Tag: NASA

NASA testing SLS fuel leak repairs; UPDATE: Problems!

10:33 am

UPDATE: NASA posted a late update today describing vaguely the results of this fueling test, and revealed that while the test of the replacement seals appeared to go well, there were other problems:

During the test, teams encountered an issue with ground support equipment that reduced the flow of liquid hydrogen into the rocket. … Engineers will purge the line over the weekend to ensure proper environmental conditions and inspect the ground support equipment before replacing a filter suspected to be the cause of the reduced flow.

In other words, the SLS fueling system is like playing whack-a-mole. You fix one problem, and others show up.

I predicted this. It remains entirely possible NASA will not be able to complete a perfect full wet-dress rehearsal countdown in time to launch before April 6th, when this present launch window closes.

Original post:
———————-
NASA yesterday did an unannounced test fueling of its SLS rocket to check out the repairs in the fueling system.

NASA is loading liquid hydrogen aboard its Space Launch System moon rocket at the Kennedy Space Center on Thursday for an unpublicized but crucial test of the repairs made to a leaky umbilical that derailed a countdown rehearsal on Feb. 2.

The operation to load liquid hydrogen into the huge fuel tank on the rocket’s core stage was thought to be already underway at launch complex 39B on Thursday morning. The test will determine if new seals installed in the launch pad umbilical are working. “As part of our work to assess the repair we made in the area where we saw elevated hydrogen gas concentrations during the previous wet dress rehearsal, engineers are testing the new seals by running some liquid hydrogen across the interface and partially filling the core stage liquid hydrogen tank. The data will inform the timeline for our next wet dress rehearsal,” a NASA spokesperson said about the previously unannounced test.

If the new seals work on these fueling tests, another full dress rehearsal countdown could take place as early as next week.

Posting is going to very light for the rest of the day. I am fighting a bad head cold and just want to go back to bed.

38 comments

Vast wins sixth ISS slot for tourist mission

5:11 pm

Haven-2
Vast’s full Haven-2 station once completed

NASA today announced that it has awarded the space station startup Vast its sixth slot for a manned commercial mission to ISS, scheduled for 2027.

The mission is expected to spend up to 14 days aboard the space station. A specific launch date will depend on overall spacecraft traffic at the orbital outpost and other planning considerations.

…Vast will submit four proposed crew members to NASA and its international partners for review. Once approved and confirmed, they will train with NASA, international partners, and SpaceX for their flight. The company has contracted with SpaceX as launch provider for transportation to and from the space station.

Vast already intends to fly four two-week missions to its single module Haven-1 demo station, scheduled to launch in the first quarter of 2027. This new ISS mission will demonstrate to NASA directly that Vast can handle manned missions. In both cases, the company is hoping its actions will convince NASA to award it a full construction contract to build its Haven-2 full-sized station, as shown in the graphic to the right.

Below are my rankings of the five private commercial space stations being developed. At this point the first three (Haven, Axiom, Starlab) are essentially tied, while the fourth (Thunderbird) is only trailing because it came late to the game. The fifth, Orbital Reef, seems practically out of the game.
» Read more

10 comments

Engineers have shut down the Gehrels-Swift space telescope in a last attempt to save it

8:07 am

Katalyst's proposed Swift rescue mission
Katalyst’s proposed Swift rescue mission.
Click for original image.

In order to delay the moment the orbit of the Gehrels-Swift Observatory decays — to increase the chance a rescue mission can get there in time — engineers have now stopped almost all scientific observations temporarily.

On Feb. 11, NASA’s Neil Gehrels Swift Observatory temporarily suspended most science operations in an effort to reduce atmospheric drag and slow the spacecraft’s orbital decay. Halting these activities will enable controllers to keep the spacecraft in an orientation that minimizes drag effects, extending its time in orbit in anticipation of a reboost mission.

“Normally, Swift quickly turns to view its targets — especially the fleeting, almost daily explosions called gamma-ray bursts — with multiple telescopes,” said principal investigator S. Bradley Cenko at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. “Swift’s Burst Alert Telescope will continue to detect gamma-ray bursts, but the spacecraft will no longer slew to observe targets with its other telescopes.”

…To maximize the orbit boost’s chances of success, Swift’s average altitude needs to be above about 185 miles. As of early February, Swift’s average altitude had fallen below about 250 miles.

NASA has awarded the orbital repair startup Katalyst the contract to rescue Gehrels-Swift, but the company has a very challenging mission. It got the contract only a few months ago, in September 2025, and is refitting its planned satellite rescue demo mission to save the space telescope instead. The graphic to the right shows how its rescue robot will approach and grab Gehrels-Swift to raise its orbit, but it must be noted that the telescope has no planned grapple points, and Katalyst’s robot has never done this before.

Moreover, the robot will be launched using the last Pegasus rocket in Northrop Grumman’s warehouse, with a launch scheduled now for sometime this summer. That means Katalyst has had to go from contract award to launch in less than a year, a pace that up until now has been unheard of in the space business. If successful however Katalyst will once again demonstrate the benefits of the capitalism model, whereby NASA buys the product from the private sector rather than building it itself. Left to NASA, this rescue mission would never happen.

And even if Katalyst’s rescue fails, that the company could get it built and launched in such a short time still proves the value of the capitalism model. Freedom and capitalism and competition at least made the attempt possible.

