International Space Station – Expedition 20 Lands Safely

Expedition 20 Commander Gennady Padalka, Expedition 20 Flight Engineer Michael Barratt and Spaceflight participant Guy Laliberté landed safely near the town of Arkalyk, Kazakhstan. Padalka and Barratt are returning from six months onboard the International Space Station. Credit: NASA Images on Flickr

The Augustine Commission – Bad Day at Black Rock – And a Reprieve

The House Committee on Science and Technology

Norm Augustine, Michael Griffin and Vice Admiral Joe Dyer USN (Ret.) testified before the House Committee on Science and Technology. And walked into a hornets nest of unenlightened criticism. Typical was the whining from Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of AZ, who released a statement. She wanted the Commission to do a detailed evaluation of the Constellation program, but added “We have a glancing attention to Constellation, even mentioning it in past tense.”

The chairman, Rep. Bart Gordon from Tennessee, as reported by the New York Times, employed the fallacious “sunk costs” argument to defend Ares I:

“I think that good public policy argues for setting the bar pretty high against making significant changes in direction at this point,” said Representative Bart Gordon, Democrat of Tennessee, who is chairman of the Committee on Science and Technology. “There would need to be a compelling reason to scrap what we’ve invested our time and money in over these past four years.”

Former Administrator Michael Griffin defended the Ares program, deflecting Commission concerns about the rocket’s problems with the request for more money. Pay no attention to the rocket behind the curtain. Pay no attention to the thrust oscillation problems that would shake the walls and bring down the curtain. Pay no attention to the underpowered rocket that cannot lift the curtain.

The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

This was a friendlier and much better informed session. Sen. Nelson from Florida and Sen. Hutchison from Texas started with praise for Augustine.

Augustine then noted that the Commission was tasked with options, not recommendations. This had been repeatedly noted by those that have followed the three month deliberations, but needs repeating. He said the next obvious destination is Mars, but that is not possible for safety and financial reason. Then he observed that the Goals and Funding are out of whack. Keeping them as they are would mean:

“If we continued on the path of the existing program, we would have to launch six shuttles in the next 12 months. One could question if that is a safe thing to do.

“No funds for Space Station and Technology. We’d have to deorbit ISS in five years from now after spending 20 years building it. We’d complete Ares I two years after the Space Station was deorbited.

“The Heavy Lift launch capability would be delayed to the mid to late 2020s – and when we got it there would be no upper stage to put on it or Lunar hardware to launch on it. That would be delayed to the 2030s. That is the path we are on.”

That is the dismal state of affairs of the current program.

The remainder of the session explored the various options, returning again and again to the “Flexible Path” or deep space option, with several variations. The emphasis was on commercial crew transportation to low Earth orbit and a return by NASA to exploration. Near Earth Objects (NEO), the Lagrange points and space observatories, building and deploying propellant depots and Phobos as a destination were all explored, as well as the necessity of avoiding deep gravity wells like the Moon and Mars until experience, technology and funding allow.

Political Reality

Behind the scenes and away from the public reassurances to local constituencies by the Senators on the Committee contained in the “questions” to Mr. Augustine, the political realities that shape the space exploration business are working on the new directions.

The Florida workforce and the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), represented by Senator Nelson, will benefit if the Shuttle is extended to 2014 or 2015, as will the Michoud Assembly Facility where the Shuttle External Tank is manufactured. This is the territory of Senator Vitter. And the Johnson Space Center (JSC) will benefit Senator Hutchison.

Senator Shelby from Alabama will ensure continued work for the Marshal Space Flight Center.

ATK (Thiokol) will ensure that solid rocket boosters are used, either with Ares I / V or with the Shuttle Derived Launch Vehicle (SDLV), such as Jupiter.

Boeing and Lockheed Martin (UAL – United Launch Alliance) will press forward with their commercial proposals, and ensuring that the Delta and Atlas rockets are well used.

PWR Rocketdyne will appreciate additional business for its Space Shuttle Main Engine if an SDLV is built. The SDLV is almost a foregone conclusion if the Space Shuttle Program is extended beyond 2011.

