News From Around The Internet: Dateline Jan 19, 2006

• Scientists at NASA's Johnson Space Center, where the Stardust probe was shipped after landing in Utah this weekend, are happy with the comet particles brought back by the StarDust mission.
  
  
• New Horizons was scrubbed yesterday after a power outage at the John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, the probes operator. The next launch attempt will be Today from 1:08 to 3:06 p.m. ET.
  
  
• The final version of NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation Services Demonstration Contract was released yesterday. The proposals are due March 3, 2006.
  
  
• New Mexico's politicians are debating the planned spaceport. The Questions include cost and liability. Ironically, in Florida, Jeb Bush who has been chastised over not spending money to attract private space companies, is asking for $55 million to support space in Florida with $8 million going towards a new space port.
  
  
• Robin McKie, the science editor of the New Statesmen, thinks takes a look at the sad history of the Space Shuttle. You only read it once a day -djs
  
  
• Nick Allen tells us what he thinks of space tourism
  

  Spaceship Earth is fine by me - I don't need expensive tickets to travel on it, and I can also see outer space from it. It's the best spaceship we have. Rather than paying to leave it, maybe we should concentrate on looking after it - and all its passengers.

  I find this an ironic statement coming from an astrophysicist who's entire career is based on studying everything but Earth.
  
  

News From Around the Internet:

Note: This is my first news roundup, which is going to be a daily item here at Space Pragmatism. It will become more consistent and polished as time goes on, so cut me some slack for a few days, 'k. -- djs

• NASA remains popular with the general public. At least space exploration does, since most people still see NASA as the only avenue to space. I would like to see some questions about space in general and private space flights thrown in the mix. (from Curmudgeons Corner)
  
  
• Michael Belifore's Popular Science article on Peter Diamandis' Rocket Racing League is out at news stands. I have read it and it is a good article covering the leagues' plans and technical aspects at a high level. As an engineer and space enthusiast, it leaves me wanting for more. I am sure Michael would have gladly given them more, if they gave him more pages. ;-)
  
  
• NASA is going to attempt to launch the New Horizons probe again today. The launch window extends from 1:16 to 3:15 p.m. ET. The first ever probe to ice planet Pluto was set to launch yesterday, but high winds forced the cancellation three minutes before launch. The weather for today at Cape Canaveral is a 10% chance of rain with winds at about 18 mph during the launch. Keep your fingers crossed.
  
  
• There is continued debate between Russia and NASA over bringing alcohol aboard the International Space Station. Russian space officials think "that a little nip would help cosmonauts relax after a tough job — and could even "replenish one's strength." NASA says alcohol and astronauts should not mix. I'll bet Sir Richard won't mind...
  
  
• Stardust looks to be in good condition. It shall be interesting to see what comes of it (other than stupid arguments over manned vs. robot I agree with Ferris Valyn's comment "the debate isn't about humans vs. robots - its about exploration vs. colonization.
  
  
• Rocketplane Ltd is hooking up with two marking agencies. Incredible Adventures and Pure Galactic (item via RLV and Space Transport News)
  
  
• NASA is finding out that he new CLV is not as easy as they thought.

  These sources also talk about interest on NASA's part of moving to using a 5 segment SRB (Solid Rocket Booster) as the first stage of the CLV instead of the initial plan to use the current 4 segment booster used by the Space Shuttle. In so doing, NASA would now be creating what would, in essence, be a wholly new launch vehicle.

  Well duh! (from SpaceRef)
  
  
• According to NASA Watch, the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) has finally been (officially) released. Of course it has been available through NASA Watch for three weeks.
  
  
• Rich Karlgaard, as Forbes.com, thinks NASA's problem is not money but rather the lack of coolness they held in years past.

  In the 1960s, the two coolest places in America to work if you were a top scientist or engineer were NASA and Bell Labs. Ask yourself: How many MIT or Caltech grads lust to work for NASA or Lucent today?

  Rich sees a place where coolness flows and thinks NASA should flow to it with prize money.
  

  Why not increase the annual prize to $2 billion? The U.S. would get a lot more bang than it gets now for that $16 billion. Latest example of NASA bloated spending: The agency has already spent billions of dollars on the National Aerospace Plane, the X-33, X-34, X-37, X-38 and the Orbital Space Plane. None of these has flown.
  By comparison, Burt Rutan's SpaceShipOne was built for less than $40 million and twice flew into space last year. It is amazing what talent and entrepreneurialism can do.
  



• Let me just say Leah Hoffmann, at the same Forbes.com, needs a little education. She starts off okay with "But there are still a number of things standing in the way of private enterprise in space. The main problems? Cost and reliability". Soon, however, she steers into the incorrect fact pit. "Rocket fuel is currently the No. 1 reason that space travel is so expensive." No, Leah it's not. Rocket fuel on an expendable rocket runs about $9.82 per pound of payload according to When Physics, Economics, and Reality Collide The Challenge of Cheap Orbital Access. Then she goes on to say

  For the suborbital space flights of the sort that billionaire Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic hopes to run, energy won't be as costly. The vehicles reach about 50 miles above the earth, so they have no need to clear the gravitational field and require much less fuel.

  First of all they go at least 62 miles up and you have to go a lot farther than that to escape the Earth's gravitational field.
  
  
• Forbes.com is on the space wagon to day. Besides the two above, articles, they have
  
  
  
  • Galactic Gold Mine? about mining the Moon
  
  
  • Space.com Is Back In Orbit about Space.com and Imaginova's ups and downs.
  
  
  • The New Space Race about private space firms coming of age.
  
  
  
  (with thanks to Space Today)
  

Do you like the format of this news burst? Comments and suggestions are welcome. -djs

Blog Changes

I am going to start adding a round-up of daily space news each morning. By daily news, I mean news that I find interesting. I don't plan on being spacetoday.net (which is a great site for space news, by the way). I just want to make my readers daily search of all things space a little easier.

Also, Marc Schwager at the Spaceward Foundation, the manager of NASA's Elevator 2010 a Centennial Challenge has made a request:

Now that we have the 2005 space elevator games under our belt, we are working to increase our visibility this year, and are looking for space-news / bloggers that are interested in consuming more output from us...

So about once a week or so, Space Pragmatism will be running these releases.

Space Cows

(I got this from Jon Goff at Selenian Boondocks)

Nell Boortz has a funny list of the politics of cows. But he left out two important groups:

NASA
You have one cow.
The cow just runs around in circles in the field.
You miss your old cow.
You can't rely on any other farmers (because farming is just too hard)
You retire your cow, dig up your old cows bones and wrap it in new leather.

Alt Space
You have fifty cow designs
Any one of your cows would put out 50 times the milk of government cows
If only you had money...

New Mexico gets it

This was in the Albuquerque Tribune written by Rick Homan, the New Mexico's secretary of Economic Development and chairman of the New Mexico Spaceport Authority.

It would be shortsighted to think that New Mexico is building a spaceport just to take rich people into space. We are building a spaceport because we know that NASA and other international space agencies will be contracting with the private sector to take passengers and payloads to the International Space Station and the Moon.

We know that as space travel becomes more affordable, government agencies and companies will establish facilities in space to host visitors and conduct zero-G research in exciting new fields such as renewable energy, health care and pharmaceuticals, microsystems and nanotechnology and other industries that will provide significant breakthroughs for life on Earth.

And we know that frequent and repeated access to space is only possible using reusable launch vehicles, and these RLVs need an inland commercial spaceport, just like what we are going to build in New Mexico.

Exactly. This is just a thrill ride for the wealthy and those (like me) who are willing to mortgage there house to see space. This is the first step to industries we can even imagine.


I wonder if the balance of power in this country is shifting. Just as the west coast in the 20th century became an economic & cultural force in this country, I wonder if states like New Mexico are going to wield similar power in the 21st century.

I also found a blog on the New Mexico Spaceport by Mike McConnell. He has detailed (an understatement) directions to the Space sport site.