One comment

Voyager wins four-year $24.5 million ISS management contract from NASA

8:01 am

The space station startup Voyager Technologies yesterday won a four-year $24.5 million contract from NASA to apparently manage the agency’s missions to ISS.

Under the task-order contract, Voyager will deliver end-to-end mission services spanning payload integration, mission operations, safety and compliance, and post-mission closeout. NASA may add options that extend the scope and value of the agreement over its life, providing Voyager with a multi-year framework for recurring mission execution. Voyager anticipates onboarding three payload missions over the next quarter, reflecting near-term demand and a steady pipeline of task orders supporting ongoing ISS operations.

The company has been doing similar ISS work for NASA at the Johnson Space Center in Texas, though this contract appears to expand that work considerably. This deal provides the company further experience operating space station missions, crucial for the Starlab station that Voyager is listed as the consortium’s lead company.

Of the five stations under development, Axiom has run tourist missions to ISS to demonstrate this capability, Vast is launching its own demo single module station to demonstrate this capability, and now Voyager is doing this work for NASA to demonstrate this capability.

Max Space, which only entered this race late last year, has no such contract or experience, but it has recently partnered with Voyager in other work, and plans to launch its own demo station module in ’27.

The last proposed space station, Orbital Reef, has no such deal as far as I know. Led by Blue Origin (partnered with Sierra Space), this station project continues to show no progress of any kind.

Leave a comment

FAKE Chandrayaan-2 images of the Apollo 11 and 12 landing sites

8:30 am

Chandrayaan-2 images of Apollo 11 and Apollo 12 landing sites

The pictures to the right are fake, as are the two stories I had linked to in the now crossed-out post below. Both stories included pictures of the Apollo 11 and Apollo 12 landing sites that were fake and did not match the actual pictures taken earlier by Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.

I seem to remember that Chandrayaan-2 had taken pictures of these Apollo landing sites, but I have not been able to find those originals. Either way, the stories below as well as the pictures to the right are fake, and for that reason I have deleted the links to both.

For reasons I don’t understand, two different news outlets in the past two days decided to highlight the 2021 images taken by India’s Chandrayaan-2 lunar orbiter of the Apollo 11 and 12 landing sites, with both outlets claiming these pictures provided third-party verification that those manned lunar landings actually happened.

Those pictures are to the right. They aren’t new, but they are so good I decided they were cool enough to post again.

As for proving the lunar landing happened, that is pure anti-American silliness, sadly too often pushed by ignorant Americans. They should be ashamed. The Apollo landings were possibly the greatest single achievement Americans have ever accomplished. And if not the greatest, the landings rank near the top, and above all they certainly were among our noblest achievement.

9 comments

NASA provides update on Artemis-2 repairs for future dress rehearsal countdown

8:01 am

NASA late last night posted an update describing the fuel leak repair work taking place in advance of a second dress rehearsal countdown prior to the launch of the manned ten-day Artemis-2 mission around the Moon.

While teams continue evaluating the cause of the leak, reconnecting the interfaces is expected to be complete on Monday, Feb. 9. Testing is planned to occur at NASA’s Stennis Space Center in Bay St. Louis, Mississippi, to evaluate additional dynamics of the plates. Engineers are reviewing options to test the repair work prior to the next wet dress rehearsal to ensure the seals are performing as expected.

NASA also will update several operations for the next wet dress rehearsal to focus on fueling activities. The Orion crew module hatch will be closed prior to the test, and the closeout crew responsible on launch day for assisting the Artemis II crew into their seats and closing Orion’s two hatches will not be deployed to the launch pad. The crew access arm will not be retracted during the next rehearsal, after engineers successfully demonstrated the ground launch sequencer can retract it during the final phase of the countdown.

Additionally, NASA has added 30 minutes of extra time during each of two planned holds in the countdown before and after tanking operations to allow more time for troubleshooting, increasing the total time of the countdown by one hour. The additional time will not affect the crew’s timeline on launch day.

In other words, the next rehearsal will focus almost entirely on fueling to make sure these issues are resolved.

The agency however has not set a date for that countdown rehearsal. To launch in March, as presently planned, it must occur sometime in the next three weeks, and go perfectly. Otherwise that launch will slip again, and begin to bump up against the end of the launch window on April 6th.

Right now I am betting that second rehearsal will not go perfectly, as this was SLS’s track record leading up to November 2022 first launch. It took five countdowns before the agency was able to get the rocket off the ground without issues.

And if it does go perfectly and Artemis-2 is launched manned, it is essential to note again that it will be flying a manned capsule with a questionable heat shield and an untested life support system.

Leave a comment

Isaacman issues directive to shift power back to NASA and away from private sector

11:51 am

Jared Isaacman, in announcing this directive
Jared Isaacman, in announcing this directive

NASA administrator Jared Isaacman yesterday issued a major three-part directive which he claimed would save more than a billion dollars at NASA while allowing the agency to “regain its core competencies in technical, engineering, and operational excellence”.

The plan could actually backfire, however, as it appears to shift power and control back to NASA and away from private sector.

First, Isaacman wants to eliminate much of the outside contracting NASA now relies on, bringing that work back into the agency itself. Second, he wants eliminate “restrictive clauses that prevent us from doing our own work and addressing intellectual property barriers that have tied our hands.” Third, he wants to “restore in-house engineering,” having more work done by NASA engineers instead of depending on outside contractors.