While the proponents of Commercial Orbital Transportation Systems (COTS) such as Space-X and Orbital Sciences make their case to the politicians, other groups are also working on the future NASA direction. One of these groups is the Direct team, which has proposed a complete exploration architecture (also here) that knits together the political considerations discussed above.

Possible Outcomes

Given the political background to the conundrum of the NASA mission and budget, one might foresee one of three possible outcomes:

• Abandonment of Human Space Flight beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO). The Space Shuttle would be extended to complete its manifest in 2011. The International Space Station (ISS) would be extended to 2020 (or beyond). Purchase of American astronaut rides to the ISS would be on Russian Soyuz rockets.
• Endorsement of the Commercialization of Space Flight with a reduction in NASA’s role to a procurer of services on bid and contract, and a modest increase in the budget. This would correspond to the UAL proposal discussed here on NSS Phoenix, where many competitors in addition to UAL would compete for the business NASA has up for bids.
• A full blown commitment on the part of the United States to maintaining its historical preeminence in space exploration. LEO operations would be contracted from commercial entities. A Shuttle Derived Launch Vehicle would be contracted out to UAL / ATK / PWR (who already operate the facilities where the Space Shuttle components are built and assembled), and would close the gap to ISS resupply until commercial vehicles came on line. These SDLVs with a Centaur derived upper stage would be capable of NEO missions, Lagrange point (EML-2 and SEL-1 and SEL-2) space observatory missions, and Phobos and Deimos missions. Certainly enough to gather the requisite space faring skills to begin contemplating permanent stations within the deep gravity wells of the Moon and Mars. This third outcome satisfies practically all of the political forces in play.

Post your thoughts on the outcomes in the comments section.

Veronica Mentioned On The Space Show

For those of you who have not discovered Dr. David Livingston and The Space Show, here’s your chance to catch up. The July 10, 2009 edition featured Maria Catalina:

Maria is now a middle school teacher of math and science, a JPL NASA Solar System Ambassador and on the Board of Directors for the National Space Society San Diego Chapter.

During the show, Veronica Ann Zabala-Aliberto, Phoenix Chapter President, received several mentions in conjunction with an upcoming project that she is working on for 2010.

Non-Profit Chapters Meeting

Non-Profit Chapters Meeting
13 June 2009
Challenger Space Center

The meeting began an effort to collaborate on outreach to the public in support of Space Exploration.

Chapters Represented:

National Space Society (NSS)
The Moon Society
The Mars Society
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)
The Planetary Society

Other organizations that should be included:

United Federation of Planets (UFP)
Space Exploration Alliance

Representatives included:

Veronica Ann Zabala – NSS chapter president
Greg Rucker – NSS chapter secretary
Craig Porter – The Moon Society past president
Mark Longenback – AIAA past chair
Patrick Lonchar – NSS treasurer
Don Jock – The Moon Society president
Rich Christianson – AIAA public policy
Dave Fischer – NSS weblog contributor
Scott Hansen – NSS friend
Patty – The Moon Society VP promotions

Other local resource persons:
David Hewitt – NSS – PAC – Phone Tree
Hough Downs – NSS activist
Lori Garver – former NSS Board of Directors
George Whiteside – NSS – Obama Advisor

Upcoming Events:

20 July – ASU – Space Exploration Day
TBD – Sally Ride – ASU
TBD – ASU – Earth & Space Exploration

General Discussion:

Development of Action Items
Possible sponsorship of ISDC 2012
Second Life activities
LROC at ASU
ASU Spaceflight Photography Lab

Galaxy Zoo

I have spent several hours during the past three days at a web site I just found.

The folks over at Galaxy Zoo are looking for volunteers to classify millions of galaxies:

Dear Galaxy Zoo users,

Thanks for making Galaxy Zoo such a success!

