Space Launch System

The NASA Authorization Act of 2010 approved the building of a heavy lifting vehicle under the name Space Launch System, using the hardware of the Ares rocket, and converting the Orion capsule into the MPVC - Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle. Today, the Space Launch System is developed in the idea of being the first NASA’s exploration-class vehicle since Saturn V, and the largest rocket ever built. Although applying the same old rocketry principles and chemical propulsion, the SLS will have a superior lift capability, and it could take the Orion capsule to deep space destinations such as the moon, an asteroid, and Mars (Harwood, 2011, n.d.). SLS will come in two configurations: the 77 tons rocket will have a lift capability of 154,000 pounds, while the 143 tons will be able to lift more than 286,000 pounds. The SLS’s lift-off capacity will therefore be much bigger than that of the space shuttle, which had a lift-off capacity of 50,000 pounds, as well as that of the Saturn V rocket that launched astronauts to the moon at 263,000 pounds of payload capabilities (Harwood, 2011, n.d.). The core stage and the avionics of the SLS will stand 200 feet tall, and will store the liquid fuel which will feed the four RS-25 engines of the rocket (NASA Marshall, 2012, n.d.). The SLS will also be equipped with two five-segment SRB’s.

To reduce cost and development, the SLS will be a blend of technology used by the Space Shuttle Program, and the technology planned for the Constellation Program. The engines used for developing this rocket will be three of the RS-25D/E shuttle main engines for the first stage, and an upgraded Apollo J-2 X engine for the second stage (NASA Marshall, 2012, n.d.).

The plan is that the first unmanned test flights would take place at the end of 2017. The cost of the first phase and test flight is expected to be $18 billion, and it would include the cost of the SLS, the MPVC, as well as the upgrades in the infrastructure of the Kennedy Space Center required for launch. Once operational, the SLS’s yearly cost will be in the range of $3 billion, while for the space shuttle alone NASA used to spend between $2 and $3 billion a year (“NASA Announces Design,” 2013, n.d.).

Some of the future planned missions of SLS are cis-lunar space exploration, near-Earth asteroids, Mars and its moons, as well as further deep space missions (“NASA Announces Design,” 2013, n.d.). The schedule of these missions is nearby asteroids by 2020s, and orbit and land on Mars in the 2030s capabilities (Harwood, 2011, n.d.).  This proposed timetable will be in accord with President Obama’s challenge that NASA would send astronauts to an asteroid by 2025, and to Mars by mid-2030s. 

The FY 2014 President’s NASA Budget Request included a budget of $1,384.9 million for the Space Launch Systems, of which $1,339.8 million for Launch Vehicle Development, and $45.1 million for SLS Program Integration & Support (“FY 2014 President’s Budget,” 2013, p. 8). Although the budget is about 100 million less than the actual budged of 2012 designated for SLS, if approved, the 2014 budget will allow a continuation in the development of the future manned launch system.

NASA will have to rely on Soyuz flights for transportation of U.S. astronauts to ISS for as long as no launch vehicle will be available. However, the SLS is more a deep space vehicle than a LEO vehicle. It will of course be capable to send astronauts to the ISS, but it would be unfortunate if that would be its main mission. The SLS will be the new Saturn V, designed to take astronauts to the moon, an asteroid, and Mars. For LEO the current plan involves relying on commercial space, hoping that perhaps ULA or SpaceX will soon provide a vehicle reliable enough to transport astronauts to the ISS. That is definitely SpaceX’s plan with the Dragon and Falcon Heavy, so one day these may be the means to replace Soyuz.

Bob Hope and Neil Armstrong

Neil Armstrong's appearances on television were with Bob Hope only.

They became pals on a tour of Vietnam in 1969.

Neil Armstrong’s Moon

Introduction to “Moon Shot” by Alan Shepard and Deke Slayton

LUNA INCOGNITA. THE UNKNOWN MOON. A silent sentinel, for all man’s history it hung overhead, remote, unreachable, unknowable.

Marching across the heavens each day and circling our earth monthly, the moon has fascinated scientists and inspired poets. Its changing shape provides a perpetual clock-calendar in the sky, a marker for planting, for holidays, for religious celebrations. So near and yet so far, men and moon intertwining for millennia, but never touching.

In the twentieth century, two distinctly different technologies emerged: the digital computer and the liquid-fueled rocket. Two great world powers, ideological adversaries, each recognized that the rocket, which could operate in a vacuum, and the computer, which could enable precision navigation, might break the barrier to space travel.

