Friday, April 29, 2011
Six Planets Now Aligned in the Dawn Sky
YahooNews: Six Planets Now Aligned in the Dawn Sky
If you get up any morning for the next few weeks, you’ll be treated to the sight of all the planets except Saturn arrayed along the ecliptic, the path of the sun through the sky.
For the last two months, almost all the planets have been hiding behind the sun, but this week they all emerge and are arrayed in a grand line above the rising sun. Mercury, Venus, Mars, and Jupiter are visible, and you can add Uranus and Neptune to your count if you have binoculars or a small telescope.
This sky map of the six planets shows how they should appear at dawn to observers with clear weather and an unobstructed view.
Astrologers have always been fascinated by planetary alignments, and the doomsayers of 2012 have been prophesying a mystical alignment on Dec. 21, 2012.
The modern tools of astronomers, such as planetarium software, show otherwise: absolutely no alignment at any time in 2012. But they also reveal a beautiful alignment visible during the month of May this year.
Six planets at one time
While astrologers view planetary alignments as foretellers of disasters, modern amateur astronomers look forward to them as nothing more than grand photo ops.
If you go out any morning for the next four days, you’ll be treated to a view of the crescent moon and all but one of the naked eye planets.
Because the moon moves rapidly from one morning to the next, it will only be part of the lineup for the next four mornings, but the four naked-eye planets will be there for the next few weeks.
Venus is, as always, the brightest and most visible of the planets, and it can be your guide to spotting the others. About half way between Venus and the rising sun is Jupiter, the second brightest planet.
Mars will be a tiny speck just above Jupiter, and Mercury another tiny speck about half way between Jupiter and Venus. Uranus is slightly more than one binocular field above and to the right of Venus, and Neptune is much farther to the right, about 40 degrees away in Aquarius. The Moon will be just above Venus on Saturday morning, and just above Jupiter and Mars on Sunday morning.
How to photograph the planets
Capturing a photograph of this gathering of the planets couldn’t be easier.
Just about any camera will do, though a camera with a telephoto lens setting will be better. Let the camera’s exposure meter be your guide, though a slight underexposure will help bring out the colors of the dawn sky.
Try to place the silhouette of some foreground object to lend depth to the scene. The best pictures will be on the next few mornings, while the crescent moon is part of the grouping.
This article was provided to SPACE.com by Starry Night Education, the leader in space science curriculum solutions. Follow Starry Night on Twitter @StarryNightEdu.
Endeavour's first commander reflects on shuttle's final mission
CNNNEws.com: Endeavour's first commander reflects on shuttle's final mission
Kennedy Space Center, Florida (CNN) -- As Space Shuttle Endeavour gears up for its 25th and final mission, its first commander is nostalgic but hopeful about the prospects of space exploration.
"I will have a good size lump in the throat on Friday, if not a tear," Capt. Daniel Brandenstein said.
Few outside the space community know Brandenstein, who was the commander on Endeavour's first flight in 1992.
"The vehicle on its maiden voyage performed flawlessly," he said.
Endeavour, which was built as a replacement for the Challenger that exploded after liftoff in 1986, was sent to repair an ailing satellite.
Brandenstein knows his shuttles; he flew four missions for NASA on four different vehicles.
"The vehicles are very similar on purpose, so you could train on one and move to the next one without a lot of retraining," he said.
Endeavour has logged more than 103 million miles in space, blasting off 24 times, but its 25th flight will be its last.
Brandenstein says it's too early to retire the spacecraft and believes it has many good years left.
"You got a vehicle that's only used up about 25 percent of its lifetime, and it's going to end up on a post," Brandenstein said, referring to the California Science Center in Los Angeles, where Endeavour will be displayed to the public.
He learned it's not easy to watch a retiring shuttle when Discovery landed for the final time last month.
"I'm not a very emotional guy, but I kind of got choked up on that," said Brandenstein who was the commander on a Discovery mission in 1985.
Watching his company make cutbacks when the 30-year shuttle program ends this summer will be hard, he said.
Brandenstein is the chief operating officer for United Space Alliance, an aerospace company that is contracted to manage the space shuttle program.
The company has announced it will layoff at least 2,600 of its 5,600 employees after the last shuttle flight.
Brandenstein, who spent 14 years at NASA and was inducted into the Astronaut Hall of Fame, says he had one ritual before his four shuttle missions.
"The night before, I would go out and run and get dehydrated, and I wouldn't drink anything until I got in orbit," he said.
Going to the bathroom once suited up and inside the shuttle, meant doing it without leaving the seat.
"Unfortunately, the commander has to get in first and spends the most time on his back in those uncomfortable suites," he said.
Brandenstein says after grueling months of training in Houston, he enjoyed coming to Florida to spend the final days before a launch.
"If you planned your mission right and trained it right, it's really a time to unwind and it's time to relax and go fly," Brandenstein said.
Brandenstein believes the current Endeavour commander, Mark Kelly, will do the same.
Kelly is an experienced astronaut flying his fourth and final shuttle mission. His wife, U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, is there to watch the liftoff. The Arizona congresswoman was shot in the head less than four months ago.
"Flying in space is a very difficult thing to give up," Kelly said. "I've got to figure out a way to get back into space again."
As the shuttle prepares for a scheduled 3:47 p.m. ET. launch, Brandenstein says Mars should be the next target.
"We got lower Earth orbit pretty well covered now, so we ought to move beyond that," he said.
Despite the nostalgia over Endeavour's final mission, the man who logged almost 800 hours in space is counting his blessings.
"I got to fly a spaceship, it doesn't get any better than that." Brandenstein said.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
US Space Program Goes Commercial
VoA.com: US Space Program Goes Commercial
This Friday, the U.S. space shuttle Endeavor is scheduled to lift off on its last voyage to the orbiting International Space Station. And on June 28, barring any last minute complications, Alantis will become the last space shuttle ever to lift off from the Kennedy Space Center. Both missions mark the end of NASA’s 30-year space shuttle program. But it is not the end of America’s space ventures.
Fifty years after a Redstone rocket carried the first American astronaut, Alan Shephard, into space, NASA is getting out of the business of sending astronauts on missions using its own spacecraft. Instead, the U.S. space agency will rely on privately designed and owned rockets to ferry cargo and crew to the orbiting International Space Station.
The commercially built space vehicles are expected to be every bit as powerful and reliable as those operated by NASA, but they’ll cost American taxpayers far less. One company, Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, or SpaceX, has signed a $1.6 billion deal with NASA for 12 unmanned delivery flights to the space station.
SpaceX says the deal should lower the cost of launching cargo to about $1,000 per half kilogram - less than one-tenth of what it costs NASA to get a payload into outer space on the shuttle.
President Barack Obama is asking Congress to approve $850 million to aid the development of private rockets to service the orbiting scientific outpost. NASA administrator Charles Bolden says the budget will support a public-private partnership in space.
"We must have safe, reliable and affordable access to it for our astronauts and their supporting equipment. That’s why this budget boosts funding for our partnership with the commercial space industry," Bolden said.
The private sector’s role in unmanned space operations - such as the manufacture of satellites and robotic spacecraft -- is nothing new. So says former NASA executive Alan Stern, now with the Southwest Research Institute, which offers technical assistance to the aerospace industry.
Stern says the private sector is promising to conduct space missions for a fraction of what they have traditionally cost NASA. For example, SpaceX says it can reduce the cost of a launch, depending upon the rocket, to between $50 million and $100 million compared to the $1.5 billion price tag for each space shuttle mission.
Stern says this savings of dimes on the dollar benefits the private sector as well as the public.
"That’s a huge reduction in cost that’s going to allow us to have multiple space lines, and to be able to afford that. and to be able to do more things in space than we could in the past," Stern said.
Last year, SpaceX became the first commercial aerospace company to successfully launch, place into orbit and retrieve a spacecraft -- the Falcon 9, carrying an unmanned capsule called the Dragon.
The Dragon is being built as part of NASA’s $1.6 billion deal with SpaceX. Company founder and CEO Elon Musk says the space agency has been pressing it to complete testing of the capsule, so it can go to the space station on a resupply mission at the end of this year. However, news reports have quoted a top official in Russia’s manned space program as saying Russia will not allow the SpaceX rocket to dock with the space station until more extensive safety testing has been completed.
Safety is a big concern for the private rocket builders, too. Alan Stern says the companies are not cutting corners to keep costs down or to meet tight deadlines. He says they have a lot to lose if there are accidents.
"If the rockets fail or the capsules have problems, that’s going to affect their future business pretty strongly; in fact it could put them out of business. And that’s a very strong motivation for any private concern," Stern said.
But there have been problems. Orbital Sciences Corporation, which has a contract with NASA to deliver supplies to the space station, tried but failed in March to launch a climate satellite aboard its Taurus (XL) rocket. The $424 million payload was lost when the clamshell-like structure designed to protect the satellite enroute to orbit failed to open.
It was an exact replay of the company’s 2009 mishap, when a nosecone failure doomed a $270 million carbon-observing satellite. Both Orbital Sciences and NASA are investigating the twin accidents.
In the meantime, the company is continuing work on its Taurus II, an expendable medium class rocket that’s designed to deliver cargo to the International Space Station from a launch pad at NASA’s Wallops Island Facility in Virginia.
Recently, SpaceX announced plans for a demonstration flight of its new heavy lift vehicle, called the Falcon Heavy, at the end of 2012 from NASA’s Cape Canaveral, Florida facility.
Company CEO Elon Musk says the Falcon Heavy will be one of the biggest rockets ever built.
"175,000 pounds (53 metric tons) is more than a fully loaded Boeing 737 with 136 passengers, luggage and fuel in orbit. So that is really humongous," Musk said.
Founder Elon Musk believes the rocket will be powerful enough to carry the Dragon capsule to the moon and possibly even Mars.
NASA has just awarded four contracts totaling $270 million to four companies to develop manned space flight capabilities. In the past, private aerospace companies built spacecraft and other hardware to NASA’s design specifications, with the space agency at the forefront of every decision.
Now, NASA’s Commercial Crew Program manager, Ed Mango, says space vehicles will be designed and owned entirely by the commercial sector, with safety input from the space agency.
"In the end, we will pay that company a certain price to purchase a seat, if you want to look at it this way, purchase a ticket, in order to fly to get our crew from the surface of the Earth to the space station," Mango said.
Mango says those ‘tickets’ won’t be available until the middle of the decade. Until then, NASA will pay Russia $750 million for a dozen round trip seats aboard the Soyuz spacecraft to ferry astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station.
This Friday, the U.S. space shuttle Endeavor is scheduled to lift off on its last voyage to the orbiting International Space Station. And on June 28, barring any last minute complications, Alantis will become the last space shuttle ever to lift off from the Kennedy Space Center. Both missions mark the end of NASA’s 30-year space shuttle program. But it is not the end of America’s space ventures.
Fifty years after a Redstone rocket carried the first American astronaut, Alan Shephard, into space, NASA is getting out of the business of sending astronauts on missions using its own spacecraft. Instead, the U.S. space agency will rely on privately designed and owned rockets to ferry cargo and crew to the orbiting International Space Station.
The commercially built space vehicles are expected to be every bit as powerful and reliable as those operated by NASA, but they’ll cost American taxpayers far less. One company, Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, or SpaceX, has signed a $1.6 billion deal with NASA for 12 unmanned delivery flights to the space station.
SpaceX says the deal should lower the cost of launching cargo to about $1,000 per half kilogram - less than one-tenth of what it costs NASA to get a payload into outer space on the shuttle.
President Barack Obama is asking Congress to approve $850 million to aid the development of private rockets to service the orbiting scientific outpost. NASA administrator Charles Bolden says the budget will support a public-private partnership in space.
"We must have safe, reliable and affordable access to it for our astronauts and their supporting equipment. That’s why this budget boosts funding for our partnership with the commercial space industry," Bolden said.
The private sector’s role in unmanned space operations - such as the manufacture of satellites and robotic spacecraft -- is nothing new. So says former NASA executive Alan Stern, now with the Southwest Research Institute, which offers technical assistance to the aerospace industry.
Stern says the private sector is promising to conduct space missions for a fraction of what they have traditionally cost NASA. For example, SpaceX says it can reduce the cost of a launch, depending upon the rocket, to between $50 million and $100 million compared to the $1.5 billion price tag for each space shuttle mission.
Stern says this savings of dimes on the dollar benefits the private sector as well as the public.
"That’s a huge reduction in cost that’s going to allow us to have multiple space lines, and to be able to afford that. and to be able to do more things in space than we could in the past," Stern said.
Last year, SpaceX became the first commercial aerospace company to successfully launch, place into orbit and retrieve a spacecraft -- the Falcon 9, carrying an unmanned capsule called the Dragon.
The Dragon is being built as part of NASA’s $1.6 billion deal with SpaceX. Company founder and CEO Elon Musk says the space agency has been pressing it to complete testing of the capsule, so it can go to the space station on a resupply mission at the end of this year. However, news reports have quoted a top official in Russia’s manned space program as saying Russia will not allow the SpaceX rocket to dock with the space station until more extensive safety testing has been completed.
Safety is a big concern for the private rocket builders, too. Alan Stern says the companies are not cutting corners to keep costs down or to meet tight deadlines. He says they have a lot to lose if there are accidents.
"If the rockets fail or the capsules have problems, that’s going to affect their future business pretty strongly; in fact it could put them out of business. And that’s a very strong motivation for any private concern," Stern said.
But there have been problems. Orbital Sciences Corporation, which has a contract with NASA to deliver supplies to the space station, tried but failed in March to launch a climate satellite aboard its Taurus (XL) rocket. The $424 million payload was lost when the clamshell-like structure designed to protect the satellite enroute to orbit failed to open.
It was an exact replay of the company’s 2009 mishap, when a nosecone failure doomed a $270 million carbon-observing satellite. Both Orbital Sciences and NASA are investigating the twin accidents.
In the meantime, the company is continuing work on its Taurus II, an expendable medium class rocket that’s designed to deliver cargo to the International Space Station from a launch pad at NASA’s Wallops Island Facility in Virginia.
Recently, SpaceX announced plans for a demonstration flight of its new heavy lift vehicle, called the Falcon Heavy, at the end of 2012 from NASA’s Cape Canaveral, Florida facility.
Company CEO Elon Musk says the Falcon Heavy will be one of the biggest rockets ever built.
"175,000 pounds (53 metric tons) is more than a fully loaded Boeing 737 with 136 passengers, luggage and fuel in orbit. So that is really humongous," Musk said.
Founder Elon Musk believes the rocket will be powerful enough to carry the Dragon capsule to the moon and possibly even Mars.
NASA has just awarded four contracts totaling $270 million to four companies to develop manned space flight capabilities. In the past, private aerospace companies built spacecraft and other hardware to NASA’s design specifications, with the space agency at the forefront of every decision.
Now, NASA’s Commercial Crew Program manager, Ed Mango, says space vehicles will be designed and owned entirely by the commercial sector, with safety input from the space agency.
"In the end, we will pay that company a certain price to purchase a seat, if you want to look at it this way, purchase a ticket, in order to fly to get our crew from the surface of the Earth to the space station," Mango said.
Mango says those ‘tickets’ won’t be available until the middle of the decade. Until then, NASA will pay Russia $750 million for a dozen round trip seats aboard the Soyuz spacecraft to ferry astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station.
Space Shuttle Endeavor Ready for its Last Mission
VOA.com: Space Shuttle Endeavor Ready for its Last Mission
People are flocking to the central Florida coast for Friday's scheduled launch of the space shuttle Endeavour, the second to last launch of a shuttle as NASA brings the three-decade-old program to an end.
The space agency is expecting around 700,000 people to be on hand for the event Friday evening, including US Representative Gabrielle Giffords, the wife of shuttle commander Mark Kelly. She is still recovering from a wound to the head suffered in a shooting rampage in her home district in Arizona back in January. Her presence adds special emotional touch to what many regard as a significant moment for the US space program.
