Wednesday, July 18, 2012
7/18/12 news
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
JSC TODAY HEADLINES
1. 'Summer of Curiosity' Mission To Mars - Design a Martian Habitat
2. Feds Feed Families - July Update
3. If You Missed it, See it -- Exp. 32 Docking, Hatch Opening and More
4. Rescheduled: Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy
5. Ice Cream Social - $1.50 Sundaes
6. JSC Career Exploration Program -- Annual Awards and Recognition Ceremony
7. ISS Electronic Document Management System (EDMS) User Forum
8. Relief Valve Set Testing and Hydrostatic Testing for Designated Verifiers
9. Demolition ViTS - Aug.24
10. Tune in to Doctor Radio July 20 - Latest on Astronaut Nutrition, Exercise
11. Starport Gift Shop Specials
12. TSU Alumni and Pre-Alumni Chapter Membership Drive
13. Green Purchasing Webinar - July 19
14. Texas Southern University Alumni Mentoring and Career Development Panel
15. Project Management Institute Clear Lake Galveston Chapter Presentation
16. Last Day to Get Your Ticket for the Co-op 50th Anniversary
17. Certified Pressure Systems Operator and Refresher Training
18. Try the DUI Simulator -- if You Dare
19. Recent JSC Announcement
________________________________________ QUOTE OF THE DAY
“ It is a sign of strength, not of weakness, to admit that you don't know all the answers. ”
-- John P. Loughrane
________________________________________
1. 'Summer of Curiosity' Mission To Mars - Design a Martian Habitat
In celebration of the Mars Science Laboratory's arrival to the Red Planet in August, the External Relations Office is sharing a variety of activities and online resources with JSC employees. JSC families are encouraged to complete the weekly activities that illustrate what's needed for a six month journey to Mars, a one year stay and a six month return trip to Earth.
Week six of the Summer of Curiosity Mission to Mars Challenge focuses on how the habitat astronauts will live in on the surface of Mars.
Even in space, there is no place like home! After a long day of collecting geological samples on Mars, astronauts need a home to return to. NASA architects, engineers and scientists are already busy with exactly that - a sustainable laboratory and living quarters for the next-generation of human spaceflight missions. The Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Habitation Systems project is currently testing the Deep Space Habitat to expand a human presence to more extreme environments, such as Mars.
The objectives for week six are to research the current designs and testing of the Deep Space Habitat and apply what you have learned to create a Mars Habitat of your own!
All JSC families are invited to the Voyage Back to School event at Space Center Houston on August 16 to celebrate their summer STEM experiences and Mars challenge results.
Please visit http://www.nasa.gov/offices/education/centers/johnson/student-activities/summ... for more information.
JSC External Relations, Office of Education x40331
[top]
2. Feds Feed Families - July Update
The pounds of food are starting to roll in with over 1500 pounds collected to date. More than 50 collection stations have been set up, and more teams are still joining! White Sands Test Facility has a big lead so far with more than 800 pounds collected! KA and AH have passed the 200-pound mark, with JA closing in on 150. BA is now coming up on their first 100. Next week is the big July push, so empty your pantries, fill your shopping carts, and let's make our 50,000-pound goal!
Karen Schmalz x47931 http://starport.nasa.gov
[top]
3. If You Missed it, See it -- Exp. 32 Docking, Hatch Opening and More
Activity following the launch of Soyuz TMA-05M has been ramping up. Expedition 32 Flight Engineers Suni Williams, Yuri Malenchenko and Aki Hoshide launched aboard the Soyuz spacecraft at 9:40 p.m. CDT Saturday, July 14, from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan.
Watch video of the docking to the International Space Station at:
http://youtu.be/JvQp2TVsM74
Watch video of the hatch opening/welcome ceremony at:
http://youtu.be/66qSNb481rM
Also, ISS Update on July 17 featured Shannon Walker, NASA astronaut and Expedition 24 and 25 flight engineer. Walker spoke about the docking of the Soyuz TMA-05M and the steps involved with opening the hatches between the station and Soyuz. Watch more of that interview here:
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/videogallery/index.html?media_id=148630441
JSC External Relations, Office of Communications and Public Affairs x35111 http://www.youtube.com/user/ReelNASA
[top]
4. Rescheduled: Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy
The IEEE Galveston Bay Section and EMBS Society Chapter present Tommy Cooper, PE, speaking on "Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy."
Cooper has worked in medical instrumentation for more than thirty-eight years. He started his career at Baylor College Medicine, where he worked in the Cardiovascular Engineering Laboratory developing cardiac assist devices. He worked as a project engineer for several companies where he designed and developed a Portable Medical Status and Treatment System for NASA, a portable a defibrillator-monitor, catheter tipped pressure transducers, a disposable pressure transducer and disposable pressure monitoring kits.
The presentation will start at noon and finish by 1 p.m. on Wednesday, July 25, in the Discovery Room of the Gilruth Center. We will offer lunch at 11:30 a.m. to the first 15 requestors for $8; there is no charge for the presentation. Please RSVP to Stew O'Dell at stewart.c.odell@nasa.gov and specify whether you are ordering lunch.
Stew O'Dell x31855
[top]
5. Ice Cream Social - $1.50 Sundaes
Join us at Building 3 Café on Thursday from 2 to 3 p.m. for an Ice Cream Social! As part of the celebrations to commemorate Starport turning 50, we will be having Ice Cream Sundaes for $1.50 each, thanks to the support of JSC Federal Credit Union. Visit http://starport.jsc.nasa.gov/Events/ for more information.
Shelly Haralson x39168 http://starport.jsc.nasa.gov/
[top]
6. JSC Career Exploration Program -- Annual Awards and Recognition Ceremony
The annual Awards and Recognition Ceremony for JSC's year-long Career Exploration Program (CEP)Interns is Tuesday, July 24, in the Gilruth Center Alamo Ballroom from 8:30 to 10:30 a.m. Please join us for a meet-and-greet at 8:30 a.m.; the program begins promptly at 9 a.m. Interns and mentors are recognized for outstanding achievements. The CEP seeks to meet NASA's mission by developing the critical pool of talented and diverse individuals who will make up the future leaders of NASA's workforce. By providing students with invaluable work experience, project-based tasks in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and business; CEP serves as a mechanism for students to complete their education and embark on a successful career in the space industry. Current students, CEP alumni, mentors, co-workers, teachers, family and friends are invited to attend.
Kayla Lechler x35936 http://www.cep.usra.edu
[top]
7. ISS Electronic Document Management System (EDMS) User Forum
The ISS EDMS team will hold the monthly EDMS General User Forum this Friday, July 20, at 9:30 a.m. in Building 4S, Conference Room 5315.
If you use EDMS to locate station documents, join us to learn about basic navigation and searching. Bring your questions, concerns and suggestions, and meet the station EDMS Application Support Center team. The agenda can be found at:
http://iss-www.jsc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/act/showAgenda.cfm?AGEN_id=43345&RequestT...
LaNell Cobarruvias 713-933-6854 http://iss-www.jsc.nasa.gov/nwo/apps/edms/web/UserForums.shtml
[top]
8. Relief Valve Set Testing and Hydrostatic Testing for Designated Verifiers
This course covers the fundamentals and requirements regarding hydrostatic testing of pressure vessels and pressure systems and pressure relief valve set testing.
Course objectives include:
- Define Designated Verifier (DV):
- Test Area Guidelines
- References: JPR 1710.13, NS-PRS-009, NT-QAS-024
- Safety Guidelines
- Procedures
Re-certification required every two years.
Date/Time: Aug. 1 - From 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
Where: Safety Learning Center, Building 226N, Room 174
Register via SATERN required:
https://satern.nasa.gov/learning/user/deeplink_redirect.jsp?linkId=SCHEDULED_...
Aundrail Hill x36369
[top]
9. Demolition ViTS - Aug.24
SMA-SAFE-NSTC-0068: This three-hour course is based on OSHA CFR 1926.850 through 1926.859 Subpart T Demolition. The student will cover Preparatory Operations (1926.850), Chutes (1926.852), Material Removal (1926.853), Removal of Walls, Masonry Sections and Chimneys (1926.854), Manual Removal of Floors (1926.855), Storage (1926.857), and Mechanical Demolition (1926.859). During the course, the student will receive an overview of those topics needed to work safely in accomplishing demolition activities and will be shown the working guidelines, training requirements and inspection to be accomplished before demolition is started. There will be a final exam associated with this course that must be passed with a 70 percent minimum score to receive course credit.
Registration in SATERN is required.
Shirley Robinson x41284
[top]
10. Tune in to Doctor Radio July 20 - Latest on Astronaut Nutrition, Exercise
Ever wonder how NASA ensures that astronauts eat well-balanced meals in space? Or how exercise and nutrition help crew members deal with adverse physiological changes that occur in the body during long stays in space?
Tune in to Sirius XM's Doctor Radio on satellite radio at noon on Friday, July 20, to hear interviews with key JSC personnel as they discuss astronaut health, nutrition and exercise before, during and after spaceflight. Scott M. Smith, NASA nutritionist, and Mark Guilliams, Wyle lead strength-and-conditioning coach, will discuss these topics with host Samantha Heller, a registered dietitian and exercise physiologist, for a full hour.
Doctor Radio is on Channel 81.
JSC External Relations, Office of Communications and Public Affairs x35111
[top]
11. Starport Gift Shop Specials
National Moon Day is Friday, July 20. All things MOON related are on sale at 15 percent off today through Friday at the Starport Gift Shops. Plus, in honor of Starport's 50th birthday, buy one item, get one 50-percent off select merchandise today.
Shelly Haralson x39168 http://starport.jsc.nasa.gov/Events/
[top]
12. TSU Alumni and Pre-Alumni Chapter Membership Drive
Join us! If you are a JSC civil servant or contractor who attended or currently attends Texas Southern University (TSU), please contact Marinda Fruge at marinda.n.fruge@nasa.gov. You will be contacted for upcoming TSU Alumni and Pre-Alumni Chapter sponsored networking and mentoring events. Meet other TSU alums and students working at JSC. If you know others who are alumni or pre-alums, please forward this announcement to them. Thank you!
Marinda Fruge x30560
[top]
13. Green Purchasing Webinar - July 19
Join us to learn about tools to help develop and implement an effective green purchasing policy in your office. During this webinar, you will hear about strategies public agencies can use to identify and procure products that reduce energy consumption and/or greenhouse gas emissions or that yield other climate protection benefits. Also covered are model green purchasing specifications for products like office equipment with top tier efficiency ratings and products that are made with recycled content or that reduce transportation impacts. You can register at the link.
Environmental Office x36207 https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/641518954
[top]
14. Texas Southern University Alumni Mentoring and Career Development Panel
Please join JSC Texas Southern University alumni on Wednesday, July 18, from 2 to 3 p.m. in the Building 3 Collaboration Center for a Career Development panel discussion - "Importance of Alumni Networking and Mentoring" with Dr. Ronald Johnson, dean of the Jesse H. Jones School of Business at Texas Southern University. This event is open to all and is co-sponsored by the JSC TSU Alumni and Pre-Alumni Chapter and the AAERG. Please RSVP to marinda.n.fruge@nasa.gov.
Marinda Fruge x30560
[top]
15. Project Management Institute Clear Lake Galveston Chapter Presentation
The Project Management Institute Clear Lake Galveston Chapter presents "Swamp PMs," on July 26, from 6 to 8 p.m. The presenter, Don R. James, PMP, will help us analyze the events in the history channel series, 'Swamp People©,' to determine if these alligator hunters are project managers that use the nine Knowledge Areas, five Process Groups and 42 processes of the PMBOK® Guide.
The meeting will be held at Mario's Flying Pizza Restaurant (618 W. NASA Road 1). Please make your reservation by noon on Tuesday, July 24. Register online at http://www.pmiclg.org (preferred method). The cost of the meeting is $20 for members and $25 for non-members. Dinner is included. Email: VP-Programs@PMICLG.ORG Registration/social - 6 p.m.; Dinner - 6:30 to 7 p.m.; Program - 7 to 8 p.m. One professional development unit hour credit is achieved by attending this presentation.
Cheyenne McKeegan x31016
[top]
16. Last Day to Get Your Ticket for the Co-op 50th Anniversary
If you are a current or former NASA co-op and have not already purchased your ticket for the 50th Anniversary Celebration of the JSC Co-op Program, the deadline has been extended, and today is your LAST CHANCE! Don't miss out on the speakers, refreshments, heavy hors d'oeuvres, fun activities and nostalgia in the Gilruth Alamo Ballroom on July 25 from 4:30 to 7 p.m. Tickets are $15 in the Buildings 3 and 11 Starport Gift Shops as well as the Gilruth Center front desk. Tell your NASA civil servant (former or current) co-op friends! The event is limited to 250 guests, so buy your tickets TODAY. Please visit http://tinyurl.com/coop50th for a questionnaire about your time as a co-op.
Randy Eckman x48230
[top]
17. Certified Pressure Systems Operator and Refresher Training
Certified Pressure Systems Operator and Refresher Training covers updated pressure systems requirements, lessons learned and written hazard analysis.
Date: Aug. 10
Location: Safety Learning Center - Building 226N, Room 174
Use this direct link to SATERN for course times and to register.