To some extent, there is value in all these changes, because in many cases NASA employees use the policy of using contractors to outsource their entire work load, so they can sit and do practically nothing.

Overall however this directive could very well squelch the present renaissance in commercial space, because it will put NASA much more in control of everything. Rather than simply being a customer buying the products built and owned by the private sector (ie, the American people) — the capitalism model — the directive demands that NASA run things, the centralized Soviet-style top-down government model.

This aspect is best illustrated by the second part of his directive. Many contractors, such as SpaceX, do not wish to reveal everything about their product designs to NASA, because then it becomes public and can be stolen by their competitors. By requiring companies to release all proprietary data, those companies will no longer own that data, and thus will no longer be as easily able to benefit from its development. This will discourage private investment. It will also once again centralize development at NASA. Rather than getting multiple ideas and innovation from multiple companies, everything will funnel into the ideas NASA managers and engineers come up with.

Isaacman has come to this directive after spending his first two months as administrator delving into how the agency is operating. But he has gotten the solution entirely backwards. Rather than centralize and expand the work done inside NASA, thus justifying its large workforce that Isaacman has found isn’t doing much, wouldn’t it be better to simply eliminate those government jobs entirely? Trim NASA down to its essentials, and let the American people, not the government, come up with what they need and want in space.

Isaacman is not doing this however. Instead, he is apparently working to rebuild the NASA empire, so that it can once again design all, own all, and control all. That was how things were during the shuttle era, and the result was that for almost a half century, America went nowhere in space.

My doubts and concerns about Isaacman and his priorities, which started during his first nomination hearings, have only increased. Despite being a man who made billions in the free private sector, he increasingly appears to be someone eager to build a government empire to laud over everyone.

31 comments

Isaacman: SLS stands on very thin ice

2:46 pm

Though NASA administration Jared Isaacman continues to support unequivocally NASA’s planned Artemis-2 ten-day manned mission around the Moon — presently targeting a March launch date — in a statement today on X he revealed that he also recognizes the serious limitations of the SLS rocket.

And it takes two-plus years between launches
And it also takes two-plus years between launches

The Artemis vision began with President Trump, but the SLS architecture and its components long predate his administration, with much of the heritage clearly traced back to the Shuttle era. As I stated during my hearings, and will say again, this is the fastest path to return humans to the Moon and achieve our near-term objectives through at least Artemis V, but it is not the most economic path and certainly not the forever path.

The flight rate is the lowest of any NASA-designed vehicle, and that should be a topic of discussion. It is why we undertake wet dress rehearsals, Pre-FRR, and FRR, and why we will not press to launch until we are absolutely ready.

These comments were also in connection with the first wet dress rehearsal countdown that NASA performed with SLS/Orion in the past few days, a rehearsal that had to be terminated early because of fuel leaks. NASA now plans to do another wet dress rehearsal, requiring it to push back the Artemis-2 launch until March.

I think there is more going on here than meets the eye.
» Read more

34 comments

NASA makes right decision and delays Artemis-2 launch to do a 2nd dress rehearsal countdown

8:53 am

Artemis Program logo

NASA management announced today that it has decided to postpone the launch of the manned Artemis-2 mission around the Moon until March in order to give it time to do a second wet dress rehearsal countdown of the rocket and fix the hydrogen fuel leaks that occurred in yesterday’s rehearsal.

Engineers pushed through several challenges during the two-day test and met many of the planned objectives. To allow teams to review data and conduct a second wet dress rehearsal, NASA now will target March as the earliest possible launch opportunity for the flight test.

Moving off a February launch window also means the Artemis II astronauts will be released from quarantine, which they entered in Houston on Jan. 21. As a result, they will not travel to NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida Tuesday as tentatively planned. Crew will enter quarantine again about two weeks out from the next targeted launch opportunity.

It should be understood that these hydrogen leaks have been systemic to SLS’s core stage rocket engines, which come from the shuttle era. Shuttle launches were routinely delayed due to similar leaks. This was partly because hydrogen is extremely difficult to control, as its atom is so small and light, and partly because of the engine design. This was the first rocket system ever to use hydrogen as fuel, and was thus cutting edge, in the 1970s. We should not be surprised by such issues.

Newer hydrogen-fueled designs have apparently overcome the problem. For example, Blue Origin uses hydrogen as a fuel in the upper stage of its New Glenn rocket, and though it has only launched twice, it has not had such issues on either launch.

In its announcement NASA also noted a bunch of other issues that occurred during this first rehearsal, all of which suggest that a delay is called for. There was a valve issue in the Orion capsule, some audio communication channels kept dropping out, and the cold weather affected some equipment. Waiting until warmer weather will help alleviate some of this.

10 comments

Fuel leaks cause Artemis-2 dress rehearsal countdown to terminate at T-5:15, several minutes early

11:15 pm

Artemis Program logo

Two hydrogen fuel leaks during today’s Artemis-2 dress rehearsal countdown forced an early termination of the count as well as the cancellation of a second practice countdown.

The Artemis II wet dress rehearsal countdown was terminated at the T-5:15 minute mark due to a liquid hydrogen leak at the interface of the tail service mast umbilical, which had experienced high concentrations of liquid hydrogen earlier in the countdown, as well. The launch control team is working to ensure the SLS (Space Launch System) rocket is in a safe configuration and begin draining its tanks.

