NASA not a priority
NASA Plans Put America At Risk
Unassessed Uncertainty Involved For the Future of American Human Spaceflight.
NASA now likely has much more risk to the long term sustainability and safety of its premier human spaceflight program (ISS) than the normally risk averse Agency would desire or admit to. Flight crew access to and from the ISS for the next 5 or more years is dependent on a single flight system (Soyuz), until one of the commercially developed American low earth orbit transportation systems demonstrates sufficient reliability to take on that responsibility. The widespread euphoria over the recent successes of SpaceX and the highly optimistic expectations for COTS operational readiness somewhat contrasts with the reality of the history of past rocket development programs. The cost, schedule, and program management difficulties and technical development issues associated with NASA’s own Constellation program and the James Webb Space Telescope program most recently have validated that history.
After the Columbia accident, NASA was extremely fortunate that the Soyuz system could sustain the ISS until the Orbiter returned to flight status. There is no planned backup available for the Soyuz after retirement of the Space Shuttle flight system for five or perhaps even several more years.
There is a non-zero probability that a random event or a scenario comprised of a series of seemingly unconnected events could prevent the Soyuz or a reliable COTS alternate capability from being available for transporting crews safely to and from the ISS for a significant length of time perhaps resulting in abandonment of the Station. Reliance on the Soyuz for this extended timeframe is very unpopular with many Americans of all stripes for a variety of reasons. If this capability becomes unreliable or perhaps utilized as some form of political leverage, NASA now has no other options available to sustain its planned ISS operations program for perhaps a long period of time.
We know that there is tangible uncertainty and risk involved in the current strategy to rely on a single human transportation system for long term access to the ISS that is provided by a foreign entity. What is the likelihood that a random event or a here-to-fore unconsidered scenario might occur that could cause a significant impact to the ISS Program? Second, are the impacts of the potential consequences acceptable to America; and what are the best mitigation strategies to address this risk? What does NASA and the Government need to do to characterize the risks involved to provide useable information for use by the decision makers who accountable for this policy, and to provide transparency and confidence to the affected stakeholders?
What are some of these non-zero probability events that could present major risk?
1. Spacecraft systems failures/deficiencies (hardware/software) or supply chain interruptions.
2. Ground support system failures, aging institutions and facilities.
3. Political Instability or irresolvable policy differences affecting the continuity of planned arrangements
4. Fire that disrupts and disables key manufacturing, utilities, or operations capabilities.
5. Terrorist attacks to key capabilities, physical, cyber, etc.
6. Major weather disaster that impacts key manufacturing or operations capabilities, Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant as an example. .
7. Human error that initiates a scenario comprised of events which renders the Soyuz system unavailable for a lengthy period.
8. The uncertainty in performance of the potential COTS providers being able to provide a safe and reliable human transportation system to support the ISS in a reasonable time frame. In comparison, the development of the Orion led by NASA, also a capsule flight system with significant legacy utilization, was taking NASA greater than 10 years to realize a LEO capability to support the ISS.
This is a partial listing of potential causes and is not intended to be a complete list of scenarios that might result in the Soyuz and/or the COTS capability being unavailable for human access to the ISS.
What are the potential adverse consequences that might result from failure of the Soyuz system to be able to fly crews to and from the ISS for an extended period of time?
1. Loss of life.
2. Major asset loss. The U.S. has approximately $100 B invested in the ISS that is at risk for loss. Other nations have varying significant investments as well.
3. Loss of prestige for America due to failure to be able to sustain the ISS.
4. Uncontrolled decay and entry of the ISS
5. Acceleration of the wide spread perceived decline and/or actual decline of America’s current world leadership in human spaceflight technology and operations.
6. Loss of confidence in NASA, its leadership; and perhaps future support for initiating new future programs.
7. Loss of momentum in the ISS based science programs including loss of the accrued sunk investments in dollars and human capital.
8. Accelerated erosion of the skills and capabilities required to move the human exploration of space forward.
9. Loss of interest in space science and space exploration by the young people who are contemplating a science or aerospace engineering career resulting in further decline in America’s capability to initiate and carry out challenging spaceflight and technological programs. (This is already happening – just talk to some science and engineering majors now in college.)
Again, a partial listing.
Who are the stakeholders and policy makers that are potentially impacted by this undefined risk level?
1. The American taxpayers who are committed to American leadership in space and depend on NASA leadership and the Government to make reliable decisions for the betterment of the Nation.
2. The governing Administration.
3. The Congress who appear to be legislating the way forward for human spaceflight by their actions (e.g. Orion & SLS).
4. NASA leadership and its people who have committed their lives and careers to the continued development of human spaceflight..
5. NASA’s Contractors that make up much of the skilled experience base necessary to conceive, develop, manufacture, and operate the systems that are required for space exploration..
6. The Commercial Space Transportation investors.
Again, a partial listing, but the stakeholder community is much larger than NASA alone.
How should NASA proceed?
NASA should follow its own policy and procedural directives imposed on its own programs and conduct a detailed risk assessment of its plans in order to understand the risk level associated with the decision to rely solely on the Soyuz flight system for human access and return to the ISS for the next five + years. Since the risks involved are so significant to the future of America, the risk analysis and assessment should be accomplished by an organization independent of the NASA decision makers who are involved in the planning and implementation of current the policy of long term reliance on a flight system provided by a foreign nation to sustain the ISS. In order to avoid a conflict of interest, the use of NASA’s current contractors should not be utilized for such an assessment. Perhaps the risk assessment should be overseen and peer reviewed by an organization like the National Science Foundation or a select blue ribbon committee.
Based on the history of spaceflight systems development including NASA’s own programs performance in meeting planned operational schedules; it would be prudent to look at the risk interval for a longer period than just the currently planned 5 years, perhaps 10 years. While there seems to be anticipation that the COTS providers will find a way to circumvent the technical, cost and schedule problems that NASA and its contractors have faced for recent development programs that hoped for result is yet to be demonstrated. NASA’s heritage for its development programs and projects has relied on a benevolent Congress to supplement its budget when the inevitable cost increases come along as a result of development problems. Receiving increased appropriations to solve project development issues looks increasingly unlikely based on what is happening to the Webb Telescope Project and the National budget deficit. The potential COTS providers will similarly face a reluctant group of investors if their costs and problems escalate.
How could this risk mitigated?
The most obvious way to control the risks associated with current NASA planning is to retain the Space Shuttle capability in some form until there is demonstrated American provided capability to transport humans and cargo to and from the ISS. Retention of the Space Shuttle would provide all of the capability to protect the integrity of the Space Station and its science programs. The issue as always is cost; however, the cost model could be significantly moderated by commercializing the Space Shuttle Program. Estimates are that a commercial venture could operate the Space Shuttle for a couple flights per year at perhaps 1/3 of its current cost. The critical skills are still available at this time. This would enable America to continue the same capability to support the ISS, and even conduct other priority earth orbit missions such as American controlled human access to space to support a critical unforeseen national security need.
By establishing commercialized Space Shuttle operations, NASA can take a known and reliable flight system and use it to develop and transition the governance and oversight processes needed for the COTS era operations. In addition to mitigating the risks and uncertainties associated with current NASA plans, America would retain its prominence as a leading participant in human space flight. A professionally done peer reviewed risk assessment will define the risks with their associated uncertainties and highlight where mitigations must be taken. To do otherwise places reliance on hope over experience.
7/20/2011
Unassessed Uncertainty Involved For the Future of American Human Spaceflight.
NASA now likely has much more risk to the long term sustainability and safety of its premier human spaceflight program (ISS) than the normally risk averse Agency would desire or admit to. Flight crew access to and from the ISS for the next 5 or more years is dependent on a single flight system (Soyuz), until one of the commercially developed American low earth orbit transportation systems demonstrates sufficient reliability to take on that responsibility. The widespread euphoria over the recent successes of SpaceX and the highly optimistic expectations for COTS operational readiness somewhat contrasts with the reality of the history of past rocket development programs. The cost, schedule, and program management difficulties and technical development issues associated with NASA’s own Constellation program and the James Webb Space Telescope program most recently have validated that history.
After the Columbia accident, NASA was extremely fortunate that the Soyuz system could sustain the ISS until the Orbiter returned to flight status. There is no planned backup available for the Soyuz after retirement of the Space Shuttle flight system for five or perhaps even several more years.
There is a non-zero probability that a random event or a scenario comprised of a series of seemingly unconnected events could prevent the Soyuz or a reliable COTS alternate capability from being available for transporting crews safely to and from the ISS for a significant length of time perhaps resulting in abandonment of the Station. Reliance on the Soyuz for this extended timeframe is very unpopular with many Americans of all stripes for a variety of reasons. If this capability becomes unreliable or perhaps utilized as some form of political leverage, NASA now has no other options available to sustain its planned ISS operations program for perhaps a long period of time.
We know that there is tangible uncertainty and risk involved in the current strategy to rely on a single human transportation system for long term access to the ISS that is provided by a foreign entity. What is the likelihood that a random event or a here-to-fore unconsidered scenario might occur that could cause a significant impact to the ISS Program? Second, are the impacts of the potential consequences acceptable to America; and what are the best mitigation strategies to address this risk? What does NASA and the Government need to do to characterize the risks involved to provide useable information for use by the decision makers who accountable for this policy, and to provide transparency and confidence to the affected stakeholders?
What are some of these non-zero probability events that could present major risk?
1. Spacecraft systems failures/deficiencies (hardware/software) or supply chain interruptions.
2. Ground support system failures, aging institutions and facilities.
3. Political Instability or irresolvable policy differences affecting the continuity of planned arrangements
4. Fire that disrupts and disables key manufacturing, utilities, or operations capabilities.
5. Terrorist attacks to key capabilities, physical, cyber, etc.
6. Major weather disaster that impacts key manufacturing or operations capabilities, Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant as an example. .
7. Human error that initiates a scenario comprised of events which renders the Soyuz system unavailable for a lengthy period.
8. The uncertainty in performance of the potential COTS providers being able to provide a safe and reliable human transportation system to support the ISS in a reasonable time frame. In comparison, the development of the Orion led by NASA, also a capsule flight system with significant legacy utilization, was taking NASA greater than 10 years to realize a LEO capability to support the ISS.
This is a partial listing of potential causes and is not intended to be a complete list of scenarios that might result in the Soyuz and/or the COTS capability being unavailable for human access to the ISS.
What are the potential adverse consequences that might result from failure of the Soyuz system to be able to fly crews to and from the ISS for an extended period of time?
1. Loss of life.
2. Major asset loss. The U.S. has approximately $100 B invested in the ISS that is at risk for loss. Other nations have varying significant investments as well.
3. Loss of prestige for America due to failure to be able to sustain the ISS.
4. Uncontrolled decay and entry of the ISS
5. Acceleration of the wide spread perceived decline and/or actual decline of America’s current world leadership in human spaceflight technology and operations.
6. Loss of confidence in NASA, its leadership; and perhaps future support for initiating new future programs.
7. Loss of momentum in the ISS based science programs including loss of the accrued sunk investments in dollars and human capital.
8. Accelerated erosion of the skills and capabilities required to move the human exploration of space forward.
9. Loss of interest in space science and space exploration by the young people who are contemplating a science or aerospace engineering career resulting in further decline in America’s capability to initiate and carry out challenging spaceflight and technological programs. (This is already happening – just talk to some science and engineering majors now in college.)
Again, a partial listing.
Who are the stakeholders and policy makers that are potentially impacted by this undefined risk level?
1. The American taxpayers who are committed to American leadership in space and depend on NASA leadership and the Government to make reliable decisions for the betterment of the Nation.
2. The governing Administration.
3. The Congress who appear to be legislating the way forward for human spaceflight by their actions (e.g. Orion & SLS).
4. NASA leadership and its people who have committed their lives and careers to the continued development of human spaceflight..
5. NASA’s Contractors that make up much of the skilled experience base necessary to conceive, develop, manufacture, and operate the systems that are required for space exploration..
6. The Commercial Space Transportation investors.
Again, a partial listing, but the stakeholder community is much larger than NASA alone.
How should NASA proceed?
NASA should follow its own policy and procedural directives imposed on its own programs and conduct a detailed risk assessment of its plans in order to understand the risk level associated with the decision to rely solely on the Soyuz flight system for human access and return to the ISS for the next five + years. Since the risks involved are so significant to the future of America, the risk analysis and assessment should be accomplished by an organization independent of the NASA decision makers who are involved in the planning and implementation of current the policy of long term reliance on a flight system provided by a foreign nation to sustain the ISS. In order to avoid a conflict of interest, the use of NASA’s current contractors should not be utilized for such an assessment. Perhaps the risk assessment should be overseen and peer reviewed by an organization like the National Science Foundation or a select blue ribbon committee.
Based on the history of spaceflight systems development including NASA’s own programs performance in meeting planned operational schedules; it would be prudent to look at the risk interval for a longer period than just the currently planned 5 years, perhaps 10 years. While there seems to be anticipation that the COTS providers will find a way to circumvent the technical, cost and schedule problems that NASA and its contractors have faced for recent development programs that hoped for result is yet to be demonstrated. NASA’s heritage for its development programs and projects has relied on a benevolent Congress to supplement its budget when the inevitable cost increases come along as a result of development problems. Receiving increased appropriations to solve project development issues looks increasingly unlikely based on what is happening to the Webb Telescope Project and the National budget deficit. The potential COTS providers will similarly face a reluctant group of investors if their costs and problems escalate.
How could this risk mitigated?
The most obvious way to control the risks associated with current NASA planning is to retain the Space Shuttle capability in some form until there is demonstrated American provided capability to transport humans and cargo to and from the ISS. Retention of the Space Shuttle would provide all of the capability to protect the integrity of the Space Station and its science programs. The issue as always is cost; however, the cost model could be significantly moderated by commercializing the Space Shuttle Program. Estimates are that a commercial venture could operate the Space Shuttle for a couple flights per year at perhaps 1/3 of its current cost. The critical skills are still available at this time. This would enable America to continue the same capability to support the ISS, and even conduct other priority earth orbit missions such as American controlled human access to space to support a critical unforeseen national security need.
By establishing commercialized Space Shuttle operations, NASA can take a known and reliable flight system and use it to develop and transition the governance and oversight processes needed for the COTS era operations. In addition to mitigating the risks and uncertainties associated with current NASA plans, America would retain its prominence as a leading participant in human space flight. A professionally done peer reviewed risk assessment will define the risks with their associated uncertainties and highlight where mitigations must be taken. To do otherwise places reliance on hope over experience.
7/20/2011
Space news 4/30/12
JSC to support training, early flight ops for Boeing CST-100
Mark Carreau - Aviation Week
Boeing is turning to the Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) at NASA’s Johnson Space Center to support the training for and early flight operations of the company’s seven-person CST-100 entrant in NASA’s Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) initiative. Under the terms of a recent addition to their April 2011 CCDev-2 Space Act Agreement, Boeing intends to reach a larger pact with MOD later this year to provide launch-to-landing operations from the Mission Control Center (MCC) at Johnson for its first several flights. Boeing will reimburse NASA for the training and flight control services.
NASA Offers Expertise to Help Private Companies Build Rockets, Capsules
Denise Chow - Space.com
To help spur the development of a new fleet of commercial spacecraft to carry astronauts to and from the International Space Station, NASA has partnered with select private companies to foster the design and testing of the new vehicles. But the firms that received funding from NASA are not the only players in the game. NASA has also made deals with several other commercial companies under so-called unfunded Space Act Agreements. As part of these arrangements, the agency provides expertise that could help the companies develop their vehicles or launch systems, but does not give out any money.
