The competition heats up: Singer Sarah Brightman appears slated to be the next tourist to fly to ISS.
Boeing has indicated that it might shelve its CST-100 manned capsule, despite their recent almost half a billion dollar contract award from NASA.
This possibility illustrates why Boeing is losing market share, not only in space, but in the aviation industry. The article suggests that the NASA contract might not be enough to pay for CST-100, and that Boeing is unsure there is enough private market to make up the difference.
“That’s just for the ISS. That’s kind of the basement,” adds Elbon. More flights than those to the ISS are required he says, and Boeing is cautious about over-committing itself while future revenue streams are unclear.
I say bull hockey.
» Read more
The competition heats up: France and Germany in the European Space Agency are in serious disagreement about whether to replace the Ariane 5 or upgrade it.
The French space agency, CNES, quietly backed by Europe’s Arianespace launch consortium, has argued that the current Ariane 5 heavy-lift vehicle has only a fragile hold on its current 50 percent commercial market share. Just as important, according to the French reasoning, is that the entire Ariane 5 system, including its ground infrastructure, is expensive to operate and likely to remain so. Because money is short in Europe, it would be preferable to move immediately to a next-generation vehicle that would carry payloads ranging from 2,500 kilograms to 6,000 kilograms — with an extension to 8,000 kilograms — into geostationary transfer orbit, one at a time. This modular vehicle ultimately would replace not only today’s Ariane 5, but also the Russian Soyuz rocket that is now operating from Europe’s Guiana Space Center in French Guiana.
Set against this reasoning are industrial policy issues raised by the German space agency, DLR, and by Astrium, which is Ariane 5’s prime contractor. They say Europe needs to complete development of an upgraded Ariane 5 — at a cost of about 1.4 billion euros ($1.8 billion) — before embarking on a decade-long development of an Ariane 6 whose cost and industrial work-share distribution are unknown. [emphasis mine]
It is very clear that ESA has recognized that once Falcon 9 becomes completely operational, it will be difficult to get anyone to buy tickets on the very expensive Ariane 5. From the article it appears the battle centers on the fact that the French realize this, while the Germans are willing to look the other way.
The competition heats up: October 7 has now been set as the launch date for the first operational cargo flight of Dragon to ISS.
For the past three days there has been a very lively debate by readers of Behind the Black, attempting to figure out the actual cost of launching payload to low Earth orbit by various rockets, including SpaceX, the space shuttle, and the NASA-built Space Launch System.
Three stories published today add some new information to this debate.
» Read more
The competition heats up: It appears that Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico and Georgia are all competing to be the location of SpaceX’s proposed private commercial spaceport.
The competition heats up: Scaled Composites, having finished glide tests of SpaceShipTwo, is now installing the rocket motor for powered flight tests.
Scaled Composites has successfully performed another test of the rocket motor that will be used on SpaceShipTwo.
The competition heats up: SpaceX today signed a contract to launch three additional satellites for the European company SES.
SpaceX already has a contract to launch one SES communications satellite next year.
It’s only money! At the AIAA meeting this week in Pasadena, NASA officials admitted that the Space Launch System (SLS) will likely cost half a billion dollars per launch.
That means that after only two flights this rocket will have cost about the same as the entire manned commercial program, from which three different space companies are building three different methods for getting humans into space. After three missions it will cost more, and after four missions it will have cost double. And this is assuming that the half billion dollar “target” number ends up correct.
We can’t afford this. We never could, which is why the Saturn 5 rocket was abandoned, and why the shuttle never fulfilled its stated goal of lowering the cost of access to space and after thirty years was abandoned as well. Instead, we have got to find a cheaper way to do this, and to my mind, competition and private enterprise is the only hope.
A dispute over launch pricing between Arianespace, the launch company, and Globalstar, the satellite company.
The article only quotes an executive from Arianespace, who suggests Globalstar has been having troubles making payments. I wonder instead if maybe Globalstar has been balking at Arianespace’s prices (knowing there are other companies that can do it cheaper) and has been holding out for a price cut.
No wonder the economy is stalled: Under the Obama administration regulations have increased by 7.4%, totaling 11,327 pages of new rules.
I should add that these numbers were only slightly better under Bush or Clinton. In general, our federal government has done everything it can for the past two decades to stifle freedom and innovation.
The competition heats up: India’s space agency celebrated its 100th launch today.
It is unclear whether the numbers include their failed launches. Regardless, India has a vibrant space program, modeled somewhat after the Russian system, a government space agency focused on gaining commercial market share. Whether that model can successfully compete in the commercial world remains unknown. Russia has had success, but only during a period when they were faced with few competitors. Now that the competition is heating up it is unclear whether Russia’s model will be flexible enough to compete.