An earlier leak of hydrogen in the count forced a hold and a recycling of the count, though it did not stop the rehearsal.

The initial plan had been to do two terminal counts. First they would run the countdown down to T-33 seconds, hold for a few minutes, then recycle back to T-10 minutes and do it again. Because of that first leak delay the launch director canceled the second count. And because of the second leak they were unable to run that one count all the way to T-33 seconds.

The wise action would be for NASA to review their data, figure out what caused the leaks, correct it, and then do another dress rehearsal countdown. This being NASA, do not be surprised if they review the data, figure out what caused the leaks, and decide they can go ahead with the launch on February 8, 2026.

Why not? They are already launching this manned 10-day mission around the Moon with an untested life support system and a questionable heat shield. Might as well try a launch when you haven’t worked out all the fueling kinks.

23 comments

Axiom wins slot for next tourist mission to ISS

2:25 pm

NASA yesterday announced that it awarded the space station startup Axiom the next slot for a tourist mission to ISS.

NASA and Axiom Space have signed an order for the fifth private astronaut mission to the International Space Station, targeted to launch no earlier than January 2027 from the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

…Axiom Mission 5 is expected to spend up to 14 days aboard the space station. A specific launch date will depend on overall spacecraft traffic at the orbital outpost and other planning considerations.

Both Axiom and the space station startup Vast had been bidding for the fifth and sixth tourist slots. That Axiom had already done this four times previously was probably NASA’s reasons for choosing it. The agency has not yet decided on who will get the sixth slot, targeting a mission likely in 2028. My bet is that it will give to Vast, because by then Vast’s own demo station Haven-1 will have launched and been visited, thus giving that company some of the experience Axiom already has.

4 comments

FAA moves forward on its environmental assessment of SpaceX’s proposal to launch Starship/Superheavy from Kennedy Space Center

12:01 pm

Proposed Starship/Superheavy launchsites at Kennedy and Cape Canaveral
Proposed Starship/Superheavy launchsites at
Kennedy (LC-39A) and Cape Canaveral (SLC-37)

While NASA has already determined that Starship/Superheavy launches from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida will have no significant impact on the environment, the FAA has not yet completed its own environmental impact statement.

Last week it released a preliminary summary [pdf] of its impact statement, revealing that it has reduced its final options to either approving SpaceX’s request to do as many as 44 launches per year, or to reject any changes — the “no action alternative” — which would block all Starship/Superheavy launches at Kennedy.

The overall tone of this summary suggests strongly that the FAA is almost certainly going to approve SpaceX’s request, allowing as many as 44 launches per year from launchpad LC-39A, as shown on the map to the right. As it notes in describing the “no action alternative”:

SpaceX would not launch Starship-Super Heavy from LC-39A. NASA would not develop, implement, or approve agreements with SpaceX associated with Starship-Super Heavy operations at LC-39A. The No Action Alternative would not meet the purpose and need. [emphasis mine]

In other words, rejecting SpaceX’s request would not fulfill the FAA’s obligation to serve the public. It would also not fulfill the FAA’s obligation to serve a fellow government agency, NASA, which has already approved this SpaceX request in a 2019 environmental assessment.

It appears a final decision by the FAA is imminent. A nice summary of this FAA document can be found here, which notes that if approved, it will give SpaceX license approval to launch Starship/Superheavy as much as 146 times per year, from its launchpads at Boca Chica, Kennedy, and Cape Canaveral. Note too that this FAA assessment is independent of the Air Force’s environment assessment, which has already approved 76 launches per year at the SLC-37 launchpad.

6 comments

NASA delays Artemis-2 wet dress rehearsal countdown due to weather

9:30 am

NASA today announced it is delaying until February 2, 2026 the wet dress rehearsal countdown of its Artemis-2 mission due to weather concerns.

NASA is targeting Monday, Feb. 2, as the tanking day for the upcoming Artemis II wet dress rehearsal at the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida, as a result of weather. With this change, the first potential opportunity to launch is no earlier than Sunday, Feb. 8.

Over the past several days, engineers have been closely monitoring conditions as cold weather and winds move through Florida. Managers have assessed hardware capabilities against the projected forecast given the rare arctic outbreak affecting the state and decided to change the timeline. Teams and preparations at the launch pad remain ready for the wet dress rehearsal. However, adjusting the timeline for the test will position NASA for success during the rehearsal, as the expected weather this weekend would violate launch conditions.

I had previously said this dress rehearsal countdown would include the astronauts inside Orion. This was incorrect. The astronauts are in quarantine in preparation for the actual mission. Orion will be unmanned during the rehearsal countdown.

6 comments

Artemis-2 proves NASA learned nothing from the Challenger and Columbia failures

9:56 am

NASA: an agency still avoiding reality
NASA: an agency that still avoids reality

Our bankrupt new media continues to fail us. NASA is about to send four astronauts on a ten-day mission around the Moon in a capsule with questionable engineering, and that media continues to ignore the problem. Mainstream news outlets continue to describe the mission in glowing terms, consistently ignoring that questionable engineering. In some cases the stories even make believe NASA has fixed the problem, when it has not.

The most ridiculous example is an article yesterday from an Orlando outlet, Spectrum New 13: “How the lessons learned from the Challenger disaster apply to Artemis rockets”. It focuses entirely on the O-ring problem that destroyed Challenger, noting repeatedly that NASA has fixed this issue in its SLS rocket.