Certified Pressure Systems Operator - Time (CST) 9 to 11 a.m.
https://satern.nasa.gov/learning/user/deeplink_redirect.jsp?linkId=SCHEDULED_...
Certified Pressure Systems Operator and Refresher - Time (CST) 11:01 a.m. to 12:01 p.m.
https://satern.nasa.gov/learning/user/deeplink_redirect.jsp?linkId=SCHEDULED_...
Aundrail Hill x36369
[top]
18. Try the DUI Simulator -- if You Dare
How much alcohol makes driving unsafe?
You can find out for yourself by taking a spin (pretend, of course) in the DUI simulator, which is on-site today at the south end of the Building 2 parking lot between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. Try it, and we guarantee you'll share what you learn with others.
This and more answers to your personal safety are the focus of the July "Stay Sharp, Stay Safe" campaign, so watch for tips you can use and share.
Also, be sure to visit the link below where you will find many facts of interest as well as instructions for the 10-question contest drawing for a special prize.
Stacey Menard x45660 http://www6.jsc.nasa.gov/safety/WhatsNew/AAC/
[top]
19. Recent JSC Announcement
Please visit the JSC Announcements Web Page to view the newly posted announcement:
JSCA 12-020: 2012 JSC Honor Awards Ceremony
Archived announcements are also available on the JSCA Web Page.
Linda Turnbough x36246 http://ird.jsc.nasa.gov/DocumentManagement/announcements/default.aspx
[top]
________________________________________
JSC Today is compiled periodically as a service to JSC employees on an as-submitted basis. Any JSC organization or employee may submit articles. To see an archive of previous JSC Today announcements, go to http://www6.jsc.nasa.gov/pao/news/jsctoday/archives.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT...
Astronaut Suni Williams trains for triathlon in space - CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta (July 16)
Astronaut Shannon Walker talks about life on the ISS - PAO Console in MCC (July 17)
Human Spaceflight News
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Southern Lights and the ISS Canadarm2 taken by Flight Engineer Joe Acaba on July 14
HEADLINES AND LEADS
Black sky research: Now the ISS proves its worth
Molly Bentley - New Scientist Magazine
A premier, world-class laboratory in low Earth orbit. That was how NASA sold the International Space Station to US congress in 2001. Eleven years on and no one can doubt the agency's technological ambition. The most complex engineering project ever attempted has created a behemoth of modules that orbits the planet at more than 27,000 kilometres per hour. It might be travelling fast but, scoff critics, as a lab it is going nowhere. So far, this money-eating monster has gobbled up $150 billion - more than $300,000 for each kilogram in orbit - and even fans admit that it has yet to fulfil its potential for scientific discovery. "The ISS is the greatest laboratory ever assembled," says Laurence Young, a space medicine expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "It is also a pale shadow of what it could be."
Private Liberty rocket and spaceship pass key NASA test
Space.com
The new commercial Liberty rocket and space capsule being developed by aerospace firm ATK have passed a key NASA test and are on track to launch astronauts into orbit by 2015, company officials announced Tuesday. ATK completed an in-depth review of the Liberty launch system, which consists of a rocket and a seven-passenger space capsule. The review was the last of five milestones required under the unfunded Space Act Agreement (SAA) ATK inked with NASA during the second phase of the agency's Commercial Crew Development Program (CCDev-2). During the review, ATK laid out the progress it's made to date, discussing Liberty's schedule, system requirements, software status, flight test plan and safety procedures, among other things, officials said.
NASA to launch inflatable heat shield test Saturday
Re-entry experiment may help with delivery of space station payloads
Leonard David - Space.com
When you think of the blistering, brutal re-entry temperatures generated by plowing through Earth’s atmosphere, using fabric doesn’t come quickly to mind. But NASA is set to try some fabric out this Saturday, as part of a novel inflatable re-entry experiment that could find a variety of uses, both off planet and possibly in returning payloads from the International Space Station as well. The Inflatable Re-entry Vehicle Experiment III, or IRVE-3, has been years in the making for all of 20 minutes of suborbital flight. It will be rocketed to high altitude above Earth from NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility near Chincoteague Island, Va., then will dive into the Atlantic Ocean.
Amazing Southern Lights View from Space Leaves Astronaut Awestruck
Tariq Malik - Space.com
Shimmering auroras in the night sky are amazing to behold, but nothing prepared one NASA astronaut for seeing the celestial lights dance over Earth from above. A new photo of the southern lights by astronaut Joe Acaba convey only a portion of the amazing view from his window on the International Space Station during a weekend photo session to catch the auroras over Earth. Acaba watched the auroras on Saturday and Sunday (July 14 and 15) from the station's observation deck, a seven-window cupola that offers astronauts a 360-degree of space and the Earth below.
NASA conducting 5th parachute airdrop test at YPG
James Gilbert - Yuma Sun
Chris Johnson, project manager for NASA's capsule parachute assembly system (CPAS), said the Orion parachute airdrop test being conducted Wednesday morning at Yuma Proving Ground is only the fifth in a planned series of 18 similar tests that will performed at the installation. “We will be doing development and testing for the next two years. Following that, we have a series of qualification testing that we will be doing out here as well,” Johnson said. “We probably have a good seven years of testing that will continue to be done at Yuma Proving Ground.”
Gagarin’s Start to be closed for repairs in 2014
Itar-Tass
Gagarin’s Start, a launch site at the Baikonur cosmodrome named after Yuri Gagarin, who made the first ever manned spaceflight, will be closed for major overhaul in 2014, the head of the federal space agency Roscosmos, Vladimir Popovkin, told reporters on Tuesday. In October 2012 cosmonauts will fly into orbit from the 31st launch pad that had not been used since 1980s.
Intergalactic space travel to lift off in H-Town?
Mayor Parker, other bigwigs beam up warp-speed plan
Tyler Rudick - CultureMap.com (Houston)
Outside the bridge of the U.S.S. Enterprise, there aren't many serious conversations about warp-speed engines, asteroid mining and exoplanets . . . That is, unless you're at an event sponsored by the 100 Year Starship (100YSS) initiative, a new non-governmental program dedicated to ensuring human travel outside the solar system within a century's time. At the helm of the ambitious project is physician and former NASA astronaut Dr. Mae Jemison, who joined Mayor Annise Parker at a 100YP press conference Monday morning at the National Center for Behavioral Health in the Texas Medical Center to announce the official launch of the initiative as well as an upcoming public symposium in Houston in September.
It's decision time for future spaceflight at NASA
Part 2: Space agency should give the prime role to veterans in the 20-teens
Jay Barbree - NBC News (Commentary)
(In a five-part series, Barbree lays out a vision of spaceflight in the 20-teens for the 2012 presidential candidates.)
In the beginning, it was said that all NASA Administrator James Webb had to do was take a couple of buckets up to the Hill, and Congress would fill them with money. It certainly is not that easy today. The country cannot afford waste. A prudent NASA should take advantage of the $6.6 billion worth of spaceport facilities and flight hardware that it bought and paid for — facilities that are now growing grass in the Florida sun. NASA should be doing everything possible to launch American astronauts from their own Cape Canaveral pads.
Is the life of an astronaut worth $28 billion?
DVice.com
NASA takes the lives of its astronauts very, very seriously. Dr. Robert Zubrin, author of The Case for Mars (which advocates for a one-way trip to Mars with reliance on local resources for a return), argues that the premium NASA places on safety is crippling the agency, and that "the mission has to come first." It's conceptually difficult to put a dollar value on the life of a person, but Zubrin's argument is this: NASA almost didn't send a shuttle to fix the Hubble Space Telescope because there was a documented one chance in 50 of vehicle failure. That's a 2% chance of killing seven people, which works out to a 14% chance of killing one person. Hubble is a $4 billion asset, from which Zubrin infers that NASA values the life of one astronaut at about $28 billion. This is a lot.
Hometown hero
Sunnyside honors former astronaut Bonnie Dunbar with bronze monument
Ross Courtney - Yakima Herald-Republic
This community gathered Monday to honor a dream-filled ranch girl who fulfilled her ambitions by braving the infinity of space. More than 200 Sunnyside residents turned out to the entrance of Central Park to watch the unveiling of a bronze monument extolling both the childhood and NASA career of Bonnie Dunbar, a Sunnyside High School graduate who grew up on a cattle ranch in nearby unincorporated Outlook. The 63-year-old gave the props right back to the community for its support and encouragement through her life and career, which included five space shuttle missions.
The Intrepid's Enterprise Exhibit Gets Ready to Launch
Soterios Johnson - WNYC TV (New York)
The new space shuttle pavilion at New York's Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum opens to the public on Thursday. It will offer visitors an up-close and personal view of the space shuttle Enterprise, as well as exhibits on NASA's current missions on earth and space science, research on improving aeronautics and the rockets destined to take humans to explore the solar system. Workers were putting the finishing touches on the pavilion, as opening day approached.
Hard Problems Solved For Space Benefit Companies On The Ground
Richard Mullins - Aerospace Daily
Solving challenging engine problems for NASA directly led one company to improve its coal gasification technology on the ground, an executive says. John Vilja, a vice president for Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, says the extreme challenge of manned space missions drives terrestrial achievement as well. “We force ourselves into multidisciplinary advancement, which in turn enables new solutions to some of our toughest challenges here on Earth,” he told a House Science subcommittee hearing July 12.
Local role will evolve with space program
Daytona Beach News-Journal (Editorial)
SpaceX made major news last week when NASA announced that the Dragon space capsule had passed a key design review, opening up the possibility that future manned missions can be done with the company's Dragon. Even more important, trips to the International Space Station and other parts of low space orbit may soon be carried out by Americans -- using American-made ships.
First Look: China’s Big New Rockets
Craig Covault - AmericaSpace.org
Images from China’s new heavy rocket development program show spotless production facilities with advanced tooling to build China’s new Long March 5/CZ-5 heavy rocket, along with even more advanced launchers to come. In addition to CZ-5 hardware development, China is completing design studies on two 11 million lb. thrust Long March 9 maximum heavy lift rocket configurations. If approved for final development, one of the designs would emerge for flight in 2020-2025 with the capability to launch Chinese astronauts to the surface of the Moon. The concepts mean that China is designing “a Super Saturn V rocket,” says Charles P. Vick, a highly experienced analyst with GlobalSecurity.Org.
Visions of Spaceflight Circa 2001 (1984)
David Portree - Wired.com
The year 1984 was nearly equidistant between the first moon landing of 1969 and the evocative year 2001. The Shuttle, flown first on 12 April 1981, had been declared operational by President Ronald Reagan, who in his January 1984 State of the Union Address had also given NASA leave to build its long-sought-after low-Earth-orbit (LEO) Space Station. Space supporters could be forgiven for believing that, after the gap in U.S. human space missions spanning from July 1975 to April 1981, a new day was dawning; that Shuttle and Station would lead in the 1990s to piloted flights beyond LEO. Surely, Americans would once again walk on the moon by 2001, and would put bootprints on Mars not long after.
__________
COMPLETE STORIES
Black sky research: Now the ISS proves its worth
Molly Bentley - New Scientist Magazine
A premier, world-class laboratory in low Earth orbit. That was how NASA sold the International Space Station to US congress in 2001. Eleven years on and no one can doubt the agency's technological ambition. The most complex engineering project ever attempted has created a behemoth of modules that orbits the planet at more than 27,000 kilometres per hour.
It might be travelling fast but, scoff critics, as a lab it is going nowhere. So far, this money-eating monster has gobbled up $150 billion - more than $300,000 for each kilogram in orbit - and even fans admit that it has yet to fulfil its potential for scientific discovery. "The ISS is the greatest laboratory ever assembled," says Laurence Young, a space medicine expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "It is also a pale shadow of what it could be."
Yet the station's fortunes could be about to change. With the US portion completed in 2011, the ISS has now been resupplied by the SpaceX Dragon capsule, ushering in an age of private, cheaper rocketry. And NASA has just charged a new agency to kick-start the station's research programme. But where should its future priorities be directed? And what will it take to transform this orbiting construction site into a world-class lab?
Some of these questions were addressed at the 1st annual ISS research and development conference in Denver, Colorado, last month. Among the presenters was Satoshi Iwase of Aichi Medical University in Japan. He has spent several years developing an experiment that could help solve one of the key problems that humans will face if we are to travel to other planets: keeping our bodies healthy in weightlessness.
One thing that physiologists have learned from putting people in space is that without gravity our bodies begin to weaken. Even the routine of treadmill running, weightlifting and cycling that the ISS crew follows leaves them with weakened bones, muscles and cardiovascular systems. To counter these effects on a long-duration mission to, say, Mars, astronauts will almost certainly need to create their own artificial gravity.
This is where Iwase comes in. He leads a team designing a centrifuge for humans. In their preliminary design, an astronaut is strapped into the seat of a machine that resembles an exercise bike. Pedalling provides a workout for the astronaut's muscles and cardiovascular system, but it also rotates the seat vertically around a central axis so the rider experiences artificial gravity while exercising. "The centrifuge spins the astronaut up and over," says William Paloski at the University of Houston in Texas, who is working on the design.
