Monday, August 18 2008 6:26 PM
To: Cline, Lynn (HQ-CA000)
Cc: Dale, Shana (HQ-AB000); Scolese, Christopher J. (HQ-AI000); Morerell, Paul (HQ-AA000); Gerstenmaier, William H. (HQ-CA000); Gilbrech, RIchard J. (HQ-BA000); SHank, Christopher M. (HQ-AA000); O'Brien, Michael F. (HQ-TA000)
Subject: RE: NAC Agenda

Lynn-

Thanks very much for the heads up. I think Obie should have been on distribution, and have copied him accordingly.

I'm sorry. You're not going to like what I have to say here. There isn't much that I will say below that I Like either, but I'll give you the best analysis that my brain can produce. Any and all who wish to argue or disagree are welcome, even encouraged to do so. Tell me where I'm wrong. Please!

First, and to get it out of the way, I will remind Jack [Jack Schmitt, NASA Advisory Council chair] that the NAC cannot make recommendations in conflict with Executive Branch Policy, and the White House is firm on Shuttle retirement in 2010. (Actually, they can make any recommendation they want, but I have no option but to implement those which are counter to Administration policy.) Jack can, however, couch his recommendation differently so that I can use it. I'll discuss this below.

I actually agree with Jack - the game has changed. I don't agree that we're going to get any more money because of it.

Exactly as I predicted, events have unfolded in a way that makes it clear how unwise it was for he US to adopt a policy of deliberate dependance upon another power for access to ISS. In a rational world, we would have been allowed to pick a Shuttle retirement date to be consistent with Ares/Orion availability, we would have been asked to deploy Ares/Orion as early as possible (rather than "not later than 2014") and we would have been provided the necessary budget to make it so. I realize that no one on this distribution disagrees with me on this point, I'm just saying it again, that's all.

The rational approach didn't happen, primarily because for OSTP and OMB, retiring the Shuttle is a jihad rather than an engineering and program management decision. Further, they actively do not want the ISS to be sustained, and have done everything possible to ensure that it would not be. They were always "okay" with buying Soyuz/Progress, and if it didn't happen, well, that was okay too. You will recall they didn't want us to brink up the need for another INKSNA exemption during budget hearings this year. I disobeyed their wishes in doing so, because we knew that we needed to get this on the table in '08.

But we are where we are. The Russians are not going to back out of Georgia any time soon, certainly not prior to the election. If they don't, INKSNA is DoA, despite Sen. Mikulski's and Nelson's favorable comments in support of a "bipartisan solution". We might get relief somewhere well down the road, if and when tensions ease, but my guess is that there is going to be a lengthy period with no U.S. crew on ISS after 2011. No additional money of significance is going to be provided to accelerate Orion/Ares, and even if it were, at this point we can;t get there earlier than 2014, so it doesn't solve the basic problem. Commercial solutions will ultimately emerge, but not substantially before Orion/Ares are ready, if then. The alternatives are to continue flying Shuttle, or abandon U.S. presence on ISS.

This Administration will not yield with regard to continuing Shuttle operations past 2010, but the next Administration will have no investment in that decision. They will tell us to extend the Shuttle. There is no other politically tenable course. It will appear irrational - heck it will be irrational - to say that we've built a Space Station we cannot use, that we're throwing away a $100 billion investment, when the cost of saving it is merely to continue flying Shuttle. Extending Shuttle creates no damage that they will care about, other than to delay the lunar program. They will not count that as a cost. They will not see what that does for U.S. leadership in space in the long term. And even if they do, they have a problem in the short term that must be solved. Flying Shuttle is the only way to solve it.

Thus, the recommendation Jack should give, and the direction I am giving, is that SOMD and SMD need to begin working together to prepare a "Plan B" -- how we would continue to operate Shuttle, in case the new Administration directs us to do so, while doing the least damage possible to Ares/Orion, in the events that (a) extra money is made available and (b) no extra money is made available. Our focus should be on minimizing the collateral damage to NASA caused by the recent events and their likely consequences.

