NASA needs to get on with the program and get rid of the daylight restriction:

NASA could reconsider restricting this flight to times when the shuttle and external tank, upon separation, are lit by the sun. That was a post-Columbia rule intended to provide good pictures of the tank and its insulating foam to make sure safety changes worked to eliminate dangerous debris. It was supposed to be in place for the first two post-Columbia launches. After the 2005 return to flight mission saw a large piece of foam debris, NASA decided this third post-Columbia flight also would be limited to daylit launch opportunities. If NASA sticks to the rule, there could be just three days the rest of 2006 meeting all safety requirements. Indeed, it could be February before another viable launch window exists that meets the daylight and other flight rules. NASA officials on Sunday were given the opportunity to rule out the possibility of simply eliminating the daylight launch restriction for this flight, the agency did not rule it out. That could open many more days in the latter half of the year to avoid a potential five-month delay in the resumption of space station construction.

Emphasis mine.

They know they have the capability to inspect at ISS now, and most of the major foam fears should be laid to rest. They need to fly as often as possible, particularly given that it’s hurricane season.

I’ve seen a number of references to Anousheh Ansari being the first Muslim woman in space, including this piece on space tourism in today’s issue of The Space Review, by Taylor Dinerman. I know that she’s Iranian, but this is the first time that I’ve heard that she’s a practicing Muslim. Not that there’s anything wrong with it, of course, but I was doing a search on “Anousheh Ansari Muslim” and I can’t find any primary source to that effect.

For instance, in this roundup at Muslim World News, all the story says is:

Moscow, May 8 (DPA) An Iranian-born US businesswoman is tipped to become the first woman “space tourist” to fly to the International Space Station (ISS), Russian media reported Monday.

Telecommunications manager Anousheh Ansari, who was born in 1967, may make a short flight to the orbiter next spring as part of a Russian crew, space officials told the Itar-Tass news agency.

Nothing about her religion. Looking at her web site, there’s no mention of her religion. She talks about wanting to inspire Iranians, but says nothing about Muslims. One would think that one’s religion would be described in an “about” section, unless she’s concerned about negative perceptions arising from it. That doesn’t mean, of course, that she’s not Muslim, but I can find no actual evidence that she is.

So is it true, or is this just an assumption that many are making because of her birth nationality?

I would also note, per this statement by Dinerman:

The industry has a long way to go to get there. The problem is still the cost of access to orbit. Some in the space industry believe that NASA

I’ve seen a number of references to Anousheh Ansari being the first Muslim woman in space, including this piece on space tourism in today’s issue of The Space Review, by Taylor Dinerman. I know that she’s Iranian, but this is the first time that I’ve heard that she’s a practicing Muslim. Not that there’s anything wrong with it, of course, but I was doing a search on “Anousheh Ansari Muslim” and I can’t find any primary source to that effect.

For instance, in this roundup at Muslim World News, all the story says is:

Moscow, May 8 (DPA) An Iranian-born US businesswoman is tipped to become the first woman “space tourist” to fly to the International Space Station (ISS), Russian media reported Monday.

Telecommunications manager Anousheh Ansari, who was born in 1967, may make a short flight to the orbiter next spring as part of a Russian crew, space officials told the Itar-Tass news agency.

Nothing about her religion. Looking at her web site, there’s no mention of her religion. She talks about wanting to inspire Iranians, but says nothing about Muslims. One would think that one’s religion would be described in an “about” section, unless she’s concerned about negative perceptions arising from it. That doesn’t mean, of course, that she’s not Muslim, but I can find no actual evidence that she is.

So is it true, or is this just an assumption that many are making because of her birth nationality?

I would also note, per this statement by Dinerman:

The industry has a long way to go to get there. The problem is still the cost of access to orbit. Some in the space industry believe that NASA

I’ve seen a number of references to Anousheh Ansari being the first Muslim woman in space, including this piece on space tourism in today’s issue of The Space Review, by Taylor Dinerman. I know that she’s Iranian, but this is the first time that I’ve heard that she’s a practicing Muslim. Not that there’s anything wrong with it, of course, but I was doing a search on “Anousheh Ansari Muslim” and I can’t find any primary source to that effect.

For instance, in this roundup at Muslim World News, all the story says is:

Moscow, May 8 (DPA) An Iranian-born US businesswoman is tipped to become the first woman “space tourist” to fly to the International Space Station (ISS), Russian media reported Monday.

Telecommunications manager Anousheh Ansari, who was born in 1967, may make a short flight to the orbiter next spring as part of a Russian crew, space officials told the Itar-Tass news agency.

Nothing about her religion. Looking at her web site, there’s no mention of her religion. She talks about wanting to inspire Iranians, but says nothing about Muslims. One would think that one’s religion would be described in an “about” section, unless she’s concerned about negative perceptions arising from it. That doesn’t mean, of course, that she’s not Muslim, but I can find no actual evidence that she is.

So is it true, or is this just an assumption that many are making because of her birth nationality?