The centrifuge project highlights the station's potential as a research lab. Similar machines have flown in space aboard NASA's shuttles, but they couldn't be tested for long enough to prove whether they were effective. Paloski calculates that to properly assess a centrifuge's impact on human physiology, astronauts would have to ride it for 30 minutes a day for at least two months. "The only way to test this is in weightlessness, and the only time we have to do that is on the space station," Young says.
The ISS offers more than just a stable lab bench for long-term experiments, however. With about 4000 square metres of photovoltaic panels, the station has a beefy electrical supply on tap for power-hungry experiments. High-speed data links to Earth and a crew of lab technicians who can modify apparatus or download results add to the attraction. Combine this with a gravity field a million times weaker than that on Earth's surface, and the station ought to be a space researcher's dream come true.
The reality is rather different. There are certainly plenty of ideas for experiments: scientists would like to understand how microgravity affects everything from plant growth to the human immune system. Some important experiments including the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer - a particle detector searching for signs of dark matter - are already aboard and gathering data. But many other cherished projects have yet to fly, despite about a quarter of the station's dedicated lab space remaining empty. Tight budgets, lack of time or vision, and a maddening bureaucracy are all to blame - a source of constant irritation to NASA staff, researchers and human space-flight fans alike.
Iwase and his team have experienced these frustrations at first hand: their centrifuge project is currently on hold. Engineers at NASA and the European Space Agency are concerned that vibrations from the seat's rotation will interfere with the links between ISS modules. Iwase's team are looking for ways around this, and ESA, which is funding the centrifuge, together with the Japanese Space Agency, will decide later this year whether the fixes are worth the cost. Yet even if it gets the green light, the station's crew will still have to wait until 2017 before they can take a spin.
Lengthy delays like this are one of the key challenges for NASA, according to an April 2011 report from the US National Academy of Sciences. Its authors said they were "deeply concerned" about the state of NASA's science research, and made a number of recommendations. Besides suggesting that the agency reduces the time between approving experiments and sending them into space, it also recommended setting clearer research priorities and providing better resources to support these plans.
NASA had already begun to take action. In May 2010, the agency hired management consultants ProOrbis to develop a plan for how to cut through the ISS's infamous bureaucracy. "It's hard to imagine an extraordinary human endeavour such as the ISS not having really brilliant management," says Jeanne DiFrancesco, from ProOrbis in Malvern, Pennsylvania.
Congress also directed NASA to hire an independent organisation to help manage the station's US lab facilities. In July 2011, the agency chose the not-for-profit Center for the Advancement of Science in Space. Under the $15 million annual contract, CASIS is to reshape the way research on the ISS is managed, find a balance of experiments with broad and practical goals, and convince public and private investors that science on the station is worth the spend.
It faces an uphill struggle. Critics have long rounded on the station's record for science. Judged solely by the number of papers published, the ISS certainly seems poor value: according to Christopher King, an analyst at Thomson Reuters's Web of Science database, research on the station has generated about 3,100 papers since 1998. The Hubble Space Telescope, meanwhile, has produced more than 11,300 papers in its 21 years, yet it cost less than one-tenth of the price of the space station. Even the $150 million Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe, designed to measure the cosmic microwave background, has generated 5,100 papers in just over a decade.
Yet Mark Uhran, assistant associate administrator for the ISS, bristles at critics who say that the station hasn't done any useful research. He points to progress made on a salmonella vaccine and the growth of protein crystals in microgravity. Besides, he argues, it is unreasonable to judge the value of discoveries from the past decade, when the station was still being assembled. "No one asked the scientists at the Large Hadron Collider what discoveries they made while they were building it."
To get the ISS's research back on track, CASIS has examined more than 100 previous microgravity experiments to identify promising research themes. From this, it has decided to focus on life science and medical research, and recently called for proposals for experiments on osteoporosis, muscle wasting, the immune system and protein crystallisation. The organisation also believes that the ISS should be used to develop products with commercial application and to test those that are either close to or already on the market. Investment from outside organisations is vital, says Uhran, and a balance between academic and commercial research will help attract this. A number of aerospace companies and academic institutions are already interested in using the station, the centre says, but their identities are confidential at present.
Plans for commercial activity have not gone smoothly, however. On 29 February, CASIS's executive director, Jeanne Becker, resigned saying that she has faced pressure to engage in activity that would jeopardise the centre's non-profit status. She also stated that asking ProOrbis to stay on in an advisory role to the organisation felt like a conflict of interest. At the same time, there have been calls from Congress for the US Government Accountability Office to audit the centre.
However these issues are resolved, a fundamental barrier remains to developing science in microgravity. The station needs to attract cutting-edge research, yet many scientists seem to have little idea what goes on aboard it. As part of her assessment, DiFrancesco conducted more than 200 interviews with people from organisations with potential interests in low gravity research. Some were aware of the ISS but they didn't know what's going on up there, she says. "Others know there's science, but they don't know what kind."
CASIS hopes its efforts will help the station turn a corner. And according to Alan Stern, planetary scientist and senior science adviser at the centre, the biggest public-relations boost for the ISS may come from an unexpected quarter: the privately funded space flight industry.
That's not the primary aim of commercial space flight, of course. Even so, companies like SpaceX and Orbital Sciences should help NASA and its partners save money on resupplying the ISS. SpaceX, for example, suggests it can reduce launch costs by two-thirds, to about $55 million a launch. Sub-orbital craft like Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo or Zero2Infinity's high-altitude balloon could also boost the space station's fortunes. They might not come close to the ISS's orbit, yet Stern believes they will revolutionise the way we perceive space. Soon everyone will be dreaming of interplanetary travel again, he predicts.
More importantly, scientists are already queuing for seats on these services. The Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio, Texas, has reserved $1.6 million worth of tickets for rides on SpaceShipTwo and XCOR Aerospace's craft so that its scientists can collect data during a few minutes of weightlessness. This demand for low-cost space flight could eventually lead to a regular service, giving researchers the chance to test their ideas before they submit a proposal for experiments on the ISS. Getting flight experience should help win a slot on the station, says Stern. "We're not used to thinking of low-entry space flight. The impact will be huge."
If the station's managers can exploit this enthusiasm for space flight as well as learn from past mistakes, their newly completed lab has every chance of fulfilling its potential. And here's a thought to help keep them focused: there are plenty of other expensive research facilities yet the ISS is probably the only one that can be seen regularly by billions of taxpayers. As it flies overhead each night, this lab is set to remain firmly in the public eye - a twinkling reminder of NASA's promise.
Rock and roll
The International Space Station might be prime research real estate (see main story), but it also faces some unique problems. The lack of gravity makes simple experiments that bit harder, says Leroy Chiao, a former NASA astronaut who spent 6 months aboard the ISS. "If you let go of something or even if you secure it down and someone bumps it, it can go floating off. Sometimes you'll find it in the air filter or it can get lost for days or months, or perhaps you never find it." In addition, crew movements, the hum of fans and pumps, and the drag of the station through space all generate minute vibrations. Although weak, these can be enough to disturb crucial experiments such as those growing delicate protein crystals, says Chiao.
So a team at the Russian space agency Roscosmos have proposed a solution. OKA-T is a 7-tonne autonomous lab designed to fly separately but in formation with the ISS. It will be able to dock with the station when needed to allow the ISS crew to carry out maintenance and set up equipment. This semi-detached approach should allow sensitive experiments on the free-flying lab to remain vibration free. OKA-T is scheduled to launch in 2015 (see diagram).
Another challenge for experiments on the ISS is chemical contamination. Each time thrusters on the ISS fire, they release small amounts of propellant into space. The result is that for more than a decade, chemicals including hydrazine have been accumulating on the outside of the ISS and in the space around it. This coats solar panels and externally mounted instruments, and astronauts bring it back into the station after each spacewalk.
A new thruster system may help reduce contamination. Engineers at aerospace company Firestar Technologies are investigating a system based on nitrous oxide, a cheap, non-toxic propellant. Their NOFBX propulsion unit is set to be tested on the ISS next year. The plan is to fly the thruster to the ISS on SpaceX's Dragon capsule, then attach it to the outside of the station with a robot arm. After that, it will be used instead of conventional thrusters to help keep the ISS in position.
Private Liberty rocket and spaceship pass key NASA test
Space.com
The new commercial Liberty rocket and space capsule being developed by aerospace firm ATK have passed a key NASA test and are on track to launch astronauts into orbit by 2015, company officials announced Tuesday.
ATK completed an in-depth review of the Liberty launch system, which consists of a rocket and a seven-passenger space capsule. The review was the last of five milestones required under the unfunded Space Act Agreement (SAA) ATK inked with NASA during the second phase of the agency's Commercial Crew Development Program (CCDev-2).
During the review, ATK laid out the progress it's made to date, discussing Liberty's schedule, system requirements, software status, flight test plan and safety procedures, among other things, officials said.
"It has been a privilege working with NASA to complete the SAA for the Commercial Crew program," Kent Rominger, ATK vice president and Liberty program manager, said in a statement.
"The feedback we received from the NASA Liberty team has helped further the development of the entire system and we believe ensures the program is on target for Liberty to provide a capable and safe commercial transportation to the International Space Station by mid-decade," Rominger added.
An ambitious schedule
ATK is developing Liberty with help from Lockheed Martin and European aerospace firm Astrium, which builds the workhorse Ariane 5 rocket.
The work is being done with internal funding. Last year, NASA awarded $270 million in CCDev-2 money to four companies, but ATK and its Liberty partners were not among them. (SpaceX, Boeing, Sierra Nevada and Blue Origin submitted the winning proposals.)
ATK has outlined an ambitious schedule. It hopes to conduct unmanned test flights of the Liberty system in 2014 and 2015, then launch its first crewed flight in late 2015. Commercial operational flights carrying NASA astronauts to the space station would begin in 2016, officials said.
NASA's CCDev program is designed to spur the capabilities of American private spaceflight companies, to fill the crew-carrying shoes of the agency's space shuttle program, which retired last July.
NASA now depends on Russian Soyuz vehicles to carry its astronauts to and from orbit, but it hopes that at least two private American vehicles are up and running by 2017.
Cargo, too
ATK and its partners envision Liberty being a player in cargo transportation to the orbiting lab as well. Earlier this month, in fact, ATK announced Liberty will be able to carry 5,100 pounds (2,300 kilograms) of cargo in a pressurized pod.
This pod features a common berthing mechanism and could ferry four full-size science racks to the space station, officials said.
"Liberty's expanded service allows us to bring a commercial capability delivering up to seven crew members, 5,000 pounds of pressurized cargo, along with external cargo in a single flight," Rominger said. "This results in tremendous value since all other commercial offerings would need two flights to accomplish what Liberty does in one."
NASA has already signed contracts with two different private companies to provide cargo services to the space station. California-based SpaceX inked a $1.6 billion deal to make 12 robotic supply runs, while the Virginia firm Orbital Sciences will get $1.9 billion to fly eight unmanned missions.
Orbital Sciences will use its Cygnus spacecraft and Antares rocket to make the flights. Orbital officials have said they're aiming for a test mission to the station this November or December, with the contracted flights to begin shortly thereafter if everything goes well.
SpaceX has already flown a demonstration mission, successfully docking its robotic Dragon space capsule to the station in May. Dragon and SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket may begin making the company's contracted supply flights as early as September, NASA officials have said.
NASA to launch inflatable heat shield test Saturday
Re-entry experiment may help with delivery of space station payloads
Leonard David - Space.com
When you think of the blistering, brutal re-entry temperatures generated by plowing through Earth’s atmosphere, using fabric doesn’t come quickly to mind.
But NASA is set to try some fabric out this Saturday, as part of a novel inflatable re-entry experiment that could find a variety of uses, both off planet and possibly in returning payloads from the International Space Station as well.
The Inflatable Re-entry Vehicle Experiment III, or IRVE-3, has been years in the making for all of 20 minutes of suborbital flight. It will be rocketed to high altitude above Earth from NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility near Chincoteague Island, Va., then will dive into the Atlantic Ocean.
It’s all “science friction” — pushing the envelope, quite literally, while trying to beat the heat of atmospheric re-entry.
Launching a space balloon
A three-stage Black Brant 11 suborbital rocket will hurl the 680-pound IRVE-3 skyward, said F. McNeil "(Neil") Cheatwood, principal investigator for the IRVE program at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. [ Photos: NASA's Inflatable Heat Shield Ideas for Spaceships ]
The uninflated IRVE-3 is carefully stuffed into a flight bag that fits inside the rocket’s nose cone. Once IRVE-3 is released at its target altitude, its high-tech inner tubes will be inflated by nitrogen to give the experimental heat shield a mushroom shape.
The ready-for-re-entry contour is made of layers of silicone-coated industrial fabric. As the tubes are inflated, they stretch out a thermal blanket covering them to create a heat shield known as an aeroshell.
During re-entry, video cameras will transmit images to the Wallops control room to confirm that the IRVE-3 is holding up during its heat-defying trek. Instruments on board will also transmit temperature and pressure data to researchers for later analysis.
A rigorous ground test program of IRVE-3’s thermal protection system has already been performed using a number of facilities, Cheatwood told SPACE.com. But the upcoming flight will use the Earth’s atmosphere as a wind tunnel in the sky for the ultimate test, he said.
IRVE-3 will be lobbed some 350 miles downrange into Atlantic Ocean waters.