...
Mile marker 2.5 miles - Odell Ranch on the right. There is a big cell tower on Odell Ranch. Your cell phone will still work when you get to Upham and few miles further north.

Mile marker 3.3 miles - Cattle guard.
...

Update:
In a Free Mexican article on the spaceport, the AP reports that

What's clear, according to the studies, is that the state must act now. Several other states, including Texas and Oklahoma, are on New Mexico's heels.

So is the entire southwest region is chasing this spacport dream. I had never realized the geography of all the companies.

This isn't just about space either. These initiatives show me that these states are the place for new ideas and free thinking. New industries can be built here. The map below may show the new economic power of the US in the 21st century.

Rocket Racing League in Popular Science

Michael Belfiore has a cover story in the February issue of Popular Science. I read the article he wrote on T/Space in Popular Science as well as his blog at Dispatches from the Final Frontier and he is very good. It is definitely worth picking up. They didn't have it at Wal-mart yet, so I will run by Books-a-Million tomorrow.

SpaceX Falcon I Launch Feb 8 @ 4:30pm (PST)

Falcon I Launch is Feb 8 @ 4:30pm PST (6:30pm CST)
SpaceX update from Elon:

January 2006 Update

New Launch Time
The new launch time is February 8 at 4:30 p.m. California time with Feb. 9 as a backup day. We will actually be ready to launch earlier, but are planning to spend extra time reviewing and double-checking all vehicle systems.

Following the problem on Dec. 19, we flew a whole new first stage to Hawaii via C-5 just in time to catch the barge from there to Kwaj a few days before New Year's Eve. The new stage should arrive at Kwaj in about a week, whereupon we will switch it out with the damaged unit, which will be sent back to California for repair. The repair is not particularly difficult or expensive, but can only be done properly in a factory setting.

What Was the Problem?
As previously reported, we traced the problem to failure of an electronic component in one of the first stage fuel tank pressurization valves. Although we have triple redundant pressure sensors and dual redundant pressurization valves, when this component shorted, it caused the valve controller board to reboot, effectively eliminating the redundancy.

This is the first time in 3.5 years of hard testing that we have ever seen this happen. Moreover, the component in question has a cycle life and power rating far in excess of the theoretical load that it should see. To address this specific problem, we are replacing the component with one that has a quasi-infinite lifespan and taking a few other steps that will isolate any issue with this component if it goes wrong in the future.

However, as I mentioned in an earlier update, we are not simply going to address this particular point problem and then merrily jump back into a countdown sequence. Throughout January, the SpaceX team will be doing another full review of vehicle systems, including propulsion, structures, avionics, software and ground support systems. We will be conducting additional engine tests, stage separation tests and avionics tests to once again attempt to flush out any issues. Even if we find nothing, the exercise is worthwhile.

Wind Delays Suck (Literally)
It is worth noting that we would have caught the problem without any damage to the vehicle if we had entered the final countdown sequence as planned. The sucked in tank damage only occurred because we partly drained the fuel tank due to the hold for high winds.

High winds are not a limitation of the rocket, which is designed to be essentially "all weather" and handle ground winds in excess of 50 mph (watch out for flying coconuts!). The ground winds limitation is actually due to the need to avoid a collision with the launch stand hold down arms, which grab the rocket at the base of the fuel tank, as the rocket lifts off.

To alleviate this problem, we have redesigned the launch stand so that the hold down arms retract out of the way on liftoff, activated by a breakwire. This gives us something very close to 100% winds availability from Kwaj. The retraction force is low, so even if there were an early activation of the actuator, it would not damage the rocket.

Another bothersome problem is the high rate of liquid oxygen (LOX) boiloff. This is not surprising when LOX is at -300F and there is a stiff wind impinging on the vehicle at 85F. To minimize boiloff, we will wrap the LOX tank in low cost cryo insulation attached with velcro straps that tear away on liftoff.

Lessons Learned on F1 Apply to F9
The challenges to date I think vindicate the strategy of building a small launch vehicle before a large one. If we had started out with an F9 class vehicle, the cost of every mistake would be multiplied by as much as an order of magnitude. As it is, we are able to overcome problems comparatively quickly and cheaply.

With the benefit of lessons learned on F1, it is taking far less time, effort and money to create F9. Despite the distraction of the F1 launch countdowns, I still anticipate a flight F9 first stage firing later this year and a maiden launch in late 2007.

Great Expectations Falcon 1 on the Omelek Launch Pad
Those familiar with the launch business will know that countdown scrubs are a way of life. It's often said that the safest time to schedule your vacation is around launch day and that's true more often than not. Even rockets that have launched hundreds of times from launch pads that are in heavy use have multiple scrubs. Not too long ago, there was a Titan launch that had eleven scrubs and Delta launch that had six.

Reasons range from hard to avoid technical glitches, like the Shuttle fuel sensor malfunction on its last launch attempt, to silly false alarms. A Titan countdown was once aborted when someone spotted a "bag of suspicious liquid" on the mobile service tower. It turned out that the latrine had simply been a bridge too far for one of the technicians.

Given that Falcon 1 is an all new rocket and is launching from an all new launch pad on a remote tropical island, countdown scrubs in the first few attempts were very likely. As it is, we have had one abort due to a launch pad issue and one due to the rocket. If this next attempt succeeds in getting to t-zero, SpaceX will be reasonably fortunate in the scheme of things.


Falcon 1 on Omelek Launch Pad

---Elon---

Sovereignty Part 2

The last post on what sovereignty means to an extraterrestrial colony prompted some comments and some references to the history of sovereignty. If you are interested, check out a discussion on sovereignty.

As I have had more time to think on it, perhaps this is a more general question. Certainly it is possible for a lunar colony to remain an outpost of a company or government with temporary residents holding earth bound concerns. But is that practical on Mars? How about further out moons or asteroids? At some point the people of a colony will be so far out and intertwined with their environment that the connection with their Earthly concerns will loosen and break.

I would guess this is true of most colonists who move their lives to a new land. This is especially for the generations born in that new land. So I say that extraterrestrial sovereignty is a foregone conclusion, at least eventually.

“Wait,” you may say. “We have no such problem today. People live in different countries without ever giving up the ties to their homeland.” That is true. We also have one day travel to practically anywhere in the world, telephones, televisions, and the wonderful stream of electrons you are reading this entry called the internet. There is no where on Earth where you have to disconnect from your place of origin to stay alive and prosper.

The distances in space are difficult to imagine. Jupiter and its interesting moon Europa never come closer than 365,000,000 miles to the Earth. Flying in a race car at 200miles/hr would get you there in roughly 222 years. That is far. (note: this is simplified so I don’t have to deal with physics at night-djs) The last mission we sent to Jupiter took six years to get there.

Imagine living on a colony away from your home and it takes six years to get back. Would you go home for Christmas? Maybe not. Would you go home at all? I don’t know about you, but I get restless driving six hours to the beach. I don’t think I could take six years.

Now the visionaries among us will say, but what about Star Trek? With super-duper-warp-hyper-drive-ftl-fairy-dust engines these far out colonies will be a few moments away. Perhaps in eons to come, but initially we will crawl in our clunky and slow spaceships. The world was not settled after we invented airplanes. It was settled on foot and by boat. Even as late as 1492, when Christopher Columbus sailed the ocean blue, it took three months to cross the Atlantic. During the American Revolution, it still took the English eight weeks to cross the ocean (if the weather was good). That is how colonies have been settled throughout time and there is no reason to believe space will be any different.

So having established that far reaching colonies will be cut off from their place of origin, where are we on the question of sovereignty? From all the comments and historical research I have been given since my first foray into this topic, it seems to me sovereignty means this:

Other countries either believe in is in their best interest to leave you alone or don’t have the resources to do anything about it.

Let’s take the Unite States of America and France as examples. There are, perhaps, many countries who would love to destroy America’s sovereignty. They just don’t have the capability. On the other hand, the US could destroy France relatively easily, but then who would make the wine? (just kidding :)

So given a colony of humans living years away from Earth, whose children only know of Earth through night-time stories, what are the chances anyone on Earth is going to expend the resources to quash their little rebellion. And if they do, the colonists have years to prepare. Call me pessimistic, but it’s hard to keep a supply line 365 million miles long.