As crews prepare the space shuttle for launch at the Kennedy Space Center, Weather Officer Kathy Winters is keeping an eye on the slow-moving front that has worked its way across US southern states in recent days spawning severe thunderstorms and devastating tornadoes.
"We are expecting that to move down into central Florida," said Kathy Winters. "Now, it won't have the energy it has had and it won't be producing the severe weather as widespread as it has been doing the last couple of days, but we do expect that there could be an isolated severe thunderstorm along the front."
She said this concern caused her to move the probability of a weather-related delay in the launch from 20 percent to 30 percent. NASA officials say a slight delay in fueling the shuttle's external tank would not be a problem and there is a four-hour leeway built into the schedule.
The launch of Endeavor Friday will be a bittersweet event for astronauts, flight crews, space and science enthusiasts as well as those who have followed the progress of Congressswoman Gabrielle Giffords since she was severely wounded nearly four months ago. This launch, commanded by her husband, Mark Kelly, and the launch of the space shuttle Atlantis scheduled for late June will mark the end of an era and the beginning of a new, somewhat uncertain phase for the US space program.
Giffords, who has witnessed two previous launches in which her husband flew, wanted to be present for the start of his final shuttle mission even though she is still healing from her head wound. Doctors who have been working with her at a rehabilitation facility here in Houston approved her trip to Florida. News video shot from a distance Wednesday showed Giffords walking with some assistance to the airplane that took her to Florida. Doctors and therapists will be on hand with her the whole time at the Kennedy Space Center and she will be in a restricted viewing area. President Barack Obama is also scheduled to attend the launch, but NASA has not indicated where he will be.
Endeavour will carry the six-member crew to the International Space station and also carry out a number of experiments on its two-week-long mission, including the testing of three small satellites, each small enough to fit in the palm of a hand. If the experiment carried out as the shuttle travels to the space station is successful it could lead to the development of tiny satellites that could be deployed in space for a small fraction of the cost of deploying a conventional satellite.
The most important part of the mission is the delivery of the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer-2 to the International Space Station. It will be used for a study of cosmic rays and is expected to be operational for around 10 years.
As the Endeavour launch was being prepared, NASA held a news conference with representatives of private companies developing their own space vehicles, with the goal of providing transport into space for US astronauts by the middle of this decade. NASA has awarded more than $269 billion to four private US companies to help them spur development of their technologies.
The chairman of one of the companies, Mark Sirangelo of the Sierra Nevada company, hailed the accomplishments of the US Space Shuttle program for opening the way for this next phase in space exploration.
"I have heard and I have read many times in the last week about the end of the space shuttle program," said Mark Sirangelo. "From my perspective I do not see it as an end. I see it as the beginning of the next step. I think space shuttle was a bridge to move forward. Our vehicle is based, in large part, on the successes, on the triumphs, on the challenges, and the pain that has been done in the space shuttle program."
The Colorado-based Sierra Nevada company received $80 million from NASA to develop its Dream Chaser space plane. Other companies with similar vehicles in development with initial funding from NASA are Boeing, based in Chicago, California-based Space Exploration Technologies, or Space X, and Blue Origin, which is based in the northwest US state of Washington.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Public urged to name China's first space station
International Business Times: Public urged to name China's first space station
The public is asked to join in the naming of China's first space station set for launch in year 2020.
Chinese scientists and space engineers will start building a 60,000-kilogram space station and cargo spaceship intended for launch in year 2020, authorities said at the launch of the very first manned space programme of China.
Chinese government authorities has announced in a press conference that China Manned Space Engineering Office is now tasked to build a a space station made up of three capsules and a cargo ship for transporting supplies.
In project documents provided the media, the said space station is composed of a core module and two others where experiments will be conducted.
A cargo spaceship to transport supplies will also be developed.
The 18.1m-long core module, with a maximum diameter of 4.2m and a launch weight of 20,000 to 22,000kg, will be launched first.
The two experiment modules will then blast off to dock with the core module. Each laboratory module is 14.4m long, with the same maximum diameter and launch weight of the core module.
The public has also been engaged to provide a name for the said space station.
The public is asked to join in the naming of China's first space station set for launch in year 2020.
Chinese scientists and space engineers will start building a 60,000-kilogram space station and cargo spaceship intended for launch in year 2020, authorities said at the launch of the very first manned space programme of China.
Chinese government authorities has announced in a press conference that China Manned Space Engineering Office is now tasked to build a a space station made up of three capsules and a cargo ship for transporting supplies.
In project documents provided the media, the said space station is composed of a core module and two others where experiments will be conducted.
A cargo spaceship to transport supplies will also be developed.
The 18.1m-long core module, with a maximum diameter of 4.2m and a launch weight of 20,000 to 22,000kg, will be launched first.
The two experiment modules will then blast off to dock with the core module. Each laboratory module is 14.4m long, with the same maximum diameter and launch weight of the core module.
The public has also been engaged to provide a name for the said space station.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
SpaceX Sets Sights on Mars
My Fox Boston: SpaceX Sets Sights on Mars
EndPlay Staff Reports) - Even though the long-running space shuttle program is winding down this year, space exploration isn't. And now sites are set even further than the moon or even the International Space Station.
Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX, recently told the Wall Street Journal's Alan Murray that his company will send humans into space within the next three years and to Mars within 10 to 20 years. He also told Murray he even envisions a future with a self-sustaining colony on the red planet.
A video of the interview can be found here .
Musk said SpaceX would provide transportation, but actual colonization would be left up to others.
"We want to be like the shipping company that brought people from Europe to America, or like the Union Pacific railroad," he said during the interview. "Our goal is to facilitate the transfer of people and cargo to other planets, and then it's going to be up to people if they want to go."
According to reports from Discovery News , SpaceX is partnering with NASA to achieve Musk's lofty initiative; as SpaceX is one of four companies sharing a $269 million boost from a NASA-funded investment. Reports indicate that SpaceX and Boeing will use the cash influx to design capsules for space travel, while Sierra Nevada will use their funds to design a winged craft. The other investment recipient, Blue Origin, was founded by online retailer Amazon's creator Jeff Bezos and is a relative newcomer to the aerospace field.
SpaceX will reportedly use the investment for work on its Dragon capsule, a free-flying and reusable spacecraft that will seat seven, according to company information.
Though the Discovery New s report indicated funds will be disbursed when the developers reach certain milestones, Musk and SpaceX are both proven performers for NASA. Last year, Musk was involved in a similar program to design cargo ships. Musk was successfully able to fly a demo ship for NASA, and was compensated with $300 million in government funding for his design and efforts.
EndPlay Staff Reports) - Even though the long-running space shuttle program is winding down this year, space exploration isn't. And now sites are set even further than the moon or even the International Space Station.
Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX, recently told the Wall Street Journal's Alan Murray that his company will send humans into space within the next three years and to Mars within 10 to 20 years. He also told Murray he even envisions a future with a self-sustaining colony on the red planet.
A video of the interview can be found here .
Musk said SpaceX would provide transportation, but actual colonization would be left up to others.
"We want to be like the shipping company that brought people from Europe to America, or like the Union Pacific railroad," he said during the interview. "Our goal is to facilitate the transfer of people and cargo to other planets, and then it's going to be up to people if they want to go."
According to reports from Discovery News , SpaceX is partnering with NASA to achieve Musk's lofty initiative; as SpaceX is one of four companies sharing a $269 million boost from a NASA-funded investment. Reports indicate that SpaceX and Boeing will use the cash influx to design capsules for space travel, while Sierra Nevada will use their funds to design a winged craft. The other investment recipient, Blue Origin, was founded by online retailer Amazon's creator Jeff Bezos and is a relative newcomer to the aerospace field.
SpaceX will reportedly use the investment for work on its Dragon capsule, a free-flying and reusable spacecraft that will seat seven, according to company information.
Though the Discovery New s report indicated funds will be disbursed when the developers reach certain milestones, Musk and SpaceX are both proven performers for NASA. Last year, Musk was involved in a similar program to design cargo ships. Musk was successfully able to fly a demo ship for NASA, and was compensated with $300 million in government funding for his design and efforts.
Monday, April 25, 2011
ranscendence Splashes Down:What was lost when Space Shuttle missions started to feel ho-hum
New York Magazine: Transcendence Splashes Down:What was lost when Space Shuttle missions started to feel ho-hum.
t is objectively no small feat, slipping the surly bonds of Earth. But somehow, over its 30 years of existence, NASA’s Space Shuttle program has become roughly as thrilling as the Delta Shuttle. Still, there’s something sad about the end of the program, which will officially shut down after Endeavour’s 25th and final mission, on April 29, and one last there-and-back by Space Shuttle Atlantis in June. It’s not so much that the program’s increasingly prosaic missions—they have amounted, in recent years, to something like space carpooling—will be missed. The sadness instead comes from the petering out of space travel’s promised transcendence.
The commonplace marvels of modern technology probably have something to do with this awe deficit—a 400-mile vertical round-trip in a less-than-sleek 1992-model vehicle may not seem as miraculous as it did in a time before one could, if booked on the right airline, stream Parks and Recreation onto an iPad mid-flight. The Shuttle program’s geopolitical moment has passed, too. We’re no longer going to space to prove that our way of life is superior to an evil empire’s; instead, we’re going up there to do some repairs, drop off a magnetic spectrometer, and see the sights. And with deficits suddenly the Greatest Threat Our Nation Has Ever Faced, such errands now stand out as a sore thumb of a line item.
The Space Shuttle program has cost nearly $200 billion over its lifetime; at a moment when we’re cutting holes in the social safety net to try to balance the books, Friday’s Shuttle launch will cost what NASA says is nearly half a billion dollars and another estimate puts at $1.2 billion. That the “economic, scientific and technological returns of space exploration have far exceeded the investment,” as former NASA life-sciences director Joan Vernikos has written, makes the accounting look a little more favorable, of course. But simply talking about it that way suggests just how un-wonderful space has become.
The Endeavour’s final mission will be commanded by Mark Kelly, the husband of Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, and for that reason, more than for its place in NASA history, it will ascend from a news brief to a bona fide national moment. Giffords, remarkably, has recovered enough from a January assassination attempt in which she was shot in the head that she is expected to be present for liftoff; President Obama and his family are scheduled to be there as well. It will be an occasion to celebrate Giffords’s inspiring recovery, to try to pull something uplifting from the horrible day in which she and other innocents were attacked, to be both moved and, in the postmodern mode, moved by how moved we are. Or it should be, anyway. It’s hard not to worry that, inevitably and unfortunately, on television and in Politico and slumped grumpily beneath WHERE’S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE? picket signs in the Kennedy Space Center parking lot, some will find a way to make this still-great thing—if you’re just joining, these people are going to space—small and familiar.
It might not be that the space program is insufficiently whiz-bang or beyond our means so much as that we’re now too busy, scared, or pissed off for it to mean anything to us. Which is a shame; baffled and broke-ish and hacked-off as the nation is, a little bit of that old humbling space-wonder and some of the shared purpose necessary to get people from here to there would go a long way right now. More than ever, the silent sanctity of space seems appealing—especially compared to being stuck down here, watching the skies and left without a ride.
t is objectively no small feat, slipping the surly bonds of Earth. But somehow, over its 30 years of existence, NASA’s Space Shuttle program has become roughly as thrilling as the Delta Shuttle. Still, there’s something sad about the end of the program, which will officially shut down after Endeavour’s 25th and final mission, on April 29, and one last there-and-back by Space Shuttle Atlantis in June. It’s not so much that the program’s increasingly prosaic missions—they have amounted, in recent years, to something like space carpooling—will be missed. The sadness instead comes from the petering out of space travel’s promised transcendence.
The commonplace marvels of modern technology probably have something to do with this awe deficit—a 400-mile vertical round-trip in a less-than-sleek 1992-model vehicle may not seem as miraculous as it did in a time before one could, if booked on the right airline, stream Parks and Recreation onto an iPad mid-flight. The Shuttle program’s geopolitical moment has passed, too. We’re no longer going to space to prove that our way of life is superior to an evil empire’s; instead, we’re going up there to do some repairs, drop off a magnetic spectrometer, and see the sights. And with deficits suddenly the Greatest Threat Our Nation Has Ever Faced, such errands now stand out as a sore thumb of a line item.
The Space Shuttle program has cost nearly $200 billion over its lifetime; at a moment when we’re cutting holes in the social safety net to try to balance the books, Friday’s Shuttle launch will cost what NASA says is nearly half a billion dollars and another estimate puts at $1.2 billion. That the “economic, scientific and technological returns of space exploration have far exceeded the investment,” as former NASA life-sciences director Joan Vernikos has written, makes the accounting look a little more favorable, of course. But simply talking about it that way suggests just how un-wonderful space has become.
The Endeavour’s final mission will be commanded by Mark Kelly, the husband of Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, and for that reason, more than for its place in NASA history, it will ascend from a news brief to a bona fide national moment. Giffords, remarkably, has recovered enough from a January assassination attempt in which she was shot in the head that she is expected to be present for liftoff; President Obama and his family are scheduled to be there as well. It will be an occasion to celebrate Giffords’s inspiring recovery, to try to pull something uplifting from the horrible day in which she and other innocents were attacked, to be both moved and, in the postmodern mode, moved by how moved we are. Or it should be, anyway. It’s hard not to worry that, inevitably and unfortunately, on television and in Politico and slumped grumpily beneath WHERE’S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE? picket signs in the Kennedy Space Center parking lot, some will find a way to make this still-great thing—if you’re just joining, these people are going to space—small and familiar.
It might not be that the space program is insufficiently whiz-bang or beyond our means so much as that we’re now too busy, scared, or pissed off for it to mean anything to us. Which is a shame; baffled and broke-ish and hacked-off as the nation is, a little bit of that old humbling space-wonder and some of the shared purpose necessary to get people from here to there would go a long way right now. More than ever, the silent sanctity of space seems appealing—especially compared to being stuck down here, watching the skies and left without a ride.
Friday, April 22, 2011
Russians 'never, ever had sex in space'
Herald Sun: Russians 'never, ever had sex in space'
RUSSIAN or Soviet cosmonauts never had sex in space in the 50 years of human exploration of the cosmos. And that's official, according to a Russian expert. As for Americans, well, you'd better ask them.
"There's no official or unofficial evidence that there were instances of sexual intercourse or the carrying out of sexual experiments in space," Valery Bogomolov, deputy director of the Moscow-based Institute of Biomedical Problems told the Interfax news agency.
"At least, in the history of Russian or Soviet space exploration this most certainly was not the case," said Bogomolov.
Rumours have persisted for years of secret Russian and American programs to test the effects of weightlessness on sex but this has always been strongly denied by both sides.
"As for American space exploration, well, I just don't have the information to categorically deny that," said Bogomolov. "There are just anecdotal rumours which are not worth trusting," he added.
RUSSIAN or Soviet cosmonauts never had sex in space in the 50 years of human exploration of the cosmos. And that's official, according to a Russian expert. As for Americans, well, you'd better ask them.
"There's no official or unofficial evidence that there were instances of sexual intercourse or the carrying out of sexual experiments in space," Valery Bogomolov, deputy director of the Moscow-based Institute of Biomedical Problems told the Interfax news agency.
"At least, in the history of Russian or Soviet space exploration this most certainly was not the case," said Bogomolov.
Rumours have persisted for years of secret Russian and American programs to test the effects of weightlessness on sex but this has always been strongly denied by both sides.
"As for American space exploration, well, I just don't have the information to categorically deny that," said Bogomolov. "There are just anecdotal rumours which are not worth trusting," he added.
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Four Companies Win NASA Funding for Space Program
The New American: Four Companies Win NASA Funding for Space Program
Private industry is making progress toward lowering the cost of space flight, and NASA would like to come along for the ride.