A game- changing technology
NASA’s Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) is behind the Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) project, under which the IRVE-3 experiment is being carried out. IRVE work is one venture within the office's OCT’s Game Changing Development program for new space technologies.
Testing of the IRVE over the years has seen both malfunction and success. A booster failure cut short its first flight in September 2007.
"The original Inflatable Re-entry Vehicle Experiment was designed to demonstrate that inflatable structures could inflate, remain inflated, and maintain stability," said Kathy Barnstorff, a Langley center spokeswoman for the project. "However, IRVE encountered a failure after launch in which the IRVE instrument was unable to separate from the metal payload cylinder surrounding it."
Building on success
In August 2009, IRVE scored its first success. Riding on a Black Brant 9 rocket, the booster reached a high point of 131 miles, where it began its descent to supersonic speed. Less than a minute later the IRVE-2 was released to inflate in less than 90 seconds at an altitude of 124 miles (200 km).
Cheatwood recalls that the 2009 flight verified the IRVE was stable when it was inflated to its profile. It behaved like a rigid blunt body of the same shape, he said, making it through the heat pulse.
"The experiment really was … just to take us through the heat pulse. It was like a 30-second experiment, officially," Cheatwood added. "It flew right through supersonic, transonic, into subsonic."
IRVE-3 is the same size — nearly 10 feet wide when inflated — as the other two.
"IRVE-3 is launching on a larger rocket which will take it to a higher altitude," Barnstorff told SPACE.com. "It will come back in with a higher velocity and more heating than IRVE-2 saw. IRVE-3 will see about 10 times the heating that IRVE-2 did. It’s a heavier payload, which also contributes to the higher heat levels."
Using atmospheres on other worlds
Cheatwood said that work is ongoing in thermal protection materials that can take even greater heat loads. "That would let us handle higher heat rates, which means we could be smaller in diameter," he said.
On the inflatable space structures side, there’s also an eye toward building larger test articles, Cheatwood said.
HIAD-inspired technology is seen as ideal for use on NASA missions, be they to Mars, Venus or even Titan — the largest moon of Saturn. For example, far more precise landings on the Red Planet of robotic craft on the Red Planet are feasible. But the technology is envisioned to be scalable for piloted expeditions to Mars, too.
Adopting inflatable heat shields could lead to landing more mass on Mars at higher surface elevations. The larger the diameter of a protective aeroshell, the bigger the payload can be.
The HIAD work can also be applied to Earth-returning payloads let loose from the International Space Station.
Already being sketched out is the High Energy Atmospheric Re-entry Test (HEART) — a design concept for a flight test that would utilize larger inflatable re-entry technology with a diameter of almost 30 feet.
Here’s the bottom line for Cheatwood: "If a planet has an atmosphere … we can use it."
Amazing Southern Lights View from Space Leaves Astronaut Awestruck
Tariq Malik - Space.com
Shimmering auroras in the night sky are amazing to behold, but nothing prepared one NASA astronaut for seeing the celestial lights dance over Earth from above.
A new photo of the southern lights by astronaut Joe Acaba convey only a portion of the amazing view from his window on the International Space Station during a weekend photo session to catch the auroras over Earth. Acaba watched the auroras on Saturday and Sunday (July 14 and 15) from the station's observation deck, a seven-window cupola that offers astronauts a 360-degree of space and the Earth below.
On Saturday, Acaba took a break from a workout session to gaze down at Earth as the space station made a southern night pass. With a recent uptick in the sun's activity, including a major solar flare last week, he was hopeful to see at least some auroras.
"Within a couple of minutes, I could not believe what I was seeing. It was absolutely incredible," Acaba wrote in a journal post Sunday. "I enjoyed the show for a few minutes and then felt I had to inform my crew mates so they could also take in the view."
At the time, the space station was home to three people: Acaba and two cosmonauts. Even the space station's veteran commander, cosmonaut Gennady Padalka now on his third tour in charge of the outpost, was amazed, Acaba explained.
"I am no expert with a camera but I tried to capture at least a small reminder of the experience. The pictures were not great, but they would do," Acaba wrote.
Auroras are caused when charged particles from the sun interact with the Earth's upper atmosphere to create a bright glow. Because the activity is concentrated over Earth's poles, they are known as the aurora borealis (northern lights) in the north, and the aurora australis (southern lights) in the south.
Acaba's Saturday aurora show set stage for Sunday, when an intense solar storm from a July 12 solar flare supercharged Earth's auroras.
"So today, at around the same time of day, I thought I would take one more look," Acaba wrote Sunday. "Just when you think it can’t get much better, it gets way better."
And there are times, Acaba added, when you just have to set the camera aside and soak in the view.
"I of course took some obligatory pictures, but then I just sat in the dark, in the peace and quiet of this incredible man made, orbiting laboratory and just looked out the window in awe," he added. "That a truly magnificent planet we live on and solar system we live in."
Acaba is one of six residents of the space station today. Three new crewmembers arrived at the orbiting lab early Tuesday (July 17). Acaba, Padalka and cosmonaut Sergei Revin have been living aboard the station since mid-May and are due to return to Earth in September.
NASA conducting 5th parachute airdrop test at YPG
James Gilbert - Yuma Sun
Chris Johnson, project manager for NASA's capsule parachute assembly system (CPAS), said the Orion parachute airdrop test being conducted Wednesday morning at Yuma Proving Ground is only the fifth in a planned series of 18 similar tests that will performed at the installation.
“We will be doing development and testing for the next two years. Following that, we have a series of qualification testing that we will be doing out here as well,” Johnson said. “We probably have a good seven years of testing that will continue to be done at Yuma Proving Ground.”
Johnson, during a news conference at the Yuma International Airport, explained that Orion is NASA's next-generation spacecraft and is being designed to carry astronauts deeper into space than ever before, eventually even to the planet Mars.
In addition to being the most advanced spacecraft ever designed, Johnson said, Orion's first flight, which will be unmanned, is scheduled to take place in about two years. The spacecraft will sent into space 15 times farther away than where the International Space Station is currently orbiting.
Before that can happen, however, the series of parachutes that work in tandem to slow the capsule's decent after re-entry, allowing it to land softly in the ocean to be recovered, must undergo a series of full-scale, flight-like testing.
Johnson said those capsule descent and landing parachutes, or main chutes, are still in the developmental stage, are known as engineering development units and have not yet been certified for human flight.
“We have gone through a sufficient amount of design and iteration where we feel the system we have right now represents the closest configuration to what we will be building for flight and for human rating. That said, we have to put the parachutes through a series of very rigourous tests in order to ensure we have the right configuration and the detail design meets the needs for a human-rated flight system.”
The primary purpose of Wednesday's test, Johnson said, is to determine what would happen if one of those three main parachutes prematurely opened and inflated too quickly, and what effect it would have on the other two chutes.
He explained that NASA uses two test vehicles for its parachute drop testing: one shaped like a dart and called the parachute compartment drop test vehicle (PCDTV), which better simulates the higher re-entry speeds, and the capsule-shaped parachute test vehicle (PTV), which is used to determine how the shape of the capsule affects airflow into the parachutes.
For Wednesday's test, Johnson said, the CPAS team the capsule-shaped test vehicle will be dropped from a C-17 flying at an altitude of 25,000 feet. Something interesting Johnson pointed out about the test is that it takes 17 parachutes to conduct, of which only eight are the actual Orion spacecraft parachutes.
Johnson said the C-17 will make three passes over the drop zone: one to make sure everything is ready to go, the second time to drop the capsule-shaped test vehicle and the third time to release atmospheric measuring devices.
“You will see, just prior to the extraction of the test article, what is called a tow chute being deployed out of the aircraft. That tow chute simply is there to, when released, pull the extraction chutes. The two extraction chutes are actually what pulls the test pallet and the hardware out of the aircraft once the locks are removed.”
The capsule will then fall for a few seconds while still on the pallet before separating. A short time later, two programmer chutes will deploy, stabilizing the capsule as it reaches the altitude where the test can begin.
“Up until this point, we have not gotten to the point where we deploy the spacecraft's parachutes,” Johnson said. “Once the spacecraft is at the right conditions, where we are going to deploy the drogue chutes, the two programmer parachutes are actually cut away, which starts the sequence of our Orion parachute system.”
Wednesday's test is just one in a series of parachute tests going back several years that NASA has conducted at YPG's many parachute ranges.
Gagarin’s Start to be closed for repairs in 2014
Itar-Tass
Gagarin’s Start, a launch site at the Baikonur cosmodrome named after Yuri Gagarin, who made the first ever manned spaceflight, will be closed for major overhaul in 2014, the head of the federal space agency Roscosmos, Vladimir Popovkin, told reporters on Tuesday.
In October 2012 cosmonauts will fly into orbit from the 31st launch pad that had not been used since 1980s.
“According to our plans, the first launch site (Gagarin’s Start) will be closed for major overhaul beginning from 2014,” he said.
Popovkin explained that Gagarin’s Start should be thoroughly repaired and modernized following the plans for certification of a Soyuz 2.1A carrier rocket for the manned launch.
Intergalactic space travel to lift off in H-Town?
Mayor Parker, other bigwigs beam up warp-speed plan
Tyler Rudick - CultureMap.com (Houston)
Outside the bridge of the U.S.S. Enterprise, there aren't many serious conversations about warp-speed engines, asteroid mining and exoplanets . . . That is, unless you're at an event sponsored by the 100 Year Starship (100YSS) initiative, a new non-governmental program dedicated to ensuring human travel outside the solar system within a century's time.
At the helm of the ambitious project is physician and former NASA astronaut Dr. Mae Jemison, who joined Mayor Annise Parker at a 100YP press conference Monday morning at the National Center for Behavioral Health in the Texas Medical Center to announce the official launch of the initiative as well as an upcoming public symposium in Houston in September.
Since her 1992 flight on the Endeavor shuttle — a trip that earned her the distinction of being first African-American woman in space — Jemison has become a leader in promoting the scientific and social value of interstellar exploration, work that has lead to the creation of the her non-profit Dorothy Jemison Foundation for Excellence and a 1993 guest spot on Star Trek: The Next Generation.
During her announcement, Jemison posed the question on everyone's mind: Is going to a star even feasible? For help, she turned to H.G. Wells' science fiction novel First Men in the Moon from 1901.
"Back then, can you image how fantastical that idea? Yet, less than 70 years later, we had humans on the moon. . . Today, we have the knowledge to build technology at a much faster pace.
"It's not so fantastical for us to imagine [traveling to a star]. We just have to be committed."
Armed with funding from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), 100YSS will bring together experts from a wide range of fields, looking to not only those working in the sciences, but also to leaders in economics, the arts and public policy.
"My role as a public figure has allowed me to step up some of the bolder things about the importance of exploring space," Jemison told CultureMap in an interview after her speech. "Sometimes you need to be revolutionary and take on the difficult challenges. Sometimes you need to push beyond what you think you can normally do."
In its first year, 100YSS will concentrate on establishing a membership base and gaining broader financial support throughout the Houston business community and beyond. The program also will create The Way, a research institute focused on speculative and long-term space technology.
The organization's inaugural symposium, which will take place Sept. 13 to 16 at the Hyatt Regency Houston, aims to promote the vision of interstellar space exploration for the general public.
"With 100YSS we want to show people that the future of space is not just for billionaires," Jemison said. "It's part of a vital journey for mankind, one that involves the commitment of everybody."
It's decision time for future spaceflight at NASA
Part 2: Space agency should give the prime role to veterans in the 20-teens
Jay Barbree - NBC News (Commentary)
(In a five-part series, Barbree lays out a vision of spaceflight in the 20-teens for the 2012 presidential candidates.)
In the beginning, it was said that all NASA Administrator James Webb had to do was take a couple of buckets up to the Hill, and Congress would fill them with money.
It certainly is not that easy today. The country cannot afford waste. A prudent NASA should take advantage of the $6.6 billion worth of spaceport facilities and flight hardware that it bought and paid for — facilities that are now growing grass in the Florida sun.
NASA should be doing everything possible to launch American astronauts from their own Cape Canaveral pads.
Instead, the agency is doing everything but. It’s been drifting, delaying and courting upstart aerospace companies to build what’s already been built, ignoring the days when America was clearly No. 1.
In the 1960s, the Cape, as it was simply called, was a sprawling gateway to the future. It was the most vital and intensely exciting place on the planet, a 15,000-acre sandspit that had been reshaped into a port of blinding searchlights surrounding active launch pads. It was a place where rows of rocket gantries and blockhouses and hangars and office buildings were lined up neatly behind a centuries-old lighthouse.
Only days after Alan Shepard became the first American in space in 1961, President John F. Kennedy decided that if America was to wrest the lead in space from the Russians, we would have to beat them in a race for national prestige to the moon. And if we were to do it, rocket scientist Wernher von Braun said, “We need a larger spaceport.”
Two launch pads for the Saturn 5 moon rockets were built on the northern leg of Cape Canaveral — extending the country’s famed rocket row. The government purchased 88,000 acres of land next door, on Merritt Island, for operational structures and safety zones.
