NASA Official Announces Chair of new Mars Program Planning Group

PR, Market Watch: NASA Official Announces Chair of new Mars Program Planning Group
WASHINGTON, Feb. 27, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- NASA' s associate administrator for the Science Mission Directorate, John Grunsfeld, has named former veteran NASA program manager Orlando Figueroa to lead a newly established Mars Program Planning Group (MPPG) tasked to reformulate the agency's Mars Exploration Program. Figueroa's first assignment is to develop a draft framework for review by March 15.

Grunsfeld made the announcement at an annual gathering of Mars scientists and engineers in Dulles, Va. Figueroa, a consultant with more than 30 years of aerospace experience, will lead the scientific and technical team to develop an integrated strategy for NASA's Mars Exploration Program in light of current funding constraints. The team's initial focus will be on a possible 2018-2020 robotic mission. The program's official framework will be developed in consultation with the science community and international partners and is expected to be released for full review as early as this summer.

"The team will develop a plan that advances the priorities in the National Research Council's Decadal Survey, which puts sample return as the top scientific goal, and leverages NASA's research in enabling technology," Grunsfeld said. "Our investments in the new Mars program will incorporate elements of advanced research and technologies in support of a logical sequence of missions to answer fundamental scientific questions and ultimately support the goal of sending people to Mars."

The MPPG will report to Grunsfeld, a physicist and five-time flown space shuttle astronaut. Grunsfeld is chairing the overall, agency-wide reformulation strategy along with William Gerstenmaier, associate administrator for the human exploration and operations directorate, NASA Chief Scientist Waleed Abdalati and NASA Chief Technologist Mason Peck. The MPPG will ensure that America maintains the critical technical skills developed over decades needed to achieve the highest priority science and exploration objectives.

NASA has a recognized track record of successful Mars missions. The rover Opportunity, which landed on Mars in 2004, is still operating despite an official mission timeline of 90 days. There are also two NASA satellites orbiting the Red Planet; the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter and Mars Odyssey. The duo continue to return unprecedented science data and images. This August, NASA will land the Mars Science Laboratory, "Curiosity," on the planet's surface. This roving science laboratory will assess whether Mars was or is today an environment able to support life. In 2013, NASA will launch the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution orbiter, the first mission devoted to understanding the Martian upper atmosphere.

NASA will continue to gather critical information to help scientists understand the Red Planet. These data will be used in future years to meet President Obama's challenge to send humans to Mars in the mid-2030s.

"We'll look at all of the assets NASA is developing to reach, explore and study Mars, as well as spacecraft at or on its way to Mars," Figueroa said.

NASA already has been developing technology that will improve precision in landing, the ability to conduct scientific analysis remotely, handle and collect samples, and transmit larger volumes of data back to Earth.

"The science and engineering communities have worked continuously over a decade to define our knowledge gaps for Mars exploration, so we have a solid starting point," Grunsfeld said.

Mars exploration is a top priority for NASA. America's investment in exploring Mars during the past decade totals $6.1 billion. NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden directed Grunsfeld to lead the agency-wide team in order to optimize a coordinated strategy of Mars exploration and continue America's leadership role in the exploration of the Red Planet within available future budgets.

For more information about NASA's Mars programs, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/mars

Researcher: Obama Budget ‘End Of The Mars Program'

From CBS DC: Researcher: Obama Budget ‘End Of The Mars Program’
WASHINGTON (AP) — NASA is making a cosmic U-turn on the road to Mars.

For the past two decades, the U.S. space agency has been practically obsessed with Mars. It has hardly missed an opportunity about every two years to fling robotic spacecraft at the red planet.

This summer, the most high-tech rover ever, Curiosity, will land near the Martian equator in search of the chemical building blocks of life. The more scientists study Mars, the closer they get to answering whether microbial life once existed there, a clue to the ultimate question: Are we alone?

Presidents have long talked about sending astronauts to Mars. Two years ago, President Barack Obama stood in Kennedy Space Center and said it was more of a priority than going to the moon and wanted astronauts there by the mid-2030s.

But robotic Mars missions slated for 2016 and 2018 were cut from the president’s new budget proposal, even though NASA has spent $64 million on early designs with the European Space Agency for the two missions. The most ambitious Mars flight yet and one the National Academy of Sciences endorsed as the No. 1 solar system priority — a plan to grab Martian rocks and soil and bring them back to Earth — is on indefinite hold.

“We’re really at a crossroads,” NASA planetary sciences chief Jim Green said.

NASA will skip the 2016 launch opportunity and if officials are lucky, they hope still to salvage something relatively cheap for 2018, when Mars passes closest to Earth. But it won’t be the large rock-collecting mission that scientists had been counting on. What a new mission for 2018 would be is still not clear even to NASA senior officials.

To scientists, the message from the White House seems simple: Bye-bye, Mars.

On Monday, upset Mars researchers are meeting with NASA officials to figure out how to reboot the program beyond the 2013 mission.

If Obama’s budget sails through as outlined, “in essence, it is the end of the Mars program,” said Phil Christensen, a Mars researcher at Arizona State University. It’s like “we’ve just flown Apollo 10 and now we’re going to cancel the Apollo program when we’re one step from landing,” he said.

It’s not that NASA officials don’t think Mars is worth exploring further; it’s just that they don’t think they can afford it anymore. Obama has proposed cutting 10 other federal agency budgets this year including Defense, Homeland Security and Education. NASA’s 0.3 percent budget cut was among the smallest. In fact, the $28.3 billion cuts to the Defense Department dwarf NASA’s entire $17.7 spending plan for 2013.

“We’re trying to identify a way to (explore Mars) in these very difficult fiscal times,” NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said last week at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., the epicenter of Mars research.

Researchers are partly to blame because they promise to do a mission cheaply and when they get approval, costs soar, said Alan Stern, a former NASA sciences chief. He called it “committing suicide in slow motion” and said it’s been happening in the Mars program since 2006. An even more over-budget space telescope forced more cuts to NASA science.

The Curiosity mission costs $2.5 billion — almost $1 billion over budget.

Many scientists believe the life question can only be answered by examining Martian samples back on Earth and that astronauts should not set foot on Mars before that happens. Stern said: “We are probably back to being 15 to 20 years from a Mars sample return.”

If NASA ignores Mars for a decade, it runs the risk of a brain drain, said Ed Weiler, who resigned last year as NASA’s sciences chief because of budget battles over Mars.

“Landing on Mars is a uniquely American talent and there aren’t too many things that are uniquely American,” Weiler said.

In 19 tries, Russia has had little to no success when it comes to Mars. The European Space Agency currently has a spacecraft circling the planet but its lander crashed. NASA has had six Martian failures during its 20 tries.

The Europeans are talking to the Russians and Chinese to replace the U.S. in the upcoming missions.

Earthlings have been captivated by Mars since the 1900s when amateur astronomer Percival Lowell saw what looked like canals. The life question was tackled by the twin Viking spacecraft, which landed in 1976. Their rudimentary experiments failed to turn up signs of life and NASA lost interest. The space agency launched an ambitious probe in 1992 but lost contact with it right before it was to slip into orbit.

After that failure, NASA came up with a blueprint for Mars: Each mission followed up on discoveries found in the previous flight, and all focused on water, a key element for life.

“It’s become a more interesting planet every time we go back there,” said Wesley Huntress, who spearheaded the new Mars program and went on to run NASA’s sciences division.

That’s why the Planetary Society and others are lobbying to save the Mars program, starting with meetings this week. Bill Nye, the former science television personality who heads the society, said exploring Mars is central to humanity’s future: “We do it to learn more about ourselves, to learn more about our relationship with the cosmos, to learn more about our place in space.”

In visit to NASA Glenn, space agency boss Charles Bolden views icing research, discusses space exploration future

From Cleveland.com: In visit to NASA Glenn, space agency boss Charles Bolden views icing research, discusses space exploration future
CLEVELAND, Ohio — NASA administrator Charles Bolden flew more than 100 combat missions during the Vietnam War, and guided four shuttles into space and back. But during his visit to NASA's Glenn Research Center this week, the veteran pilot and former astronaut learned something new about flight: that high-altitude ice crystals can choke a jet engine.

"Wow!" the space agency's boss said, peering through 3-D glasses at a vivid computer simulation of the process, as frost hardened on a virtual engine's whirling blades. "I didn't even know about this."

Early next year, Glenn engineers will study the real thing. In a refurbished $15 million tunnel the size of a railroad car, they'll fire up an actual jet engine and spray ice crystals into it, to monitor what happens and figure out how it can be prevented.

Research work like that, with direct commercial applications, will allow the Glenn center to remain relatively stable at a time when sharp budget cutbacks are rocking other segments of NASA.

