Tag: politics

Donations and applications to Harvard drop significantly

Harvard: where you get can get a shoddy education centered on hate and bigotry
Harvard: where you can spend a lot of money
and still get a shoddy education

According to Harvard, donations to the university in 2024 dropped more than $151 million from donations the previous year, with other indications that overall donors and students are fleeing the university due to its anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas, racist DEI, pro-plagiarism, and anti-free speech policies.

Total donations were down by $151 million, or 14%, in fiscal 2024 from the prior year. Within that total, donations to Harvard’s endowment fell by nearly $193 million from a year ago, while donations for current use gifts increased by $42 million in that time frame.

The drop in donations won’t leave Harvard bankrupt, as it still has more than $53 billion in its endowment, giving it a strong foundation for survival, in the near term, if donations dry up entirely.

And they might.

Bill Ackman, a billionaire Harvard alum, said in December that Gay’s “failures have led to billions of dollars of canceled, paused and withdrawn donations to the university. … I am personally aware of more than a billion dollars of terminated donations from a small group of Harvard’s most generous Jewish and non-Jewish alumni,” Ackman said.

More significant however was the 17% decline in student applications as of December 2023. Though the numbers still exceeded application numbers from before the COVID epidemic, the drop now suggests students have reviewed the reality of this college versus its fantasy, and are now beginning to reject it.

Eventually Harvard will have to fix its bankrupt DEI policies as well as diversify its faculity so that not every teacher and staff member is a pro-Hamas anti-Semite who considers America the devil incarnate and all western civilization nothing more than an expression of “white supremacy.” (I know I am exaggerating but I also know sadly not by much.) If it doesn’t it will certainly fade from view, as students find more viable colleges, knowing that a degree from this bankrupt university will no longer get them the high level jobs they want.

6 comments

Oman: 1st launch from Duqm spaceport by the end of the year

Middle East, showing Oman's proposed spaceport

According to an announcement yesterday Oman plans to complete its first launch before the end of 2024 from its proposed new spaceport near the city of Duqm on the Indian coast.

The map to the right indicates its location. Oman has dubbed the spaceport Etlaq, and it is being run by what Oman claims is a private company, the National Aerospace Services Company (NASCOM), but based on what little I can find out, it appears either to be Oman’s space agency, or a variation of the pseudo-companies in China, privately run but very tightly controlled and owned by government officials.

The announcement provided no information about the rocket or launch, which I suspect will be nothing more than a relatively simple suborbital mission, designed to demonstrate they are serious about this spaceport. The news story at the link shows a picture of a very sophisticated rocket resembling India’s GSLV rocket. I think it is a AI image having nothing to do with reality.

This project was first announced in 2023, with more information released in January 2024. It hopes to attract American rocket companies by claiming it is being built to FAA standards.

3 comments

Good news: The European Union’s space law is delayed

According to comments by one official of the European Union (EU) at a conference in Italy this week, its proposed space law has been delayed and will not be ready for publication in 2024, as previously promised.

It appears the delay is mostly because of what appear to be complex objections to this law from many of the EU’s many member nations.

Ten of the European Union’s 27 member states “have a full-fledged national space law addressing private-sector operation,” Von der Dunk said. The national laws cover authorization and supervision of commercial activities under Article VI of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty.

The EU’s authority to promote scientific progress and the industrial competitiveness of member states comes from the 2007 Lisbon Treaty. That authority is limited, though. “The commission has to make an argument why [space law] should be treated at the EU level, as opposed to the national level,” Von der Dunk said. [emphasis mine]

As I noted in April 2024 when the release of the EU’s space law was pushed back until the summer of 2024 (which by the way did not happen), those member nations do not wish to give the EU that authority, as the EU’s track record in these kinds of matters is heavy regulation and a lot or red tape, all designed to give it power and squelch private enterprise.

It appears those member nations are acting to block this law, and appear to be succeeding. My guess is that Germany, France, Spain, and Italy are the main opponents, all of which have their own space laws in place and are now developing viable private commercial rocket and spacecraft companies. They don’t want the EU’s busy hands anywhere close to these businesses, because they expect it to squash them if it gets the chance.

One comment

Space Force awards SpaceX big launch contract

Space Force yesterday awarded SpaceX a $733 million contract for what appears to be a total of eight future launches of military and national security payloads.

Few details were released about the payloads, including the launch timeline. The deal was issued as part of the military launch contracting system, which in June named SpaceX, ULA, and Blue Origin as its launch providers for the next five years.

However, one official’s comment appeared to suggest this contract award was the military’s expression of disgust at the delays at ULA and Blue Origin in getting their rockets launchworthy.

“In this era of Great Power Competition, it is imperative to not leave capability on the ground,” Brig. Gen. Kristin Panzenhagen, program executive officer for Assured Access to Space, said in an emailed statement on Friday. “The Phase 3 Lane 1 construct allows us to execute launch services more quickly for the more risk-tolerant payloads, putting more capabilities on orbit faster in order to support national security,” Panzenhagen added. [emphasis mine]

In other words, the Space Force wanted to split this contract between the three companies, but it decided to give it all to SpaceX because it expected any launches given to ULA and Blue Origin would not launch on time, and it didn’t want “to leave [that] capability on the ground.”

