Romney puts forth his space plans at a rally in Florida

In a campaign rally Friday in Florida, Mitt Romney put forth his perspective on the state of the American space program, and what he plans to do about it.

The speech is about 16 minutes long. It is worth listening to it in its entirety.

In it, Romney outlined the reasons he thinks a robust space program is important: defense, innovation, exploration, and the ability to respond to potential natural threats from space. Having done so, however, he then refused to outline any specific actions he would take to address these issues, saying instead that once in office he will bring together the right kinds of space experts who will then advice him on the right kind of plan to achieve all these important goals.

I appreciate his refusal to pander. At the same time, his vagueness does not make me enthusiastic. Moreover, he is only offering us the same thing we have seen numerous times before, another blue ribbon panel study outlining a plan. It would make me far happier if he already understood better the problems of the space program, and could articulate the actions he wishes to take, as Gingrich did.
» Read more

“This re-entry capsule now cannot be used for manned spaceflight.”

“This re-entry capsule now cannot be used for manned spaceflight.”

This postponement of the next two Russian manned missions to ISS looks like a serious problem. For cracks to form in a finished capsule when tested under pressure suggests significant production failures that had gone unnoticed during assembly. In fact, this problem is far more serious than the launch failure that occurred last year. The Russians have to not only find a capsule they can trust to use on the next flight, they have to track down the errors that allowed a capsule to be built that is so obviously flawed it cracked when put in use.

The full Gingrich speech on space

As noted by one commenter, the full Gingrich speech on space is available here on C-SPAN.

I have now listened to the whole speech, and can say without hesitation that everything I wrote in my previous post was correct. Gingrich is knowledgeable about space, science, and history. He is basing his proposals on past successful models where the U.S. government did nothing but buy the product developed by private individuals or companies. These proposals actually continue as well as accelerate the Obama administration’s efforts. And he is not proposing a giant pork program.

His proposal to have a moon base by 2020 is unquestionably campaign talk that won’t happen. Nonetheless, this proposal is aimed at energizing the American aerospace industry by focusing the government’s goals, which will then need to be purchased by the government from private companies. He also made it very clear he wants to shrink the NASA bureaucracy, reducing its budget while devoting ten percent of that savings (equal to billions of dollars) for prizes. The example of a $10 billion tax-free prize for the first to get to Mars was only for illustration. As he said,

The model I want us to build is largely is the model of the ’20s and ’30s, when the government was actively encouraging development but the government wasn’t doing anything. The government was paying rewards, it was subsidizing the mail. … We had enormous breakthroughs in aviation in the ’20s and ’30s at very little cost to the government because lots of smart people [outside the government] did it.

I beg everyone to listen to this speech, in its entirety. It illustrates a thoughtful man who understands history. Gingrich might not be a perfect man, and he certainly is not the perfect candidate for President, but don’t tell me what you think of him if you refuse to listen to him. For two decades too many people have eagerly expressed opinions about him without really listening to what he has actually said or done. And what he says here is reasonable, intelligent, and certainly worthy of consideration.

Gingrich’s speech on space

In the days ahead there is going to be a lot of talk about Newt Gingrich’s proposals for space exploration. I think it important that people actually see and listen to the entire speech before discussing it. Here is the longest clip I can find on youtube, covering the first seven and a half minutes. I think it is complete, but unfortunately, I can’t be sure. It doesn’t appear to include his remarks about awarding space prizes, and when it ends Gingrich does not appear to be finished. When I find a longer clip I will post it.

Several points immediately come to mind:
» Read more

Gingrich pledges a moon base by his second term

Bumped with Update 2: I will be on the radio in Houston tomorrow morning with Scott Braddock for twenty minutes to discuss Gingrich’s proposals. See the “Recent and Upcoming Appearances” list in the right column for details.
———————————
In a speech today Newt Gingrich pledged a moon base would be operating by his second term.

I’m not sure I trust the reporting here. However, this story fits with many other things that Gingrich has said over the years. And though I like his desire to think big, I dislike the feeling I get that he wants to once again make this a big government-run effort.

There will certainly be more details about Gingrich’s proposals in the coming days.

Update. More details here.

It seems to me that Gingrich’s promise of a moonbase by 2020 is campaign fodder, designed to inspire voters not only to dream big but to vote for Gingrich. However, his proposal that the U.S. offer big prizes for private achievement in space is right on the money, literally identical to ideas I proposed more than eight years ago.

Gingrich plans ‘visionary’ speech on space this week in Florida

Gingrich has announced that he plans to give a “visionary” speech on space this week in Florida.

To me, this does not bode well. The last thing the American aerospace industry needs right now is another politician dictating a “new” path. The best thing Gingrich could do is to endorse the effort to have private companies do the work, and to then outline how he will get the government out of their way.

The Russian commission investigating the failure of Phobos-Grunt has concluded that the spacecraft failed because of Russian engineering errors, not U.S. sabotage.

Why am I not surprised? The Russian commission investigating the failure of Phobos-Grunt has concluded that the spacecraft failed because of Russian engineering errors, not U.S. sabotage.

I had suspected this whole kerfuffle was a fake issue inspired by Russian politicians. This report proves it.

In a break from standard practice, U.S. military has removed the links to its tracking data of Phobos-Grunt.

Could the Russians be right!? In a break from standard practice, U.S. military has removed the links to its tracking data of Phobos-Grunt.

On Jan. 12, the Space Track website originally published information on the estimated re-entry track for Phobos-Grunt, a Russian probe that malfunctioned shortly after its November 2011 launch and was stuck in low-Earth orbit for more than two months.