The space agency's proposed $17.7 billion 2013 budget, which Bolden unveiled last week, contains deep cuts in areas such as planetary science, including the cancellation of some high-profile robotic missions to Mars and Jupiter's moon Europa.

Glenn, however, will get a $17 million boost from its $641 million 2012 budget. The money will support projects such as the engine icing research, the center's ongoing share of work on NASA's new heavy-lift rocket and space capsule, and infrastructure upgrades at the Cleveland campus and its Plum Brook testing station near Sandusky.

Congress likely will revise NASA's austere spending plan due to concerns that it jeopardizes America's space leadership. Though Bolden insisted, in a wide-ranging question-and-answer session at Glenn Tuesday, that NASA's exploration plans are still ambitious, he stressed the need to face fiscal realities, and to rein in cost-overruns like those that plagued the agency's now $8 billion James Webb Space Telescope, set to launch in 2018.

"If we want more money," Bolden said of NASA, "the best way to do in this day and age is to set a plan in place as [Glenn Director] Ray Lugo and his team have done here . . . and work to it so that everything is on time and on cost, over and over again."

In light of the recession-battered economy, NASA is seeking no funding increases for the next five years. Those spending constraints, coupled with the ballooning cost of the Webb telescope – a successor to the Hubble Space Telescope, with a price tag eight times its original $1 billion estimate – forced the space agency to make what Bolden described as tough cuts elsewhere.

Among them are two unmanned Mars exploratory missions collectively known as ExoMars that NASA was to undertake with the European Space Agency in 2016 and 2018. The probes were to study the Martian environment and search for signs of present and past life, using an orbiter and rover.

That was to pave the way for a future joint robotic mission to bring Martian soil samples back to Earth. All are precursors for human exploration. President Obama's goal is for NASA to land astronauts on Mars sometime in the 2030s.

Some observers have worried that the cancellations will further erode America's space-faring reputation, and will damage the international partnerships that NASA increasingly relies on to make big-ticket "flagship" exploration missions possible. Reports indicate that European space officials are seeking Russia's cooperation to keep the ExoMars missions alive.

View full sizeNASA/JPL-CaltechNASA's Mars Science Lab rover, shown in this artist's rendering, is scheduled to land on the Red Planet in August. It's about the size of a Mini Cooper.

Bolden said NASA's Mars exploration program is still robust, with the car-sized Mars Science Lab rover en route for an August landing, and an atmospheric probe called MAVEN set to launch in November. Discussions with the European Space Agency about alternatives to ExoMars are underway, he said.

"We want to satisfy our European partners," he said. "They don't think we're backing away from them, contrary to what's been written in the press. They understand the exact fiscal situation we're in. They know we want to work with them to try to accomplish the objectives of ExoMars."

A lower-cost Mars soil sample-return mission might be possible, Bolden said.

"We think we can do it without making it a flagship," the administrator said. "This country has made its role as a leader in exploration by flagship missions. That's something we have to do. But you don't do a flagship mission every year, or every two or three years. We have two underway" – the Mars rover and the Webb telescope – "and that's about all this agency can handle."

NASA's major emphasis also is on continued development of a rocket and crew capsule for deep space exploration, and on nurturing American commercial space transporters to take over re-supply and replacement-crew flights to the International Space Station. NASA handled those transport duties until last year's retirement of the shuttle fleet, which is supposed to free up money for other missions. NASA currently pays Russia to ferry crew and cargo to the space station.

An upstart U.S. aerospace company, Space Exploration Technologies, or SpaceX, is readying a demonstration cargo-carrying flight for an April 20 launch. If successful, the unmanned vehicle would be the first commercial spacecraft to rendezvous with the space station, with regular cargo missions to follow. Bolden said U.S. commercial crew-carrying flights probably will begin between 2015 and 2017.

Their destination, the International Space Station, had been scheduled to cease operations in 2020, but Bolden said the station's U.S., Russian, Canadian, Japanese and European partners are discussing extending its life through 2028.

View full sizePlain Dealer file, Marvin FongThe 12-story tall vacuum chamber at NASA's Plum Brook testing station exposes spacecraft to the airless conditions, heat and cold of space. Other Plum Brook facilities simulate the vibration and shockwaves of rocket launch.

NASA's new deep-space rocket and crew capsule project, called the Space Launch System, is intended to deliver astronauts to an asteroid landing by 2025, and to Mars by the next decade. The Glenn center is overseeing development of some of the rocket's components, and plans to test the crew capsule, Orion, at its Plum Brook facility, where the world's largest space-environment vacuum chamber is located.

NASA already had invested $150 million in improving Plum Brook's testing facilities, and will spend $25 million more for upgrades in 2013, Lugo said. In addition to the Orion tests, Plum Brook may soon host trials of commercial spacecraft from SpaceX and another company, Sierra Nevada Corp., Lugo said, as well as tests of a European Space Agency rocket engine.

Bolden's meeting with Glenn officials this week emphasized applying NASA know-how to aid commercial projects and solve real-world problems, like the engine-icing issue. The risk of ice buildup on airplane wings and tails has been known for decades, with significant contributions from Glenn researchers. But the icing threat to jet engines has gone largely unrecognized.

There are no known crashes, said Glenn project manager Ron Colantonio, but at least 150 instances of engine failure where icing is the likely culprit. "We're trying to be pre-emptive and understand the problem before there's a fatal accident," he said.

View full sizeNASASensors on this modified Gulfstream jet will allow NASA Glenn researchers to collect data about conditions where ice crystals form at altitudes up to 40,000 feet.

A modified jet will gather high-altitude data about ice crystal-forming conditions, which occur near storm systems. That information will help Glenn engineers recreate the icing conditions in the testing tunnel. Jet engine-makers can test ice-damping designs there, and the test results should help the Federal Aviation Administration develop new safety standards.

"This is tangible evidence, the work going on here, that we're really trying to stay out in front of the power curve so we can help the nation," Bolden said.

Obama campaign could trip over space policy

From the Houston Chronicle: Obama campaign could trip over space policy
WASHINGTON - President Obama's visit to the political battleground of Florida on Thursday will showcase a robust economic agenda, reap hundreds of thousands of campaign dollars and - he hopes - stymie any Republican effort to render the intricacies of his space policy into a bumper sticker.

Like, "Hey NASA, if you need a ride to the space station, call Moscow."

The Democrat's visit comes as NASA quietly deepens politically embarrassing reliance on Russia to loft U.S. astronauts and cargo to and from the $100 billion U.S.-built International Space Station. The development hands Republicans a potential avenue of attack on Obama in the fall campaign - a contest that could turn on the results in space-conscious Florida, home of the Kennedy Space Center.

Obama's political vulnerability has only increased with the delayed test of an unmanned U.S. commercial spacecraft to service the space station and continued snafus with Russia's workhorse Soyuz spacecraft.

"It's been foolish for us to give up the strategic national capability to send humans into space - and then to depend upon Russia or any other entity," says former NASA chief Mike Griffin.

"Access to space should have been a campaign issue in every election since Nixon cancelled Apollo in the 1970s," added Griffin, an adviser to GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

Congressman Pete Olson, a Sugar Land Republican, welcomes prospects for a partisan clash over space policy, figuring it might bolster congressional support for operations at Houston's Johnson Space Center, home of mission control for manned operations and the astronaut corps.

"Presidential candidates have an obligation to clearly outline their level of support for U.S. human space exploration," says Olson, whose district hosts JSC's multibillion-dollar contribution to the Houston-area economy. "President Obama's actions prove he doesn't believe a vibrant space program is important to American prosperity, technological advancement or national security."

Not a partisan issue?

But Democrats say Obama is not solely responsible for NASA turning to the Russian space agency to taxi U.S. astronauts into orbit.

"You'd have to distort reality to make that a partisan issue in the fall campaign," insists John Logsdon, a space historian and veteran of the Columbia accident board who helped Obama develop his policies. "We are where we are because of decisions by the last two presidents and both parties in Congress. This should not be a campaign issue."

NASA has contracted with its one-time Russian rival to ferry 24 U.S. astronauts to the orbiting laboratory aboard the Soyuz spacecraft over the next four years as the timetable slips for NASA-approved commercial spacecraft to step in to deliver U.S. astronauts to low-earth orbit.

But the agency is making provisions to extend its reliance on the Russians for another 18 months from July 2016 through the end of 2017. Doing so could require the administration to ask Congress to again waive the restrictions of Iran, North Korea, Syria, and the Nonproliferation Act (INKSNA) to allow NASA to purchase Russian launch services.

William Gerstenmaier, head of NASA's human space exploration and operations, says NASA may end up buying seats aboard both the developing U.S. commercial spacecraft and the established Soyuz to assure astronauts can reach the space station.