In the case of ULA, its Vulcan rocket finally made its first two launches this year, four years late, but on the second launch had a failure on one of its solid-fueled strap-on boosters (the nozzle fell off). Though the rocket successfully placed its dummy payload into the correct orbit, the military has either decided that it can’t yet certify Vulcan for military launches, or sees further delays while the investigation and fixes are installed.

As for Blue Origin, its New Glenn rocket is also four years behind schedule, and likely won’t launch until next year. To get it certified will also probably require two launches, and since that company never seems to be in a hurry to do anything (NASA removed its payload from New Glenn’s first launch because the company had failed to meet the required interplanetary launch window), the Pentagon probably decided it can’t give it any contracts at this time.

And so, more launches and profits for SpaceX. While it is great for that company, with revenue that will likely aid in developing Starship/Superheavy, this is not a healthy situation for the American space industry. As a nation we need more than one launch provider. We need these other companies to stop dithering around and get the job done. That’s the true American way. Have they forgotten how to do it?

14 comments

GAO: Next SLS Artemis launches will almost certainly be delayed

SLS's two mobile launchers, costing $1 billion
NASA’s bloated SLS mobile launchers

According to a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report released yesterday, NASA’S continuing delays and technical problems building the various ground systems required for the next few Artemis launches will almost certainly cause those launches to be delayed.

The schedule at present is as follows:

  • September 2025: Artemis-2 will be the program’s first manned mission, taking four astranauts around the Moon.
  • September 2026: Artemis-3 will complete the first manned lunar landing.
  • September 2028: Artemis-4 will send four astronauts to the Lunar Gateway station in orbit around the Moon, and then complete the second manned lunar landing.

The GAO report notes at length that modifications to the mobile launch platform SLS will use on the first two missions is taking longer than planned. It also notes that the problems completing the second mobile launcher continue, with the budget growing from $383 million to $1.1 billion, and the work years behind schedule with no certainty it will be completed in time for the 2028 mission. These issues are the same ones noted by NASA’s inspector general in August 2024.

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

This report focused exclusively on the scheduling delays for the ground systems that will be used by SLS for each launch. It did not address the serious questions that remain concerning the serious heat shield damage experienced by the Orion capsule when it returned to Earth on its first unmanned mission in late 2022. NASA has been studying that problem now for two years, and as yet has not revealed a solution.

I continue to predict that the first manned landing, now scheduled for 2026, will not occur before 2030, six years behind the schedule first proposed by President Trump but actually fifteen years behind the schedule initially proposed by President George Bush Jr in 2004. All in all, it will take NASA almost a third of a century to put American astronauts back on the Moon, assuming the landing occurs in 2030 as I now predict. Compare that with the development time of SpaceX’s Starship/Superheavy. Proposed in 2017, it is already flying, and will almost certainly complete its first private manned lunar mission and its first test missions to Mars by 2027. The contrast is striking.

More and more the entire part of Artemis run by NASA is proving to be the failed disaster I predicted it would be in 2011. No wonder former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg wrote an op-ed yesterday calling for its cancellation. Like most politicians, reality is finally percolating into his thick skull, though several decades late.

22 comments

Commerce loosens regulations, allowing American space companies easier use of international facilities

The Commerce department today announced that it has issued three new rulings that will ease the regulations and licensing procedures that American rocket and satellite companies have to go through in order to launch from international facilities.

The first rule will ease licensing for launches from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. This will make it easier for American rocket companies to launch from the new spaceports being built in these nations, as well as allow satellite and orbital tug companies to launch their spacecraft from these nations using non-American rockets.

The second rule, still in its interim stage of approval, would ease the export licensing for satellites and spacecraft “to over 40 allies and partners worldwide, reducing licensing requirements for the least sensitive components for most destinations, and broadening license exceptions to support additional National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) cooperative programs.” It appears this ruling focuses specifically on the countries who have signed the Artemis Accords, joining NASA’s Artemis program.

The third rule, which is at present only proposed, will remove from the State Department’s strict ITAR regulations many space-related defense technology, transfering their licensing to the much more relaxed Commerce department. This ruling appears aimed at helping the new burgeoning orbital tug, refueling, and satellite servicing industry, which uses rendezvous and proximity technology that was previously considered military in nature.

While it appears this easing of regulation goes against the Biden administration general policy of tightening regulations, the changes make sense if we recognize that these regulations also loosen access to American technology for many international partners, something this administration favors.

All in all, however, the changes are thoughtfully worked out, and will likely help energize the American space industry without releasing important technology to the wrong nations.

6 comments

ESA awards OHB Italia a preliminary contract to build Ramses probe to Apophis

The European Space Agency (ESA) yesterday awarded the company OHB Italia a €63 million preliminary contract to begin work on mission dubbed Ramses that will launch in 2028 and rendezvous with the potentially dangerous asteroid Apophis when it flies past the Earth on April 13, 2029 at a distance of less than 20,000 miles.

The contract award is preliminary because the entire project still has to be approved by the ESA ministral council of nations, meeting in 2025. Because of the short development time, however, ESA’s management found funds from its existing budget to begin work.

To speed work, the project is also using as its design basis the Hera asteroid spacecraft, which was recently launched to study the binary asteroids Didymos-Dimorphos. That mission was also built remarkably fast for a European space project, going from contract to launch in just four years.

