I have a new piece up over at Popular Mechanics on the future of the space station.
Also, it’s the fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the Space Act, creating NASA.
[2 PM Update]
Here’s another rollout story at PM, with a lot of pics. It’s the current front page of the on-line version, along with my ISS story.
More on the “flight test” of Ares 1-X, which seems to be mostly for show. Though if it’s as risky as indicated here, it may be a more spectacular performance than they count on.
Unfortunately, the same folks who think a flight dynamics test of a four segment SRB with a different propellant, old-style grain design, and inert (that is to say, non-sloshing and stiff) upper pieces is a good idea also thought they could grab a bunch of used equipment (Atlas avionics software, Peacekeeper hardware, etc.), chewing gum, and duct tape (perhaps FEMA is helping the minions) and use it to demonstrate how something “like” ARES-1X might get off the ground after “the gap” has widened to its furthest extent.
And, like all of the shortcuts the Emperor’s minions have taken to date, this approach, too, is soon to come back and bite them. The list of critical components going into ARES-1X that are either beyond shelf life or being put to work in an environment for which they were not intended is astounding. And the risks that are being accepted, because of schedule and budget pressures, are equally marvelous.
Hey, it’s OK. That’s what waivers are for.
Jeff Foust talked to Burt Rutan at yesterday’s rollout.
Rutan confirmed that the investigation was causing “a lot” of design changes for SS2. “We have not worked on SpaceShipTwo in a year,” he said, “because there’s a possibility that the propulsion system would be markedly different and we’d be building things that we would have to scrap.”
So they’ve essentially lost a year due to the accident. I wonder if they’ll finally switch over to a liquid system? It would save them quite a bit in ops costs, I’d think.
[Update a few minutes later]
Here’s more on the subject from Rob Coppinger, who interviewed Burt.
I agree that nukes aren’t necessarily the best way to deal with asteroids, but the notion that NASA is promoting them in order to justify nuclear weapons in space is more than a little nutty.
Tomorrow, the first demonstration of the rocket racer, in Oshkosh. There’s a picture of the taxi test on the front page of the site, but it’s not likely to be there for long.
White Knight Two will be rolled out for the general public today in Mojave. Scaled Employees had a private rollout yesterday.
[Late morning update]
Clark Lindsey has the Virgin press release.
I don’t understand why they say that this is environmentally friendly. Compared to what? If they’re still going with the hybrid, it presumably burns rubber, and has CO2 as a combustion by-product. What’s so friendly about that, compared to, say, LOX/kerosene? Just marketing hype, I guess.
[Update mid afternoon]
Clark Lindsey has a lot more links.
This is the future of space exploration. Which is why we have to stop talking about “exploration” as a justification for humans in space.
[Update in the evening]
Commenter Paul Dietz recommends >Saturn’s Children
Ares 1 marches (or staggers) on:
Thrust Oscillation is specifically named in relation to end of the first stage burn of Ares I-X, which requires mitigation – proposed to be in the form of high strength fasteners.
“Preliminary results show lower axial loads and higher lateral loads during thrust oscillation at the end of the FS (First Stage) burn (T+120sec). Proposed mitigation (high strength fasteners in impacted hardware) in work, needs to be presented at ERB (Engineering Review Board).
Afraid it will shake apart? Use bigger screws!
I love this, too.
While beefing up the structure is a mitigation for the hardware, Ares I-X’s components are also in the TO firing line, with the most concerning element referencing the Flight Termination System (FTS) – which may require a range waiver due to the potential TO could exceed the components certification, and the threat of vibrating them out of action.
“Requirement – Range Safety: multiple waivers. Lack of dual S&A device. Lack of initiation of LSC at both ends. Lack of “CRD Self-test” capability. Minimum separation of FTS components,” added the presentation.
We may massage the thing so hard that we won’t be able to blow up the vehicle if something goes wrong (e.g., it starts blasting toward the VAB). Can we have a waiver, please?
NASA’s unending ability to waive itself from its own requirements is one of the reasons that the notion of “human rating” is nonsensical.
[Early evening update]
Link to NASA Space Flight was bad before. It’s fixed now. I’m kind of surprised that it took all day for someone to point it out. Just more evidence that most people don’t follow the links, at least if I post significant excerpts and/or commentary on them.
[Update a couple minutes later]
Rob Coppinger has Ares 1, then and now. That upper stage has really grown. I also hadn’t realized that it had a common bulkhead for the tanks. Well, at least it’s not hypergolic.
Clark notes that tomorrow will be a time of remembrance in Mojave.
And one year later, they still don’t seem to know for sure what happened. And we haven’t heard what’s going on with SpaceShipTwo propulsion development, though it won’t fly before late next year (at least two years behind the original schedule, with some of that slippage no doubt due to last year’s incident).
The “rocks have rights” crowd are worried again about vandalizing space:
Edward O Wilson has suggested that biophilia, our appreciation of Earth’s biosphere, is a by-product of evolving in this environment. If he’s right, we might find we don’t care about other worlds in the same way. This raises the alarming prospect of rapacious lunar mining altering the view from Earth.
Maybe our biophilia will kick in here: after all, our view of the Moon is one of Earth’s natural vistas. Surely we can agree that we don’t want that changed? It is an awesome thing to look up and remember that human footprints once marked the Moon’s surface. It’s quite another to imagine the moon looking like an abandoned quarry.
No, we can’t agree. Note that this was in the context of a discussion on “eco issues” on the moon.
Here’s the “eco issue” on the moon (and in the rest of the universe, as far as we know right now). There is no “eco” there. There is also no “bio” for our “biophilia” to kick in about. Ecology and biology are about life, something that exists only on earth. It’s one thing to want to preserve an ecosystem, but when one simply wants to preserve the entire universe in its current “pristine” state, there’s something unsettling and misanthropic going on.
Why is it all right for a meteroid to slam into the lunar surface and leave a crater (which has happened billions of times throughout history, and continues today) which is how the moon got to look the way it is, but a pit for mining is verboten? Would he object to seeing the lights of a lunar city up there? Does he have any idea how far away it is and how much mining one would have to do to see it from earth, even with a telescope?
What is this worship of entropy? What is this loathing of humanity? What is this apparent loathing of life itself?