US Launch Vehicles and Spacecraft: Discussion & News

Prince Darling wrote:i will say only this

"couldn't have happened to a bigger asshole"

I agree. Mcain talk lot

today feel salt !

NASA Wants to Send Microbes to Mars Prep Red Planet for Human Habitation

As NASA considers the possibility of a manned mission to Mars, it may first send another lifeform: microscopic bacteria which could biologically engineer the planet’s ecosystem, making it more habitable.

Terraforming has long been a staple of science fiction. Literally meaning "Earth-shaping," the theoretical process involves artificially altering a planet’s atmosphere and climate to be more accommodating for human life.

The question has always been: How? Do you bombard the stratosphere with particles which would help trap or release greenhouse gases? A similar proposal was made to solve global warming on Earth. Or do you somehow dump an ocean’s worth of water onto the surface and hope it sticks?

For NASA, the answer could be cyanobacteria.

The agency has begun funding research to send "ecosystem-building, pioneer organisms" to Mars. If all goes according to plan, the microorganisms could be used to make living a bit easier on any future astronauts landing on the Red Planet.

Stored inside small canisters, the bacteria could be planted in the Martian soil by a robot like the Curiosity rover. Interactions between the bacteria and the arid clay would then produce oxygen. Slowly, but surely, a habitable atmosphere would begin to develop.

"This is a possible way to support a human mission to Mars, producing oxygen without having to send heavy gas canisters," project head Eugene Boland said in a statement. "Let’s send microbes and let them do the heavy lifting for us."

To terraform the entire planet in this way would take centuries, at best. But to speed up the process, the project would also incorporate large biodomes on the surface. With the bacteria producing oxygen in the land beneath, the biodome would trap in the gases, establishing an isolated, contained ecosystem in a fraction of the time.

The NASA team hopes to also use the concept to provide water. If pockets of water ice can be found beneath the surface, organisms could be utilized to unlock the water’s potential.

"I’m a biologist and an engineer. So I want to put those two things together to make a useful tool," Boland said.

At this time, the project remains in the early test phase, with scientists experimenting with various microbes inside a small container known as the "Mars room," which mimics the planet’s conditions. Depending on how successful the team’s work proves, microscopic travelers could be the first Earthlings to see a Martian sunrise.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/science/20150702/1024106769.html#ixzz3ejM3YWgA

George1 wrote:NASA’s New Horizons Spacecraft to Pluto Experiences Anomaly

Spooky

NASA Scared of Traffic Jams Around Mars

With a growing number of spacecraft orbiting the Red Planet, NASA is beginning to worry about celestial collisions. To avoid satellite fender benders, the agency is looking to boost its Deep Space Network traffic monitoring system.

If 2013’s "Gravity" taught us anything, it’s that there’s little room for error in space. One defunct satellite bumps into your space shuttle, and suddenly you’ve got a chain reaction which pretty much brings down every space station every launched into orbit.

We almost lost Sandra Bullock.

While it may be over 100 million miles away from Earth – and presumably immune to the traffic problems that plague Interstate 405 in Los Angeles – the space around Mars is also becoming surprisingly crowded. India launched its Mangalyaan probe last year, immediately followed by NASA’s Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution (MAVEN) spacecraft. They’re now rocketing around Mars, often narrowly avoiding the Mars Odyssey, Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO), and Mars Express probes also in orbit.

Not to mention Phobos and Deimos, the planet’s two moons. While their orbits are typically further out than that of the spacecraft, there are points of overlap.

"Previously, collision avoidance was coordinated between the Odyssey and MRO navigation teams," Robert Shotwell, Mars Program chief engineer with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said in a statement.

But the new spacecraft are complicating things.

"There was less of a possibility of an issue. MAVEN’s highly elliptical orbit, crossing the altitudes of other orbits, changes the probability that someone will need to do a collision-avoidance maneuver," Shotwell said. "There’s still a low probability of needing a maneuver, but it’s something we need to manage."

To accomplish that, the agency relies on Deep Space Network. With communications facilities in the US, Spain, and Australia, the system utilizes a global antenna network designed to assist interplanetary spaceflight.

Using ultra-sensitive receivers, DSN can keep track of any vessel travelling over 10,000 miles from Earth. If any of those spacecraft appear to be getting too close to one another, an alert is sent to the remote pilot, who can then alter the flightpath.

