Keep the shuttle flying: February 2018

Wednesday, February 28, 2018

A Strategy— STS. By F. Buzzard

A strategy---- STS. F. Buzzard

Returning to the Moon to learn how to sustain human presence on another planet (Earth Orbit to Lunar orbit resupply using ion engine or nuclear engine stage transportation infrastructure development is crucial) and learn how to live off the land (Insitu resource utilization) is a strategy, a technology driver, and a necessary precursor to going to Mars.

4. Using the ISS as a transportation node (aka St. Louis, MO to build, supply, and form the wagon trains before proceeding to CA and Oregon) is a critical and correct strategy to return to the Moon or Mars. NASA has no plan to use ISS as a transportation node for deep space exploration.

None of these seem to be in NASA's vision. Wonder what I am missing here?

Frank Buzzard

Sent from my iPad

Comment to How Russia won space Race

And meanwhile the shuttle program is mothballed by funding cuts, with no viable replacement so now we hitch a ride with the Russians like a hipster using Uber. If it wasn't for people like Elon Musk, there would be no American space program! The great Americans who worked on Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, and The Shuttle have been told thanks, but we don't need to have a great AMERICAN space program again, we need to focus on social injustice and "Global Warm...er uhh...Climate Change" on Fwd: Documentary Shows How Russia 'Won the Space Race'

Sent from my iPad

Response to WHY? Re no X37C

Boeing has enough more than enough capital to make it's own modifications to the x-37b. Their problem is, that they have no vision for space exploration. Hence the CST-100's inability to loiter in orbit past 48 hrs without being parked at the ISS. It's only a basic crew escape craft that's also a crew taxi. What happens in the event of an emergency & the crew can't return to earth or reach the station for 3 days. Another visionless space vehicle from Boeing. on Why????????

Sent from my iPad

Tuesday, February 27, 2018

Why?

Jim Hillhouse

March 5, 2014 at 7:19 pm

Well, after talking to Capitol Hill staffers, they too are suffering the same head issues I am. At least I'm in good company.

Rather than talk about what Congress will or will not pay for, let's review what Congress has done since 2010 on space funding.

Congress has, on its own and despite both opposition from the Administration and aggressive delaying tactics on the SLS and Orion programs from NASA, appropriated those amounts needed to keep both Orion and SLS on track. And just as it's done since 2010, Congress is going to do what it wants on HSF, which is fund Orion and SLS fully.

What Congress sees is not a justification for Commercial Crew. Far from it. Congressional staffers are well aware of the true progress of that program and no, none of those players are getting us to ISS anytime soon. That's largely NASA's fault since Congress has informed it that the CCP program needed to down-selected years ago to better focus limited resources for faster progress. But NASA's leadership didn't do that for political reasons. Loose Boeing and CCP looses luster and respectability. Loose Sierra Nevada and we working on three capsule programs. And if you want to make engineers working in GN&C or ELSS laugh, tell them that one of the CCP companies will be flying crews by 2016. Guffaws galore.

And those in Congress specializing in space are well aware that, had getting independent access to ISS for our nation really been Job #1 for NASA's leadership, then the Administration would have approved Boeing's proposal for the X-37B follow-on, the 5 crew X-37C. We are talking about a dependable spacecraft that can sit in orbit for over a year and NASA said no to making it a crewed vehicle. Why?

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/03/x-37b-expanded-capabilities-iss-missions/

What Congress does see is that if we had not gone through the nonsense of 2010, we would be much closer to our own capability to launch crews to ISS than we are today. Instead, Neil Armstrong was right–the Administration changed our nation's HSF course in secret, without consultation, and mucked things up.

When it comes to the Moon, Congress is funding $3.5B annually on the DDTE for Orion and SLS. Anything else will have to wait for a new Administration as there is zero trust right now in Congress of anything the White House or NASA HQ are selling about human spaceflight.