My purpose in thinking about this, as always, goes back to the Outer Space Treaty. If a colony declares its independence to the world, are they bound by that treaty? More importantly, can nations on Earth recognize their independence without violating that treaty? I am sure many countries and corporations with no presence on said colony would gladly support there separation. So is a declared sovereign nation, who has never signed the Outer Space Treaty, bound by it or do they have to win a battle with the world first?

So in conclusion, I think as we go further out into space, humans are going to have to deal with multi-world politics. Can we then discuss the solarization of humanity? I can see the bumper stickers now:

Think Solarly, Act Locally

Newspace News at SFF

The new edition of Newsspace News at the Space Frontier Foundation is out. Check it out.

Return to the Moon - Review

It is finally here:

Return to the Moon – Edited by Rick N. Tumlinson with Erin R. Medlicott

Return to the Moon is a collection of short essays about different aspects of our return to the moon after thirty years. In the words of Mr. Tumlinson:

It is an anthology of essays by more than 20 authors covering a broad spectrum of ideas and concepts revolving around a permanent human return to the Moon.

This book is a good introduction for the beginning space enthusiast who doesn’t understand the difference between the approaches prescribed by private space and NASA. While most of the essays lean towards the private space argument as a whole, both sides of the debate are represented. While a hard-core “alt-spacer” might not get as much out of it as a someone new to the debate, I think that all these concepts put together in place could generate a lot of new ideas.

The essays in this book are varied and interesting. There are many ideas I had not heard or considered along with some standard points on the economics of space flight and colonization. The essays flowed well together and the book was easy to read. Rick Tumlinson’s comments about each author at the beginning of his/her essay were very helpful in understanding the author’s point-of-view in the debate.

Some of the ideas will seem fantastic, such as Dr Mike Ryan’s nuclear idea of throwing hazardous waste into orbit with a mass driver. Other essays had me yelling at the book, like Robert Zimmerman’s characterization of the Virginia as a “miserable and wretched place to live” which offended my southern sensibilities. While there are some questionable assertions made in many of the essays, this book inspires intelligent debate and that is always good.

The photos and artwork in the center of the book were done well and I think overall the book was layout well. However, there were some typos in the book that were distracting. Also, it would have been nice to have each essay’s title at the top of the page.

Overall I would recommend this book to anyone interested in going to the moon.

Commercial Space Flight Book

Michael Belfiore has a new book coming out on commercial space flight called "The Entreprenauts." His post gives some of his history in reporting on the private space industry. It is pretty interesting stuff.

60 Minutes Story on the New Space Race

60 Minutes has a Story Sunday January 1, 2006 (tomorrow night) at 7pm EST/6pm CST called THE NEW SPACE RACE. Here is their teaser:

The private sector’s race to space is being led by maverick aeronautical engineer Burt Rutan, who foresees thousands of people enjoying the view from space in the very near future. Ed Bradley reports. Harry Radliffe is the producer.

Not sure if it is anything new, or just a rehash of stuff. I will be watching it regardless. I will post comments here, if any of you have any thoughts on it, feel free to comment.

Sovereignty

As I have been pondering the fate of a lunar colony this Christmas, I came across an idea. What is sovereignty? The diction says:

Freedom from outside interference and the right to self-government

Well that answers that. More to the point how does a group gain sovereignty?

Over the past few months, I have read more than a few novels on Moon colonies. Most notably, Ben Bova’s Moonwar and Robert Heinlein’s The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. In these, and most other novels, the lunar citizens are forced to declare independence and fight a war for their freedom.

Since I am on vacation this week, I have given myself the freedom to dwell on philosophical what-ifs for a little while. And having done that, I have found myself asking, what makes a country sovereign?

Is it simply the will to declare as a collective the will to determine your own destiny? Or is it the point at which other countries recognize your sovereignty? At worst it is when the primary opponent of your independence gives in.

To answer this question in my most Socratic fashion, let us examine some historical examples of groups of people declaring sovereignty.

Let me premise this by saying, I am in no way a historian. But let us consider for a moment, when did the United States of America become a self-governing nation? Was it at the signing on the Declaration of Independence? Perhaps it was when the war was over. I may have even been when we, as a collective, decided to separate ourselves from England and stopped obeying their laws.

Think you have the answer. Well how about this one? When the southern states withdrew from the union, were they sovereign? Did they, in fact, create a new nation? Or, because they did not when the war, were they never an independent nation.

In a more modern example, when did Iraq become a sovereign nation? When the US troops rolled into Baghdad or at the last elections? When Sadam was found and put on trial? Maybe they still aren’t a sovereign nation.

Okay, great political philosophy discussion, but what does this have to do with space exploration? What does sovereignty mean for colonist on another “celestial body?” If all the nations of the Earth said “You can not be sovereign,” does that make them not sovereign?

To say it more generally, does a group’s right to self-govern depend on other countries’ willingness to accept their sovereignty? When a group of lunar colonist decide to quote the immortal words of Whitney Houston and tell the Earth to “kiss my ass,” are they subject to a treaty other countries signed.

Can a group of countries 225,000 miles away take away a person’s right of self determination? Do people even have a God given right to self determination? If people, in fact, have a right to determine how they are going to be ruled, what treaty could take that away?

I am curious about your thoughts on this.

Return to the Moon Arrived

The book is here. I will post the review next week. I am off to Christmas vacation, so sparse posting until the New Year.

Modular Space is Catching On

Jim Benson said in his interview with The Space Show

(about SpaceX's Falcon program) I like the modular design...

Modular is a movement people. Get on board!

Ad Astra per Ardua

Update from SpaceX

Here is the latest update from Elon:

All systems have passed their prelaunch checkout and we are go for launch tomorrow at 11 a.m. California time (7 p.m. GMT).

Over the past month, we have also improved and upgraded the countdown sequence in several ways:

• More computer controlled operations vs manual
  
• Improved ground support equipment to load propellant/pressurant faster
  
• Worked with range safety to speed up checkout of the thrust termination system
  
• Changed to simultaneous load of LOX and fuel on both stages
  

The Vandenberg hold down firing countdown was 5 hours, the first Kwaj countdown was 4 hours and now we are at 3 hours. Having a responsive launch capability is important to DARPA and the Air Force (and us for cost reasons), so we've put a lot of effort into streamlining the countdown.


A C-17 buzzes Falcon for good luck



--Elon--

I am a Computer Geek God

Somehow this didn't supprise me.

SpaceX Launch Date/Time Set

SpaceX announced tonight that their Falcon I rocket is going to launch on December 19, at 1:00pm CST (2:00pm EST & 11:00am PST). The launch will take place from Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands carrying a payload for DARPA.

As a reminder, Out of the Cradle and Michael Belfiore should have live blogging of the event.

Reading List

I have decided to place a reading list to Space Pragmatism. The last six books I have read are listed to the left with links to Amazon. Check them out, they are all good (I leave off the ones I don't like.)

Virgin Galactic Has a new Website

Today Virgin released a little more information on their lease of New Mexico's coming spaceport. Check out Leonard David's report at Virgin Galactic Sets Deal With New Mexico Spaceport.

But what I am really jazzed about is virgin Galactic has finally added news to their website, after a year and a half. Clark Lindsey doesn't see what Sir Richard's iris has to do with going to space, but I think it looks very futuristic. And like Clark said, " he is the one who made billions via great marketing." Check it out at http://www.virgingalactic.com/

New COTS Watch Blog

Michael has started a new blog specially about:

...news, articles, whitepapers and opinions about NASA's Commercial Orbital
Transportation Services (COTS) initiative.

Check it out.

SpaceX Launch Update

Just got this from Elon:

Launch Date
The new launch date is approximately December 20, depending on when the Missile Defense Agency testing is complete. As soon as we have a firm time, it will be posted on the SpaceX website.