Of course it has. That’s the last war, long over. Engineers fixed this issue almost four decades ago. The article however dismisses entirely the new engineering concern of today, Orion’s heat shield, which did not work as expected during its own test flight in space in 2022. It covers this issue with this single two-sentence paragraph:

However, during re-entry, it broke up into chunks instead of burning away. This issue pushed back the Artemis II and III missions, but NASA has stated it has resolved the problem.

NASA however has not resolved the problem. It is using the same heat shield now on this manned mission, and really has no reason to assume it will work any better, even if the agency has changed the re-entry flight path in an effort to mitigate the heat shield’s questionable design.

You see, NASA with Artemis-2 is doing the exact same thing it did prior to both the Challenger and Columbia accidents. » Read more

40 comments

NASA targeting January 31, 2026 for Artemis-2 dress rehearsal countdown

8:25 am

The flight plan for the Artemis-2 mission around the Moon
The flight plan for the Artemis-2 mission around the Moon. Click for original.

NASA engineers are now targeting January 31, 2026 for the manned dress rehearsal countdown of the Artemis-2 SLS rocket and Orion capsule.

The upcoming wet dress rehearsal is a prelaunch test to fuel the rocket. During the rehearsal, teams demonstrate the ability to load more than 700,000 gallons of cryogenic propellants into the rocket, conduct a launch countdown, and practice safely removing propellant from the rocket without astronauts inside the spacecraft.

During several “runs,” the wet dress rehearsal will test the launch team’s ability to hold, resume, and recycle to several different times in the final 10 minutes of the countdown, known as terminal count. The rehearsal will count down to a simulated launch at 9 p.m. EST, but could run to approximately 1 a.m. if needed.

This rehearsal will include the four-person crew inside the Orion capsule, which will once launched take them in a wide ten-day Earth orbit that will swing them past the Moon and then back to Earth. The crew entered quarantine at the end of last week to reduce the chance they will catch any illnesses prior to launch.

This mission carries great risk, as the capsule’s life support system has never been used in space before, while the viability of its heat shield remains questionable.

5 comments

Dragonfly’s rotors complete testing

12:07 pm

According to a press release yesterday from the Applied Physics Lab (APL) in Maryland that is building the Dragonfly helicopter that is going to Saturn’s moon Titan, the rotors have completed the first round of testing, and are now about to undergo “fatigue and cryogenic trials under simulated Titan conditions.”

Over five weeks, from August into September, the team evaluated the performance of Dragonfly’s rotor system — which provides the lift for the lander to fly and enables it to maneuver — in Titan-like conditions, looking at aeromechanical performance factors such as stress on the rotor arms, and effects of vibration on the rotor blades and lander body. In late December, the team also wrapped up a set of aerodynamics tests on smaller-scale Dragonfly rotor models in the TDT [Transonic Dynamics Tunnel].

This quote about the manufacture of the rotors however stood out the most:

Pennington and team cut Dragonfly’s first rotors on Nov. 1, 2024. They refined the process as they went: starting with waterjet paring of 1,000-pound aluminum blocks, followed by rough machining, cover fitting, vent-hole drilling, and hole-threading. After an inspection, the parts were cleaned, sent out for welding, and returned for final finishing.

“We didn’t have time or materials to make test parts or extras, so every cut had to be right the first time,” Pennington said, adding that the team also had to find special tools and equipment to accommodate some material changes and design tweaks. [emphasis mine]

In other words, this is another hardware-poor NASA project. What they build is what they have. No time or money for testing of prototypes.

This mission is really pushing the envelope, possibly more than any NASA planetary probe in a half century. I just hope they get it right.

3 comments

Update on NASA’s damaged Goldstone antenna

8:25 am

According to a scientists at JPL, the Goldstone antenna — one third of NASA’s Deep Space Network (DSN) that scientists and NASA use to communicate with any interplanetary mission — will not resume operations until May of 2026.

The antenna has been out of service since September 2025 when it was damaged badly by workers who rotated the antenna past its correct limits, causing damage to piping and cables.

DSS-14 is officially scheduled to resume operations May 1, Benner said. “Unofficially, this might change. We’re hearing a variety of things,” he added, without specifying whether the return could be earlier or later. He noted that DSS-14 had already been scheduled to go offline in August 2026 for extended maintenance expected to last until October 2028, replacing equipment that in some cases is 40 to 50 years old.

In other words, this outage essentially took the antenna out of service a year early.

The outage can be covered by NASA’s other two DSN antennas in Spain and Australia, but it also limits the whole network’s capabilities. When Artemis-2 launches in the next month or so this limitation will significantly reduce communications with NASA’s other planetary missions at Mars and elsewhere during that mission’s 10-day flight around the Moon.

We still do not know the cause of the over-rotation, which at present does appear to have been the result of human carelessness. And NASA’s lack of transparency in this matter reinforces that speculation.

9 comments

Expedition-11 crew splashdowns safely

9:03 am

SpaceX’s Endeavour capsule has safely splashed down and been recovered off the coast of California, returning the four Expedition-11 astronauts several weeks early from ISS due to an as-yet undisclosed medical issue with one astronaut.