NASA has already re-tasked its OSIRIS-REx asteroid mission to head for Apophis, renaming it OSIRIS-APEX for reasons that baffle me. The mission had successfully delivered samples from the asteroid Bennu, but after completing that mission had sufficient fuel and was well placed to do this additional rendezvous as well.

One comment

ULA recovers nozzle debris that fell off during second Vulcan launch

ULA has recovered some of the debris that fell to earth after the nozzle on one of Vulcan’s two solid-fueled strap-on boosters fell off during the early stages of the rocket’s second launch on October 4, 2024.

Julie Arnold, a ULA spokesperson, confirmed to Ars that the company has retrieved some of the debris. “We recovered some small pieces of the GEM 63XL SRB nozzle that were liberated in the vicinity of the launch pad,” Arnold said. “The team is inspecting the hardware to aid in the investigation.”

The booster was built by Northrop Grumman. Vulcan can use from from two to six on each flight (in pairs), depending on the mass of its payload and the mission requirements. At the moment ULA has 35 of these boosters in storage awaiting future flights. It is expected that once the company has an idea of the root cause of the failure, it will have to inspect each booster to avoid a repeat of the problem.

Though ULA has not announced any changes in its plans to launch twice more before the end of the year, both for the Pentagon, that schedule is now uncertain due to this problem. For example, there as yet is no word on whether the military is willing to certify the launches. It had required ULA to complete two test flights of Vulcan before doing so, and the nozzle issue has cast a cloud on that plan.

5 comments

Sinwar’s elimination is merely one small win in Israel’s new quest for total victory

Hamas vs Israel
The obvious reasons why killing the leaders
of Hamas and Hezbollah is a good thing.
Courtesy of Doug Ross.

The confirmation today that Israel had finally killed Hamas leader Yahha Sinwar, considered the main architect behind the October 7, 2023 murder, rape, and torture of more than a thousand Israeli men, women, children, and babies near Gaza is good news, but it only is one small victory in what is now clearly Israel’s decision to go for nothing less than total victory against the terrorists who have been hounding and killiing its citizens wantonly for decades.

You see, since the 1973 Yom Kippur war, all of Israel’s responses against terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah have been limited and targeted, and ended quickly with fake ceasefires that allowed those terrorist groups to not only regroup, but actually expand their capabilities.

The most blatent and best example of this what happened in connection with Israel’s 2006 month-long invasion of Lebanon, launched in an attempt to defeat Hezbollah. The invasion bogged down, and as a result Israel and Hezbollah ended up agreeing to UN resolution 1701, which had Israel evaculate southern Lebanon and the UN take on the task of keeping the peace. The agreement also created a demilitarized zone in southern Lebanon, where Hezbollah was forbidden.

That agreement was an utter failure. Neither the UN nor Lebanon had the ability or even the desire to limit Hezbollah, and so before long it had made that demilitarized zone a launchpad for rocket attacks into Israel. In Israel’s most recent campaign to clear out that zone, it has also discovered tunnels and large weapons caches clearly designed for Hezbollah’s own planned October 7th-type invasion.

After October 7th, what I labeled Israel’s Pearl Harbor, Israel was clearly no longer going to accept this failed piecemeal and limited negotiating approach, administered by dishonest third parties like the UN and even the United States. Instead, it decided to go by an old American concept of “unconditional surrender,” first made plain by Grant during the Civil War and then underlined by Eisenhower and Roosevelt in their insistence on “total victory” in World War II.

In other words, Israel would only accept a ceasefire or peace treaty if it involved the surrender and capture of the leadership of Hamas and Hezbollah. If they refused to do this, then Israel resolved to kill them.

It has now demonstrated its ability to do so, with gratifying success.

Israel’s military actions since October 7th however also illustrate a major change in strategy and tactics. » Read more

14 comments

NASA assembles two new panels to review its Mars Sample Return mission plans

NASA yesterday announced that it has assembled two new panels to review its Mars Sample Return mission plans, dubbed the strategy review and the analysis team, to be done in conjunction with the proposals the agency has already received from the private sector.

The team’s report is anticipated by the end of 2024 and will examine options for a complete mission design, which may be a composite of multiple studied design elements. The team will not recommend specific acquisition strategies or partners.

The strategy review team has been chartered under a task to the Cornell Technical Services contract. The team may request input from a NASA analysis team that consists of government employees and expert consultants.

The analysis team also will provide programmatic input such as a cost and schedule assessment of the architecture recommended by the strategy review team.

The first panel contains a mixture of NASA officials and scientists, while the second is mostly made up of NASA managers.

Whatever these panels decide, it is very clear that major changes are required to this project in order to get the Perseverance core samples on Mars back to Earth within a reasonable amount of time and at an acceptable cost. The present project design is chaotic, confused, and running significantly overbudget and behind schedule, with no indication anything will change in the near future.

2 comments

Musk: We will attempt to catch Starship like Superheavy, “hopefully early next year”

According to a tweet by Elon Musk on October 15, 2024, SpaceX is targeting early 2025 for the first attempt to recover Starship after launch, and to do it the same way it recovered Superheavy, by catching it with a set of launch tower chopsticks.

To do this will require getting that second launch tower at Boca Chica operational. It will also require SpaceX to successfully restart Starship’s Raptor engines in space, something it has not yet done. Once this is demonstrated to work, the company would also have to do another orbital test where Starship is put in a full orbit and then de-orbited precisely to a point over the ocean, demonstrating that such a return can next be done reliably over land.