Liquid Oxygen
Regarding liquid oxygen (LOX) supplies, we expect to have enough on hand this time to fill the rocket four or five times over. This should account for almost any issue with a particular storage tank as well as an extended hold on the pad. There is an engineering term known as a s*load. I have asked that we have at least two s*loads on hand in case one s*load is not enough.

We chartered a C-17 to fly two of our empty high quality LOX containers to Hawaii, sourced another high quality LOX container on Hawaii and put all three on the barge to Kwajalein. In addition, our LOX plant on Kwajalein has been repaired and is producing LOX on island again.

Some might be wondering why we were so dumb as to run out of LOX on a remote tropical island on the last launch attempt. Believe me, we tried hard to avoid it, but several issues conspired to create the problem:

• The additional month of Merlin testing resulted in additional LOX boil-off on island. Even though it is stored in vacuum jacketed containers, LOX at -300F degrees does not like being on a tropical island at 85F.
  
• The SpaceX LOX plant on island broke down a few weeks prior to launch, which meant we could not top up.
  
• We ordered replacement LOX from Hawaii, but the container quality was poor, so only 20% of what we ordered actually arrived.
  
• Ground winds were unusually high on launch day, which amplifies the boil-off rate significantly, since the Falcon's first stage LOX tank is uninsulated.
  
• All of the above would not have mattered if our final storage tank did not have a small, manual vent valve incorrectly in the open position. Somewhat agonizingly, we were only a few percent away from being full. We just needed a little sip from the last tank.
  
• After a while, we were able to close the vent and fill the vehicle's LOX tanks. However, we use LOX to chill our onboard helium and the absence of ground LOX to do so resulted in the helium heating up and venting back to storage. In the end, we did not have enough LOX to stay filled on the rocket and chill & pressurize the helium.
  

Engine Computer
The engine computer reboot anomaly was definitively traced to a ground power problem. Importantly, this would have had no effect on flight, since we switch to vehicle power before the autosequence begins. The reason it cropped up at Kwajalein was that the higher load on the longer umbilical (three times longer than in prior tests) coupled with high temperatures in Kwajalein resulted in increased resistance in the ground umbilical. This was just enough to lower the voltage below minimums and cause an engine computer reset when drawing maximum power. The same max power test was repeated on internal vehicle batteries with no problem at all.

This problem has been solved by slightly increasing voltage on the ground umbilical.

--Elon--

"Return to the Moon"

I have been asked by Rick Tumlinson, the cofounder of the Space Frontier Foundation, to review a new book Return to the Moon. In Rick's words it is an:

anthology of essays by more than 20 authors covering a broad spectrum of ideas and concepts revolving around a permanent human return to the Moon.

I should have it in the next week and I will post a review here if I can. I haven't really done this sort of thing before, so I'll have to play it by ear.

If you want to take a look:

Return to the Moon at Amazon

The T/Space Take on COTS

Michael believer has a post on NASA's new Commercial Orbital Transportation Service (COTS) RFP. He also has some quotes from Gary Hudson, t/Space's co-founder. T/Space seems happy with it:

...he's impressed with the RFP and that he's confident that private industry can rise to the challenge

Money will be tight, as NASA only has $500 million to work with, but isn't that we all wanted? A thrifty NASA goes a long way to a commercial space infrastructure.

If you look at the vendors interested in this, a few names stick out. We all expected T/Space and SpaceDev, but IBM? ATK is a little ironic, I think. I am sure everyone interested isn't a rocket builder. I mean they will need communications, sensors, launch ops, etc... But it is still odd to see IBM and Cisco on the list.

Looking at the COTS Q&A, this gives me a warm and fuzzy:

Q: If a contractor's full service approach includes multiple mission capabilities, will bundling of mission capability demonstrations be allowed?
A: Yes.

It means that NASA is looking past it's own requirements crap to allow efficiency. Five or Ten years ago the answer to that would have been no (IMHO).

The schedule is here. Looks like the official annoucement will be out January 9, 2006 and proposals are due Feb 10, 2006. The contracts will be done in May 2006 (here's keeping our fingers crossed).

Come on Mike, don't screw this up.

By the Way, I joined NSS

Both the local HAL5 chapter and NSS today. If you don't belong, look up your local chapter at http://chapters.nss.org/a/lists/ and give one of the officers a ring/email/fax/whatever. You will be glad you did.

SpaceX Falcon I Set for December 19-21, 2005

SpaceX announced a launch window of December 19-21 (assuming DOD doesn't take away one or more days). Apparently they order 2 sh**loads of LOX this time (SpaceX terms) so they should have plenty.

Quotes from the press conference are at http://www.outofthecradle.net/archives/2005/12/falcon-1-december-launch-date/#more-126 where "intrepid OotC reporter Mark Trulson" will live blog the launch again.

SpaceX spokesperson Dianne Molina said “This time I plan on the teleconference to be bigger, better and run more smoothly.” Hopefully, this time, we will get status as soon as it is available.

Ad Astra per Ardua

Arguing with your Father

In the latest Ad Astra (via Spaced.com), Robert Zubrin lists what he sees as the positive and negatives of NASA implementation of the Vision for Space exploration put forth by President Bush January, 2004.

I have to say, I agree with some of what he says. I am all for dropping the shuttle and moving on with our lives. I am all for shifting our fuel to methane/oxygen to make insitu production on Mars easier. That may be about it, though.

I have to admit, criticizing Bob is a lot like arguing with my Dad, or at least a good uncle. Bob almost single-handedly brought my love of space back. By 1997, I had given up on any reasonable space exploration in my lifetime and moved on to astronomy, grad school, and finding my wife. Case for Mars made me excited again. He is a big reason why I am here now.

The problem, as I see it, is he is doing just what he argued against in his book. He is arguing that it is too hard to do with what we have now. We must go out a build a big huge HLV or we should just give up. What really bothers me is he doesn't even give any reasons, just assumes it is gospel.

The importance of this cannot be overemphasized. An HLV is absolutely necessary to enable human exploration of the Moon or Mars, and it was a measure of former NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe's unfitness for his position that he was willing to promote a clearly unworkable quadruple launch/quadruple rendezvous lunar architecture for the purpose of justifying the abandonment of that capability. Dr. Griffin has reversed that position and backed his policy with action, and that is excellent.

So we have to have one (of course) and O'Keefe was an idiot for not seeing that. Okay, fine I continue reading waiting on the reason. It never comes. Just more name calling.

...or the nonsensical O'Keefe quadruple-launch/quadruple rendezvous lunar mission plan of 2004, in order to breathe a huge sigh of relief.

Theprevious NASA plans were pure nonsense. This one is real engineering. Finally, we have a plan that could actually work.

Don't get me wrong, I believe we can get to the Moon with an HLV. I think we could get there on a SpaceX Falcon IV, EELVs, or even a hopped up SpaceShipsThree. What bugs me is his (apparent) belief that if we weren't building a HLV we might as well shut it all down and go back to thinking the moon is a giant cheese-ball. Again he says

An HLV is absolutely necessary to enable human exploration of the Moon or Mars.

I disappointed in Mr. Zubrin. There is one line in this piece that makes me happy, however:

NOTE: The views of this article are the author’s and do not reflect the policies of the National Space Society.

(Notice they say "do not reflect" and not "may not reflect" ... )

NASA Commercial Orbital Transportation Services Draft Released

NASA has at least released a draft of the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS). Nothing shocking in it, but it is good to have it in writing.

Basically it is in two phases:

Phase 1 – A period of development and demonstration by private industry in coordination with NASA of various space transportation capabilities to and from low-Earth orbit (LEO) determined to be most desirable for the Government and other customers.

Phase 2 – A potential competitive procurement of orbital transportation services to resupply the ISS with cargo and crew, if a capability is successfully demonstrated and the Government determines it is in its best interest.

Phase 1 is broken into three different capabilities:

Capability A delivers cargo (payloads) that operate directly in the space environment to a LEO test bed and provides for its safe disposal.

Capability B delivers cargo (payloads) that operate within a volume maintained at normal atmospheric pressure to a LEO test bed and provides for its safe disposal.

Capability C delivers cargo (payloads) that operate within a volume maintained at normal atmospheric pressure to a LEO test bed and provides for its safe return to Earth.

Phase 2 is (currently) only one capability:

Capability D delivers crew to a LEO test bed and provides for safe return to Earth.

I am glad they are going to work with multiple sources:

NASA intends to use its Space Act authority to enter into multiple funded
agreements resulting from this announcement.

But you can’t do Cap D until you prove you can do Cap C (which stands to reason, I suppose).

Proposals are also solicited for crew transportation Capability D, but only as an option to period 1 proposals for Capability C. The period 2 demonstrations will consist of multiple missions to LEO and the ISS. The number of missions proposed to satisfy human rating requirements for commercial passengers will be evaluated and ultimately determined by NASA. The option will be considered for execution only after the successful demonstration of Capability C.

And it is fixed priced milestone based payment approached

Payments will be made upon the successful completion of performance milestones as proposed by the participants and negotiated with NASA. NASA’s contribution will be a fixed amount and will not be increased or decreased based on the participant’s ability to obtain private funding. 2.2 Project Schedule Period 1 will commence upon the execution of the SAA targeted for May 2006 and will end after the successful flight demonstration of the selected capability expected to occur in the 2008-2010 timeframe.

You can get more schedule info as time passes at the following COTS website: http://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/cots/

All right, all you space entrepreneurs, let get this party started!

Apparently, NSS and Me are on the Same Page

Here is the National Space Society's principles:

NSS Principles -- What Does NSS Stand For?
These are the guiding principles of the National Space Society by which we will conduct our Mission in pursuit of our Vision. (In priority order).

Human Rights
NSS shall promote the principle of fundamental rights of every human being.

Ethics
NSS shall observe, practice, and promote ethical conduct.

Settlement
NSS shall actively pursue and promote human settlement beyond Earth. Scientific
inquiry and exploration are important precursors to settlement.

Pragmatism
Within the bounds of these Principles, NSS shall promote and support any and all methods and practices that support achievement of our Vision.

Gotta love that..

How to find New Members for the NSS

Arthur Smith in my comments section in the post on "Why
I am not a member of he NSS"

I think you're right about the "simple letter" being a great start -
however, blasting letters to every member of the public isn't
financially feasible... We do spend a lot of money on paper mailings
but it doesn't seem to be very productive (I think even with targeted
mailings we spend more on the mailings than we receive back in
first-year dues, but donations and renewals help make it positive); I
wonder if you have any specific ideas for improving the collection of
addresses to send to? Any idea how Planetary Society got your address?

This is a question I have been thinking about all weekend. I am no
sure how they got my name and I am not sure how the NSS targets people
for mailing. I can offer some possibilities about when I received the
first mailer:

• I subscribed to Astronomy Magazine
  
• I was a sophomore engineering student
  
• I bought a lot of books on space (Case for Mars, Hyperspace, etc...)
  
• Saw & bought a lot of space movies (Star Trek, Star Wars, etc...)
  

Here are some things I have done since that I guess don't show up on
the NSS's targeting:

• Continued subscribing to Astronomy for 10 years
  
• Season pass the Space & Rocket Center
  
• Buying model rocket stuff
  
• Buying space games (simulators and shoot-um ups)

I am really not sure what kind of stuff works. I am beginning to
think one-on-one stuff works really well. Nothing could have
gotten me to join faster than emails from most of the HAL5 executive
committee and your comments.

Maybe we should follow the Christian evangelism model of "converting"
people you know. Neighbors, coworkers, family could all be a
possibility. It did turn a couple of dozen people into about 2
billion in 2000 years. That's an increase of ~1,000,000/year.

Just my first thoughts. I will continue thinking about it.

Why I should be a local Huntsville member of NSS

This is an email I received from Ronnie Lajoie about the Huntsville Chapter of the National Space Society. Ronnie is a member of the NSS Web Site Development Team, the NSS Membership Committee, and NSS Chapters Committee. For those thinking of joining the NSS, at least the chapter in Huntsville sounds pretty good. Check out there web site at:
HAL5

Mr. Schrimpsher,

It was with great dismay that I just read your Web posting "Why I am not a member of he NSS" to Space Pragmatism that was just forwarded to me by a co-worker. But first let me assure you that there IS indeed a chapter of the National Space Society in Huntsville. In fact, we are one of the largest and most active chapters. (I am CC'ing the other

HAL5 chapter officers in this reply.) I invite you now to join our local chapter as well as our parent organization National Space Society. Our local membership form is available at http://www.HAL5.org/HAL5/HAL5_Membership_Form.pdf
You can join the NSS via http://www.NSS.org/join

I wish I had seen your posting YESTERDAY (I would have phoned you),
because you just missed a great public lecture we hosted last night at the
Public Library. Over 70 people attended the free program, including HAL5
members, other local NSS members, members of AIAA, VBAS, NASFA and others, and other local citizens who saw the flyers and announcements. You can download
the flyer at http://www.HAL5.org/HAL5/reports/2005/Flyer_2005_12_Dec.pdf

I say "dismay" for a number of reasons. I should tell you that I had a
similar situation to your own while living in Seattle, Washington in
1990. Somehow, "space cadet" me totally missed the fact that NSS was holding
an "International Space Development Conference" in Seattle in 1990; at the
same time as I was lamenting the lack of local space interest groups. I learned too late (I moved to Huntsville in 1991) that Seattle had TWO chapters of the NSS. I later vowed not to let it happen to other space enthusiasts. Looks like we may have more work to do.

As the leader of the NSS Web Site Development Team, and a member of the
both the NSS Membership Committee and Chapters Committee, I had started
to believe that NSS was doing a much better job of getting the word out
both nationally and locally. For example:

1. Just search on the word "space" in Google and a link to the NSS Web
site shows up in the very FIRST "sponsored link" spot. One cannot
do much better than that in a search engine! I agree that our Web
site could be much better, and I and other NSS leaders are actively
seeking support for a major overhaul/redesign of our Web site.

2. NSS advertises its conferences and major events in "Space News" and
other space-related publications. Our leaders are frequented quoted
in the press and our leaders' editorials frequently show up
nationally.

3. We just hosted a fantastic national conference in Washington, D.C.
and we preparing to host our biggest conference ever, in Los Angeles,
in partnership with The Planetary Society. For more information, see
http://ISDC.NSS.org/2006/

4. HAL5 worked VERY hard last November to locally publicize a regional
space conference called "Exploring and Privateering Space". We had
Huntsville and surrounding cities plastered with colorful posters,
including 3x4-foot displays at the Space and Rocket Center, NASA,
the Huntsville Public Library, and the University of Alabama (HSV).
We had ads and articles in the Huntsville Times, plus radio spots.
More info on this event at http://www.nsschapters.org/al/conference/

So please join our local chapter and the NSS, and you will never want
again for space enthusiast companionship and activities. In addition
to our monthly programs (FIRST Thursday), the HAL5 chapter leadership
meets once per week for a lunch meeting near Madison Square Mall. If
you interested, please join us at one of our meetings. Details at:
http://www.HAL5.org/HAL5_calendar.shtml#Meetings

-- Ronnie

Why I am not a member of he NSS

The National Space Society. As far as I can tell a great little organization. Not really sure, since I have yet to meet anyone (physically) in it and I have never received any information on it. Why am I telling you this? Ken Murphydyne wrote a post the other day on Selenian Boondocks lamenting the 2005 NSS Membership Survey. Basically he is a very active VP of a very active chapter of NSS in North Texas. I am here to answer some of Ken's concerns and perhaps create new ones.

The first thing that bothers Ken is that only 7% of NSS members are affiliated with a local chapter. You want to be bothered even more, Ken? I would consider myself a space activist, or at the very least a space fanatic. I only just found out the NSS exists earlier this year (thanks to Clark over at Hobby Space). And until your post, I didn't even know they had local chapters. Bet that makes you smile.