The largest building east of the Mississippi River was built to assemble the huge rockets, and a wide and deep “crawler way” was dredged and filled to form a path from that Vehicle Assembly Building to the pads. After JFK was felled by an assassin's bullet, NASA named its sprawling new creation the Kennedy Space Center.
Within a period of four years, 24 Americans sailed through the vacuum from Earth to the moon. Some of them flew twice. Twelve out of those 24 rode their landers down to the lunar surface, walked and drove through the dust and rocks of the small world.
Had Russia sustained its early lead in power and technology, the number of humans going to the moon might have increased greatly. It was a fierce competition, and the Russians went all-out in their desperate attempt to lead the human race to another world. But after they reached Earth orbit, the Russians went through a series of devastating rocket explosions and costly failures.
Slow slide for spaceport
For the next four decades, America was the unquestioned leader in space. Taxpayers invested $1 billion in 1960s dollars ($6.6 billion in 2012 dollars) to build their country’s sprawling launch and landing facilities. But when the space shuttles were grounded for good, that spaceport began a slow slide back to seed.
NASA went with a different strategy to keep the International Space Station in business: Turn America’s space program over to a patchwork of private companies. Short-change America’s great rocket and spacecraft facilities. Ask the taxpayers and private businesses to rebuild it all again in California, Texas and Colorado in the name of commercialization.
When President George W. Bush decided to bring the space shuttle program to an end, on the advice of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, he put in place Project Constellation.
Constellation would have given America two sets of rockets with emergency abort systems to save its crews. The smaller one was called Ares 1. It took the most successful rocket in history, the solid rocket booster used by the space shuttles, and married it to a Boeing second stage with a human-rated J-2X engine. Engineers modified a corner of Kennedy Space Center’s giant assembly building for stacking the new creation and outfitted Launch Complex 39B to launch the Ares 1-X.
The early version lifted off in October 2009. It worked as advertised. But despite that successful flight, and the fact that Ares 1 offered the shortest and least costly route to keep American astronauts flying from America’s paid-for $6.6 billion master spaceport, it was canceled.
Hits and misses
Those speaking for the Obama administration like to point out that George W. Bush made the decision to cancel the space shuttle program. He did, but he left Constellation in place. President Obama canceled Constellation, putting thousands of the best engineering and technical minds out of work. Most are still searching for a job today.
If NASA had given Ares 1 the attention and budget it deserved from the very beginning, the replacement rocket for the space shuttles could have been well on its way to flying astronauts to and from the space station, depending on spacecraft readiness.
But instead of following the course offered by Ares 1, NASA paralyzed itself with indecision. The agency ridded itself of experienced workers, hardware and facilities, replacing them with a patchwork of commercial facilities and rockets.
Only one of those commercial companies has gotten off the ground so far: California-based SpaceX, which was started up in 2002 with $100 million from its millionaire founder, Elon Musk. Since its founding, SpaceX has received $773 million from NASA.
On May 22 — 32 months later than originally planned — SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket launched an unmanned Dragon capsule from the Cape to the International Space Station. During a virtually flawless mission, the Dragon was brought in for a berthing with the station, delivering a half-ton of supplies.
The capsule closed out its mission by parachuting into the Pacific, 500 miles off Mexico’s Baja California, bringing more than half a ton of space station hardware and experiments back down to Earth. It was the first time NASA had received a large load from the station since the space shuttles stopped flying.
The flight was called a first for a private company, but it certainly wasn’t a first for spaceflight.
Thirty-five years ago, on Jan. 22, 1978, Russia’s unmanned cargo space freighter Progress-1 automatically docked with the Salyut 6 space station, delivering 5,000 pounds of supplies. Since then, hundreds of unmanned automated dockings have taken place in space, but the feat by the private company SpaceX represented NASA’s future of reinventing the wheel.
Ready to fly
President Barack Obama's plan calls for turning over space deliveries in low Earth orbit to private businesses, so NASA can build the heavy-lift rockets and advanced spacecraft needed to send Americans into deep space.
Most space experts, even most of the plan's critics, would say there's nothing wrong with that. Mr. President, now you just need to select truly ready-to-fly rockets and spacecraft. One hiccup with Russia’s Soyuz, as John Glenn says, and the International Space Station could be out of business. America would then stand silly before the world, with egg on its face.
What’s done is done, and after drifting across an indecisive sea, we can wait no longer for novices to build a space program from scratch. We already have the best flight hardware out there. We must put these veteran rockets on our launch pads and fly.
Only last week, Pakistani Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf issued a message of greeting and felicitation to his Chinese counterpart, Wen Jiaboa, on the occasion of the successful launch of the Shenzhou 9 spacecraft. Ashraf said Pakistan desired to enhance its cooperation with China in the field of space technology.
“We are thankful to China for helping us build and launch the Paksat-IR satellite, and hopefully, with your support we would be able to launch a Pakistan remote sensing satellite soon,” he said.
Only Russia and China launching astronauts?
India and Pakistan scrambling to get on board?
The United States self-grounded, despite rockets and spacecraft ready to fly for less money than NASA is paying Russia?
What else is needed other than our own flight hardware again?
The word is decision.
Just make it.
More from 'Spaceflight in the 20-teens'
· Part 1: Space needs a place on to-do list
· Next: Rocket designers build on space legacy
Is the life of an astronaut worth $28 billion?
DVice.com
NASA takes the lives of its astronauts very, very seriously. Dr. Robert Zubrin, author of The Case for Mars (which advocates for a one-way trip to Mars with reliance on local resources for a return), argues that the premium NASA places on safety is crippling the agency, and that "the mission has to come first."
It's conceptually difficult to put a dollar value on the life of a person, but Zubrin's argument is this: NASA almost didn't send a shuttle to fix the Hubble Space Telescope because there was a documented one chance in 50 of vehicle failure. That's a 2% chance of killing seven people, which works out to a 14% chance of killing one person. Hubble is a $4 billion asset, from which Zubrin infers that NASA values the life of one astronaut at about $28 billion. This is a lot.
To get a little bit of perspective on both the risk and NASA's safety valuation, let's take a look at the space shuttle. The shuttle was estimated by the engineers involved in designing, constructing and maintaining it to have a probability of failure with loss of vehicle and human life at about one in 100. Before the Challenger disaster, NASA management estimated the same probability at one in 100,000, but after a total of 135 shuttle launches with two catastrophic failures, even the engineers may have been a bit optimistic.
We mention all this to emphasize how dangerous space travel really is. That, and also to illustrate how NASA management (the people who make budgetary and mission decisions) aren't always in agreement with NASA engineering about the overal risk to the astronauts, implying that NASA's high-level risk assessment may not even be based on reality. Of course, the numbers in the previous paragraph (taken from Richard Feynman's report on the Challenger disaster) are from several decades ago, but the Columbia Accident Investigation Board noted that a similar disconnect between engineers and management contributed to the loss of that shuttle, as well.
Obviously, safety is and should be important. What's being looked at here is how far NASA can reasonably pursue safety versus the amount of risk we're willing to take on to achieve new heights. So the question, really, is this: What amount of resources is it reasonable to allocate to attaining a reasonable amount of safety? Even if a figure like $28 billion per astronaut (including the cost of the training, the vehicle, etc) isn't reasonable, there are no clear rules as to how much a human life is worth — although that hasn't prevented various values from being assigned. Here's Stan V. Smith, an economist that the New York Times spoke to a couple years ago:
The average [value of a life], Mr. Smith figures, is around $4 million. Mr. Smith says that people unknowingly set a value on their own lives by what they are willing to pay to reduce their everyday risk of death. Say a certain home safety feature costs $50. If research shows that for every 100,000 of those devices in use, one life is saved, then the implied value of that life is $5 million. The more people are willing to pay for safety features, the more they are implicitly valuing their lives. Mr. Smith has calculated value-of-life figures for numerous purchases, based on their costs and how much they reduce the risk of death.
PURCHASED ITEMS AND IMPLIED VALUE OF ONE LIFE:
· Automotive air bags: $598,463
· Smoke detectors: $628,618
· Auto safety features: $4,198,517
· Top-grade tires: $6,031,019
Astronauts would have a gigantic list all to themselves, featuring safety systems that are very expensive but highly effective at increasing the likelihood of survival for a very small group of people.
Another way to look at the value of a life is to use the same metrics as the fund to compensate families of those killed on 9/11. On average, families were paid about $2 million, but the exact amount ranged from about $800,000 to over $6 million, depending on various factors such as pain and suffering, which was worth $250,000 plus $100,000 for each surviving spouse and child. To give just one more example, as of 2009, the military set aside just under $2 million for a family of a soldier (married with three children) who was killed in Iraq.
The point of all these numbers is try and show just how much money NASA spends on keeping its astronauts safe(er). If NASA were to just assign the worth of the life of an astronaut at, say, $10 million, how much more science and exploration would then be possible? Even setting the bar at $100 million — or as high as $1 billion — would result in a huge increase in resources.
On the other hand, having accidents in space has a huge detrimental effect on NASA as a whole. It's not fair, but that's the way it is: when NASA loses a shuttle with seven astronauts on board, it's not the same thing as the military losing a helicopter with seven soldiers on board. This would suggest that unmanned missions might be a more efficient way to explore space, but it's also true that there's nothing quite as inspiring as having humans explore something new.
Ultimately, NASA is going to have to make some tough choices here. Under constant pressure to perform and with a budget that almost never gets appreciably increased, the agency has become increasingly focused on safety. Again, there's nothing wrong with safety, and in a world without budgets and economies we'd take every precaution we could, but the fact is that space exploration is inherently dangerous, and astronauts know this. As Gus Grissom said:
"If we die, we want people to accept it. We're in a risky business, and we hope that if anything happens to us it will not delay the program. The conquest of space is worth the risk of life."
Hometown hero
Sunnyside honors former astronaut Bonnie Dunbar with bronze monument
Ross Courtney - Yakima Herald-Republic
This community gathered Monday to honor a dream-filled ranch girl who fulfilled her ambitions by braving the infinity of space.
More than 200 Sunnyside residents turned out to the entrance of Central Park to watch the unveiling of a bronze monument extolling both the childhood and NASA career of Bonnie Dunbar, a Sunnyside High School graduate who grew up on a cattle ranch in nearby unincorporated Outlook.
The 63-year-old gave the props right back to the community for its support and encouragement through her life and career, which included five space shuttle missions.
"No one ever told me here I couldn’t follow my dreams," she told the crowd in a brief address. "Not one single person."
Students, family friends and officials from the city and Yakima County, and a representative of Gov. Chris Gregoire’s office, all thanked Dunbar for her inspiring career and her dedication to encouraging students to enter science careers, especially in Sunnyside.
"This is my home," she said. "It always has been my home and I will always be a part of it."
She was joined by her mother, Ethel Dunbar, and extended family from across the country. Her niece, 13-year-old Sydney Squires from Jacksonville, Fla., pulled away the homemade shrouds to the applause of the crowd.
Mayor Mike Farmer, who attended high school with Dunbar, proclaimed July 16 "Bonnie J. Dunbar Day" for Sunnyside. Schuyler Hoss, an outreach specialist from Gregoire’s office, read a proclamation on her behalf.
Sunnyside school board member Lorenzo Garza encouraged children on their way to the nearby city pool to visit the statue: "This story is one that we can share with all the children in our community."
Cathy Mears, a childhood friend of Dunbar’s and the chairwoman of the volunteer committee that organized the bronze, did most of the speaking. She shared stories of her friend voraciously reading books from the library bookmobile and competing at 4-H shows together. She also presented Dunbar with three books: "The Angry Planet" by John Keir Cross, "Journey to the Center of the Earth" by Jules Verne and "Jules Verne’s Moon Book - From Earth to the Moon & Round the Moon."
Dunbar "has done more for her world than most of us will ever think about doing," Mears said.
The bronze is really two statues. One shows Dunbar in her space suit holding her helmet under one arm. The other is of a braided fifth-grader reading a Verne novel, detailed with a picture of a rocket blasting off and the Verne quote, "Anything one man can imagine, other men can make real."
Sunnyside sculptress Desiree Dawn designed the statue, while the Norman Arts foundry in Joseph, Ore., cast the life-sized versions. Van Wingerden Landscaping of Sunnyside built the concrete likenesses of hay bales on which the statues are mounted.
Early Monday before the formalities, Brady Norman, James Van Wingerden and volunteers hoisted the statues into place on the hay bales, unwrapping the plastic wrap and draping them with handmade muslin shrouds.
The $90,000 statue is the fourth by The Foundation for the Community of Sunnyside. Others pay homage to Ren Ferrell, the first white settler in the Lower Valley; irrigation pioneer H. Lloyd Miller; and "Morning Chores," a fictitious depiction of a girl milking a cow. All sit within one block in downtown Sunnyside.
Sunnyside has a precedent of honoring local heroes. The community has war memorials downtown near City Hall and north of town at the Lower Valley Memorial Gardens cemetery. In the past, nonprofit groups also have honored Living Pioneers.
"Our future is our past really," Farmer said. "We need to make citizens aware of what our forerunners have done to get us where we are and we should do the same going forward."
Dunbar is one of the most famous Sunnyside natives, of course.
Growing up in a homestead that lacked running water for the first three years of her life, she learned the value of hard work and determination.
"There wasn’t anything given to her," said Frank Beard, a former ranching neighbor.