Among the earliest actions of the Obama administration was the appointment of the “Augustine Committee,” which was given the responsibility of carrying out a review of NASA’s manned space program. The result of the committee deliberations was a NASA with its budget intact, but without a mission or mandate to go anywhere. The previous administration’s plans for a return to the Moon and eventual missions to Mars were abandoned — few presidential administrations are interested in implementing the showpiece programs of their predecessors.
One of the implications of the new administration’s policy was to make tentative steps toward privatization. As reported over a year ago for The New American:
The Obama plan would rely on private spacecraft to replace the space shuttle in transporting astronauts to and from the International Space Station. But such reliance on private corporations does not mean that NASA’s spending will be cut; as in all budgetary matters under the current administration, the space agency will receive more funding, and although work on Constellation-related project will be cut back, even cancelled, this does not mean that the space agency will not pursue new technologies.
The implementation of this change in policy continues, as NASA awards a total of $269.3 million to four companies that are developing new spacecraft, which the space agency may seek to purchase from them in the future. A story for the Los Angeles Times details the division of NASA’s funds:
On Monday, NASA handed out $269.3 million to four companies to privately develop rockets and spacecraft for what could be the next step in manned spaceflight.
The winners included Hawthorne-based rocket maker Space Exploration Technologies Corp., or SpaceX, and Boeing Co., which develops spacecraft in Huntington Beach and uses rocket engines made by Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne in Canoga Park.The other two awards were $22 million to Blue Origin, a closely held space venture in Kent, Wash., that is owned by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, and $80 million to Sierra Nevada Corp. of Sparks, Nev.
After the shuttle program is mothballed and before privately built space vehicles are astronaut-ready, the U.S. will have no way to travel to the International Space Station other than shelling out $63 million for rides on a Russian Soyuz rocket. "We're committed to safely transporting U.S. astronauts on American-made spacecraft and ending the outsourcing of this work to foreign governments," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a statement.
SpaceX has drawn a great deal of attention in recent months with its successful launch of the Falcon 9 booster and its ambitious plan for the largest rocket since the days of the Apollo program: the Falcon Heavy. For SpaceX, and other rocket manufacturers, a future which is less reliant on NASA funding offers prospects for a greater involvement by private industry in space. In a post-shuttle era, NASA is less a provider of access to low earth orbit, and more a consumer; their role is more analogous to buying tickets on the plane, rather than owning the whole airline. Over the long term, the existence of privately-owned launch vehicles offers far greater prospects for the exploration and development for the commercial use of space than anything dreamed of by NASA or any other governmental space agency.
Private industry is making progress toward lowering the cost of space flight, and NASA would like to come along for the ride.
Among the earliest actions of the Obama administration was the appointment of the “Augustine Committee,” which was given the responsibility of carrying out a review of NASA’s manned space program. The result of the committee deliberations was a NASA with its budget intact, but without a mission or mandate to go anywhere. The previous administration’s plans for a return to the Moon and eventual missions to Mars were abandoned — few presidential administrations are interested in implementing the showpiece programs of their predecessors.
One of the implications of the new administration’s policy was to make tentative steps toward privatization. As reported over a year ago for The New American:
The Obama plan would rely on private spacecraft to replace the space shuttle in transporting astronauts to and from the International Space Station. But such reliance on private corporations does not mean that NASA’s spending will be cut; as in all budgetary matters under the current administration, the space agency will receive more funding, and although work on Constellation-related project will be cut back, even cancelled, this does not mean that the space agency will not pursue new technologies.
The implementation of this change in policy continues, as NASA awards a total of $269.3 million to four companies that are developing new spacecraft, which the space agency may seek to purchase from them in the future. A story for the Los Angeles Times details the division of NASA’s funds:
On Monday, NASA handed out $269.3 million to four companies to privately develop rockets and spacecraft for what could be the next step in manned spaceflight.
The winners included Hawthorne-based rocket maker Space Exploration Technologies Corp., or SpaceX, and Boeing Co., which develops spacecraft in Huntington Beach and uses rocket engines made by Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne in Canoga Park.The other two awards were $22 million to Blue Origin, a closely held space venture in Kent, Wash., that is owned by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, and $80 million to Sierra Nevada Corp. of Sparks, Nev.
After the shuttle program is mothballed and before privately built space vehicles are astronaut-ready, the U.S. will have no way to travel to the International Space Station other than shelling out $63 million for rides on a Russian Soyuz rocket. "We're committed to safely transporting U.S. astronauts on American-made spacecraft and ending the outsourcing of this work to foreign governments," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a statement.
SpaceX has drawn a great deal of attention in recent months with its successful launch of the Falcon 9 booster and its ambitious plan for the largest rocket since the days of the Apollo program: the Falcon Heavy. For SpaceX, and other rocket manufacturers, a future which is less reliant on NASA funding offers prospects for a greater involvement by private industry in space. In a post-shuttle era, NASA is less a provider of access to low earth orbit, and more a consumer; their role is more analogous to buying tickets on the plane, rather than owning the whole airline. Over the long term, the existence of privately-owned launch vehicles offers far greater prospects for the exploration and development for the commercial use of space than anything dreamed of by NASA or any other governmental space agency.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
NASA Honors Pioneer Astronaut Alan Shepard With Moon Rock
PR Newswire: NASA Honors Pioneer Astronaut Alan Shepard With Moon Rock
WASHINGTON, April 19, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- NASA will posthumously honor Alan B. Shepard Jr., the first American astronaut in space who later walked on the moon, with an Ambassador of Exploration Award for his contributions to the U.S. space program.
Shepard's family members will accept the award on his behalf during a ceremony at 5:30 p.m. EDT on Thursday, April 28, at the U.S. Naval Academy Museum, located at 74 Greenbury Point Road in Annapolis, Md. His family will present the award to the museum for permanent display. NASA's Chief Historian Bill Barry will represent the agency at the event, which will include a video message from NASA Administrator Charles Bolden.
Shepard, a 1945 graduate of the Naval Academy, was one of NASA's original seven Mercury astronauts selected in April 1959. On May 5, 1961, he was launched from Cape Canaveral, Fla., aboard the Freedom 7 spacecraft on a suborbital flight that carried him to an altitude of 116 miles.
Shepard made his second spaceflight as the commander of Apollo 14 from Jan. 31 to Feb. 9, 1971. He was accompanied on the third lunar landing by astronauts Stuart Roosa and Edgar Mitchell. Maneuvering the lunar module "Antares" to a landing in the hilly upland Fra Mauro region of the moon, Shepard and Mitchell deployed and activated a number of scientific instruments and collected almost 100 pounds of lunar samples for return to Earth.
NASA is giving the Ambassador of Exploration Award to the first generation of explorers in the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo space programs for realizing America's goal of going to the moon. The award is a moon rock encased in Lucite, mounted for public display.
The rock is part of the 842 pounds of lunar samples collected during six Apollo missions from 1969 to 1972. The astronauts or family members receiving the award present it to a museum of their choice, where the moon rock is placed on public display.
For pictures of the NASA Ambassador of Exploration Award, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/AofEphotos.html
Shepard retired from NASA in 1974 and passed away in July 1998. For more biographical information, visit:
http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/shepard-alan.html
NASA Television will broadcast a Video File of the award presentation. For NASA TV streaming video, schedules and downlink information, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/ntv
WASHINGTON, April 19, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- NASA will posthumously honor Alan B. Shepard Jr., the first American astronaut in space who later walked on the moon, with an Ambassador of Exploration Award for his contributions to the U.S. space program.
Shepard's family members will accept the award on his behalf during a ceremony at 5:30 p.m. EDT on Thursday, April 28, at the U.S. Naval Academy Museum, located at 74 Greenbury Point Road in Annapolis, Md. His family will present the award to the museum for permanent display. NASA's Chief Historian Bill Barry will represent the agency at the event, which will include a video message from NASA Administrator Charles Bolden.
Shepard, a 1945 graduate of the Naval Academy, was one of NASA's original seven Mercury astronauts selected in April 1959. On May 5, 1961, he was launched from Cape Canaveral, Fla., aboard the Freedom 7 spacecraft on a suborbital flight that carried him to an altitude of 116 miles.
Shepard made his second spaceflight as the commander of Apollo 14 from Jan. 31 to Feb. 9, 1971. He was accompanied on the third lunar landing by astronauts Stuart Roosa and Edgar Mitchell. Maneuvering the lunar module "Antares" to a landing in the hilly upland Fra Mauro region of the moon, Shepard and Mitchell deployed and activated a number of scientific instruments and collected almost 100 pounds of lunar samples for return to Earth.
NASA is giving the Ambassador of Exploration Award to the first generation of explorers in the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo space programs for realizing America's goal of going to the moon. The award is a moon rock encased in Lucite, mounted for public display.
The rock is part of the 842 pounds of lunar samples collected during six Apollo missions from 1969 to 1972. The astronauts or family members receiving the award present it to a museum of their choice, where the moon rock is placed on public display.
For pictures of the NASA Ambassador of Exploration Award, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/AofEphotos.html
Shepard retired from NASA in 1974 and passed away in July 1998. For more biographical information, visit:
http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/shepard-alan.html
NASA Television will broadcast a Video File of the award presentation. For NASA TV streaming video, schedules and downlink information, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/ntv
Shuttle Endeavor to Take Off on April 29
AutoEvolution: Shuttle Endeavor to Take Off on April 29
Unaware of the fact that 2011 is a historic year for the American space exploration program, the Russian space agency has somewhat messed things up for Endeavor, the space shuttle that is was originally scheduled to dock with the International Space Station on April 27.
In order to avoid a space traffic jam with the Progress unmanned mission, set to take off on the same date, NASA decided to postpone the last launch in Endeavor's career. On Wednesday, the agency confirmed that the new launch date is April 29.
On her final journey into space, Endeavor will be transporting to the ISS spare parts, supplies and a $2 billion astrophysics experiment. The mission, dubbed STS-134, is scheduled to last for 14 days, but Mike Moses, NASA's shuttle program launch integration manager, told Space.com that that can be extended to 16 days.
"We'll probably add those two days, taking that to a 16-day mission, but we won't do that until we get on orbit and see what we've got," Moses told the source. "All in all it's going to be a very busy mission, very packed."
At the end of which the shuttle will make her return trip to land for the final time. After NASA completes stripping the shuttle from all potentially harmful and non-essential parts, the craft will be taken into custody by the California Science Center in Los Angeles. That will leave only one shuttle running, the Atlantis, which will follow the same process later in the year, after it too makes its final flight.
Unaware of the fact that 2011 is a historic year for the American space exploration program, the Russian space agency has somewhat messed things up for Endeavor, the space shuttle that is was originally scheduled to dock with the International Space Station on April 27.
In order to avoid a space traffic jam with the Progress unmanned mission, set to take off on the same date, NASA decided to postpone the last launch in Endeavor's career. On Wednesday, the agency confirmed that the new launch date is April 29.
On her final journey into space, Endeavor will be transporting to the ISS spare parts, supplies and a $2 billion astrophysics experiment. The mission, dubbed STS-134, is scheduled to last for 14 days, but Mike Moses, NASA's shuttle program launch integration manager, told Space.com that that can be extended to 16 days.
"We'll probably add those two days, taking that to a 16-day mission, but we won't do that until we get on orbit and see what we've got," Moses told the source. "All in all it's going to be a very busy mission, very packed."
At the end of which the shuttle will make her return trip to land for the final time. After NASA completes stripping the shuttle from all potentially harmful and non-essential parts, the craft will be taken into custody by the California Science Center in Los Angeles. That will leave only one shuttle running, the Atlantis, which will follow the same process later in the year, after it too makes its final flight.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
NASA awards $270M to spacecraft builders
Florida Today: NASA awards $270M to spacecraft builders
NASA on Monday awarded almost $270 million to developers of four U.S. spacecraft that are the frontrunners to fly astronauts after the shuttle.
Two capsules, a space plane and a gumdrop-shaped spacecraft were selected under a program seeking to develop commercial vehicles to taxi astronauts to the International Space Station or other destinations by the middle of the decade.
After two more shuttle flights, NASA will rely on Russian spacecraft for rides to the space station until a U.S. commercial service becomes available.
"We're committed to safely transporting U.S. astronauts on American-made spacecraft and ending the outsourcing of this work to foreign governments," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a statement. "These agreements are significant milestones in NASA's plans to take advantage of American ingenuity to get to low-Earth orbit, so we can concentrate our resources on deep space exploration."
NASA hopes privately run crew transportation will cost less than a government-run system, allow the agency to focus on building a giant rocket and capsule for exploration and help spur a market for commercial spaceflight.
The agency last year began its commercial crew development program, known as "CCDev," with $50 million in federal stimulus funds split among five companies.
The highly anticipated second round spread more than five times as much funding among fewer companies, hoping to accelerate progress on commercial systems.
After winnowing 22 proposals to eight finalists, NASA made the following awards:
$92.3 million to The Boeing Co. of Houston, Texas, to continue work on the Apollo-style CST-100 capsule, which the company hopes will also visit private stations launched by Bigelow Aerospace.
$80 million to Sierra Nevada Corp. of Louisville, Colo., developer of the Dream Chaser spacecraft, which resembles a small space shuttle orbiter.
$75 million to SpaceX of Hawthorne, Calif., whose Dragon spacecraft has completed one orbital test flight under a NASA program readying it for cargo deliveries to the space station.
$22 million to Blue Origin of Kent. Wash., a start-up backed by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos that will work on its gumdrop-shaped New Shepard spacecraft and an escape system.
Each of the spacecraft - all able to carry up to seven people - would launch from the Space Coast on United Launch Alliance's Atlas V or Delta IV rockets or SpaceX's Falcon 9, and the program will be managed at Kennedy Space Center.
The new funding will likely bring some jobs to Brevard County, though the numbers initially would be very small compared to the thousands being lost as the shuttle program nears retirement.
NASA did not specify when it would open a competition to select the vehicles that will ultimately fly crews, saying plans could be released by late this summer.
Philip McAlister, acting director of the Commercial Spaceflight Development program at NASA headquarters, said the field of competitors also won't be limited to Monday's winners, which did not include any launch vehicle providers.
Among the four finalists that lost out Monday were ULA, which won $6.7 million in the program's first round to work on an emergency detection system, and ATK, which sought to repurpose a solid rocket booster developed under NASA's canceled Constellation program as the first stage of a crew launcher.
The other two were Orbital Sciences Corp., which has a contract to deliver cargo and had proposed a space plane to carry crews, and Excalibur Almaz, which is upgrading old Soviet-designed systems.
Also overlooked Monday was a proposal by lead shuttle contractor United Space Alliance to study the viability of flying the shuttle commercially.
McAlister said a selection panel weighed how much technical progress could be made in a year and how much the proposals would advance availability of a commercial crew system given the funding available.
It's not clear how soon any of those systems will fly missions, with NASA citing only a "middle of the decade" target.
SpaceX has said it could be ready to fly crews within three years of being awarded a contract. Boeing said Monday it remained on track to fly by 2015, with test flights in 2014, if funding continued to ramp up.
"We'll be well along within a year," said Keith Riley, deputy manager for Boeing's commercial crew programs.
While the second round of commercial crew development funding was significantly bigger than the first, it's a fraction of the at least $3 billion budgeted in 2011 to work on a heavy-lift rocket and the Orion capsule for exploration.
NASA has requested $850 million to accelerate commercial crew efforts in 2012, but many in Congress are insisting NASA focus more resources on the heavy-lift project that by law is expected to be ready to fly by 2016.
Still, the commercial spaceflight advocates called Monday "a landmark day."
"This is a big step towards opening up the space frontier," said John Gedmark, executive director of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation. "Leveraging private investment is the only way NASA can make its dollars go farther in these times of belt tightening."