In other words, a tower catch can only happen after at least two more test flights. Thus, to do it early next year means SpaceX will have to establish a test launch pace of a launch every one or two months. This is actually something Musk has said repeatedly he wants to do, but has been stymied repeatedly by FAA red tape from doing it.

I suspect Musk’s tweet is expressing his unstated hope that a Trump victory in November will force the FAA to ease its bureaucratic interference.

9 comments

NASA to phase out its government-built communications satellite constellation, rely on commercial services

Capitalism in space: NASA yesterday announced that beginning on November 8, 2024 it will begin the phase out of its government-built TDRS communications satellite constellation, requiring all future missions to use commercial services for communications and data transmission.

As of Friday, Nov. 8, the agency’s legacy TDRS (Tracking and Data Relay Satellite) system, as part of the Near Space Network, will support only existing missions while new missions will be supported by future commercial services.

…While TDRS will not be accepting new missions, it won’t be retiring immediately. Current TDRS users, like the International Space Station, Hubble Space Telescope, and many other Earth- and universe-observing missions, will still rely on TDRS until the mid-2030s. Each TDRS spacecraft’s retirement will be driven by individual health factors, as the seven active TDRS satellites are expected to decline at variable rates. 

NASA in 2022 already issued contracts to six commercial communication companies to provide these services, Inmarsat, Kuiper Government, SES, SpaceX, Telesat, and Viasat. Yesterday’s annoncement involves NASA’s long term plan to retire the TDRS constellation.

Leave a comment

SpaceX sues California Coastal Commission

Wants to be a dictator
Wants to be a dictator

As promised by Elon Musk, SpaceX has now filed suit against California Coastal Commission, and its commissioners, accusing it of violating Musk’s first amendment rights and using its regulatory power against the company simply because those commissioners disagree with Musk’s political positions.

You can read SpaceX’s lawsuit filing here [pdf]. From its introduction:

[The Commission has engaged in naked political discrimination against Plaintiff Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) in violation of the rights of free speech and due process enshrined in the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Rarely has a government agency made so clear that it was exceeding its authorized mandate to punish a company for the political views and statements of its largest shareholder and CEO. Second, the Commission is trying to unlawfully regulate space launch programs—which are critical to national security and other national policy objectives—at Vandenberg Space Force Base (the Base), a federal enclave and the world’s second busiest spaceport.

The lawsuit stems from the comments made by the commissioners when then voted against the military’s plan to allow SpaceX to increase its launch rate at Vandenberg spaceport to up to 50 launches per year. In those comments, the commissioners made it clear that the main reason they were voting against the motion was because they were offended by Elon Musk and his political positions, not because the company was doing anything wrong. In fact, the commissioners knew SpaceX was doing nothing wrong. As noted at the first link above:
» Read more

5 comments

Axiom unveils its spacesuit design

Axiom's moonsuit
Click for original image.

Axiom today unveiled its proposed spacesuit for NASA’s Moon missions, designed in partnership with the fashion company Prada.

The graphic to the left, cropped and reduced to post here, shows the suit. The letters refer to detailed descriptions contained in the full image.

The suit accommodates a wide range of crewmembers, including males and females from the first to 99th percentile (anthropomorphic sizing). It will withstand extreme temperatures at the lunar south pole and endure the coldest temperatures in the permanently shadowed regions for at least two hours. Astronauts will be able to perform spacewalks for at least eight hours.

The AxEMU incorporates multiple redundant systems and an onboard diagnostic system to ensure safety for crewmembers. The suit also uses a regenerable carbon dioxide scrubbing system and a robust cooling technology to remove heat from the system. It includes advanced coatings on the helmet and visor to enhance the astronauts’ view of their surroundings, as well as custom gloves made in-house featuring several advancements over the gloves used today. The spacesuit architecture includes life support systems, pressure garments, avionics and other innovative systems to meet exploration needs and expand scientific opportunities.

It appears the suit follows the design concept of the Russian Orlan suit, with access in and out using the backpack as the access hatch.

Axiom had won the $228 million contract to build this suit in 2022. In two years it is now testing the suit as it nears what it calls “the final development stage.” Compare that with NASA’s failed effort over fourteen years and a billion dollars to create its own suit, never getting much past powerpoint presentations.

11 comments

Proposed commerical spaceport in Nova Scotia signs launch deal with rocket startup Reaction Dynamics

UPDATE: My first version of this post was fundamentally incorrect. I had confused the new Canadian rocket startup Reaction Dynamics (RDX) with the renamed Raytheon (RTX). Because some of the content relating to Raytheon and the comments is still relevant, I have placed that content below the fold so that readers will understand the context of those comments..

Maritime Launch Services, the company that has been trying to build a commerical spaceport in Nova Scotia since 2016, has now signed a launch deal with a small new Canadian rocket startup, Reaction Dynamics, to do a suborbital test launch.

This new partnership between the two Canadian space companies will begin with a pathfinder launch designed to reach the edges of space. The low impulse launch will push the limits toward a future orbital launch by reaching the Karman Line, the internationally recognized edge of Space.