Sent from my iPad

Friday, February 23, 2018

Homeless bring diseases to cities. Time to remove them from streets – The Savage Nation

https://michaelsavage.com/?p=12397

Sent from my iPad

Astronaut: Trump's plan for the space station would be huge mistake (opinion) - CNN

The United States ended the space shuttle program in 2011, after the ISS was complete. We gave up a national treasure, forever. Beyond the loss of prestige and pride, with the end of the space shuttle program, we lost huge operational capabilities. We have not been able to send astronauts to space ourselves since then.
The shuttle was able to launch seven astronauts and nearly 60,000 pounds of payload into low Earth orbit. None of the spacecraft that might be built in the next few years comes close to that capability. Now, if the administration succeeds in ending the ISS program by 2025, our future in space will be set back even more

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/22/opinions/trumps-plan-for-the-space-station-would-be-tragic-for-america-chiao/index.html

Sent from my iPad

Thursday, February 22, 2018

Trump calls for a $2.7B space station to orbit the moon - Houston Chronicle

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Trump-calls-for-a-2-7B-space-station-to-orbit-12631646.php

Sent from my iPad

Monday, February 19, 2018

Amazing how our leaders can just ignore what we had & place in museum!

Thursday, February 15, 2018

Lost in space

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/lost-in-space/article/2568052

Sent from my iPad

A critical capability!

Sunday, February 11, 2018

Fwd: A rising space power?

Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: "RHooi" <rwlh21@comcast.net>
Date: February 11, 2018 at 7:43:32 PM CST
To: <Undisclosed-Recipient:;>
Subject: A rising space power?

China could become a major space power by 2050

Plans include launches, robotic moon bases, and interplanetary manned missions.

By Jeffrey Lin and P.W. Singer

Spaceplane

The China Aerospace Science & Industry Corporation notes that its single-stage-to-orbit hypersonic spaceplane will be ready for service by 2030.

CASIC

Last week, President Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum directing NASA to send astronauts back to the moon for long-term exploration and to prepare for the long-awaited manned Mars mission. The significance of the directive is unclear, however, as it comes without any clear budget or strategy.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, China has been making some ambitious space plans backed by multi-step procedures and lots of money. On the docket: reusable space plans, nuclear-powered spaceships, and robotic moon bases.

Three Phases of Reusability

China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation has three planned stages: (1) a reusable carrier rocket plane, (2) a reusable rocket plane and a second-stage rocket, and (3) a hypersonic carrier aircraft with a turbine rocket combined cycle engine. However, recent plans suggest that CASC is skipping the first phase.

CASC via xyz

The China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC) plans to fly its reusable space plane for the first time in 2020, and have it carry taikonauts and freight into space by 2025. The China Academy of Launch Technology (a CASC subsidiary) research and development Director Chen Hongbo told the official Xinhua News Agency that the two-stage spaceplane would be rocket-powered at first, and will be able to fly off a runway at hypersonic speeds to near space. It would then detach a reuseable second-stage rocket that would carry passengers and cargo and reach an altitude of 180-310 miles in orbit. In line with previous space plane plans, CASC will fly a scramjet-powered version of the first-stage carrier by 2030, thus increasing the second-stage payload.

The CASC program has competition, though. Vice Director Liu Shiquan of the rivaling China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC) said its own spaceplane program is off to a good start, with engines and other core technologies in advanced testing.

VASIMIR

The VASIMIR concept spaceship uses a nuclear power source to provide thrust through its plasma engines. Presumably CASC's interplanetary nuclear spaceship will operate on similar principles.

NASA

CASC also has equally ambitious plans for deep-space exploration. Key among these plans is for a nuclear-powered spacecraft, which is slated to enter service in 2040, most likely to support a manned Chinese Martian mission. CASC also has plans for China to engage in deep-space economic activity, like building orbit solar power plants, and mining asteroids and the moon.

Repeat Long Marches

CASC's Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology will start testing vertical landing technology for LM-4 and LM-6 rockets in 2019 and 2020.

Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology

To launch the thousands of tons of payload required to execute these plans, CASC is planning to make its rockets all completely reusable by 2035, from the small Long March 6 all the way to the giant Long March 5. The Long March 4B will test grid fins in 2019 (grid fins on reusable rockets like the SpaceX Falcon are used to control flight during the high velocity portion of the descent phase) and vertically land a Long March 6 rocket in 2020.

New Line Rockets

Linkspace's New Line 1 rockets are built for launching microsatellites of up to 440 pounds. Future New Line models will be completely reusable.

Link Space

Similar plans in the U.S. depend on a new breed of private launch companies, owned by tech billionaires. These firms also have competition in China. The Chinese private space launch company Link Space is also betting on reusable rockets. Its New Line 1 rocket, a 33-ton spacecraft that can launch a 440-pound payload to sun synchronous orbit, will theoretically have a vertically landed first stage. What's more, the company has already tested its rocket engines over 200 times, making good progress on plans for a first New Line 1 launch in 2020.