She was an avid reader, particularly of science fiction, and gravitated toward science classes. She graduated from Sunnyside High in 1967 and went on to earn degrees at the University of Washington and the University of Houston, achieving a Ph.D. in mechanical and biomedical engineering.
She worked as an engineer at the Rockwell International Space Division and flew five space shuttle missions from 1985-1998. She later held management and administrative positions at the Johnson Space Center in Houston.
After retiring from NASA, she served as the president and CEO of the Seattle Museum of Flight, owned a consulting business and now is the director of higher education for Boeing Co.
Throughout her life, she often has visited schools — especially those in Sunnyside — to encourage dreamers to pursue science careers and their passions.
"She really pushes that you can do whatever you want if you put your mind to it," said Van Wingerden.
The Intrepid's Enterprise Exhibit Gets Ready to Launch
Soterios Johnson - WNYC TV (New York)
The new space shuttle pavilion at New York's Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum opens to the public on Thursday. It will offer visitors an up-close and personal view of the space shuttle Enterprise, as well as exhibits on NASA's current missions on earth and space science, research on improving aeronautics and the rockets destined to take humans to explore the solar system.
Workers were putting the finishing touches on the pavilion, as opening day approached.
"All the graphics have been installed," said Eric Boehm, the museum's Curator of Aviation. "Right now, we're installing a lot of video monitors and all those shows will be test-run here the next couple days. You know, just getting everything tweaked."
The opening of the Intrepid Museum's Space Shuttle pavilion will be celebrated by a five day long Space Fest, featuring a free concert, special hands-on robotics and astronomy displays, and opportunities to meet former and current astronauts, many of whom have ties to the New York City area.
According to Boehm, visitors to the Enterprise will have much better access to this shuttle compared to the other shuttles on display at other museums.
"We've kind of propped her up a little higher," Boehm said. "The temporary structure kind of surrounds the shuttle, so really the best views will be right underneath and right around the sides of her. So, the public will get all around."
The shuttle and its exhibits are currently housed in a huge white inflatable structure on the Intrepid's flight deck, where it will remain for the next couple of years as the museum plans and builds a separate permanent structure to house the Enterprise. Boehm says when that new Space Center is completed, it will be a monument to the shuttle program, NASA and New York City.
Enterprise was NASA's first space shuttle, but it never actually went into space. It was built as a prototype to perform test flights and landings. Nonetheless, the museum considers it an important acquisition.
"We look at the Enterprise as really the test vehicle that made the rest all possible, that made all the space exploration possible with the space shuttle program,” said Matt Woods, the Intrepid Museum's senior vice president of Operations. “Without Enterprise, you never would have gotten further with the program.”
The arrival of Enterprise in New York was a year in the making. It had been on display at the Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum's Udvar-Hazy Center outside Washington D.C., where it was the collection's centerpiece. On April 27, Enterprise was transported to New York's Kennedy Airport on the back of NASA's specially-modified Boeing 747 jetliner.
Before landing, the plane performed a dramatic low-altitude fly-over of its new hometown, passing by landmarks including the Statue of Liberty, the World Trade Center and the Intrepid itself. Then, in June, the shuttle was taken by barge to the Intrepid Museum, where it was hoisted on the museum's flight deck by crane.
With the space shuttle program's retirement in 2011, all of the surviving shuttles found homes at museums across the country. The Discovery’s new home is the Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum outside nation's capitol. Shuttle Endeavor is in Los Angeles at the California Science Center. The Atlantis is at Florida's Kennedy Space Center.
Hard Problems Solved For Space Benefit Companies On The Ground
Richard Mullins - Aerospace Daily
Solving challenging engine problems for NASA directly led one company to improve its coal gasification technology on the ground, an executive says.
John Vilja, a vice president for Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, says the extreme challenge of manned space missions drives terrestrial achievement as well. “We force ourselves into multidisciplinary advancement, which in turn enables new solutions to some of our toughest challenges here on Earth,” he told a House Science subcommittee hearing July 12.
The company’s improved coal gasification uses 30% less water, cuts capital and product costs and reduces emissions. Plus, the technology isn’t picky about coal blends.
Pratt & Whitney has partnered with the Energy Department, ExxonMobil and Alberta Innovates to develop the product for market. The diversification of technologies and customers benefits its launch engine customers, Vilja says, by spreading fixed costs over a larger market base.
All this, Vilja told the committee, came from working with NASA. “There is no commercial analog to push such investment since the term of any payback is not clearly understood at the start of the projects.”
Richard Aubrecht, a vice president at Moog Inc., told the committee: “The manned space programs all have really hard problem statements,” using the wording familiar to engineers. The mission demands extend previous technology limits and companies put their best talent to work on NASA projects. As a result, Aubrecht says, companies working with NASA achieve new technical capabilities.
“This NASA model is an example where a federal investment in technology development has an enormous impact on the overall economy,” he says.
As for policy issues Congress should address to keep the good results rolling, Aubrecht says funding needs to be steady so NASA can keeping paying primes and subcontractors, ensuring projects have stability and continuity. NASA’s “start/stop” history is a major impediment to success.
Local role will evolve with space program
Daytona Beach News-Journal (Editorial)
SpaceX made major news last week when NASA announced that the Dragon space capsule had passed a key design review, opening up the possibility that future manned missions can be done with the company's Dragon.
Even more important, trips to the International Space Station and other parts of low space orbit may soon be carried out by Americans -- using American-made ships.
Right now, Americans are paying the Russians to taxi them to the International Space Station because of the 2011 retirement of the space shuttle program. It's an outsourcing patch that doesn't sit well with many Americans, given that we have so much aerospace potential from Cape Canaveral to Daytona Beach to Houston and California.
But federal officials have promised to renew the manned missions sometime in the next decade. When that time arrives, Volusia County's aerospace assets will be part of the process.
There is no denying that the U.S. space program is going through its biggest change since the early 1960s, when President John F. Kennedy vowed to get to the moon.
The space program's evolution is still in progress. In its new form, both the private sector and the federal government will be part of the ongoing exploration of space.
Although the politicians have not actually come out and said it, the new space program of the 21st century won't be the proportionally mammoth program of the 1960s and early 1970s.
In the face of long-term budget constraints, the new space program will be a bit less ambitious. And private-sector players like SpaceX will carry part of the cost burden.
Volusia County is well positioned to be part of the new efforts that emerge on the Space Coast. The county has NASA workers and former workers, and it also has strong ties to private-sector aerospace companies through Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. Those ties will grow as the university develops its research and technology park.
Embry-Riddle is also developing the new air-traffic technology, NextGen, at the Daytona Beach International Airport. The NextGen technology will replace current land-based technology with satellite-based navigation systems. This program involves the Federal Aviation Administration and a number of aerospace and high-tech companies, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin and GE Aviation.
So much of Volusia County's future investment in aerospace technologies could come through Embry-Riddle and not NASA.
But NASA also will provide more jobs to Volusia County residents -- but not as many as during the years of the Apollo missions and the space shuttles.
There will still be a large role for NASA in future space exploration. The nation will need to launch satellites and military payloads. And, of course, U.S. manned space flight -- from U.S. launch sites --will likely resume within 10 to 15 years using a new rocket and a new crew vehicle.
NASA and the private sector are also taking steps toward the mining of asteroids for rare materials, although that feat could be years and years away. The possibility, however, does demonstrate the commercial potential of space exploration.
As the federal government's resources shrink, the private sector is providing a new source of revenue -- and a new partner -- for the government's space program.
Space has become a growth industry for the private sector. Satellite technology is crucial to the operation of a number of private-sector industries, including television and communication.
There will be future launches of Americans to the International Space Station and beyond; to asteroids; and perhaps there will be an expansion of space tourism.
What we are witnessing now is a gradual transition to a new type of space industry, one that will hopefully carry the Space Coast well into the 21st century.
First Look: China’s Big New Rockets
Craig Covault - AmericaSpace.org
Images from China’s new heavy rocket development program show spotless production facilities with advanced tooling to build China’s new Long March 5/CZ-5 heavy rocket, along with even more advanced launchers to come.
In addition to CZ-5 hardware development, China is completing design studies on two 11 million lb. thrust Long March 9 maximum heavy lift rocket configurations. If approved for final development, one of the designs would emerge for flight in 2020-2025 with the capability to launch Chinese astronauts to the surface of the Moon.
The concepts mean that China is designing “a Super Saturn V rocket,” says Charles P. Vick, a highly experienced analyst with GlobalSecurity.Org.
The Long March 5 and other future planned vehicles are shown here in context with each other for the first time in a major news article.
Images of the construction underway at China’s new Wenchang Satellite Launch Center on Hainan island are also shown as the site is readied to fire Long March 5’s into space by 2014.
Currently, six Long March 5 vehicle configurations are planned for different missions, with a maximum payload capacity of 55,000 lbs. to LEO and nearly 31,000 lbs. to geostationary transfer orbits. This makes it more powerful than a Delta IV Heavy, depending upon the mission configuration.
Details emerging from largely secret Chinese rocket projects point up the importance of the Long March 5 to future far more powerful Chinese rockets.
Whether the timing of China’s Long March 9 development is a deliberate challenge to the U. S. is unknown. But while neither China nor the U. S. professes to be in a new space race, they may well already be in one.
The most powerful version of the new U. S. Space Launch System (SLS) rocket currently under development is scheduled to be ready for flight at the same time as the CZ-9 to carry NASA astronauts beyond Earth orbit to the Moon, Lagrangian points, asteroids and eventually Mars.
The new Long March 9 details were revealed by Liang Xiaohong, the Communist Party Chief at the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology (CALT), China’s largest rocket contractor. Vick at Global Security did an extensive review of Liang’s revelations.
Liang outlined several new Long March versions, virtually all of them testing elements that would eventually find their way into the Long March 9 that has 4 million lb. more of liftoff thrust than the 7.5 million lb. thrust NASA Saturn V. Forty-three years ago this week a Saturn V propelled the Apollo 11 astronauts to the first manned landing on the Moon on July 20, 1969.
The Long March 5 appears positioned in the development flow to function like the U. S. Saturn 1B rockets did in relation to the Saturn V in Apollo. That role was to use a powerful, but smaller launch vehicle to launch key elements of the program like the Apollo Command/Service modules and Lunar Modules for test in Earth orbit.
There is one major difference with the Long March 5 however. It is powerful enough to launch a Shenzhou manned spacecraft on a lunar orbit flight, a mission the Saturn 1Bs could not duplicate.
For the massive Long March 9, the Chinese have both an “Option A” oxygen/kerosene powered launcher and an “Option B oxygen/hydrogen rocket. The detailed specifications for both rocket concepts are at the bottom of this article.
Option A appears to be the preferred of the two options because its first stage uses liquid propellant strap on boosters, compared with ”Option B” that combines an oxygen/hydrogen core with solid rocket boosters, an area where China lacks experience.
The Option A concept would stand 321 ft. tall and have a design payload to low Earth orbit of 130 metric tons (286,601 lb.) exactly the same as the largest of two SLS versions.
As part of an oxygen/kerosene Long March 9 project, China has already started development of a large new oxygen/kerosene rocket engine called the YF-650 that stems directly from the Long March 5 in advanced production.
“The YF-100, oxygen/kerosene engine with 120 metric tons of thrust for the new Long March-5 debuting in 2014 forms the technical basis for 330 metric tons thrust YF-330 single thrust chamber engine,” said Vick.
“It in turn is being combined with a second identical thrust chamber engine to create the YF-650 engine with 650 metric tons thrust,” he said.
This is similar to the Russian Energomash RD-180 design used on the Russian Zenit. The same engine was essentially cut in half to power the Atlas V.
“The Chinese will combine several of them to achieve 5,200 metric tons of liftoff thrust. That equates to an 11.46 million lb. thrust ‘Super Saturn V’ class rocket,” said Vick.
Data on the Option A and Option B Chinese “Super Saturn Vs” compiled by Vick from Chinese sources is presented in chart form below.
CZ-9/Long March-9 Lunar, Planetary Heavy Lift Booster
Configurations Studies
Concept-A*
Concept-B
Original Launch Thrust metric tons thrust force 2009
3,000
3,000
New 2012 launch thrust metric ton’s
5,200
5,000
Payload capacity- metric tons mass
130
133
Maximum overall booster diameter meters
15.70
15.70
Maximum design height for study meters
98
101-108
Launch mass metric tons
4,100
4,150
Strap-on boosters
4 – liquid Kerosene, Lox boosters
4 five segment solid propellant motors
Strap-on boosters diameter meters
3.35
3.35
Strap-on booster thrust metric tons
1 x 650 x 4 = 2,600, engine YF-650
1 x 1,000, x 4 = 4,000 Solid Motor
Strap-on propellant mass metric tons
1 x 320 x 4= 1,280
1 x 575 4 =2,300
Core Stages diameter meters
8-9
8-9
Core first stage metric tons thrust, propellants and engines
4 x 650 = 2,600, YF-650 engines, Kerosene, Lox propellants**
5 x 200 = 1,000 YF-220 engines, Lox, Hydrogen propellants
Core first stage propellant mass metric tons
1,756
1,000
Core second stage maximum diameters meters
8-9
8-9
Core second stage thrust metric tons and propellants
2 x 200 = 400, Lox, Hydrogen propellants
1 x 200 = 200, YF-220 engine, Lox, Hydrogen
Core second stage propellant mass metric tons
Visions of Spaceflight Circa 2001 (1984)
David Portree - Wired.com
The year 1984 was nearly equidistant between the first moon landing of 1969 and the evocative year 2001. The Shuttle, flown first on 12 April 1981, had been declared operational by President Ronald Reagan, who in his January 1984 State of the Union Address had also given NASA leave to build its long-sought-after low-Earth-orbit (LEO) Space Station. Space supporters could be forgiven for believing that, after the gap in U.S. human space missions spanning from July 1975 to April 1981, a new day was dawning; that Shuttle and Station would lead in the 1990s to piloted flights beyond LEO. Surely, Americans would once again walk on the moon by 2001, and would put bootprints on Mars not long after.
