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.

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.

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.

Not So Inspiring

Well, now that we have read the words of President Kennedy, maybe we can find something similarly inspiring from our current President. Or maybe not. As Douglas MacKinnon notes in his editorial, President Obama is not so keen on space and, as a result, "...the promise of space may be lost to us for decades." What did Obama say? Back in 2007 then-Senator Obama said, as part of proposing cuts to NASA's budget, "We're not going to have the engineers and scientists to continue space exploration if we don't have kids who are able to read, write and compute." While I concur that the education of the next generation of America is critical, this does not replace the need for a space program but rather gives it new energy. Such national projects as a mission to another planet is what can inspire kids to achieve great things. It's not one or the other, but instead a combination of efforts (i.e. education, safety-nets, important national achievements, etc.) that can make a nation great. I hope now-President Obama realizes this.

The Anniversary

Here is an excerpt from President John Kennedy's May 25, 1961 speech delivered before a joint session of Congress. Take a look at the entire speech after reading this and you will see the theme was the continual battle with the Soviet Union for military dominance. The space program was just one small part of this strategy.

Finally, if we are to win the battle that is now going on around the world between freedom and tyranny, the dramatic achievements in space which occurred in recent weeks should have made clear to us all, as did the Sputnik in 1957, the impact of this adventure on the minds of men everywhere, who are attempting to make a determination of which road they should take. Since early in my term, our efforts in space have been under review. With the advice of the Vice President, who is Chairman of the National Space Council, we have examined where we are strong and where we are not, where we may succeed and where we may not. Now it is time to take longer strides--time for a great new American enterprise--time for this nation to take a clearly leading role in space achievement, which in many ways may hold the key to our future on earth.

I believe we possess all the resources and talents necessary. But the facts of the matter are that we have never made the national decisions or marshalled the national resources required for such leadership. We have never specified long-range goals on an urgent time schedule, or managed our resources and our time so as to insure their fulfillment.

Recognizing the head start obtained by the Soviets with their large rocket engines, which gives them many months of leadtime, and recognizing the likelihood that they will exploit this lead for some time to come in still more impressive successes, we nevertheless are required to make new efforts on our own. For while we cannot guarantee that we shall one day be first, we can guarantee that any failure to make this effort will make us last. We take an additional risk by making it in full view of the world, but as shown by the feat of astronaut Shepard, this very risk enhances our stature when we are successful. But this is not merely a race. Space is open to us now; and our eagerness to share its meaning is not governed by the efforts of others. We go into space because whatever mankind must undertake, free men must fully share.

I therefore ask the Congress, above and beyond the increases I have earlier requested for space activities, to provide the funds which are needed to meet the following national goals:

First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish. We propose to accelerate the development of the appropriate lunar space craft. We propose to develop alternate liquid and solid fuel boosters, much larger than any now being developed, until certain which is superior. We propose additional funds for other engine development and for unmanned explorations--explorations which are particularly important for one purpose which this nation will never overlook: the survival of the man who first makes this daring flight. But in a very real sense, it will not be one man going to the moon--if we make this judgment affirmatively, it will be an entire nation. For all of us must work to put him there.

Secondly, an additional 23 million dollars, together with 7 million dollars already available, will accelerate development of the Rover nuclear rocket. This gives promise of some day providing a means for even more exciting and ambitious exploration of space, perhaps beyond the moon, perhaps to the very end of the solar system itself.

Third, an additional 50 million dollars will make the most of our present leadership, by accelerating the use of space satellites for world-wide communications.

Fourth, an additional 75 million dollars--of which 53 million dollars is for the Weather Bureau--will help give us at the earliest possible time a satellite system for world-wide weather observation.

Let it be clear--and this is a judgment which the Members of the Congress must finally make--let it be clear that I am asking the Congress and the country to accept a firm commitment to a new course of action, a course which will last for many years and carry very heavy costs: 531 million dollars in fiscal '62--an estimated seven to nine billion dollars additional over the next five years. If we are to go only half way, or reduce our sights in the face of difficulty, in my judgment it would be better not to go at all.