Under the terms of the MOU, Maritime Launch and Reaction Dynamics [RDX] will work towards a Pathfinder mission that will enable a first ever orbital launch of a Canadian vehicle from Canadian soil on the coast of Nova Scotia. These missions will be supported by RDX’s patented, cutting-edge hybrid rocket technology. Building on the success of the first launch, both companies will work toward the first commercial missions of the Aurora vehicle.

This Nova Scotia spaceport has had a complex and difficult history. Initially it was going to offer launches using a Ukrainian-built rocket, but that plan fell through with Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine. It then opened the spaceport to any rocket company, but it appears it has gotten few takers. Now it is working with Reaction Dynamics to once again provide its own launch services. We shall see how this plays out.
» Read more

6 comments

NASA appears to be about to drop Boeing’s Starliner from its manned mission schedule in 2025

In a short announcement outlining its planned two manned ISS missions for 2025, NASA by omission revealed that it now does not expect Boeing’s Starliner capsule to be ready for the second manned flight in July 2025, as previously planned.

Previous updates had noted what capsule would launch the astronauts, with the plan to have Dragon launch the February 2025 crew and Starliner the July 2025 crew. It was assumed in those earlier updates that Starliner would be certified for operational use after the completion of its first manned demo this past summer. This new update does not provide this capsule information, instead saying the following:

The timing and configuration of Starliner’s next flight will be determined once a better understanding of Boeing’s path to system certification is established. This determination will include considerations for incorporating Crew Flight Test lessons learned, approvals of final certification products, and operational readiness.

Meanwhile, NASA is keeping options on the table for how best to achieve system certification, including windows of opportunity for a potential Starliner flight in 2025.

It appears NASA is pulling back from that certification, based on the various technical issues experienced by Starliner during that demo mission, issues that eventually forced NASA to return the capsule unmanned. As such, this announcement yesterday suggests that there is serious negotiations going on between Boeing and NASA as to what will happen next. It appears the agency wants Boeing to fly another demo mission — on Boeing’s dime — before putting astronauts on board and paying for a mission. The Starliner contract was fixed price, and until Boeing successfully completes that manned demo mission NASA is not obligated to pay it any additional funds.

I suspect Boeing is telling NASA it can’t afford to do this, and if NASA doesn’t pony up some bucks for that demo flight it will simply not do it, and NASA will be stuck with just SpaceX as its manned ferry to ISS.

Unconfirmed reports had suggested NASA was considering issuing Boeing a separate contract to do a cargo mission to ISS using Starliner, thus allowing it to pay the company to fly a test mission outside of the fixed price contract. This NASA update yesterday suggests these negotiations are on going, but likely cannot be completed until after the election. A new administration might balk at such a deal.

2 comments

China launches “Earth observation satellite”

China today successfully launched what its state-run press described as an “Earth observation satellite,” its Long March 4C rocket lifting off from its Jiuquan spaceport in northwest China.

No word on where the rocket’s first stage, using very toxic hypergolic fuels, crashed inside China. As for the satellite, it was described as something to “be used in a variety of fields including land surveys, urban planning, road network design, crop yield estimation and disaster relief.”

The leaders in the 2024 launch race:

100 SpaceX
47 China
11 Russia
11 Rocket Lab

American private enterprise still leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 117 to 70, while SpaceX by itself now leads the entire world, including American companies, 100 to 87.

2 comments

The evidence strongly suggests FAA top management is working to sabotage SpaceX

FAA administrator Mike Whitaker today said this to SpaceX:
FAA administrator Mike Whitaker to SpaceX:
“Nice company you have there. Shame if something
happened to it.”

After SpaceX’s incredibly successful fifth test flight of Starship/Superheavy on October 13, 2024, I began to wonder about the complex bureaucratic history leading up to that flight. I was most puzzled by the repeated claims by FAA officials that it would issue no launch license before late November, yet ended up approving a license in mid-October in direct conflict with these claims. In that context I was also puzzled by the FAA’s own written approval of that launch, which in toto seemed to be a complete vindication of all of SpaceX’s actions while indirectly appearing to be a condemnation of the agency’s own upper management.

What caused the change at the FAA? Why was it claiming no approval until late November when it was clear by early October that SpaceX was preparing for a mid-October launch? And why claim late November when the FAA’s own bureaucracy has now made it clear in approving the launch that a mid-October date was always possible, and nothing SpaceX did prevented that.

I admit my biases: My immediate speculation is always to assume bad behavior by government officials. But was that speculation correct? Could it also be that SpaceX had not done its due diligence properly, causing the delays, as claimed by the FAA?

While doing my first review of the FAA’s written reevaluation [pdf] that approved the October 13th launch, I realized that a much closer review of the history and timeline of events might clarify these questions.

So, below is that timeline, as best as I can put together from the public record. The lesser known acronyms stand for the following:

TCEQ: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
NMFS: National Marine Fisheries Service (part of NOAA)
FWS: Fish & Wildlife Service (part of the Department of Interior)

My inserted comments periodically tell the story and provide some context.
» Read more

17 comments

China launches “satellite group” using Long March 6A rocket

According to China’s state run press, it today successfully launched what it simply describes as “a new satellite group,” its Long March 6A rocket lifting off from its Taiyuan spaceport in northeast China.

This tweet appears to show video of the launch, though once again there is little information.