The system is already proving its worth. In January, an automated signal warned of a potential collision between MRO and MAVEN, which would pass within two miles of each other. Thankfully, avoidance maneuvers turned out to be unnecessary.

Monitoring, of course, can only do so much. The Mars Global Surveyor, an old mapping satellite which went dark in 2006, is also being tracked by Deep Space Network. If it were to enter the flight path of one of the active probes, those could be steered away. But because NASA has lost communication with Surveyor, it could do little if that satellite was on a collision course with either of the two moons or a rogue asteroid.

Over 19,000 large pieces of space junk are being tracked in orbit around Earth. If a similar buildup were to occur around Mars, it could add strain on the tracking system, and make future missions to the Red Planet exponentially more complicated.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/science/20150731/1025234219.html#ixzz3hQT1Nm9s

Forget Flybys: Now NASA Wants to Land on Jupiter Moon to Look for Aliens

In our search for life-harboring bodies in the solar system, the Jovian satellite of Europa may be our safest bet. While NASA previously announced a flyby mission to observe the moon from afar, the space agency now has plans to send a probe down to the surface, where life may exist in vast oceans beneath the ice.

"All these worlds are yours, except Europa. Attempt no landing there." reads a cryptic message from an alien race in Arthur C. Clarke’s sequel to "2001: A Space Odyssey."

As you can probably guess, that warning was pretty much ignored. A team of astronauts land on the moon’s frozen surface, only to be immediately attacked by a giant squid creature from beneath the ice.

Clarke, one of science fiction’s most fastidiously scientific writers, may not be entirely off base. While the mysterious alien message and aggressively evolved octopus may be imagined narrative devices, there’s still a reason he chose to set the tale on Europe: as far as our solar system goes, it may be the most likely candidate to host life beyond Earth.

And according to a statement from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), the space agency may soon be attempting a landing of its own.

"We are actively pursuing the possibility of a lander," Robert Pappalardo, Europa project scientist with JPL, said during a conference last week, according to Space.com.

"NASA has asked us to investigate: What would it take? How much would it cost? Could we put a small surface package on Europa with this mission?"

A mission to Europa was previously announced by the space agency. Slated for launch sometime in the mid-2020s, NASA originally planned to survey the moon through a series of 45 flybys. Using a number of instruments, including ice-penetrating radar and high-resolution cameras, the observations would provide untold details about Europa’s surface composition and characteristics.

But a lander could take even more accurate measurements. NASA has also asked the European Space Agency if it would like its own lander to be included on the flyby mission.

What we already know about Europa has many researchers excited about the moon’s possibilities. Slightly smaller than our own moon, Europa is wrapped in a 50 mile-thick sheet of ice. But beneath that layer, scientists believe the planet to be covered in a massive ocean, which could contain twice as much salt water as the planet Earth.

Researchers also believe that ocean to be as old as the solar system itself. An ancient, 4.5 billion-year-old ocean could theoretically provide ample time for life to evolve.

"When it comes to habitability, we’d like to have the knowledge that the potentially habitable environment has been there for a significant duration," Kevin Hand, deputy chief scientist at JPL’s Solar System Exploration Directorate, said during the same panel.
What we’ve imagined as a sister planet lush with salt oceans may have, in fact, been a very dry and frozen place.

Still, much about the moon’s landscape remains a mystery, and that could present extreme challenges for the possibility of a lander. While we know the icy surface contains a number of cracks, most likely caused by the waters beneath, the effect of those cracks on the topography remains unknown.

"We don’t actually know what the surface of Europa looks like at the scale of this table, at the scale of a lander – if it’s smooth, if it’s incredibly rough, if it’s full of spikes," Curt Niebur, a Europa program scientist with NASA, said during a conference in June.

"Without knowing what the surface even looks like, it’s difficult to design a lander that could survive."

Whatever NASA decides, Pappalardo expects a decision to be made by the end of the year. It’s impossible to say what we’ll find, but if there’s a giant black monolith sticking out of the ice, can we all just agree to pack up and move on?