Spacecraft 9 years away

As things stand now, NASA doesn't plan to have a government-owned spacecraft for manned operations until 2021, when a new deep-space, heavy-lift rocket and the Orion spacecraft are expected to be available. Those would be used to reach an asteroid by 2025 and Mars orbit by 2035. The space station is due to plunge into earth's atmosphere in 2020.

"I have long been concerned about the gap in U.S. human spaceflight capability which has led to the reliance on Russia for the delivery of crew to the International Space Station," said Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. "Our NASA goal should include the capability to launch crews to low-Earth orbit, including missions to service the space station, as we maintain space superiority by developing a robust heavy lift and crew exploration vehicle development to enable us to go beyond low-Earth orbit."

The timetable for relying on Russia is rooted in tragedy and economic reality.

President George W. Bush sought to revive the nation's space faring after the shuttle Columbia tragedy in 2003 by setting an end date for the 30-year space shuttle program and financing a back-to-the-moon effort. But a White House commission appointed by Obama in 2009 concluded the nation could not afford Bush's ambitious vision.

The sobering assessment prompted Obama to focus on supporting the commercial spacecraft industry to eventually service the space station and devoting the bulk of NASA's efforts to new technology and eventual deep space exploration.

"Americans don't like relying on Russia to get into space," says a space policy expert who has worked at the space agency, the White House and Capitol Hill. "This is one of those rare moments that transcend the intricacies of the space program."

The $8.8bn Nasa telescope that is 100 times more powerful than Hubble and will let us look back into the dawn of time

From the Daily Mail: The $8.8bn Nasa telescope that is 100 times more powerful than Hubble and will let us look back into the dawn of time
It’s one of the most technologically advanced devices ever built and will give cosmologists incredible insights into the origins of the universe.

Nasa's James Webb Telescope, if it’s a success, will herald a new era in the understanding of the universe, because it will be able to look further back in time, and with more clarity, than any telescope that exists today.

Nasa boasts that the telescope is 100 times more powerful that the Hubble, a device that has already given star-gazers thousands of stunning images of the cosmos.

But the project has a dark side - it is costing the U.S. space agency so much money that it is acting like a financial black hole, sucking funds away from other projects and threatening their future.

The telescope began as a $500million project in the late 1990s, but that cost has now ballooned to over $8.8billion.

Last year Congress tried to permanently halt the project. It’s all systems go at the moment, but it’s such a drain on Nasa’s budget that the agency may only be able to afford one big science mission per decade from now on, with some key projects killed off.

For example, House Science Committee staff warn that a mission to bring Martian soil back to Earth may now be too expensive to carry out.

Not only that, but Webb will sit much further out into space.

Hubble is in orbit 350 miles above the Earth. Webb will gaze into the cosmos almost a million miles from Earth.

The area of Webb’s mirror, meanwhile, is six and a quarter times larger than Hubble’s. The larger primary mirror the more light from objects the telescope can see.

It will also have new communications networks to transmit and store large quantities of data and ultra-sensitive infrared detectors to record extremely faint signals.

All this means Webb will see objects that are fainter and farther away and allow scientists to peer back to a time when galaxies were just forming.

The Webb Telescope is due to launch in 2018, with various components currently undergoing rigorous testing.

Exciting times ahead for space exploration: experts

From Global Montreal: Exciting times ahead for space exploration: experts
TORONTO- In a time of austerity, advancements in space travel seem to be a thing of the past.

On the 50th anniversary of the U.S.’s first orbital space flight, the country that once led the space race now relies on Russian partners to provide transportation for humans and cargo to the International Space Station (ISS).

According to Gilles Leclerc, director general of space exploration at the Canadian Space Agency (CSA), for astronauts, the only ‘game in town’ is Russia. And the situation is going to be such until the U.S. develops a replacement for the retired shuttle. So is there anything to be excited about when it comes to space travel? Is space travel dead?

It’s not dead – just going through a transition period, says Leclerc.

Canada has always been and remains dependent on U.S. partners to carry Canadian astronauts to orbit.

With the end of the shuttle program last summer, there is no available launch system for astronauts for the U.S. side, said Leclerc.

So what’s next for space exploration? According to Leclerc, it may be space tourism.

Leclerc says the current environment lends itself to more international cooperation in sharing the risk and cost of space travel. In addition to more traditional cooperation between the Canadian Space Agency and NASA, there will be new opportunities on a purely commercial basis within the next five to ten years.

“The most interesting thing that is really going to explode in the coming years is space tourism,” said Leclerc.

“You have companies like Branson’s Virgin Galactic, other entrepreneurs are building space ports, they have a plane that is going to take tourists, there is a waiting list. I’m not saying that millions of people will be going to space, within this decade, but it’s going to be something exciting to look at the democratization of low Earth orbit. The ability for adventure tourism to have a new destination around the Earth.”

Leclerc says despite the rough patch experienced at the CSA, it’s still developing plans and trying to make the best of the money that the agency has access to.

“Space is still very exciting and inspiring to Canadians,” said Leclerc. “Canadian accomplishments in space are modest by any standard, but very significant. Compared to the size of Canada and the industry, we’ve always punched above our weight and that’s what we’re going to do.”

Experts React to Obama Slash to NASA’s Mars and Planetary Science Exploration

From the Universe Today: Experts React to Obama Slash to NASA’s Mars and Planetary Science Exploration Earth’s next Mars Rover – NOT Made in USA.

Just days after President Obama met with brilliant High School students at the 2012 White House Science Fair to celebrate their winning achievements and encourage America’s Youth to study science and take up careers in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) technical fields, the Obama Administration has decided on deep budgets cuts slashing away the very NASA science programs that would inspire those same students to shoot for the Stars and Beyond and answer the question – Are We Alone ?

Last year, the Obama Administration killed Project Constellation, NASA’s Human Spaceflight program to return American astronauts to the Moon. This year, the President has killed NASA’s ExoMars Robotic Spaceflight program aimed at dispatching two ambitious missions to Mars in 2016 and 2018 to search for signs of life.

Both ExoMars probes involved a joint new collaboration with the European Space Agency (ESA) carefully crafted to share costs in hard times and get the most bang for the buck – outlined in my earlier Universe Today story, here.

Expert Scientists and Policy makers have been voicing their opinions.

All of NASA’s “Flagship” Planetary Science missions have now been cancelled in the 2013 Fiscal Year Budget proposed on Feb. 13, and others missions have also been curtailed due to the severe economy.

“There is no room in the current budget proposal from the President for new Flagship missions anywhere,” said John Grunsfeld, NASA’s Associate Administrator for Science at a NASA budget briefing for the media on Feb. 13.

ESA is now looking to partner with Russia as all American participation in ExoMars is erased due to NASA’ s forced pull out.

On Feb. 13, NASA’s Fiscal 2013 Budget was announced and the Obama Administration carved away nearly half the Mars mission budget. Altogether, funding for NASA’s Mars and Planetary missions in the Fiscal 2013 budget would be sliced by $300 million – from $1.5 Billion this year to $1.2 Billion in 2013. NASA was forced to gut the Mars program to pay for the cost overruns of the James Webb Space Telescope.

Mars rover scientist Prof. Jim Bell of Arizona State University and President of The Planetary Society (TPS) told Universe Today that “no one expects increases”, but cuts of this magnitude are “cause for concern”.

NASA’s robotic missions to Mars and other solar system bodies have been highly successful, resulted in fundamental scientific breakthroughs and are wildly popular with students and the general public.

“With these large proposed cuts to the NASA Mars exploration program, there will be a lot of cause for concern,” said Bell.

“The Mars program has been one of NASA’s crown jewels over the past 15 years, both in terms of science return on investment, and in terms of public excitement and engagement in NASA’s mission. It would also represent an unfortunate retreat from the kind of international collaboration in space exploration that organizations like The Planetary Society so strongly support.”

Bell and other scientists feel that any cuts should be balanced among NASA programs, not aimed only at one specific area.

“Certainly no one expects increasing budgets in these austere times, and it is not useful or appropriate to get into a battle of “my science is better than your science” among the different NASA Divisions and Programs.” Bell told me.

“However, it would be unfortunate if the burden of funding cuts were to befall one of NASA’s most successful and popular programs in a disproportionate way compared to other programs. As Ben Franklin said, “We should all hang together, or surely we will all hang separately.”

Bell added that science minded organizations should work with Congress to influence the debate over the coming months.

“Of course, this would only be an initial proposal for the FY13 and beyond budget. Over the winter, spring, and summer many professional and public organizations, like TPS, will be working with Congress to advocate a balanced program of solar system exploration that focuses on the most important science goals as identified in the recent NRC Planetary Decadal Survey, as well as the most exciting and publicly compelling missions that are supported by the public–who ultimately are the ones paying for these missions.”

“Let’s hope that we can all find a productive and pragmatic way to continue to explore Mars, the outer solar system, and our Universe beyond,” Bell concluded.