The program differs from traditional NASA contracts in that companies will only be paid upon meeting negotiated milestones, and they must invest in their projects. That investment ranges from 10 percent to 20 percent over the next year, NASA said.
"The next American-flagged vehicle to carry our astronauts into space is going to be a U.S. commercial provider," said Ed Mango, manager of the Commercial Crew Program based at KSC.
Commission that oversees U.S. Space & Rocket Center adopts policy to handle contracts
blog.al.com: Commission that oversees U.S. Space & Rocket Center adopts policy to handle contracts
HUNTSVILLE, Alabama -- The commission that oversees the U.S. Space & Rocket Center has agreed to changes in a policy for managing contracts, with committee approval required for certain contracts.
The center's CEO will review and approve all contracts, agreements or purchase orders, according to an amended contract management policy approved Monday by the Alabama Space Science Exhibit Commission. However, contracts that must be approved by the commission's business committee in order to be binding on the commission are:
Any contract, agreement or purchase order with a cumulative cost of $75,000 or more, including options;
Any contract that is a renewal or extension of a previously approved contract with a cumulative cost of $75,000 or more, including options;
Any contract with a single party in which the total value of all contracts exceeds $75,000; or
Any contract of longer than 60 months.
In addition, contracts in any of those categories that exceed $150,000 and license agreements for any Space Camp or Aviation Challenge license must also be approved by the commission's executive committee.
When the business or executive committee approves a contract, then the CEO and the commission's chair or vice chair is authorized to execute it.
"The (business) committee has been working (on policy changes) for quite some time," said Daniel Wilson, a committee member and former committee chair, at the commission's meeting. The amended policy gives the CEO some authority in dealing with contracts, he said, while providing oversight from commission members.
"If it's too cumbersome, we can always revisit the issue," Wilson said.
"I think it's a good, protective measure," said Dr. Deborah Barnhart, who was named the center's CEO in December. "I don't think it will be cumbersome."
Previously, for contracts with cumulative costs of $100,000 or more, only the approval by the CEO and the commission's chair or vice chair was required, and contracts with cumulative costs under $100,000 required only the CEO's approval.
The execution of a number of contracts by former CEO Larry Capps became a major issue with some commission members. Under an involuntary termination agreement reached last November, Capps remained as a consultant through February and retired.
Barnhart reported to commission members that, to date, funding has been received to send 73 children to Space Camp programs as part of the "Summer of Fun" campaign. Local businesses have been asked to sponsor scholarships for area children.
More than 200 scholarship applications have been received, Barnhart said.
Michael Flachbart, the center's vice president of operations, said that registration for this year's weeklong camps is 3 percent higher than at the same time last year.
Attendance for the center's traveling exhibit, "CSI: The Experience," reached 12,256 as of last Thursday, compared to projections of 14,056 guests, Barnhart said. That brings attendance of the exhibit, which opened in late January, to about 78 percent of projections, she said. About 1,800 more children with school groups are scheduled to attend the exhibit before it closes May 1, she said.
The commission on Monday also amended its by-laws, changing the name of its finance committee to business committee and its aerospace programs committee to education committee, to reflect the restructuring earlier this year of Space Center departments. The development committee and visions and plans committee were included in the by-laws as standing committees.
HUNTSVILLE, Alabama -- The commission that oversees the U.S. Space & Rocket Center has agreed to changes in a policy for managing contracts, with committee approval required for certain contracts.
The center's CEO will review and approve all contracts, agreements or purchase orders, according to an amended contract management policy approved Monday by the Alabama Space Science Exhibit Commission. However, contracts that must be approved by the commission's business committee in order to be binding on the commission are:
Any contract, agreement or purchase order with a cumulative cost of $75,000 or more, including options;
Any contract that is a renewal or extension of a previously approved contract with a cumulative cost of $75,000 or more, including options;
Any contract with a single party in which the total value of all contracts exceeds $75,000; or
Any contract of longer than 60 months.
In addition, contracts in any of those categories that exceed $150,000 and license agreements for any Space Camp or Aviation Challenge license must also be approved by the commission's executive committee.
When the business or executive committee approves a contract, then the CEO and the commission's chair or vice chair is authorized to execute it.
"The (business) committee has been working (on policy changes) for quite some time," said Daniel Wilson, a committee member and former committee chair, at the commission's meeting. The amended policy gives the CEO some authority in dealing with contracts, he said, while providing oversight from commission members.
"If it's too cumbersome, we can always revisit the issue," Wilson said.
"I think it's a good, protective measure," said Dr. Deborah Barnhart, who was named the center's CEO in December. "I don't think it will be cumbersome."
Previously, for contracts with cumulative costs of $100,000 or more, only the approval by the CEO and the commission's chair or vice chair was required, and contracts with cumulative costs under $100,000 required only the CEO's approval.
The execution of a number of contracts by former CEO Larry Capps became a major issue with some commission members. Under an involuntary termination agreement reached last November, Capps remained as a consultant through February and retired.
Barnhart reported to commission members that, to date, funding has been received to send 73 children to Space Camp programs as part of the "Summer of Fun" campaign. Local businesses have been asked to sponsor scholarships for area children.
More than 200 scholarship applications have been received, Barnhart said.
Michael Flachbart, the center's vice president of operations, said that registration for this year's weeklong camps is 3 percent higher than at the same time last year.
Attendance for the center's traveling exhibit, "CSI: The Experience," reached 12,256 as of last Thursday, compared to projections of 14,056 guests, Barnhart said. That brings attendance of the exhibit, which opened in late January, to about 78 percent of projections, she said. About 1,800 more children with school groups are scheduled to attend the exhibit before it closes May 1, she said.
The commission on Monday also amended its by-laws, changing the name of its finance committee to business committee and its aerospace programs committee to education committee, to reflect the restructuring earlier this year of Space Center departments. The development committee and visions and plans committee were included in the by-laws as standing committees.
Taxis in space new NASA goal
Montreal Gazette: Taxis in space new NASA goal
NASA divided up more than $269 million US Monday among several companies vying to build commercial spaceships to carry astronauts to the International Space Station, the space agency said.
Boeing received $92.3 million and privately held Sierra Nevada Corp. got $80 million, NASA said.
Space Exploration Technology, the privately held company founded by Internet entrepreneur Elon Musk, was awarded $75 million. The company, also known as SpaceX, is considering an initial public offering next year, Musk recently said.
Blue Origin, founded by Amazon's Jeff Bezos, received a contract worth $22 million. The companies were competing for the next round of funding in NASA's Commercial Crew Development program.
The program is aimed at developing a U.S. commercial alternative to fly astronauts to and from the International Space Station after the U.S. space shuttles are retired later this year.
The United States has already turned over flights to Russia at a cost of $51 million per person. The price is expected to increase to $63 million in 2014.
"We're committed to safely transporting U.S. astronauts on American-made spacecraft and ending the outsourcing of this work to foreign governments," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said.
"These agreements are significant milestones in NASA's plans to take advantage of American ingenuity to get to low-Earth orbit so we can concentrate our resources on deep space exploration."
The companies chosen for the program came from a pool of 22, Philip McAlister, acting director of Commercial Spaceflight Development at NASA, told reporters during a conference call.
In addition to government funds, the companies will be expected to invest their own resources, a shift from how the United States has developed spacecraft in the past.
The agreement covers work for about 14 months. The goal is for NASA to be able to buy commercial orbital space transportation services by about 2015.
NASA divided up more than $269 million US Monday among several companies vying to build commercial spaceships to carry astronauts to the International Space Station, the space agency said.
Boeing received $92.3 million and privately held Sierra Nevada Corp. got $80 million, NASA said.
Space Exploration Technology, the privately held company founded by Internet entrepreneur Elon Musk, was awarded $75 million. The company, also known as SpaceX, is considering an initial public offering next year, Musk recently said.
Blue Origin, founded by Amazon's Jeff Bezos, received a contract worth $22 million. The companies were competing for the next round of funding in NASA's Commercial Crew Development program.
The program is aimed at developing a U.S. commercial alternative to fly astronauts to and from the International Space Station after the U.S. space shuttles are retired later this year.
The United States has already turned over flights to Russia at a cost of $51 million per person. The price is expected to increase to $63 million in 2014.
"We're committed to safely transporting U.S. astronauts on American-made spacecraft and ending the outsourcing of this work to foreign governments," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said.
"These agreements are significant milestones in NASA's plans to take advantage of American ingenuity to get to low-Earth orbit so we can concentrate our resources on deep space exploration."
The companies chosen for the program came from a pool of 22, Philip McAlister, acting director of Commercial Spaceflight Development at NASA, told reporters during a conference call.
In addition to government funds, the companies will be expected to invest their own resources, a shift from how the United States has developed spacecraft in the past.
The agreement covers work for about 14 months. The goal is for NASA to be able to buy commercial orbital space transportation services by about 2015.
Monday, April 18, 2011
NASA to Announce Funding for Private Spaceship Builders Today
Space.com: NASA to Announce Funding for Private Spaceship Builders Today
NASA today (April 18) will announce the private companies who will receive funding awards to help develop technologies that will support the agency's commercial spaceship needs.
The awards are part of the second round of NASA's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program, which is aimed at supporting growth within U.S. industry to develop and demonstrate human spaceflight capabilities.
The first round of the agency's CCDev initiatives began in 2009, and the second round of selected proposals will be used to advance the commercial crew space transportation system concepts and mature the design and development of launch vehicles and spacecraft, NASA officials said in a statement.
In February, NASA contacted at least eight private companies, including Alliant Techsystems (ATK), Blue Origin, Boeing, Excalibur Almaz, Orbital Sciences Corp., Sierra Nevada Corp., Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to discuss their proposals for the CCDev2 awards. [Infographic: Spaceships of the World]
After NASA's space shuttle program ends later this year, the agency will rely on commercial providers to carry cargo and eventually humans to the International Space Station. SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corp. already have contracts with NASA to ferry supplies to the space station following the retirement of the veteran orbiters.
NASA will discuss its commercial space company picks today during media briefing at 4:30 p.m. EDT (2030 GMT). The teleconference will feature the following representatives:
Philip McAlister, acting director of commercial spaceflight development at NASA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Edward Mango, program manager of the commercial crew program at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
Andrew Hunter, deputy chief financial officer at NASA Headquarters.
Today's announcement comes on the heels of last week's political compromise that resulted in a new federal spending bill. On April 14, Congress passed a spending measure for the last five months of the year 2011.
The bill left NASA with about $18.5 billion, putting its budget roughly $240 million below its 2010 funding level.
NASA today (April 18) will announce the private companies who will receive funding awards to help develop technologies that will support the agency's commercial spaceship needs.
The awards are part of the second round of NASA's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program, which is aimed at supporting growth within U.S. industry to develop and demonstrate human spaceflight capabilities.
The first round of the agency's CCDev initiatives began in 2009, and the second round of selected proposals will be used to advance the commercial crew space transportation system concepts and mature the design and development of launch vehicles and spacecraft, NASA officials said in a statement.
In February, NASA contacted at least eight private companies, including Alliant Techsystems (ATK), Blue Origin, Boeing, Excalibur Almaz, Orbital Sciences Corp., Sierra Nevada Corp., Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to discuss their proposals for the CCDev2 awards. [Infographic: Spaceships of the World]
After NASA's space shuttle program ends later this year, the agency will rely on commercial providers to carry cargo and eventually humans to the International Space Station. SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corp. already have contracts with NASA to ferry supplies to the space station following the retirement of the veteran orbiters.
NASA will discuss its commercial space company picks today during media briefing at 4:30 p.m. EDT (2030 GMT). The teleconference will feature the following representatives:
Philip McAlister, acting director of commercial spaceflight development at NASA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Edward Mango, program manager of the commercial crew program at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
Andrew Hunter, deputy chief financial officer at NASA Headquarters.
Today's announcement comes on the heels of last week's political compromise that resulted in a new federal spending bill. On April 14, Congress passed a spending measure for the last five months of the year 2011.
The bill left NASA with about $18.5 billion, putting its budget roughly $240 million below its 2010 funding level.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
To outer space and back to Earth again
To outer space and back to Earth again
Man has come a long way since Yuri Gagarin first went into space 50 years ago. But as space travel becomes a preserve of the wealthy and the Moon return project is slashed, is the heydey of space exploration over?
It’s 1957 Russia. Laika the dog is preparing for lift-off, sat in a padded cabin sealed off from the radio transmitters, telemetry system and programming unit that will transport her to the ends of the Earth.
The world is watching, astonished and aghast – the 18kg Russian spacecraft is far superior to anything the US is considering.
Building on the success of Sputnik 1, launched just one month before, Russian engineers are preparing the first ever spacecraft to carry a living animal into orbit.
In the years that followed, the Soviet Union and USA would become locked in a battle for supremacy in outer space exploration, against the backdrop of an increasingly cold war.
The Space Race unleashed a proliferation of experiments, from artificial satellites to excursions to the Moon. But while the 1950s and 60s boasted space exploration in abundance, manned voyages in the years that followed were to deplete.
The space agenda began to prioritise analysis and photography from orbit over man exploring the Moon in earnest - Venera 13 analysed Venusian soil from 1982, while the surface of Mars was brought into focus by Phobus 2 in 1989.
Undoubtedly, planetary science has seen a tremendous growth in new knowledge. We have discovered Europa’s ocean could support life, and that liquid methane rain falls on Saturn’s moon, Titan, creating rivers and lakes not unlike those on Earth.
But aren’t the days of astronauts setting foot on the Moon to explore its peaks and crevasses, not as a tourist in exchange for millions of dollars, but for the sake of science, over?
Recent developments might suggest as much. In 2010 Barack Obama announced the end of the Constellation mission back to the Moon, and encouraged NASA to shift its focus in exchange for a $6 billion funding increase.
Meanwhile business tycoon Richard Branson built on his £14 million deal to allow his company, Virgin, to take passengers into space. Yesterday Virgin Galactic announced it is looking for pilot-astronauts for both the carrier vehicle and the craft that will fly into space.
Chris Bergin, Managing Editor of NASASpaceflight.com, a website which publishes space exploration news, acknowledged moon missions are declining.
“While Moon missions may no longer be the main focus of the future plans, staged manned exploration goals of potentially visiting a Near Earth Object (NEO) - such an asteroid - working off the long duration space flight lessons of six month tours on the International Space Station, will lay the path for an eventual manned mission to Mars,” he said.
“Robotic exploration of the outer solar system has always been part of the space program's focus, and will continue to be so - from a robotic standpoint - not least because manned exploration of those destinations won't occur in our lifetimes.
“Manned exploration of Beyond Earth Orbit (BEO) is technically achievable, but highly costly. While robotic missions are less costly, the balance is to build a viable roadmap for manned BEO missions, given manned missions still cultivate far more inspiration and public interest over robotic missions, and by some margin.”
Bergin also spoke about space tourism: “Space tourism will become part of - as opposed to a dominating element - of the future of space travel, at least from a public interest standpoint, and probably not from a launch frequency standpoint,” he said.
“The big missions will still remain with NASA, and commercial space, such those seen with SpaceX's plans, who continue to impress with their evolving fleet of vehicles, led by billionaire founder Elon Musk.”
Turning specifically to Richard Branson’s venture, Bergin said: “Virgin Galactic are certainly leading the charge for space tourism, which had previously only been open to a handful of selected multi-millionaires paying to ride on the Russian Soyuz to the International Space Station for around a week.
“However, you will still need to be extremely rich to afford to ride on Virgin's SpaceShip2, and notably, you are only going to be riding to suborbit, for a matter of minutes. To put into context, you are only going as "high" as where the Solid Rocket Boosters separate during the first two minutes of a Shuttle launch. It will still be amazing, but there's certainly some confusion in the public domain that these flights will be like a Shuttle mission.