Long March 9

Capable of carrying 140 tons to low earth orbit (or 50 tons on a lunar bound course), the Long March 9 will be the world's most powerful space launch rocket when it flies around 2030. It'll be the workhorse not just for lunar missions, but for trips to Mars and beyond.

Chinese Internet

Also, the heavy Long March 9, which can carry 130 tons into low-earth orbit, or 50 tons into lunar orbit, will make its first flight by 2030. The Long March 9 will likely be used for manned missions to the moon as well as installing orbital solar power plants. Its massive payload capacity would also support Chinese plans to explore Jupiter, Saturn and its moons, and other celestial objects beyond the asteroid belt.

Moonpad for Lunar Roombas

China's first moon base could be entirely manned by robots that would analyze the lunar soil and send back samples to Earth on the cheap.

Global Times

The Long March 9's huge payload could come in handy for creating a base on the moon as well. It'll likely be a robotic facility; a manned base would cost a whole lot more. Jiao Weixin of Peking University says that a robot base dug into the lunar surface, unlike lunar rovers and landers, could conduct more sophisticated scientific tests of lunar soil, and cheaply send back lunar rock samples.

Researching and operating all this is going to be very expensive, but it is clear China views the new space race as a way to pick up a lot of prestige. These new plans will be added China's already wide range of space offerings, including navigation and spy satellites, a vibrant hypersonic technology industry, and growing robotics and AI industries.

Peter Warren Singer is a strategist and senior fellow at the New America Foundation. He has been named by Defense News as one of the 100 most influential people in defense issues. He was also dubbed an official "Mad Scientist" for the U.S. Army's Training and Doctrine Command. Jeffrey is a national security professional in the greater D.C. area.

A very important asset!

Thursday, February 8, 2018

Wednesday, February 7, 2018

Success! SpaceX Launches Falcon Heavy Rocket on Historic Maiden Voyage

https://www.space.com/39607-spacex-falcon-heavy-first-test-flight-launch.html

Sent from my iPad

Elon Musk’s Tesla roadster, which launched on top of SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy earlier today, is going farther out into the Solar System than originally planned. - The Verge

https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/6/16983744/spacex-tesla-falcon-heavy-roadster-orbit-asteroid-belt-elon-musk-mars

Sent from my iPad

Falcon Heavy | SpaceX

http://www.spacex.com/falcon-heavy

Sent from my iPad

Very critical capability

Tuesday, February 6, 2018

Space weapons—- USA must be PREEMINENT!

Weapons in Space - 2018

(Launchspace Special Release)

Bethesda, MD - The issue of placing weapons in orbit about the Earth continues to be of increasing concern to the U.S. and other nations. Discussions of militarizing space have been ongoing since the first artificial satellite was launched in 1957. By definition, space militarization is the placement and development of weapons and military technology in Earth orbits.Although ballistic missiles do transit space, they do not stay in space. Therefore, such missiles are not considered to be space weapons.

It is true that space is the home of many devices that serve national security interests. For example, there are many imaging and communications satellites that are owned and operated by defense and security organizations of several governments. However, these have been thought to be weaponless.

Based on publically available information, weapons are not currently stationed in space. In fact, the Outer Space Treaty, the basic legal framework of international space law, bars any signatory to the treaty from placing weapons of mass destruction in orbit, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body. Furthermore, it limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers or establishing military fortifications. On the other hand, the Treaty does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit. Accordingly, governments are forbidden from claiming ownership of celestial resources such as the Moon or a planet.

Unfortunately, just in the last few years, space has become increasingly congested and contested among an increasing number of spacefaring nations. The attraction of space-based weapons that can interfere with an adversary's defensive spacecraft operations has increased significantly. Just recently, a number of speeches and articles have been presented on the growing threat from potential spacefaring adversaries. This situation has prompted the buildup of defensive devices and techniques that are designed to counter adversary's offensive devices. Thus, the number and complexity of spacecraft are increasing rapidly. This buildup cannot continue indefinitely, but no one knows the eventual outcome.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Featured short course - available for customized presentation at your facility

Contact Launchspace for a quote: info@launchspace.com

Spacecraft Environments

Sent from my iPad