With your help, we’ve been able to collect millions of classifications, with which to do science faster than we ever thought possible. We are currently preparing the first science papers for submission to peer-reviewed journals and we will keep you posted on the progress of the papers on the BLOG and the FORUM. From now on, if you classify galaxies on the ANALYSIS page, your classifications will continue to be recorded and will be part of the public release, but it won’t be part of the first round of papers. Don’t be alarmed if the galaxies are odd, this is part of the process of checking our results.

But we still need you! As part of our follow-up work, we need volunteers to review our set of possible merging galaxies. If you’re already familiar with basic Galaxy Zoo analysis, click here to read the instructions and click here to take part. Galaxy Zoo 2 will go live in the near future featuring a much more detailed classification system, while further off we plan GalaxyZoo 3 with lots of exciting new data. We’ll notify all of you via the newsletter when we’re able to start these two new endeavours.

Once you register and log in, they give you a tutorial on classification, and then you take a test. Fifteen galactic images. Off to the side is a handy chart. Click on one of six images that correspond to your classification.

After that, its off to the analysis page.

Here is one presented to me during a recent run:

Its a routine clockwise spiral galaxy.

Now what is this?

Is it a merger? Is it a spiral, an elliptical?

So far, I have tagged 225 images.

Galaxy Crash

I ran across this site while searching for information on galaxies. Hope you enjoy Galaxy Crash.

Sally Ride Science Festival at ASU

The Sally Ride Science Festival on March 1, 2008 was well attended. Under a bright, warm sun, hundreds of local school girls with parents, siblings, friends and teachers in tow explored the exhibits and displays, took in Sally Ride’s lecture and went off to workshops in the afternoon. Not for the faint of heart, some of the workshops had titles such as “Properties of Light, Gases & Vacuum and Heat Transfer & Cryogenics”, “Exploding Stars”, “Extreme Astronomy: Monstrous Black Holes and Spectacular Supernovae” and “Stem Cells”.

The National Space Society of Phoenix, along with the Moon Society, the Mars Society and the Planetary Society all contributed to the buzz, chatter, questions and answers. We passed out back issues of Ad Astra along with student membership applications for NSS, talked with the girls and their parents, and answered questions about the Moon and Mars and space exploration.

Perhaps the largest draw was Menkes van den Briel’s “How High Can You Jump on Mars”? Using a standing jump tape measure device, the girls jumped and then translated the height of the jump on Earth into height on Mars, the Moon and the moons of Mars. A twelve inch jump on Earth becomes thirty two inches on Mars. The best jump of the day was equal to five feet three inches on Mars. The exhibit was packed for several hours, right up until the announcement of Sally Ride’s lecture.

Our next adventure is Yuri’s Night, at the Challenger Space Center in Peoria on April 12th.

NSS Legislative News

NSS Legislative and Grassroots Action Center

Guidelines for Contacting Congress
NSS Position Papers: Why Space? – Space Solar Power

NSS Legislative Alert

LoST Alert 03 Oct 07

Private Property Rights in Space in Serious Jeopardy due to the Law of the Sea Treaty (LoST)!

NSS White Paper: Rejecting the Law of the Sea Treaty (LoST)

Message your Senators!

Please stop the Senate from ratifying the Law of the Sea Treaty (LoST). The “Common Heritage of Mankind” language in the treaty and numerous provisions therein will not only make practical development of vast resources on Earth extremely difficult, but it can set precedent that would render the even grander resources of outer-space impossible to develop. This treaty is an attack on property rights and the sovereignty of the United States. Vote NO on LoST!

All Senators and Members of Congress can be reached by calling the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at:

202-224-3121

Position Statement

The National Space Society believes that the United States should reject the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, also known as the Law of the Sea Treaty (LoST). We believe that the Senate should not ratify LoST because it subjects the U.S. and other nations to unnecessary and counterproductive international authority; sets a bad precedent for signing other, more restrictive “common heritage of mankind” treaties; inhibits the future development of space resources; and is in fact unnecessary since the U.S. already complies with the portions of the Treaty that do NOT inhibit resource development.