Commercial space companies complete wind tunnel testing
Zach Rosenberg - FlightInternational.com
Two of the four teams given awards under the second phase of commercial crew development (CCDev II) have announced completing wind tunnel testing. Both teams will receive money for the tests under the milestone-based contracts. Blue Origin, one of the four awardees under NASA's commercial crew development (CCDev) programme, has announced completion of wind tunnel testing for its Space Vehicle scale model, a biconic capsule meant to transport crew to the International Space Station (ISS). The secretive company has not publically announced a timeline for construction of a full-scale, flight worthy vehicle.
Commercial Space Shuttle Replacements Complete Wind Tunnel Testing
Jason Paur - Wired.com
Two of the companies competing in NASA’s Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program have been busy in the wind tunnel. The overly secretive Blue Origin broke its silence this week with pictures of its unique capsule design and Sierra Nevada Corporation also released news of its Dream Chaser, completing scale model wind tunnel testing in Texas. Blue Origin, the space company started by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, is easily the quietest of the CCDev participants to provide astronaut transportation to the International Space Station and other low-earth-orbit missions. Little is known about what is going on at the Seattle-area company, with news only leaking out a few times a year. This week’s update provided a few more details about the innovative design the company is developing for its creatively named Space Vehicle.
ESA Favors Upgrading Orion over Building In-orbit Service Tug
Peter de Selding - Space News
The European Space Agency (ESA) is proposing that its 19 member governments finance development of a module to power NASA’s Orion crew transport vehicle and limit work on a competing proposal — a robotic vehicle that would perform multiple tasks in low Earth orbit — to initial studies. Development of this vehicle, whose chores would include removing dead satellites and rocket stages from orbit, would accelerate starting in 2015, according to the ESA proposal. The agency also is proposing to build and launch a lunar lander — a project long backed by Germany — that would launch in 2018 and would be followed, in 2022, by a mission to retrieve samples from the Moon’s south pole.
NASA begins new round of J-2X tests at Stennis Space Center
Mike Kelley - Huntsville Times
Southern Mississippi residents may awaken to the sound of rumbling from NASA's Stennis Space Center as it conducts a series of 16 tests on the J-2X, the next generation engine that will power the upper stage of NASA's new Space Launch (SLS). The tests begin this week and are expected to conclude by the end of this year. The series of tests builds on the results of last year's successful test firings in which the engine was tested at sea-level condition. This second test series will simulate high-altitude conditions where the atmospheric pressure is low, a more realistic test scenario.
A new era for the Space Coast
Tia Mitchell - Tampa Bay Times
Tourists began booking rooms weeks ago, making plans to see what is more than a routine rocket launch from Cape Canaveral. The next chapter in U.S. space exploration should begin in about a week, when California-based Space Exploration Technologies — SpaceX for short — expects to become the first private company to send a rocket to the International Space Station. Once it perfects its delivery system for cargo, the company will turn its focus to transporting U.S. astronauts. "We are right now standing at kind of the beginning of a new era in space travel," SpaceX spokeswoman Kirstin Brost Grantham said, "one in which the commercial companies work with NASA to advance space flight."
USA's local chief takes new KSC role
QinetiQ next job for Nappi
James Dean - Florida Today
Mark Nappi, who led United Space Alliance’s Florida operations during the shuttle program’s final years of flight, left the company Friday to join another Kennedy Space Center contractor. Nappi oversaw USA’s local operations beginning in 2008 when many were concerned about the ability of NASA and its lead shuttle contractor to safely fly out the final missions while simultaneously laying off thousands of contractors.
With shuttle’s end, space firms feeling their way
Stephen Singer - Associated Press
Less than a year after NASA ended its shuttle program, players in America’s space business are casting around for new direction. United Technologies Corp. is the most recent company to say it will sharply scale back its role in space exploration. It is selling Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, a manufacturer of rocket engines and liquid-propulsion systems it has owned for seven years. The sale of Rocketdyne and other businesses is intended to raise $3 billion to finance United Technologies’ purchase of aerospace parts maker Goodrich Corp. Greg Hayes, chief financial officer at United Technologies, rapped US space policy when he announced the decision in mid-March to sell Rocketdyne.
PWR Reducing Manufacturing Space by More than Half
Warren Ferster - Space News
With business volume down sharply following the retirement of NASA’s space shuttle fleet, liquid propulsion provider Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR) is reducing its production footprint by more than half, mostly in California, company officials said. Jim Maser, PWR’s president, said that by the end 2013, the company will have shrunk its factory floor space from 189,000 square meters to less than 90,000 square meters. PWR has sprawling manufacturing and test facilities in Canoga Park, Calif., where it is headquartered, but Maser said operations in West Palm Beach, Fla., also are being consolidated.
NASA's New Spaceship Arrives for Tests
Irene Klotz - Discovery News
It's not going into space, but the mock-up Orion capsule, which arrived at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida this week, at least is a sign of a post-shuttle life. The vehicle comes to Florida from manufacturer Lockheed Martin's plant in Colorado to serve as a test vehicle for the ground processing systems under development for NASA's next human space program, which is designed to fly astronauts to the moon, asteroids, Mars and other destinations in deep space, beyond the space station's 240-mile-high orbit. NASA's first test flight of an Orion capsule is scheduled for 2014. (NO FURTHER TEXT)
Orion Work Helps Lockheed Martin Space Systems Post Quarterly Gains
Peter de Selding - Space News
Lockheed Martin Space Systems on April 26 reported modest increases in revenue and profit for the three months ending March 25, saying sales from work on NASA’s Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle more than overcame the drop in space shuttle revenue after the vehicle’s retirement. Operating profit rose to 12 percent of revenue as the company successfully eliminated risks from unnamed government satellite programs despite slightly lower equity earnings from two 50 percent-owned affiliates, United Launch Alliance and United Space Alliance. These joint ventures with Chicago-based Boeing are focused, respectively, on providing launch services to the U.S. government and providing ground operations that have been reduced with the shuttle’s retirement.
With Shuttle Enterprise in NYC, Endeavour Is Next to Move
Mike Wall - Space.com
Two space shuttles down, two to go. The prototype shuttle Enterprise arrived in New York City Friday morning (April 27) atop a specially modified 747 jet, on its way to Manhattan's Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum. Enterprise's flight came just a week after the shuttle fleet leader, Discovery, was delivered to the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C. NASA's two other remaining orbiters — Endeavour and Atlantis — are also headed to museum retirement homes soon. Endeavour, the agency's youngest shuttle, is the next to move.
Past-To-Future: NASA's Crawler-Transporters
Jason Rhian - AmericaSpace.org
They move across the landscape at the staggering speed of one mile an hour. They have to – the cargo they carry is delicate and precious. They are NASA’s monstrous crawler-transporters. Since the time when the U.S. sent astronauts to the Moon, these ponderous vehicles have carried their own payloads out to Launch Complex 39. These iconic vehicles are now undergoing renovations to prepare them to once again send humans beyond the confines of their homeworld. The fact that these mammoths have been in service so long – is causing some issues during their refurbishment. Some companies that manufactured parts for the crawler-transporters no longer exist making the task of preparing them for future missions more challenging. The transporter’s massive treads are one of the vehicle’s elements that are currently experiencing these issues.
City plants tree started in space
Stephanie Loder - Vineland Daily Journal (NJ)
Officials marked Arbor Day here by planting a tree grown from space-traveling seeds that flew 1.5 million miles aboard the space shuttle Columbia with an astronaut from New Jersey. The city was one of 35 in the state randomly selected from about 600 entries during the 86th annual New Jersey Shade Tree Federation Conference last year. The nonprofit federation assists individuals and agencies entrusted with the selection, planting and care of trees. Astronaut Gregory Linteris, a Bergen County native, took eastern white pine tree seeds with him in 1997 on Columbia’s 22nd voyage. The mission lasted three days, 23 hours, 13 minutes and 38 seconds, according to NASA.
Asteroid mining no flight of fancy
John Kelly - Florida Today (Viewpoint)
Make fun all you want, but exploring asteroids is a space endeavor worth the effort. You can make a scientific case and a business case for sending probes and people to space rocks. There are tons of reasons to go, not the least of which is the bold move by some of the biggest names in private space and the wealthiest venture capitalists in the world to go after asteroid exploration rather than waiting for NASA. There are two commonly cited reasons for looking more into them: Asteroids are packed with valuable resources, and they're packed with the potential to wipe out life as we know it on this planet. The first is the one that’s attracting more and more attention.
__________
Mark Carreau - Aviation Week
Boeing is turning to the Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) at NASA’s Johnson Space Center to support the training for and early flight operations of the company’s seven-person CST-100 entrant in NASA’s Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) initiative. Under the terms of a recent addition to their April 2011 CCDev-2 Space Act Agreement, Boeing intends to reach a larger pact with MOD later this year to provide launch-to-landing operations from the Mission Control Center (MCC) at Johnson for its first several flights. Boeing will reimburse NASA for the training and flight control services.
NASA Offers Expertise to Help Private Companies Build Rockets, Capsules
Denise Chow - Space.com
To help spur the development of a new fleet of commercial spacecraft to carry astronauts to and from the International Space Station, NASA has partnered with select private companies to foster the design and testing of the new vehicles. But the firms that received funding from NASA are not the only players in the game. NASA has also made deals with several other commercial companies under so-called unfunded Space Act Agreements. As part of these arrangements, the agency provides expertise that could help the companies develop their vehicles or launch systems, but does not give out any money.
Commercial space companies complete wind tunnel testing
Zach Rosenberg - FlightInternational.com
Two of the four teams given awards under the second phase of commercial crew development (CCDev II) have announced completing wind tunnel testing. Both teams will receive money for the tests under the milestone-based contracts. Blue Origin, one of the four awardees under NASA's commercial crew development (CCDev) programme, has announced completion of wind tunnel testing for its Space Vehicle scale model, a biconic capsule meant to transport crew to the International Space Station (ISS). The secretive company has not publically announced a timeline for construction of a full-scale, flight worthy vehicle.
Commercial Space Shuttle Replacements Complete Wind Tunnel Testing
Jason Paur - Wired.com
Two of the companies competing in NASA’s Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program have been busy in the wind tunnel. The overly secretive Blue Origin broke its silence this week with pictures of its unique capsule design and Sierra Nevada Corporation also released news of its Dream Chaser, completing scale model wind tunnel testing in Texas. Blue Origin, the space company started by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, is easily the quietest of the CCDev participants to provide astronaut transportation to the International Space Station and other low-earth-orbit missions. Little is known about what is going on at the Seattle-area company, with news only leaking out a few times a year. This week’s update provided a few more details about the innovative design the company is developing for its creatively named Space Vehicle.
ESA Favors Upgrading Orion over Building In-orbit Service Tug
Peter de Selding - Space News
The European Space Agency (ESA) is proposing that its 19 member governments finance development of a module to power NASA’s Orion crew transport vehicle and limit work on a competing proposal — a robotic vehicle that would perform multiple tasks in low Earth orbit — to initial studies. Development of this vehicle, whose chores would include removing dead satellites and rocket stages from orbit, would accelerate starting in 2015, according to the ESA proposal. The agency also is proposing to build and launch a lunar lander — a project long backed by Germany — that would launch in 2018 and would be followed, in 2022, by a mission to retrieve samples from the Moon’s south pole.
NASA begins new round of J-2X tests at Stennis Space Center
Mike Kelley - Huntsville Times
Southern Mississippi residents may awaken to the sound of rumbling from NASA's Stennis Space Center as it conducts a series of 16 tests on the J-2X, the next generation engine that will power the upper stage of NASA's new Space Launch (SLS). The tests begin this week and are expected to conclude by the end of this year. The series of tests builds on the results of last year's successful test firings in which the engine was tested at sea-level condition. This second test series will simulate high-altitude conditions where the atmospheric pressure is low, a more realistic test scenario.
A new era for the Space Coast
Tia Mitchell - Tampa Bay Times
Tourists began booking rooms weeks ago, making plans to see what is more than a routine rocket launch from Cape Canaveral. The next chapter in U.S. space exploration should begin in about a week, when California-based Space Exploration Technologies — SpaceX for short — expects to become the first private company to send a rocket to the International Space Station. Once it perfects its delivery system for cargo, the company will turn its focus to transporting U.S. astronauts. "We are right now standing at kind of the beginning of a new era in space travel," SpaceX spokeswoman Kirstin Brost Grantham said, "one in which the commercial companies work with NASA to advance space flight."
USA's local chief takes new KSC role
QinetiQ next job for Nappi
James Dean - Florida Today
Mark Nappi, who led United Space Alliance’s Florida operations during the shuttle program’s final years of flight, left the company Friday to join another Kennedy Space Center contractor. Nappi oversaw USA’s local operations beginning in 2008 when many were concerned about the ability of NASA and its lead shuttle contractor to safely fly out the final missions while simultaneously laying off thousands of contractors.
With shuttle’s end, space firms feeling their way
Stephen Singer - Associated Press
Less than a year after NASA ended its shuttle program, players in America’s space business are casting around for new direction. United Technologies Corp. is the most recent company to say it will sharply scale back its role in space exploration. It is selling Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, a manufacturer of rocket engines and liquid-propulsion systems it has owned for seven years. The sale of Rocketdyne and other businesses is intended to raise $3 billion to finance United Technologies’ purchase of aerospace parts maker Goodrich Corp. Greg Hayes, chief financial officer at United Technologies, rapped US space policy when he announced the decision in mid-March to sell Rocketdyne.
PWR Reducing Manufacturing Space by More than Half
Warren Ferster - Space News
With business volume down sharply following the retirement of NASA’s space shuttle fleet, liquid propulsion provider Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR) is reducing its production footprint by more than half, mostly in California, company officials said. Jim Maser, PWR’s president, said that by the end 2013, the company will have shrunk its factory floor space from 189,000 square meters to less than 90,000 square meters. PWR has sprawling manufacturing and test facilities in Canoga Park, Calif., where it is headquartered, but Maser said operations in West Palm Beach, Fla., also are being consolidated.
NASA's New Spaceship Arrives for Tests
Irene Klotz - Discovery News
It's not going into space, but the mock-up Orion capsule, which arrived at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida this week, at least is a sign of a post-shuttle life. The vehicle comes to Florida from manufacturer Lockheed Martin's plant in Colorado to serve as a test vehicle for the ground processing systems under development for NASA's next human space program, which is designed to fly astronauts to the moon, asteroids, Mars and other destinations in deep space, beyond the space station's 240-mile-high orbit. NASA's first test flight of an Orion capsule is scheduled for 2014. (NO FURTHER TEXT)
Orion Work Helps Lockheed Martin Space Systems Post Quarterly Gains
Peter de Selding - Space News
Lockheed Martin Space Systems on April 26 reported modest increases in revenue and profit for the three months ending March 25, saying sales from work on NASA’s Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle more than overcame the drop in space shuttle revenue after the vehicle’s retirement. Operating profit rose to 12 percent of revenue as the company successfully eliminated risks from unnamed government satellite programs despite slightly lower equity earnings from two 50 percent-owned affiliates, United Launch Alliance and United Space Alliance. These joint ventures with Chicago-based Boeing are focused, respectively, on providing launch services to the U.S. government and providing ground operations that have been reduced with the shuttle’s retirement.
With Shuttle Enterprise in NYC, Endeavour Is Next to Move
Mike Wall - Space.com
Two space shuttles down, two to go. The prototype shuttle Enterprise arrived in New York City Friday morning (April 27) atop a specially modified 747 jet, on its way to Manhattan's Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum. Enterprise's flight came just a week after the shuttle fleet leader, Discovery, was delivered to the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C. NASA's two other remaining orbiters — Endeavour and Atlantis — are also headed to museum retirement homes soon. Endeavour, the agency's youngest shuttle, is the next to move.