“The impact of the cuts … will be to immediately terminate the Mars deal with the Europeans,” said Scott Hubbard, of Stanford University and a former NASA planetary scientist who revived the agency’s Mars exploration program after failures in 1999, to the Washington Post. “It’s a scientific tragedy and a national embarrassment.”

“I encourage whoever made this decision to ask around; everyone on Earth wants to know if there is life on other worlds,” Bill Nye, CEO of The Planetary Society, said in a statement. “When you cut NASA’s budget in this way, you’re losing sight of why we explore space in the first place.”

“There is no other country or agency that can do what NASA does—fly extraordinary flagship missions in deep space and land spacecraft on Mars.” Bill Nye said. “If this budget is allowed to stand, the United States will walk away from decades of greatness in space science and exploration. But it will lose more than that. The U.S. will lose expertise, capability, and talent. The nation will lose the ability to compete in one of the few areas in which it is still the undisputed number one.”

Ed Weiler is NASA’s recently retired science mission chief (now replaced by Grunsfeld) and negotiated the ExoMars program with ESA. Weiler actually quit NASA specifically in opposition to the Mars Program cuts ordered by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and had these comments for CBS News;

“To me, it’s bizarro world,” Weiler said an interview with CBS News. “Why would you do this? The President of the United States, President Obama, declared Mars to be the ultimate destination for human exploration. Obviously, before you send humans to the vicinity of Mars or even to land on Mars, you want to know as much about the planet as you possibly can. … You need a sample return mission. The president also established a space policy a few years ago which had the concept of encouraging all agencies to have more and more foreign collaboration, to share the costs and get more for the same bucks.”

“Two years ago, because of budget cuts in the Mars program, I had to appeal to Europe to merge our programs. … That process took two long years of very delicate negotiations. We thought we were following the president’s space policy exactly. Congressional reaction was very positive about our activities. You put those factors in place and you have to ask, why single out Mars? I don’t have an answer.”

Space Analysts and Political leaders also weighed in:

“The president’s budget is just a proposal,” said Howard McCurdy, a space-policy specialist at American University in Washington to the Christian Science Monitor.

The cuts “reflect the new reality” in which the economy, budget deficits, and the federal debt have elbowed their way to the top of Washington’s agenda, McCurdy adds.

“You don’t cut spending for critical scientific research endeavors that have immeasurable benefit to the nation and inspire the human spirit of exploration we all have,” said Rep. John Culberson (R-Tex.). Texas is home to NASA’s Johnson Space Center.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), who represents the district that’s home to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), released this statement following his meeting with NASA Administrator Charles Bolden to discuss the agency’s 2013 budget proposal:

“Today I met with NASA Administrator Charles Bolden to express my dismay over widespread reports that NASA’s latest budget proposes to dramatically reduce the planetary science program, and with it, ground breaking missions to Mars and outer planetary bodies like Jupiter’s icy moon Europa, and to inform him of my vehement opposition to such a move.”

“America’s unique expertise in designing and flying deep-space missions is a priceless national asset and the Mars program, one of our nation’s scientific crown jewels, has been a spectacular success that has pushed the boundaries of human understanding and technological innovation, while also boosting American prestige worldwide and driving our children to pursue science and engineering degrees in college.

“As I told the Administrator during our meeting, I oppose these ill-considered cuts and I will do everything in my power to restore the Mars budget and to ensure American leadership in space exploration.”

In an interview with the San Gabriel Valley Tribune, Schiff said, “What they’re proposing will be absolutely devastating to planetary science and the Mars program. I’m going to be fighting them tooth and nail. Unfortunately if this is the direction the administration is heading, it will definitely hurt JPL – that’s why I’m so committed to reversing this.”

NASA still hopes for some type of scaled back Mars missions in the 2016 to 2020 timeframe which will be outlined in an upcoming article.

In the meantime, the entire future of America’s Search for Life on the Red Planet now hinges on NASA’s Curiosity Mars Science Laboratory rover speeding thru interplanetary space and a pinpoint touchdown inside the layered terrain of Gale Crater on August 6, 2012.

Curiosity will be NASA’s third and last generation of US Mars rovers – 4th Generation Axed !

NASA’s Opportunity Rover is now Earth’s only surviving robot on Mars.

GREEN: Leave space exploration to the private sector

This is a blog entry from a college student. He doesn't think much of Newt Gingrich's idea to put a colony on the moon. He doesn't mention the Chinese - who are going to be doing that. From the Daily Nebraskan: GREEN: Leave space exploration to the private sector I WANT YOU … To help me build a colony on the moon! Here's why:

In 1941, Henry Luce proclaimed the 1900s would be remembered as the "American Century." By most objective standards, he was correct. Our nation was the wealthiest, boasted the strongest military, had the best schools and was liberal democracy's great counterweight to communism.

The first 12 years of this century, however, have sucked.

This century has featured terrorist attacks, constant war and financial meltdowns across the world. For the first time since the 1970s, people can fairly question whether their life prospects will be better than those of their parents.

Unless the world ends in December (per those pesky Mayans and their calendars), there's plenty of time to improve this century. Luckily, we have visionary leaders such as Newton "Leroy" Gingrich, who want America to go the basics.

By basics, I mean space. After all, we beat the Soviets into space, right? Some say the reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union was because of complex geopolitical realities and overly stretched military spending.

That's hogwash. All "Real Americans" know the Soviet Union ended because Ronald Reagan beat up Mikhail Gorbachev at 200 miles in altitude.

We bested everyone once in space. Why not go back to where we're the best?

To fix our problems, let's build a colony on the moon. After dealing with the Decepticons on the dark side of the moon, we might even be able to paint the entire moon with the American flag.

As soon as it's up and running, let's send a man to Mars. Before you know it, we'll be discovering Endor and Tatooine.

Only these great projects can restore American confidence and assure our people that we're the best.

Now, I know, this might sound like a bad idea to some of you lesser mortals. In the spirit of my infinite wisdom, I'm going to preemptively answer a few questions that you're all sure to have:

Q: Don't we have better things to spend our time on than building a colony on the moon?

A: No. Our nation's government is not in 15 trillion dollars of debt. Our economy is fundamentally sound. Our government treats all citizens according to their rights and with a basic sense of respect for their dignity. What better things could we have to work on than a sweet colony on the moon? Also, money isn't a problem because it literally grows on Mars.

Q: In "Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century," they have working electric cars, sweet shuttles that take people easily into space, an amazing space station, and awesome technology. Will building a moon colony help us get there faster?

A: Yes. Just as giving away basic freedoms like the right to due process or habeas corpus keeps Americans safe, building a moon colony is the only way to ensure that we can have sweet technology as soon as possible.

I'll go a step further and say that only a moon colony will ensure that we have an iPhone 10 by 2020.

Unless the government decides to do something, nothing is possible. Thank the good Lord we have political leaders like Newt Gingrich with the vision required to think up big ideas for our country.

Stop.

Hopefully, you realized the satirical nature of this piece before you saw the Star Wars references. Space is the final frontier, but we don't need to have it explored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

There is ample reason for private entities to explore space. You don't have to be a science fiction fan to appreciate the scientific advances special exploration would encourage. Better yet, the American public doesn't have to pay to see them.

Politicians like to say the rich don't pay their fair share. That may be the case, but it's far from the whole story. The basic reality of government is that the middle class ends up paying for projects they don't need. A bunch of lawyers in Washington, D.C. decide they want to do something, and the cost can be damned.

That might work when the economy's booming, unemployment's low and other nations are still recovering from World War II. It doesn't work when Brazil, India and China are rapidly growing.

There was an excellent time to explore space. It was called the Cold War.

I don't believe we need to beat al-Qaida or Iran to the moon anytime soon.

If the benefits of exploring space make sense, someone will explore space. If the benefits aren't good, there's no need to explore.

Leave government to mess up the Earth. They do a good enough job of that for us all.

Justin Green is a senior political science and history major. he blogs at huskerred.tumblr.com. reach him at justingreen@dailynebraskan.com.

Nasa plots deep-space base just past the dark side of the moon as a 'stepping stone' to Mars

From Daily Mail Online: Nasa plots deep-space base just past the dark side of the moon as a 'stepping stone' to Mars
Nasa is considering plans for a manned base parked beyond the dark side of the moon as its 'leading option' for deep space exploration.

The U.S. space agency is forming a team to draw up plans for the outpost, to be parked at a spot in space known as the Earth-moon libration point 2 (EML-2).

Libration points are 'parking spots' in space where an object can be balanced between the gravitational pull of two large masses - such as the Earth and the moon.

An outpost at EML-2 could allow for exploration on the moon and its surrounding space, or even act as a staging post for missions to Mars, Nasa officials say.

The agency hopes to use its heavy-lift rocket Space Launch System and the Lockheed Martin-built Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle 'as the foundational elements' for the base.