“Some people who follow the space program have noted that Virgin's PR machine has been working overtime on selling their flights, noting they are 'safer than the Space Shuttle', whilst completely ignoring the Shuttle's amazing 30 year career in their legacy of flight logo on the side of the vehicle. Let's be clear, in space flight terms, we're comparing a new Mini popping to the supermarket, with an 18 wheeler juggernaut carrying a delivery across Europe.
“However, we are witnessing the start of what will eventually be numerous companies offering tickets to ride into space, notably the plans seen for Bigelow Aerospace, who continue to plan a 'Space Hotel' via their innovative inflatable module design. It may turn into an exciting future for private passengers, with costs eventually reducing so that non-millionaires will be able to book a flight into space. That can only a good thing. Sir Richard Branson is being rightly praised for opening up these possibilities.”
Fifty years ago the world was full of aspirations that a new age of space exploration was upon them. And according to the Space Odyssey series, trips to the moon should by now be as customary as popping to the supermarket. Instead, space exploration looks set to become the preserve of the mega-rich, while funding for voyages which shape the world as we know it are slashed. To infinity and?back to Earth again?
Man has come a long way since Yuri Gagarin first went into space 50 years ago. But as space travel becomes a preserve of the wealthy and the Moon return project is slashed, is the heydey of space exploration over?
It’s 1957 Russia. Laika the dog is preparing for lift-off, sat in a padded cabin sealed off from the radio transmitters, telemetry system and programming unit that will transport her to the ends of the Earth.
The world is watching, astonished and aghast – the 18kg Russian spacecraft is far superior to anything the US is considering.
Building on the success of Sputnik 1, launched just one month before, Russian engineers are preparing the first ever spacecraft to carry a living animal into orbit.
In the years that followed, the Soviet Union and USA would become locked in a battle for supremacy in outer space exploration, against the backdrop of an increasingly cold war.
The Space Race unleashed a proliferation of experiments, from artificial satellites to excursions to the Moon. But while the 1950s and 60s boasted space exploration in abundance, manned voyages in the years that followed were to deplete.
The space agenda began to prioritise analysis and photography from orbit over man exploring the Moon in earnest - Venera 13 analysed Venusian soil from 1982, while the surface of Mars was brought into focus by Phobus 2 in 1989.
Undoubtedly, planetary science has seen a tremendous growth in new knowledge. We have discovered Europa’s ocean could support life, and that liquid methane rain falls on Saturn’s moon, Titan, creating rivers and lakes not unlike those on Earth.
But aren’t the days of astronauts setting foot on the Moon to explore its peaks and crevasses, not as a tourist in exchange for millions of dollars, but for the sake of science, over?
Recent developments might suggest as much. In 2010 Barack Obama announced the end of the Constellation mission back to the Moon, and encouraged NASA to shift its focus in exchange for a $6 billion funding increase.
Meanwhile business tycoon Richard Branson built on his £14 million deal to allow his company, Virgin, to take passengers into space. Yesterday Virgin Galactic announced it is looking for pilot-astronauts for both the carrier vehicle and the craft that will fly into space.
Chris Bergin, Managing Editor of NASASpaceflight.com, a website which publishes space exploration news, acknowledged moon missions are declining.
“While Moon missions may no longer be the main focus of the future plans, staged manned exploration goals of potentially visiting a Near Earth Object (NEO) - such an asteroid - working off the long duration space flight lessons of six month tours on the International Space Station, will lay the path for an eventual manned mission to Mars,” he said.
“Robotic exploration of the outer solar system has always been part of the space program's focus, and will continue to be so - from a robotic standpoint - not least because manned exploration of those destinations won't occur in our lifetimes.
“Manned exploration of Beyond Earth Orbit (BEO) is technically achievable, but highly costly. While robotic missions are less costly, the balance is to build a viable roadmap for manned BEO missions, given manned missions still cultivate far more inspiration and public interest over robotic missions, and by some margin.”
Bergin also spoke about space tourism: “Space tourism will become part of - as opposed to a dominating element - of the future of space travel, at least from a public interest standpoint, and probably not from a launch frequency standpoint,” he said.
“The big missions will still remain with NASA, and commercial space, such those seen with SpaceX's plans, who continue to impress with their evolving fleet of vehicles, led by billionaire founder Elon Musk.”
Turning specifically to Richard Branson’s venture, Bergin said: “Virgin Galactic are certainly leading the charge for space tourism, which had previously only been open to a handful of selected multi-millionaires paying to ride on the Russian Soyuz to the International Space Station for around a week.
“However, you will still need to be extremely rich to afford to ride on Virgin's SpaceShip2, and notably, you are only going to be riding to suborbit, for a matter of minutes. To put into context, you are only going as "high" as where the Solid Rocket Boosters separate during the first two minutes of a Shuttle launch. It will still be amazing, but there's certainly some confusion in the public domain that these flights will be like a Shuttle mission.
“Some people who follow the space program have noted that Virgin's PR machine has been working overtime on selling their flights, noting they are 'safer than the Space Shuttle', whilst completely ignoring the Shuttle's amazing 30 year career in their legacy of flight logo on the side of the vehicle. Let's be clear, in space flight terms, we're comparing a new Mini popping to the supermarket, with an 18 wheeler juggernaut carrying a delivery across Europe.
“However, we are witnessing the start of what will eventually be numerous companies offering tickets to ride into space, notably the plans seen for Bigelow Aerospace, who continue to plan a 'Space Hotel' via their innovative inflatable module design. It may turn into an exciting future for private passengers, with costs eventually reducing so that non-millionaires will be able to book a flight into space. That can only a good thing. Sir Richard Branson is being rightly praised for opening up these possibilities.”
Fifty years ago the world was full of aspirations that a new age of space exploration was upon them. And according to the Space Odyssey series, trips to the moon should by now be as customary as popping to the supermarket. Instead, space exploration looks set to become the preserve of the mega-rich, while funding for voyages which shape the world as we know it are slashed. To infinity and?back to Earth again?
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Editorial: Shuttle decision more than a disappointment; it’s an outrage
Dallas Morning News: Editorial: Shuttle decision more than a disappointment; it’s an outrage
Forget that we’re all Texans here and more than a little biased. If you asked unbiased people in Botswana to name the city they most associate with space exploration, chances are they’d say Houston.
When humans landed on the moon in 1969, the very first sentences out of commander Neil Armstrong’s mouth were heard around the world: “Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed.” For all of the past 135 shuttle missions, the first and last sentences out of the mission chief’s mouth included some reference to Houston.
It boggles the mind, then, to contemplate the Washington decision-making that, on Tuesday, awarded exhibits of retired shuttle orbiters to New York, Washington, the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, and a fourth to (drum roll) … Los Angeles.
The announcement came on the 30th anniversary of the first space shuttle flight — a flight that shuttle biographer Henry Dethloff describes as having been conceived in large part during discussions on Oct. 27, 1966, about creation of a reusable launch vehicle. And where did those discussions occur? Houston.
The commander of the first shuttle mission, STS-1, was John Young, who spent nearly all of his career training at the Johnson Space Flight Center in Houston. From his current home near Houston, Young can drive to the space center’s museum and look over capsules and all kinds of memorabilia from his early days in the Gemini program and its Mercury predecessor.
Young can tour various gigantic Saturn V rocket components that carried Apollo vehicles like the one he commanded to the moon and back. And he can recall incredible stories of Apollo 13 — the infamous “Houston, we’ve had a problem” flight. Young was part of the Houston team that scrambled to adapt filters, tubes and other odds and ends to extend the crew’s life on the lunar landing module as the Apollo 13 capsule slowly died.
Young and millions of visitors to the Johnson Space Center can tour just about every aspect of the U.S. space program except one big one: the shuttle itself. Like the rest of us, he’ll have to hop on a plane to Florida, Washington, New York or … Los Angeles.
Texans were warned weeks ago that politics would play a role in this decision, even though Maj. Gen. Charles F. Bolden, the NASA administrator, insists that’s not the case. Bolden, himself a former astronaut, could not possibly have overlooked Houston’s pivotal role in the shuttle program.
This newspaper shares the skepticism of Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who stated, “It is clear political favors trumped common sense and fairness in the selection of the final locations for the orbiter fleet.”
This decision isn’t just a disappointment. It’s an outrage.
Forget that we’re all Texans here and more than a little biased. If you asked unbiased people in Botswana to name the city they most associate with space exploration, chances are they’d say Houston.
When humans landed on the moon in 1969, the very first sentences out of commander Neil Armstrong’s mouth were heard around the world: “Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed.” For all of the past 135 shuttle missions, the first and last sentences out of the mission chief’s mouth included some reference to Houston.
It boggles the mind, then, to contemplate the Washington decision-making that, on Tuesday, awarded exhibits of retired shuttle orbiters to New York, Washington, the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, and a fourth to (drum roll) … Los Angeles.
The announcement came on the 30th anniversary of the first space shuttle flight — a flight that shuttle biographer Henry Dethloff describes as having been conceived in large part during discussions on Oct. 27, 1966, about creation of a reusable launch vehicle. And where did those discussions occur? Houston.
The commander of the first shuttle mission, STS-1, was John Young, who spent nearly all of his career training at the Johnson Space Flight Center in Houston. From his current home near Houston, Young can drive to the space center’s museum and look over capsules and all kinds of memorabilia from his early days in the Gemini program and its Mercury predecessor.
Young can tour various gigantic Saturn V rocket components that carried Apollo vehicles like the one he commanded to the moon and back. And he can recall incredible stories of Apollo 13 — the infamous “Houston, we’ve had a problem” flight. Young was part of the Houston team that scrambled to adapt filters, tubes and other odds and ends to extend the crew’s life on the lunar landing module as the Apollo 13 capsule slowly died.
Young and millions of visitors to the Johnson Space Center can tour just about every aspect of the U.S. space program except one big one: the shuttle itself. Like the rest of us, he’ll have to hop on a plane to Florida, Washington, New York or … Los Angeles.
Texans were warned weeks ago that politics would play a role in this decision, even though Maj. Gen. Charles F. Bolden, the NASA administrator, insists that’s not the case. Bolden, himself a former astronaut, could not possibly have overlooked Houston’s pivotal role in the shuttle program.
This newspaper shares the skepticism of Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who stated, “It is clear political favors trumped common sense and fairness in the selection of the final locations for the orbiter fleet.”
This decision isn’t just a disappointment. It’s an outrage.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
BRP To Contribute To Canadian Moon and Mars Exploration Programs
UTV Weekly: BRP To Contribute To Canadian Moon and Mars Exploration Programs
BRP, in cooperation with the Centre de technologies avancées BRP-Université de Sherbrooke (CTA), will develop the chassis and locomotion systems for a Lunar Exploration Light Rover and a Mars Exploration Science Rover.
BRP was awarded $5.6 million in contracts by MacDonald Dettwiler and Associated Ltd. (MDA) after they received the mandate of two contracts by the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) for the design, development, construction and testing of advanced space vehicles under the CSA’s Exploration Surface Mobility Program.
Terrestrial prototypes of the rovers will be constructed from advanced aluminum alloys with electric propulsion systems powered by battery and, in the case of the Mars rover, solar energy. They will also be capable of integrating hydrogen fuel cells. The rover prototypes will target improvements to the performance of existing Martian and lunar exploration vehicles by a factor of between 5 and 10, in terms of speed, range and size.
“Future vehicles will be tasked with accessing harsher, rougher and more remote regions of planetary surfaces than ever before,” said Dr. Christian Sallaberger, vice-president and director for Space Exploration at MDA. “For Canada to play a role, we must demand the very best that our nation has to offer. BRP’s world leadership in terrestrial off-road vehicles make them a natural partner for MDA on these projects. We are thrilled to welcome them to our growing team in Canada and we are truly excited by the rich synergy between Canadian space and terrestrial technology advancements.”
“BRP is proud to participate in Canada’s space program,” said José Boisjoli, president and CEO. “While this type of R&D is outside our regular activities, we have the resources with the CTA to take advantage of this opportunity. Employees from BRP’s triad of R&D facilities located in Canada and in Austria work together to explore the unexplored and challenge existing paradigms; this is part of our DNA. We look forward to pooling our knowledge with MDA and the CSA to help further Canada’s role in space exploration. Such a project will no doubt also increase our knowledge and speed up our development of more eco-performing technologies that could, in time, be integrated into our existing products.”
Three base vehicles will be developed and built at the CTA, a private-public partnership between BRP and Sherbrooke University, before delivery to MDA for integration with a range of smart sensors and payloads. “The CTA’s team is used to thinking outside the box,” said Mihai Rasidescu, president and general manager of the CTA. “We are developing systems that may eventually need to function in the most remote and hostile environments with extreme variations in temperature, reduced gravity, and of course, the inability of the locomotion system to be serviced once in use. That’s definitely outside the box.”
About the CTA
The Centre de technologies avancées BRP – Université de Sherbrooke (CTA) is the result of a partnership between BRP and the Université de Sherbrooke. Its mandate is to develop new cutting-edge technologies in the field of motorized recreational vehicles. Since it opened in 2006, the CTA has developed two technologies that have been integrated into BRP products and is currently developing a hybrid version of the Can-Am Spyder roadster. The CTA employs more than 70 researchers and students.
About BRP
Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. (BRP), a privately-held company, is a world leader in the design, development, manufacturing, distribution and marketing of motorised recreational vehicles. Its portfolio of brands and products includes: Ski-Doo and Lynx snowmobiles, Sea-Doo watercraft and boats, Evinrude and Johnson outboard engines, Can-Am all-terrain and side-by-side vehicles and roadsters, as well as Rotax engines. BRP products are distributed in more than 100 countries.
BRP, in cooperation with the Centre de technologies avancées BRP-Université de Sherbrooke (CTA), will develop the chassis and locomotion systems for a Lunar Exploration Light Rover and a Mars Exploration Science Rover.
BRP was awarded $5.6 million in contracts by MacDonald Dettwiler and Associated Ltd. (MDA) after they received the mandate of two contracts by the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) for the design, development, construction and testing of advanced space vehicles under the CSA’s Exploration Surface Mobility Program.
Terrestrial prototypes of the rovers will be constructed from advanced aluminum alloys with electric propulsion systems powered by battery and, in the case of the Mars rover, solar energy. They will also be capable of integrating hydrogen fuel cells. The rover prototypes will target improvements to the performance of existing Martian and lunar exploration vehicles by a factor of between 5 and 10, in terms of speed, range and size.
“Future vehicles will be tasked with accessing harsher, rougher and more remote regions of planetary surfaces than ever before,” said Dr. Christian Sallaberger, vice-president and director for Space Exploration at MDA. “For Canada to play a role, we must demand the very best that our nation has to offer. BRP’s world leadership in terrestrial off-road vehicles make them a natural partner for MDA on these projects. We are thrilled to welcome them to our growing team in Canada and we are truly excited by the rich synergy between Canadian space and terrestrial technology advancements.”
“BRP is proud to participate in Canada’s space program,” said José Boisjoli, president and CEO. “While this type of R&D is outside our regular activities, we have the resources with the CTA to take advantage of this opportunity. Employees from BRP’s triad of R&D facilities located in Canada and in Austria work together to explore the unexplored and challenge existing paradigms; this is part of our DNA. We look forward to pooling our knowledge with MDA and the CSA to help further Canada’s role in space exploration. Such a project will no doubt also increase our knowledge and speed up our development of more eco-performing technologies that could, in time, be integrated into our existing products.”
Three base vehicles will be developed and built at the CTA, a private-public partnership between BRP and Sherbrooke University, before delivery to MDA for integration with a range of smart sensors and payloads. “The CTA’s team is used to thinking outside the box,” said Mihai Rasidescu, president and general manager of the CTA. “We are developing systems that may eventually need to function in the most remote and hostile environments with extreme variations in temperature, reduced gravity, and of course, the inability of the locomotion system to be serviced once in use. That’s definitely outside the box.”