Crew-11 returned home about a month earlier than planned because of a medical concern teams are monitoring with one of the crew members, who remains stable. Due to medical privacy, it is not appropriate for NASA to share more details about the crew member. Prior to return, NASA previously coordinated for all four crew members to be transported to a local hospital for additional evaluation, taking advantage of medical resources on Earth to provide the best care possible.

Following the planned overnight hospital stay, the crew members will return to NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston and undergo standard postflight reconditioning and evaluations.

This hospital visit for all four astronauts is simply a cover to hide which astronaut has the medical issue. At some point this information must be revealed, simply because it impacts how future space travel will be planned.

7 comments

Axiom has delayed the launch of its first space station module to ’28

11:53 am

Axiom's module assembly sequence
Axiom’s module assembly sequence

When Axiom announced in September 2025 that Redwire would be building the solar panels for the first module of its space station, dubbed the PPTM, it also said that module would launch in late 2027, which was a delay of one year from the original launch date of 2026.

That schedule has now apparently been delayed again. In an interview yesterday, the company’s vice president of human spaceflight, former NASA astronaut Peggy Whitson, indicated the launch was now targeting 2028.

Plans call for the initial Axiom Station to be comprised of two modules, the PPTM — short for Payload Power Thermal Module — and a habitat module. The PPTM, which is to be shipped shortly to Houston for final assembly and integration, is slated to be launched in early 2028, with the second module following just months later. From there, Axiom aims to swiftly begin welcoming crew, Peggy Whitson, the company’s vice president of human spaceflight, told me in an interview.

This schedule almost guarantees that the Axiom station will not detach from ISS as quickly as originally intended. PPTM has a large hatch opening connecting it to ISS, allowing for the easy transfer of much of the research racks held on ISS. Before Axiom can become a free-flying station that ISS equipment must be moved, a process that will take time, likely months. To get it done the company will probably have to also attach its second habitation module so that crews can arrive and begin this transfer process.

In other words, Axiom’s schedule margins for getting its station launched, docked to ISS, loaded with ISS equipment, and then separated before ISS retires in 2030 are shrinking. It can ill afford further delays.

Below are my rankings of the five American space stations presently under development. Note that I now consider Axiom and Starlab tied for second.
» Read more

12 comments

NASA and Department of Energy agree to place nuclear reactor on Moon by ’30

8:56 am

NASA and Department of Energy have signed an agreement to develop nuclear power stations for NASA lunar base, and are targeting 2030 for placing a nuclear reactor on Moon.

NASA, along with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), announced Tuesday a renewed commitment to their longstanding partnership to support the research and development of a fission surface power system for use on the Moon under the Artemis campaign and future NASA missions to Mars.

A recently signed memorandum of understanding between the agencies solidifies this collaboration and advances President Trump’s vision of American space superiority by deploying nuclear reactors on the Moon and in orbit, including the development of a lunar surface reactor by 2030. This effort ensures the United States leads the world in space exploration and commerce. [emphasis mine]

Wanna bet? I’m laying odds that this joint government effort will end up being delayed and overbudget. In fact, the highlighted phrase suggests this work is already experiencing delays and budget overruns. Why else make a big deal about “a renewed commitment”?

3 comments

Portugal signs Artemis Accords

8:30 am

Portugal yesterday become the 60th nation to sign the Artemis Accords, according to an announcement posted by NASA administrator Isaacman on X.

In October 2025 a Latvia government report had indicated that it had signed the accords, making it the 60th nation in this American alliance, but Isaacman’s announcement did not include it.

Thus, Portugal is the 60th nation, with this the full and corrected list: Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, the Philippines, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, the Ukraine, the United States and Uruguay.

I suspect Latvia will soon make it official, especially because its neighbors, Estonia and Lithuania, have already signed. These three former Soviet vassal states try to work together as this reduces the Russian threat.

Portugal’s signing means practically all of Europe is now on board.

Leave a comment

Isaacman makes it official: Artemis-2 will fly manned around the Moon, despite Orion’s heat shield concerns

8:01 am

Orion's damage heat shield
Damage to Orion heat shield caused during re-entry in 2022,
including “cavities resulting from the loss of large chunks”

In a tweet yesterday afternoon, NASA administration Isaacman essentially endorsed the decision of the NASA managers and engineers in its Artemis program who decided they could live with the engineering issues of Orion’s heat shield (as shown in the image to the right) and fly the upcoming Artemis-2 mission around the Moon carrying four astronauts with that same heat shield design.

Isaacman’s statement however suggests to me that he is not looking at this issue as closely as he should.

Human spaceflight will always involve uncertainty. NASA’s standard engineering process is to identify it early, bound the risk through rigorous analysis and testing, and apply operational mitigations that preserve margin and protect the crew. That process works best when concerns are raised early and debated transparently.

I appreciate the willingness of participants to engage on this subject, including former NASA astronaut Danny Olivas, whose perspective reflects how serious technical questions can be addressed through data, analysis, testing, and decisions grounded in the best engineering judgment available. [emphasis mine]

The highlighted sentence is fundamentally incorrect. » Read more

12 comments

Former astronaut once again blasts NASA decision to fly Artemis-2 manned

10:13 am

Charles Camarda on the shuttle
Charles Camarda on the first shuttle flight
after the Columbia failure.