The plans have been outlined in a memo from Nasa's associate administrator for human exploration and operations, William Gerstenmaier, seen by Space.com.

It points out that if the agency manages to establish an manned waypoint at EML-2, it would be the furthest humans have yet travelled from our home planet.

A white paper from the Lunar University Network for Astrophysics Research (LUNAR) Centre at the University of Colorado, Boulder, points out that an EML-2 mission would have astronauts traveling 15 percent farther from Earth than did the Apollo astronauts.

Jack Burns, LUNAR director, told Space.com: 'This is extremely exciting from both the exploration and science sides. 'This mission concept seems to be really taking off now because it is unique and offers the prospects of doing something significant outside of low-Earth orbit within this decade.'

For more than a year, Mr Burns and his team have been collaborating with Lockheed to plan an early Orion mission that would go into a halo orbit of EML-2.

The mission could act as a proving ground for the Orion spacecraft's life-support systems and demonstrate the high-speed re-entry capability needed for return to Earth from deep space.

It would also help scientists investigate the effects on crews of radiation from cosmic rays and solar flares and verify whether Orion offers enough protection.

However, Mr Gerstenmaier notes that EML-2 'is a complex region of cis-lunar space that has certain advantages as an initial staging point for exploration, but may also have some disadvantages that must be well understood.'

Mr Gerstenmaier's team is due to report back by March 30.

Team Helping Japanese Space Program Launch Safely

From Newswise: Team Helping Japanese Space Program Launch Safely
Newswise — A team of scientists from The University of Alabama in Huntsville's Earth System Science Center is working with the Japanese space agency to develop new rules to protect spacecraft from lightning.

Data from instruments being installed aboard a small jet will help the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) develop guidelines that can be used to determine which clouds over the Tanegashima Space Center launch site pose the threat of triggering a lightning bolt that could damage or destroy a launch vehicle.

A problem, according to Hugh Christian, an Earth System Science Center (ESSC) principal research scientist, is that when the Japanese apply NASA's rules for launch safety to their climatological conditions, they find those rules to be very restrictive.

"For instance, NASA has what is called the 'thick cloud rule,'" he said. "Basically, any cloud above the freezing level that's 4,000 or more feet thick will stop a launch. Well, those kinds of clouds are very common during Japan’s winter launch window, and it is quite probable that in most cases those clouds are only very weakly electrified and pose no threat to launch safety.

"We're going to fly this specially-instrumented aircraft through these clouds to see if there is any chance they might be a threat for triggering a lightning flash."

Christian and the UAHuntsville team have been involved in similar research campaigns around NASA's Cape Canaveral launch facility since the 1990s, and helped develop NASA's lightning safety protocols.

The problem, he said, is that NASA's guidelines, while very safe, can also be very restrictive. "If you have to delay a launch it can cost as much as a million dollars a day," Christian said. "So you want to be sure the rules you use to cancel that launch are optimal."

The six instruments installed on the business-size jet are electric field mills, which measure the atmosphere's static electrical field. Flying them through a cloud or storm can tell the UAHuntsville team how much of a lightning threat that system presents.

They hope to merge that data with information from a nearby weather radar to develop a set of standards for judging lightning threats based on cloud height and radar reflectivity.

The flights are scheduled for later this month, with Christian and three members of his lightning research team on site in Japan. The three-month project is supported by a $250,000 research contract from JAXA.

NASA Eyes Plan for Deep-Space Outpost Near the Moon

From YahooNews: NASA Eyes Plan for Deep-Space Outpost Near the Moon

NASA is pressing forward on assessing the value of a "human-tended waypoint" near the far side of the moon — one that would embrace international partnerships as well as commercial and academic participation, SPACE.com has learned.

According to a Feb. 3 memo from William Gerstenmaier, NASA's associate administrator for human exploration and operations, a team is being formed to develop a cohesive plan for exploring a spot in space known as the Earth-moon libration point 2 (EML-2).

Libration points, also known as Lagrangian points, are places in space where the combined gravitational pull of two large masses roughly balance each other out, allowing spacecraft to essentially "park" there.

A pre-memo NASA appraisal of EML-2, which is near the lunar far side, has spotlighted this destination as the "leading option" for a near-term exploration capability.

EML-2 could serve as a gateway for capability-driven exploration of multiple destinations, such as near-lunar space, asteroids, the moon, the moons of Mars and, ultimately, Mars itself, according to NASA officials.

A capabilities-driven NASA architecture is one that should use the agency's planned heavy-lift rocket, known as the Space Launch System, and the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle "as the foundational elements."

Cadence of compelling missions

The memo spells out six strategic principles to help enable exploration beyond low-Earth orbit:

* Incorporating significant international participation that leverages current International Space Station partnerships.

* U.S. commercial business opportunities to further enhance the space station logistics market with a goal of reducing costs and allowing for private sector innovation.

* Multiuse or reusable in-space infrastructure that allows a capability to be developed and reused over time for a variety of exploration destinations.

* The application of technologies for near-term applications while focusing research and development of new technologies to reduce costs, improve safety, and increase mission capture over the longer term.

* Demonstrated affordability across the project life cycle.

* Near-term mission opportunities with a well-defined cadence of compelling missions providing for an incremental buildup of capabilities to perform more complex missions over time.

Quiet zone
According to strategic space planners, an EML-2 waypoint could enable significant telerobotic science on the far side of the moon and could serve as a platform for solar and Earth scientific observation, radio astronomy and other science in the quiet zone behind the moon.

Furthermore, the waypoint could enable assembly and servicing of satellites and large telescopes, among a host of other uses.

If NASA succeeds in establishing an astronaut-tended EML-2 waypoint, it would represent the farthest humans have traveled from Earth to date, the memo points out.

Extended stays at EML-2 would provide advancements in life sciences and radiation-shielding for long-duration missions outside of the Van Allen radiation belts that protect Earth, scientists say.

Next step
Gerstenmaier noted that moving forward on international, commercial and academic partnerships will "require significant detailed development and integration."

Moreover, Gerstenmaier added, EML-2 "is a complex region of cis-lunar space that has certain advantages as an initial staging point for exploration, but may also have some disadvantages that must be well understood."

A NASA study team is assigned the task of developing near-term missions to EML-2 "as we continue to refine our understanding and implications of using this waypoint as part of the broader exploration capability development," the memo explains.

The study is targeted for completion by March 30, 2012.

A working group of International Space Station members — a meeting bringing together space agencies from around the world — is being held in Paris this week with NASA’s EML-2 strategy likely to be discussed with international partners.

Proving ground
Bullish on the promise of telerobotics exploration of the moon from EML-2 is Jack Burns, director of the Lunar University Network for Astrophysics Research (LUNAR) Center at the University of Colorado, Boulder. LUNAR is funded by the NASA Lunar Science Institute.

Burns and his team have been collaborating with Lockheed Martin (builder of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle) for more than a year to plan an early Orion mission that would go into a halo orbit of EML-2 above the lunar far side.

"This is extremely exciting from both the exploration and science sides," Burns told SPACE.com. "This mission concept seems to be really taking off now because it is unique and offers the prospects of doing something significant outside of low-Earth orbit within this decade."

In collaboration with Lockheed-Martin, the LUNAR Center is investigating human missions to EML-2 that could be a proving ground for future missions to deep space while also overseeing scientifically important investigations.

Roadways on the moon?
In a LUNAR Center white paper provided to SPACE.com, researchers note that an EML-2 mission would have astronauts traveling 15 percent farther from Earth than did the Apollo astronauts, and spending almost three times longer in deep space.

Such missions would validate the Orion spacecraft's life-support systems for shorter durations, could demonstrate the high-speed re-entry capability needed for return to Earth from deep space, and could help scientists gauge astronauts’ radiation dose from cosmic rays and solar flares. Doing so would help verify that Orion provides sufficient radiation protection, as it is designed to do, researchers said.

On such missions, the white paper explains, Orion astronauts could teleoperate gear on the lunar far side. For instance, the moon-based robotic hardware could obtain samples from the geologically appealing far side — perhaps from the South Pole-Aitken basin, which is one of the largest, deepest and oldest craters in the solar system.

Also on a proposed lunar robotic agenda is deployment of a low-frequency array of radio antennas to observe the first stars in the early universe.

Among a number of research jobs, the LUNAR team has been investigating how modest equipment could be used to fuse lunar regolith into a concrete-like material, which could then be used for construction of large structures, without the expense of having to carry most of the material to the lunar surface.

The ability to fabricate hardened structures from lunar regolith could also foster on-the-spot creation of solar arrays, habitats, and radiation shielding and maybe, even roadways on the surface of the moon.