Now this is a choice which this country must make, and I am confident that under the leadership of the Space Committees of the Congress, and the Appropriating Committees, that you will consider the matter carefully.

It is a most important decision that we make as a nation. But all of you have lived through the last four years and have seen the significance of space and the adventures in space, and no one can predict with certainty what the ultimate meaning will be of mastery of space.

I believe we should go to the moon. But I think every citizen of this country as well as the Members of the Congress should consider the matter carefully in making their judgment, to which we have given attention over many weeks and months, because it is a heavy burden, and there is no sense in agreeing or desiring that the United States take an affirmative position in outer space, unless we are prepared to do the work and bear the burdens to make it successful. If we are not, we should decide today and this year.

This decision demands a major national commitment of scientific and technical manpower, materiel and facilities, and the possibility of their diversion from other important activities where they are already thinly spread. It means a degree of dedication, organization and discipline which have not always characterized our research and development efforts. It means we cannot afford undue work stoppages, inflated costs of material or talent, wasteful interagency rivalries, or a high turnover of key personnel.

New objectives and new money cannot solve these problems. They could in fact, aggravate them further--unless every scientist, every engineer, every serviceman, every technician, contractor, and civil servant gives his personal pledge that this nation will move forward, with the full speed of freedom, in the exciting adventure of space.

For the full text of the speech, click here.

Peaceful Space Programs?

The United States has moved anti-missile systems to Hawaii to ward off stray North Korean missiles, while the North Korean leader continues to claim that they are part of a peaceful space mission. Is there such a thing today? And was there ever?

In the Wall Street Journal review of Craig Nelson's book Rocket Men (see below), we read of a quote by then Vice President Lyndon Johnson stating, "Control of space means control of the world. From space the masters of infinity would have the power to control the Earth's weather, to cause droughts and floods, to change the tides and raise the level of the sea, divert the Gulf stream and change the temperature to frigid." And we think North Korea is a little bit crazy? The Vice President sounds like Dr. Evil in Austin Powers. Maybe you remember this bit:

Shit. Oh hell, let's just do what we always do. Hijack some nuclear weapons and hold the world hostage. Yeah? Good! Gentlemen, it has come to my attention that a breakaway Russian Republic called Kreplachistan will be transferring a nuclear warhead to the United Nations in a few days. Here's the plan. We get the warhead and we hold the world ransom for... ONE MILLION DOLLARS!

40 Years Later - Rocket Men

I guess I should not be surprised with the number of books out there on the 40th anniversary of our landing a man on the Moon. Its a feat yet to be equaled by any other nation, and certainly a high point to a decade that saw the assassination of President, as well as his brother, the shooting of Martin Luther King, and the slow erosion of American influence as we slogged through Vietnam. But what a way to exit the 1960s!

One of these books is Craig Nelson's Rocket Men. His story about Apollo 11 is getting some great reviews. Here is how Fred Bortz describes it in The Dallas Morning News:

The book is divided into three parts. Part I introduces the astronauts, their families and the Apollo launch and mission control teams. Part II presents a distinctive view of NASA’s evolution from its origin to the day of that momentous launch. Part III picks up after Apollo 11’s liftoff and continues to the moon and beyond. It closes with a poignant and thought-provoking discussion of the biggest question faced by the astronauts and agency alike: What do you do after you’ve been to the moon?

Nelson faced his own daunting mission in telling the Apollo story in a fresh way. He rises to the occasion with meticulous research, skillful storytelling rich in detail and a narrative as stimulating and disciplined as Apollo 11’s trajectory through space and history.

For example, the book’s lengthy but exquisitely controlled opening sentence puts readers on the scene on May 20, 1969, as the 30-story-tall Saturn V rocket “was painstakingly trundled five miles across the raging heat and searing green of central Florida’s eastern coast by an eleven-man Kennedy Space Center crew aboard the world’s largest land vehicle, a six-million-pound, tank-wheeled crawler out of NASA’s Vehicle Assembly Building, itself so massive that … clouds would form under its 525-foot ceiling … and it would rain.”