Past-To-Future: NASA's Crawler-Transporters
Jason Rhian - AmericaSpace.org
They move across the landscape at the staggering speed of one mile an hour. They have to – the cargo they carry is delicate and precious. They are NASA’s monstrous crawler-transporters. Since the time when the U.S. sent astronauts to the Moon, these ponderous vehicles have carried their own payloads out to Launch Complex 39. These iconic vehicles are now undergoing renovations to prepare them to once again send humans beyond the confines of their homeworld. The fact that these mammoths have been in service so long – is causing some issues during their refurbishment. Some companies that manufactured parts for the crawler-transporters no longer exist making the task of preparing them for future missions more challenging. The transporter’s massive treads are one of the vehicle’s elements that are currently experiencing these issues.
City plants tree started in space
Stephanie Loder - Vineland Daily Journal (NJ)
Officials marked Arbor Day here by planting a tree grown from space-traveling seeds that flew 1.5 million miles aboard the space shuttle Columbia with an astronaut from New Jersey. The city was one of 35 in the state randomly selected from about 600 entries during the 86th annual New Jersey Shade Tree Federation Conference last year. The nonprofit federation assists individuals and agencies entrusted with the selection, planting and care of trees. Astronaut Gregory Linteris, a Bergen County native, took eastern white pine tree seeds with him in 1997 on Columbia’s 22nd voyage. The mission lasted three days, 23 hours, 13 minutes and 38 seconds, according to NASA.
Asteroid mining no flight of fancy
John Kelly - Florida Today (Viewpoint)
Make fun all you want, but exploring asteroids is a space endeavor worth the effort. You can make a scientific case and a business case for sending probes and people to space rocks. There are tons of reasons to go, not the least of which is the bold move by some of the biggest names in private space and the wealthiest venture capitalists in the world to go after asteroid exploration rather than waiting for NASA. There are two commonly cited reasons for looking more into them: Asteroids are packed with valuable resources, and they're packed with the potential to wipe out life as we know it on this planet. The first is the one that’s attracting more and more attention.
__________
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Glittering Jewels of Messier 9 provided by Hubble
Considering the great results from Hubble, we threw away our capability to service it--the Shuttle.
Climate change alarmist Recants: " I made a mistake"
British environmental expert James Lovelock now admits he was an “alarmist” regarding global warming — and says Al Gore was too.
Lovelock previously worked for NASA and became a guru to the environmental movement with his “Gaia” theory of the Earth as a single organism. In 2007 Time magazine named Lovelock one of its “Heroes of the Environment,” and he won the Geological Society of London’s Wollaston Medal in 2006 for his writings on the Gaia theory.
That year he wrote an article in a British newspaper asserting that “before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.”
But in an interview this week with MSNBC, Lovelock said a book he is now writing will reflect his new opinion that global warming has not occurred as he had expected.
“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing,” he said. “We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books — mine included — because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened.
“The climate is doing its usual tricks. There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now.
“The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time. [The temperature] has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising. Carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that.
“We will have global warming, but it’s been deferred a bit.”
MSNBC reported: “He pointed to Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ and Tim Flannery’s ‘The Weather Makers’ as other examples of ‘alarmist’ forecasts of the future.”
Lovelock also declared in the interview that “as an independent and a loner,” he did not mind saying, “All right, I made a mistake,” adding that university or government scientists might fear that admission of such a mistake could jeopardize their funding.
In response to Lovelock’s interview, the Climate Depot website stated: “MSNBC, perhaps the most unlikely of news sources, reports on what may be seen as the official end of the manmade global warming fear movement.”
Sent from my iPad
Lovelock previously worked for NASA and became a guru to the environmental movement with his “Gaia” theory of the Earth as a single organism. In 2007 Time magazine named Lovelock one of its “Heroes of the Environment,” and he won the Geological Society of London’s Wollaston Medal in 2006 for his writings on the Gaia theory.
That year he wrote an article in a British newspaper asserting that “before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.”
But in an interview this week with MSNBC, Lovelock said a book he is now writing will reflect his new opinion that global warming has not occurred as he had expected.
“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing,” he said. “We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books — mine included — because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened.
“The climate is doing its usual tricks. There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now.
“The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time. [The temperature] has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising. Carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that.
“We will have global warming, but it’s been deferred a bit.”
MSNBC reported: “He pointed to Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ and Tim Flannery’s ‘The Weather Makers’ as other examples of ‘alarmist’ forecasts of the future.”
Lovelock also declared in the interview that “as an independent and a loner,” he did not mind saying, “All right, I made a mistake,” adding that university or government scientists might fear that admission of such a mistake could jeopardize their funding.
In response to Lovelock’s interview, the Climate Depot website stated: “MSNBC, perhaps the most unlikely of news sources, reports on what may be seen as the official end of the manmade global warming fear movement.”
Sent from my iPad
“For a country that has invested so much for so long to achieve a leadership position in space exploration and exploitation, this condition is viewed by many as lamentably embarrassing and unacceptable,” the 81-year-old Apollo 11 commander said.
The first man to walk on the moon had some strong words for the U.S. space program on Thursday, telling the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology that the retirement of the space shuttle has left it in an “embarrassing” state, according to AFP reports.
“We will have no American access to, and return from, low Earth orbit and the International Space Station for an unpredictable length of time in the future,” former astronaut Neil Armstrong, one of four space experts testifying before the committee, said, according to a September 22 report by Kerry Sheridan of the French news agency.
“For a country that has invested so much for so long to achieve a leadership position in space exploration and exploitation, this condition is viewed by many as lamentably embarrassing and unacceptable,” the 81-year-old Apollo 11 commander said.
“The past year has been frustrating to NASA observers,” Armstrong added, according to a separate report by Stewart Powell of the Houston Chronicle. “The leadership enthusiastically assured the American people that the agency was embarking on an exciting new age of discovery in the cosmos… But the realities of the termination of the shuttle program, the cancellation of existing rocket launcher and spacecraft programs, the layoffs of thousands of aerospace workers, and the outlook for American space activity throughout the next decade were difficult to reconcile with the agency assertions.”
Armstrong and fellow astronaut Eugene Cernan, who in 1972 became the last American to walk on the moon, “criticized the pace, scope and resources devoted to manned space exploration” during testimony before the House committee, Powell said. The pair made similar comments when speaking to the panel in May of last year, the Chronicle reporter added.
“Get the shuttle out of the garage down there at Kennedy (Space Center), crank up the motors and put it back in service,” Cernan, the Apollo 17 flight commander, said, according to the AFP. “You want a launch vehicle today that will service the ISS? We’ve got it sitting down there. So before we put it in a museum, let’s make use of it. It’s in the prime of its life, how could we just put it away?”
“We are at a crossroads,” he added, according to Powell. “If we abdicate our leadership in space today, not only is human spaceflight and space exploration at risk, but I believe the future of this country and thus the future of our children and grandchildren as well… Now is the time to be bold, innovative and wise in how we invest in the future of America. Now is the time to re-establish our nation’s commitment to excellence. It is not about space — it’s about the country.”
With President Barack Obama’s cancellation of the Constellation program, which would have returned humans to the moon, and the retirement of the 30-some year old space shuttle program in July, the U.S. is currently without domestic means to send astronauts into space.
Currently, NASA relies upon Russian owned and operated Soyuz capsules to carry equipment, supplies, and astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), at a cost of $50 to $60 million per person, according to Sheridan. In the meantime, they are investing in private-sector development, which could lead to a new commercial space vehicle within the next four years, according to reports.
Cernan said that the cancelled Constellation mission had been replaced by a “mission to nowhere” and argued that the modern U.S. space program was on a “path of decay.”
“We are seeing the book close on five decades of accomplishment as the leader in human space exploration,” the AFP article quoted him as saying. “As unimaginable as it seems, we have now come full circle and ceded our leadership role in space back to the same country — albeit by a different name — that spurred our challenge five decades ago.”
In a statement released following Armstrong’s and Cernan’s testimony, NASA spokesman David Weaver said that the administration respected their contributions to the program, and added, “Just as their ambitious missions captivated the nation’s attention nearly a half-century ago, today’s American space explorers are leading the way to even farther destinations that will one day allow the first astronauts to set foot on Mars.”
“It is a bold vision laid out by President Obama and Congress, in bi-partisan fashion, to pioneer new frontiers, push the bounds of exploration, and test the limits of innovation and technological development,” Weaver added, according to the Chronicle. “It is a plan that will ensure America’s continued leadership in space with science missions that will rewrite textbooks, invests in innovative technologies that will put Americans to work in new jobs, and develops new space vehicles to explore farther into the universe than any nation has ever gone before.”
—
On the Net:
NASA
International Space Station (ISS)
Neil Armstrong
Eugene Cernan
Edit
US Space program embarrassing says Armstrong/Cernan
The firm man to walk on the moon had some strong words for the U.S. space program on Thursday, telling the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology that the retirement of the space shuttle has left it in an “embarrassing” state, according to AFP reports.
“We will have no American access to, and return from, low Earth orbit and the International Space Station for an unpredictable length of time in the future,” former astronaut Neil Armstrong, one of four space experts testifying before the committee, said, according to a September 22 report by Kerry Sheridan of the French news agency.
“For a country that has invested so much for so long to achieve a leadership position in space exploration and exploitation, this condition is viewed by many as lamentably embarrassing and unacceptable,” the 81-year-old Apollo 11 commander said.
“The past year has been frustrating to NASA observers,” Armstrong added, according to a separate report by Stewart Powell of the Houston Chronicle. “The leadership enthusiastically assured the American people that the agency was embarking on an exciting new age of discovery in the cosmos… But the realities of the termination of the shuttle program, the cancellation of existing rocket launcher and spacecraft programs, the layoffs of thousands of aerospace workers, and the outlook for American space activity throughout the next decade were difficult to reconcile with the agency assertions.”
Armstrong and fellow astronaut Eugene Cernan, who in 1972 became the last American to walk on the moon, “criticized the pace, scope and resources devoted to manned space exploration” during testimony before the House committee, Powell said. The pair made similar comments when speaking to the panel in May of last year, the Chronicle reporter added.
“Get the shuttle out of the garage down there at Kennedy (Space Center), crank up the motors and put it back in service,” Cernan, the Apollo 17 flight commander, said, according to the AFP. “You want a launch vehicle today that will service the ISS? We’ve got it sitting down there. So before we put it in a museum, let’s make use of it. It’s in the prime of its life, how could we just put it away?”
“We are at a crossroads,” he added, according to Powell. “If we abdicate our leadership in space today, not only is human spaceflight and space exploration at risk, but I believe the future of this country and thus the future of our children and grandchildren as well… Now is the time to be bold, innovative and wise in how we invest in the future of America. Now is the time to re-establish our nation’s commitment to excellence. It is not about space — it’s about the country.”
With President Barack Obama’s cancellation of the Constellation program, which would have returned humans to the moon, and the retirement of the 30-some year old space shuttle program in July, the U.S. is currently without domestic means to send astronauts into space.
Currently, NASA relies upon Russian owned and operated Soyuz capsules to carry equipment, supplies, and astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), at a cost of $50 to $60 million per person, according to Sheridan. In the meantime, they are investing in private-sector development, which could lead to a new commercial space vehicle within the next four years, according to reports.
Cernan said that the cancelled Constellation mission had been replaced by a “mission to nowhere” and argued that the modern U.S. space program was on a “path of decay.”
“We are seeing the book close on five decades of accomplishment as the leader in human space exploration,” the AFP article quoted him as saying. “As unimaginable as it seems, we have now come full circle and ceded our leadership role in space back to the same country — albeit by a different name — that spurred our challenge five decades ago.”
In a statement released following Armstrong’s and Cernan’s testimony, NASA spokesman David Weaver said that the administration respected their contributions to the program, and added, “Just as their ambitious missions captivated the nation’s attention nearly a half-century ago, today’s American space explorers are leading the way to even farther destinations that will one day allow the first astronauts to set foot on Mars.”
“It is a bold vision laid out by President Obama and Congress, in bi-partisan fashion, to pioneer new frontiers, push the bounds of exploration, and test the limits of innovation and technological development,” Weaver added, according to the Chronicle. “It is a plan that will ensure America’s continued leadership in space with science missions that will rewrite textbooks, invests in innovative technologies that will put Americans to work in new jobs, and develops new space vehicles to explore farther into the universe than any nation has ever gone before.”
—
On the Net:
NASA
International Space Station (ISS)
Neil Armstrong
Eugene Cernan
Edit
Why are we throwing the USA space program away? Along with it mars, ISS , Hubble .
One thing I do not understand, why doesn't Mitt speak out to Restart the shuttle. The shuttle can handle all our needs to go to mars, get to ISS, service Hubble, and it is paid for, facilities exist and are paid for. We had it and now we are throwing it away. As Krantz said, do you expect to develop a major system without some loss? The shuttle was killed based on safety issues, most were corrected. As Aldrin says we should use & evolve the shuttle. Read his paper and The Case to Save the Shuttle by Al Richardson on nova and all papers on website keeptheshuttleflying.com. Putting the shuttle in a museum is a real waste of hundreds of billions which is compounded by spending money on design which are not well thought out such as cots and SLS/Orion. Mitt you can fix this. Please discuss with the America space leaders such as Crippen, Glenn, Kraft, Krantz, Aldrin, plus leaders of Lockheed, Boeing, Rockwell, and other large American Aerospace companies. The American space program is in your hands.
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 28, 2012, at 2:34 PM, "Abe Adams" wrote:
Friend,
After three and a half years of Barack Obama's unfulfilled promises, Americans still carry one fundamental burden. And Mitt couldn't have said it better:
"It's still about the economy... and we're not stupid."
Donate $12 to receive an "It's Still About the Economy" Bumper Sticker and tell the world you've had enough of the Obama economy.
With your help, we can make sure we get it right in 2012.
So donate $12 and get your bumper sticker today:
https://www.mittromney.com/donate/economy-bumper-sticker
Thanks,
Abe Adams
Deputy Digital Director
http://twitter.com/AbeAdams
This email was sent to: bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com
This email was sent by:
Romney for President, Inc.
PO Box 149756, Boston, MA 02114-9756 USA
We respect your right to privacy - view our policy
Manage Subscriptions | Update Profile | One-Click Unsubscribe | View email as a webpage
Paid for by Romney for President, Inc.
www.MittRomney.com
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 28, 2012, at 2:34 PM, "Abe Adams"
Friend,
After three and a half years of Barack Obama's unfulfilled promises, Americans still carry one fundamental burden. And Mitt couldn't have said it better:
"It's still about the economy... and we're not stupid."
Donate $12 to receive an "It's Still About the Economy" Bumper Sticker and tell the world you've had enough of the Obama economy.
With your help, we can make sure we get it right in 2012.
So donate $12 and get your bumper sticker today:
https://www.mittromney.com/donate/economy-bumper-sticker
Thanks,
Abe Adams
Deputy Digital Director
http://twitter.com/AbeAdams
This email was sent to: bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com
This email was sent by:
Romney for President, Inc.