“Teachers in Space” becomes “Citizens in Space”

From the Vindicator: “Teachers in Space” becomes “Citizens in Space” Space Center Houston (Feb. 2, 2012) - The United States Rocket Academy made a surprise announcement at the Space Exploration Educators Conference, which began here today. "Teachers in Space is now Citizens in Space," said Edward Wright, chairman of the United States Rocket Academy and project manager of Teachers in Space. "The focus of our program is growing beyond the public school system. We are creating a more inclusive program that will enable teachers, students, museum educators, and others to become citizen scientists and space explorers." "Teachers in Space was created to enable large numbers of teachers to fly in space and return to the classroom. Working with the companies that are now developing reusable suborbital vehicles, we have made significant progress toward that goal. We began training our first Pathfinder astronaut candidates and acquired a contract for 10 space flights with one of the new suborbital companies - XCOR Aerospace. This is, to the best of our knowledge, the largest single bulk purchase of suborbital flights to date. We expect that it will be only the first of many such contracts. "As we developed our astronaut training course, we had many requests to open the program to a wider audience. Requests from university students, aerospace museum directors, science-center educators, as well as private, religious, and home-school teachers. "At the same time, we noticed the growing awareness of and interest in citizen science and participatory exploration. New technological developments are making it possible for private citizens to become involved in the scientific process. More and more, the professional scientific community is recognizing the importance of contributions made by these amateur scientists. Citizen scientists are discovering exoplanets and dinosaurs, monitoring climate and endangered species, and helping to map the human genome. "The development of low-cost reusable suborbital spacecraft will be the next great enabler, allowing citizens to participate in space exploration and space science. "Citizens have told us that education is not just a process that occurs within the public schools. Science fairs, hackerspaces, museums; private, religious, and home schools - all have a role to play. Today, we are listening to those citizens. "We want to put a thousand astronaut teachers into American schools . We want to engage America's students and reach out to the public through museums, science centers, and other venues. We want to make space research and space exploration part of the mainstream, not treasures locked away in the ivory tower. "When Apollo 12 commander Pete Conrad was asked what it was like to fly in space, he said, ‘Everyone should go!' We agree. "In the next few months, we will announce our first citizen-science projects and a new Pathfinder program. We have three Pathfinder astronaut candidates in training right now and are looking to add many more. "Space is not just the final frontier. It's the citizen-science frontier."

Thousands apply for astronaut program

From TGDaily: Thousands apply for astronaut program NASA's received over 6,300 applications to join its astronaut corps - twice as many as usual.

It put out the call late last year for people who will live and work aboard the International Space Station, help build the Orion spacecraft for exploration beyond low earth orbit and work in partnership with the commercial companies scheduled to provide transport services to the ISS.

"Historically, we’ve received between 2,500 and 3,500 applications for each class," says Duane Ross, who leads NASA’s Astronaut Selection Office.

"We were a bit surprised, but very pleased by the overwhelming response to our recent Astronaut Candidate vacancy announcement. To me, this demonstrates the fact that the public remains genuinely interested in continuing the exploration of space. As for my office, we will be busy for a while."

Over the next couple of months, the applications will be filtered to weed out those that lack certain basic qualifications. Those that make it through will then be reviewed by a selection committee to identify 'highly qualified' applicants - the best of whom will be invited for an interview and medical evaluations.

Initial interviews will be held by the Astronaut Selection Board from August through October. Then, starting in November and running through January 2013, final interviews will be held along with medical evaluations of each applicant.

A final decision should come next spring, with the new astronaut candidates reporting for training that summer. They'll need two years of training before being eligible for mission assignments.

"The Flight Crew Operations Directorate is very happy with the large number of applicants for the astronaut program," says Janet Kavandi, director of flight crew operations.

"NASA feels strongly that an appropriate mix of skills, education, and background provide the office with "a greater ability to successfully work a wide array of operational situations."

Rebirth of Moon exploration

From Russia & India Report: Rebirth of Moon exploration Russia is planning to put a man on the Moon, and anyone can apply to join the crew. The Russian Space Agency, Roscosmos, may have suffered some humiliating setbacks in recent months, but it’s hitting back by aiming even higher.

“Man should return to the Moon. And not just like in 1969, to leave a mark. We can do important work there – such as building astrology labs and observing the Sun,” Vladimir Popovkin, head of Roscosmos, told the Ekho Moskvy radio station.

Popovkin’s plans are nothing if not ambitious with the first landing scheduled for 2020. Regular flights planned within five years of that, culminating in a fully-functioning scientific base complete with giant telescopes by 2030.

Roscosmos has called for volunteers, hoping that an X-factor style search will rekindle the public’s interest in space exploration. Among the requirements: a scientific or medical degree, knowledge of English and shoes no bigger than a UK size 11.

Russia had its own Moon exploration program in the late 1960s, but once Neil Armstrong and the crew of the US ship Apollo 11 got there, there was little political prestige to be gained by coming second.

In fact, both space superpowers focused elsewhere, and Moon colonization was virtually abandoned until the end of the 20th Century when new players arrived on the scene. For the budding space programs of India, China and Japan, this was an important barrier to be conquered.

Four years ago the United States proposed the creation of an International Lunar Network – a set of interconnected bases dotting the surface of the moon.

Among its scientific aims would be an attempt to understand the composition and origin of the Moon. In its landmark report, NASA called this research a “cornerstone” in trying to understand how the Earth and other planets of the Solar System were formed. NASA also says that the Moon provides a “unique” platform for astrophysics.

For its part, since 1998 the Russian Space Agency has worked on Luna Glob – a series of robotic missions to the moon, which will culminate either in the construction of an orbital space station or a base on the Moon itself.

Popovkin has recently said that Russia may co-operate with NASA and the European Space Agency and join the International Lunar Network.

“We are not just coming back to the Moon. Now, we know much more about it than during the time of the first space launches” he told Vesti Radio.

And one such breakthrough may mean that manned as well as robotic missions are feasible. In 2008, significant amounts of water were discovered on the lunar surface.

“The areas that contain ice sheets could become suitable locations for permanent manned bases,” Lev Zeleniy, the Director of the Institute of Space Studies, told Interfax news agency.

Roscosmos has even said that any technologies tested on the Moon could serve asprototypes for future manned missions to Mars.

Overcoming past failure
But while space agencies around the world earn their bread by making big plans and capturing the public’s imagination, actually getting there is another matter entirely.

Although the Russian Space Agency is no longer surviving on a shoestring as in the 1990s – its budget has risen five-fold in five years – its record of success last year was less than stellar. There were five failed missions in 2011, including the much-touted Phobos-Grunt probe to Mars, which failed to get further than the Earth’s orbit before crashing back down.

In fact, it is that failure that may have sparked the current plans for space exploration. “We may need to think again about how to allocate our resources. Perhaps, we need a more specific, realistic Moon program, and do any Mars research as a part of a bigger international program,” Anatoliy Davydov, the deputy head of Roscosmos, said in the aftermath of the Phobos-Grunt failure.

Unfortunately, the two programs may be interconnected in another way – sharing the same vulnerabilities. “The design decisions used on Phobos-Grunt need to be reconsidered and significantly adjusted. Unfortunately, the same ones are used on the lunar missions. This is likely to push back the dates of any future launches, particularly of the Luna Glob modules” said Lev Zelenkin, who is closely involved with both projects

After Popovkin’s announcement, some praised the agency’s aspiration to return to its Soviet heyday, while others were openly skeptical of whether Roscosmos is able to deliver, especially at such short notice.

Valeriy Ryumin, a former cosmonaut who traveled to space on four different missions, dismissed the project altogether. “There is nothing particularly interesting on the Moon and it has been visited by both men and machines. The only reason such a project would be of interest is if a lot of money was allocated to it,” he told the Trud newspaper.

In any event, Roscosmos faces competition in its bid to reconquer the Moon.

Not only are there rival national programs, but Space Adventures, the company set up to send space tourists to the ISS, says that it intends to launch a modified Russian ship towards the moon, and is in the process of selling two tickets for the trip at $150 million apiece.

Whether this mission, the Roscosmos program or one of the other space agencies will get there first, or indeed, at all, remains the burning question. But there is no doubt that even more than 40 years after Neil Armstrong set foot on the Moon, any return there will be hailed as a major success.

Space exploration is a must

From the Eastern Echo: Space exploration is a must Several months ago, I used this space to make a case that the United States should commit to sending a man to Mars by the end of the decade. We need the Kennedy-esque goal for innovation, inspiration and morale.

Yet it seems with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s recent entrance into the space conversation, it is important to discuss some other reasons why space exploration is absolutely vital.

Gingrich took a lot of fire for the grandiose idea of a permanent moon colony by the end of the decade, but in this case, he is right.

There’s a list of reasons as long as “War and Peace” why he shouldn’t be president, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have good ideas from time to time.