Both the Soviet Union and the United States believed that technological leadership was the key to demonstrating ideological superiority. Each invested enormous resources in evermore spectacular space achievements. Each would enjoy memorable successes. Each would suffer tragic failures. It was a competition unmatched outside the state of war. Finally, and unpredictably, the competitors would join in a cooperative effort that would contribute to the demise of the Cold War that enveloped them.

The moon’s isolation of nearly five billion years would end soon. Early in the space age, man-made probes flew near the moon. Others soon crashed into the lunar surface. Robot craft landed and transmitted pictures and scientific measurements back to earth laboratories. The stage was set for a visit by man.

The Soviets established an impressive number of “firsts”: first to place a satellite in orbit, first to send a probe to the moon, first to place a human in space, first to orbit two manned craft simultaneously, first to have a human exit his craft in space. But it would be the Americans who would accomplish the seemingly impossible sending men to the moon and returning them safely to earth.

History will remember the twentieth century for two technological developments: atomic energy and space flight. One threatened the extinction of society, one offered a survival possibility. If Earth were ever threatened by man-made or natural catastrophe, space flight could, just possibly, provide protection or escape.

Alan Shepard and Deke Slayton knew the practical aspects and the visceral feelings of flight. Both were experienced airplane test pilots. Test pilots have the responsibility for finding errors in airplane design. They may discover them during flight, but they would much prefer to identify the problems before going aloft. As two of the seven initial American astronauts, this search for perfection served them well.

Deke and Alan were at the heart of the manned space program. Deke was responsible for the selection of flight crews and their preparedness to fly in space. He took an intense interest in the well-being of his flock, protecting, supporting, and encouraging them. He was a superb boss.

Alan, as chief of the Astronaut Office, was responsible for da-to-day operations. Astronauts were needed for spacecraft tests, for design reviews, for newspaper interviews. With equanimity, he distributed these seemingly limitless tasks to a very limited number of “his boys”. He was an impenetrable barrier to inappropriate or ultimately requests. He was “the man in the middle” and handled it well.

Moon Shot is their story. Much more than the story of their flights in space, it details their central role in the most exciting adventure in history. Jay Barbree, one of the world’s most experienced space journalists, reported the triumphs and the tragedies from the dawn of the space age. He is exceptionally well qualified to recall and record the remarkable events and emotions of the time.

Luna is once again isolated. Four decades have passed without footfalls on its dusty surface. No wheeled Rovers patrol the lunar highlands. Silent ramparts guard vast territories never yet visited by man. Unseen vistas await the return of explorers from Earth.

And they will return.

—Neil Armstrong

Neil Armstrong - A Rare Interview, 2011

The First Artificial Satellite

On October 4, 1957 life as everyone knew it was to forever change. The Homo sapiens has become the first species to ever space fare by deploying the first object to orbit the Earth. It was called Sputnik, I and it was the first artificial satellite of the Blue Planet. Sputnik I was followed by Sputnik II and the first living being ever to reach space, the dog Laika. Needless to say, an entire constellation of satellites followed afterwards, pervading Earth’s orbit with manned-made objects, and changing the life of the earthlings in a multitude of ways. This paper summarizes the launches and features of the first two Soviet satellites Sputnik I and II, as well as of the first successfully launched American satellite Explorer I, focusing on some of the systems aboard each satellite.

Sputnik I was the first Soviet satellite to launch into space and the first manned made object to orbit Earth. It was launched from Baikonur Cosmodrome on October 4, 1957 atop the Old Number Seven rocket.[1] Sputnik I orbited the Earth for 92 days, had about 184 pounds, and it was a contribution to the International Geophysical Year (1957-1958). Its main mission was to successfully launch into space and orbit Earth as the first artificial satellite ever built and deployed by humans. Sputnik I was an aluminum sphere with a diameter of 58 centimeters and equipped with four whip-like antennas about 2.4 to 2.9 meters long, deployed at 35 degrees angles. [2] The sphere was filled with nitrogen under pressure. The power source was made of three silver-zinc batteries housed inside a sealed capsule, while a ventilator was used for thermal regulation. [3] Sputnik I also had a one-watt transmitter that was received by amateur radios on Earth. Its beeping signal first hit the United States in the evening of October 4, 1957. [4] The orbital parameters of Sputnik I were: periapsis – 215 km, apoapsis – 939 km, period – 96 minutes, inclination – 65 degrees and eccentricity 0.05. [5]

Sputnik I was not equipped with an attitude stabilization system of any kind. Its communications system transmitter had one-watt of power and its signals were of 0.4 seconds alternatively at forty and twenty megahertz wavelengths. The power system consisted of three silver-zinc batteries. The satellite had four whip antennas of 2.4 and 2.9 meters length. [6] Sputnik I was indeed the embodiment of simplicity. It did not even have a payload other than its own body, the aluminum sphere and the beeping radio. Sputnik I did not receive any commands from ground stations, being only equipped with a transmitter and not a receiver. The thermal control system, powered by the three batteries onboard, consisted of a fan, a dual thermal switch and a control thermal switch. [7] The thermal control system successfully operated as planned.