For the record, and without regard to the underlying truth of the proposition, I do not believe the Russians would ever admit -- nor do I think they believe -- that they need us to help them operate ISS. Yes, there are actions we could take to hold ISS hostage, or even to prevent them from using it -- power management stuff, for example. We will not take those actions. Practically speaking, the Russians can sustain ISS without US crew as long as we don't actively sabotage them, which I do not believe we would ever do, short of war. So I will not make the argument that "dependence" works both ways. We need them. They don't "need" us. We're a "nice to have". The argument that we need to get Shuttle out of the way so that conversion of VAB/MAF for Constellation can proceed is simply specious. If we are told to extend Shuttle without any new money, there is no immediate need to convert. If we're given extra money, then the VAB/MAF conflicts are solvable If we absolutely had to find a way for Shuttle and Ares/Orion to co-exist at VAB and MAF, we would. Its only a matter of money. So I'm not going to make this argument either.

Again, I am open to different views, in part because my own view is about as pessimistic as it is possible to be. And certainly I would welcome any correction of factual errors.
Otherwise, please begin preparing the briefings that Jack has requested.

Thanks.

Mike.

Statement of Administration Policy

2008-09-09T14:02:00.002-04:00

Direct from the bean counters in the President's Office of Management and Budget, I have found a small document stating the outgoing Administration's opposition to H.R. 6063 because it "mandates specific Space Shuttle flights that greatly threaten NASA’s ability to retire the Shuttle in 2010, an action that is critical to implementing the President’s Vision for Space Exploration."

Here is the actual pdf.

And this is the text of HR 6063.