The opposition to NASA’s decision to fly humans in the Orion capsule around the Moon with a questionable heat shield continues. Charles Camarda, an engineer and former NASA astronaut who has repeatedly expressed concerns about that heat shield and had been invited to attend the review meeting that NASA administrator Isaacman had arranged to ease his concerns, has now revealed his concerns were not eased in the slightest by that meeting, and that the Ars Technica article by Eric Berger that suggested otherwise was wrong, and that he is still “outraged” at NASA’s bad engineering decisions.

The rage you witnessed was my observing the exact behaviors used to construct risk and flight rationale which caused both Challenger and Columbia Accidents. Using “tools” inappropriately and then claiming results to be “Conservative.” Not to mention the reliance on Monte Carlo simulations to predict failure probabilities which were also proven to be inaccurate by orders of magnitude in my book “Mission Out of Control” which you claim to have read.

I suggest, in the spirit of transparency, you should ask NASA to release just the “Findings” of NESC Report TI-23-01849 Volume I. Finding 1 states the analysis cannot accurately predict crack initiation and propagation at flight conditions. And there was so much more which was conveniently not presented.

In other words, he finds NASA’s engineering claims that Orion’s heat shield will work using a different less stressful return trajectory as it dives back into the atmosphere about 25,000 mph to be false and untrustworthy. Worse, he sees it as proof that this is a continuation of the same culture at NASA that resulted in the Columbia failure.

Some of the exact same people responsible for failing to understand the shortcomings of the Crater Analysis tool (used tiny pieces of foam impacts to Shuttle tiles to predict a strike from a piece of foam which was 6000 larger and which caused the Columbia Accident) were on the Artemis Tiger Team now claiming they could predict the outcome of the Orion heatshield using a tool (similar to CRATER) called the Crack Identification Tool (CIT) which was also not physics based and relied on predictions of the key paramenter, permeability, which they claim to be the “root” cause, pressure, to vary by three orders of magnitude (that’s over 1000x).

In defense of NASA, those engineers had also presented data that showed Orion’s hull was strong enough to survive re-entry, even if the heat shield failed entirely. It is unclear if Camarda’s objections here apply to that data as well.

Regardless, his strong public disagreement with NASA on this once again raises serious questions about the upcoming manned Artemis-2 mission, set to launch sometime in the February to March time frame.

24 comments

An outline of NASA’s present schedule leading up to the Artemis-2 manned lunar fly-by mission

8:11 am

Link here. The mission will slingshot four astronauts around the Moon and back to Earth. The update includes lots of details about the rollout, the dress rehearsal countdown, the follow-up, and finally the various launch windows and the requirements that determine them.

This paragraph however about those requirements struck me:

The launch day and time must allow SLS to be able to deliver Orion into a high Earth orbit where the crew and ground teams will evaluate the spacecraft’s life support systems before the crew ventures to the Moon.

That life support system will be making its first flight in space, with four humans as the guinea pigs. Though this is another example of NASA putting schedule ahead of safety (the system should have flown at least once unmanned), it does indicate the agency recognizes the risk it is taking, and has added this extra longer orbit to give engineers time to test the system.

There are three launch windows, within which there are only five available launch dates:

January 31 to February 14 (February 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11)
February 28 to March 13 (March 6, 7, 8, 9, 11)
March 27 to April 10 (April 1, 3, 4, 5, 6)

In 2022, once NASA managers chose their first launch window, they were able to get the rocket off on the first attempt. There were no scrubs or aborts, though prior to that attempt the launch date was delayed numerous time over five years. Based on that past history, it is likely the agency will succeed on its first attempt in February, barring weather issues.

2 comments

ISS crew to return on Wednesday January 14, 2026

10:40 pm

The present four-person expedition 11 crew on ISS, which has one member with an undisclosed sudden health issue that needs addressing on the ground, will undock and return to Earth on January 14, 2025 in SpaceX’s Endeavour capsule.

NASA and SpaceX are targeting no earlier than 5 p.m. EST, Wednesday, Jan. 14, for the undocking of the agency’s SpaceX Crew-11 mission from the International Space Station, pending weather conditions. … NASA astronauts Zena Cardman and Mike Fincke, JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) astronaut Kimiya Yui, and Roscosmos cosmonaut Oleg Platonov will splash down off the coast of California at approximately 3:40 a.m. on Thursday, Jan. 15.

Mission managers continue monitoring conditions in the recovery area, as undocking of the SpaceX Dragon depends on spacecraft readiness, recovery team readiness, weather, sea states, and other factors. NASA and SpaceX will select a specific splashdown time and location closer to the Crew-11 spacecraft undocking.

NASA has released no information about the medical issue that canceled a spacewalk and prompted the early return of this crew. We do not even know the name of the impacted astronaut.

7 comments

Isaacman okays flying Artemis-2 manned, despite heat shield questions

1:53 pm

According to an article posted today at Ars Technica, after a thorough review NASA administrator Jared Isaacman has decided to allow the Artemis-2 mission — set to launch sometime before April and slingshot around the Moon — to fly manned with four astronauts despite the serious questions that still exist about its heat shield.

The review involved a long meeting at NASA with NASA engineers, several outside but very qualified critics, as well as two reporters (for transparency).

Convened in a ninth-floor conference room at NASA Headquarters known as the Program Review Center, the meeting lasted for more than three hours. Isaacman attended much of it, though he stepped out from time to time to handle an ongoing crisis involving an unwell astronaut on orbit. He was flanked by the agency’s associate administrator, Amit Kshatriya; the agency’s chief of staff, Jackie Jester; and Lori Glaze, the acting associate administrator for NASA’s Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate. The heat shield experts joined virtually from Houston, along with Orion Program Manager Howard Hu.