First, we have no idea where the rocket’s lower stage and four strap-on stide boosters crashed inside China, doing so at night when no one can see them coming down. Second, we have no idea whether China has made any upgrades to the Long March 6A upper stage, which on four previous launches has broken apart and scattered space junk after deploying its payload in orbit.

The leaders in the 2024 launch race:

100 SpaceX
46 China
11 Russia
11 Rocket Lab

American private enterprise still leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 117 to 69, while SpaceX by itself now leads the entire world, including American companies, 100 to 86.

2 comments

Army successfully completes one-year commercial satellite pilot program

Capitalism in space: The U.S. Army has now successfully completed a one-year pilot program whereby it purchased the use of commercial communications satellites from both Intelsat and SES, rather than attempt to build and launch its own satellites.

Under the pilot, the Army selected satellite operators Intelsat and SES to provide “satcom as a managed service,” a model where the provider handles all satellite communications functions — from setup and maintenance of equipment to network management and technical support — through a subscription-based contract.

The project, officially completed on Sept. 30, is now raising questions about whether the Department of Defense will expand its reliance on commercial satcom providers for long-term military communications needs. David Broadbent, president of Intelsat’s Government Solutions, said that while the pilot program demonstrated the efficiency of managed services, it is still uncertain if the Army will fully embrace this model for future satellite communications (satcom) procurement.

It appears that the Pentagon’s bureaucracy is uncomfortable with the idea, and is resisting expanding the program beyond this one test. For decades the military has designed, built, owned, and operated its own satellites. That approach has created a very large job-base within the military that feels threatened by the idea of out-sourcing this work to the private sector. That approach however has also in the last two decades done a poor job of providing the Pentagon the communications satellites it needs on time and on budget.

Whether the Pentagon will change to this new approach, as NASA mostly has, will likely hinge on who wins the election in November. A Harris administration will likely provide little guidance one way or the other, but will also likely take the side of the bureaucrats in power now. A Trump administration is much more likely to force a change.

3 comments

China releases its planned space science program through 2050

China’s state run press today announced the release of a planned space science program covering all Chinese space missions through 2050 and put together by several government agencies.

The program, the first of its kind at the national level, was jointly released by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), the China National Space Administration and the China Manned Space Agency at a press conference held by the State Council Information Office.

The program outlines the development goals of China’s space science, including 17 priority areas under five key scientific themes, as well as a three-phase roadmap. The five key scientific themes include the extreme universe, space-time ripples, panoramic view of Sun-Earth, habitable planets, and biological and physical sciences in space, Ding Chibiao, vice president of the CAS, said at the press conference.

The article describes the program as having three phases. The first phase goes until 2027 and will focus on both the operation of China’s Tiangong-3 space station as well as the initial establishment of its lunar base. The second phase, from ’28 to ’35, will focus mostly on completing that lunar base, though other space science missions will fly as well. The third phase, from ’35 to ’50, lists 30 space science missions, though this is so far in the future it should treated merely as a rough premlinary proposal for the future.

This proposal continues the overall rational long term approach of China’s space-related government agencies. However, much of it will depend on China’s overall economy in the long term. I am reminded of similar long term plans put forth by Russia early in the last decade, all of which came to nothing because of economic and political factors (largely but not entirely related to Russia shooting itself in the foot with its two invasions of the Ukraine in 2014 and 2022). Similar events could do the same to China, especially as its program is not truly competitive but run from the top, a method that never works that well when one is trying to develop cutting edge technology.

One comment

Even as the left ramps up its effort to cancel Columbus, new DNA data suggests he was born of Jewish parents

What Philadelphia thinks of Columbus
How Democrats in Philadelphia celebrated
Christopher Columbus in 2022, placing
a box over his statue so no one could see it.

Now we know why the anti-Semitic left has been striving for years to cancel Columbus: New DNA analysis of the remains of Christopher Columbus now strongly suggests his ancestry was Jewish and that he might even have come originally from Spain, not Italy as has been long claimed.

“We have DNA from Christopher Columbus, very partial, but sufficient. We have DNA from Hernando Colón, his son,” [said forensic expert Miguel Lorente]. “And both in the Y chromosome (male) and in the mitochondrial DNA (transmitted by the mother) of Hernando there are traits compatible with Jewish origin.”

Around 300,000 Jews lived in Spain before the ‘Reyes Catolicos’, Catholic monarchs Isabella and Ferdinand, ordered Jews and Muslims to convert to the Catholic faith or leave the country. Many settled around the world. The word Sephardic comes from Sefarad, or Spain in Hebrew.

After analysing 25 possible places, Lorente said it was only possible to say Columbus was born in Western Europe.

Though these results do involve a lot of uncertainties, they are very intriguing and indeed quite possible. If Columbus was born Jewish he would have had to convert in order to have any chance of obtaining work in Catholic Spain. He would have also done everything he could to keep secret his Jewish ancestry.

As this is Columbus Day, which for almost a century has been an American holiday to celebrate this greatest of explorers who changed human history, it is not surprising that this news was released just last week. It is also not surprising that the campaign to cancel Columbus continues.
» Read more

8 comments

Vast unveils its proposed full space station concept

Haven-2
Haven-2 station once completed

After revealing the layout planned for its first single module space station dubbed Haven-1 last week, the startup Vast today unveiled its proposed full space station concept, dubbed Haven-2.