To introduce Part II, Nelson writes: “The standard version of the history of NASA has always been that, alarmed and deflated by Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin, the United States created a wholly civilian agency that, through the vital legacy of its youngest president, won the space race ‘in peace for all mankind.’ Besides the fact that almost all these assertions are either misleading or expressly false … [t]he actual story is much richer and the achievements more profound.”

Part III is full of heart-pounding detail that reaches its peak as Armstrong searches for a boulder-free area when unknown lunar mass concentrations cause Eagle to overshoot its planned landing spot. Nelson begins by putting the oral history in context. “From a height of two thousand feet while traveling twenty feet per second, Armstrong tried to orient himself to the landscape below from his studies of the Apollo 10 photographs, but Eagle was now too low to the ground, and too far off-course,” he writes. Then he leaves the rest of the story to flight director Gene Kranz, Buzz Aldrin, Armstrong and Armstrong’s wife, Jan.

Whether or not we need to go back to the Moon is its own question, but the fact that we made it there at all is a marvel and a turning point in human history.

Who Wants to Go to the Moon?

In a recent Wall Street Journal article, Michio Kaku discusses the race for the Moon and how China, Japan and India all have plans to land on the surface of the Moon sometime around 2020. Not to be outdone, the European Space Agency (ESA) plans a manned mission to Mars in 2030 called the Aurora Program. (Note: The ESA's own site is calling for an "international human mission" to Mars by 2025, so it seems ESA does not plan to go on its own). Even so, Mr. Kaku seems to be worried about a "traffic jam" on the surface of the Moon. An interesting idea (and less worrisome than an explosion that pushes the Moon away from Earth ala Space 1999).

Mr. Kaku also calls a trip the Moon "symbolic," citing its lack of military value, lack of air and water, and expensive-to-retrieve minerals. Finally, he worries about the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, wondering if it is up to the task when all these visits start of occur. Here are the basics:

1. the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind;
2. outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States;
3. outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means;
4. States shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner;
5. the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes;
6. astronauts shall be regarded as the envoys of mankind;
7. States shall be responsible for national space activities whether carried out by governmental or non-governmental activities;
8. States shall be liable for damage caused by their space objects; and
9. States shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies.

It still seems pretty relevant today, but maybe a recommitment to these principles might make sense just to make sure everyone has read the fine print. Overall, a new space race is not such a bad idea if it stimulates new approaches and technologies that can advance mankind in the Heavens and here on Earth.

Phobos or Bust?

The New York Times had an interesting interview with Buzz Aldrin in its Sunday magazine. Asked about a return to the Moon, Aldrin thought we should be aiming higher. For instance, the Russians are planning a trip to Phobos, one of Mars' "moons," as a stepping stone to the Martian surface. Aldrin noted "Russia perhaps is still entertaining the possibility that the moons of Mars might have access to ice or water." An interesting approach. Aldrin would rather send robots to the Moon and men to Mars, which is the very reverse of the current American plans. Maybe he is onto something.

NASA Administrator Named

Just to follow up on an earlier posting, President Obama has named General Charles Bolden as the new Administrator of NASA. According to the NASA press release, General Bolden has a pretty impressive background:

Gen. Charles Bolden, Nominee for Administrator of NASA Charles Bolden retired from the United States Marine Corps in 2003 as the Commanding General of the Third Marine Aircraft Wing after serving more than 34 years, and is currently CEO of JackandPanther LLC, a privately-held military and aerospace consulting firm. Gen. Bolden began his service in U.S. Marine Corps in 1968. He flew more than 100 sorties in Vietnam from 1972-73. In 1980, he was selected as an astronaut by NASA, flying two space shuttle missions as pilot and two missions as commander. Following the Challenger accident in 1986, Gen. Bolden was named the Chief of the Safety Division at the Johnson Space Center with responsibilities for overseeing the safety efforts in the return-to-flight efforts. He was appointed Assistant Deputy Administrator of NASA headquarters in 1992. He was Senior Vice President at TechTrans International, Inc. from 2003 until 2005. Gen. Bolden holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis and a M.S. in Systems Management from the University of Southern California.