But maybe you live in a cave, you may say. I work across the street from the Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, AL. I can see a full size Saturn-V out my window standing tall all day long. I live where Werner Van Broun lived and worked for many years. We are even nick-named the Rocket City. And I didn't know we have a NSS chapter. Mind boggling, isn't it?

Now as to the %73 of the 93% that didn't even want to join a chapter, you guys are not exactly making a rousing case for yourselves around here. I mean I'm sure you do a lot of neat stuff and talk about space and all that, but where is the PR? Why am I not a member? Why do I still get crap from the Planetary Society which I quit on purpose (we have our differences off opinion which I will not relate her) and I have never received anything from NSS?

And to go one better, earlier this year when Clark told me about them, I went to their web site, clicked on the contact us and asked them what sort of space activities they do, what membership entails, etc... I am still waiting on the reply. Not a good first impression.

So my advice to Ken and everyone at NSS, get serious about membership. Let people know who you are with advertising, sponsorships, go places where space people go.

Just my opinion, take it for what it is worth.

A Space Divided can not Call

Amen. That is all I can say to Sam Dinkin's article in Space Review on The high road. Listen to this:

As Monte Davis recently said on The Space Show, we have to set aside our petty differences. Shut up about Moon vs. Mars, hybrid vs. liquid, SSTO vs. TSTO, alt vs. biz, tourism vs. military, private vs. public, orbital vs. suborbital, robots vs. people, and asteroids vs. space invaders. Start subordinating our unimportant grousing about other's companies and products to common goals. Start smoothing over our differences, agree to disagree, and push forward a positive message about our own and all competing products. Start teaching each other how to promote in a positive way and teach the media how to cover us in a positive way.

That is something Space Pragmatism can get behind (even if I am guilty of it occasionion).

JAXA Gets their Piece of the Sky

Well an asteroid, really. This just in from UPI on the JAXA probe Hayabusa:

Scientists believe it collected the debris, but will only be sure when the craft returns to Earth, the BBC reported. Hayabusa was launched in May 2003 and has until early December before it must begin its journey home. It is expected to return to Earth and land in the Australian outback in June 2007.

Keep your fingers crossed.

Falcon I Now Scrubbed 'till Mid-December

According to Mark Trulson, who is live blogging the SpaceX Falcon I launch scheduled for today, the launch has been delayed due to both weather and LOX issues. The launch window has been extended until 7:00pm (PST) or 10:00pm (EST).

More as it happens.

Update 8:08pm CST: Bummer. This just in from the live blog:

5:21 pm (pst)

Strong winds and some troubles with the LOX refueling
tanks have forced the scrubbing of today’s launch. The attempt has been
rescheduled for sometime in the am Sunday.

As they get the time pinned
down closer an announcement will be posted on SpaceX.com

I will try to
resume my live blogging as we get more info.

Update Nov 27 8:04 pm CST: They have to wait on LOX from Hawaii. Big Bummer.

Falcon I on the launch-pad

SpaceX Falcon I Launch Delayed 24 hours

This from Elon:

Falcon 1 Launch Delayed by Army Range

In order to facilitate preparations for a missile defense launch, the Army Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC) has bumped the SpaceX Falcon 1 maiden flight from its officially scheduled launch date of 1 p.m. California time (9 p.m. GMT) on November 25. The new launch time is 1 p.m. California time (9 p.m. GMT) on November 26.

---Elon---

Oh well, guess we'll have to wait until Saturday.

Griffin can Talk the Talk...

I love his speeches, he always says what I would say if I were him. I think he is a true believer.

In a recent speech to the AAS, Griffin said:

If we are to make the expansion and development of the space frontier an integral part of what it is that human societies do, then these activities must, as quickly as possible, assume an economic dimension as well. Government-directed space activity must become a lesser rather than a greater part of what humans do in space.

He goes on to talk about ISS re-supply, crew rotation, and (gasp, be still my beating heart) orbiting commercial fuel depots. This is great stuff, the kind of stuff that could put Boeing and LockMart out of the space business for good (but not military). I think he means it and most of it may come to pass.

How do we keep anything in Washington D.C. that takes longer than four years to happen. Movement of "routine" orbital services to commercial enterprise has to happen quickly & become ingrained in American society before some less visionary President and another false prophet take control of NASA.

Michael Mealling also has some questions about what is going to happen after Bush and Griffin are gone. Good questions and now is the time to ask them.

Where to find Live Blogging of the SpaceX Launch

Mark Trulson over at Out of the Cradle is going to live blog the SpaceX Falcon I launch on Friday for us mortals who can't get out to El Segundo, CA for the web cast. Click on and enjoy.

Does Anyone have a Clue About China's Moon Program?

I would guess not. Voice of America is saying 2020:

Like the United States, China is planning a manned lunar mission by 2020 to
collect mineral samples and the isotope Helium 3, a potential energy source for
future missions to the moon.

Previous articles have said 2017, and 2035. Are we just guessing know? Even I can guess, so let's say 2006. That should make a stir (just kidding).

Spacex Falcon I Udpate Out

Here is the update, just emailed from Elon:

FALCON 1 MAIDEN FLIGHT

This Friday at 1 p.m. PST (9 p.m. GMT), the Falcon 1 countdown to launch is expected to reach T-Zero. At that point, the hold-down clamps will release and it will begin its journey to orbit, accelerating to 17,000 mph or twenty-five times the speed of sound in less than ten minutes.

The launch will take place from Omelek island, which is in the Kwajalein Atoll of the Marshall Islands. This mission's customer is DARPA and the Air Force and the payload will be FalconSat-2, part of the Air Force Academy’s satellite program that will measure space plasma phenomena, which can adversely affect space-based communications, including GPS and other civil and military communications. The target orbit is 400 km X 500 km, just above the International Space Station, at an inclination of 39 degrees.

On launch day, SpaceX will make history for several reasons:

• Falcon 1 will be the first privately developed, liquid fueled rocket to reach orbit and the world's first all new orbital rocket in over a decade.
• The main engine of Falcon 1 (Merlin) will be the first all new American hydrocarbon booster engine to be flown in forty years and only the second new American booster engine of any kind in twenty-five years.
• The Falcon 1 is the only rocket flying 21st century avionics, which require a small fraction of the power and mass of other systems.
• It will be the world's only semi-reusable orbital rocket apart from the Shuttle (all other launch vehicles are completely expendable).
• The Falcon 1 first stage has the highest propellant mass of any launch vehicle currently flying.
• SpaceX will have developed and activated two new launch sites, including the only American ground launch site near equator.
• Most importantly, Falcon 1, priced at $6.7 million, will provide the lowest cost per flight to orbit of any launch vehicle in the world, despite receiving a design reliability rating equivalent to that of the best launch vehicles currently flying in the US.

We have done everything we can think of at SpaceX to ensure reliability, which is our primary goal, superceding cost. There were no shortcuts and when we needed to take extra time to test something, we did so even if it caused a significant delay. However, even multi-billion dollar programs executed conscientiously, such as the Ariane V, the Space Shuttle and the Delta IV Heavy, have had failures and it is certainly possible that will happen with the Falcon 1 too.

To prepare for this possibility, the first flight is highly instrumented with one megabit of realtime telemetry and a live video feed streaming back to the launch control center. If something goes wrong, we will discover and fix the problem, returning to the launch pad for flight two as soon as the solution is thoroughly tested.

--- Elon ---

Click here for more Falcon 1 maiden launch information

Which Science Fiction Writer are You?

I am: Robert A. Heinlein Beginning with technological action stories and progressing to epics with religious overtones, this take-no-prisoners writer racked up some huge sales numbers.

Which science fiction writer are you?

Couldn't have picked a better guy.
Go take the quiz yourself. (Got this from Mark over at Curmudgeons Corner)

Also From Robot Guy, this is also not a big suprise...