The graphic to the right is a screen capture from the video describing the step-by-step assembly of this larger station. Initially it will be comprised of four modules, linked together in a straight line. This confirguration is aimed at winning a space station contract from NASA when it announces the winners in the second phase of its commercial space station program in mid-2026. If picked, Vast then intends in the expand that four-module station to the eight modules illustrated in the graphic.

Between 2030 and 2032, Vast will add a larger 7m diameter core module and four more Haven-2 modules, fully realizing the next-generation commercial space station capable of meeting the needs of international partners, NASA, commercial researchers & manufacturers, and private astronauts.

Key features of the completed station include an unprecedented 3.8m diameter cupola window, external payload hosting capabilities, a robotic arm, visiting vehicle berthing capabilities, external payload airlock, and an extravehicular activity (EVA) airlock to support customers’ needs. Each module will also feature two Haven-1-like 1.1m dome windows, totaling 16 windows by 2032.

Vast’s design is projected to surpass all other proposed on-orbit space stations in terms of volume, functionality, and operational efficiency.

Vast’s overall plan is quite ambitious, but well thought out. If all goes as planned, just as NASA is about to decide on the winners in phase 2 of its space station program, Vast plans to launch in 2026 its Haven-1 station and immediately fly a manned 30-day mission to it, using SpaceX rockets and Dragon capsules. If successful, that private mission will do wonders in convincing NASA to pick Vast.

9 comments

ESA awards D-Orbit €119.6 million contract to complete Europe’s first robotic service mission

The European Space Agency (ESA) today awarded the European orbital tug company D-Orbit a €119.6 million contract to fly Europe’s first robotic mission to extend the life of an already orbiting satellite.

Referred to as RISE, the mission will demonstrate the D-Orbit GEA satellite life extension vehicle’s ability to dock with a geostationary satellite, maneuver the satellite, and then release it. After this sequence is verified, ESA’s involvement in its operation will come to an end. The vehicle will then move into an operational phase with D-Orbit offering a life extension service to active geostationary satellite operators.

The mission is targeting a 2028 launch, though no specific target satellite as yet has been identified.

This project is very similar to the Mission Extension Vehicle (MEV) robotic missions of Northrop Grumman, which has been flown twice successfully. I guess ESA needed to see it work before it would consider doing its own mission. Moreover, ESA probably wanted to sign up a European company to do it, and until now no such company existed. D-Orbit has already completed fourteen orbital tug missions with seven more scheduled for 2025. This mission extension project however will be a significant leap forward in its capabilities, funded by ESA.

Leave a comment

Uzbekistan signs Outer Space Treaty

More than a half century after the Outer Space Treaty was written and put into force in 1967, Uzbekistan’s legislature in August approved joining the treaty, with the nation’s president signing that legislation this week.

By joining this treaty, Uzbekistan aims to strengthen cooperative relations with developed nations, accelerate the transfer of space-related technologies, and ensure that its space activities are conducted in accordance with international law and its national interests.

By signing the law the country — formerly part of the Soviet Union — is better positioned to sign joint agreements with other nations, either with China’s lunar base partnership or the American Artemis Accords (as presently being structured by the Biden administration).

One comment

Estonia signs Artemis Accords

NASA yesterday announced that Estonia had become the 45th nation to sign the Artemis Accords, the bi-lateral treaty created during the Trump administration initially to overcome the Outer Space Treaty’s limits on private property and ownership.

The Biden administration appears to be working to de-emphasize those goals, and in fact to instead strengthen the Outer Space Treaty. From this press release (and similar to statements in all recent press releases):

The accords are grounded in the Outer Space Treaty and other agreements including the Registration Convention, the Rescue and Return Agreement, as well as best practices and norms of responsible behavior that NASA and its partners have supported, including the public release of scientific data.

The full list of nations is as follows: Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Peru, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, the Ukraine, the United States and Uruguay.

It is interesting to note that Estonia as well as Lithuania, Armenia, and the Ukraine were once part of the Soviet Union (against their will). Similarly, the Czech Republic, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia were once part of the Soviet bloc, also against their will. It appears they want to ally themselves with the west, with one reason their fear that Russia might invade them as it has the Ukraine. It also could be that these nations agree with the Trump administration’s original goals, and wish to promote capitalism and private property, having experienced for decades the failures of communist and authoritarian rule.

The future goals of the Artemis Accord alliance will demand entirely on who wins the presidency in the elction in November.

Leave a comment

Musk says SpaceX will sue California Coastal Commission

In a tweet on X on October 12, 2024, Elon Musk said that SpaceX will sue the California Coastal Commission for violating his first amendment rights as soon the court opens tomorrow.

“Filing suit against them on Monday for violating the First Amendment,” he wrote, adding: “Tuesday, since court is closed on Monday.”

At least two commissioners had made it very clear in public statements at a hearing last week that they were voting against a Space Force request that would increase the number of launches at Vandenberg because they opposed Elon Musk’s political positions, not because the request would do any harm to the coast. The commission then rejected the request 6-4, with others claiming that SpaceX should have made the request directly rather than have the Space Force do it.

The vote remains non-binding, as the Space Force has the legal power to do whatever it wants at Vandenberg, and only works with the commission as a courtesy.

2 comments

FAA approves launch license for tomorrow’s SpaceX Starship/Superheavy launch

Superheavy being captured by the tower chopsticks at landing
Artist rendering of Superheavy being captured by
the tower chopsticks at landing. Click for video.