PO Box 149756, Boston, MA 02114-9756 USA
We respect your right to privacy - view our policy
Manage Subscriptions | Update Profile | One-Click Unsubscribe | View email as a webpage
Paid for by Romney for President, Inc.
www.MittRomney.com
FORCE the DC IDIOTS to Restart Shuttle & not Waste the Shuttle's Capabilities--WE Must go to Mars & Save Hubble
MARS Aerobraker Vehicle --with Shuttle To MARS Faster/Cheaper Than other Approaches
The next President and his NASA administrator should also consider a change in the next goal of the U.S. manned space program as well as a change in the hardware to achieve that goal. Scientific interest now centers on Mars rather than on the moon. Four of the five elements of a manned mission to Mars are already in place:
1) The space shuttle (the launch vehicle)
2) The International Space Station, or ISS (the assembly and launch platform for the Trans Mars vehicle)
3) Extensive experience with on-orbit assembly
4) Numerous unmanned precursor missions to Mars
The only missing element is the Mars Aerobraker Vehicle (MAV) to transport the expected three astronauts to and from Mars. Conceptual designs already exist for this vehicle. At an estimated departure weight of 400,000 pounds, a dozen shuttle flights could deliver all needed modules of the MAV to the ISS over a period of years at a cost of perhaps $10 billion. This would leave most of $200 billion (the amount currently contemplated for lunar exploration) to design, build, and assemble the MAV. This redirection would focus the attention and resources of NASA and the aerospace community on the MAV, and would sharpen skills valuable to the nation for further exploration of our solar system. With the manned space program thus redirected, the goal of landing humans on Mars within the next decade appears to be feasible.
My e-mail address is alrichardson2@aol.com
On behalf of the members of SAT, thank you for your interest.
The next President and his NASA administrator should also consider a change in the next goal of the U.S. manned space program as well as a change in the hardware to achieve that goal. Scientific interest now centers on Mars rather than on the moon. Four of the five elements of a manned mission to Mars are already in place:
1) The space shuttle (the launch vehicle)
2) The International Space Station, or ISS (the assembly and launch platform for the Trans Mars vehicle)
3) Extensive experience with on-orbit assembly
4) Numerous unmanned precursor missions to Mars
The only missing element is the Mars Aerobraker Vehicle (MAV) to transport the expected three astronauts to and from Mars. Conceptual designs already exist for this vehicle. At an estimated departure weight of 400,000 pounds, a dozen shuttle flights could deliver all needed modules of the MAV to the ISS over a period of years at a cost of perhaps $10 billion. This would leave most of $200 billion (the amount currently contemplated for lunar exploration) to design, build, and assemble the MAV. This redirection would focus the attention and resources of NASA and the aerospace community on the MAV, and would sharpen skills valuable to the nation for further exploration of our solar system. With the manned space program thus redirected, the goal of landing humans on Mars within the next decade appears to be feasible.
My e-mail address is alrichardson2@aol.com
On behalf of the members of SAT, thank you for your interest.
Get to MARS FASTER --KEEP SHUTTLE FLYING--A MUST READ
MARS Aerobraker Vehicle --with Shuttle To MARS Faster/Cheaper Than other Approaches
The next President and his NASA administrator should also consider a change in the next goal of the U.S. manned space program as well as a change in the hardware to achieve that goal. Scientific interest now centers on Mars rather than on the moon. Four of the five elements of a manned mission to Mars are already in place:
1) The space shuttle (the launch vehicle)
2) The International Space Station, or ISS (the assembly and launch platform for the Trans Mars vehicle)
3) Extensive experience with on-orbit assembly
4) Numerous unmanned precursor missions to Mars
The only missing element is the Mars Aerobraker Vehicle (MAV) to transport the expected three astronauts to and from Mars. Conceptual designs already exist for this vehicle. At an estimated departure weight of 400,000 pounds, a dozen shuttle flights could deliver all needed modules of the MAV to the ISS over a period of years at a cost of perhaps $10 billion. This would leave most of $200 billion (the amount currently contemplated for lunar exploration) to design, build, and assemble the MAV. This redirection would focus the attention and resources of NASA and the aerospace community on the MAV, and would sharpen skills valuable to the nation for further exploration of our solar system. With the manned space program thus redirected, the goal of landing humans on Mars within the next decade appears to be feasible.
My e-mail address is alrichardson2@aol.com
On behalf of the members of SAT, thank you for your interest.
The next President and his NASA administrator should also consider a change in the next goal of the U.S. manned space program as well as a change in the hardware to achieve that goal. Scientific interest now centers on Mars rather than on the moon. Four of the five elements of a manned mission to Mars are already in place:
1) The space shuttle (the launch vehicle)
2) The International Space Station, or ISS (the assembly and launch platform for the Trans Mars vehicle)
3) Extensive experience with on-orbit assembly
4) Numerous unmanned precursor missions to Mars
The only missing element is the Mars Aerobraker Vehicle (MAV) to transport the expected three astronauts to and from Mars. Conceptual designs already exist for this vehicle. At an estimated departure weight of 400,000 pounds, a dozen shuttle flights could deliver all needed modules of the MAV to the ISS over a period of years at a cost of perhaps $10 billion. This would leave most of $200 billion (the amount currently contemplated for lunar exploration) to design, build, and assemble the MAV. This redirection would focus the attention and resources of NASA and the aerospace community on the MAV, and would sharpen skills valuable to the nation for further exploration of our solar system. With the manned space program thus redirected, the goal of landing humans on Mars within the next decade appears to be feasible.
My e-mail address is alrichardson2@aol.com
On behalf of the members of SAT, thank you for your interest.
Update on Chinese Aircraft maintenance--not like it appeared
Claim: Photographs show a damaged jet engine repaired with seatbelts during a refueling stop.
REAL PHOTOGRAPHS;
INACCURATE DESCRIPTION
Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006]
UNSCHEDULED STOP
UNSCHEDULED REFUELING: Choose your airlines carefully. Incredible! You might not want to fly "AIR CHINA"
Perhaps a Junk might be a safer mode of travel.
This is an excellent example of why any prudent traveler should generally stick with North American carriers, Western European carriers and a few other carriers like Quantas, Air New Zealand, and Singapore.
A pilot for a Chinese carrier requested permission and landed at FRA (Frankfurt, Germany) for an unscheduled refueling stop. The reason became soon apparent to the ground crew: The Number 3 engine had been shut down because of excessive vibration, and because it didn't look so good. It had apparently been no problem for the tough guys back in China: they took some sturdy straps and wrapped them around several of the fan blades and the structures behind, thus stopping any unwanted windmilling (engine spinning by itself due to airflow passing thru the blades during flight) and associated uncomfortable vibration caused by the suboptimal fan.
Note that the straps are seatbelts....how resourceful!
After making the "repairs", off they went into the wild blue yonder with another revenue-making flight on only three engines! With the increased fuel consumption, they got a bit low on fuel, and just set it down at the closest airport for a quick refill. That's when the problems started: The Germans, who are kind of picky about this stuff, inspected the malfunctioning engine and immediately grounded the aircraft.
(Besides the seatbelts, notice the appalling condition of the fan blades.)
The airline operator had to send money to get the first engine replaced (it took about 10 days). The repair contractor decided to do some impromptu inspection work on the other engines, none of which looked all that great either.
The result: a total of 3 engines were eventually changed on this plane before it was permitted to fly again.
LOOK AT THIS ENGINE.....The aircrew obviously had more balls than brains. Hard to believe anyone would take off with an engine in this condition.
Origins: The photographs displayed above have been circulated since at least as far back as 2001, in versions with text attributing them to Air China as well as a number of different airlines, in each case accompanied by the claim that a ground crew had
hastily (and dangerously) repaired damaged jet engines on one of the airline's planes by using seat belts to hold them together, and the plane had taken off on a commercial flight in that state. While the pictures do show an engine that has been removed from an aircraft, when and where they were taken (and whether they have any connection to Air China or any other airline) is unknown. Nonetheless, they do not document a case of substandard repairs or an occurrence anything like the circumstances described in the accompanying text. The pictures included in the e-mail show engine fan blades that have suffered foreign object damage (FOD) such as encountering a bird strike or a hail storm, and the "seatbelts" are tie-down straps used to secure the engine to a shipping stand as it is removed from the aircraft for inspection, repair, or replacement.
Last updated: 13 January 2009
Urban Legends Reference Pages © 1995-2012 by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson.
This material may not be reproduced without permission.
snopes and the snopes.com logo are registered service marks of snopes.com.
REAL PHOTOGRAPHS;
INACCURATE DESCRIPTION
Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006]
UNSCHEDULED STOP
UNSCHEDULED REFUELING: Choose your airlines carefully. Incredible! You might not want to fly "AIR CHINA"
Perhaps a Junk might be a safer mode of travel.
This is an excellent example of why any prudent traveler should generally stick with North American carriers, Western European carriers and a few other carriers like Quantas, Air New Zealand, and Singapore.
A pilot for a Chinese carrier requested permission and landed at FRA (Frankfurt, Germany) for an unscheduled refueling stop. The reason became soon apparent to the ground crew: The Number 3 engine had been shut down because of excessive vibration, and because it didn't look so good. It had apparently been no problem for the tough guys back in China: they took some sturdy straps and wrapped them around several of the fan blades and the structures behind, thus stopping any unwanted windmilling (engine spinning by itself due to airflow passing thru the blades during flight) and associated uncomfortable vibration caused by the suboptimal fan.
Note that the straps are seatbelts....how resourceful!
After making the "repairs", off they went into the wild blue yonder with another revenue-making flight on only three engines! With the increased fuel consumption, they got a bit low on fuel, and just set it down at the closest airport for a quick refill. That's when the problems started: The Germans, who are kind of picky about this stuff, inspected the malfunctioning engine and immediately grounded the aircraft.
(Besides the seatbelts, notice the appalling condition of the fan blades.)
The airline operator had to send money to get the first engine replaced (it took about 10 days). The repair contractor decided to do some impromptu inspection work on the other engines, none of which looked all that great either.
The result: a total of 3 engines were eventually changed on this plane before it was permitted to fly again.
LOOK AT THIS ENGINE.....The aircrew obviously had more balls than brains. Hard to believe anyone would take off with an engine in this condition.
Origins: The photographs displayed above have been circulated since at least as far back as 2001, in versions with text attributing them to Air China as well as a number of different airlines, in each case accompanied by the claim that a ground crew had
hastily (and dangerously) repaired damaged jet engines on one of the airline's planes by using seat belts to hold them together, and the plane had taken off on a commercial flight in that state. While the pictures do show an engine that has been removed from an aircraft, when and where they were taken (and whether they have any connection to Air China or any other airline) is unknown. Nonetheless, they do not document a case of substandard repairs or an occurrence anything like the circumstances described in the accompanying text. The pictures included in the e-mail show engine fan blades that have suffered foreign object damage (FOD) such as encountering a bird strike or a hail storm, and the "seatbelts" are tie-down straps used to secure the engine to a shipping stand as it is removed from the aircraft for inspection, repair, or replacement.
Last updated: 13 January 2009
Urban Legends Reference Pages © 1995-2012 by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson.
This material may not be reproduced without permission.
snopes and the snopes.com logo are registered service marks of snopes.com.
MARS Aerobraker Vehicle --with Shuttle To MARS Faster/Cheaper Than other Approaches
The next President and his NASA administrator should also consider a change in the next goal of the U.S. manned space program as well as a change in the hardware to achieve that goal. Scientific interest now centers on Mars rather than on the moon. Four of the five elements of a manned mission to Mars are already in place:
1) The space shuttle (the launch vehicle)
2) The International Space Station, or ISS (the assembly and launch platform for the Trans Mars vehicle)
3) Extensive experience with on-orbit assembly
4) Numerous unmanned precursor missions to Mars
The only missing element is the Mars Aerobraker Vehicle (MAV) to transport the expected three astronauts to and from Mars. Conceptual designs already exist for this vehicle. At an estimated departure weight of 400,000 pounds, a dozen shuttle flights could deliver all needed modules of the MAV to the ISS over a period of years at a cost of perhaps $10 billion. This would leave most of $200 billion (the amount currently contemplated for lunar exploration) to design, build, and assemble the MAV. This redirection would focus the attention and resources of NASA and the aerospace community on the MAV, and would sharpen skills valuable to the nation for further exploration of our solar system. With the manned space program thus redirected, the goal of landing humans on Mars within the next decade appears to be feasible.
My e-mail address is alrichardson2@aol.com
On behalf of the members of SAT, thank you for your interest.
1) The space shuttle (the launch vehicle)
2) The International Space Station, or ISS (the assembly and launch platform for the Trans Mars vehicle)
3) Extensive experience with on-orbit assembly
4) Numerous unmanned precursor missions to Mars
The only missing element is the Mars Aerobraker Vehicle (MAV) to transport the expected three astronauts to and from Mars. Conceptual designs already exist for this vehicle. At an estimated departure weight of 400,000 pounds, a dozen shuttle flights could deliver all needed modules of the MAV to the ISS over a period of years at a cost of perhaps $10 billion. This would leave most of $200 billion (the amount currently contemplated for lunar exploration) to design, build, and assemble the MAV. This redirection would focus the attention and resources of NASA and the aerospace community on the MAV, and would sharpen skills valuable to the nation for further exploration of our solar system. With the manned space program thus redirected, the goal of landing humans on Mars within the next decade appears to be feasible.
My e-mail address is alrichardson2@aol.com
On behalf of the members of SAT, thank you for your interest.
Space news 4/28/12
Soyuz TMA-22 lands in Kazakhstan
William Harwood - CBS News
Strapped into a cramped Soyuz ferry craft, outgoing space station commander Daniel Burbank and two Russian cosmonauts, Anton Shkaplerov and Anatoly Ivanishin, undocked from the International Space Station early Friday and plunged back to Earth to close out a five-and-a-half-month stay in space. Descending through a clear blue sky under a large red-and-white parachute, the Soyuz TMA-22 descent module landed near Arkalyk, Kazakhstan, at 7:45 a.m. EDT (GMT-4; 2:45 p.m. local time) after a 56-minute fall from orbit.
Soyuz craft carrying three-man crew lands safely
Peter Leonard - Associated Press
A Soyuz space capsule carrying two Russians and an American touched down safely Friday on the sweeping steppes of central Kazakhstan, ending the men's 163-day stay on the International Space Station. Anton Shkaplerov, Anatoly Ivanishin and NASA's Daniel Burbank returned to Earth as the Russian-made module landed on schedule at a remote, dusty site north of the town of Arkalyk, then rolled on its side. NASA television broadcast vivid images of the capsule carried by a parachute swaying slightly as it floated downward in the clear skies while six all-terrain vehicles approached the landing spot. Eight search-and-rescue helicopters circled the landing site to ensure a speedy recovery.
Astronaut, cosmonauts safely return to Earth
Todd Halvorson - Florida Today
An American astronaut and two Russian cosmonauts are back on Earth today after a high-flying departure from the International Space Station. Cosmonaut Anton Shkaplerov backed a Russian Soyuz spacecraft away from the outpost about 4:18 a.m. EDT. Flying along with him: U.S. astronaut Dan Burbank and cosmonaut Anatoly Ivanishin. The spacecraft trailed the station by about 12 miles when Shkaplerov fired the ship’s braking rockets at 6:49 a.m. The four-minute firing slowed the ship by 257 miles per hour, or enough to drop the vehicle out of orbit. The three crewmates landed on the central steppes of Kazakhstan north of Arkalyk at 7:45 a.m. EDT.
Soyuz Space Capsule Lands Safely with U.S.-Russian Crew
Mike Wall - Space.com
A Russian space capsule touched down on the steppes of Kazakhstan in Central Asia Friday, safely returning a joint U.S.-Russian crew to Earth after months aboard the International Space Station. The Soyuz TMA-22 spacecraft landed at 7:45 a.m. EDT (1145 GMT), less than four hours after undocking from the space station. Riding home aboard the space capsule were NASA astronaut Dan Burbank and Russian cosmonauts Anton Shkaplerov and Anatoly Ivanishin, who were reintroduced to the strong tug of Earth's gravity after spending 165 days, or nearly 5 1/2 months, in orbit.