About the CTA
The Centre de technologies avancées BRP – Université de Sherbrooke (CTA) is the result of a partnership between BRP and the Université de Sherbrooke. Its mandate is to develop new cutting-edge technologies in the field of motorized recreational vehicles. Since it opened in 2006, the CTA has developed two technologies that have been integrated into BRP products and is currently developing a hybrid version of the Can-Am Spyder roadster. The CTA employs more than 70 researchers and students.
About BRP
Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. (BRP), a privately-held company, is a world leader in the design, development, manufacturing, distribution and marketing of motorised recreational vehicles. Its portfolio of brands and products includes: Ski-Doo and Lynx snowmobiles, Sea-Doo watercraft and boats, Evinrude and Johnson outboard engines, Can-Am all-terrain and side-by-side vehicles and roadsters, as well as Rotax engines. BRP products are distributed in more than 100 countries.
Why we should embrace the end of human spaceflight
Salon.com - an opinion piece! - Why we should embrace the end of human spaceflight
If God wanted us to live in outer space, we wouldn't have inner ears
By Michael Lind
This week NASA is announcing where the soon-to-be-retired space shuttles will be displayed as museum relics. On April 19 the space shuttle Endeavor will be launched, on the penultimate mission of the program. The end of the space shuttle program will mean that the U.S. will have to rely on Russian rockets to deliver American astronauts to space, pending the development of private commercial spaceflight.
It is tempting to say that this is an outrage; that the effective end of the American manned spaceflight program is a national humiliation; that the program's demise is yet another symbol of the gap in mentality between the confident, ambitious Kennedy-Johnson years and today's solipsistic, penny-pinching America. It is tempting to say all that, but the temptation should be resisted.
The truth is that the American space program is flourishing. In recent years Mars has been visited by the Phoenix lander and the Mars rovers, Spirit and Opportunity. At the moment the Messenger probe is orbiting Mercury and the New Horizons probe is scheduled to pass Pluto in 2015. With the help of the orbiting Kepler space telescope, more than 500 planets in other solar systems have been identified. We live in the greatest age of cosmic exploration in history, even if the public pays little attention because there are no astronauts to engage in white-knuckle landings or to clown around for the cameras.
When the Apollo astronauts landed on the moon, many assumed that this was the first step toward permanent colonization of the moon and journeys by astronauts to other planets. From today's perspective, though, the space race was like the races to the North Pole and the South Pole. Once explorers had reached those destinations, the world lost interest.
Another parallel is ocean exploration. Back in the 1960s, visions of colonies on the moon competed with plans for domed cities on the ocean floor that gave a new meaning to the phrase "real estate bubble." Scientific exploration of the ocean depths continues to produce marvelous discoveries, like whole ecosystems that have evolved to take advantage of the heat and emissions of undersea volcanic vents. But the year 2000 came and went and millions of homeowners are "underwater" only in metaphor.
The parallel is not complete, of course. The poles and the ocean depths are far more hospitable to human life than near Earth orbit or the moon or Mars. Astronauts have learned that prolonged weightlessness does terrible things to the bones and the circulatory system. If God wanted us to live in outer space, we wouldn't have balancing systems in our inner ears. When and if the science-fiction alternative of providing a simulacrum of gravity by spinning a spaceship or space station is tried, let us hope there will be a plentiful supply of barf bags.
The worst enemies of human spaceflight are its proponents. Their arguments are so weak that you keep waiting for the real, knock-down argument, which never comes.
The success of robot space probes has discredited the idea that machines are too stupid to do science in space. When that argument for human spaceflight collapses, those that remain are preposterous.
One is the assertion that life has always sought out new environments. Just as plants and animals moved from the seas to the land, it is said, so humanity must transcend the boundaries of the Earth.
This is just silly. Animals never leave a comfortable habitat for a harsh one, unless they are forced to. That is why we don't see buffalo, raccoons and turtles marching off to Death Valley in great numbers to test their mettle, in a spirit of adventure.
Our vertebrate ancestors did not come ashore hundreds of millions of years ago because they decided to boldly go where no fish had gone before. Instead, generations of proto-amphibians in shallow water got stranded in separated ponds. The ones that were accidentally equipped to survive by desperately gulping air survived long enough to breed, and here we and our fellow land animals are. No lungfish congress would have voted to colonize dry land.
Equally silly is the comparison between the exploration of America by Europeans and the exploration of outer space. The Americas had native people to be enslaved by greedy Europeans, abundant resources and lots of pleasant places to live -- to say nothing of breathable air and drinkable water. That's why the European powers fought to control the Western Hemisphere, while ignoring the continent of Antarctica.
What about the argument that part of the human race needs to dwell somewhere other than on Earth, if humanity is to avoid extinction? In 500 million years the gradually warming sun may boil the oceans, and a few billion years later the sun will evolve into a red giant, incinerating or engulfing the Earth. Our descendants, if there are any, might consider relocating.
In the half-billion years until then, the chances of war, plague or global warming producing the total extinction of a species as numerous, widespread and versatile as humanity are pretty low. A sufficiently large asteroid or comet impact like the one that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs could do the job. But if a massive bolide threatened the Earth, we would send unmanned spacecraft, not Robert Duvall or Bruce Willis, to steer it away or destroy it.
In the event some other natural catastrophe -- a supervolcano, a nearby supernova -- rendered the surface of the Earth temporarily or permanently uninhabitable, it would be cheaper and easier to build and maintain underground bunkers than to use the same technology to do the same thing at vastly greater cost on the moon or other planets or in space stations. By the same token, if humanity had the technology to "terraform" the surface of Mars, it would have the power to make the ruined surface of a dead Earth habitable again, making the colonization of Mars unnecessary.
If there is no compelling argument for government-sponsored human spaceflight, there is no convincing rationale for private commercial spaceflight, either. The Robert Heinlein wing of science-fiction fandom has always combined Tea Party-style anti-statism with a love of big rockets. Now that the dead hand of the NASA bureaucracy is out of the way, will visionary billionaires inspired by Ayn Rand inaugurate a new age of commercial space travel for the masses?
Don't count on it. There might be a niche market for a few space-planes or rockets to take bored plutocrats into orbit for a joy ride. But investors would be wiser to invest in private bathyscaphes offering tours of the Mariana Trench. After 9/11, can anyone believe that the world's governments are going to foster a regime of laissez-faire toward private space shuttles that could be hijacked for suicide missions from orbit, or that might disintegrate over several time zones?
And then there is the problem noted by the late William F. Buckley Jr. Because of security precautions, he joked, the increase of speed with each new mode of transport is neutralized by waiting times. A plane is faster than a train or bus, but you have to get to the airport two hours in advance. A spaceplane might take you across the continent in an hour -- but you would have to arrive at the spaceport the day before.
In the next few generations there will probably be more human spaceflight on a small scale. In time there might even be tiny teams of scientists in orbit, on the moon or other planets, like those in Antarctica. But for the foreseeable future space exploration will be undertaken mainly by machines that don't horrify a watching world when they die slowly, with no hope of rescue.
The epitaph for the dream of human travel to outer space might be borrowed from Samuel Johnson's verdict on a natural monument, the Giant's Causeway, in Ireland. It is worth seeing, he said, but it is not worth going to see.
Michael Lind is Policy Director of the Economic Growth Program at the New America Foundation and is the author of "The Next American Nation: The New Nationalism and the Fourth American Revolution."
If God wanted us to live in outer space, we wouldn't have inner ears
By Michael Lind
This week NASA is announcing where the soon-to-be-retired space shuttles will be displayed as museum relics. On April 19 the space shuttle Endeavor will be launched, on the penultimate mission of the program. The end of the space shuttle program will mean that the U.S. will have to rely on Russian rockets to deliver American astronauts to space, pending the development of private commercial spaceflight.
It is tempting to say that this is an outrage; that the effective end of the American manned spaceflight program is a national humiliation; that the program's demise is yet another symbol of the gap in mentality between the confident, ambitious Kennedy-Johnson years and today's solipsistic, penny-pinching America. It is tempting to say all that, but the temptation should be resisted.
The truth is that the American space program is flourishing. In recent years Mars has been visited by the Phoenix lander and the Mars rovers, Spirit and Opportunity. At the moment the Messenger probe is orbiting Mercury and the New Horizons probe is scheduled to pass Pluto in 2015. With the help of the orbiting Kepler space telescope, more than 500 planets in other solar systems have been identified. We live in the greatest age of cosmic exploration in history, even if the public pays little attention because there are no astronauts to engage in white-knuckle landings or to clown around for the cameras.
When the Apollo astronauts landed on the moon, many assumed that this was the first step toward permanent colonization of the moon and journeys by astronauts to other planets. From today's perspective, though, the space race was like the races to the North Pole and the South Pole. Once explorers had reached those destinations, the world lost interest.
Another parallel is ocean exploration. Back in the 1960s, visions of colonies on the moon competed with plans for domed cities on the ocean floor that gave a new meaning to the phrase "real estate bubble." Scientific exploration of the ocean depths continues to produce marvelous discoveries, like whole ecosystems that have evolved to take advantage of the heat and emissions of undersea volcanic vents. But the year 2000 came and went and millions of homeowners are "underwater" only in metaphor.
The parallel is not complete, of course. The poles and the ocean depths are far more hospitable to human life than near Earth orbit or the moon or Mars. Astronauts have learned that prolonged weightlessness does terrible things to the bones and the circulatory system. If God wanted us to live in outer space, we wouldn't have balancing systems in our inner ears. When and if the science-fiction alternative of providing a simulacrum of gravity by spinning a spaceship or space station is tried, let us hope there will be a plentiful supply of barf bags.
The worst enemies of human spaceflight are its proponents. Their arguments are so weak that you keep waiting for the real, knock-down argument, which never comes.
The success of robot space probes has discredited the idea that machines are too stupid to do science in space. When that argument for human spaceflight collapses, those that remain are preposterous.
One is the assertion that life has always sought out new environments. Just as plants and animals moved from the seas to the land, it is said, so humanity must transcend the boundaries of the Earth.
This is just silly. Animals never leave a comfortable habitat for a harsh one, unless they are forced to. That is why we don't see buffalo, raccoons and turtles marching off to Death Valley in great numbers to test their mettle, in a spirit of adventure.
Our vertebrate ancestors did not come ashore hundreds of millions of years ago because they decided to boldly go where no fish had gone before. Instead, generations of proto-amphibians in shallow water got stranded in separated ponds. The ones that were accidentally equipped to survive by desperately gulping air survived long enough to breed, and here we and our fellow land animals are. No lungfish congress would have voted to colonize dry land.
Equally silly is the comparison between the exploration of America by Europeans and the exploration of outer space. The Americas had native people to be enslaved by greedy Europeans, abundant resources and lots of pleasant places to live -- to say nothing of breathable air and drinkable water. That's why the European powers fought to control the Western Hemisphere, while ignoring the continent of Antarctica.
What about the argument that part of the human race needs to dwell somewhere other than on Earth, if humanity is to avoid extinction? In 500 million years the gradually warming sun may boil the oceans, and a few billion years later the sun will evolve into a red giant, incinerating or engulfing the Earth. Our descendants, if there are any, might consider relocating.
In the half-billion years until then, the chances of war, plague or global warming producing the total extinction of a species as numerous, widespread and versatile as humanity are pretty low. A sufficiently large asteroid or comet impact like the one that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs could do the job. But if a massive bolide threatened the Earth, we would send unmanned spacecraft, not Robert Duvall or Bruce Willis, to steer it away or destroy it.
In the event some other natural catastrophe -- a supervolcano, a nearby supernova -- rendered the surface of the Earth temporarily or permanently uninhabitable, it would be cheaper and easier to build and maintain underground bunkers than to use the same technology to do the same thing at vastly greater cost on the moon or other planets or in space stations. By the same token, if humanity had the technology to "terraform" the surface of Mars, it would have the power to make the ruined surface of a dead Earth habitable again, making the colonization of Mars unnecessary.
If there is no compelling argument for government-sponsored human spaceflight, there is no convincing rationale for private commercial spaceflight, either. The Robert Heinlein wing of science-fiction fandom has always combined Tea Party-style anti-statism with a love of big rockets. Now that the dead hand of the NASA bureaucracy is out of the way, will visionary billionaires inspired by Ayn Rand inaugurate a new age of commercial space travel for the masses?
Don't count on it. There might be a niche market for a few space-planes or rockets to take bored plutocrats into orbit for a joy ride. But investors would be wiser to invest in private bathyscaphes offering tours of the Mariana Trench. After 9/11, can anyone believe that the world's governments are going to foster a regime of laissez-faire toward private space shuttles that could be hijacked for suicide missions from orbit, or that might disintegrate over several time zones?
And then there is the problem noted by the late William F. Buckley Jr. Because of security precautions, he joked, the increase of speed with each new mode of transport is neutralized by waiting times. A plane is faster than a train or bus, but you have to get to the airport two hours in advance. A spaceplane might take you across the continent in an hour -- but you would have to arrive at the spaceport the day before.
In the next few generations there will probably be more human spaceflight on a small scale. In time there might even be tiny teams of scientists in orbit, on the moon or other planets, like those in Antarctica. But for the foreseeable future space exploration will be undertaken mainly by machines that don't horrify a watching world when they die slowly, with no hope of rescue.
The epitaph for the dream of human travel to outer space might be borrowed from Samuel Johnson's verdict on a natural monument, the Giant's Causeway, in Ireland. It is worth seeing, he said, but it is not worth going to see.
Michael Lind is Policy Director of the Economic Growth Program at the New America Foundation and is the author of "The Next American Nation: The New Nationalism and the Fourth American Revolution."
Monday, April 11, 2011
World celebrates 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin’s space flight
Itar Tass: World celebrates 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin’s space flight
OTTAWA, April 11 (Itar-Tass) -- The MacMillan Space Centre in Vancouver has held a gala meeting devoted to an outstanding role played by first world cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin in the history of space exploration. A representative of the MacMillan Space Center, Tracy Cromwell, in an interview with Itar-Tass praised a great role played by Gagarin’s space mission. The gala event was organized to pay tribute to Yuri Gagarin and his contribution to the history of manned space flights, Cromwell said.
On the eve of the 50th jubilee of the first manned space flight special events devoted to the historic anniversary were held in Canada, including at the Canadian parliament in Ottawa, a conference of writers of science fiction in Toronto, museums in Calgary, Edmonton and Winnipeg, the Astronomical Observatory in Alberta and the University of Western Ontario.
ROME - Special events timed to coincide with the 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's space flight are beginning at the Sapienza University of Rome on Monday. The main gala events attended by Russian and Italian cosmonauts will be held at the University of Insubria in Varese (Milan) on April 12, where a scientific conference devoted to the present, past and future of manned space flights will be held. Russian cosmonaut Yuri Usachev, who had been to space four times including a space mission to the Mir orbital station and the International Space Station, will take part in the conference. A documentary film devoted to Yuri Gagarin will be demonstrated for the first time at Milan Planetarium.
The Leonardo da Vinci National Museum of Science and Technology organized a meeting with Russian cosmonaut Valery Tokarev, who took part in two international space expeditions to the Mir orbital station and the International Space Station, and US astronaut Walter Cunningham who was the Lunar module pilot in the 1968 Apollo mission. Italian astronaut Maurizio Cheli who took part in the Columbia shuttle expedition in 1975 is to join his Russian and US colleagues.
TBILISI - An exhibition "The Way to the Stars" devoted to the 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin’s space flight was held at the Russian Drama Theatre in Tbilisi on Sunday. On display were paintings created by talented children who took part in the Georgian national competition of children’s drawings organized by the “Russian Club” international cultural organization.
More than 250 young artists from Georgia aged from 4 to 17 took part in the competition at which 600 drawings were displayed. The winners - the nine-year-old Luka Gotua from Tbilisi and the 16-year-old Georgy Kopadze from Rustavi, were awarded a free sightseeing tour to Russia which includes historical cities on Russia's "Golden Ring" tourist itinerary.