It might seem like a moon colony by 2020 might be unnecessary and extraordinarily expensive in a time when we’re contemplating drastic budget cuts, but a moon colony, or a similar project, is exactly what we need.

We need it for innovation, inspiration and morale. We also need it, because we’re a frontier nation. It’s who we are. It’s who we’ve always been. We have to go into space and be the ones who establish a base on the moon and plant our flag on the red planet.

If we let China or Russia dominate the space race of the 21st century, it will be one giant step toward becoming a follower nation, a second tier power that only looks inward. We tried that in the 1920s and got the Great Depression and World War II.

Will it cost us blood and treasure to go back into space with a strong purpose?

Absolutely. But some things are worth it. It’s worth it, because it’ll create new technology, a generation of new scientists inspired by the images and will improve sinking American confidence.

It’s also worth it because we don’t know what’s out there. We have always been a nation that goes boldly into the frontier. If we give that up because it doesn’t seem worth it right now, we’re giving up who we are.

You don’t always have concrete goals and perfect plans, but you know exploration is something you have to do. It’s in our DNA. It’s why we ask questions and have libraries flooded with books. We need answers. We need to see for ourselves.

But mostly, we have to go into the heavens because we’ve explored the known world. We have work to do perfecting it, but while we’re doing that, we need to send others onward. Sam Seaborn from “The West Wing” put it best, and I’ll defer to him, because he also once said, “Good writers borrow from other writers.”

We should go back to the moon or to Mars “Because it’s next. Because we came out of the cave, and we looked over the hill, and we saw fire, and we crossed the ocean, and we pioneered the West, and we took to the sky. The history of man is on a timeline of exploration, and this is what’s next.”

The day we stop looking over the hill is the day we start dying out as a people. We can’t have gone to the moon in 1969 and said, “This is good enough; we’ve gone as far as we need to.”

We must continue to push the boundaries of our existence or we’ve given up. We do need a moon colony, no matter how silly it sounds in a pandering stump speech in west Florida.

We must go back to the moon and on to Mars, because it’s next. It’s the frontier, and we’re a frontier people. As Seaborn also said, no one is hungrier, colder or dumber, because we went to the moon.

Imagine what might have been if Columbus had never sailed to the New World or Lewis and Clark had never set out across Louisiana. What if we never climbed Mount Everest?

Exploration is a key part of our existence, and we can’t turn our backs on it, or we’ll lose a fundamental piece of our humanity. All of the balanced budgets and full stomachs in the world can’t make up for that.

SpaceX hopes to launch to International Space Station on March 20

From EarthSky: SpaceX hopes to launch to International Space Station on March 20 SpaceX wants to launch the first commercially built spacecraft to the International Space Station on March 20, 2012, but might push back the launch to April. Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) is aiming to complete the first launch of a commercially built craft to the International Space Station (ISS) on March 20, 2012. But the launch might be pushed back to early April, 2012, ISS program manager Mike Suffredini announced in a press briefing on February 2. The original launch date was set for February 7, but the schedule proved to be too tight. These announcements come about a year after SpaceX’s historic first recovery of a commercial craft from orbit, after their Dragon spacecraft successfully orbited Earth two times in late 2010. The first SpaceX flight to ISS will be a demonstration flight, launching out of Cape Canaveral in Florida. During the briefing, Suffredini said: I don’t think they’re going to make March 20. I think it will be early April. We won’t fly until we’re ready . . . . There is not much margin in their schedule and on a new vehicle schedules without margins tend to move to the right. SpaceX’s Dragon craft is capable of carrying cargo and, eventually, crew to the ISS, a pressing need for the United States now that the shuttle program has ended. The Dragon is designed to be reusable, as the shuttles were. The company is also aiming to to develop the first-ever reusable launch vehicle. Dragon will be launched on SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket. It was the Falcon 9 that launched SpaceX’s Dragon craft on December 8, 2010, for its successful two orbits of Earth and history-making first commercial recovery of a craft from orbit. Though development of the ISS launch is behind schedule, Suffredini expressed confidence in the way things are proceeding. And on February 1, SpaceX successfully test fired its SuperDraco engine, an advanced version of the Draco engine currently used on Dragon. The SuperDraco is part of Dragon’s launch-escape system, and, because it is not jettisoned like other escape systems, allows astronauts to escape to safety at any point during a launch, not just the first few minutes. Falcon 9 lifts off for its first flight. Credit: SpaceX/Chris Thompson SpaceX currently has a $1.6 billion contract with NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program, representing 12 flights to the ISS. More flights can be added and the contract can be increased to up to $3.1 billion. The company’s current launch manifest calls for two launches to resupply the ISS in 2012, two in 2013, three in 2014, and five in 2015. SpaceX is also planning to use Dragon to conduct in-orbit science independent of NASA, in a program called Dragon Lab. Bottom line: Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) hopes to launch the first commercially built craft to the International Space Station (ISS) on March 20, 2012. But the launch might be pushed back to early April, 2012. These announcements come about a year after SpaceX’s historic first recovery of a commercial craft from orbit, after their Dragon spacecraft successfully orbited Earth two times in late 2010. Dragon will be launched to ISS on SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket. A new launch-escape system and SuperDraco engine are being developed for future missions

Newt May Have Lost in the Space State, but He Wasn't Just Giving Way to Lunar-cy

Huff Post: Newt May Have Lost in the Space State, but He Wasn't Just Giving Way to Lunar-cy

Now that it's over, it seems to me that the most interesting thing about the GOP primary in Florida was seeing America's beleaguered space program getting some political attention. Predictably, Newt Gingrich's bold visions of moon bases and resurgent American daring-do in space were viewed like a Daffy Duck cartoon by a media ever more resigned to national mediocrity and a public ever more comfortable with second place finishes behind a militant, communist China.

Last year, President Obama's visionary move to outsource routine space operations to competitive private sector firms met with a similar reaction from a cynical Congress. Many, if not most, politicos see space exploration as either unnecessary or as a right-wing jobs program for middle-aged engineers in red states like Alabama and Texas. The former view is smugly embraced by many on the left who see exploration as a waste of our ever-dwindling resources, while the latter vision is represented by the antiquarian chair of the House Science and Technology committee, Ralph Hall, a Republican who ironically argues that a free market would be unable to deliver reliable and safe solutions.

Both of these views completely fail to grok both the documented benefits of America's leadership in space and the font of inspiration for visionaries from Wernher von Braun to Richard Branson who have aspired to send people there.

I could go on about the contribution of the mid-century aerospace boom to the American economy and technological infrastructure from PCs (see the Steve Job's bio) to the Internet (launched as a DARPA project led by a former NASA engineer). However, with space being limited (pun intended) I'll offer just one little example. According to a Motorola funded report, the Global Positioning System (GPS) -- originally designed as a military project and offered to civilian navigation by President Reagan after the Soviet downing of a Korean 747 in 1983 -- now saves American long haul trucking fleets $52 billion a year. That's only one small application of one amazing space spinoff and yet the economic return is larger than the combined NASA (at $18 billion) and military (est. at $24 billion) space budgets combined. Oh, and by the way, it's probably also the world's number one technology for reducing carbon emissions, by improving the navigational efficency of millions of vessels and vehicles around the globe.

A recent piece in The Economist nicely summarized the viewpoint that favors timid robotic missions with the statement, "Ultimately, manned space flight is futile. All the scientifically and practically important stuff can be done by robots." While I might amuse myself with the thought that this fellow has a crush on SIRI and owns one of those Sony robot dogs, somebody has got to have the courage to stand up and say that the most valuable return on space science is not from abstract experiments in physics or attempts to scan for primitive life on some Jovan moon. Heck, I'm as excited as the next guy about glorious pictures of an expanding universe and finding those sneaky scorpions on Venus, but the ultimate purpose of space flight and all human explorations must be to expand the realm of human presence and deliver a brighter future for all.

At the risk of looking beyond the next election cycle and being declared a nutcase like Newt, I must point out that Malthus made it clear that unless we find a way to move beyond our precious home planet we will eventually kill it or ourselves in a sad battle over its limited resources. While technology offers us a plethora of delaying tactics, ultimately development of manned space flight offers the only permanent solution to that dilemma.

Incongruously, some on the right need a lesson in free market economics from American firms, like Elon Musk's California's Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) that are ready and eager to take on this challenge given the chance. In an amusing twist of global trade norms a Chinese space executive at a Colorado conference recently complained that their Long March rockets could not possibly compete with the low-cost launch services of that California startup. No surprise really, unless you think centrally planned, patronage-based businesses are efficient.

Despite this, there is a growing group inside the aerospace community so eager to throw in the towel that they would extend America's thinning space budget by embracing a brutal and militant China in order to tap the its ill-gotten trade wealth. (Wealth acquired from abusive exploitation of its domestic labor force and the systematic gutting of America's industrial base.) Folks like Robert Dickman, executive director of The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics continually push for technology exchange with China under the pretense that the cadres who run China's secretive state owned space firms are "businessmen" that are "fun and interesting to be with." No doubt Bob, I've heard about those parties myself.