Russia brings three spacemen safely back to Earth
Agence France Presse
Two Russian spacemen and a NASA astronaut touched down safely on Friday in the Kazakh steppe aboard a Soyuz capsule after a stay of almost six months aboard the International Space Station. Seventeen Russian helicopters and jets patrolled the clear blue skies as the silver metal capsule parachuted gracefully through the air before bumping into a field of straw and early spring grass and rolling over gently onto its side. Live NASA TV footage showed a team of medics swarm the capsule and pull out a smiling Anton Shkaplerov -- a Russian awarded the honour of breathing the fresh air first because he occupied the capsule's middle seat.
Dragon bolted to Falcon rocket ahead of engine firing
Stephen Clark - SpaceflightNow.com
Engineers connected SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft to its Falcon 9 launcher Thursday, setting the stage for a busy weekend of preparations for a brief firing of the rocket's nine main engines on the launch pad Monday. The Falcon 9 rocket's Merlin 1C first stage engines will fire for about two seconds in a standard pre-launch test of the fully assembled rocket before liftoff. The hotfire is scheduled for the conclusion of a practice countdown at 3 p.m. EDT (1900 GMT) on launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla. SpaceX plans to webcast the event starting at 2:30 p.m. EDT.
Space Shuttle Arrives in New York
Patrick McGeehan - New York Times
Enterprise, the prototype for the space shuttles, flew over the New York City area, riding atop a specially equipped 747 jet, before landing at Kennedy International Airport at 11:22 a.m. And, perhaps in a scenario familiar to many air travel passengers arriving in New York, the shuttle took its time meandering over the area before landing. Crowds of people lined various vantage points across the area to get a glimpse of the shuttle, which flew up from Dulles Airport near Washington on Friday morning.
Welcome, Enterprise! Shuttle catches ride to New York aboard jumbo jet
Scores turn out to watch museum piece arrive in city
Charles Beacham & Larry Mcshane - New York Daily News
The space shuttle Enterprise went airborne one last time Friday before returning to Earth — and a new life as a museum piece. The shuttle, piggybacking atop a modified jumbo jet, made a rare Friday fly-by along the Hudson River past thousands of gawkers and space geeks on rooftops, piers and boats. “It was a once in a lifetime opportunity, you know?” said Richard Grizzell Jr. of Brooklyn, who watched from the shuttle’s future home — The Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum.
Space shuttle arrives in NYC; crowds watch in awe
Meghan Barr - Associated Press
In a city understandably wary of low-flying aircraft, New Yorkers and tourists alike watched with joy and excitement Friday as space shuttle Enterprise sailed over the skyline on its final flight before it becomes a museum piece. Ten years after 9/11, people gathered on rooftops and the banks of the Hudson River to marvel at the sight of the spacecraft riding piggyback on a modified jumbo jet that flew over the Statue of Liberty and past the skyscrapers along Manhattan's West Side.
Shuttle Enterprise arrives in NYC
Associated Press
An unusual flying object came to New York from Washington on Friday — the space shuttle Enterprise. Enterprise zoomed around the city, riding piggyback on top of a modified jumbo jet. Its trip included flyovers over parts of the city and landmarks including the Statue of Liberty and the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum on Manhattan’s west side, before landing at its temporary home, Kennedy Airport. At the Kennedy tower, air traffic controllers had been busy fielding inquiries from circling pilots, who were informed they’d be delayed from landing because of “special activity.” Some wondered how much longer they would be in the air. Others asked where they should look to get the best view. When the big event occurred, the controller said to the shuttle craft: “Welcome to New York, and thanks for the show.”
Piggybacked On A 747, NASA Shuttle Enterprise Arrives In City
NY1 TV News
The Space Shuttle Enterprise has reached its final frontier in the Big Apple. NASA's prototype orbiter touched down Friday at John F. Kennedy Airport following a flight from Dulles International Airport outside Washington, D.C., on its way to its future home at the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum on Manhattan's West Side. The Enterprise got a piggyback ride to the city atop NASA's specially-designed 747. After taking off, the shuttle flew north to New York, then made trips up and down the Hudson River, passing the Statue of Liberty and the Verrazano-Narrows bridge before making its final approach into JFK around 11:30 a.m.
Space shuttle Enterprise lands in the Big Apple
Justin Ray - SpaceflightNow.com
The trailblazing prototype for the space shuttle fleet, the Enterprise, was hauled today atop a modified Boeing 747 to New York City where it will become a new exhibit aboard the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum, a vintage aircraft carrier turned museum anchored in the Hudson River. With her aerodynamic tailcone still attached, Enterprise will be set within a protective bubble on the aircraft carrier's flight deck starting this summer, a unique artifact of the space program to display in the nation's largest city.
Space Shuttle Enterprise's Historic Flyover Wows New Yorkers
Denise Chow - Space.com
Hundreds of space shuttle fans braved the chilly temperatures and biting wind Friday morning along the Hudson River here to catch a glimpse of NASA's prototype orbiter as it flew past the museum it will soon call home. Enterprise, the agency's original test shuttle, flew to New York today from Dulles International Airport in Washington, D.C., atop a modified Boeing 747 jet. Before landing at New York's John F. Kennedy (JFK) International Airport, the piggybacking duo flew over the Statue of Liberty, then followed the Hudson River past the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum, where it will soon be placed on public display. The shuttle flyover attracted fans of all ages, who gathered around the Intrepid museum and Pier 86 on Manhattan's west side to witness the historic event.
When the Space Shuttle Buzzed New York City: How Did They Do That?
Jeffrey Kluger - Time
Looking up is something New Yorkers rarely do. There's no better way to be thought a rube — or, worse, a tourist — than for someone to think you're craning your neck at the skyscrapers. But Friday morning New Yorkers made an exception, as the shuttle Enterprise buzzed the city on the back of a retrofitted 747, en route to permanent display at the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum. The residents of Washington, DC got a similar sky-show last week, when the shuttle Discovery came to town to settle into its new home at a Smithsonian annex in Chantilly, Va. In November, the shuttle Endeavour will arrive in Los Angeles the same sensational way, destined for the California Science Center. The twinned ships make a wonderfully cool sight, but they inevitably raise two questions: Just how do you pull a piggyback flight like that off, and isn't there a better way to do things? The answers are: carefully and no.
Leonard Nimoy to Shuttle Enterprise: 'Live Long and Prosper' in NYC
Clara Moskowitz - Space.com
Science fiction met fact with a "Star Trek" twist here Friday when the space shuttle Enterprise, named in honor of the starship from the beloved television show, came face-to-face with Spock — Leonard Nimoy, that is. The "Star Trek" actor was on hand at John F. Kennedy International Airport when the shuttle Enterprise flew in atop a jumbo jet Friday morning. Enterprise was delivered from Washington, D.C. to the Big Apple, where it will eventually go on display at Manhattan's Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum. "This is a reunion for me," Nimoy said during a ceremony after Enterprise's touchdown. "Thirty-five years ago, I met the Enterprise for the first time."
How Nerds Named NASA's Space Shuttle Enterprise
Life's Little Mysteries
The naming of the space shuttle Enterprise involves one of the funniest presidential orders of all time. Enterprise, the first space shuttle orbiter, was originally to be named Constitution, in honor of the Constitution of the United States. However, "Star Trek" fans started a write-in campaign urging the White House to instead select the name of the starship that James T. Kirk captained in the original TV series. Although President Gerald Ford did not mention the campaign, he directed NASA officials to change the name, saying he was "partial to the name" Enterprise. In recognition of their namesake, "Star Trek" creator Gene Roddenberry and most of the principal cast of the original series were on hand when the shuttle Enterprise was rolled out of Rockwell's Air Force Plant 42, Site 1, Palmdale, Calif., assembly facility on Sept. 17, 1976.
Space Shuttle Enterprise's new keeper: Q&A with Intrepid museum curator
Clara Moskowitz - Space.com
New York City's Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum is gearing up to welcome the space shuttle Enterprise to its permanent collection this summer. Enterprise, a prototype shuttle that never made it to space, but paved the way for the rest of the fleet, was gifted by NASA to Intrepid when it assigned its three retired shuttles to museums last year. The orbiter is due to fly from its old home in Virginia (it had been on display at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum's Udvar-Hazy Center) to New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport Friday. SPACE.com caught up with the new keeper of Enterprise - the Intrepid's Eric Boehm, curator of aviation - to talk about the museum's plans for its new addition.
Discovery flies for last time, ends chapter in aerospace history
Alexander Riedel - Air Force News Service
After almost 27 years and 39 flights in Earth's orbit, the space shuttle Discovery arrived at Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C., April 17 on its way to its final resting place. The last moments in the air for Discovery began at Kennedy Space Center, Fla., mounted on top of a modified Boeing 747. The retired spacecraft will take final residence in a hangar at the Smithsonian's Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center April 19, in Chantilly, Va. At its new home, Discovery will stand on the same spot the shuttle Enterprise occupied since the center's opening in 2003, according to Dr. Valerie Neal, the curator at the National Air and Space Museum. Unlike Discovery, Enterprise was only a test vehicle and was never used for space flight, making it a less significant artifact to experts. Therefore, it was moved to the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum in New York.
House Appropriations Committee approves CJS bill
SpacePolitics.com
During a two-hour hearing on Thursday, the House Appropriations Committee debates and then approved by voice vote the Commerce, Justice, and Science (CJS) appropriations bill. The committee made no amendments to the bill that affects NASA, which receives a little less than $17.6 billion in the bill. In his statement introducing the bill, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) got a little emotional when discussing NASA. “Last week, when the shuttle came over, I bet almost everyone in this room went outside to look at it. That was almost a sign that American people are thirsting for this program to do something great,” he said. The funding for NASA’s exploration programs provided in the bill, along with the “decadal study” of NASA’s human spaceflight plans that is separately getting started, will help “get back to the days whereby people got excited about the program as they did in the days of Alan Shepard and John Glenn.”
Clinton: Branson my last chance to go into space
Associated Press
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's childhood aspiration of becoming an astronaut was dashed by NASA, but she may not be giving up on the dream of reaching the heavens. Clinton welcomed the British billionaire Richard Branson to a State Department conference on global investment on Thursday by saying she was "excited he's here because many, many, many years ago, I wanted to be an astronaut, and I think he may be my last chance to live out that particular dream." She often tells the story about how NASA rejected her inquiry on joining the space program in the early 1960s because she was a girl. Branson's Virgin Galactic Venture will send paying tourists into space. (NO FURTHER TEXT)
Ohio natives John Glenn, Toni Morrison to receive Presidential Medal of Freedom
Sabrina Eaton - Cleveland Plain Dealer
Former Ohio Sen. and astronaut John Glenn will be among 13 people who will receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom, President Barack Obama announced Thursday. Novelist Toni Morrison, a Lorain native, also will receive the medal, the nation's highest civilian honor. Obama will present the awards at the White House in late spring. Other recipients will include former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, songwriter and musician Bob Dylan, former U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, the late Girl Scout founder Juliette Gordon Low and NCAA women's basketball coach Pat Summitt.
__________
William Harwood - CBS News
Strapped into a cramped Soyuz ferry craft, outgoing space station commander Daniel Burbank and two Russian cosmonauts, Anton Shkaplerov and Anatoly Ivanishin, undocked from the International Space Station early Friday and plunged back to Earth to close out a five-and-a-half-month stay in space. Descending through a clear blue sky under a large red-and-white parachute, the Soyuz TMA-22 descent module landed near Arkalyk, Kazakhstan, at 7:45 a.m. EDT (GMT-4; 2:45 p.m. local time) after a 56-minute fall from orbit.
Soyuz craft carrying three-man crew lands safely
Peter Leonard - Associated Press
A Soyuz space capsule carrying two Russians and an American touched down safely Friday on the sweeping steppes of central Kazakhstan, ending the men's 163-day stay on the International Space Station. Anton Shkaplerov, Anatoly Ivanishin and NASA's Daniel Burbank returned to Earth as the Russian-made module landed on schedule at a remote, dusty site north of the town of Arkalyk, then rolled on its side. NASA television broadcast vivid images of the capsule carried by a parachute swaying slightly as it floated downward in the clear skies while six all-terrain vehicles approached the landing spot. Eight search-and-rescue helicopters circled the landing site to ensure a speedy recovery.
Astronaut, cosmonauts safely return to Earth
Todd Halvorson - Florida Today
An American astronaut and two Russian cosmonauts are back on Earth today after a high-flying departure from the International Space Station. Cosmonaut Anton Shkaplerov backed a Russian Soyuz spacecraft away from the outpost about 4:18 a.m. EDT. Flying along with him: U.S. astronaut Dan Burbank and cosmonaut Anatoly Ivanishin. The spacecraft trailed the station by about 12 miles when Shkaplerov fired the ship’s braking rockets at 6:49 a.m. The four-minute firing slowed the ship by 257 miles per hour, or enough to drop the vehicle out of orbit. The three crewmates landed on the central steppes of Kazakhstan north of Arkalyk at 7:45 a.m. EDT.
Soyuz Space Capsule Lands Safely with U.S.-Russian Crew
Mike Wall - Space.com
A Russian space capsule touched down on the steppes of Kazakhstan in Central Asia Friday, safely returning a joint U.S.-Russian crew to Earth after months aboard the International Space Station. The Soyuz TMA-22 spacecraft landed at 7:45 a.m. EDT (1145 GMT), less than four hours after undocking from the space station. Riding home aboard the space capsule were NASA astronaut Dan Burbank and Russian cosmonauts Anton Shkaplerov and Anatoly Ivanishin, who were reintroduced to the strong tug of Earth's gravity after spending 165 days, or nearly 5 1/2 months, in orbit.
Russia brings three spacemen safely back to Earth
Agence France Presse
Two Russian spacemen and a NASA astronaut touched down safely on Friday in the Kazakh steppe aboard a Soyuz capsule after a stay of almost six months aboard the International Space Station. Seventeen Russian helicopters and jets patrolled the clear blue skies as the silver metal capsule parachuted gracefully through the air before bumping into a field of straw and early spring grass and rolling over gently onto its side. Live NASA TV footage showed a team of medics swarm the capsule and pull out a smiling Anton Shkaplerov -- a Russian awarded the honour of breathing the fresh air first because he occupied the capsule's middle seat.
Dragon bolted to Falcon rocket ahead of engine firing
Stephen Clark - SpaceflightNow.com
Engineers connected SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft to its Falcon 9 launcher Thursday, setting the stage for a busy weekend of preparations for a brief firing of the rocket's nine main engines on the launch pad Monday. The Falcon 9 rocket's Merlin 1C first stage engines will fire for about two seconds in a standard pre-launch test of the fully assembled rocket before liftoff. The hotfire is scheduled for the conclusion of a practice countdown at 3 p.m. EDT (1900 GMT) on launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla. SpaceX plans to webcast the event starting at 2:30 p.m. EDT.
Space Shuttle Arrives in New York
Patrick McGeehan - New York Times
Enterprise, the prototype for the space shuttles, flew over the New York City area, riding atop a specially equipped 747 jet, before landing at Kennedy International Airport at 11:22 a.m. And, perhaps in a scenario familiar to many air travel passengers arriving in New York, the shuttle took its time meandering over the area before landing. Crowds of people lined various vantage points across the area to get a glimpse of the shuttle, which flew up from Dulles Airport near Washington on Friday morning.