There were, of course, some problems: despite being declared operational, Shuttle operations had yet to become routine. Despite some high-flung rhetoric at the time it was announced – President Reagan had said that we would “follow our dreams to distant stars” – the Station he agreed to fund was meant to serve as a laboratory, not a jumping-off place for missions beyond LEO. Hardware for any “space port” function it might eventually fulfill would need to be bolted on later, after some future President gave the word. In addition, NASA’s robotic exploration program remained a shadow of its former self. There would, for example, be no U.S. probe in the international armada to Halley’s Comet in 1985-1986.
Nevertheless, with American astronauts in space again and concept artists hard at work on tantalizing visions of sprawling space stations, very few foresaw rough waters ahead. It seemed the perfect time to revive advanced planning for missions to the moon and beyond, which had been virtually moribund in the U.S. since the early 1970s.
Advanced planning revived first outside of NASA. Participants in the 1981 and 1984 Case for Mars conferences, mindful of how Apollo had left no long-term foothold on the moon, developed a plan for a permanent Mars base. The Planetary Society, with 120,000 members the largest spaceflight advocacy group on Earth, had helped to underwrite the Case for Mars conferences. The Planetary Society had grown rapidly following its founding in 1980 in large part because its President was planetary scientist Carl Sagan, whose 1980 PBS television series Cosmos had done more to popularize spaceflight than any space public outreach effort since the Walt Disney-Wernher von Braun collaborations of the 1950s.
In 1984, The Planetary Society paid the Space Science Department of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) in suburban Chicago, Illinois, to outline three piloted missions for the first decade of the 21st century. The three missions were: a moon mission intended to scout out a site for a permanent base; a two-year journey to 1982DB, in 1984 the most easily accessible Earth-approaching asteroid known (it remains one of the most accessible, but is now called 4660 Nereus); and, most ambitious, a three-year mission to land three astronauts on Mars for 30 days.
The missions were not meant to occur in order; in fact, any of them could stand alone. In its report to The Planetary Society, the six-man SAIC study team declared that “any. . .would be a commanding goal for future U.S. space exploration.”
The Planetary Society favored space missions of an international character; it saw in them a means of reducing geopolitical tension on Earth and of dividing the cost of exploration among the space-faring nations. In his Foreword to the SAIC report, Carl Sagan wrote of his hope that the study would “stimulate renewed interest in major international initiatives for the exploration of nearby worlds in space.” The SAIC team did not, however, emphasize this; apart from the European Space Agency-provided Spacelab modules upon which the pressurized modules in its spacecraft would be based, there was little evidence of international involvement in its missions.
The SAIC planners assumed that NASA would convert the Space Station into an LEO spaceport at the turn of the 21st century. The U.S. civilian space agency would use its Shuttle fleet to launch to the Station hangars, living accommodations for crews in transit to destinations beyond LEO, remote manipulators, propellant storage tanks, and auxiliary spacecraft such as Orbital Transfer Vehicles (OTVs). Parts and propellants for the team’s piloted moon, asteroid, and Mars spacecraft would also reach the Station on board Shuttle Orbiters.
The SAIC team wrote that it had assumed no Space Shuttle upgrades. The standard Shuttle Orbiter had a 15-by-60-foot (4.6-by-18.5-meter) payload bay and could in theory carry up to 60,000 pounds (27,270 kilograms) of cargo into LEO. Curiously, however, the team estimated the number of Shuttle flights needed to launch parts and propellants for its lunar and asteroid missions based on the assumption that the Shuttle could transport 65,000 pounds (29,545 kilograms) to LEO. Only its Mars mission estimates assumed use of the standard “60K” Shuttle.
SAIC’s lunar base site survey mission for The Planetary Society closely resembled the one it had presented in its December 1983 report to the National Science Foundation. The mission – for which SAIC gave no starting date – would need 12 Shuttle launches and four “sorties” to the moon. Each sortie would make use of a pair of reusable OTVs based at the Space Station.
According to the SAIC planners, the Station would normally include in its fleet of auxiliary vehicles two OTVs, each with a fully fueled mass of about 70,400 pounds (32,000 kilograms). These would suffice for the company’s lunar mission, but additional OTVs would be needed for the asteroid and Mars missions.
At the start of each lunar mission, the lunar payload/OTV #2/OTV #1 stack would move away from the Space Station. OTV #1 would fire its twin RL-10-derived engines to push OTV #2 and a lunar payload out of LEO, then would separate and fire its engines again to slow itself and return to the Space Station for refurbishment and refueling. OTV #1 would burn 59,870 pounds (27,215 kilograms) of propellants.
OTV #2 would then fire its engines to place the lunar payload on course for the moon. Depending on the nature of its payload, it would then either fire its engines to slow down and enter lunar orbit or would separate from the payload and adjust its course so that it could swing around the moon and fall back to Earth.
The SAIC team envisioned that OTV #2 would be outfitted with a reusable aerobrake heat shield. Following return from the moon, OTV #2 would skim through Earth’s upper atmosphere to shed speed, then would reorient itself about its long axis to gain lift and skip out of the atmosphere. At apogee (the high point in its Earth-centered orbit), it would fire its engines briefly to raise its perigee (the low point in its orbit) above the atmosphere. OTV #2 would then rendezvous with the Station, where it would be refurbished and refueled.
The SAIC team’s lunar mission would begin with unmanned Sortie #1. A pair of nearly identical 15,830-pound (7195-kilogram) pressurized rover/trailer combinations would reach the moon on a one-way lander. OTV #2 would swing around the moon after releasing its rover/trailers and lander, which would descend directly to a soft landing in the proposed lunar base region.
On Sortie #2, OTV #2 would enter a 30-mile-high (50-kilometer-high) lunar orbit and release an unmanned, unfueled single-stage Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) lander. It would then fire its twin engines to depart lunar orbit, aerobrake in Earth’s atmosphere, and return to the Space Station.
The first manned sortie, Sortie #3, would see OTV #2 deliver to lunar orbit four astronauts in a pressurized crew module. They would pilot the OTV #2/crew module combination to a docking with the waiting LEM. The crew would board the LEM and load it with propellants from OTV #2, then would undock from OTV #2, which would fire its engines to depart lunar orbit, fall to Earth, aerobrake, and return to the Space Station.
The astronauts would descend in the LEM to a landing near the one-way lander and twin rover-trailers. They would divide up two per rover-trailer and commence a 30-day survey of candidate base sites within the 30-mile-wide (50-kilometer-wide) proposed lunar base region. In addition to providing living quarters, the rover-trailers would each carry 2640 pounds (1200 kilograms) of science instruments for determining surface composition, seismicity, and stratigraphy at candidate base sites, plus a scoop or blade for moving large quantities of lunar dirt. They would rely on liquid oxygen-liquid methane fuel cells for electricity to power their drive motors.
The rover-trailers would travel together for safety; if one broke down and could not be repaired, the other could return all four astronauts to the LEM. Travel in harsh sunlight would be avoided. SAIC assumed that the rover-trailer combinations would spend most of the two-week lunar day parked at a “base camp” under reflective thermal shields, from which they would venture out for only a few 24-hour excursions. They would travel continuously during the two-week lunar night, however, their way lit by headlights and earthlight.
Sortie #4 would see OTV #2 and the crew module arrive unmanned in lunar orbit. The crew would park the rover-trailers under the base camp thermal shields, load the LEM with samples, film, and other data from their traverses, and ascend in the LEM to lunar orbit to rendezvous and dock with the OTV #2/crew module combination. They would then undock from the LEM, depart lunar orbit, aerobrake in Earth’s atmosphere, and rendezvous with the Space Station. The SAIC planners proposed that the orbiting LEM and parked rover-trailers be put to work again in the initial phase of lunar base buildup.
For its second manned mission, SAIC considered four asteroid targets (three of which were hypothetical) and eight mission plans. It settled on a two-year voyage with a flyby of the Main Belt asteroid 1577 Reiss and a 30-day stopover at Earth-approaching asteroid 1982DB. Nine upgraded (“65K”) Shuttle Orbiters would launch parts and propellants for the three-man asteroid mission spacecraft and the OTVs necessary to launch it from Earth orbit.
Following assembly and checkout, the manned asteroid mission spacecraft/OTV stack would move away from the Space Station. A total of five OTVs would be needed to launch the spacecraft out of Earth orbit. OTV #1 would ignite at the stack’s perigee to raise its apogee. It would then separate and fire its engines to return to the Station. OTV #2 would ignite at next perigee to boost the stack’s apogee higher, then would detach and use an aerokit to return to the Station. OTV #3 and OTV #4 would do the same.
The time between perigees would increase with each burn: the five-burn sequence would need about 48 hours, with nearly 24 hours separating the OTV #4 and OTV #5 burns. On 5 January 2000, OTV #5 would fire its engines until it exhausted its propellants, launching SAIC’s asteroid mission spacecraft out of Earth orbit and onto a Sun-centered path toward 1577 Reiss and 1982DB. OTV #5 would be discarded; that is, it would not be reused.
The crew would next spin up their spacecraft. Twin 81.25-foot (25-meter) hollow arms, each carrying a solar array and a radiator panel, would link twin habitat modules to a cylindrical central hub. Habitats, booms, and hub would spin three times per minute to create acceleration in the habitats, which the crew would feel as a continuous pull of 0.25 Earth gravities.
SAIC lacked data on whether 0.25 gravities of acceleration would counter the deleterious effects of long stays in weightlessness (indeed, such data do not exist at this writing). The team explained that its choice of 0.25 gravities constituted “a compromise between the desire to have a near normal gravity, a short habitat arm length, and a slow spin rate.”
A logistics supply module and two propulsion systems – liquid methane/liquid oxygen for course corrections during the long trip from Earth to 1982DB and for departure from 1982DB, plus storable bipropellant for 1982DB stationkeeping and course corrections during the short trip from 1982DB to Earth – would link to the central hub’s aft end. An experiment module with a 16.25-foot (five-meter) radio dish antenna for high-data-rate communications, an “EVA station” for spacewalks, and a conical Earth-return capsule with a 37.4-foot (11.5-meter) flattened cone (“coolie hat”) aerobrake would link to the hub’s front. The modules on either end of the hub would spin as a unit in the direction opposite hub, arms, and habitats, so would appear to remain motionless. Astronauts inside them would experience weightlessness.
The crew would point the Earth-return vehicle aerobrake and twin solar arrays toward the Sun, placing radiators, propulsion systems, logistics module, hub, hollow arms, experiment module, EVA station, and Earth-return capsule in protective shadow. In the event of a solar flare, the crew would use the spacecraft’s structure as radiation shielding: they would assemble in the logistics module, placing aerobrake, Earth-return capsule, EVA station, experiment module, hub, and logistics module structure and contents between themselves and the erupting Sun.
During their two-year mission, the crew would spend about 23 months doing “cruise science.” 440 pounds (200 kilograms) of the asteroid mission spacecraft’s 1650-pound (750-kilogram) cruise science payload would be devoted to studies of human physiology in space, and 375 pounds (170 kilograms) would be used to perform solar observations and other astronomy and astrophysics studies. In addition, the spacecraft would carry 55 pounds (25 kilograms) of long-duration exposure samples on its exterior. These swatches of spacecraft metals, foils, paints, ceramics, plastics, fabrics, and glasses would be retrieved by spacewalking astronauts before the end of the mission.
SAIC’s asteroid mission spacecraft would fly past 1577 Reiss at a speed of 2.8 miles (4.7 kilometers) per second on 2 March 2001, 14 months into the mission, and would intercept 1982DB six months after that, on 12 September 2001. It would spend 30 days near 1982DB, during which time Earth would range from 55 million miles (90 million kilometers) distant on 12 September to 30 million miles (50 million kilometers) away on 12 October.
While close to 1577 Reiss, the crew would first use the “asteroid science” equipment packed in their spacecraft’s experiment module. They would bring to bear on the asteroid a 220-pound (100-kilogram) package of remote-sensing instruments, including a mapping radar and instruments for determining surface composition. They would also image 1577 Reiss using high-resolution cameras with a total mass of 110 pounds (50 kilograms).
These instruments would again be put to use as the spacecraft closed on 1982DB. During approach, the crew would locate the 1600-foot-wide (500-meter-wide) asteroid precisely in space, determine its spin axis and rate, and perform long-range mapping. They would then halt a few hundred miles/kilometers from 1982DB to perform detailed global mapping. This would enable selection of sites for in-depth investigations.