You scored as Serenity (from Firefly). You like to live your own way and do not enjoy when anyone but a friend tries to tell you that you should do different. Now if only the Reavers would quit trying to skin you. Coming on December 1, 2005: Your Ultimate Sci-Fi Profile: which sci-fi crew would you best fit in? The Sequel SG-1 (from Stargate) 75% Nebuchadnezzar (from The Matrix) 75% Serenity (from Firefly) 75% Moya (from Farscape) 63% Millennium Falcon (from Star Wars) 50% Enterprise D (from Star Trek) 38% Bebop (from Cowboy Bebop) 31% Galactica (from Battlestar: Galactica) 31% Your Ultimate Sci-Fi Profile: which sci-fi crew would you best fit in? (pics) created with QuizFarm.

Lunar Dreams

Apparently SpaceDev says they can do Lunar Missions for about ~$10 billion. They break it up into segments

• launch to low Earth orbit (LEO)

• Geo Transfer Orbit (GTO)

• LEO and GTO to Lunar orbit

• Lunar orbit to landing,

• takeoff to Lunar orbit

• Lunar orbit to LEO

• return to Earth from LEO

Not really surprised by the cost savings. Governments are nothing if not expensive. Of course were is the $10 billion coming from? The way Griffin has been talking, he might be willing to buy seats from SpaceDev if they can get up there. Keep your fingers crossed true believers. (from a reader Jouth).

At the same time, I read an article this morning about Peter Diamandis (founder of the X-Prize) starting up a new company.

A company that Diamandis co-founded, which set up an office at Kennedy Space Center over the summer, plans to launch private suborbital flights by 2008. It plans to send private spacecraft to land on the moon by 2015, he said.

Hell that even beats China's rumored date of 2017. Todays news is good for my dreams. Hope the money starts flowing...

Falcon I Payload Blog

Jim White is blogging his experience in Omelek with the FalconSat-2. This is spaceX's first payload that will be launch November 25, 2005 about 1:00pm PST. Pretty interesting stuff.

One of the last things SpaceX will do is bolt the first stage engine nozzle and chamber to the business end of the rocket. They are going to do that while it's out on the pad, about 4 days from now. Then she is ready to shoot.

Falcon Launch Date - Netscape Moment

Nov 25 (next Friday after Thanksgiving) at 1:00pm PST (4:ooPM EST). They have a 4 hour launch window. Good luck and Godspeed.

-Update 9:03pm CST from Michael Belfiore's transcript of the press conference.

Q: What's next in the entreprenurial space field?
A: Lots of people doing
things--Paul Allen [who funded SpaceShipOne], Jeff Bezos with Blue Origin, John
Carmack with Armadillo Aerospace...Musk thinks we're heading toward a Netscape
moment, when someone turns a profit, and hopefully it'll be SpaceX, and then
investment capital will start to flow in.

Hmmm, investment never hurts.
I am ready to put some money were my blog is...

Iron Bowl (Not Space Related)

The Iron Bowl is tomorrow. Just had to put it out. War Eagle!!!! Go Auburn .

SpaceX First launch Date Today

Elon Musk, at a 2:00pm PST (4:00PM CST, 5:00PM EST) press conference, will give the launch date for the first launch of the Falcon I out of Kwajalein Atoll. I believe this to be not only important for SpaceX's credibility in the industry, but could very well be a historical moment in the space movement.

The Falcon V and IX will be more important to watch in the long run, but this is a huge reduction in cost. The Falcon I cost $6.7 million dollars vs $25 million for the next cheapest competitor. That is like being able to buy a new truck for ~$8,000 vs $30,000. Can't wait to see where this takes us (hopefully up fore it is finished).

I will let you know when it is...

(per nasawatch.com)

China Spends How Much?

I know everyone got in a hissy last week about whether China's space program is a threat or not, but I saw this and did a double take. According to space.com,

...China does spend about one-half of 1 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on its space program, and since the nation's GDP has risen 30 percent since 2002 due to a booming economy, more funding is expected

.5% of GDP? Is that right? Tariq Malik may mean the Budget, but if not, wow. The US GDP in real dollars for 2004 was 11.743 trillion dollars (yes I said trillion). If the US spent .5% of GDP on NASA, their budget would be 58.67 billion dollars a year. Not to mention, if it was tied to GDP, it would grow at an average of ~3% a year. I guess China is serious...

NASA Needs a Public Relations Overhaul

While going through my after lunch review of all the space news on the web, I ran across this statement Mark Whittington made as a comment to Rand Simberg's post of Iraq and Space.

Not enough is being articulated about the economic benefits of doing so. Of
course, NASA public relations has been dysfunctional since the birth of the
space agency.

Now I have been an advocate of NASA having better PR for a while now. I had kind of given up hope, but I have been thinking about some stuff lately and this prompted me to put fingers to keys, as it were.

How many of you watch NASA TV? If you are like me, you wish you did, but
its like watching public access TV with cable rates. What are they
thinking? Let's go through the problems one by one.

#1) No schedule - I can even pull PBS up and see what shows are coming on a week in advance. With NASA TV I can't even tell what is on right now. It is either Video File (which means whatever crap they have laying around) or ISS Coverage (which is usually shots of mission control). Even if you are putting on random crap, at least tells us what it is. We might be interested in some of it. Get an intern to do it. You are already broadcasting a digital signal, how hard could it be.

#2) No Plan - it is obvious to me after about 3 hours of watching NASA TV that there is no plan on how to use this forum. Does NASA want a PR vehicle, a information channel on space science (much like the science channel), or a CSPAN like just shoot everything we do. (Note: CSPAN, at least, usually has some kind of schedule). I would vote for a PR vehicle, but I would take anything organized.

#3) No interest - Now this is a bit subjective, I admit, but I am a science/space guy. I watch the discovery channel, science channel, Nova, and congressional hearings on space (on CSPAN usually). I am the ideal NASA TV viewer. And yet I almost never watch it (except for the occasional press conference on the Mars Rovers). What does this say to us? Why not, at the very least, use this medium to promote the ESAS and space in general to your base. Show your plans. Show simulations of Mars missions. Show debates on exploration architectures. It doesn't have to be Hollywood, but at least make an effort.

Now, before you go calling me a complainer, I have some ideas that NASA is welcome to take and run with.

#1) Reuse existing programming - Make with deal with Discovery or PBS. Get some documentaries about space, rockets. Play them every day at some specified time.

#2) Have some general information shows. VSE or whatever. But play to adults. So much of the stuff is video of an astronaut talking with a 3rd grade class. Adults like this stuff. We pay taxes. Get us excited about your plans. Don't let the newspapers tell us what you are doing with all the bias they bring to the table. Tell us directly.

#3) Space Movies. Some stuff that paints space exploration in a good light. Old stuff is fine. I am sure Tom Hanks would help.

Anybody else have any thoughts.

As I write this, ISS Mission Coverage (replay no less) is running on NASA TV.

NASA is Cutting Science, the Bastards

According to Keith over at Nasawatch, Yet Another Mission Sacrificed for VSE? Oh wait, is that all there is to this story?

"They basically said that we should slow down or almost stop the development
while they decide to take a look at it and make an investigation," Russell said.
"They got concerned by the number of problems that they saw that we were
having."

I guess it could be the problems they are having actually building the system. No that couldn't be it.

I have a confession to make

As much as it pains me to tell you all this, I feel I must. The truth is I feel there are more of you out there like me. You may be afraid to show your feelings, or afraid of being laughed at by your other space geek friends. But today I say to you, fear no more.

I don't like rockets. I don't mean I am against them for any reason, or that I am waiting on a space elevator, as I don't really like them either. I mean I am not enamored with them. I don't lay awake at night comparing the various ISPs of LOX or hybrid engines. I don't think about VTVL various air launch. I just don't care.