Welcome, Enterprise! Shuttle catches ride to New York aboard jumbo jet
Scores turn out to watch museum piece arrive in city
Charles Beacham & Larry Mcshane - New York Daily News
The space shuttle Enterprise went airborne one last time Friday before returning to Earth — and a new life as a museum piece. The shuttle, piggybacking atop a modified jumbo jet, made a rare Friday fly-by along the Hudson River past thousands of gawkers and space geeks on rooftops, piers and boats. “It was a once in a lifetime opportunity, you know?” said Richard Grizzell Jr. of Brooklyn, who watched from the shuttle’s future home — The Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum.
Space shuttle arrives in NYC; crowds watch in awe
Meghan Barr - Associated Press
In a city understandably wary of low-flying aircraft, New Yorkers and tourists alike watched with joy and excitement Friday as space shuttle Enterprise sailed over the skyline on its final flight before it becomes a museum piece. Ten years after 9/11, people gathered on rooftops and the banks of the Hudson River to marvel at the sight of the spacecraft riding piggyback on a modified jumbo jet that flew over the Statue of Liberty and past the skyscrapers along Manhattan's West Side.
Shuttle Enterprise arrives in NYC
Associated Press
An unusual flying object came to New York from Washington on Friday — the space shuttle Enterprise. Enterprise zoomed around the city, riding piggyback on top of a modified jumbo jet. Its trip included flyovers over parts of the city and landmarks including the Statue of Liberty and the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum on Manhattan’s west side, before landing at its temporary home, Kennedy Airport. At the Kennedy tower, air traffic controllers had been busy fielding inquiries from circling pilots, who were informed they’d be delayed from landing because of “special activity.” Some wondered how much longer they would be in the air. Others asked where they should look to get the best view. When the big event occurred, the controller said to the shuttle craft: “Welcome to New York, and thanks for the show.”
Piggybacked On A 747, NASA Shuttle Enterprise Arrives In City
NY1 TV News
The Space Shuttle Enterprise has reached its final frontier in the Big Apple. NASA's prototype orbiter touched down Friday at John F. Kennedy Airport following a flight from Dulles International Airport outside Washington, D.C., on its way to its future home at the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum on Manhattan's West Side. The Enterprise got a piggyback ride to the city atop NASA's specially-designed 747. After taking off, the shuttle flew north to New York, then made trips up and down the Hudson River, passing the Statue of Liberty and the Verrazano-Narrows bridge before making its final approach into JFK around 11:30 a.m.
Space shuttle Enterprise lands in the Big Apple
Justin Ray - SpaceflightNow.com
The trailblazing prototype for the space shuttle fleet, the Enterprise, was hauled today atop a modified Boeing 747 to New York City where it will become a new exhibit aboard the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum, a vintage aircraft carrier turned museum anchored in the Hudson River. With her aerodynamic tailcone still attached, Enterprise will be set within a protective bubble on the aircraft carrier's flight deck starting this summer, a unique artifact of the space program to display in the nation's largest city.
Space Shuttle Enterprise's Historic Flyover Wows New Yorkers
Denise Chow - Space.com
Hundreds of space shuttle fans braved the chilly temperatures and biting wind Friday morning along the Hudson River here to catch a glimpse of NASA's prototype orbiter as it flew past the museum it will soon call home. Enterprise, the agency's original test shuttle, flew to New York today from Dulles International Airport in Washington, D.C., atop a modified Boeing 747 jet. Before landing at New York's John F. Kennedy (JFK) International Airport, the piggybacking duo flew over the Statue of Liberty, then followed the Hudson River past the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum, where it will soon be placed on public display. The shuttle flyover attracted fans of all ages, who gathered around the Intrepid museum and Pier 86 on Manhattan's west side to witness the historic event.
When the Space Shuttle Buzzed New York City: How Did They Do That?
Jeffrey Kluger - Time
Looking up is something New Yorkers rarely do. There's no better way to be thought a rube — or, worse, a tourist — than for someone to think you're craning your neck at the skyscrapers. But Friday morning New Yorkers made an exception, as the shuttle Enterprise buzzed the city on the back of a retrofitted 747, en route to permanent display at the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum. The residents of Washington, DC got a similar sky-show last week, when the shuttle Discovery came to town to settle into its new home at a Smithsonian annex in Chantilly, Va. In November, the shuttle Endeavour will arrive in Los Angeles the same sensational way, destined for the California Science Center. The twinned ships make a wonderfully cool sight, but they inevitably raise two questions: Just how do you pull a piggyback flight like that off, and isn't there a better way to do things? The answers are: carefully and no.
Leonard Nimoy to Shuttle Enterprise: 'Live Long and Prosper' in NYC
Clara Moskowitz - Space.com
Science fiction met fact with a "Star Trek" twist here Friday when the space shuttle Enterprise, named in honor of the starship from the beloved television show, came face-to-face with Spock — Leonard Nimoy, that is. The "Star Trek" actor was on hand at John F. Kennedy International Airport when the shuttle Enterprise flew in atop a jumbo jet Friday morning. Enterprise was delivered from Washington, D.C. to the Big Apple, where it will eventually go on display at Manhattan's Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum. "This is a reunion for me," Nimoy said during a ceremony after Enterprise's touchdown. "Thirty-five years ago, I met the Enterprise for the first time."
How Nerds Named NASA's Space Shuttle Enterprise
Life's Little Mysteries
The naming of the space shuttle Enterprise involves one of the funniest presidential orders of all time. Enterprise, the first space shuttle orbiter, was originally to be named Constitution, in honor of the Constitution of the United States. However, "Star Trek" fans started a write-in campaign urging the White House to instead select the name of the starship that James T. Kirk captained in the original TV series. Although President Gerald Ford did not mention the campaign, he directed NASA officials to change the name, saying he was "partial to the name" Enterprise. In recognition of their namesake, "Star Trek" creator Gene Roddenberry and most of the principal cast of the original series were on hand when the shuttle Enterprise was rolled out of Rockwell's Air Force Plant 42, Site 1, Palmdale, Calif., assembly facility on Sept. 17, 1976.
Space Shuttle Enterprise's new keeper: Q&A with Intrepid museum curator
Clara Moskowitz - Space.com
New York City's Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum is gearing up to welcome the space shuttle Enterprise to its permanent collection this summer. Enterprise, a prototype shuttle that never made it to space, but paved the way for the rest of the fleet, was gifted by NASA to Intrepid when it assigned its three retired shuttles to museums last year. The orbiter is due to fly from its old home in Virginia (it had been on display at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum's Udvar-Hazy Center) to New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport Friday. SPACE.com caught up with the new keeper of Enterprise - the Intrepid's Eric Boehm, curator of aviation - to talk about the museum's plans for its new addition.
Discovery flies for last time, ends chapter in aerospace history
Alexander Riedel - Air Force News Service
After almost 27 years and 39 flights in Earth's orbit, the space shuttle Discovery arrived at Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C., April 17 on its way to its final resting place. The last moments in the air for Discovery began at Kennedy Space Center, Fla., mounted on top of a modified Boeing 747. The retired spacecraft will take final residence in a hangar at the Smithsonian's Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center April 19, in Chantilly, Va. At its new home, Discovery will stand on the same spot the shuttle Enterprise occupied since the center's opening in 2003, according to Dr. Valerie Neal, the curator at the National Air and Space Museum. Unlike Discovery, Enterprise was only a test vehicle and was never used for space flight, making it a less significant artifact to experts. Therefore, it was moved to the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum in New York.
House Appropriations Committee approves CJS bill
SpacePolitics.com
During a two-hour hearing on Thursday, the House Appropriations Committee debates and then approved by voice vote the Commerce, Justice, and Science (CJS) appropriations bill. The committee made no amendments to the bill that affects NASA, which receives a little less than $17.6 billion in the bill. In his statement introducing the bill, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) got a little emotional when discussing NASA. “Last week, when the shuttle came over, I bet almost everyone in this room went outside to look at it. That was almost a sign that American people are thirsting for this program to do something great,” he said. The funding for NASA’s exploration programs provided in the bill, along with the “decadal study” of NASA’s human spaceflight plans that is separately getting started, will help “get back to the days whereby people got excited about the program as they did in the days of Alan Shepard and John Glenn.”
Clinton: Branson my last chance to go into space
Associated Press
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's childhood aspiration of becoming an astronaut was dashed by NASA, but she may not be giving up on the dream of reaching the heavens. Clinton welcomed the British billionaire Richard Branson to a State Department conference on global investment on Thursday by saying she was "excited he's here because many, many, many years ago, I wanted to be an astronaut, and I think he may be my last chance to live out that particular dream." She often tells the story about how NASA rejected her inquiry on joining the space program in the early 1960s because she was a girl. Branson's Virgin Galactic Venture will send paying tourists into space. (NO FURTHER TEXT)
Ohio natives John Glenn, Toni Morrison to receive Presidential Medal of Freedom
Sabrina Eaton - Cleveland Plain Dealer
Former Ohio Sen. and astronaut John Glenn will be among 13 people who will receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom, President Barack Obama announced Thursday. Novelist Toni Morrison, a Lorain native, also will receive the medal, the nation's highest civilian honor. Obama will present the awards at the White House in late spring. Other recipients will include former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, songwriter and musician Bob Dylan, former U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, the late Girl Scout founder Juliette Gordon Low and NCAA women's basketball coach Pat Summitt.
__________
Friday, April 27, 2012
Companies in Calif. Have to provide green power by 2025
According to Michael Reagen, by 2025 companies will have to provide own green power.
Even illegal aliens are leaving Calif. Per Reagen
Credit: Gerri Willis Show
Even illegal aliens are leaving Calif. Per Reagen
Credit: Gerri Willis Show
USA owed 133 B from tarp funds
The Neverending Bailout: The U.S. Is Still Owed $133 Billion from Crisis Fund
By STEPHEN GANDEL | @stephengandel | January 30, 2012 |
+
MARK LENNIHAN / AP
File photo of the AIG office building in New York. AIG is among the companies that still owe the government billions in bailout funds.
If you thought the bank bailout that started in late 2008 was long gone, you would be far from wrong. The special investigator for TARP, the government fund that was created in the wake of the financial crisis, released a report last week that said the government is still owed $133 billion from the fund. In fact, there are 458 companies, most of which are small banks, that have yet to fully pay back the government. And it could be another 5 years before the bailout fund is fully wound down. Worse, we’re probably never going to get all of our money back. Best estimate for the final cost: $34 billion.
Still, TARP is not going to cost anywhere near as much as the headline grabbing $700 billion figure that was first associated with it. The reason is that while there was a public perception that money was given straight to bankers, only about one third of the money ever went to bailout financial institutions. The bulk of that money went to the nation’s largest institutions – Bank of America, Citibank, J.P. Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo and others. Those banks have all paid back the money the government gave them plus interest. And that briefly gave the impression that the government was going to make money on the bailout, but that no longer appears to be the case.
(MORE: Is the Fed Undermining the Recovery?)
Among the bailout deadbeats are AIG, General Motors and Chrylser. All three have paid back some of the money owed to the government. But the giant insurance company, the auto companies and their financing arms still owe the government nearly $90 billion collectively. Nearly $20 billion is still owed by community banks and thrifts. The report says there is no real plan on behalf of Treasury to help these still struggling banks repay the government.
The question, of course, is whether the bailout was worth it. The report doesn’t go into that. But if you really believe (as many have said) that the bailout averted a depression, then $34 billion, or about one fifth of one percent of the national GDP, seems like a pretty good deal. A depression could have erased 10% of our nation’s $15 trillion economy.
Still, there appears to be some massive failures in TARP. One of the reasons TARP didn’t cost more is because some of the programs never got off the ground. Perhaps the biggest tragedy of TARP was that the government could never figure out how to use the money to assist more struggling homeowners. Less than 10% of government’s $45 billion TARP-funded mortgage modification program ever got spent. Originally, it was estimated the program would help as many as 4 million homeowners facing foreclosure. So far, just over 750,000 homeowners have received modifications, and given how little money was spent, you can assume many of the most dire cases were rejected.
(MORE: Should Americans Care About Apple’s iPhone Factory Conditions?)
What’s more, in the end, the bank bailout appears to have done little to reign in excessive executive compensation. Early on, it looked like the government was going to pressure the big banks to dramatically rewrite their compensation schemes. There was hope that lower Wall Street pay might reset runaway CEO pay in general.
But, despite a par czar, that didn’t happen. According to the TARP inspector’s report, the government repeatedly pressured the pay czar Kenneth Feinberg to allow firms to pay more than the stated salary cap of $500,000. In all, 49 executives of bailed out firms received pay packages of $5 million or more between 2009 and 2011. A recent report from the Wall Street Journal found that even bankrupt companies appear to be continuing to hand out multi-million-dollar paydays to their CEOs.
Read other related stories about this:
The incredibly shrinking bill for TARP The Washington Post
Treasury Department approves huge paydays for execs at firms who received TARP bailout money Read more: The New York Post
By STEPHEN GANDEL | @stephengandel | January 30, 2012 |
+
MARK LENNIHAN / AP
File photo of the AIG office building in New York. AIG is among the companies that still owe the government billions in bailout funds.
If you thought the bank bailout that started in late 2008 was long gone, you would be far from wrong. The special investigator for TARP, the government fund that was created in the wake of the financial crisis, released a report last week that said the government is still owed $133 billion from the fund. In fact, there are 458 companies, most of which are small banks, that have yet to fully pay back the government. And it could be another 5 years before the bailout fund is fully wound down. Worse, we’re probably never going to get all of our money back. Best estimate for the final cost: $34 billion.
Still, TARP is not going to cost anywhere near as much as the headline grabbing $700 billion figure that was first associated with it. The reason is that while there was a public perception that money was given straight to bankers, only about one third of the money ever went to bailout financial institutions. The bulk of that money went to the nation’s largest institutions – Bank of America, Citibank, J.P. Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo and others. Those banks have all paid back the money the government gave them plus interest. And that briefly gave the impression that the government was going to make money on the bailout, but that no longer appears to be the case.
(MORE: Is the Fed Undermining the Recovery?)
Among the bailout deadbeats are AIG, General Motors and Chrylser. All three have paid back some of the money owed to the government. But the giant insurance company, the auto companies and their financing arms still owe the government nearly $90 billion collectively. Nearly $20 billion is still owed by community banks and thrifts. The report says there is no real plan on behalf of Treasury to help these still struggling banks repay the government.
The question, of course, is whether the bailout was worth it. The report doesn’t go into that. But if you really believe (as many have said) that the bailout averted a depression, then $34 billion, or about one fifth of one percent of the national GDP, seems like a pretty good deal. A depression could have erased 10% of our nation’s $15 trillion economy.
Still, there appears to be some massive failures in TARP. One of the reasons TARP didn’t cost more is because some of the programs never got off the ground. Perhaps the biggest tragedy of TARP was that the government could never figure out how to use the money to assist more struggling homeowners. Less than 10% of government’s $45 billion TARP-funded mortgage modification program ever got spent. Originally, it was estimated the program would help as many as 4 million homeowners facing foreclosure. So far, just over 750,000 homeowners have received modifications, and given how little money was spent, you can assume many of the most dire cases were rejected.
(MORE: Should Americans Care About Apple’s iPhone Factory Conditions?)
What’s more, in the end, the bank bailout appears to have done little to reign in excessive executive compensation. Early on, it looked like the government was going to pressure the big banks to dramatically rewrite their compensation schemes. There was hope that lower Wall Street pay might reset runaway CEO pay in general.
But, despite a par czar, that didn’t happen. According to the TARP inspector’s report, the government repeatedly pressured the pay czar Kenneth Feinberg to allow firms to pay more than the stated salary cap of $500,000. In all, 49 executives of bailed out firms received pay packages of $5 million or more between 2009 and 2011. A recent report from the Wall Street Journal found that even bankrupt companies appear to be continuing to hand out multi-million-dollar paydays to their CEOs.