Specific Policy Objections

We believe the United States President and Senate must reject LoST as it is currently written for the following reasons:

LoST Sets a Bad Precedent for Signing Future Treaties

Ratification would set a bad precedent for the future development and settlement of outer space. The L5 Society, one of the founding organizations of NSS, fought successfully against the Moon Treaty, another “common heritage” treaty that is based on LoST. If the U.S. signed LoST, it would face increasing pressure to sign the Moon Treaty, which explicitly prohibits private development of resources from the unexplored reaches of our world and solar system. We believe private development is the best way for the resources of Earth or space to be used to improve human life everywhere.

LoST Subjects the U.S. and Other Nations to International Authority

Part XI establishes an international bureaucracy with the power to approve, oversee, transfer technology from, and tax private enterprises that explore the open seas to an unprecedented and unnecessary degree. We believe the nations of the world should be free to establish their own footholds in space in cooperation with other nations without being subject to approval by an international authority.

LoST Will Inhibit the Development of Space Resources

Resources that are ultimately necessary to the future health of our civilization will be subject to, as well as confiscated and redistributed by, the UN, an organization with a long history of acting against the best interest of the United States and a poor history of managing anything. The very future of our civilization will depend upon the resources and technologies gained by exploring new worlds. We should not restrict that future through short-sighted decisions today. Accepting the UN’s mandate on future resource development will mean a dimmer future for all—not just the United States. Free enterprise must be allowed to continue to expand, on this world and others for the sake of our global civilization.

The U.S. Already Complies with LoST, Except Part XI

As a major international partner, the U.S. already complies with most provisions of the LoST convention and recognizes other nations’ rights under the Treaty. However, if the U.S. signs the Treaty, we also must accept Part XI, which is directly detrimental to U.S. interests with no advantage to us. NSS does not believe the U.S. should accept a Treaty that offers no benefit from signing it, especially if we are already enjoying its benefits and obeying its provisions without being a signatory.

Conclusion

LoST is an all-or-nothing treaty; if the U.S. signs it, we must accept all of it, even Part XI, which will set the stage for preventing human access to the resources of the seabed and, eventually, space. We believe the resources of this world and others should be explored and developed by free people, not subjected to an international bureaucracy. Therefore, NSS urges the Senate and the President to renegotiate LoST or to continue complying with all of it except Part XI.

What should you say when you call the members of the Senate?

Here are some talking points you can use:

Specific Objections to Part XI of the LoST

Despite the 1994 modifications, NSS reiterates its objections to signing LoST for the following reasons:

The International Seabed Authority (ISA) Creates a Centralized, Command Economy

• LoST still treats the resources of the sea beds as the “common heritage of mankind.” The “common heritage” clause equates to developing nations having a preponderant say, share, and veto power over the ability of United States citizens and companies to develop the resources of the seas or space.
• The international centralized economy of the International Seabed Authority (ISA) remains an inefficient and ineffective means of exploiting the world’s unclaimed seabeds.
• Private individuals or companies are less likely to develop ocean or space resources if they know that an unelected, unaccountable international organization or a developing nation could seize their profits or technologies at its convenience.
• LoST, like its offspring the Moon Treaty, creates strong disincentives for private individuals to develop these new resources, however beneficial their eventual exploitation may be to humanity as a whole. By making the resources of the Earth or space as the common heritage of mankind, we ensure that there will be NO heritage.
• Nations that sponsor seabed mining companies are financially liable for damages caused by their citizens. This discourages development, as developed nations are often unwilling to pay for damages of this sort.
• “Pioneer” individuals or companies must provide two sites for development—one for the pioneer and one for the ISA to develop or hand over to a developing nation.
• The Treaty still favors state-run or state-sponsored enterprises rather than individual, private, or public corporations.

For more background information, see the NSS White Paper: Rejecting the Law of the Sea Treaty (LoST).

After contacting your senator or congressperson, email the results of your conversation to Greg Allison (ghallison4space@yahoo.com) or Bart Leahy (bart_leahy@hotmail.com) so the NSS Policy Committee can track Congress’s position on a particular bill or issue. Thank you for getting involved and supporting NSS!