Of course, none of this says anything about the General's vision for NASA, so we will have to wait a little longer to hear about this.

More on Moon Dust

Brian O'Brien, an Australian physicist, has figured out the secret of moon dust, or what is officially called regolith. Mr. O'Brien worked on the Apollo program back in the 1960s and his curiosity related to the Moon's surface continued all this time. Now it seems the amount of sunlight on the Moon's surface impacts the stickiness of the regolith. It appears the sun's radiation on the surface puts a positive charge on the regolith, causing it to stick to anything from a space suit to NASA instruments. What does this mean for future missions? Well, NASA will need to find a way to overcome this positive charge. Of course, one option is to work on the dark side of the Moon, but I am not sure anyone likes that idea just yet.

In fact, NASA has been running regolith competitions for years to "promote the development of mechanical designs to excavate lunar regolith." NASA keeps adding money to the pot but no one has really come up with a winning design. The 2009 competition will be August 15-16. The rules for competing can be found here. Just think of it as an advance version of the Pinewood Derby.

HD 189733b

Okay, the name is not as memorable as Mars or the ice planet of Hoth, but HD 189733b is the first distant world where traces of carbon dioxide has been detected. And while it might be a fiery giant about 64 light years away, it provides some new insights into another solar system. HD 189733b is said to be about the same size as Jupiter, though it orbits much close to its sun. For more on the specifics of this exoplanet, visit Universe Today.

Who Will be NASA's Administrator?

One of the names that had been bouncing around as the new Administrator is retired Air Force Major General Scott Gration, one of his advisors during the campaign. However, not everyone was happy with this name, including Senator Nelson from Florida.

So, what is the situation today? Well, the Major General will be going to Sudan after being selected as a special envoy. President Obama stated "Standing alongside Secretary Clinton and Ambassador Rice, his appointment is a strong signal of my Administration’s commitment to support the people of Sudan while seeking a lasting settlement to the violence that has claimed so many innocent lives." Interestingly enough, the Major General was born in Congo. This is good news for Sudan, but what about NASA?

Also, maybe this is not where the Major General wants to be. The New Republic notes that "...Gration originally had his heart set on running NASA. Obama tried to put him there until defense lobbyists scotched the idea."

So who else is on the NASA list? Other names have been U.S. Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Charles Bolden, a former space shuttle commander; Charles Kennel, who chairs the National Academy of Science's Space Studies Board; Alan Stern, former NASA associate administrator for science; Scott Hubbard, former director of NASA's Ames Research Center; Wesley Huntress, former NASA associate administrator for space science; and Steve Isakowitz, who was recently reappointed chief financial officer at the Energy Department.

According to The Washington Post, President Obama said he will make a selection any day now. We shall see, since he had orginally planned to this before the inauguration. The Congress is certainly getting impatient, as the letter below demonstrates.

Bipartisan Letter Expressing Need for an Administrator Who Will Minimize the Spaceflight Gap

Dear President Obama:

We write to you as Members of Congress with an abiding interest in the important contributions of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). NASA has been a leading catalyst for innovation and technology development and has enjoyed over 50 years of broad public interest and strong bipartisan political support. The agency’s work is linked to larger issues facing our country such as national security, climate change and American competitiveness. Currently, NASA faces numerous time-sensitive challenges and needs decisive leadership.

One of the most important issues facing NASA and our nation is the impending retirement of the Space Shuttle, and the subsequent five year gap in independent U.S. access to the International Space Station before the Ares 1 and Orion systems can be deployed. This issue has been identified by the Government Accountability Office as one of thirteen ‘urgent’ items for your administration to address. As you know, this issue is linked to our economic recovery since the gap could result in layoffs for several thousand highly skilled aerospace engineers and technicians over the next two years.