After routine updates and revised estimates over the course of the next two days, the military removed links to these re-entry predictions and did not publish final confirmation data on the spacecraft’s fall on Jan. 15, according to Aviation Week.

A careful analysis of recent activities by U.S. radar show that it could not have affected Phobos-Grunt. Yet, the U.S. military has now taken actions that not only break with standard procedures, they draw attention to the issue. All very astonishing.

Orbital Sciences has once again delayed its first launch of Antares, the rocket that will lift its Cygnus cargo capsule to ISS.

Orbital Sciences has once again delayed its first launch of Antares, the rocket that will lift its Cygnus cargo capsule to ISS.

A hold-down test of Orbital Sciences Corp.’s Antares rocket, a prerequisite for the launch vehicle’s maiden flight, likely will not be completed before April because of ongoing tests and certification work on the vehicle’s launch pad at Wallops Island, Va., a launch official said.

As much as I am a fan of these private companies (Orbital and SpaceX), I also recognize the great risks. Both companies are building new rockets and capsules, and have many enemies. If they fail, those enemies will jump on their effort like sharks, ready to shut them down and move all government funding to NASA’s big heavy-lift program. Thus, they have to succeed. Better to delay and get things right then hurry and have them blow up in everyone’s face.

It looks like there will be no manned Soyuz missions launched from South America.

It looks like there will be no manned Soyuz missions launched from South America.

An ESA study conducted between 2002 and 2004 found that because the Soyuz has not been designed to land in the sea, a French Guiana launch that had to be aborted would endanger the spacecraft and its crew as it would likely have to ditch in the Atlantic Ocean. The Soyuz spacecraft have always landed on land in the former Soviet territory of Kazakhstan.

The Obama administration formally announced today that it is joining Europe in writing an international code of conduct for space.

What could go wrong? The Obama administration formally announced today that it is joining Europe in writing an international code of conduct for space.

The State Department announcement describing the administration’s intentions notes the U.S. will not agree to anything “that in any way constrains our national security-related activities in space or our ability to protect the United States and our allies.” However, it is also so vague about what they will agree to that I wonder what the point is. Either this whole effort is a waste of time, or it carries the risk that our government will agree to a treaty with unintended consequences that cannot be predicted.

In such a circumstances, it seems to me that the wiser thing to do would be to do nothing.

Russia is now claiming that a U.S. military radar might have disabled Phobos-Grunt.

Looking for scapegoats: Russia is now investigating whether a U.S. military radar signal might have disabled Phobos-Grunt.

The state news agency RIA Novosti quoted Yury Koptev, former head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos, as saying investigators will conduct tests to check if a U.S. radar emissions could have impacted the Phobos-Ground space probe, which became stuck in Earth’s obit for two months before crashing down. “The results of the experiment will allow us to prove or dismiss the possibility of the radar’s impact,” said Koptev, who is heading the government commission charged with investigating causes of the probe’s failure.

The current Roscosmos head, Vladimir Popovkin, previously said the craft’s malfunction could have been caused by foreign interference. Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin acknowledged U.S. radar interference as a possible cause but said it was too early to make any conclusions. “This version has the right to exist,” Rogozin said Tuesday. “There is evidence indicating that frequent disruptions in the operation of our space technologies occur in that part of the flight path that is not visible to Roscosmos and is beyond its control.”

Though this might be technically possible, it is incredibly unlikely. For Russian politicians to focus on this issue indicates serious problems in both their space engineering community and their political culture.

Phobos-Grunt due to crash to Earth anytime in the next ten hours

path of Phobos-Grunt's reentry

Updated and bumped. An updated prediction from Aerospace now calls for Phobos-Grunt to come down sometime between 9 and 3 pm (Eastern). This puts the U.S. now out of danger, though Europe, South America, Africa, Australia, and the southern half of Asia all remain in the spacecraft’s path.

Watch your heads! Phobos-Grunt is due to crash to Earth anytime in the next ten hours. And unfortunately, this new prediction has it flying over both North America and much of Europe and Africa during that time period.

NASA is soliciting private aerospace companies to bid on building their designs for rocket upper stage that will send the Orion capsule beyond Earth orbit.

NASA is soliciting private aerospace companies to bid on building their own designs for the rocket upper stage that will send the Orion capsule beyond Earth orbit.

This is good news: Rather than design the upper stage themselves, NASA is behaving like a customer and looking for someone else to provide them the product, much as the agency has been doing in buying from private companies crew and cargo services for ISS. Using this approach the agency is more likely to get its upper stage quickly and at less cost.

Engineers have gone to a back up radio system on Cassini after a primary unit did not respond as expected in late December.

Engineers have gone to a back up radio system on Cassini after a primary unit did not respond as expected in late December.

The cause is still under investigation, but age may be a factor. The spacecraft launched in 1997 and has orbited Saturn since 2004. Cassini completed its prime mission in 2008 and has had two additional mission extensions. This is the first time its ultra-stable oscillator has had an issue.

Phobos-Grunt’s reentry this weekend

path of Phobos-Grunt's reentry

Watch your head this weekend: The re-entry of Phobos-Grunt has been refined, and is expected to come down sometime between 5 pm (Eastern), Saturday January 14 and 9 am (Eastern), Monday January 16.

As you can see by the image on the right, there is as yet no way to predict where it will land, though it appears that — except for the tip of Florida — North America is in the clear. The blue lines show its orbital path during the first half of this window, while the yellow lines show its path during the window’s second half.

1 442 443 444 445 446 476