I would also note, per this statement by Dinerman:

The industry has a long way to go to get there. The problem is still the cost of access to orbit. Some in the space industry believe that NASA

Eric Hedman has concerns about the VSE (really, ESAS–I wish that people would be more careful to make the distinction). This is a new one that I hadn’t previously considered:

Michael Griffin recently said two things that significantly bother me about the Ares architecture. He said that the Ares 5 is being designed with the requirements of a Mars mission in mind. He also said that he didn

There’s a very friendly article toward NewSpace in today’s Wall Street Journal (subscription required, sorry) based on the reporter’s interview with Clark Lindsey. It notes the disconnect between the science-fiction reality in which we live in many respects, and the woefully slower pace of space development, relative to what we thought we’d have:

…the Pluto debate was another unhappy reminder that except for a few astronauts, we’re stuck down here on Earth long after sci-fi paperbacks predicted we would have been occupying moon bases or exploring Mars or mining asteroids. It’s not as if we haven’t seen an enormous amount of technological progress in recent decades. In some ways, we live in a science-fiction world: We carry massive music collections in our pockets, conduct real-time conversations with people across the globe for fractions of a cent and can spend hours playing (and even making money) in hypnotically detailed virtual worlds. Pure cyberpunk, down to the jihadis exchanging deadly tips on hidden message boards.

But at the same time, the science fiction of “out there” seems stillborn — 25 years after the first space shuttle took off, it’s news if it returns with all aboard safe and sound. Space elevators and moon bases? C’mon, kid: Your square-jawed rocket engineers of future histories past are now tattooed, pierced software engineers coding social-networking sites. Pluto’s a faraway place in more ways than one.

Or is that too pessimistic? Is there another way into space, one that isn’t dependent on the fitful attention of big government and the iffy performance of big bureaucracies?

Clark S. Lindsey, for one, is optimistic. Mr. Lindsey is a Java programmer and space enthusiast who runs the blog www.spacetransportnews.com. Last summer, a Real Time column being decidedly mopey about the future prompted a letter from him, contending that we’re at the start of a private-industry-led era in space development, one that would develop more quickly than many disappointed sci-fi fans like me thought. (His letter, and other reflections on space exploration, are available here.)

…As sketched out by Mr. Lindsey, it sounds convincing — aided, perhaps, by the fact that I desperately want to believe it. Once thing that does seem certain is this: If we’re to shed our disappointment, we have to let go of space exploration as it was, and accept how it will be. Don’t think of the race to the moon as a first step to Mars and beyond — that’s a perspective best left to history books that will be written centuries from now, if we’re lucky. Instead, consider the space race of the 1960s a mutation of cold-war competition, a peaceful contest that caught the imagination of a more-uniform society that united behind it. Put that big-government model from your mind, and the relatively small scale of private-sector efforts to get into orbit may catch your imagination, instead of just arousing cynicism and disappointment.

Jon Goff’s musings on essential spacefaring technologies was very useful, inasmuch as it seems to have kicked off a substantial discussion in the blogosphere. One wonders how many at NASA are reading.

[Friday morning update]

Jon has some further thoughts. I would add one technology to his list: routine EVA equipment and orbital assembly techniques.

Anousheh Ansari may want to reconsider her upcoming trip:

Zvezda has manufactured seats, suits and other personal equipment for every single of Soviet cosmonauts, including Yuri Gagarin and Valentina Tereshkova who was the first woman to fly to space. Ansari as any other female member of a Soyuz-TMA crew requires a different bowl for disembowelment, Pozdnyakov. “This equipment is fit for answering both kinds of calls of the nature,” Pozdnyakov told Space.com in an interview on Thursday.

[Emphasis mine–Via emailer Adrian Reilly]

[Update at noon]

This part was cute, too:

A woman’s organism is different, that’s why we need to modify some of the life systems in the capsule…

It sure is. Vive la difference!

Jon Goff writes about technologies necessary to a spacefaring civilization that NASA is avoiding developing, instead pouring most of its resources into new and expensive (and probably ultimately unaffordable) launch systems.

[Afternoon update]

Clark Lindsey notes an omission. I agree, tugs are important as well. And NASA’s not working on one of those, either.

Travis Johnson writes about SpaceDev’s prospects, with the loss of its COTS bid. I’m not sure he understands Rocketplane Kistler, though:

Rocketplane Kistler arguably has the design that’s most like SpaceDev’s DreamChaser, in that it’s based on a spaceplane design somewhat like a smaller version of the current shuttle, so if there was a spot for SpaceDev on this contract I expect we have Rocketplane to blame for them not getting it. SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft is essentially a capsule that rides on the Falcon launch vehicle.

I have no idea what he’s talking about here (perhaps because he has no idea what he’s talking about, either). There is no resemblance whatsoever between the Shuttle, Dreamchaser or the Kistler orbital vehicle.

Well, all right, there’s a superficial resemblance between Dreamchaser and the Shuttle, in that they’re both vertical takeoff/horizontal landing vehicles. But neither of them look anything like the Kistler vehicle, which returns a capsule with no wings at all (via parachute, I believe). Perhaps he is confused by the Rocketplane XP (a Learjet derivative), but that has nothing to do with COTS–it’s a suborbital vehicle only.