We believe it is imperative for NASA to have a leader who understands the implications of a five year or longer hiatus in America’s independent access to space. The new NASA Administrator should grasp the broad strategic and international aspects of NASA’s mission, as well as the technical, budgetary and programmatic tradeoffs that lie ahead. We urge you to keep these issues in mind as you search for a NASA Administrator candidate with the right background, integrity and focus on minimizing the spaceflight gap and preserving the agency’s cutting edge science and aeronautics programs. Maintaining a focused policy and providing the necessary funding to allow NASA to succeed are essential to the technological advances and scientific discoveries that benefit all Americans.

We fully recognize the difficult challenges our nation faces, and we believe that a focused and properly funded NASA can aid our national economy and contribute to our shared goals of sustaining our technological edge and competing on a global stage.

We look forward to working with you and a new Administrator to ensure a robust, successful NASA. We stand ready to work together with you and continue providing the nation’s civilian space and aeronautics agency our steadfast support.

Thank you for your attention to this important issue.

Sincerely,

Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL)
Ken Calvert (R-CA)
Robert Aderholt (R-AL)
John Culberson (R-TX)
Al Green (D-TX)
Parker Griffith (D-AL)
Ralph Hall (R-TX)
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX)
Michael McCaul (R-TX)
Pete Olson (R-TX)
Bill Posey (R-FL)
Adam Schiff (D-CA)
Lamar Smith (R-TX)
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL)

Source: Office of Rep. Suzanne Kosmas

Where is NASA Going?

As of today, if you review the NASA organizational chart you will see an acting Administrator (Christopher Scolese) and a missing Deputy Administrator. So, when do we see some new leadership at NASA, and will the priorities change? A January article in The Economist magazine called "Mars Rising?" that spelled out a few arguments for a change in the U.S. space policy, including a greater reliance on robots. What concerns me more is a possible Obama Adminstration preference for satellites looking back onto Earth rather than keeping our eyes on the Heavens. I would prefer to place the Earth-focused projects into another agency so NASA's mission can be primarily other-worldly. We have plenty to explore and better understand on this planet, including the oceans that cover most of our world, but we should have the resources to stare back at our navel and reach for distant locations.

Anyway, here is the article in full for those who are interested:

Mars rising?

Jan 22nd 2009
From The Economist print edition

Why NASA should give up its ambitions to send men into space

AS LONG as people have looked up at the night sky, they have wondered whether humanity is alone in the universe. Of places close enough for people to visit, Mars is the only one that anybody seriously thinks might support life. The recent confirmation of a five-year-old finding that there is methane in the Martian atmosphere has therefore excited the hopes of exobiologists—particularly as the sources of three large plumes of the gas now seem to have been located. These sources are probably geological but they might, just, prove to be biological.

The possibility of life on Mars is too thrilling for mankind to ignore. But how should we explore such questions—with men, or machines? Since America is the biggest spender in space, its approach will heavily influence the world’s. George Bush’s administration strongly supported manned exploration, but the new administration is likely to have different priorities—and so it should.

Bug-eyed monsters

Michael Griffin, the boss of American’s National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), a physicist and aerospace engineer who supported Mr Bush’s plan to return to the moon and then push on to Mars, has gone. Mr Obama’s transition team had already been asking difficult questions of NASA, in particular about the cost of scrapping parts of the successor to the ageing and obsolete space shuttles that now form America’s manned space programme. That successor system is also designed to return humans to the moon by 2020, as a stepping stone to visiting Mars. Meanwhile, Mr Obama’s administration is wondering about spending more money on lots of new satellites designed to look down at the Earth, rather than outward into space.

These are sensible priorities. In space travel, as in politics, domestic policy should usually trump grandiose foreign adventures. Moreover, cash is short and space travel costly. Yet it would be a shame if man were to give up exploring celestial bodies, especially if there is a possibility of meeting life forms—even ones as lowly as microbes—as a result.