Sputnik I operated for 1,400 orbits of the Earth, a mission of three months. The first artificial satellite was able to communicate with the ground for about three weeks, the actual duration of the batteries supplying the transmitter with power. The limiting factor in its ability to communicate was of course the short life of the batteries. The main mission of Sputnik I was massively met because it successfully reached the orbit of Earth and it stayed there for three month, simply demonstrating that humans are able to launch objects into space. The launch of Sputnik I in 1957 opened a whole new world of adventure for humanity. It was the beginning of what turned out being known as the space age.

Neil Armstrong: First Man on the Moon

The Sun and Earth's Climate

The effects of space weather on Earth's climate are currently still a controversy. The idea that solar activity affects climate on our planet is a given, considering that the sun is our source of energy and heat. We are all familiar with a cloudy and rainy day and its colder temperatures as opposed to a sunny, warm day. But does solar activity affect climate in the long run?

One idea was that sun spot activity could relate to changes in short term weather cycles and long term climate changes. In the beginning of the 20th century some scientists concluded that higher sun spot numbers contributed to a rainier and colder weather in some areas of the planet. Others claimed that more sun spots meant a brighter star and hence more heat on Earth. [1]

While short term effects on weather could be eventually verified, this was not the case with long term climate changes, so speculations on this matter went even further. Slight changes in solar radiations were blamed for ice ages on Earth, to the extent that such changes were mentioned in textbooks as possible causes for ice ages, shifts in ocean currents and volcanic dust. [2] These speculations were unconfirmed as soon as the space age started and spacecraft were able to measure ultraviolet radiation, which turned out to fluctuate during high peak solar activity, however which are not able to pass through the stratosphere and have an impact on the climate. Solar wind was also blamed for climate changes. It was suspected that high energy particles generated by solar wind could have an impact on the climate. [3]

In 1980 NASA tried to solve the mystery of the solar constant and its effect on climate by adding a special instrument to a satellite. This instrument detected small variations in the constant, depending on the number and position of sunspots. [4] Since the only assumed way solar activity could affect climate was in the amount of the sun’s output of energy, more and more scientists focused on this idea. During the Nineties, scientists focused on other similar stars and noticed their output of energy varies. As it later turned out, those stars were not so similar to ours after all. [5] With the beginning of the 21st century the increase in global temperatures over the previous century were yet again blamed on solar activity. With the help of numerous satellites, accurate sea surface temperatures were taken and a connection between temperature small variations and the 11 years solar cycle were noticed. [6]

I believe that so far very small influences of solar activity on the climate were revealed, and it does not seem that solar activity would be the main engine behind climate change on Earth. So far human activity has proven a much stronger engine that drives climate changes. Since there is not much we can do to influence solar activity, but there is a lot we can do in terms of our behavior and activities, we should definitely put more energy into that in regard to climate change. Solar activity has other strong effects on our planet and it is important to understand how these work and what we can do to prevent such issues.
________________________________________
Notes:
[1]
American Institute of Physics. Changing Sun, Changing Climate?  February 2013. http://www.aip.org/history/climate/solar.htm (accessed April 26, 2013), para. 4-6.
[2] Ibid, para. 10-11.
[3] Ibid, para. 13.
[4] Ibid, para. 36.
[5] Ibid, 41.
[6] Ibid, 47.

Space Control

Space control is a method of watching and protecting space from any type of non peaceful space faring undergone by any nation of the world. From the beginning of the Space Race, it was soon realized that using space for anything but peaceful endeavors would have serious consequences on the future of the human race, and therefore international treaties were created and signed by the space faring nations of the time, stipulating that space can and must be used for peaceful purposes only and for the benefit of all mankind. Therefore, methods of space control must always be in place to assure such stipulations are continuously respected and maintained. During the Cold War era, one such method of space control were the reconnaissance satellites, [1] developed early in the Space Race mainly as response to the launch of Sputnik I and the suspicion that the Soviet Union already had such reconnaissance capabilities in place. Another implemented method was that of the anti-satellite systems, which of course implied the complete aggressive destruction of the enemy target. Such aggressive methods were however found to be quite repulsive after the end of the Cold War, and therefore new and less aggressive methods of space control had to be implemented.

