Sunday, September 27
Water, Water Everywhere
Last week NASA had two reports on extraterrestrial water in our solar system. First, NASA reported that water molecules had been definitely found on the surface of the Moon. The amount of water was estimated to be about 32 ounces of water for every ton of surface material. The second NASA report on water was associated with Mars. The Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter located water just below Mar's surface at a latitude which was much further south than anticipated. New craters revealed the water near the surface. Amazingly, NASA's Viking Lander 2 might have discovered this water back in 1976 had it dug just 4 inches deeper.
Monday, September 21
Tavis Smiley Interviews NASA's Administrator
Just this past weekend I listened in on Tavis Smiley's radio interview of NASA's new Administrator General Charles Bolden. It was a good interview, but what surprised me the most was Bolden's statement that the United States may not be the first nation to put a man on Mars. I had not heard this before from such a high level in the Administration, let alone from the man who is supposed to make it happen. I find this a little sad. Yes, we are all one global village, but what we need is determination and drive, not an attitude of "Oh well, I am sure someone will do it." Let's hope we find a little bit of that can-do spirit real soon before we go back in for budget talks.
You can download the interview here.
You can download the interview here.
Friday, September 18
The Future of the Moon Shot
The recent study of the Human Space Flight Review Committee, released by NASA, indicates our ambitions are outstripping our resources. To quote,
The U.S. human spaceflight program appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory. It is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources. Space operations are among the most complex and unforgiving pursuits ever undertaken by humans. It really is rocket science. Space operations become all the more difficult when means do not match aspirations. Such is the case today.
The report covers a number of topics, including plans to return to Moon and the fate of the International Space Station (ISS). In terms of the Moon, the Committee appears to support the idea of using the Moon landing as a good test on our way to eventually visiting Mars. In fact, robotic exploration of other solar system bodies first (called "Flexible Path") may also have more benefits for awhile before storming Mars. The report states
Mars is the ultimate destination for human exploration; but it is not the best first destination. Both visiting the Moon First and following the Flexible Path are viable exploration strategies. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive; before traveling to Mars, we might be well served to both extend our presence in free space and gain experience working on the lunar surface.
If NASA follows these recommendations it is possible the Mars plans will be pushed even further into the future.
Concerning the ISS, the report believes the station should remain in orbit longer than planned. After all, it will be a $100 billion asteroid at some point, but maybe we can wait awhile.
Finally, the report recommends more commercial involvement and relevant competitions to spur development. I like this idea. To quote,
Commercial services to deliver crew to low-Earth orbit are within reach. While this presents some risk, it could provide an earlier capability at lower initial and lifecycle costs than government could achieve. A new competition with adequate incentives should be open to all U.S. aerospace companies. This would allow NASA to focus on more challenging roles, including human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit, based on the continued development of the current or modified Orion spacecraft.
All in all, the Committee's findings make a lot of sense. Much of the debate comes down to resources, and given the state of the U.S. economy and plans for future government programs, such as health care, we are unlikely to see a huge rush to fund expanded space programs. NASA will be lucky to hold onto its current budget.
The U.S. human spaceflight program appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory. It is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources. Space operations are among the most complex and unforgiving pursuits ever undertaken by humans. It really is rocket science. Space operations become all the more difficult when means do not match aspirations. Such is the case today.
The report covers a number of topics, including plans to return to Moon and the fate of the International Space Station (ISS). In terms of the Moon, the Committee appears to support the idea of using the Moon landing as a good test on our way to eventually visiting Mars. In fact, robotic exploration of other solar system bodies first (called "Flexible Path") may also have more benefits for awhile before storming Mars. The report states
Mars is the ultimate destination for human exploration; but it is not the best first destination. Both visiting the Moon First and following the Flexible Path are viable exploration strategies. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive; before traveling to Mars, we might be well served to both extend our presence in free space and gain experience working on the lunar surface.
If NASA follows these recommendations it is possible the Mars plans will be pushed even further into the future.
Concerning the ISS, the report believes the station should remain in orbit longer than planned. After all, it will be a $100 billion asteroid at some point, but maybe we can wait awhile.
Finally, the report recommends more commercial involvement and relevant competitions to spur development. I like this idea. To quote,
Commercial services to deliver crew to low-Earth orbit are within reach. While this presents some risk, it could provide an earlier capability at lower initial and lifecycle costs than government could achieve. A new competition with adequate incentives should be open to all U.S. aerospace companies. This would allow NASA to focus on more challenging roles, including human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit, based on the continued development of the current or modified Orion spacecraft.
All in all, the Committee's findings make a lot of sense. Much of the debate comes down to resources, and given the state of the U.S. economy and plans for future government programs, such as health care, we are unlikely to see a huge rush to fund expanded space programs. NASA will be lucky to hold onto its current budget.