June 10, 2008 (House Rules)
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY
H.R. 6063 – National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2008
(Rep. Udall (D) Colorado and 7 cosponsors)
The Administration supports maintaining a strong national civil space science and aeronautics enterprise and is committed to advancing the quest for new knowledge, discovery, and exploration that is embodied in NASA programs and activities. However, the Administration strongly opposes H.R. 6063 because it mandates specific Space Shuttle flights that greatly threaten NASA’s ability to retire the Shuttle in 2010, an action that is critical to implementing the President’s Vision for Space Exploration. In addition, the Administration has other serious objections to several provisions of H.R. 6063 that must be satisfactorily addressed prior to final congressional action on reauthorization legislation.
The bill contains provisions that mandate two contingency logistics flights and an additional Shuttle flight for the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer and require that these flights take place before Shuttle retirement, thus effectively superseding the 2010 Shuttle retirement date that is a critical step to enabling successful development of the Crew Exploration Vehicle as called for by the President’s Vision for Space Exploration. Consistent with the Vision, the current Space Shuttle flight manifest is a measured and carefully balanced plan to allow the completion of the International Space Station (ISS), a safe and orderly retirement of the Shuttle, and the smooth transition of facilities and personnel to Exploration Systems programs by September 2010. The direction in this section would almost certainly result in several serious impacts and risks to NASA’s exploration programs and other activities, including: (1) significantly increasing costs of the Shuttle program, not including potential recertification activities; (2) delaying the operational capability of the Orion CEV well beyond its current projected dates; (3) exacerbating transition challenges, including facilities and workforce; and (4) exposing astronaut crews to increased risks. In addition, statutorily mandating additional flights regardless of safety assessments and costs sets a dangerous and unwise precedent.
The Space Shuttle must be retired by the end of 2010, and the NASA Administrator’s authority to make the final determination on Shuttle flights based on safety considerations must be preserved. In addition, any increased cost of an additional Shuttle flight must be satisfactorily accommodated within the President’s proposed discretionary spending total.
The FY 2009 budget request of $17.6 billion is sufficient to achieve NASA’s goals, and the additional $2.6 billion authorized in the bill above the President’s request is inconsistent with the Administration’s fiscal policies. Accordingly, the Administration opposes this increased authorization level.
In addition, H.R. 6063 directs several specific activities under the assumption that additional funding will be appropriated, making it likely they will become unfunded
mandates. Directing activities in this manner would severely disrupt the budgets for NASA’s ongoing, carefully-balanced programs and Centers linked to other high-priority goals and activities. For this reason and in view of associated problematic policy implications, the following requirements should either be removed from the bill or appropriately modified: (1) carrying out an additional procurement for Commercial Orbital Transfer Services (COTS) crew capabilities, and mandating that NASA purchase commercial services regardless of cost; (2) establishing an Exploration-related technology research and development program that would draw funding away from the Orion CEV, delaying its availability; (3) establishing a cross-cutting technology development program within the Science Mission Directorate at a level of five percent of the Directorate’s budget; (4) requiring the continued operation and utilization of the ISS by the United States after 2016, without first mitigating significant budget implications in the outyears; and (5) prescribing specific roles and responsibilities regarding NASA’s work with various advisory and external review committees and other Federal agencies that the Administration believes would be problematic and duplicative of already well-established roles and responsibilities.
The Administration also is concerned with the proposed wording of certain provisions and strongly urges that these provisions be modified before passage of the bill. For example, the direction in the bill to limit NASA’s ability to dispose of Space Shuttle-related hardware is likely to severely disrupt ongoing Shuttle retirement and transition activities. Similarly, the specific wording of other provisions in H.R. 6063, including requiring all space observatories to be serviceable regardless of practicality; overly-prescribed aeronautics research goals; and unproductive astronaut health surveys could lead to serious unintended consequences, including greatly increased costs to carry out these mandates. The Administration calls on Congress to modify these provisions to provide NASA sufficient flexibility to make programmatic and management decisions as necessary.
In addition, the bill directs NASA to initiate discussions with foreign nations on "space traffic management." This provision directly infringes upon the President’s authority to conduct foreign affairs. The United States already actively promotes international cooperation to enhance spaceflight safety and supports consideration of voluntary transparency and confidence building measures in appropriate venues under the leadership of the Department of State, with appropriate assistance from the Department of Defense. These provisions accordingly should be removed. A similar objectionable provision is contained in the bill’s section governing "exploration crew rescue."
Finally, in addition to the significant concerns highlighted above that must be satisfactorily addressed prior to final congressional action, the Administration has an overarching concern about the highly prescriptive nature of the bill and the significant number of reports and studies that this legislation would require. The Administration understands the need for timely information for Congress to conduct its oversight responsibilities; however, the burden that would be placed on various agencies of the Executive Branch, including NASA, is of concern. The Administration looks forward to working with Congress to modify these aspects of the bill.

Armageddon, starring Bruce Willis

2008-09-08T11:56:00.007-04:00

Russian authorities have warned that the incoming asteroid 99942 Apophis looms as the largest threat to civilization since Bruce and the Chin blew up a Texas sized asteroid with a green nuke. Apophis is scheduled to pass within a tenth of the distance between the Earth and the Moon in 2029 and possibly even collide with the Earth on its next visit in 2036. The Russians imply that an international body administered through the UN similar to WHO and other groups would be acceptable to them.

With every spacefaring nation racing to set up outposts on the Moon, Apophis in my opinion represents a huge opportunity. The asteroid passes inside cis-lunar space twice within the next thirty years. Everyone on the Moon and in orbit is going the need cheap access to what the asteroid contains. Specifically: volatiles. According to researchers at MIT, Apophis is an LL chondrite. That makes it an ordinary chondrite with a very low iron level. Apophis would be a good source of metals and volatiles for any space outpost.

Consider the size of Apophis and this is a windfall. It’s already in orbit. No need to boost from Earth’s surface. If I was finished with school, I’d be doing the cost-benefit analysis on moving Apophis to L-4 of L-5.

Although it’s an older post, this article by SpaceWorks Engineering, a local Atlanta company, outlines the composition of Apophis.