The astronauts would move their spacecraft closer to 1982DB, halting a few tens of miles/kilometers away to commence in-depth exploration. During this period, they would move their spacecraft even closer, to within a few miles/kilometers of the asteroid, at least 10 times. During these close approaches, two astronauts would each don a Manned Maneuvering Unit (MMU) in the EVA station, then would depart the spacecraft to land at a site of interest on the asteroid. They would spend up to four hours away from their spacecraft each time. After the crew returned from the surface, the spacecraft would resume its position several tens of miles/kilometers away from 1982DB.
The astronauts would deploy four small and three large experiment packages on 1982DB and collect a total of 330 pounds (150 kilograms) of samples. The small experiment packages, with a mass of 110-pounds (50 kilograms), would each include a seismometer and instruments for measuring temperature and determining surface composition. The 220-pound (100-kilogram) large packages would include a “deep core drill,” a sensor package for insertion into the core hole, and a mortar. After the surface crew returned to the safety of the spacecraft, they would fire the mortar to send shockwaves through 1982DB. The small-package seismometers would register the shockwaves, enabling scientists to chart the asteroid’s interior structure.
The SAIC team noted that 1982DB would have “negligible gravitational attraction,” so the asteroid mission spacecraft would be unable to orbit it in a conventional sense. Spacecraft and asteroid would instead share nearly the same orbit around the Sun. 1982DB would, meanwhile, rotate at some unknown rate. The asteroid’s rotation would mean that astronauts at a site of interest on its surface would tend to be carried away from their spacecraft. In fact, if 1982DB rotated quickly enough, astronauts on its surface might pass out of sight of the spacecraft during their four-hour “asteroid-walks.”
The SAIC planners judged that loss of radio and visual contact between spacecraft and surface crew would be undesirable, so they proposed that the shipboard astronaut perform station-keeping maneuvers to match 1982DB’s rotation; that is, that he keep his shipmates in sight by maintaining a “forced circular orbit” about 1982DB. The team budgeted enough storable propellants for a station-keeping velocity change of 32.5 feet (10 meters) per second per surface visit.
If 1982DB were found to rotate slowly, then the velocity change needed to maintain the spacecraft in its forced orbit would be reduced. In that case, the only limitations on the number of surface visits would be astronaut stamina, the supply of gaseous nitrogen MMU propellant, and the mission’s planned 30-day stay-time near the asteroid.
On 12 October 2001, the crew would depart 1982DB and bend their trajectory so that it would almost intersect Earth. Three months later, they would load their samples, film, and other data into the conical Earth-return capsule and undock. On 13 January 2002, almost exactly two years after Earth departure, the crew would aerobrake their capsule in Earth’s atmosphere and pilot it to a rendezvous with the Space Station. Meanwhile, the abandoned asteroid mission spacecraft would swing by Earth and enter orbit around the Sun.
SAIC’s third proposed mission for The Planetary Society, the first piloted Mars landing, would employ four astronauts and two separate spacecraft. The largest, the tripartite Mars Outbound Vehicle (MOV), would comprise the Interplanetary Vehicle, the Mars Orbiter, and the conical Mars Lander. The Mars Orbiter and Mars Lander together would comprise the Mars Exploration Vehicle.
The Interplanetary Vehicle would resemble the SAIC team’s asteroid mission spacecraft, though it would lack an Earth-return capsule and would move through space with its logistics module pointed toward the Sun. The Interplanetary Vehicle’s hub, twin hollow arms, and twin habitats would revolve independently of the rest of the MOV at a rate of three times per minute. Its EVA station would link it to the Mars Orbiter, a bare-bones, non-rotating vehicle made up of a single habitat module and hollow arm, a solar array, a radiator, a radio dish antenna, an EVA station, an unspecified propulsion system, and the conical Mars Departure Vehicle (MDV). The Mars Orbiter’s EVA station would link it to the Mars Lander ascent stage. The lander would include a 175.5-foot (54-meter) flattened cone aerobrake.
SAIC’s second Mars mission spacecraft, the Earth Return Vehicle (ERV), would resemble the asteroid mission spacecraft even more than would the Interplanetary Vehicle. It would, like the asteroid spacecraft, move through space with its Earth-return capsule aerobrake pointed toward the Sun.
The unmanned ERV would depart Earth ahead of the MOV, on 5 June 2003, but would follow a path that would cause it to reach Mars after the MOV, on 23 January 2004. A total of five Shuttle Orbiters would launch ERV and OTV parts and propellants to the Space Station, then three OTVs (the two normally based at the Station plus one assembled at the Station specifically for the Mars mission) would launch the ERV toward Mars.
The OTVs would take it in turns to ignite their engine pairs at perigee to increase the ERV/OTV stack’s apogee. OTV #1 would use its engines to return to the Station after separating from the ERV/OTV #3/OTV #2 stack. OTV #2 would rely on its aerokit to return to the Station. OTV #3 would expend all of its propellants to place the 94,600-pound (43,000-kilogram) ERV on course for Mars, then would be discarded. ERV Earth-orbit departure would last about six hours.
The MOV with four astronauts on board would leave Earth orbit 10 days later, on 15 June 2003. Thirteen Space Shuttle launches would place MOV and OTV parts and propellants into Earth orbit. A total of seven OTV burns over the space of a little more than two days would boost the 265,300-pound (120,600-kilogram) MOV toward Mars. Following separation, OTV #1 would ignite its engines to slow itself and return to the Station; OTV #2 through OTV #6 would return after aerobraking; and OTV #7 would exhaust its propellants and be discarded.
The MOV would follow a slightly faster Earth-Mars trajectory than would the ERV, so would arrive at Mars on 24 December 2003, 30 days ahead of the ERV. Assuming that telemetry from the unmanned ERV showed that it remained able to support a crew, the MOV astronauts would cast off the Interplanetary Vehicle (top image above), strap into the Mars Lander ascent capsule, and aerobrake in Mars’s atmosphere. The abandoned Interplanetary Vehicle, meanwhile, would swing past Mars and enter solar orbit.
Following aerobraking, the Mars Exploration Vehicle would climb to an apoapsis (orbit high point) of 1000 kilometers. Once there, the Mars Orbiter and Mars Lander would separate. One astronaut would remain on board the Mars Orbiter. At apoapsis, he or she would ignite the Mars Orbiter’s propulsion system to raise its periapsis (orbit low point) to 600 miles (1000 kilometers), giving it a circular orbit about Mars. The three astronauts in the Mars Lander, meanwhile, would fire its engine briefly at apoapsis to raise its periapsis to an altitude just above Mars’s atmosphere.
As the planet rotated beneath the Mars Lander, the three astronauts would prepare for atmosphere entry and landing. As the target landing site rotated into view, they would ignite the Mars Lander’s engine at apoapsis, lowering their periapsis into the atmosphere. They would cast off the aerobrake following atmosphere entry and lower to a soft landing using the Mars Lander descent engine.
Immediately after touchdown, the crew would deploy a teleoperated rover. Trailing power cables, it would carry a small nuclear reactor a safe distance away from the Mars Lander and bury it. The crew would then remotely activate the reactor to supply their encampment with electricity.
SAIC’s Mars mission would, of course, have a range of cruise, Mars orbital, and Mars surface science objectives. The study team explained that, during the six-month Earth-Mars cruise, the astronauts would have at their disposal on board the Interplanetary Vehicle a cruise science payload identical to that on the asteroid mission spacecraft. Human physiology studies during Earth-Mars cruise would focus on keeping the Mars landing crew in good shape for a strenuous 30 days on the planet. The astronauts would also observe the Sun.
At Mars, they would perform Mars Orbiter and Mars Lander science. The “primary duty” of the lone astronaut on board the Mars Orbiter would be to support the surface team, the SAIC planners explained. Four hundred and forty pounds (200 kilograms) of remote sensors would enable him or her to spot threatening weather conditions near the landing site and generate detailed maps of landing site terrain and surface composition for the surface crew and for scientists and mission planners on Earth.
The surface crew would have as “a major goal” the selection of a future Mars base site, the SAIC team explained. They would have at their disposal 1980 pounds (900 kilograms) of science equipment, including a 220-pound (100-kilogram) Mobile Geophysics Lab rover, 110 pounds (50 kilograms) of high-resolution cameras, four small deployable packages with a mass of 110 pounds (50 kilograms) each, and three large deployable packages with a total mass of 880 pounds (400 kilograms).
The small packages would each measure temperature, seismicity, and surface composition, while the large packages would include a 440-pound (200-kilogram) deep-core drill, a 220-pound (100-kilogram) sensor package for insertion down core holes, and a mortar for generating shock waves that the seimometers in the small packages would register. The surface crew would also set up an inflatable “tent” in which they would begin examination of the 550 pounds (250 kilograms) of Mars samples they would collect.
As the ERV approached Mars, the surface crew would transfer their samples, film, and other data to the Mars Lander ascent stage and blast off to rendezvous with the Mars Orbiter. The nuclear reactor they left behind might power equipment long after they departed; it could, for example, drive a system that would extract oxygen from Mars’s atmosphere and cache it for future Mars base builders, SAIC suggested.
After docking with the Mars Orbiter, the four astronauts would transfer their surface and orbital Mars data to the MDV. They would then undock from the Mars Orbiter in the MDV and set out in earnest pursuit of their ride home. Because launching it back onto an interplanetary path after crew recovery would demand considerable quantities of propellants, the ERV would not enter Mars orbit; instead, to reduce overall Mars mission mass (and thus the number of Shuttle launches needed to launch it into LEO and OTVs needed to boost it on course for Mars), the crew would rendezvous with it as it raced past the planet on a free-return trajectory that would take it back to Earth after 1.5 circuits of the Sun and 2.5 years of flight time.
This approach, which SAIC termed Mars Hyperbolic Rendezvous (MHR), resembled the Flyby Landing Excursion Mode put forward by Republic Aviation engineer R. Titus in 1966. As might be expected, given the critical maneuvers required to return the crew to Earth, the SAIC team felt it necessary to study possible contingency modes for crew recovery in the event that MHR failed. If, for example, the unmanned ERV malfunctioned en route to Mars before the crew discarded the Interplanetary Vehicle and aerobraked the Mars Exploration Vehicle into Mars orbit, the astronauts would perform a powered Mars swingby maneuver using Mars Lander and Mars Orbiter propulsion, bending their course so that they would intercept Earth 2.5 years later. The crew would separate in the Mars Lander near Earth and use its aerobrake to capture into Earth orbit.
Assuming, however, that all went as planned, the MDV would dock with the ERV a few hours after leaving Mars orbit. As Mars shrank behind them, the astronauts would transfer to the ERV with their samples and other data, cast off the MDV, and spin the ERV hub, arms, and habitats.
During the 2.5-year cruise home to Earth, the astronauts would use a science payload identical to that on board the Interplanetary Vehicle and the asteroid mission spacecraft to study human physiology during long-term spaceflight, the Sun, and astrophysics. The SAIC team suggested that they might also continue study of the samples they had collected on Mars, though it did not indicate how this would be accomplished in the absence of an isolation lab and the necessary instruments and tools.
On 5 June 2006, three years to the day after they left Earth, the crew would undock in the 9750-pound (4430-kilogram) Earth-return capsule, aerobrake in Earth’s atmosphere, and rendezvous with the Space Station. The abandoned ERV, meanwhile, would swing past Earth and enter solar orbit.
SAIC offered preliminary cost estimates for its three missions and compared them with the cost of the Apollo Lunar Program, which encompassed 11 manned missions, six of which landed on the moon. A dispassionate observer might be forgiven for seeing the team’s cost estimates as unrealistically low. Partly this was the result of Shuttle cost-accounting. Taking its lead from NASA, the SAIC team calculated that the price tag for the 18 Shuttle flights needed for its Mars mission would total only $2 billion, or about $110 million per flight.
The lunar base site survey mission would, the SAIC planners calculated, cost only $16.5 billion, or about a quarter of the Apollo Program’s $75-billion cost in 1984 dollars. The asteroid mission would be slightly cheaper, coming in at $16.3 billion. The Mars mission, not surprisingly, would be the most costly of the three. Even so, it would only cost about half as much as Apollo; SAIC pegged its cost at just $38.5 billion.
Less than two years after SAIC turned over its study to The Planetary Society, the optimistic era of piloted mission planning begun with the launch of the first Space Shuttle on 12 April 1981, drew to a close. Following the loss of the Shuttle Orbiter Challenger on 28 January 1986, at the start of the 25th Space Shuttle mission, advanced planning did not stop; in fact, it expanded as part of efforts to demonstrate that NASA’s Shuttle and Station Programs had worthwhile long-term objectives, and thus should continue despite Challenger.
The rules had, however, changed. After Challenger, few planners assumed that the Space Station President Reagan had called for in January 1984 would ever become an LEO spaceport, and even fewer assumed that Shuttle Orbiters alone would suffice to launch the components and propellants needed for piloted missions beyond LEO. New plans would call for a purpose-built LEO spaceport to augment the Space Station and Shuttle-derived heavy-lift rockets to augment the Space Shuttle.
END
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 7/18/2012
Tested on: 7/18/2012 6:58:10 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment