Welcome Home

April 09, 2009

A Russian Soyuz capsule carrying space station commander Mike Fincke, flight engineer Yury Lonchakov and space tourist Charles Simonyi returned to Earth on Wednesday -- and apparently NASA photographer Bill Ingalls was airborne to see it. Hope the landing was softer than this looks. To the left is Fincke with the official welcoming committee. 

Space Tourism Program Still Ticking

April 03, 2009

Space Adventures, the Virginia-based firm that so far has cornered the market on commercial spaceflight, isn't letting a little thing like no more flight opportunities spoil its business plans.

In a conference call with reporters, company president Eric Anderson said the ongoing flight of space tourist Charles Simonyi (they prefer the term "spaceflight participant") shouldn't be its last. 

Simonyi, who is flying for the second time, is among six wealthy business people who have ventured into orbit thanks to Space Adventures' business ties with Russian space officials. NASA won't fly anyone other than professional astronauts, in case you're wondering.

Space Adventures has been selling spare seats on the Russian Soyuz capsules traveling to the International Space Station to swap out crews. But beginning in May, when the live-aboard crew size doubles to six, there aren't going to be any spare seats available, barring last-minute hiccups. That's one of Space Adventures' business models: Be prepared to pounce if something opens up. Anderson said the company is keeping a close watch on a potential issue that may free a seat on the Soyuz slated to fly on September 30 with a flier from Kazakhstan, which is paying Russia directly for the venture.

Space Adventures also is trying to put together dedicated commercial Soyuz flights, though the capsule manufacturer, which already has to double production to handle the extra flights to ferry the station's larger crews, may find it impossible to crank out more vehicles. Also, there's limited parking space at the station -- assuming that's still the tourist destination of choice. Two of the station's docking ports will be filled with Soyuz craft serving as the crew's lifeboats. The leaves just one port free for either a third Soyuz, a Russian Progress cargo ship, or Europe's ATV cargo ship, which docks at the Russian side of the station. 

Still, there's reason to hope, Anderson said. The world economic situation apparently hasn't hit his clientele (Simonyi paid $35 million for his flight) as much as other industries.

"The kind of person … who has indicated an interest in going to space is a long-term thinker. Someone who has had a life dream of going to space is not going to let an economic downturn -- even if it’s a longer one than we would have hoped -- change their objective," Anderson said.

That's a load off. 

(Caption: Charles Simonyi in space. Courtesy: NASA) 

China Planning Military Outpost in Orbit

March 03, 2009

China is speeding up plans to launch and operate a space station in Earth orbit and turning over the project to military control, according to reports from the official Chinese news agency Xinhua and SpaceflightNow.com.

The 8.5-ton laboratory, called Tiangong -- Chinese for "heavenly palace"  -- is slated for launch before the end of next year. Its first crew would arrive in 2011. 

"The People's Liberation Army's General Armament Department aims to finish systems for the Tiangong-1 mission this year," the Chinese government said in an official statement.

 The design was unveiled during a nationally televised Chinese New Year broadcast, writes Spaceflightnow's Craig Covault.

 "It's surprising in some ways,"  China space expert Joan Johnson-Freese, head of the Department of National Security Studies at the Naval War College in Rhode Island, tells me.  "They said all along that they had a three-step program. This is a big acceleration."

China appears to be positioning itself for two space station programs, one similar to the U.S. Skylab program of the 1970s that made use of spacecraft built for the Apollo moon program, and another more along the lines of Russia's Mir series that were larger and included several modules.

The United States considered a manned military space program, but dismissed the concept in favor of flying reconnaissance and other sensors on satellites.

China may have decided to pursue a manned military program because it lacks the technology for cheaper robotic operations, said Charles Vick, a senior technical analyst with GlobalSecurity.org.

Still, "the Chinese space program is a considerable concern to the DoD (U.S Department of Defense,)" he said in an interview. "What are their intentions? What are their purposes?"

Johnson-Freese said the shift was "bureaucratically puzzling" and may mean nothing more than funding from  the military was more readily available than from other government sectors.

"I think they're going to get a lot out of it, in terms of propaganda," she said. "This is China trying to get resources wherever they can."

If schedules hold, China will be putting its station in orbit just as the United States retires its shuttle fleet and enters a five-year gap in its ability to launch people into orbit. The shuttles replacement is not expected to be ready to fly until 2015.

"It will be a political coup for them," said Johnson-Freese. "They'll be flying while we're still wringing our hands about what to do."

 

Fly Your Experiment -- For Free!

January 23, 2009

A Houston-based space advocacy group is teaming up with pioneer rocket launching company SpaceX to develop and  fly a research experiment in space for free. 

The purpose of the Microgravity Research Competition, which is being organized by the Heinlein Prize Trust and the Rice Alliance for Technology and Entrepreneurship, is to use microgravity to advance biotech, nanotech, combustion, metallurgy, and other fields.

Proposals are due March 20 and the winner will be announced in April. Launch could take place as early as November 2009.

In addition to a 4.5-day mission aboard a SpaceX Dragon capsule, the winning team will be awarded a $25,000 grant. The contest is open to U.S. universities, colleges and non-profit organizations with or without industry partners. For more information, check out the project's website. 

Last in Line

January 20, 2009

IF you were listening closely, which I attempted to do given my usual divided attention, I heard Barack Obama talk about “space” exactly zero times in his inaugural address. The topic also didn’t warrant a mention as an Agenda item on the home page of the new whitehouse.gov website -- even under the “Additional Issues” header.

That’s no real surprise, given the competition for Obama’s attention, but anyone entrenched in the notion that the good ship NASA will not have to reset its sails might want to take note of what the new president had to say about government work in general:

“The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works,” Obama said. “Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end.”

It also would behoove civilian space program advocates to note that the only mention about space on the government's new website is as Defense issue. On the military’s to-do list:

“Ensure Freedom of Space: The Obama-Biden Administration will restore American leadership on space issues, seeking a worldwide ban on weapons that interfere with military and commercial satellites. They will thoroughly assess possible threats to U.S. space assets and the best options, military and diplomatic, for countering them, establishing contingency plans to ensure that U.S. forces can maintain or duplicate access to information from space assets and accelerating programs to harden U.S. satellites against attack.”

Finally, not to make anyone at NASA nervous, but guess who is scheduled to appear dead last in the 13,000-member Inaugural Parade?

Spurned Contractor Wants New Deal from NASA

January 15, 2009

NASA is suspending contract awards to two firms selected to fly cargo to the International Space Station after a third contender formally protested the outcome of the competition.

PlanetSpace, a Chicago-based partnership set up by three of the U.S. space agency’s prime contractors -- Lockheed Martin Corp., Boeing Co, and Alliant Techsystems Inc. -- filed a protest with the U.S. Government Accountability Office on Wednesday, contesting contracts awarded last month worth $3.5 billion to startup Space Exploration Technologies of Hawthorne, Calif., and Virginia-based Orbital Sciences Corp.

The contracts called for a total of 20 flights to the space station to deliver cargo after the space shuttles are retired in 2010.

NASA has 30 days to respond to the complaint and the GAO is required to issue a ruling by April 29, 2009.

You can read some details about the complaint here and a statement by PlanetSpace on the matter.

Tool Bag Tracker

November 24, 2008

The $100,000 bag of tools that got away from astronauts Heidemarie Stefanyshyn-Piper and Stephen Bowen during the first spacewalk of shuttle Endeavour's home-makeover mission at the space station is back in the news -- for better or worse.

Bad news first, and I use the term "news" loosely: An enterprising judgment-challenged entrepreneur claims to have found Heide's tool bag on a golf course in Minnesota -- quite the coincidence considering that's Heide's home state. Well, you've probably figured this was coming, but said "tool bag" is up for sale on eBay. Here's a tip: It's a scam.

The real tool bag is still traveling around the Earth. The good news part of this tale comes from another enterprising soul who put together this flying tool kit tracker to chart its progress.

Update: Surprise, surprise. eBay pulled the auction. Fortuitously, NASAWatch stored a screengrab.

NASA Mars Probe Wins Reprieve

October 10, 2008

NASA is gambling more money will resolve problems with its next Mars mission and keep it on track for launch next year.

But exactly where the extra cash to keep the Mars Science Laboratory on schedule -- and how much will be needed -- officials with the U.S. space agency would not say.

“If we’re going to launch in 2009 or 2011 additional budget resources are going to be necessary. The sources of that we cannot release until we get approval from the Office of Management and Budget and Congress,” Doug McCuistion, director of the Mars Exploration Program at NASA headquarters, said during a conference call with reporters.

Costs for the roving chemistry station, which is designed to assess Mars' suitability for life, already have swelled from $1.6 billion to $1.9 billion. The probe, which is about the size of a SUV, is slated for launch between Sept. 15 and Oct. 15, 2009, when Earth and Mars are favorably aligned. The planets sweep into optimal position every two years.

NASA has been launching probes at every opportunity in an attempt to learn if life ever took hold beyond Earth.

Mars Science Lab is an ambitious follow-on program to the two small rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, currently exploring the equatorial regions of Mars for signs of past water.

“This is a really important scientific mission,” McCuistion said. “This is truly the push into the next decade for the Mars program and for the discovery for the potential for life on other planets.

“I fully believe that Congress will support us as we go forward on this because they recognize the importance of the mission as well,” he added.

In an attempt to make up time lost due to a host of technical challenges, including actuators, materials and parachutes, Mars Science Lab contractors are working multiple shifts to deliver components so that testing can begin in late November or early December.

NASA plans to reassess the mission’s progress in January. If the probe has to miss its 2009 launch date, keeping the contractor and science teams employed for another two years is estimated to cost $300 million.

In addition to seeking additional funding from Congress, NASA will assess other science programs to see if any money can reallocated for Mars Science Lab, said NASA’s lead scientist Ed Weiler.

Help Me, NASA!

October 03, 2008

I'm sure there will be some (many) folks who will shudder to learn that their tax dollars are being spent on this, but I for one, am all for it. You see, I live with a TEEN-AGER, just one (and I bow to any of you with multiples) and I've come to believe that mine, at least, is the living embodiment of CONFLICT.

It starts in the morning with breakfast (Me: Yes. Kid: No), continues after school through homework (Me: No TV. Kid: "I NEEEEEED the noise" +iPhone+Computer+Music) all the way through bedtime (Me: Goodnight, Did-you-remember-your-retainers? Kid: Deep growling sounds.)

So it was with a bit of glee that I found myself in a discussion about conflict resolution with Dartmouth University's Jay Buckey, a doctor and former space shuttle researcher who flew in 1998. He is working with a team developing psychological self-help programs that NASA is funding for use on the space station.

I hope this is one program that doesn't get stuck in the spin-off process, because I think it has tremendous potential. Buckey kindly guided me through what has become a standard script in my house, I'll title, "Mom, I Really Need The Car."

"The conflict is not about the car," Buckey tells me. "The conflict is about the internal thoughts, the meaning that we put on the action, and then the response. It's helpful to pause for a moment before responding, if you can, and think 'What is the meaning I'm putting on this?'

"The other side is the action. We desire to respond emotionally, but that may not be the best response."

Buckey suggested I asked the demanding tyrant teen-ager before me why he wants the car, even if the question only serves to buy me more time to think.

Apparently, these sorts of techniques are useful for a wide range of situations, including living with a group of people in an enclosed area like the space station.