Nowadays, a non-destructive space control tool implies temporarily and reversibly affecting the functionality of the enemy target without blowing it up. [2] This method does support the above mentioned definition of space control because it implies disabling the enemy hardware by make it dysfunctional and hence stopping any type of possible aggressive use of space. It also gives the participating nations a chance for discussing the issue on a diplomatic level rather than a military one. Answering aggression with aggression does not bear peaceful fruits, and therefore a space control tool that does not imply military action but still protects space is an excellent method. Another huge advantage of a non-destructive space control tool is the avoidance of generating more space debris. [3] Space debris has become a huge issue in orbit, and any more anti-satellite actions could only make the situation worse. Especially after China’s 2007 anti-satellite action, this issue has become an important one. This is yet another reason why answering an anti-satellite action with the same method would not be a smart way of space control. Besides this, such method would further contribute to the reduction of space debris simply by its capability to deactivate any anti-satellite weapon before detonation. In the same time, using a non-destructive space control method does not contravene international treaties that forbid the use of any type of weapons in space. An example of such non-destructive space control tools are the ones deployed to interfere and possibly jam the Libyan, Iranian and Chinese communication satellites. [4]

The Strategic Defense Initiative “Star Wars”

The Strategic Defense Initiative was initiated on March 23, 1983 under President Reagan with the purpose to accomplish defense against ballistic missiles. The testing and utilizing of various types of weapons for this purpose led many domestic and international critics to claim that the SDI initiative was a serious violation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972, a treaty that committed the two world powers of the time to not develop a missile defense system. Especially the utilization of nuclear weapons for this purpose was a breach of most international space and defense treaties, including the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. One of the main reasons for the SDI initiative was the fact that the utilization of space for military conflicts became a serious threat. Russian directed-energy weapons deployed in space were the primarily source of worry at that time. [1]

Among the reasons behind the Strategic Defense Initiative were the critiques against the high level of defense spending underwent by the Reagan administration. Having such a developed defense program functional would have meant that nuclear threats could be completely eliminated, making the SDI beneficial to everyone, and hence becoming a peace initiative. Besides this, a strong Strategic Defense Initiative meant the Soviet Union could not be the one to initiate a strike anymore, which in turn could put an end to the Cold War. [2]

The Strategic Defense Initiative stirred up some emotionality mainly because it was strongly contravening important international treaties. Because of its farfetched ideas such as the utilization of lasers, the program was nicknamed “Star Wars”. The “science-fiction” technology was meant to be a whole new and better method of intercepting the enemy weapons while still in space in order to minimize their impact and effect. Thirty billion dollars were invested in SDI, but sophisticated technology such as laser was never used, and in the end the program focused more on kinetic energy weapons rather than space-based sophisticated weapons. [3]

SDI was worrisome for the Soviet Union mainly because the Soviets felt the development of such a program by the U.S. meant no future bilateral negotiations in regard of weaponization. The former Soviet Union feared that the United States would deploy a large scale defense systems and this would force the Soviet Union to initiate an attack, a fact that actually contributed to the U.S. insecurity rather than assuring a strong national security. President Mikhail Gorbachev asked that the United States renounced the Strategic Defense Initiative, and President’s Reagan refusal to stop the development of this program was the main issue of the time that prevented the two powers to agree on any means and methods of weapons control. [4]

Star Wars ended up being abandoned, one of the reasons for the abandonment being that the development of such a defense program would generate worries in the international community, as well as tensions between the United States and the former Soviet Union, a tension that could involuntarily lead to a possible conflict. [5]

________________________________________

Notes:

[1] Preston, Bob, Johnson, Dana J., Edwards, Sean J.A., Miller, Michael, Shipbaugh Calvin. Space Weapons Earth Wars. RAND Project Air Force. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/2011/RAND_MR1209.pdf (accessed January 29, 2013), 14.

[2] U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian. Milestones 1981-1989: Strategic Defense Initiative, 1983. http://history.state.gov/milestones/1981-1989/SDI (accessed January 29, 2013), para. 3.

[3] Crowley, Kevin. Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI): Star Wars. Cold War Museum. http://www.coldwar.org/articles/80s/SDI-StarWars.asp (accessed January 29, 2013), para. 1.

[4] U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian. Milestones 1981-1989: Strategic Defense Initiative, 1983. http://history.state.gov/milestones/1981-1989/SDI (accessed January 29, 2013), para. 5.