The Economist suggested that the U.S. only denies access to the International Space Station out of either "paranoia" or "pique." Heck, if a de-industrialized U.S. can no longer afford the bucks for Buck Rogers and Ralph Hall won't trust American entrepreneurship, we might as well just give up and let the folks who make our iPhones and build those swell Dong Feng nuclear ICBMs do the job. If it's good enough to fry my family, it must be good enough to fly America's astronauts.

The funny thing is the Chinese space program is really not in the least bit impressive. It's a clunky, slow moving imitation of the Soviet program from the 1960s. Despite having stolen vast amounts of Russian and American space technology, China has managed to put only six astronauts into low Earth orbit over eight years using a vehicle that looks like an illustration from a Jules Verne novel.

Let us never forget that in the eight years following Alan Shepard's 1961 sub-orbital flight America lofted more than 40 astronauts in a score of flights and landed men on the moon for an encore. To suggest that we can't continue to lead or that we must go into business with thugs is defeatism in the extreme. America must go forward aggressively in space and we must do it not because it would be an easy political decision to make at this time, but because it would be hard.

- Greg Autry teaches Macro Economics at the Merage School of Business, UC Irvine and is the co-author, with Peter Navarro, of Death by China. He holds a MBA from UCI and is completing a Management PhD in the area of public policy and economics. Greg serves as senior economist with the American Jobs Alliance and is on the Commercial Space Group at the AIAA. More info can be found at www.deathbychina.com.

NASA says Russian space woes no worry

From Fox News: NASA says Russian space woes no worry WASHINGTON – NASA says it still has confidence in the quality of Russia's manned rockets, despite an embarrassing series of glitches and failures in the Russian space program. A leak developed recently during a test of the next Soyuz capsule scheduled to launch astronauts to the International Space Station, so Russian space officials have decided not to use it. That delays upcoming launches. NASA relies solely on Russia to take crews to the space station. NASA space station manager Michael Suffredini said he still considers the Soyuz rocket the world's most reliable space system. "I have confidence in the focus and abilities of the managers who build the systems and fly those systems," Suffredini said Thursday during a NASA teleconference. The Soyuz leak means that the six crew members at the space station will now spend a few extra weeks in space. American Dan Burbank, who is the station commander, and Russians Anton Shkaplerov and Anatoly Ivanishin will stay in orbit until the end of April. American Don Petit, Dutch astronaut Andre Kuipers and Russian Oleg Konenko, will stay in space through the end of June for about 193 days in space, pushing close to the limit of 200 days that NASA likes. The latest problem comes after a series of failures in unmanned Russian rockets that raised questions about quality control in the nation that launched the first satellite and human into space. Last month, a spacecraft that was supposed to go to a Mars moon crashed back to Earth after a launch failure. And in the past six months, a Russian communications satellite and a cargo ship to the space station have crashed. "They've had a pretty challenging year that's true," Suffredini said. But he said that doesn't really have anything to do with the workhorse manned Soyuz capsule. A private U.S. rocket — the Dragon built and operated by Space Exploration Technologies — probably won't launch until early April on a first-ever commercial resupply of the space station, Suffredini said. It had been set for a launch this month, but was already delayed. SpaceX spokeswoman Kirstin Brost Grantham said the company "will not launch before late March." A date should be set in about two weeks.

Europe Seeks Space Cooperation With China

From Der Spiegel: Europe Seeks Space Cooperation With China Thomas Reiter is a man who isn't easily impressed. He is a former test pilot with the German Air Force, and he also flew into space twice for Germany. Since last April, the 53-year-old has been one of the directors of the European Space Agency (ESA). When it comes to the technology that transports people into space, Reiter has seen just about everything -- so he was all the more astonished by what he saw during a trip to China in late 2011. In Beijing, government representatives took him through factory buildings where satellites and rocket engines are being built. He could see how the Chinese are building a moon-landing vehicle and capsules for manned space missions. At the end of his trip, Reiter was able to observe a rocket carrying the "Shenzhou-8" lifting off from the Jiuquan space center in the Gobi Desert, headed for China's Tiangong 1 space station. "It was a perfect lift-off," Reiter says enthusiastically. There is hardly any other area in which China is as active today as in space technology. In late December, the government in Beijing unveiled a five-year plan that ranges from the increased exploration of the earth via satellite to the preparation of a manned mission to the moon. China's foray into space presents a challenge to the West. The United States is determined not to allow anyone to usurp its dominant position in space. The Europeans and the German government, however, see the Chinese as less of a rival than a potential partner. Merkel Trip to China Chancellor Angela Merkel travels to China this week. German-Chinese cooperation in the field of space travel could be worthwhile for both nations. The rocket lift-off that ESA Director Reiter was allowed to witness brought the first bilateral research project into space. The spacecraft contained a box containing plants, bacteria and cancer cells. The "Simbox," built by the German company Astrium, was used to examine the effects of two-and-a-half weeks of zero gravity on the contents. If Peter Hintze, a member of the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the chancellor's space travel advisor, has his way, this project will have been only the beginning of broader Chinese-German cooperation in space. The Chinese space travel offensive is "an enrichment" when it comes to the scientific exploration of the moon and the solar system, says Hintze. In fact, he would like to convince the Chinese to become involved with the Galileo navigation system and become a user of the International Space Station (ISS). "The Chinese have great ambitions and have such enormous means at their disposal that we can hardly keep up in areas such as manned space travel," says Hintze. The consequence, he adds, must be "to seek cooperation." Aim For Chinese Spaceship to Dock at ISS Reiter, one of ESA's directors, recently chose the European Satellite Control Center in the western German city of Darmstadt as the venue to announce concrete plans. The center is directly behind the city's main train station. From there, ESA controls a large number of satellites, and from the control room, there is a direct connection to the European Space Center in Kourou, French Guyana. According to Reiter, China is very interested in cooperation. Three workshops will take place soon, including one on rendezvous in space. "Our goal is that, within the current decade, a Chinese spaceship will dock at the International Space Station or a European spaceship will dock at the Chinese space station," says Reiter. He has already told some of his employees to start learning Chinese. Europe's interest in cooperation with China is partly a result of the financial crisis. While the Asians are forging ahead, the European space program is threatened with budget cuts. Italy has already said it will reduce its contribution to the ESA as part of the country's austerity program. The ESA still has about €12 billion ($15.7 billion) at its disposal, but the agency's budget could shrink considerably between 2013 and 2015. Some have already suggested that Germany, already the ESA's most important financial contributor, should step in for Italy, since it would be difficult to finance an independent space program with a reduced budget. The ESA insists that the Europeans have no intention of turning away from the Americans. The cooperation with China is "complements rather than competes with" projects being undertaken with the United States, say officials at the German Aerospace Center (DLR). "We should not fall victim to the dangerous rhetoric of a new Cold War in space," says DLR Director Johann-Dietrich Wörner. Challenging US Dominance in Space Nevertheless, tensions are growing. America's doctrine demands a dominant role in space. European companies are blacklisted if they supply sensitive technologies to China. Sooner or later, Europe will probably have to decide between the United States and China. Influential US politicians are already voicing their opposition to the idea of granting the Chinese access to the ISS. Whoever controls space controls the world of high-tech. Satellites are used to handle communication and navigation tasks, and nowadays no warship can function correctly without reconnaissance from space. In the US, where memories are still alive of the Sputnik shock of the late 1950s, the tone is becoming aggressive. Republican presidential contender Newt Gingrich said last week that if he is elected president, he will install a permanent US base on the moon. According to Gingrich, it is in the US interest to boost the country's capacities in space and to make sure that the Chinese and the Russians will never come close to matching them. China also presents a challenge to Europe. There is a risk "that important technological advances will occur elsewhere, and not here," says Klaus-Peter Willsch, the aerospace spokesman for the CDU/CSU parliamentary group. The carrier rocket industry is also threatened. The Europeans developed the "Ariane" rocket with substantial government support. China, for its part, could position itself as a low-cost supplier in the future, making the Ariane superfluous. About 6,700 people work in the space industry in Germany, primarily for specialized companies in the area around Friedrichshafen and Bremen. "The price may be lower for a launch from China," says Dietmar Schrick, the managing director of the Federal Association of the German Aerospace Industry. But this isn't the only relevant factor, he adds, noting that "Europe's autonomous access to space" is also important. CDU politician Willsch believes that more investment in the Ariane is needed. "It would be wrong to depend on China or Russia as a provider here," he says. One only has to "think of Russia's natural gas customers to see how dangerous one-sided dependence can be." Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan