http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:31:17 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/18/083117.php Bennett DawsonThe first dust samples from a comet parachuted safely down to Earth on Sunday, January 15th. The Stardust mission's capsule left a bright streak of light in the night sky as it ripped through the atmosphere at almost 29,000 miles per hour (~46,000 kph). The capsule opened a series of parachutes to slow its descent, and then touched down in the desert at 2:10 AM local time.The dust inside the spacecraft is the first geological sample returned from space since the manned moon flights of the early 1970s. Stardust's round trip to the comet Wild-2 took seven years, and its close encounter in January 2004 provided the best pictures of a comet ever taken, and revealed a surface pockmarked by craters and a surprisingly rigid core. Approaching to within 150 miles of the comet's surface, the craft detected organic molecules in the particles drifting from Wild-2. During this encounter, it deployed a soft, lightweight material called aerogel. Drifting through the halo of dust and gas surrounding the comet's tail allowed this collector to gather samples for analysis back on Earth."I have been waiting for this day since the early 1980s when Deputy Principal Investigator Dr. Peter Tsou of JPL and I designed a mission to collect comet dust," said Dr. Don Brownlee, Stardust principal investigator from the University of Washington, Seattle. "To see the capsule safely back on its home planet is a thrilling accomplishment." The capsule, resting on desert sands.What Next For The Dust?The sample material will be shipped to NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. There it will be divided into minute crumbs and sent to over 175 different science laboratories around the world. A wide range of analysis will be performed to glean the secrets from this unprecedented sample of a comet's tail. The Comet - Up Close. Phil Bland, a planetary scientist from the Imperial College of London will be one of the first to get his hands on the grains. "It's so exciting," he says. "I was three years old when the last Apollo samples came back, and there have been no rocks brought back from space since then."Identifying minerals in the grains should reveal which elements were available as building blocks for our Solar System, and what sorts of stars created them. And if researchers find minerals that have been altered by water in the past, it might help to determine whether comets were instrumental in delivering much of the water in Earth's oceans.After delivering its sample unit safely to Earth, the Stardust mother ship has been put into orbit around the Sun. NASA officials say they are open to any viable suggestions that could send the craft on another adventure, such as exploring asteroids.NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., manages the Stardust mission for NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Washington. Lockheed Martin Space Systems, Denver, developed and operated the spacecraft. Also posted at VERMONT SPACE (That's a hell of an accomplishment!) Sci/Tech42446@blogcritics.org Wed, 18 Jan 2006 08:31:17 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/01/11/060057.php Bennett DawsonSpaceX Founder Elon Musk is hoping that 'the third time is a charm' in his attempt to launch America's first private industry rocket program. The first attempt in November was scrubbed due to a tank fill valve that vented unexpected quantities of liquid oxygen. Without enough liquid oxygen in reserve, the launch was scrubbed and rescheduled for December 19th.The second attempt in December started out with a stand-down due to high winds. When management decided to delay the launch for 24 hours, technicians started emptying the fuel tanks. Unfortunately, a short circuit in the tank vent valves resulted in a vacuum that distorted the fuel tank walls, and launch #2 was scrubbed.In an emailed press release, Elon Musk of SpaceXwrote: 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.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.One thing I love about this start up company is their rapid response to adversity, and the efficiency that comes from having someone on the spot to write the check: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....and they're damn good at time management: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.Plus, they have a sense of humor, and aren't afraid of being 'on the spot' innovative: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.And most of all, Elon Musk always seems to keep things in perspective... 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 a 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.I'm looking forward to Feb 9th. I have a good feeling about these folks, and count them as a great investment should they ever go public (after the first successful launch I'm guessing).If you'd like to read more about SpaceX, I recommend these Blogcritics posts: June 28, 2005 - Space Exploration Technology Corporation - SpaceX September 9, 2005 - SpaceX Announces Falcon 9 - A Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle October 8, 2005 - The Space Age of SpaceX Also posted at VERMONT SPACE ( Let's Launch! ) Sci/Tech42107@blogcritics.org Wed, 11 Jan 2006 06:00:57 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/19/210408.php Bennett DawsonWith increasing ability to look far beyond our Milky Way Galaxy using the Hubble and Chandra orbiting telescopes and the Swift Satellite, scientists at NASA are learning more about black holes and other stellar phenomenon. Earlier this year, the Swift satellite captured what could be the first evidence of a very large black hole devouring a neutron star."A neutron star is the core remains of an exploded star that was once about 10 to 25 times more massive than our sun. It contains about a sun's worth of mass crammed into a sphere only about 12 miles across. A black hole is the core remains of an even larger exploded star, over 25 times the mass of the sun."Is it just me? Because this stuff blows me away. Not just that we caught this event with our instruments, but more that we have spent enough time looking at "what's out there" that a scientist can toss off a sentence like "Supporting this merger scenario is the fact that the GRB 050724 burst took place in the outskirts of an old, elliptical galaxy filled with neutron stars and black holes."Oh yeah, that old elliptical galaxy... on the outskirts no less.Few of us understand the forces involved when a black hole "eats" a star, but I believe it's good to fund programs to learn about this stuff. Someone on our small planet should be trying to understand what's happening in our occasionally violent universe. Plus, the pictures are usually worth viewing...Here then, is the report from NASA:GREENBELT, Md., Dec. 14 /PRNewswire/ -- Scientists using NASA's Swift satellite have found evidence of a black hole swallowing a neutron star. The discovery is reported in the December 15 issue of Nature.This rare event, seen on July 24, created a gamma-ray burst that lasted only for a few milliseconds. However, observations of the lingering afterglow provided evidence of what could have been the demise of a neutron star orbiting a black hole. Click picture to download animation! The black hole may have first stretched the dense neutron star into a crescent and broke off pieces in the process. The black hole could have then swallowed the star largely in one gulp, feeding on the broken off pieces in the minutes and hours that followed. Such a black hole would grow more massive."For billions of years this black hole and neutron star orbited each other in a gravitational tug-of-war," said Dr. Scott Barthelmy of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., lead author on one of three Nature articles on this subject. "The neutron star lost."In recent months, the Swift team has reported that "short" gamma-ray bursts arise from a merger either between two neutron stars or a neutron star and black hole. The specific scenario was not clear. Although not definitive, this latest analysis of the July burst is the best evidence of a black hole - neutron star merger, said Barthelmy.A neutron star is the core remains of an exploded star once about 10 to 25 times more massive than our sun. It contains about a sun's worth of mass crammed into a sphere only about 12 miles across. A black hole is the core remains of an even larger exploded star, over 25 times the mass of the sun.The July burst, called GRB 050724, was one of the most thoroughly observed short gamma-ray bursts to date. Swift, NASA's Chandra telescope and the Keck Observatory in Hawaii, along with other observatories, captured the burst afterglow in detail. The combined data enabled scientists to speculate on the nature of the merging objects.If GRB 050724 were a neutron star merger, according to current models, there would not be many pieces falling into a black hole later. The two objects would smash, instantly form a black hole, and after a modest afterglow no more light would be seen. Similarly, two black holes would smash and release very little residual light. But GRB 050724 had a long, flaring afterglow.Prof. Peter Meszaros of Penn State University, University Park, Pa., and Dr. Bing Zhang of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, co-authors on the Barthelmy Nature article, theorize that smaller flares of X-ray light and optical light, detected in the first tens of seconds after GRB 050724, could have resulted from pieces of the neutron star falling into the black hole. Flares occurring later might be from magnetized pieces of gas, which would behave differently. Supporting this merger scenario is the fact that the GRB 050724 burst took place in the outskirts of an old, elliptical galaxy filled with neutron stars and black holes."There's only one thing I know of that could rip apart a neutron star with bits flying out, and that's a black hole. Now we have the first evidence that this might actually be occurring," said Meszaros.Numerical simulations by Drs. Melvyn Davies and Andrew King and others at Leicester University, England, have provided evidence for such a disruption of a neutron star by a black hole, including the late infall of pieces of matter. Other simulations elsewhere indicate conversely that neutron star mergers would leave no flaring afterglow.Drs. Nial Tanvir of the University of Hertfordshire in Hatfield, England, and Edo Berger of the Carnegie Observatories in Pasadena, Calif., are lead authors on the two accompanying Nature articles, which describe follow-up observations after Swift's detection of GRB 050724.Swift, launched in November 2004, is a NASA mission in partnership with the Italian Space Agency and the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council, United Kingdom, and is managed by Goddard Space Flight Center. Penn State University personnel control science and flight operations from the Mission Operations Center. For more information: Go Here!Also posted at VERMONT SPACE ( The star said "eat me", a bad move with black holes ) Sci/Tech41239@blogcritics.org Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:04:08 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/08/180913.php Bennett DawsonOver the last six months, NASA has cut over half of its space science programs and "de-emphasized" many others. This has led to thousands of layoffs around the country, and a concensus that the "Vision For Space Exploration" was going to end up gutting the innovative and long term research being performed by our nations scientists. Two days ago, NASA Administrator Mike Griffin decided to speak to the concerns of America's science community:Dr. Mike Griffin - NASA Administrator I'm here today to talk about what science at NASA means to U.S. leadership in space exploration, and in the world at large. I will also address specific components of our Science Mission Directorate plans, and discuss the opportunities in science that we expect to result from both our new exploration plan and our ongoing decadal research plans. To begin, I think that some perspective on the role of science in our national life might be in order. We are all here in San Francisco this evening because we believe that what we do is important, not only to our specific disciplines, but also to society at large. It is our good fortune to live in a society that invests in and greatly values scientific achievement. Indeed, most of us have grown up in a world in which we take it for granted that the United States government will invest significant taxpayers' resources in scientific research. But this has not always been the case; prior to World War II, government investment in scientific research was minuscule. But the contributions of science and technology to the war effort prompted President Roosevelt to request a report from Dr. Vannevar Bush, the Director of the Office of Scientific Research, on how scientific expertise could be used in the post-war world. Bush's report, Science: The Endless Frontier, provided the framework for much of the federal backing of scientific research of which many of us have been or currently are the beneficiaries. In his report, Bush wrote, "It is in keeping also with basic U.S. policy that the government should foster the opening of new frontiers and this is the modern way to do it." I think Dr. Bush got it exactly right. America's space program is a prime example of a successful national investment in opening new frontiers that became possible precisely because our leaders thought about scientific advancement in this new context. Today we conduct bold and rewarding, but costly, scientific activities in space today because our leaders two generations ago viewed American preeminence in all aspects of space exploration as essential to maintaining world leadership. It was in this same spirit that, nearly two years ago, President Bush announced the Vision for Space Exploration, noting its implementation would advance America's economic, scientific and security interests. In this sense, science is the beneficiary of our commitment to seek out and explore new frontiers. While exploration has historically spurred technological innovation and commercial enterprise, it has also led to the flowering of scientific activity. I have high hopes for the scientific progress we will achieve as we pursue the Vision for Space Exploration. Through space exploration and related scientific activities, we can project humankind's vantage point into space, both virtually and physically with robots and humans. From space and in space, our scientific initiatives encompass questions as practical as tomorrow's weather and as profound as the origin and nature of the Universe. From space, we can view the Earth as a planet – one member of a solar system governed by a typical main-sequence star midway through its life cycle. We can view the Earth's relationship with the Sun, shaped not just by gravity, but by the solar wind, solar radiation, and the Earth's own magnetic field and atmosphere. And we can view the Earth in its entirety, seeing the interconnectedness of the oceans, atmosphere, continents, ice sheets and life itself. We can observe and track global-scale changes, and perceive regional changes in their global context. We can observe the role that human civilization increasingly plays as a force of change. Earth science at NASA is Earth system science, the study of Planet Earth as dynamic system of diverse components interacting in complex ways. We are learning to trace cause to effect, to connect variation with response, and vastly improve national capabilities to predict climate, weather, and natural hazards. Thus, NASA research is also an essential part of national and international efforts to employ Earth science and observation in service to society. In space, we are extending our virtual presence via robotic missions to other planets and their moons, to asteroids and comets, and to the Kuiper Belt. We are in the midst of a full-scale investigation of Mars, with one or more missions launching every twenty-six months. We are directing more of our attention to the moons of the giant planets as we see intriguing signs of both water and dynamism on their surfaces, knowing that on Earth, where there is water and energy there is also life. We are progressing from observers to rovers to sample return missions, each step bringing us closer to our principal goals: to understand whether life does or did exist elsewhere in the Solar System, and to prepare for human expeditions to other planetary bodies. The human exploration of space will benefit from the scientific research that we conduct in support of the Vision. The selection of lunar and Martian landing sites, the development of techniques for operations in differing radiation environments and atmospheres, and the exploitation of the Lagrange points are examples of the productive interactions we anticipate between science and exploration as each is pursued for its own purposes. But having painted this picture, let me make a second point about the space frontier, which is that in fact we have barely entered it. To gain some historical perspective on the matter, consider that the great European voyages of maritime discovery began in the early 15th Century with the founding, by Prince Henry the Navigator, of the School of Oceanic Navigation in Sagres, Portugal in 1418. Though he never went to sea himself, Prince Henry sponsored a long series of voyages of exploration down the coast of Africa, in search of a seagoing path to the Orient. Henry's vision for ocean exploration was "a journey, not a race." In 1420 the Madeira Islands were discovered by Joao Zarco. In 1434, after no less than fourteen expeditions had failed – many of them simply never returning – Henry's man Gil Eannes finally made it through the treacherous waters off Cape Bojador, on the coast of Africa south of the Canary Islands, and returned alive. Portuguese explorers rounded the western bulge of Africa in 1460, the year of Henry's death. And the southern tip of Africa, the Cape of Good Hope, was finally reached by Bartolomeu Dias in 1488. Vasco da Gama reached India in 1498. By the time Columbus sailed westward in search of a shorter, easier path to Asia, European maritime exploration had been firmly underway for almost 75 years. Yet today, we think of the 1492 voyage of the Nina, the Pinta, and the Santa Maria as the beginning of everything. That is hardly the case. The space age, for all its achievements, is less than fifty years old, and is just getting underway. To date, twelve human beings have explored the surface of the moon for a total time of less than one man-month; it is now my job to make that number grow by leaps and bounds. Our initial scientific reconnaissance of the solar system is still incomplete, with NASA planning to launch the New Horizons mission next month to conduct the first robotic exploration of Pluto. We have also barely scratched the surface when it comes to understanding the extent and nature of extra-solar planets. In just ten years, more than 150 planets beyond our solar system have been discovered, and there are indications that at least one has the same rocky characteristics as our home planet. And as this audience knows quite well, we have only begun to tap the potential of Earth observing, weather, and other remote sensing satellites. Continuing on the theme that we are just at the dawn of the true space age, let me point out that in a matter of years, people around the globe will be able to look up at a new moon, and with the aid of a good telescope, be able to see the glimmering lights of a research station on the lunar surface. At this research station, pioneering astronauts will be learning how to obtain oxygen from the lunar regolith. They will be deploying antennas on the back side of the moon, linked in phase to form the largest radio telescope ever built, free of radio noise from Earth. They will be engaged in geological exploration of the moon, finally establishing the origins of our Earth-moon system. And other astronauts, in Earth orbit, will be readying a 500 ton spaceship for mankind's first voyage to Mars. This is the direction for our space program that two successive Congresses have endorsed, and that, according to a very recent Gallup Poll, three-quarters of our citizens "support", or "strongly support". This support is found roughly in equal proportions across the political spectrum, and between the genders. This is the kind of support that will fuel many of our space science initiatives in the future. And we are just at the beginning. Having said this, I am aware that many in the science community have questioned NASA's commitment to science, and believe their own work to be gravely threatened by the Vision for Space Exploration. Let me speak directly to this point. I have frequently stated my belief that exploration will be a boon for science in the long-term. I have also said on many occasions that it is not our desire to sacrifice present-day scientific efforts for the sake of future benefits to be derived from exploration. We who run NASA today are doing our very best to preserve these efforts in the face of, frankly, some daunting fiscal realities. But we also must avoid setting unrealistic expectations. NASA's $5.4 billion investment in its Earth and space science portfolio is almost the size of the entire National Science Foundation, and this robust portfolio has grown at a rate significantly greater than has NASA's top line budget over the past decade. Such growth cannot logically be supported within an overall portfolio that is at best fixed in constant dollars. But we must also acknowledge the plain fact that we cannot do everything that was on our plate when I assumed office. All of you know many reasons why this is so. NASA can only move forward on our fundamental missions of exploration, science and aeronautics at the pace that available resources will allow, so it is important to be as efficient as possible in allocating these resources. To this end, we have made several changes in recent months, and I would like to discuss some of these changes with you tonight. First, we are reconstituting the organization the Science Mission Directorate into separate offices for Earth science, heliophysics, planetary science and physics and astronomy. Second, Mary is defining an executable science program across each of these portfolios in Earth and space science. She is conducting a rigorous review of each flight project now in formulation and development, and establishing gates through which each program must pass in order to proceed from formulation to development. This process requires balancing technical performance against cost, evaluating the management team that is in place, and rigorously identifying risks and defining plans to mitigate them. We very much need better cost discipline in the large assignment missions, as cost growth inhibits the future of the smaller, but incredibly prolific, competed lines. Third, we are returning to NASA's classical approach to science management, including relying on outside bodies for strategic advice on the ranking of missions by priority. In each of the four major elements of our research portfolio, we will establish priorities through dialog with the science community, based on the budget realities we face. The decadal surveys of the National Research Council have proven essential to this process in the past, and we will continue to rely on them as authoritative sources of science community priorities. We also will engage in more frequent venues for dialog with the science community, such as professional society conferences like these. For tactical level advice we will engage the science community in workshops that help us to implement successful programs by balancing detailed technical requirements, cost and schedule. A principle source of advice at this level is the NASA Advisory Council, which has just been reconstituted. The NAC has five committees, including a five-member science committee with many subcommittees. I believe the latter group's advice will be very helpful to the agency. Many of you are interested in our plans for Earth science. While it is true this activity does not get the media attention that human spaceflight and planetary exploration receive, I can assure you it is an important activity that we are determined to continue well beyond the completion of the Earth Observation System. I believe most of you know that I have significantly re-emphasized Earth science since rejoining NASA earlier this year. Our Earth science programs are essential to the accomplishment of three initiatives begun by President Bush: The Climate Change Research program, the Global Earth Observation System and the Oceans Action Plan. We recognize that through our contributions to these initiatives, NASA is providing researchers around the world with unprecedented access to diverse data about the Earth system. This is being done at a time when there are huge societally relevant questions about global changes that require the view from space. One need look no further than NASA's contributions to this season's hurricane predictions to recognize that we are getting tremendous value out of our Earth observation satellites. Indeed, as a result of NASA's development and deployment in the past decade of the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM), the Aqua satellite and the Quickscat sea winds measurement instrument, our colleagues at the National Weather Service are now able to predict the formation of tropical storms nine days instead of seven days out, and predict landfall within 400 miles of coastline instead of 800. Such advances allow significant improvement in the marshalling of resources to deal with the inevitable property destruction of, and better warning to people likely to be affected by, major hurricanes. At NASA's request, the National Research Council has undertaken its first decadal survey for Earth science and applications from space. Our colleagues at NOAA and the U.S. Geological Survey are co-sponsors of this effort, whose results should be available by the end of next year. We will use these results to create a profile with an optimal mix of systematic and exploratory missions, technology development, and research programs to implement the survey's priorities and the presidential initiatives I mentioned. Turning to the sun, NASA's heliophysics program is helping us to gain a better understanding of the sun, and the sun's interaction with Earth, other planetary environments, and interplanetary space itself. We have used a strategy of deploying frequent, smaller missions within this vast system to form a distributed Great Observatory that is truly greater than the sum of its parts. Next year, we are poised to reap the rewards of several years of hard work. In 2006, we will launch STEREO, a mission to track the evolution of solar disturbances from the sun's surface to Earth's orbit; the five-satellite THEMIS mission to determine the causes of space weather reconfigurations of Earth's near space environment; and the AIM small explorer satellite that will examine the formation of the highest altitude clouds in Earth's atmosphere in response to external and internal forcing functions. Also next year, we look forward to deployment of the NASA CINDI and TWINS instruments on two DoD missions, and to providing instrumentation for Japan's Solar-B mission that will resolve magnetic fields on the sun's surface and how they interact with the sun's outer atmosphere. Similarly, our planetary program is guided by the decadal surveys we have in hand, and we will proceed with our planetary mission priorities as quickly as our budget will allow. One area pinpointed for further attention is the Moon. As we plan to return to the Moon to open up the next great era of space exploration, I'd like to mention a few of the new vistas a more extensive focus on lunar exploration will provide. Paul Spudis, my former colleague at Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory, has written extensively on the subject, including a Scientific American article from December 2003 that I commend to your attention. In the article, Paul notes that scientists still have many unanswered questions about the Moon's history, composition and internal structure, whose understanding may also illuminate the history of all the rocky planets in the inner solar system. Paul also wrote of the importance of determining whether significant amounts water ice do in fact exist in lunar polar areas. If confirmed, such a discovery would offer the hope that a lunar base would have a source of water for life support as well as for rocket fuel. We're looking at a number of promising lunar science targets in our Robotic Lunar Exploration Program, an activity that links our Exploration and Science Mission Directorates. Their collaboration began with the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter now in development for launch in 2008. The Science Mission Directorate managed the selection process for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter instruments, and will play a Program and Project Scientist role in spacecraft development managed by the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate. Of course, we're also interested in outer planet exploration which represents some of the most challenging scientific missions NASA carries out. I already mentioned the New Horizons mission set to launch next month. We're in the preliminary design phase for the Juno mission that will investigate whether an icy rock core exists at the center of Jupiter, and NASA hopes to conduct future missions to investigate the potential of life at Europa, Titan, and other compelling targets for outer planet exploration. Again, these missions represent some of the most technically challenging science missions for NASA over the next decade. And I'm also very intrigued by Ed Lu and Rusty Schweickart's ideas about nudging large near-Earth asteroids before they can pose a threat to humanity. We will most certainly continue our work to discover large asteroids close to the Earth. It is important to note that we cannot accomplish all our goals for science and exploration on our own. We're very fortunate to have strong partnerships with a number of spacefaring countries. Today, 29 of NASA's 53 ongoing planetary, astronomy and Earth-observing satellites and spacecraft missions include international participation, with NASA involved in 13 operating science missions led by our international partners. As I've said on numerous occasions, I am looking forward to the opportunity to enlarge and extend these partnerships. In closing, please allow me to offer a few thoughts on what we might achieve in science if we move ahead with purpose and dispatch with our space exploration program. By 2020 we will be surveying our portion of the galaxy to create a census of extra-solar planets, and using the next generation of space telescopes to study the origin and destiny of the universe. We will be probing the Martian surface and subsurface for resources that will enable human exploration, and to answer questions about the past and present habitability of Mars. Together with our partners we will have created a global Earth observing system that includes sentinel satellites in higher orbits communicating with active remote sensing systems in lower orbits. These systems will provide both real time information for hazard warning and management and the long term data records required to understand and predict global change. All of these advances will come about because of the hard work and commitment of our diverse community, which I believe has its greatest successes when we allow the pursuit of exploration and scientific progress to complement each other. I thank you for your hospitality today, and again extend my heartfelt thanks to all of you for your commitment to regaining the initiative that has driven our past successes. [end] As someone who believes that it is in our species' best interests to pursue the "Vision", to start now on the journey that will eventually lead to self sustaining colonies on planets other than our Earth, I accept the tough decisions that Dr. Griffin is being forced to make. I believe that if he had his druthers, nothing would get cut, and he'd spend whatever it took to get this exploration and colonization "under way".However, given specific goals to achieve within a limited budget, Griffin is fearlessly taking the necessary steps to make it happen. It won't make him popular with many, but it will guarantee him a place in the history books if he can pull it off. I wish him, and us, the best of luck with this. What do you think?Also posted at VERMONT SPACE (I hope this works... ) Sci/Tech40719@blogcritics.org Thu, 8 Dec 2005 18:09:13 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/04/002837.php Bennett DawsonThe continued layoffs at NASA have inspired a serious look at the viability of this vital organization even as it reaches for the sci-fi dreams of a generation inspired by 2001 A Space Odyssey, Apollo 13, and Star Trek - The Next Generation. We expect NASA to reach for the moon and the planets, but has underfunding caused NASA to cut programs essential to the "primary mission" of NASA?Read about the latest debate in this Science Magazine Editorial . I suggest Emailing this article to your Senator or Congressman.There's a series of articles on the NASA layoffs at NASA Watch.I tell ya, now's not a bad time to join the National Space Society . They send out a great quarterly magazine packed with articles and upcoming events. Worth the minimum.Also posted at VERMONT SPACE (if it seems too good to be true... ) Sci/Tech40467@blogcritics.org Sun, 4 Dec 2005 00:28:37 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/26/204817.php Bennett DawsonSpaceX announced late today that today's Falcon 1 launch has been scrubbed. According to SpaceX: "The reason for the delay was an auxiliary liquid oxygen (LOX) fill tank had a manual vent valve incorrectly set to vent. The time it took to correct the problem resulted in significant LOX boiloff and loss of helium, and it was the latter that caused the launch abort. LOX is used to chill the helium bottles, so we lose helium if there is no LOX to cool the bottles." "Although we were eventually able to refill the vehicle LOX tanks, the rate at which we could add helium was slower than the rate at which LOX was boiling away. There was no way to close the gap, so the launch had to be called off. In addition, we experienced an anomaly with the main engine computer that requires further investigation and was arguably reason in and of itself to postpone launch."The next launch date (TBA) will be in mid-December. Prelaunch - November 26th. The delayed dawn of a new era.Here are articles leading up to today's attempted launch that tell the story in greater detail.June 28, 2005 - Space Exploration Technology Corporation - SpaceX is ready to Launch September 09, 2005 - SpaceX Announces the Falcon 9 - A Fully Reusable Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle October 08, 2005 - The Space Age of SpaceX - Falcon I Prepares For Liftoff Also posted at VERMONT SPACE (Stick around kids, we're not finished.) Sci/Tech40106@blogcritics.org Sat, 26 Nov 2005 20:48:17 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/25/192247.php Bennett DawsonOn November 25th, 2005, the spacecraft Hayabusa landed on the surface of asteroid Itokawa, but JAXA's mission controllers didn't know about it for hours. Under autonomous control, the spacecraft tightly followed the planned decent curve to the asteroid, released a target marker, slowed, bounced twice, and then landed gently on the surface. Planned vs. actual descent path.Mission specialists were surprised when the data was analyzed and it became clear that a landing had taken place. They had initially reported that the landing had been "waved off" by onboard control, and were waiting for the return-to-orbit telemetry to restart. When the telemetry did not automatically reconnect, JAXA engineers assumed a fatal error and possible loss of the craft. Mission guidelines called for sending an "emergency landing abort" signal to the spacecraft. Some independent news reports stated that the craft had been lost. Hours later communication was reestablished, and only then did JAXA learn of their partial success.The data received from