OTTAWA, April 11 (Itar-Tass) -- The MacMillan Space Centre in Vancouver has held a gala meeting devoted to an outstanding role played by first world cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin in the history of space exploration. A representative of the MacMillan Space Center, Tracy Cromwell, in an interview with Itar-Tass praised a great role played by Gagarin’s space mission. The gala event was organized to pay tribute to Yuri Gagarin and his contribution to the history of manned space flights, Cromwell said.
On the eve of the 50th jubilee of the first manned space flight special events devoted to the historic anniversary were held in Canada, including at the Canadian parliament in Ottawa, a conference of writers of science fiction in Toronto, museums in Calgary, Edmonton and Winnipeg, the Astronomical Observatory in Alberta and the University of Western Ontario.
ROME - Special events timed to coincide with the 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's space flight are beginning at the Sapienza University of Rome on Monday. The main gala events attended by Russian and Italian cosmonauts will be held at the University of Insubria in Varese (Milan) on April 12, where a scientific conference devoted to the present, past and future of manned space flights will be held. Russian cosmonaut Yuri Usachev, who had been to space four times including a space mission to the Mir orbital station and the International Space Station, will take part in the conference. A documentary film devoted to Yuri Gagarin will be demonstrated for the first time at Milan Planetarium.
The Leonardo da Vinci National Museum of Science and Technology organized a meeting with Russian cosmonaut Valery Tokarev, who took part in two international space expeditions to the Mir orbital station and the International Space Station, and US astronaut Walter Cunningham who was the Lunar module pilot in the 1968 Apollo mission. Italian astronaut Maurizio Cheli who took part in the Columbia shuttle expedition in 1975 is to join his Russian and US colleagues.
TBILISI - An exhibition "The Way to the Stars" devoted to the 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin’s space flight was held at the Russian Drama Theatre in Tbilisi on Sunday. On display were paintings created by talented children who took part in the Georgian national competition of children’s drawings organized by the “Russian Club” international cultural organization.
More than 250 young artists from Georgia aged from 4 to 17 took part in the competition at which 600 drawings were displayed. The winners - the nine-year-old Luka Gotua from Tbilisi and the 16-year-old Georgy Kopadze from Rustavi, were awarded a free sightseeing tour to Russia which includes historical cities on Russia's "Golden Ring" tourist itinerary.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Key dates in the history of space exploration
Space Travel.com: Key dates in the history of space exploration
Following are key dates in the history of space travel and exploration, 50 years after Soviet cosmonaut Yury Gagarin became the first man in space:
1957
October: USSR launches first satellite Sputnik 1.
November 3: Russian dog Laika becomes first live animal in space but dies aboard Sputnik 2.
1958
October: American space agency National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) created.
1961
April: Gagarin becomes first man in space, completing a single, 108-minute orbit aboard Vostok 1.
May: US President John Kennedy launches the Apollo programme which foresees a man on the moon by the end of the decade. American Alan Shepard carries out a 15-minute space flight aboard Mercury.
1962
February: American John Glenn completes the first three orbits of the Earth.
August: US launches a probe to Venus, USSR fires a probe to Mars in November.
1963
June: First space flight by a woman, Soviet cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova.
1965
March: Cosmonaut Aleksei Leonov undertakes first spacewalk during a 26-hour flight.
1967
January: Launchpad blaze kills all three astronauts aboard Apollo 1. Soviet cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov killed when Soyuz 1 parachute fails in April.
1969
July: US astronauts Neil Armstrong, then Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin (Apollo 11) become first men to set foot on the Moon.
1971
April: USSR launches first orbital space station, Salyut 1.
June: Three cosmonauts on Soyuz 11 die during descent of their module.
1975
May: European Space Agency created.
July: A US Apollo spacecraft docks with a Soviet Soyuz spacecraft while in Earth orbit.
1979
December: Europe becomes a space power with the launch of the Ariane rocket.
1981
April: Maiden voyage of the US space shuttle Columbia, the first reusable manned spacecraft. It is followed later by Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour.
1986
January: Challenger explodes on liftoff, killing all seven astronauts.
1990
April: Launch of of the Hubble Space Telescope, a joint venture between NASA and the European Space Agency.
1998
November: Start of the contruction of the International Space Station (ISS), which is inhabited in late 2000.
2001
April: US millionaire Dennis Tito becomes the world's first space tourist.
2003
February: Shuttle Columbia disintegrates over Texas upon reentry killing seven astronaunts.
October: China launches the Chang'e I satellite, the nation's first lunar orbiter. In September 2008 Chinese astronaut Zhai Zhigang aboard the Shenzhou VII successfully completes his country's first ever space walk.
2004
September: British airline magnate Richard Branson announces a plan for the world's first commercial space flights.
2008
October: India's first lunar mission blasts off from the national space centre on the southeastern coast.
2009
February: Iran launches its first domestically manufactured satellite into orbit. A year later it sends animals into space.
2010
February: US President Barack Obama scraps plans to return Americans to the moon and to conquer Mars.
2011
February: Shuttle Discovery lands back on Earth after its final space flight before retirement. After the last journeys of Endeavour and Atlantis, the US will depend totally on Russia's Soyuz to go to space.
Following are key dates in the history of space travel and exploration, 50 years after Soviet cosmonaut Yury Gagarin became the first man in space:
1957
October: USSR launches first satellite Sputnik 1.
November 3: Russian dog Laika becomes first live animal in space but dies aboard Sputnik 2.
1958
October: American space agency National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) created.
1961
April: Gagarin becomes first man in space, completing a single, 108-minute orbit aboard Vostok 1.
May: US President John Kennedy launches the Apollo programme which foresees a man on the moon by the end of the decade. American Alan Shepard carries out a 15-minute space flight aboard Mercury.
1962
February: American John Glenn completes the first three orbits of the Earth.
August: US launches a probe to Venus, USSR fires a probe to Mars in November.
1963
June: First space flight by a woman, Soviet cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova.
1965
March: Cosmonaut Aleksei Leonov undertakes first spacewalk during a 26-hour flight.
1967
January: Launchpad blaze kills all three astronauts aboard Apollo 1. Soviet cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov killed when Soyuz 1 parachute fails in April.
1969
July: US astronauts Neil Armstrong, then Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin (Apollo 11) become first men to set foot on the Moon.
1971
April: USSR launches first orbital space station, Salyut 1.
June: Three cosmonauts on Soyuz 11 die during descent of their module.
1975
May: European Space Agency created.
July: A US Apollo spacecraft docks with a Soviet Soyuz spacecraft while in Earth orbit.
1979
December: Europe becomes a space power with the launch of the Ariane rocket.
1981
April: Maiden voyage of the US space shuttle Columbia, the first reusable manned spacecraft. It is followed later by Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour.
1986
January: Challenger explodes on liftoff, killing all seven astronauts.
1990
April: Launch of of the Hubble Space Telescope, a joint venture between NASA and the European Space Agency.
1998
November: Start of the contruction of the International Space Station (ISS), which is inhabited in late 2000.
2001
April: US millionaire Dennis Tito becomes the world's first space tourist.
2003
February: Shuttle Columbia disintegrates over Texas upon reentry killing seven astronaunts.
October: China launches the Chang'e I satellite, the nation's first lunar orbiter. In September 2008 Chinese astronaut Zhai Zhigang aboard the Shenzhou VII successfully completes his country's first ever space walk.
2004
September: British airline magnate Richard Branson announces a plan for the world's first commercial space flights.
2008
October: India's first lunar mission blasts off from the national space centre on the southeastern coast.
2009
February: Iran launches its first domestically manufactured satellite into orbit. A year later it sends animals into space.
2010
February: US President Barack Obama scraps plans to return Americans to the moon and to conquer Mars.
2011
February: Shuttle Discovery lands back on Earth after its final space flight before retirement. After the last journeys of Endeavour and Atlantis, the US will depend totally on Russia's Soyuz to go to space.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Science shortfalls limit NASA spaceflight ambitions
Space.MSNBC.com: Science shortfalls limit NASA spaceflight ambitions
Nearly 50 years after the first human spaceflight, NASA is in poor shape to send astronauts on long deep-space voyages because the agency's life and physical sciences program has shrunk dramatically in both size and scope in recent years, a new report suggests.
However, NASA could achieve the insights and breakthroughs needed to send humans deeper into space than ever before – including to Mars – if the agency supports its life and physical sciences program with strong leadership and stable funding, according to the National Research Council report.
The report, titled "Recapturing a Future for Space Exploration: Life and Physical Sciences for a New Era," was released Tuesday by the council to help set an agenda for research in the next decade.
NASA's human spaceflight future
NASA's success in human space exploration to date has depended on strong programs studying important questions in life and physical sciences. A forward-looking portfolio of such research could help lead to interplanetary voyages and advance fundamental knowledge of life, materials and technology that can lead to spinoff benefits on Earth, the report noted.
However, several years of budgetary challenges and priority being given to other programs at NASA have left the agency's life and physical sciences program with no clear institutional home and led it to dwindle significantly, according to the committee that wrote the report. As a result, NASA is now in poor shape to take full advantage of the unparalleled opportunities presented by the International Space Station's laboratory environment.
"At some point in the 2001-2002 time frame, life and physical sciences research was an integrated program, receiving about $500 million per year," said Elizabeth Cantwell, co-chair of the committee that wrote the report and director of mission development at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. "There were a number of reorganizations and changes between then and 2010, with the biggest change in the 2006-2007 timeframe, and a number of lines of research were either parceled out to new management structures or eliminated."
"It's hard to track how much funding was eliminated, but it looks like it's down to $150 million to $200 million, so a lot of fundamental research was cut," Cantwell told Space.com.
Leadership is key
Strong leadership with scientific know-how is needed to highlight just how important life and physical sciences are in human exploration and help give it the clout it requires, the committee wrote. The report concludes that re-establishing the program under a single management structure housed in an appropriate part of the agency will be key to the program's success, although the committee makes no recommendations as to what that place might be. In addition, they add that a stable and adequate funding base is needed to support a robust research program that attracts top scientists.
"A focused life and physical sciences program can make possible the achievements that bring the space community, policymakers and the U.S. public to a realization that we are ready for the next significant phase of human space exploration," Cantwell said.
Among the areas that the report recommended future life and physical science research at NASA should concentrate on included:
--An effective countermeasures program to fight the adverse effects of the space environment on the health and performance capabilities of astronauts, which would make prolonged human space exploration missions possible.
--The effect that gravity or lack thereof has on biology, a deeper understanding of which could not only help astronauts fight loss of bone in microgravity but also perhaps slow the loss of bone with aging.
-Orbital fuel depots for cryogenic rocket fuels.
-Collecting or producing large amounts of water on the moon or Mars.
-Advances stemming from research on fire retardants, fire suppression, fire sensors and combustion in microgravity that provide the basis for a comprehensive fire-safety system, greatly reducing the likelihood of a catastrophe.
-Regenerative fuel cells that can provide power for long periods at high rates, of use not only in the dark on the surface of the moon but potentially on Earth.
"Research in the life and physical sciences can enable space missions and, as a unique benefit, there is critical research that can in turn be enabled on Earth by access to space," said Wendy Kohrt, professor at the University of Colorado, Denver, and co-chair of the committee that wrote the report. "With the advantage of the space environment, we believe there is an opportunity to significantly advance fundamental scientific understanding."
The committee that wrote the report has met with NASA and congressional staffers about their findings. "It's being taken seriously," Cantwell said. "The challenge they have to take into consideration is how we make the next decade or two decades of important research happen, to keep human space exploration not just in existence but moving forward."
Nearly 50 years after the first human spaceflight, NASA is in poor shape to send astronauts on long deep-space voyages because the agency's life and physical sciences program has shrunk dramatically in both size and scope in recent years, a new report suggests.
However, NASA could achieve the insights and breakthroughs needed to send humans deeper into space than ever before – including to Mars – if the agency supports its life and physical sciences program with strong leadership and stable funding, according to the National Research Council report.
The report, titled "Recapturing a Future for Space Exploration: Life and Physical Sciences for a New Era," was released Tuesday by the council to help set an agenda for research in the next decade.
NASA's human spaceflight future
NASA's success in human space exploration to date has depended on strong programs studying important questions in life and physical sciences. A forward-looking portfolio of such research could help lead to interplanetary voyages and advance fundamental knowledge of life, materials and technology that can lead to spinoff benefits on Earth, the report noted.
However, several years of budgetary challenges and priority being given to other programs at NASA have left the agency's life and physical sciences program with no clear institutional home and led it to dwindle significantly, according to the committee that wrote the report. As a result, NASA is now in poor shape to take full advantage of the unparalleled opportunities presented by the International Space Station's laboratory environment.
"At some point in the 2001-2002 time frame, life and physical sciences research was an integrated program, receiving about $500 million per year," said Elizabeth Cantwell, co-chair of the committee that wrote the report and director of mission development at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. "There were a number of reorganizations and changes between then and 2010, with the biggest change in the 2006-2007 timeframe, and a number of lines of research were either parceled out to new management structures or eliminated."
"It's hard to track how much funding was eliminated, but it looks like it's down to $150 million to $200 million, so a lot of fundamental research was cut," Cantwell told Space.com.
Leadership is key
Strong leadership with scientific know-how is needed to highlight just how important life and physical sciences are in human exploration and help give it the clout it requires, the committee wrote. The report concludes that re-establishing the program under a single management structure housed in an appropriate part of the agency will be key to the program's success, although the committee makes no recommendations as to what that place might be. In addition, they add that a stable and adequate funding base is needed to support a robust research program that attracts top scientists.
"A focused life and physical sciences program can make possible the achievements that bring the space community, policymakers and the U.S. public to a realization that we are ready for the next significant phase of human space exploration," Cantwell said.
Among the areas that the report recommended future life and physical science research at NASA should concentrate on included:
--An effective countermeasures program to fight the adverse effects of the space environment on the health and performance capabilities of astronauts, which would make prolonged human space exploration missions possible.
--The effect that gravity or lack thereof has on biology, a deeper understanding of which could not only help astronauts fight loss of bone in microgravity but also perhaps slow the loss of bone with aging.
-Orbital fuel depots for cryogenic rocket fuels.
-Collecting or producing large amounts of water on the moon or Mars.
-Advances stemming from research on fire retardants, fire suppression, fire sensors and combustion in microgravity that provide the basis for a comprehensive fire-safety system, greatly reducing the likelihood of a catastrophe.
-Regenerative fuel cells that can provide power for long periods at high rates, of use not only in the dark on the surface of the moon but potentially on Earth.
"Research in the life and physical sciences can enable space missions and, as a unique benefit, there is critical research that can in turn be enabled on Earth by access to space," said Wendy Kohrt, professor at the University of Colorado, Denver, and co-chair of the committee that wrote the report. "With the advantage of the space environment, we believe there is an opportunity to significantly advance fundamental scientific understanding."
The committee that wrote the report has met with NASA and congressional staffers about their findings. "It's being taken seriously," Cantwell said. "The challenge they have to take into consideration is how we make the next decade or two decades of important research happen, to keep human space exploration not just in existence but moving forward."
Monday, April 4, 2011
EU wants better space cooperation with China
EU wants better space cooperation with China
The European Union announced Monday that it wants to improve cooperation with China on space exploration and technology.
But one expert in the field said China is catching up quickly with the EU and should be regarded as an ever-stronger competitor in the field.
EU Industry Commissioner Antonio Tajani said the space initiatives should become an integral part of EU foreign policy, making it all the more important to improve cooperation with China, which has a rapidly developing space policy.
Advertisement: Story continues below The EU said it wants to develop its links in the field of satellite navigation.