Read other related stories about this:
The incredibly shrinking bill for TARP The Washington Post
Treasury Department approves huge paydays for execs at firms who received TARP bailout money Read more: The New York Post
Obama scandals, 4th estate would call for Bush Impeachment--no problem with bho
Managing partner, U.S. Government Relations Intl., LLC :
This burgeoning GSA scandal is certainly a major political embarrassment for President Obama, but the problem for the president is that these “embarrassments” throughout his Administration are beginning to pile up like cord wood. Fast and Furious, Solyndra (and a half a dozen other green energy misfires at DOE), Secret Service, GSA, etc. The list is now the size of my right arm.
This GSA sandal in particular smells on so many levels; lavish parties, rap videos on government time, federal employees goofing off, and now the potential of criminal referrals from the GSA Inspector General involving bribery and kickbacks. This is the culture that is born when leaders view taxpayer dollars as an endless stream of cash. We threw a party costing hundreds of thousands of dollars; that’s okay, tax the people more!
Any one of these scandals, especially Fast and Furious, would have made the main stream media calling for the resignation of the president and the individual cabinet member in the Bush Administration. With President Obama, however, these scandals, individually and collectively, are met with a giant yawn by the Fourth Estate. There is only one conclusion to make - the press loves the man!
Sent from my iPad
This burgeoning GSA scandal is certainly a major political embarrassment for President Obama, but the problem for the president is that these “embarrassments” throughout his Administration are beginning to pile up like cord wood. Fast and Furious, Solyndra (and a half a dozen other green energy misfires at DOE), Secret Service, GSA, etc. The list is now the size of my right arm.
This GSA sandal in particular smells on so many levels; lavish parties, rap videos on government time, federal employees goofing off, and now the potential of criminal referrals from the GSA Inspector General involving bribery and kickbacks. This is the culture that is born when leaders view taxpayer dollars as an endless stream of cash. We threw a party costing hundreds of thousands of dollars; that’s okay, tax the people more!
Any one of these scandals, especially Fast and Furious, would have made the main stream media calling for the resignation of the president and the individual cabinet member in the Bush Administration. With President Obama, however, these scandals, individually and collectively, are met with a giant yawn by the Fourth Estate. There is only one conclusion to make - the press loves the man!
Sent from my iPad
AF 1 getting Tired and so are pilots
Subject: Fwd: AIR FORCE ONE
"ORBIS NON SUFFICIT"
-----Original Message-----
Sent: 4/26/2012 1:22:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: FW: AIR FORCE ONE
Interesting read... Do the math = Big Bucks!
It's hard to believe that CBS actually said something that wasn't flattering to this so-called President!
Air Force One:
This is from Mark Knoller of CBS.
The pilots and crew of Air Force One are flying more hours than a rookie on a beer run.
They are tired of it too, and are adding more crew to Air Force-1, - I know this for a fact because I'm one of the instructors that trains the crews. Our company (Atlas Air) has had the Air Force-1 and E-4 contract for over three years and I've been doing it for about 18 months now.
Last year (2011) Obama flew in Air Force One 172 times, almost every other day. White House officials have been telling reporters in recent days that the Democrat doesn't intend to hang around the White House quite so much in 2012.They explain he wants to get out more around the country because, as everyone knows, that midterm election shellacking had nothing to do with his health care bill, over-spending or other policies, and everything to do with Obama's not adequately explaining himself to his countrymen and women.
And with only 288 days remaining in Obama's never ending presidential campaign, the incumbent's travel pace will not likely slacken. At an Air Force-estimated cost of $181,757 per flight HOUR (not to mention the additional travel costs of Marine One, Secret Service, logistics and local police overtime), that's a lot of frequent flier dollars going into Obama's carbon footprint.
$8 Million every time it lands & takes off.
We are privy to some of these numbers thanks to CBS' Mark Knoller, a bearded national treasure trove of presidential stats. According to Knoller's copious notes, during the last year, Obama made 65 domestic trips over 104 days, and six trips to eight countries over 22 days. Not counting six vacation trips over 32 days. He took 196 helicopter trips, signed 203 pieces of legislation and squeezed in 29 rounds of left-handed golf.
Obama last year gave 491 speeches, remarks or statements. That's more talking than goes on in some entire families, at least from fatherly mouths. In fact, even including the 24 days of 2010 that we never saw Obama in public, his speaking works out to about one official utterance every 11 waking hours. Aides indicate the "Real Good Talker" believes we need more.
Related: Obama spends nearly half his presidency outside Washington, plans to travel more.
Related: Vacationer-in-Chief Spends $1.75 Million to Visit Hawaiian Chums.
Obama has spent over $100 million taxpayer dollars flying around in Air Force One, and probably another $100 million on his entourage.
Obama is just another tin-pot dictator living lavishly at the expense of his subjects.
And we seniors have to "tighten our belts."
THANKS TO ALL WHO HELPED PUT THIS GREEDY WINDBAG IN OFFICE!
PLEASE BE MORE CAREFUL NEXT TIME!!
America's continued freedom depends upon your awareness !
--Forwarded Message Attachment--
From: wcbiss@roadrunner.com
To: AMAYERG@aol.com; chezdeull@juno.com; trebor35@roadrunner.com; cosmo1926@verizon.net; forbes9814@roadrunner.com; 1bigoaktree@gmail.com; GilbertScrivani@yahoo.com; hmsmarty@adelphia.net; judyf1234@verizon.net; ken369@live.com; msmayer73@hotmail.com; Trink1321@cs.com; R.Bache@me.com; rwm6744@frontiernet.net; sjbiss@me.com; stephenb1019@verizon.net; TracksideCJD@aol.com; ELassTic@yahoo.com
Subject: FW: AIR FORCE ONE
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 19:20:06 -0400
From: Anne DesPres [mailto:anneharold@roadrunner.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2012 2:44 PM
To: dor
Subject: Fw: AIR FORCE ONE
From: Pat Kilcoyne
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2012 5:49 AM
To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
Subject: Fw: AIR FORCE ONE
----- Original Message -----
From: DENNIS K BANTZ
To: william alder ; Judy Branham ; April Brenneman ; Dougrobertson517@hotmail.com ; dshaulis@comcast.net ; emcpaul@atlanticbb.net ; j_bantz@yahoo.com ; kevin ; Pat Kilcoyne ; Joyce Lashley ; Westley Marks ; pappylillard@gmail.com ; Becky Short ; spiritflow@hughes.net ; Ralph Wertz ; william ; Jim Williams ; Maryann Yutzy ; Bill & Philomena Zapf
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 9:27 PM
Subject: Fwd: AIR FORCE ONE
Interesting read... Do the math = Big Bucks!
It's hard to believe that CBS actually said something that wasn't flattering to this so-called President!
Air Force One:
This is from Mark Knoller of CBS.
The pilots and crew of Air Force One are flying more hours than a rookie on a beer run.
They are tired of it too, and are adding more crew to Air Force-1, - I know this for a fact because I'm one of the instructors that trains the crews. Our company (Atlas Air) has had the Air Force-1 and E-4 contract for over three years and I've been doing it for about 18 months now.
Last year (2011) Obama flew in Air Force One 172 times, almost every other day. White House officials have been telling reporters in recent days that the Democrat doesn't intend to hang around the White House quite so much in 2012.They explain he wants to get out more around the country because, as everyone knows, that midterm election shellacking had nothing to do with his health care bill, over-spending or other policies, and everything to do with Obama's not adequately explaining himself to his countrymen and women.
And with only 288 days remaining in Obama's never ending presidential campaign, the incumbent's travel pace will not likely slacken. At an Air Force-estimated cost of $181,757 per flight HOUR (not to mention the additional travel costs of Marine One, Secret Service, logistics and local police overtime), that's a lot of frequent flier dollars going into Obama's carbon footprint.
$8 Million every time it lands & takes off.
We are privy to some of these numbers thanks to CBS' Mark Knoller, a bearded national treasure trove of presidential stats. According to Knoller's copious notes, during the last year, Obama made 65 domestic trips over 104 days, and six trips to eight countries over 22 days. Not counting six vacation trips over 32 days. He took 196 helicopter trips, signed 203 pieces of legislation and squeezed in 29 rounds of left-handed golf.
Obama last year gave 491 speeches, remarks or statements. That's more talking than goes on in some entire families, at least from fatherly mouths. In fact, even including the 24 days of 2010 that we never saw Obama in public, his speaking works out to about one official utterance every 11 waking hours. Aides indicate the "Real Good Talker" believes we need more.
Related: Obama spends nearly half his presidency outside Washington, plans to travel more.
Related: Vacationer-in-Chief Spends $1.75 Million to Visit Hawaiian Chums.
Obama has spent over $100 million taxpayer dollars flying around in Air Force One, and probably another $100 million on his entourage.
Obama is just another tin-pot dictator living lavishly at the expense of his subjects.
And we seniors have to "tighten our belts."
THANKS TO ALL WHO HELPED PUT THIS GREEDY WINDBAG IN OFFICE!
PLEASE BE MORE CAREFUL NEXT TIME!!
America's continued freedom depends upon your awareness !
=
Chinese airplane maintenance
Subject: Fwd: Chinese airplane maintenance
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:58:25 -0400
-----Original Message-----
From: GeoManor
Sent: 4/26/2012 8:08:56 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: FW: Chinese airplane maintenance
Subject: Chinese airplane maintenance
To:
A pilot for a Chinese carrier requested permission and landed at FRA ( Frankfurt, Germany ) for an unscheduled refueling stop. The reason became soon apparent to the ground crew: The Number 3 engine had been shutdown previously because of excessive vibration, and because it didn't look too good. It had apparently been no problem for the tough guys on the ground back in China: as they took some sturdy straps and wrapped them around two of the fan blades and the structures behind, thus stopping any unwanted wind-milling (engine spinning by itself due to airflow passing thru the blades during flight) and associated uncomfortable vibration caused by the sub optimal fan.
Note that the straps are seat-belts ....how resourceful! After making the "repairs", off they went into the wild blue yonder with another revenue-making flight on only three engines! With the increased fuel consumption, they got a bit low on fuel, and just set it down at the closest airport (FRA) for a quick refill.
That's when the problems started: The Germans, who are kind of picky about this stuff, inspected the malfunctioning engine and immediately grounded the aircraft. (Besides the seat-belts, notice the appalling condition of the fan blades.) The airline operator had to send a chunk of money to get the first engine replaced (took about 10 days). The repair contractor decided to do some impromptu inspection work on the other engines, none of which looked all that great either. The result: a total of 3 engines were eventually changed on this plane before it was permitted to fly again.
And you all were worried about toys with lead paint!
=
See any lessons here? From 1963 to now & years to come, Russians maintained capability.
We need to start thinking like our friends in the Russian space program. The first launch of the Soyuz rocket that is used today for taxi flights to the International Space Station had its first flight in November 1963 — the same month President Kennedy was assassinated! But while the rocket and capsule look the same as the
one that flew first in 1963, there have been many changes, some subtle and some more obvious. Newer and more powerful engines, a new upper stage, and advanced spaceship controls and systems mark today’s Soyuz. In fact, the Soyuz itself is a more advanced version of the R-7 ICBM that Russia developed in the late 1950s and which first lofted spaceman Yuri Gagarin in 1961. Instead of abandoning the system for something entirely new — which is what the U.S. intends to do after the Shuttle — Russia has made incremental improvements to Soyuz, basically building an entire space program around that space-going workhorse.
See any lessons here?
America has invested 30 years in the Shuttle system. Instead of retiring it and beginning with a new “clean sheet of paper” approach
one that flew first in 1963, there have been many changes, some subtle and some more obvious. Newer and more powerful engines, a new upper stage, and advanced spaceship controls and systems mark today’s Soyuz. In fact, the Soyuz itself is a more advanced version of the R-7 ICBM that Russia developed in the late 1950s and which first lofted spaceman Yuri Gagarin in 1961. Instead of abandoning the system for something entirely new — which is what the U.S. intends to do after the Shuttle — Russia has made incremental improvements to Soyuz, basically building an entire space program around that space-going workhorse.
See any lessons here?
America has invested 30 years in the Shuttle system. Instead of retiring it and beginning with a new “clean sheet of paper” approach
NASA plan puts Hubble at Risk
Hubble Lovers--Better Get Shuttle Flying or this great observatory will not survive.
Hubble NEEDS Shuttle
HST life limited due to Shuttle retirement
HST has been placed in an undesirable position with premature shuttle retirement. After the fourth repair mission in 2009 (sts 125) it is functioning acceptably at this time. However, the premature shuttle retirement leaves the USA without repair or reboost capability for the HST (it will need both) . Plans are to keep it in service until 2015 or 2016 or later. The JWT may not fly until 2018 or later due to budget problems. The USA has 9 B in HST when all repair missions and additional hardware is factored in. So we put the ISS and the HST in jeopardy, put an extremely capable vehicle in a museum so we can hire the Russians to service ISS, and develop other programs which may or may not succeed and if they do succeed don’t have near the shuttle capability.
All of the above, thanks to the leadership in this adm. and Congress.
The CAIB, the ASAP, and weak NASA leadership have gotten the USA where we are with shuttle. Since the Columbia accident safety overkill has been the approach. The basic premise has been it is unsafe. You hear fly fewer missions by chairman of the CAIB, or got to use ISS as safe haven, and so on. Between the ASAP, CAIB safety overkill and weak NASA leadership/this adm, shuttle is not flying.
Unfortunately, the HST and ISS will suffer. Hope all those who participated in this are satisfied. All Astronauts are safe, shuttle in the trash, while important space operation are not getting accomplished, or the Russians are doing them. This is not the American way.
In the article below, the staffer had it right, accept the risk. On a complex system, the precise probability of success can not be
calculated. You fix the problems and accept the risk. The conclusion the shuttle was unsafe and should be retired was a political decision and has and will result in unbelievable waste of tax payer money. This would not have occurred under DOD management. DOD should assume all NASA programs.
Read the Case to Save the Shuttle. The ASAP, CAIB and weak NASA leadership got us here, put DOD in charge. Does DoD handle aircraft failures this way? The answer is NO.
Article below illustrates the safety overkill.
SHUTTLE NEWS
Analysis: Shuttle Safety Rules Hubble Fate
illustration only
by Frank Sietzen
Washington DC (UPI) Jul 20, 2004
The National Academy of Sciences’ preliminary review of the Hubble Space Telescope repair issue has placed the question of space shuttle safety squarely at the center of the ongoing debate about the instrument’s future.
It also increases the pressure on NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe to lay out in greater detail the raft of questions that drove his decision last January to cancel the shuttle’s planned servicing call to the orbiting telescope. For it is the safety of space shuttle flights, not the value of Hubble that is really at issue here.
Hubble was lifted into space as a shuttle cargo in 1990. Four times since, astronauts have repaired or upgraded the instruments onboard the telescope. A fifth shuttle servicing flight was being planned when, on Feb. 1, 2003, shuttle Columbia was destroyed during re-entry after a 16-day science mission that did not involve a rendezvous with the International Space Station.
In the aftermath of the disaster, the Columbia Accident Investigations Board reviewed mission control data and Columbia’s wreckage and pinpointed that insulation foam shed during launch from the external fuel tank bolted to the winged orbiter was the cause of the accident.
The foam struck Columbia’s left wing at about 500 miles per hour, punching a hole in the left wing’s leading edge of reinforced carbon carbon panels. During the vehicle’s descent, hot gases entered the hole, destroyed the wing and, eventually, the ship.