I am a space nut. I love space and more than anything I want to go to space, live on the Moon or Mars, and see the mighty king Jupiter up close. But like a man about to take a car trip across Europe, I only care that whatever transportation I use gets me to my goal. He doesn't care if it is a bus, a Ranger Rover, or an F15 so long as he reaches his hotel each night. I feel the same way about space transportation.

Now, you may wonder why I bring this up. I have no problem with people liking rockets. Actually, I need you to, so one day one of them will carry me and my family up to the heavens. But, you may not realize the peer pressure one feels when posting about space.

I feel an expectation from others to understand and even enjoy a rousing discussion about the various pros and cons of different rocket architectures. Truth is I neither understand it nor enjoy it very much. I have never really gotten that delta-v thing and the difference between various engine types bores me to tears.

So, to sum it all up, do not expect aerospace information from Space Pragmatism. I refuse to even fake it. We are all about the destination here.

Okay with that said, carry on...

China: I can take that moon in 12 years, Bob...

According to Reuters, a paper in Guangzhou, the Southern Metropolis News, is reporting China now plans to put a man on the Moon in 2017. Curious number don't you think? I wonder if President Bush and Mike Griffin are going to shoot for 2016 now. Might be fun little race.

Course you have to take what a Chinese paper says with a grain of salt, so who really knows...

(Hat tip to Curmudgeons Corner)

What do I think about NASA?

Okay, after getting blindsided by Mark at Curmudgeons Corner, I thought it necessary to clear up some things. Apparently Mark thinks am an "alt.spacer blubbering about NASA's plan to return to the Moon continues."

I'll admit I have leanings towards private space flight, but I am certainly not a libertarian anarchist. I may be the most socially conservative space nut you have ever met.

So to clear all this up, I need to explain how I feel about NASA and about space in general. I am a big fan of NASA. I watch all the launches I can. I watch whenever Griffin speaks to Congress. I was very excited when President Bush gave out the Vision last year. I am happy to pay my taxes to support NASA exploring. Not only is it expanding out knowledge but it is certainly better than most of the useless crap our taxes go towards.

That having been said, the point of my post was not to bash NASA but to simply say why I am not more excited about ESAS. As Mark said himself:

The purpose of the space program is not to get me and mine a trip to Club Moon
but to spread human civilization beyond the Earth. If I get to go, fine. If not,
sad for me but it doesn't matter in the large scale scheme of things.

Exactly. NASA's goal is not to get me or my wife or you into space. As excited as I may be about NASA's 13 year out plans to put a group of men on the Moon (which I am), it doesn't immediately help my cause.

Well, I actually do care if you get into space, especially if you share my
values about Western Civilization. The purpose of the space program is not to
get me and mine a trip to Club Moon but to spread human civilization beyond the
Earth. If I get to go, fine. If not, sad for me but it doesn't matter in the
large scale scheme of things.

And while I congratulate you on your altruism, I simply don't share it. You don't care if I get into space, you care if Americans in mass get into space. I would love that (if I was one of them). But you know what, I want to go to space. I am passionate about it. It is my greatest dream. And quite frankly I think you cheapen dreams in general to say my dream should be for western civilization and not personal. Real dreams only happen at the personal level. I bet all our space nut forefathers wanted, personally, to go to space. That is why they worked so hard to make it happen and why we are where we are today.

Okay that was a little bit of venting, but I believe the core of America is personal dreams, not the greater good. The greater good piggy-backs off of personal dreams. So no one should feel bad or selfish for their personal visions of anything, especially space flight.

I Guess I have to comment on the ESAS Eventually...

I suppose I have to comment on the plan to return to the Moon NASA put out a little while ago. I have to say, I am a little torn. I mean this is Space Pragmatism, where we are pragmatic, as it were.

Well for the executive summary, I am okay with it. Unlike many of my private space industry brothers, I don't think it is doomed to failure already. I think they could get to space, and with the right leadership (and I mean in the White House not in Griffin's seat) they could build colonies and launch Americans to Mars.

So why am I not jumping for joy and waving my arms. The problem is, it doesn't get me and my wife to space. That, of course, is my ultimate goal. Like Ron "Tater Salad" White said about being a dog lover:

I a dog lover. Actually I love my dog. I don't give a crap
about your dog.

Well, just the same for me. I want to go to space. I don't give a crap if you go to space. (I wouldn't mind the company, so come on up). But the best way to get me to space is to get everybody to space.

Mr Borman (who has been to space which hurts me to the core) is a dumbass (yes I said it). His recent statement (from Space Politics):

Well, I think Spacecraft One [sic] was a nice stunt. You spend twenty-five
million dollars to win ten. I'm not taking anything away from it because the
people who flew it were very brave and courageous, but I don't think it leads to
much, and I think it's inappropriately displayed up there next to Lindbergh's
and Yeager's airplanes.

Well, Mr Borman, screw you. You got to go to space, and unless I change my personality, my career path, and my vision pretty soon, NASA ain't send'n me up. Burt is the only person around who has done a lot to get me to space. So he falls right below God, my wife, and my kids on my list of people I love.

So were do I fall. It will be a fun show. I hope them the best. I also hope Virigin Galactic has a resort on the Moon before then. I be drinking 7n7's and toasting the landing, from the lunar side.

Update: 7:30 PM CST Nov 2, 2005
Jonathan Goff over at Selenian Boondocks seems to agree with me.

So What Are You Going To Do About It?

The Speculist has a note about space property rights. Know as many of you know (if I still have any steady readers since I haven't posted in a while) I am very interested in space property. All of this talk about who owns what in space will only be settled when there are people truly living there and when commerce is established.

The article goes on to suggest that the UN is King George to the
would-be-settlers' American colonists. Let's hope it doesn't come down to that.
But if it does, I think I know which side I'm on.

To sum it up, this issue will be resolved when settlers and/or companies look back at the UN from space and say "So what are you going to do about it?" When that question is asked, history happens. Where it is a young, nerdy, overly picked on boy finally has enough, or when a group of humans finally has enough. English colonists look at England and said (through their actions) "Screw you, so what are you going to do about it?" England, of course, march one of the greatest armies in the world (at the time) across the sea (figuratively) and brought war to our land. From that war, came America.

Now, not to disparage the UN, my inclining is that they will shrug their shoulders and talk about how rough and barbaric space is. How space citizens need to be enlightened. Truth is they will do nothing of consequence. What could the do, really, as they are worse than useless.

That moment, whether through war or elitists inaction, is when we will become an extraterrestrial species.

Falcon IX from SpaceX

I am really busy planning a trip to a technical Interchange Meeting in San Diego real soon, but I couldn't let this go by. Here is the announcement:

SpaceX today announced its new launch vehicle, the Falcon 9, an Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) class vehicle. With up to a 17 ft (5.2 m) diameter fairing, Falcon 9 is capable of launching approximately 21,000 lbs (9,500 kg) to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) in its medium configuration and 55,000 lbs (25,000 kg) to LEO in its heavy configuration, a lift capacity greater than any other launch vehicle. In the medium configuration, Falcon 9 is priced at $27 million per flight with a 12 ft (3.6 m) fairing and $35 million with a 17 ft fairing. Prices include all launch range and third party insurance costs, making Falcon 9 the most cost efficient vehicle in its class worldwide.

Now you can look at RLV & Space Transport News or Selenian Boondocks for technical and political ramifications, but what I think is cool is the reuse Elon is getting. He is taking the same engine and material structures and making a little rocket, a medium rocket, and a heavy rocket. That is agile. (Bet you knew it would come around to that -djs)

Imagine if your car could be a tiny compact that gets 80mpg but when you need the power, you drop 8 more engines in and change out the cab and you have a 4x4 2 ton pickup. That is a handy engineering feat.

Update: 10:42pm CST - Daniel Schmelzer has some thoughts on the Falcon IX as well at Carried Away.

What did he say?

Only near a NASA field center could this be thought of as a bad thing. (from spacetoday.net)

The ranks of the spaceport's 14,500 workers could be slashed one-third in the next decade as NASA makes the transition -- a transition geared to safer and more reliable rockets that are cheaper and need fewer people to fly.