The FAA today announced that it has finally approved a launch license for the fifth test launch tomorrow of SpaceX’s Starship/Superheavy, and that this approval applies to the next few launches as well, assuming the FAA or other government agencies or politicians don’t attempt to nitpick things again.

The full written re-evaluation [pdf] released today is somewhat hilarious, in that it spends 61 pages essentially concluding that SpaceX’s proposed actions were already approved by the 2022 Environoment Reassessment [abbreviated PEA by the FAA], spending page after page detailing why a license should be approved based on that 2022 reassessment. After wasting more than two months essentially retyping the 2022 conclusions, this report concludes ludicrously:

The 2022 PEA examined the potential for significant environmental impacts from Starship/SuperHeavy launch operations at the Boca Chica Launch Site and defined the regulatory setting for impacts associated with Starship/Super Heavy. The areas evaluated for environmental impacts in this WR [written reevaluation] included noise and noise compatible land use and biological resources.

Based on the above review and in conformity with FAA Order 1050.1F, Paragraph 9-2.c, the FAA has concluded that the modification of an existing vehicle operator license for Starship/Super Heavy operations conforms to the prior environmental documentation, that the data contained in the 2022 PEA remains substantially valid, that there are no significant environmental changes, and all pertinent conditions and requirements of the prior approval have been met or will be met in the current action. Therefore, the preparation of a supplemental or new environmental document is not necessary to support the Proposed Action.

In plain English, SpaceX is doing nothing to require this bureaucratic paperwork, but we have insisted on doing it anyway in order to justify our useless jobs while acting to squelch free Americans from getting the job done as they wish. As Musk so rightly put it last month, “It takes longer to do the government paperwork to license a rocket launch than it does to design and build the actual hardware.”

Despite this approval, we must emphasize that this action has now set a very bad precedent for the future, When SpaceX makes changes to its flight plans on future test launches — something that is guaranteed as the company incrementally improves the design — the FAA will almost certainly shut things down again as it spends months once again determining that nothing is wrong.

Either way, stand by for tomorrow’s test launch, lifting off at 7 am (Central time). I have embedded the Space Affairs youtube live stream below, since SpaceX’s live streams on X don’t allow one to stand by, and will only go live 35 minutes before launch.
» Read more

34 comments

Study proves that more than a decade after passage the promises of Obamacare were all a pack of lies

Figure 1 from the study, and possibly its most damning datapoint
Figure 1 from the study, and possibly its most
damning datapoint. ACA stands for Affordable
Care Act, Obamacare’s official name.

A new study comparing the promises made about Obamacare by President Barack Obama and the Democrats in 2010 with the real world results more than a decade later shows that either those promises were a pack of lies, or were pushed by politicians so ignorant of the basic facts of economy that we would have been better off having the legislation written and approved by blind voles.

“Obamacare has failed in every particular – it failed to make health care more affordable; it failed to improve the health of Americans; it piled on an enormous amount of additional debt on taxpayers; it has principally enriched massive insurance company conglomerates, and it now serves as a major impediment to real heath care reforms that would empower patients and doctors,” Phil Kerpen, American Commitment and Unleash Prosperity president and one of the study’s co-authors, told the DCNF. “As we show in this paper, every single promise that was made to pass this law turned out to be false.”

You can read the actual study here. From its executive summary:
» Read more

8 comments

California officials: SpaceX shouldn’t be allowed to launch from Vandenberg because we hate Elon Musk

In voting yesterday to reject a plan by the military to increase the number of launches at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California, members of the California Coastal Commission admitted openly they did so because they do not like Elon Musk and his publicly stated political preferences.

The California Coastal Commission on Thursday rejected the Air Force’s plan to give SpaceX permission to launch up to 50 rockets a year from Vandenberg Air Force Base in Santa Barbara County.

“Elon Musk is hopping about the country, spewing and tweeting political falsehoods and attacking FEMA while claiming his desire to help the hurricane victims with free Starlink access to the internet,” Commissioner Gretchen Newsom said at the meeting in San Diego.

…“I really appreciate the work of the Space Force,” said Commission Chair Caryl Hart. “But here we’re dealing with a company, the head of which has aggressively injected himself into the presidential race and he’s managed a company in a way that was just described by Commissioner Newsom that I find to be very disturbing.”

It must be noted that this vote is not legally binding on the military. Though it has always tried to work in cooperation with this commission, it has the right to decide for itself how many launches it wants to allow out of Vandenberg. Whether it will defy the commission however is uncertain, and likely depends entirely on who wins the presidential election. If Harris wins, she will likely order the Space Force to not only obey the commission but to further limit launches by SpaceX at Vandenberg. If Trump wins, he will likely tell the Space Force to go ahead and expand operations, ignoring the immoral political machinations of these commissioners.

And it must be emphasized how immoral and improper these commissioners are. Their task is to regulate the use of the California coast in order to protect it for all future users, from beach-goers to rocket companies. It is not their right to block the coast’s use to certain individuals simply because those individuals have expressed political views they oppose. Not only does this violate Musk’s first amendment rights, it is an outright abuse of power.

If anyone in California reading this article wishes to tell these commissioners what they think of their actions yesterday, you can find their contact information here.

27 comments
1 … 21 22 23 24 25 … 378