Hayabusa show an unusual string of logic controls that allowed the craft to approach, and then land under it's own volition. Thinking they had lost the spacecraft, the engineers sent emergency abort orders to Hayabusa, only to find out later that their craft had indeed landed on the asteroid, and had been waiting 30 minutes for further commands. Due to the odd functions surrounding the landing event, Hayabusa's Touch Down Sensor did not activate and the sampling functions were not deployed. Doppler measurement during descent of Hayabusa. The abort orders received 30 minutes after landing activated the craft's propulsion system, Hayabusa moved back into a control orbit above the surface of the asteroid, and began sending news back to earth of it's brief contact with Asteroid Itokawa. Target marker (circled) separated from Hayabusa. The black shape is the spacecraft's shadow.Additional landing are scheduled, and JAXA hopes to take samples of the asteroid's surface which will be returned to earth for analysis. If you want to read (decipher) the JAXA news release visit SpaceRef, because even with Japanese characters, JAXA's website is a complete mystery.Also posted at VERMONT SPACE (You've got Asteroids? Cool! ) Sci/Tech40071@blogcritics.org Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:22:47 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/23/215732.php Bennett DawsonWhat we seem to have here is a classic NASA fuckeroo. Who knew that the President's call for a new Vision for Space Exploration would result in the end of so many scientific programs and projects? Those that watch NASA are watching slack-jawed at the wide spread down sizing (RIF), and the outright cancellation of almost every program that doesn't directly support the "Vision".This appears to include America's interest in the International Space Station. It may be prudent from a purely American point of view (our shuttle and crew at risk), but our European partners in the ISS have put a lot into this project. They have invested in the ISS, they have provided crew members for the flights, and they have been just as frustrated with the delays in the Shuttle program as any space-happy Yank.And they're very concerned by the reduction in flights of the Space Shuttle. It's not clear yet, but this reduction may include flights that were supposed to carry their work into orbit. Our partners are sitting on equipment that's been designed and built, and has been ready to launch since 2003. Including the Columbia Science Module, Europe's showcase contribution to the ISS, with a billion dollar price tag. This then, from Business Monday:Europe has begun evaluating its options in the event the U.S. space shuttle is retired too early to launch the Columbus science laboratory, Europe's billion-dollar contribution to the international space station, European Space Agency (ESA) Director-General Jean-Jacques Dordain said July 28.ESA has ordered a team of engineers to evaluate scenarios in which the shuttle is capable of launching 20 times, 15 times and 10 times between now and its intended 2010 retirement date. The study, whose conclusions are expected in early September, includes a scenario in which the shuttle cannot launch the Columbus module."I will have an evaluation of all these scenarios, including a scenario in which there is no Columbus," Dordain said in an interview. "My biggest concern is to optimize the investments that our member governments have already made."Columbus is the centerpiece of a multibillion-dollar European investment in the space station that includes an unmanned space tug, called the Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) that will deliver water, fuel and other supplies to the station. The ATV, whose first launch is scheduled for mid-2006, has been financed by ESA governments in part to repay NASA for the U.S. investment in the station's basic infrastructure and utility-type support including electricity and astronaut transport.Dordain said that if Columbus is not launched, the ATV program's original reason for being would be lost and the program's interest to European governments would diminish.ESA has spent some 300 million euros ($362 million) in charges directly related to the delay in the launch of the Columbus lab, which is completed and in storage at EADS Space Transportation's Bremen, Germany, plant. Those delay-related costs are certain to rise, as the estimates assumed a Columbus launch by the U.S. shuttle in 2006. A 2007 date is more likely — assuming no further delays.Like a similar laboratory built by Japan, Europe's Columbus facility was designed for launch only on the shuttle.ESA member governments plan to meet in December in Berlin to fix the agency's mid-term financial and program objectives. Dordain said that by then he hopes the latest shuttle-related issues are resolved, and that the vehicle has been once again cleared for flight.If not, he said, he will canvass his government members to determine how they wish to proceed. "Maybe we can use the station even without Columbus, and barter ATV against some kind of access to the station," Dordain said. "We are looking at all kinds of possibilities. We also need to think about whether, even if it is launched, we will be able to use it as we planned. There is no sense in launching Columbus without being able to use it fully. I know this: Our governments have invested billions of euros into this project, and right now my top priority for the program is to maximize a return on that investment." [end]I can only imagine their frustration. I would like to see the ISS brought up to the minimum configuration for sustained scientific research. I think we owe our international partners this measure of commitment.Some folks have openly called for the scrapping of the ISS. "Don't spend a single penny on a program that may not provide any returns on the investment. It's money better spent on manned missions to the Moon or Mars, rather than on an already-out-of-date Space Station."I disagree with this for several reasons. First, we really don't know what will be discovered by the