Adjusting the flight manifest to ISS
Pete Harding at NasaSpaceflight.com has written a very thorough review of the changes to the flight manifest to ISS expected due to the August 24 failure of the Soyuz-U rocket.
Pete Harding at NasaSpaceflight.com has written a very thorough review of the changes to the flight manifest to ISS expected due to the August 24 failure of the Soyuz-U rocket.
The space shuttle program officially ended on Wednesday. Note however:
Closeout of the shuttle program is an enormous effort expected to take two years. The program occupied 640 facilities and used more than 900,000 pieces of equipment with a value exceeding $12 billion, according to NASA. Much of the work will take place at Kennedy Space Center, where orbiters have been maintained and prepared for launch. NASA requested $89 million for shuttle transition and retirement work in the 2012 fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, but Congress has not yet approved a budget.
Orbital Sciences has gotten its launch license from the FAA for the first test launch of the Taurus 2 rocket, scheduled for later this year.
This rocket is Orbital’s version of the Falcon 9. It is a new rocket, never before flown, yet after this test it is scheduled to fly the Cygnus capsule on its first flight only two months later. Talk about cutting things close!
More details on why the rocket carrying the Progress freighter to ISS failed last week.
Ground controllers successfully replaced a failed circuit box on ISS this weekend, using the two-armed Dextre robot.
Up to now, exchanging the boxes was done by spacewalkers, which always carries a certain level of risk. Dextre was designed to reduce the need for astronauts to conduct spacewalks for routine maintenance, therefore freeing up the crewβs time for more important activities, like conducting science.
Clark Lindsey has written a very nice and short summary of the present political battles over NASA’s budget and its future manned space rockets.
The launch of a Progress freighter to ISS today has failed, with the freighter ending up crashing into Siberia.
This is very bad news for the station. Everyone in the space industry knows that with the shuttle gone, it will be a challenge to maintain supplies to the station’s the six-person crew. Losing just one supply ship will strain the station’s supplies, if not now in the long run for sure.
Worse, this is the first launch failure of the Soyuz rocket that puts both Progress and manned Soyuz capsule into orbit in more than eleven years. The next manned crew is scheduled for launch on September 21. Whether this failure will delay that launch remains unknown.
Blue Origin, one of the four commercial companies NASA hopes to use to get crew up and down from ISS, plans to do a test flight tomorrow. Hat tip to SpaceRef.
This company, founded by Jeff Bezos of amazon.com, has generally released very little information about their effort.
Bigelow Aerospace is in negotiations with both NASA and Japan to supply ISS with privately-built modules
The module could be rented out as an ISS storage unit, making the station less dependent on frequent resupply flights, says Hiroshi Kikuchi of JAMSS. To show that the modules are capable of safe, crewed operation, Bigelow is also negotiating with NASA to attach one to a US-owned ISS module.
.
NASA has announced three awards for technology demonstration space missions, all set to fly within four years. More details here.
The three missions are:
I especially like the solar sail mission because of its long range possibilities, though the other technologies would probably be put to practical use more quickly.
Rocket shortage: NASA is reconsidering the Delta 2 rocket as a vehicle to launch its unmanned science satellites.
The new commercial space companies are challenging NASA’s new contracting policy.
The article covers the conflict that I described in this post, whereby NASA is abandoning the more flexible contracting approach used for the commercial cargo contracts of SpaceX and Orbital Sciences and going instead with the contracting system it used for all past NASA subcontracts.
The article is errs badly when it calls the new contracting approach that NASA wants to use “non-traditional.” It is instead the way NASA has been doing things for decades, whereby the agency takes full control of everything and requires contractors to fill out so much paperwork that the costs double and triple.