The CAIB laid out specific tasks for NASA to accomplish to get the shuttles flying in space again safely. The board presented NASA with 29 recommendations, 15 of which had to be met before the next launch, now set for sometime between March and May of 2005. They included eliminating the foam shedding, improved imaging of the climbing shuttles during launches, inspecting the spaceship in orbit to see if any damage was sustained, and developing ways to repair any damage.
O’Keefe has pledged the space agency will satisfy all of these recommendations before he authorizes the next flight.
The board also said the shuttle — now more than three decades old — remains a developmental vehicle and the risk of flying it in space — and ways to mitigate those risks — must be a continuing effort. The space agency agreed, but also has decided that when the space station assembly is completed, around 2010, the shuttle fleet will be retired.
The best risk mitigation strategy, NASA announced last spring, was to fly less.
As part of its return-to-flight planning, NASA decided to establish a safe haven concept in the event, despite its best efforts, the shuttle becomes critically damaged during lift-off and the damage is discovered after the space vehicle enters Earth orbit. The space station would serve as the haven.
Though not mentioned in the Columbia investigation report, NASA said this option would increase shuttle safety. Astronauts could have both more tools at their disposal and more time if they worked on a damaged shuttle while docked to the station. Equally important, should repairs fail, the crew could abandon the shuttle and stay on the station awaiting the launch of another shuttle or a Russian Soyuz spacecraft to bring them home.
NASA wants to stockpile extra provisions aboard the station as soon as shuttle missions resume, because no other cargo craft has the extra capacity. Also, the agency wants to store spare reinforced carbon panels and tiles, as well shuttle repair equipment. Both the crew of the station and the crew of the injured shuttle would pitch in for the repair effort.
NASA has looked at the fifth Hubble servicing mission in light of all these issues. The length of time a shuttle could spend in space during a Hubble trip would be significantly shorter due to limited stores of cryogenic oxygen on the orbiter, NASA said in an analysis released last spring. To make up for the limited time it could spend in space, a second shuttle would be prepared on an adjacent launch pad, standing by and ready for launch in case a rescue became necessary.
Even if a second rescue shuttle could be safely launched, however, its ability to rendezvous with the damaged craft would be questionable because a double-shuttle rendezvous has never been tested. NASA has said the procedure itself is dangerous.
A Hubble flight would not be able to take advantage of the space station or its equipment so engineers would have to design special tile and leading edge repair equipment just for that flight, including modifying the shuttle’s robot arm for emergency use.
The arm would have to function as a boom-and-camera system to allow astronauts to inspect the entire area around their shuttle — something that could be performed by the station crew in a safe-haven flight.
The challenges involved in developing such specialized equipment, as well as other, post-Columbia changes, have led NASA officials to determine the earliest they could safely perform a fifth Hubble mission would be spring 2007.
That is just about the time the telescope’s batteries will start to die out. NASA has pointed out if any of the preparations for the specialized Hubble flight fall behind, even that date might not be achievable.
All of this is why O’Keefe made his controversial decision to cancel the flight, causing several members of Congress and a good-sized slice of the science community to fly into an uproar.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., was not happy with the decision. Last spring she asked the head of the CAIB, retired Navy Adm. Hal Gehman, to review the decision and address the issue of shuttle safety. He responded on March 5.
Reviewing the actual risk posed during a shuttle mission, Gehman said, for now, and in the foreseeable future, by far most of the risk in space flight is the launch, ascent, entry and landing phases. So, he said, to be safe, NASA should launch the shuttle as few times as possible before it is retired. Though he said it was not unsafe, he also said it was not safe, either, and he called for more studies.
With the political pressure mounting, O’Keefe asked the National Academies of Science to convene a panel to review the entire spectrum of safety issues, and also to evaluate a potential new option: Design a robotic servicing mission to do what the shuttle astronauts were planning to do.
In their preliminary report released last Tuesday, the panel, echoing Gehman, did not say whether the shuttle was safe. Instead, it urged evaluating the robotic option and advised O’Keefe to keep the shuttle mission option alive for the next year.
Thus, the committee members seem to have to come down on the side that concludes a Hubble servicing call would not be any more risky to astronauts than a station flight — safe haven notwithstanding.
Politicians who had been howling in protest over O’Keefe’s decision immediately embraced that part of the NAS report that kept the manned flight alive. Mikulski called the report enormously encouraging.
I support these recommendations, she said.
I wholeheartedly endorse its recommendations, added Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., chair of the House Science Committee.
Several key Democrats on the committee also were supportive, including Reps. Bart Gordon of Tennessee, the ranking member of the committee, Nick Lampson of Texas and Mark Udall of Colorado. All support the idea of a shuttle flight to the Hubble — if it can be proven to be safe.
Now what does NASA do?
The pressure has increased substantially to lay out repair protocols and a servicing scenario that could be accelerated in time to reach the Hubble before the 2007 anticipated cutoff of its batteries. The agency also must address all of the remaining shuttle safety issues that will need to be met before next year’s resumed launch schedule — including the repair equipment, camera-and-boom and other solo inspection procedures. The addition of the safe haven concept will almost certainly get a complete review by the agency, as well as in the NAS panel’s final report later this summer.
Or, NASA must show why it would forego any of the Columbia panel’s recommendations.
Some congressional staffers also think NASA needs to address the issue of whether the shuttle could — or should — ever fly again.
It (the NAS report) calls into question all of (O’Keefe’s) logic in this decision, which we never fully understood anyway, said one staffer, who requested anonymity. Either that or just accept a higher level of risk on this flight.
Whatever the outcome, the NAS panel seems to be sending the ball back in NASA’s court to find a way to get the shuttle back to space and fix the Hubble — with either astronaut or robot elbow grease.
All rights reserved. Copyright 2004 by United Press International. Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by United Press International. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the prior written consent of by United Press International.
Related Links
SpaceDaily
Search SpaceDaily
Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express
SHUTTLE NEWS
Successful Test Leads Way For Safer Shuttle Solid Rocket Motor
Huntsville AL (SPX) Jun 11, 2004
NASA’s Space Shuttle program successfully fired a full-scale Reusable Solid Rocket Motor today, testing modifications that will enhance the safety of the Space Shuttle.
Posted by keeptheshuttleflying.com at 8:39 AM 0 comments
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Posted by keeptheshuttleflying.com at 6:56 PM
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Hubble NEEDS Shuttle
HST life limited due to Shuttle retirement
HST has been placed in an undesirable position with premature shuttle retirement. After the fourth repair mission in 2009 (sts 125) it is functioning acceptably at this time. However, the premature shuttle retirement leaves the USA without repair or reboost capability for the HST (it will need both) . Plans are to keep it in service until 2015 or 2016 or later. The JWT may not fly until 2018 or later due to budget problems. The USA has 9 B in HST when all repair missions and additional hardware is factored in. So we put the ISS and the HST in jeopardy, put an extremely capable vehicle in a museum so we can hire the Russians to service ISS, and develop other programs which may or may not succeed and if they do succeed don’t have near the shuttle capability.
All of the above, thanks to the leadership in this adm. and Congress.
The CAIB, the ASAP, and weak NASA leadership have gotten the USA where we are with shuttle. Since the Columbia accident safety overkill has been the approach. The basic premise has been it is unsafe. You hear fly fewer missions by chairman of the CAIB, or got to use ISS as safe haven, and so on. Between the ASAP, CAIB safety overkill and weak NASA leadership/this adm, shuttle is not flying.
Unfortunately, the HST and ISS will suffer. Hope all those who participated in this are satisfied. All Astronauts are safe, shuttle in the trash, while important space operation are not getting accomplished, or the Russians are doing them. This is not the American way.
In the article below, the staffer had it right, accept the risk. On a complex system, the precise probability of success can not be
calculated. You fix the problems and accept the risk. The conclusion the shuttle was unsafe and should be retired was a political decision and has and will result in unbelievable waste of tax payer money. This would not have occurred under DOD management. DOD should assume all NASA programs.
Read the Case to Save the Shuttle. The ASAP, CAIB and weak NASA leadership got us here, put DOD in charge. Does DoD handle aircraft failures this way? The answer is NO.
Article below illustrates the safety overkill.
SHUTTLE NEWS
Analysis: Shuttle Safety Rules Hubble Fate
illustration only
by Frank Sietzen
Washington DC (UPI) Jul 20, 2004
The National Academy of Sciences’ preliminary review of the Hubble Space Telescope repair issue has placed the question of space shuttle safety squarely at the center of the ongoing debate about the instrument’s future.
It also increases the pressure on NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe to lay out in greater detail the raft of questions that drove his decision last January to cancel the shuttle’s planned servicing call to the orbiting telescope. For it is the safety of space shuttle flights, not the value of Hubble that is really at issue here.
Hubble was lifted into space as a shuttle cargo in 1990. Four times since, astronauts have repaired or upgraded the instruments onboard the telescope. A fifth shuttle servicing flight was being planned when, on Feb. 1, 2003, shuttle Columbia was destroyed during re-entry after a 16-day science mission that did not involve a rendezvous with the International Space Station.
In the aftermath of the disaster, the Columbia Accident Investigations Board reviewed mission control data and Columbia’s wreckage and pinpointed that insulation foam shed during launch from the external fuel tank bolted to the winged orbiter was the cause of the accident.
The foam struck Columbia’s left wing at about 500 miles per hour, punching a hole in the left wing’s leading edge of reinforced carbon carbon panels. During the vehicle’s descent, hot gases entered the hole, destroyed the wing and, eventually, the ship.
The CAIB laid out specific tasks for NASA to accomplish to get the shuttles flying in space again safely. The board presented NASA with 29 recommendations, 15 of which had to be met before the next launch, now set for sometime between March and May of 2005. They included eliminating the foam shedding, improved imaging of the climbing shuttles during launches, inspecting the spaceship in orbit to see if any damage was sustained, and developing ways to repair any damage.
O’Keefe has pledged the space agency will satisfy all of these recommendations before he authorizes the next flight.
The board also said the shuttle — now more than three decades old — remains a developmental vehicle and the risk of flying it in space — and ways to mitigate those risks — must be a continuing effort. The space agency agreed, but also has decided that when the space station assembly is completed, around 2010, the shuttle fleet will be retired.
The best risk mitigation strategy, NASA announced last spring, was to fly less.
As part of its return-to-flight planning, NASA decided to establish a safe haven concept in the event, despite its best efforts, the shuttle becomes critically damaged during lift-off and the damage is discovered after the space vehicle enters Earth orbit. The space station would serve as the haven.
Though not mentioned in the Columbia investigation report, NASA said this option would increase shuttle safety. Astronauts could have both more tools at their disposal and more time if they worked on a damaged shuttle while docked to the station. Equally important, should repairs fail, the crew could abandon the shuttle and stay on the station awaiting the launch of another shuttle or a Russian Soyuz spacecraft to bring them home.
NASA wants to stockpile extra provisions aboard the station as soon as shuttle missions resume, because no other cargo craft has the extra capacity. Also, the agency wants to store spare reinforced carbon panels and tiles, as well shuttle repair equipment. Both the crew of the station and the crew of the injured shuttle would pitch in for the repair effort.
NASA has looked at the fifth Hubble servicing mission in light of all these issues. The length of time a shuttle could spend in space during a Hubble trip would be significantly shorter due to limited stores of cryogenic oxygen on the orbiter, NASA said in an analysis released last spring. To make up for the limited time it could spend in space, a second shuttle would be prepared on an adjacent launch pad, standing by and ready for launch in case a rescue became necessary.
Even if a second rescue shuttle could be safely launched, however, its ability to rendezvous with the damaged craft would be questionable because a double-shuttle rendezvous has never been tested. NASA has said the procedure itself is dangerous.
A Hubble flight would not be able to take advantage of the space station or its equipment so engineers would have to design special tile and leading edge repair equipment just for that flight, including modifying the shuttle’s robot arm for emergency use.
The arm would have to function as a boom-and-camera system to allow astronauts to inspect the entire area around their shuttle — something that could be performed by the station crew in a safe-haven flight.
The challenges involved in developing such specialized equipment, as well as other, post-Columbia changes, have led NASA officials to determine the earliest they could safely perform a fifth Hubble mission would be spring 2007.
That is just about the time the telescope’s batteries will start to die out. NASA has pointed out if any of the preparations for the specialized Hubble flight fall behind, even that date might not be achievable.
All of this is why O’Keefe made his controversial decision to cancel the flight, causing several members of Congress and a good-sized slice of the science community to fly into an uproar.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., was not happy with the decision. Last spring she asked the head of the CAIB, retired Navy Adm. Hal Gehman, to review the decision and address the issue of shuttle safety. He responded on March 5.
Reviewing the actual risk posed during a shuttle mission, Gehman said, for now, and in the foreseeable future, by far most of the risk in space flight is the launch, ascent, entry and landing phases. So, he said, to be safe, NASA should launch the shuttle as few times as possible before it is retired. Though he said it was not unsafe, he also said it was not safe, either, and he called for more studies.
With the political pressure mounting, O’Keefe asked the National Academies of Science to convene a panel to review the entire spectrum of safety issues, and also to evaluate a potential new option: Design a robotic servicing mission to do what the shuttle astronauts were planning to do.
In their preliminary report released last Tuesday, the panel, echoing Gehman, did not say whether the shuttle was safe. Instead, it urged evaluating the robotic option and advised O’Keefe to keep the shuttle mission option alive for the next year.
Thus, the committee members seem to have to come down on the side that concludes a Hubble servicing call would not be any more risky to astronauts than a station flight — safe haven notwithstanding.
Politicians who had been howling in protest over O’Keefe’s decision immediately embraced that part of the NAS report that kept the manned flight alive. Mikulski called the report enormously encouraging.
I support these recommendations, she said.
I wholeheartedly endorse its recommendations, added Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., chair of the House Science Committee.
Several key Democrats on the committee also were supportive, including Reps. Bart Gordon of Tennessee, the ranking member of the committee, Nick Lampson of Texas and Mark Udall of Colorado. All support the idea of a shuttle flight to the Hubble — if it can be proven to be safe.
Now what does NASA do?
The pressure has increased substantially to lay out repair protocols and a servicing scenario that could be accelerated in time to reach the Hubble before the 2007 anticipated cutoff of its batteries. The agency also must address all of the remaining shuttle safety issues that will need to be met before next year’s resumed launch schedule — including the repair equipment, camera-and-boom and other solo inspection procedures. The addition of the safe haven concept will almost certainly get a complete review by the agency, as well as in the NAS panel’s final report later this summer.
Or, NASA must show why it would forego any of the Columbia panel’s recommendations.
Some congressional staffers also think NASA needs to address the issue of whether the shuttle could — or should — ever fly again.
It (the NAS report) calls into question all of (O’Keefe’s) logic in this decision, which we never fully understood anyway, said one staffer, who requested anonymity. Either that or just accept a higher level of risk on this flight.
Whatever the outcome, the NAS panel seems to be sending the ball back in NASA’s court to find a way to get the shuttle back to space and fix the Hubble — with either astronaut or robot elbow grease.
All rights reserved. Copyright 2004 by United Press International. Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by United Press International. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the prior written consent of by United Press International.
Related Links
SpaceDaily
Search SpaceDaily
Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express
SHUTTLE NEWS
Successful Test Leads Way For Safer Shuttle Solid Rocket Motor
Huntsville AL (SPX) Jun 11, 2004
NASA’s Space Shuttle program successfully fired a full-scale Reusable Solid Rocket Motor today, testing modifications that will enhance the safety of the Space Shuttle.
Posted by keeptheshuttleflying.com at 8:39 AM 0 comments
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Posted by keeptheshuttleflying.com at 6:56 PM
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
0 comments:
Post a Comment