scientists working in the ISS. But the other member nations are willing to find out, with or without the USA's participation. "Just launch the damn modules so we can get on with it!"Second, the ISS is the perfect proving ground for companies like SpaceX. Give them a long term contract for re-supplying the ISS, and watch them step up to the plate. Let an American company profit from this mission, while saving NASA tens of millions of dollars. Third, I believe that it's a good thing to have a human habitat orbiting our home planet. If nothing else, it's a monument to the growth of our species over the last 10,000 years. A monument to the research, engineering, and construction that went into every single part or component that we've sent up there. And it's a monument to the cooperation between the leaders of Earth's major space programs. The ISS is a unique achievement, and I'll always think of it as a symbol of our species' potential. "Working together, the people of our planet built this."That's worth a monument, isn't it? Also posted at VERMONT SPACE ( We're Giving Thanks ) Sci/Tech40005@blogcritics.org Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:57:32 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/20/115708.php Bennett DawsonHaving grown up watching the Goodyear blimp soar over the Bay Area, I always wondered how high you could get in one of those dirigibles. I still don't have the answer to that question, but here's a report on what appears to be the highest flying powered cargo airship, to date.Source:Southwest Research InstituteŽA team led by Southwest Research InstituteŽ successfully demonstrated powered flight of the HiSentinel stratospheric airship at an altitude of 74,000 feet. The development team of Aerostar International, the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) and SwRI launched the airship on November 8 from Roswell, N.M., for a five-hour technology demonstration flight. The 146-foot-long airship carried a 60-pound equipment pod and propulsion system. Sponsored by the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, the flight was the culmination of a six-month preparation effort. "There are a number of stratospheric airship programs being promoted around the world, but this is the first of these programs to successfully fly a real airship in near-space," says William Perry, assistant director of Space Systems in the SwRI Space Science and Engineering Division. HiSentinel is the first airship developed under the Composite Hull High Altitude Powered Platform (CHHAPP) program. CHHAPP is a spiral development program for a family of long-endurance autonomous solar-electric, stratospheric airships. These low-cost systems will be capable of lifting small- to medium-payloads (20 to 200 pounds) to near-space altitudes for durations of longer than 30 days for communications, military and science applications. Designed for launch from remote sites, these airships will not require large hangars or special facilities. Unlike most stratospheric airship concepts, HiSentinel is launched flaccid with the hull only partially inflated with helium. As the airship rises, the helium expands until it completely inflates the hull to the rigid aerodynamic shape required for operation. Photo Courtesy Southwest Research InstituteŽThe airship is shown fully inflated during preflight verification in a hangar in Roswell, N.M. It was later deflated and refolded in preparation for the launch. HiSentinel is the first in a family of long-endurance airships developed under the Composite Hull High Altitude Powered Platform program.Also posted at VERMONT SPACE (lawnchair anyone?) Sci/Tech39806@blogcritics.org Sun, 20 Nov 2005 11:57:08 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/18/225942.php Bennett DawsonSpace Exploration Corporation has set a new date for the maiden flight of the Falcon 1 Rocket. This non-government rocket (the first American private launch services company), will liftoff from its tropical island launch site at 4:00 p.m. EST on November 25th with a mission to place a small U.S. Air Force Academy satellite into orbit. On launch day, Falcon 1 will make history for several reasons: It 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 21s 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). When the Shuttle stops flying in 2010, Falcon 1 will be the only semi-reusable launch vehicle. 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. Though low cost, Falcon 1 has received a design reliability rating equivalent to that of the best launch vehicles currently flying in the United States. The maiden flight of Falcon 1 will take place from the Reagan Test Site in the Marshall Islands (Kwajalein Atoll). The customer for this mission 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. SpaceX on Blogcritics: SpaceX Charges Racketeering - Sues Boeing and Lockheed Martin The Space Age of SpaceX - Falcon I Prepares For Liftoff SpaceX Announces the Falcon 9 - A Fully Reusable Heavy Lift Launch VehicleSpace Exploration Technology Corporation - SpaceX is ready to Launch This is more of a deal than most people realize. It will be interesting to watch the launch, and the dawn of a new era. Here are a few quotes from Elon Musk, founder of SpaceX: "I actually don't feel nervous, I feel relief," Musk told reporters during a press conference. "No matter what happens next week, this is something that is the first stepping stone in reducing the cost of access to space.""We feel at peace with ourselves in this launch because we've really done all we can. I think that I can say with confidence that we've left no stone unturned.""We actually delayed the launch a few times to really put extra care into the engines." "Our funding needed to complete the man-rated Falcon 9 is about $100 million," adding that he has financed about 98 percent of SpaceX's costs to date with $100 million of his money. "My interest is in helping others get into space and helping us become a space faring civilization." Also posted at VERMONT SPACE (this should be good) Sci/Tech39755@blogcritics.org Fri, 18 Nov 2005 22:59:42 EST