China launched its first manned flight in 2003 and plans an unmanned moon landing next year and a space station later. Within years, it has become a major player in space technology, while the EU has lost some its edge over protracted political haggling related to its Galileo satellite navigation system.
Now the European Commission wants to boost the industry again to increase economic output.
"Space is strategic for Europe's independence, job creation and competitiveness," Tajani said in Frascati, Italy. In his outline for the 27 EU member states, he called for outreach programs with "emerging space powers," specifically China.
After being an investment partner in Galileo, China has developed its own Beidou, or "Compass," navigation system and has been in conflict with the EU over radio frequency overlap. It is increasingly seen as a test of wills.
"We have had more competition than cooperation," said Jonathan Holslag, a research fellow at the Institute for Contemporary China Studies at the University of Brussels. "The Beidou initiative is extremely important. Their development is extremely fast, while the EU has been bogged down in administration and political games."
The EU does not want to back down though. Both the EU and France came out in defense of maintaining the European system and set it as a priority for the next years.
Even though Europe still has an edge in many areas, it also shows that international cooperation is necessary to secure its own future.
Currently, the EU space industry has euro5.4 billion ($7.7 billion) in revenue. The EU expects that the market for global satellite navigation systems will reach an annual global turnover of euro240 billion ($342 billion) in 10 years.
The European Union announced Monday that it wants to improve cooperation with China on space exploration and technology.
But one expert in the field said China is catching up quickly with the EU and should be regarded as an ever-stronger competitor in the field.
EU Industry Commissioner Antonio Tajani said the space initiatives should become an integral part of EU foreign policy, making it all the more important to improve cooperation with China, which has a rapidly developing space policy.
Advertisement: Story continues below The EU said it wants to develop its links in the field of satellite navigation.
China launched its first manned flight in 2003 and plans an unmanned moon landing next year and a space station later. Within years, it has become a major player in space technology, while the EU has lost some its edge over protracted political haggling related to its Galileo satellite navigation system.
Now the European Commission wants to boost the industry again to increase economic output.
"Space is strategic for Europe's independence, job creation and competitiveness," Tajani said in Frascati, Italy. In his outline for the 27 EU member states, he called for outreach programs with "emerging space powers," specifically China.
After being an investment partner in Galileo, China has developed its own Beidou, or "Compass," navigation system and has been in conflict with the EU over radio frequency overlap. It is increasingly seen as a test of wills.
"We have had more competition than cooperation," said Jonathan Holslag, a research fellow at the Institute for Contemporary China Studies at the University of Brussels. "The Beidou initiative is extremely important. Their development is extremely fast, while the EU has been bogged down in administration and political games."
The EU does not want to back down though. Both the EU and France came out in defense of maintaining the European system and set it as a priority for the next years.
Even though Europe still has an edge in many areas, it also shows that international cooperation is necessary to secure its own future.
Currently, the EU space industry has euro5.4 billion ($7.7 billion) in revenue. The EU expects that the market for global satellite navigation systems will reach an annual global turnover of euro240 billion ($342 billion) in 10 years.
Friday, April 1, 2011
Fallen giant: The Soviet space industry
Ria Novosti, Features & Opinion Page: Fallen giant: The Soviet space industry
Ordinary Russians see little connection between space exploration and economics. If anything, they see expensive space programs as a permanent drain on the nation’s resources. Some are inclined to take it personally, as if the dark vacuum of space somehow sucked the money right out of their pockets.
Space is beyond the realm of the rational and, therefore, beyond the realm of economics. But Russia’s space program was built, in part, by ordinary Russians using ordinary steel. Space exploration was considered a national priority in the Soviet Union, with the funding to match. Elaborate production chains were set up, the necessary infrastructure was built, and state-of-the-art technologies were developed virtually from scratch. Aerospace specialists were paid stable salaries and received good housing, both of which were in short supply in the command economy of the Soviet Union. But it wasn’t just about the money for them. By their own account, they worked to experience the thrill of creative endeavor and to feel a sense of confidence about the future.
Three megaprojects, in particular, made an enormous contribution to the development of Soviet production and technical expertise. They were the three horses that pulled the Soviet troika into the future.
The nuclear project was managed by Igor Kurchatov, Igor Tamm and Yuly Khariton. The space rocket project was led by Sergei Korolyov, Valentin Glushko, Vladimir Chelomei and Mikhail Yangel. The aerospace defense project utilized surface-to-air missile systems developed by Pyotr Grushin and Lev Lyulyev, under the supervision of Alexander Raspletin. Anatoly Basistov and Grigory Kisunko helped create a missile-defense system around Moscow. Moreover, Aksel Berg and Alexander Mints contributed to the creation of over-the-horizon radar.
By the late 1940s, thirty years had passed since the Bolsheviks took power and set about transforming a largely agrarian country into an industrial power. Moreover, the Soviet Union had just emerged victorious from the most destructive war in history. But the three horses of the Soviet troika galloped ahead so fast that here was hardly any time to stop and admire the results. Enormous challenges were laid before Soviet scientists, and they proved themselves up to the task.
The existence of nuclear physicists in the Soviet Union was an open secret, but no one knew about the missile-defense specialists who had worked in secret since the 1950s until the collapse of the Soviet Union. In recent years, publications about their herculean efforts have begun to appear.
The Soviet space program symbolized the victory of brains and willpower over a seemingly insurmountable legacy of technical and economic backwardness under the tsars.
Last train to the sky
The Soviet space program was immensely popular. People followed news of new launches with rapt attention. Cosmonauts could not go anywhere without being recognized. Rocket and spacecraft designers were supposed to keep a low profile and inhabit their own private world. They even used pseudonyms to join the Soviet Academy of Sciences.
But the results of their work were hard not to notice. They merged technologies and established production chains at countless plants, research institutes, design bureaus and scientific associations. Affiliated companies sprung up all across the nation, from the Baltic republics to Russia’s Far East. Leading research and production facilities came and went, establishing various co-production arrangements in their own interests. Enterprises were built and commissioned, matter-of-factly manufacturing products unheard of only five years ago.
The government lavished money on the space industry. In return, it was supposed to stun the world with tangible results, regardless of the price.
As the years went by, this young and vibrant industry grew ossified. Its intellectual centers were covered over with a crust of “specialized agencies.” These centers fenced themselves off from rivals with “planned research subjects” and fancy titles like “lead project manager.” Designers were given state awards and prizes, while rank-and-file employees were rewarded with quarterly and annual bonuses. Intrigues were commonplace, causing heart attacks for the people involved. The entire design and production process involved hundreds of thousands of people operating machine-tools and working at drawing boards for decades on end. Everything changed, except that the Soviet state invariably paid for results, allowing people to devote themselves entirely to their work.
Anatoly Basistov, the father of the A-135 missile-defense system around Moscow, rebelled against the bureaucratic logic of the late 1970s. At the time, the general contractor was expected to request the maximum possible resources for its subordinate science-and-production agencies. Basistov told the Soviet leadership that he was unable to develop a system that would completely shield Moscow from nuclear warheads. Basistov was horrified to realize that if he said he could do it, the Politburo would provide him with however many billions from the budget, without giving second thought to what else the money could be used for.
Rocket-and-missile experts, radio electronic system designers and nuclear physicists lived in a world of unlimited responsibility for unlimited results, to be obtained using limited resources and under tough deadlines. They lived that way for decades, growing accustomed to walls separating them from the rest of the country. It would be blasphemy to say that they lived and worked in ideal conditions. It would be double blasphemy to claim that they did not realize that such work deprived the entire nation of something highly important. And it would be naïve to believe that this situation could continue indefinitely.
Much has already been said about the economic implications of the U.S. space program. There is no need to go into details here. Suffice it to recall Teflon and Velcro, which became household names. Both were by-products of the Apollo lunar program. The Soviet Union, in contrast, was capable of coming up with fantastic engineering solutions but cared little about their consumer value and possible civilian applications.
The Soviet Union turned its hi-tech industry into a deadly “blade” to accomplish just one objective. But the “blade” did not always serve as the extension of the economic “hand,” except when it was needed to create another defense-industry miracle.
Its capacity for working miracles disappeared in the 1990s when the colossal monolith crumbled along with the system that had spawned it, leaving a sea of bitterness and grudges in its wake, as well as nostalgia for a lost paradise for engineers and technicians.
A bad hangover
Imagine the shock when two or three generations of specialists, who were convinced that that they are the best of the best in the most advanced fields, suddenly see their situation change 180 degrees overnight.
After Russia embarked on the road to a market economy, these specialists were told that the country no longer needed their work, that too much had already been spent on them. They were also told that they had to adapt to the market system in the next five years, including by selling their products wherever they could.
You can turn a blind eye to technology, but you can’t abolish it completely. In 1993, the national aerospace industry asserted itself on the commercial space-launch market. It took the industry a lot of time and effort to adapt to the realities of the market economy, losing human resources, production facilities, experience, knowledge and hope in the process.
These strong and proud people had flown too close to the Sun, or rather they had brought the Sun too close to their pedestrian and sinful fellow humans. The fall of the aerospace industry was cruelly sobering after several decades of intoxication with the limitless possibilities afforded under the Soviet space program.
The seeds of the Soviet space industry’s tragic downfall had been sown in its very creation. It could not have been otherwise. Without those fatal flaws it would have never emerged, and would have failed to accomplish all those stunning feats that won respect world over.
Even the Soviet Union, with its supposedly developed socialist society, could not escape the Darwinist dialectic. Highly specialized “species” are unavoidably doomed to a bright, albeit brief, existence when the environment to which they were so perfectly adapted vanishes in an instant.
Ordinary Russians see little connection between space exploration and economics. If anything, they see expensive space programs as a permanent drain on the nation’s resources. Some are inclined to take it personally, as if the dark vacuum of space somehow sucked the money right out of their pockets.
Space is beyond the realm of the rational and, therefore, beyond the realm of economics. But Russia’s space program was built, in part, by ordinary Russians using ordinary steel. Space exploration was considered a national priority in the Soviet Union, with the funding to match. Elaborate production chains were set up, the necessary infrastructure was built, and state-of-the-art technologies were developed virtually from scratch. Aerospace specialists were paid stable salaries and received good housing, both of which were in short supply in the command economy of the Soviet Union. But it wasn’t just about the money for them. By their own account, they worked to experience the thrill of creative endeavor and to feel a sense of confidence about the future.
Three megaprojects, in particular, made an enormous contribution to the development of Soviet production and technical expertise. They were the three horses that pulled the Soviet troika into the future.
The nuclear project was managed by Igor Kurchatov, Igor Tamm and Yuly Khariton. The space rocket project was led by Sergei Korolyov, Valentin Glushko, Vladimir Chelomei and Mikhail Yangel. The aerospace defense project utilized surface-to-air missile systems developed by Pyotr Grushin and Lev Lyulyev, under the supervision of Alexander Raspletin. Anatoly Basistov and Grigory Kisunko helped create a missile-defense system around Moscow. Moreover, Aksel Berg and Alexander Mints contributed to the creation of over-the-horizon radar.
By the late 1940s, thirty years had passed since the Bolsheviks took power and set about transforming a largely agrarian country into an industrial power. Moreover, the Soviet Union had just emerged victorious from the most destructive war in history. But the three horses of the Soviet troika galloped ahead so fast that here was hardly any time to stop and admire the results. Enormous challenges were laid before Soviet scientists, and they proved themselves up to the task.
The existence of nuclear physicists in the Soviet Union was an open secret, but no one knew about the missile-defense specialists who had worked in secret since the 1950s until the collapse of the Soviet Union. In recent years, publications about their herculean efforts have begun to appear.
The Soviet space program symbolized the victory of brains and willpower over a seemingly insurmountable legacy of technical and economic backwardness under the tsars.
Last train to the sky
The Soviet space program was immensely popular. People followed news of new launches with rapt attention. Cosmonauts could not go anywhere without being recognized. Rocket and spacecraft designers were supposed to keep a low profile and inhabit their own private world. They even used pseudonyms to join the Soviet Academy of Sciences.
But the results of their work were hard not to notice. They merged technologies and established production chains at countless plants, research institutes, design bureaus and scientific associations. Affiliated companies sprung up all across the nation, from the Baltic republics to Russia’s Far East. Leading research and production facilities came and went, establishing various co-production arrangements in their own interests. Enterprises were built and commissioned, matter-of-factly manufacturing products unheard of only five years ago.
The government lavished money on the space industry. In return, it was supposed to stun the world with tangible results, regardless of the price.
As the years went by, this young and vibrant industry grew ossified. Its intellectual centers were covered over with a crust of “specialized agencies.” These centers fenced themselves off from rivals with “planned research subjects” and fancy titles like “lead project manager.” Designers were given state awards and prizes, while rank-and-file employees were rewarded with quarterly and annual bonuses. Intrigues were commonplace, causing heart attacks for the people involved. The entire design and production process involved hundreds of thousands of people operating machine-tools and working at drawing boards for decades on end. Everything changed, except that the Soviet state invariably paid for results, allowing people to devote themselves entirely to their work.
Anatoly Basistov, the father of the A-135 missile-defense system around Moscow, rebelled against the bureaucratic logic of the late 1970s. At the time, the general contractor was expected to request the maximum possible resources for its subordinate science-and-production agencies. Basistov told the Soviet leadership that he was unable to develop a system that would completely shield Moscow from nuclear warheads. Basistov was horrified to realize that if he said he could do it, the Politburo would provide him with however many billions from the budget, without giving second thought to what else the money could be used for.
Rocket-and-missile experts, radio electronic system designers and nuclear physicists lived in a world of unlimited responsibility for unlimited results, to be obtained using limited resources and under tough deadlines. They lived that way for decades, growing accustomed to walls separating them from the rest of the country. It would be blasphemy to say that they lived and worked in ideal conditions. It would be double blasphemy to claim that they did not realize that such work deprived the entire nation of something highly important. And it would be naïve to believe that this situation could continue indefinitely.
Much has already been said about the economic implications of the U.S. space program. There is no need to go into details here. Suffice it to recall Teflon and Velcro, which became household names. Both were by-products of the Apollo lunar program. The Soviet Union, in contrast, was capable of coming up with fantastic engineering solutions but cared little about their consumer value and possible civilian applications.
The Soviet Union turned its hi-tech industry into a deadly “blade” to accomplish just one objective. But the “blade” did not always serve as the extension of the economic “hand,” except when it was needed to create another defense-industry miracle.
Its capacity for working miracles disappeared in the 1990s when the colossal monolith crumbled along with the system that had spawned it, leaving a sea of bitterness and grudges in its wake, as well as nostalgia for a lost paradise for engineers and technicians.
A bad hangover
Imagine the shock when two or three generations of specialists, who were convinced that that they are the best of the best in the most advanced fields, suddenly see their situation change 180 degrees overnight.
After Russia embarked on the road to a market economy, these specialists were told that the country no longer needed their work, that too much had already been spent on them. They were also told that they had to adapt to the market system in the next five years, including by selling their products wherever they could.
You can turn a blind eye to technology, but you can’t abolish it completely. In 1993, the national aerospace industry asserted itself on the commercial space-launch market. It took the industry a lot of time and effort to adapt to the realities of the market economy, losing human resources, production facilities, experience, knowledge and hope in the process.
These strong and proud people had flown too close to the Sun, or rather they had brought the Sun too close to their pedestrian and sinful fellow humans. The fall of the aerospace industry was cruelly sobering after several decades of intoxication with the limitless possibilities afforded under the Soviet space program.
The seeds of the Soviet space industry’s tragic downfall had been sown in its very creation. It could not have been otherwise. Without those fatal flaws it would have never emerged, and would have failed to accomplish all those stunning feats that won respect world over.
Even the Soviet Union, with its supposedly developed socialist society, could not escape the Darwinist dialectic. Highly specialized “species” are unavoidably doomed to a bright, albeit brief, existence when the environment to which they were so perfectly adapted vanishes in an instant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)