Luckily, technology means that man can explore both the moon and Mars more fully without going there himself. Robots are better and cheaper than they have ever been. They can work tirelessly for years, beaming back data and images, and returning samples to Earth. They can also be made sterile, which germ-infested humans, who risk spreading disease around the solar system, cannot.

Humanity, some will argue, is driven by a yearning to boldly go to places far beyond its crowded corner of the universe. If so, private efforts will surely carry people into space (though whether they should be allowed to, given the risk of contaminating distant ecosystems, is worth considering). In the meantime, Mr Obama’s promise in his inauguration speech to “restore science to its rightful place” sounds like good news for the sort of curiosity-driven research that will allow us to find out whether those plumes of gas are signs of life.

Keep Track of the New Planets

Now that the Kepler spacecraft is on its way, we need some way to keep track of all the new planets we hope to discover. Well, do not fear because The Planetary Society is here to help. The Society has set up a new Catalog of Exoplanets to store information on all the new discoveries. This Catalog will include essential information about each exoplanet, such as : (1) planet's location and home star; (2) mass; (3) orbital period; (4) method by which it was detected; and (5) date of discovery.

The Society notes that

Researchers have discovered more than 300 exoplanets to date. Most are gas giants hundreds of times the mass of the Earth, many orbiting very close to their home stars. But as the sensitivity of the search and the range of detection methods have increased, so has the variety of known exoplanets. Planetary systems composed of as many as five planets have been discovered, some of them sharing similarities with our own solar system. Planet-hunters are also detecting smaller and smaller planets, as small as twice the diameter of the Earth. As detection techniques improve, scientists are closing in on the exoplanet we are all waiting for: an alien “Earth” orbiting a distant star.

Life on Other Planets?

It's good to hear NASA's Kepler spacecraft is safely on its way into its 6-year mission to study the heavens and find other Earth-like planets. The Delta II rocket carried Kepler aloft on March 6th with no problems. Kepler is expected to study between 100,000 and 170,000 sunlike stars in the Milky Way galaxy in the hopes of finding orbiting planets. To do this, Kepler will analyze shifts in each star's brightness.

According to NASA, the mission is as follows:

The scientific objective of the Kepler Mission is to explore the structure and diversity of planetary systems. This is achieved by surveying a large sample of stars to:

1. Determine the percentage of terrestrial and larger planets there are in or near the habitable zone of a wide variety of stars;
2. Determine the distribution of sizes and shapes of the orbits of these planets;
3. Estimate how many planets there are in multiple-star systems;
4. Determine the variety of orbit sizes and planet reflectivities, sizes, masses and densities of short-period giant planets;
5. Identify additional members of each discovered planetary system using other techniques; and
6. Determine the properties of those stars that harbor planetary systems.

This is quite a mission and it should be interesting to read about the results in the years to come.

$70 Million Per Astonaut?

Last month NASA awarded a $3.5 billion cargo contract to Orbital Sciences Corp. and Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX). This should help get the United States through the 2010-2015 period when the shuttles are offline and a new system is being developed. However, to get our astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) during this same period the Russians will be charging $70 million per astronaut. That is one expensive trip. I would rather we consider a private firm such as Space Adventures, which successfully placed Richard Garriott onto the ISS in October 2008. Given the current budget situation, we should be partnering as much as possible with the private sector. We will need the creativity and ingenuity of all interested parties to meet all of the expected challenges.

Note: The image above is the SpaceX Dragon to be used to carry cargo. The craft has also been designed to carry crew, though that is not the mission at this time.

NASA Will Be Part of Parade

Well, while we do not know where the space program fits into the Obama budget priorities (see my earlier posting), at least we know that NASA will be part of the inaugural parade on Tuesday. According to a NASA press release, "The crew of NASA's recent STS-126 space shuttle mission and other agency officials will join representatives from across the country and our armed forces in this historic parade down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington following swearing-in ceremonies on the steps of the Capitol." A protype rover related to the 2020 Moon mission will also be present for the celebration. Maybe this is the reminder the President will need, though for some reason the President may have a few additional items on his mind.