Please get all call out and feedback complete by 19 Oct 07.

Guidelines for contacting Congress

---

Mars Alert 04Sep07

Moon, Mars, and Beyond is in serious jeopardy!

When the United States House of Representatives recently passed its version of the FY08 budget, the House approved language in the NASA budget that would restrict NASA from spending any money on programs that are exclusively intended for human missions to Mars. This language poses a real danger to the future of the program. It not only endangers future human missions to the red planet but also undermines the rationale behind out successful robotic Mars program.

According to NSS Executive Director, George Whiteside’s, “This shortsighted language must be changed. At a time when Europe, Russia, and China are turning their attention towards Mars, this language would hobble America’s leadership position in exploration of the red planet.”

It is NOT too late to prevent this language from ending up in the final budget. The U.S. Senate budget version does not include this language and House Appropriations members can still help remove the language during the Conference Committee. However, they are unlikely to do this if they don’t hear any objections from their constituents and the space advocacy community.

We need you to take a stand. How? You need to call your representatives in Congress (Senate and House) and express your opposition to this anti-Mars language. In addition, tell Congress that NASA needs to be funded at the level that Congress itself agreed to fund the space program in the 2005 NASA Authorization Act.

What should you say when you call? The following are guidelines but use your own words.

1. I am calling to object to the anti-Mars language that has been placed in the House Appropriations Bill. The language, which was inserted by staff, would forbid NASA from working on human Mars exploration. This language will weaken NASA’s entire exploration program, cutting out the real rationale behind our successful robotic Mars program. We must not have this language in the final appropriations bill for NASA.

2. Congress should also support a top-line increase in NASA’s budget, which is an investment in America’s future. We hope that you will support the funding level that Congress overwhelmingly agreed in the 2005 NASA Authorization Act.

Guidelines for contacting Congress

Find Your Elected Officials

READING SPACE: NSS Reviews and Recommended Reading for December

READING SPACE:  NSS Reviews and Recommended Reading

Whenever you purchase anything from Amazon.com, please use any of our links to enter their site. NSS will receive credit for anything you purchase in that session. You can also right-click the Amazon logo to the right and save it as a bookmark or favorite. It helps NSS and doesn’t cost you a penny more!

NSS REVIEW: Non-Fiction Book of the Month (NOV) More Non-Fiction Books Title: The Case for Mars Author: Robert Zubrin Date: 1996 / 1997		NSS REVIEW: Fiction Book of the Month (DEC) More Fiction Books Title: Lucifer’s Hammer Author: Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle Date: 1985		NSS REVIEW: Children’s Book of the Month (DEC) More Children’s Books Title: Astrobiology Author: Fred Bortz Date: October 2007
Still a major pathfinding book ten years after publication. “Bob Zubrin really, nearly alone, changed our thinking on this issue.”—Carl Sagan		Probably the first novel to describe realistically the effects of a comet striking the planet Earth.		An informative introduction to the fascinating topic of possible life on other worlds, providing an appropriate level of background and detail.
Read our review by Ted Spitzmiller		Read our review by Bart Leahy		Read our review by Marianne Dyson

Books are selected for recommendation based on their connection to the NSS vision of people living and working in space. Reviews are provided by members of the NSS Space Books Committee and other individuals. Opinions expressed are those of the reviewers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Space Society. Contact Space Books Committee Chairman Marianne Dyson with comments or requests for book reviews. Note: NSS does not review self- or pod-published books.

NSS Projects & Events

Projects & Events

If you would like to learn

what other Chapters are doing
what Space related opportunities are there for you or your children to get involved in

If you have something to tell us about how your chapter is working to promote space exploration, travel and settlement.

Tell us how the members of your chapter are making a difference in what the public knows about Space and the National Space Society

Go To http://chapters.nss.org/committees/ProjectsandEvents/NSSChaptersNetworkProjectandEvents.html