Isaacman made it clear at the outset that, after reviewing the data and discussing the matter with NASA engineers, he accepted the agency’s decision to fly Artemis II as planned. The team had his full confidence, and he hoped that by making the same experts available to Camarda and Olivas, it would ease some of their concerns.

My readers know that I have been strongly opposed to flying Artemis-2 manned, an opposition I expressed in an op-ed at PJMedia only yesterday. However, after reading this Ars Technica report, my fears are allayed somewhat by this quote:
» Read more

21 comments

ISS expedition 11 will return early due to medical issue

3:34 pm

Though NASA officials provided no new details on what the medical issue is on ISS nor who it occurred to, in a briefing this afternoon they announced that they have decided to bring the crew home early, and are also looking at launching the next crew earlier than its presently scheduled February launch.

They did say that the medical issue had nothing to do with space operations or the spacewalk the astronauts were getting ready to do. Though NASA’s chief medical officer James Polk was amazingly vague in his comments, he did suggest it was related to the environment of micogravity.

The one comment that struck me during the press briefing was the repeated insistence by all three officials, including NASA administrator Jared Isaacman, that NASA “never compromises safety”. Considering my own op-ed today and the unreasonable risks the agency is taken for the upcoming Artemis-2 mission, as well as its failures with Apollo 1, Challenger, and Columbia, NASA has compromised on safety many times in the past, and is doing it right now.

6 comments

Second Escapade Mars orbiter completes a delayed engine burn

10:03 am

Engineers have now successfully placed both Escapade Mars orbiters in their parking orbit, the second orbiter completed the required engine burn after it was delayed due to unexpected telemetry during an earlier mid-course correction burn.

That unexpected telemetry suggested the engine was firing at a lower thrust than expected. Today’s update did not provide any additional information as to how the thrust issue had been solved or overcome. All it said was that both spacecraft will fire their engines in November 2026 as planned to head to Mars.

Leave a comment

Medical issue forces NASA to postpone spacewalk and consider an early crew return

9:56 am

An unspecified medical issue by one crew member on ISS last night forced NASA to postpone a planned spacewalk — even as the astronauts were suiting up — and consider bringing the crew back early.

The agency is monitoring a medical concern with a crew member that arose Wednesday afternoon aboard the orbital complex. Due to medical privacy, it is not appropriate for NASA to share more details about the crew member. The situation is stable.

At this moment, we know nothing more, including the name of the astronaut with the problem. Though the crew member is “stable,” it does appear the condition is serious, as it apparently developed quite abruptly, based on the public communications feed.

In a brief space-to-ground radio exchange just after 2:30 p.m. EST, Yui called mission control in Houston and asked for a private medical conference, or PMC. Mission control replied that a PMC, using a private radio channel, would be set up momentarily. Yui then asked if a flight surgeon was available and if flight controllers had a live camera view from inside the station.

“Houston, do we still have, like, a camera view in Node 2, uh, 3, lab?” Yui asked.

“We don’t have any internal cameras right now, but we can put the lab view in if you’d like,” the mission control communicator replied.

“I appreciate that,” Yui replied. He then asked: “Do you have like a crew surgeon? … A flight surgeon?”

No additional exchanges were heard. Later Wednesday, NASA’s space station audio stream, normally carried live around-the-clock on YouTube, went silent without explanation.

Though NASA has never had to return a crew early due to an emergency medical situation, the Russians in the Soviet era did so twice. In 1976 on the Salyut 5 station the crew couldn’t get along, with one member becoming paranoid and both claiming (falsely) that the station’s atmosphere was becoming unbreathable. The crew came home early, but the next crew found nothing wrong with the station.

Then during a mission in 1985 mission to the Salyut-7 space station, one astronaut developed a prostate condition that also cancelled a spacewalk and eventually required an early return to Earth.

26 comments

Zimmerman Op-Ed at PJ Media

7:50 pm

Orion's damage heat shield
Damage to Orion heat shield caused during re-entry in 2022,
including “cavities resulting from the loss of large chunks”

PJ Media this evening published an op-ed I prepared this week in a last desperate effort to convince both President Trump and NASA administrator Jared Isaacman to rethink the manned nature of the Artemis-2 mission scheduled to launch sometime in the next three months.

President Trump and NASA Administrator Isaacman: Please Take the Crew Off of Artemis II

Nothing I say in this op-ed will be unfamiliar to my readers. I choose to farm it to PJ Media because I wanted it to get as much exposure as possible. As big as my audience is becoming, from 4 to 6 million hits per month, PJ Media has a wider reach.

I also decided in the op-ed to make no general arguments against SLS or Orion. Though my opposition to them is long standing and well known, this is not the time to fight that battle. My goal was simply to get NASA to put engineering ahead of schedule, so as to avoid the possibility of it repeating another Apollo 1 fire or Challenger accident.

I doubt at this point this op-ed will make a difference, but to paraphrase a quote written by Gordon Dickson in his wonderful science fiction book Way of the Pilgrim, there was a hand pushing me from behind, forcing me forward. I had no choice. The image of Orion’s heat shield to the right, after the 2022 return from the Moon, required action.

25 comments
1 2 3 … 75