What is clear about India, however, is that they are passionate about space exploration. Historically, even the Russian government model has worked when the country using it was the new kid on the block.
Do you think the commercial space program led by SpaceX is the fastest and cheapest way for the U.S. to get humans back into low Earth orbit? Then why not do it for missions beyond Earth orbit?
The LunarCOTS petition is a campaign to have NASA subsidize private companies to design and build the United States’ future interplanetary missions rather than have NASA do it in big government programs like SLS. Makes sense to me, and so I signed the petition immediately.
The competition heats up: ATK and ULA yesterday successfully tested the solid rocket strap-on motor that is used by their Delta 4 rocket. With video.
They are using a new manufacturer for the motor’s nozzle, and needed to test this under cold conditions.
The competition heats up: There is a shortage of launch-pads available for the number of rocket launches planned.
More reality from the Democratic convention: A reporter asks delegates if we should ban profits.
It is hilarious and frightening in the same breath. Video below the fold.
» Read more
SpaceX’s first official cargo flight to ISS could occur as early as October 5.
The competition heats up: SpaceShipTwo is being readied for its first powered flights before the end of the year.
The article also provides a good review of the last two years of glide tests, what was learned and what was done with that knowledge.
A website, ScienceDebate.org, submitted a wide range of questions to Barack Obama and Mitt Romney about their plans for science and technology, and the answers, shown in a side-by-side comparison, are interesting, though in general they demonstrate the ability of politicians to speak for a long time without saying much.
This ability to blather is especially apparent to their answers to the question 12: “What should America’s space exploration and utilization goals be in the 21st century and what steps should the government take to help achieve them?” Neither candidate adds much to what was said in the Republican and Democratic party platforms, making it obvious that neither really cares or knows that much about this subject.
Overall, however, the answers do reveal the basic and fundamental differences between the two candidates, which can be seen in their answers to the very first question about encouraging innovation:
» Read more
The Democratic Party platform’s [pdf] position on space and NASA is one sentence long.
President Obama has charted a new mission for NASA to lead us to a future that builds on America’s legacy of innovation and exploration.
This is even worse than the Republican Party platform, and is more inexplicable. Considering how much support the Obama administration has given to private commercial space, this was a great opportunity to sell Obama as supportive of private enterprise. Sadly, they do not, which suggests again that Obama and his party really aren’t that interested in it.
The competition heats up: Two Russian companies have announced a joint plan to build a suborbital spacecraft for tourism.
Sounds great, but Clark Lindsey has a very informative review of the history of these announcements from Russia, none of which has ever born fruit.
Russia has decided to delay the rest of its military launches this year, pending a full review of the upper stage problems of the Proton rocket.
The Forest Products Laboratory of the U.S. Forest Service has opened a $1.7 million pilot plant for the production of cellulose nanocrystals, which have the potential to be stronger, stiffer, and lighter than Kevlar or carbon fibers.
It appears that the lab has been researching the useful properties of these nanocrystals, which is a good thing. However, I can’t help wondering why they are now building a production plant. Shouldn’t this be left to the private sector? What business is it of the Forest Service to be a producer of this product? It could be that the plant is aimed not at production but at figuring out how to make it affordable and practical, a goal that might make sense for a government agency to pursue. If not, however, it seems inappropriate for a government agency to use taxpayer dollars to run a facility aimed at selling a product to the private sector.
The article, as well as the lab’s webpage, do not make this clear.
Though this is a nice write-up describing Sierra Nevada’s Dream Chaser, the part where they talk about using the vehicle like the shuttle to repair other orbiting satellites is a bit of a stretch.
The head of the Russian space center that built the upper stage that failed on two recent Proton launches has been fired.
Putin’s action here suggests the Russians are taking these problems seriously. especially with the looming competition from SpaceX. At the same time, the boss doesn’t actually build anything, and firing him won’t fix anything if there aren’t also changes on the factory floor.
The competition heats up: On Friday SpaceX successfully completed a launch pad dress rehearsal for the next Falcon 9 launch to ISS.
The possibility that NASA might finally agree with Russia’s repeated request to fly a year-long mission to ISS grew stronger this morning with two stories:
The first, by James Oberg, digs into the underworld of NASA politics to find that plans might very well be more advanced than NASA is letting on:
» Read more
The competition heats up: Bigelow Aerospace has expanded its workforce as well doubled its factory space in response to the commercial contracts NASA recently awarded.
The company just opened a 185,000-square-foot addition, bringing its North Las Vegas plant up to about 350,000 square feet. It slashed its work force from 150 before the recession to 50 during the downturn; now, it’s looking to jump back up to 90 workers by Christmas. It’s hiring structural, mechanical and electrical engineers, as well as chemists, molecular biologists and workers who craft composite spacecraft parts.
Hat tip to Clark Lindsey at NewSpace Watch.