[5] Crowley, Kevin. Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI): Star Wars. Cold War Museum. http://www.coldwar.org/articles/80s/SDI-StarWars.asp (accessed January 29, 2013), 

The Sanctuary of Space

Sanctuary is defined by the idea of keeping space and space faring weapons-free for the benefit of the entire humanity. [1] In order to protect the sanctuary of space, ever since the beginnings of the space age, nations involved in space activities and not only were drawn towards legalizing space activities to make sure no nation of the world would utilize space capabilities for military purposes. This was the initial scope of the Outer Space Treaty, as well as the Moon Treaty. Maintaining the sanctuary of space has been so far quite successful, despite the competition of the Space Race and the tensions of the Cold War.

The subject of the sanctuary of space is somehow debatable. Some nations claim that the Outer Space Treaty refers not only to weaponization, but also to any sort of military use of space itself, as well as space hardware. While keeping weapons away from space has been achieved so far, the use of space for the military has been widespread worldwide. Reconnaissance, communication and global positioning satellites are all used for military purposes and ultimately for achieving national security. However there have been suggestions that using space hardware for national security can only benefit the entire humanity, because it is a means of maintaining world peace. [2]

Placing weapons in space would affect the concept of sanctuary in a negative manner, or in other words, space would not be a sanctuary anymore. It is recommended to maintain space in a status somehow similar to the international waters where special laws apply for all nations of the world. Therefore, placing any type of weapon with any sort of aggressiveness in mind would destroy the status of the sanctuary. However there are exceptions that the international community must agree with. For example, using nuclear weapons for deflecting a hazardous near-Earth object should be something pre-agreed. Waiting until such a situation arises to decide may be a problem. It is somehow widely agreed in the space community that blowing up an asteroid in the “Armageddon” style would not be a good idea, but there are other ideas circulating around that suggest using nuclear weapons to just change the course of such a hazardous object while still at a considerable distance from Earth would be a reliable method of deflection. Such uses of weapons in space would help maintain the sanctuary.

Maintaining the sanctuary of space is beneficial for the entire humanity, but especially to the space faring nations. [3] The sanctuary assures the safety of space hardware of any kind, from satellites to the International Space Station itself. It is important to note however that one of the reasons the sanctuary of space has been maintained is that space faring is hard and not at every nation’s hand. The more space activities and possibilities will be developed, the more the sanctuary will be at risk. We are presently witnessing the first tentative of Iran to become a space faring nation. Who is to tell that such a nation would respect the international treaties and express care for the sanctuary of space?

Space Policy and Law

[...]
In reality, maintaining the position of leader in the field while peacefully utilizing space renders the United States a strong military power as well. It is important to keep in mind the exercise of power exhibited by the U.S. as opposed to the former Soviet Union during the cold war. At that time, one of the most valuable assets a state could have was to become a pioneer of space exploration. The first state to explore and use the space for national security would have been the most powerful in the world. In the words of James Lipp of RAND Corporation,

… since mastery of the elements is a reliable index of material progress, the nation which first makes significant achievements in space travel will be acknowledged as the world leader in both military and scientific techniques. [4]

Therefore, spaceflight was and still is a form of soft power, a method to influence other nations by an impressive display of space capabilities. What other means to keep the world leader positions but to continue the peaceful space exploration for the benefit of all humanity!

---

Notes:

[1] The White House. National Space Policy of the United States of America. June 28, 2010. https://edge.apus.edu/access/content/group/177677/Readings%20_I001_/2010_06_28_US_National_Space_Policy.pdf (accessed January 21, 2013), 3.

[2] United Nations. United Nations Treaties and Principles on Outer Space. New York, 2002.

http://www.unoosa.org/pdf/publications/STSPACE11E.pdf (accessed January 21, 2013), vi.

[3] ACQ Web. ABM Treaty: Remarks by the President on NMD. December 13, 2001. www.acq.osd.mil/tc/treaties/abm/remarks.htm (accessed January 21, 2013), para. 6.

[4] Gillespie, Paul and Grant Weller, Eds. 2008. Harnessing the Heavens: National Defense Through Space. U.S. Air Force Academy: Launnius, Roger D. National Security, Space, and the Course of Recent U.S. History, 8.

Outer Space Treaty

---

Notes:

[1] United Nations. United Nations Treaties and Principles on Outer Space. New York, 2002.

http://www.unoosa.org/pdf/publications/STSPACE11E.pdf (accessed January 15, 2013), 4.

[2] Ibid, 4.

[3] The Universe: Stopping Armageddon, produced by Alexander G. Morano. 2009; The History Channel. DVD.

[4] West, Jessica. The Space Review: Back to the future: The Outer Space Treaty turns 40. The Space Review, October 15, 2007. http://www.thespacereview.com/article/982/1 (accessed January 15, 2013), para. 10.

Neil Armstrong Host NASA 50th Anniversary Documentary

Neil Armstrong 2005 Interview