"A successful long-duration flight is very dependent on the atmosphere between the people," Buckey says. "If it's a group really working well together and enjoying each other's company, it's going to be a great experience."

So, last night I kept my mouth shut while the kid slouched in a bean bag chair doing calculus with TV on; let him take the car so he could get to school early to make up a history test; and felt a glimmer of satisfaction when he decided that yes, he would like breakfast today after all.

Baby steps, my friends.

The President of Free Space, Part 3: Hope or Fear

September 24, 2008

Silly me. When I embarked on this project to chase down strings of rationality in the race for the U.S. presidency, using the space program as my fishing reel, I made a bad assumption. I thought rationality MATTERED to all people. You know?  Fact-gathering, logical reasoning, analysis, verification … the processes of science? Please stop chuckling. I know I should have known better.

So forget about the LOGICAL thing to do for NASA, let alone the country. I've realized what counts most in our society is a good story. We love drama. If it was our gross domestic product, we'd have so much money Sarah Palin would be writing us checks from the Treasury, just like they do with oil revenue in Alaska.

Now I know that (supposedly) the most important thing in the universe right now is our national financial situation. The question is what we are going to do about it? What will solve it?

I've learned from NASA that there is really only one way to go about solving a problem. It's called the scientific method, but I'm not really sure if it's being taught in school anymore. It's what got this country to the moon FORTY YEARS before our sisters, Japan, India, China (and I'm sorry if I'm forgetting anyone) had a clue how to do it, much less a program. Our only peer was the Soviet Union and we were scared to death they'd get there first. (They shouldn't have worried. Apparently, all they needed to do was wait until we became diverted, and in exchange for losing the moon race we'd build them a castle in the sky; for I'm told that Russia will be left sole occupant of the $100 billion International Space station unless our elected officials take a break from handling the NATIONAL FINANCIAL EMERGENCY and approve an exemption for NASA to buy rides to the station on Russian Soyuz rockets.  Perhaps that's why NASA's very erudite leader, Michael Griffin, used a most unscientific word in his officially acknowledged leaked email alerting the world to our IMPENDING NATIONAL SPACE CRISIS. He termed its handling a "jihad.")

I don't know if the proposed  $700 billion GREAT GOVERNMENT GIVEAWAY of 2008 is the right thing to do or not. I don't know if time is of the essence. I don't even know how you decide that, but I hope and pray that it is made with some degree of rationality. My Libertarian friends are even kind of exited by the stir, hoping it will rouse the good but sleepy citizens of this land we love to stop watching American Idol and reruns of Gilligan's Island (but by all means, please keep tuning in to Discovery Channel).

In a Democracy, APATHY is a cancer.

No offense intended, but we might want to question the sanity and motivations of John McCain and Barack Obama for wanting to take on this mess. (You too, Bob Barr!) There's no question they have balls: We've seen the pictures, watched the grainy films of handsome, young McCain in the POW camp and we can only imagine. And as far as Obama, well would YOU want to be a black man in America, much less one running for PRESIDENT??

Though I personally haven't given up that rationality will prevail when it comes time to vote, I've realized that that's a pretty high standard. As a steppingstone, I've designed a little quiz to help choose the next president, who as the leader of what we like to call The Free World, will be the President of Free Space, with the potential to galvanize what our space policy -- and our country -- will become.  Open or closed? Driven by fear or hope? Logical or emotional? Privately pioneered or not? Breaking ground or following footsteps? Creative or reactive?

Since I realize this cannot be objective (and frankly I find it a little exhausting trying to figure out which administration would be better for the country, the Big Government Republicans or the Big Government Democrats) I'm basing this quiz on things that matter to me. Ready? Here goes:

Who has the better sense of humor?

Who is smarter?

Who is more tolerant of dissenting views?

Who solicits and loves feedback?

Who can better control his behavior?

Got your candidate?  Good. Oh, one last question, if you don't mind. Does this change your vote?