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/science/20150909/1026757046/Europa-Lander.html#ixzz3lBrNOhLZ

US Orion Rocket Passes Review, Moves to Assembly Stage - Lockheed Martin

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/us/20151026/1029144116/us-orion-rocket-lockheed-martin-nasa.html#ixzz3piOhpsoS

George1 wrote:US Orion Rocket Passes Review, Moves to Assembly Stage - Lockheed Martin

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/us/20151026/1029144116/us-orion-rocket-lockheed-martin-nasa.html#ixzz3piOhpsoS

Lockheed Martin!!
Ooh boy, this ain't gonna end well.

NASA Chief: We're Closer to Sending Humans on Mars Than Ever Before

President Barack Obama remains committed to a 2030 manned mission to Mars, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Administrator Charles Bolden, Jr. stated on Wednesday.

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — Bolden noted that NASA’s deadline the Mars mission was 2030.

“We're closer to sending human beings to the Red Planet than ever before in human history,” Bolden told a meeting at the Center for American Progress in Washington, DC.

In a preparatory mission for the manned Mars landing, Bolden explained, NASA also plans to send an unmanned module in 2020.

“[NASA will send a] new rover to the red planet in 2020 that will help us prepare for [a] human mission,” Bolden said.

The unmanned mission would be designed to send Mars rocks back to Earth for direct scientific examination, he told the audience.

Bolden also said that when the 2030 manned mission arrived on the Martian surface, the astronauts would not have to build their own base because it would already have been constructed underground for them by robots sent in advance.

“We are going to send a team of robots in. We will send the robotic precursors in. … That's what I mean about collaboration between humans and robotic technology,” he pointed out.

Bolden explained an underground base on Mars would have many advantages for human survivability over one constructed on the planet’s surface.

“I think we will probably live under ground for the most part. It gets rid of the need for above ground shielding,” he stated.

Bolden commanded two US space shuttle missions and was the pilot on two in his previous career as an astronaut. He has been NASA’s chief administrator since July 2009.

Before and after his time as an astronaut, Bolden served in the US Marine Corps and rose to the rank of major general.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/science/20151028/1029244785/mars-nasa-chief-send-humans.html#ixzz3py6nuRWG

Miser Pays Twice: Low-Cost Super Strypi Rail-Launched Rocket Fails in Debut


The debut of a new, rail-launched experimental rocket for small satellites failed less than a minute into its flight, the US Air Force said, according to Spacenews.com.

The rail-launched Super Strypi rocket was part of the Operationally Responsive Space (ORS)-4 mission.

"The ORS-4 mission on an experimental Super Strypi launch vehicle failed in mid-flight after liftoff at 5:45 p.m. Hawaii Standard Time (7:45 p.m. PST/10:45 p.m. EST) today from the Pacific Missile Range Facility off Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii," the Air Force said in a brief statement on November 4.

Project officials wanted to build a new launcher that would provide a low-cost launch option for smaller satellites. The Super Strypi project was expected to cost about $15 million per mission and bring as much as 300 kilograms of load into orbit.

Currently US defense organizations, such as the US Army, the Air Force and the National Reconnaissance Office build heavy-lift rockets that cost billions of dollars.

No Space Without Moscow: US Buying Once Sanctioned Russian Rocket Engines


Washington continues to purchase rocket engines from Moscow, as the US has removed them from the list of sanctioned materials, Russia's trade representative to the United States told RIA Novosti.

According to Alexander Stadnik, the rocket engines were initially sanctioned by the United States, but Washington removed them from the list.
"They must have understood that they needed this Russian equipment for development of rocket equipment, otherwise they would have to limit themselves in a series of expensive projects. It is evident that this is the reason the supplies of our engines were continued."

Stadnik noted that the sides were continuing cooperation with previously signed contracts.

In January, Russian rocket producer Energia signed a $1 billion contract with US Orbital Sciences Corporation for the delivery of 60 RD-181 engines. The contract also includes a provision on a range of services including flight training, installation of the engine and engine testing.

In the late 1990s, the Russian Energomash company won a contract with United Launch Alliance to supply RD-180 engines for the Atlas rockets. This contract, valued at about $1 billion, remains in place.

The West, led by Washington, has been imposing sanctions on Russia since 2014, when a military and political crisis in Ukraine escalated, with the US and the EU alleging Russia's involvement.

NASA Gives SpaceX Company 1st Mission Order to International Space Station

The first mission order has been submitted to SpaceX to ferry US astronauts to ISS.

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The first mission order has been submitted to the private space company SpaceX to ferry US astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) in 2017, NASA announced in a press release.

NASA’s contract with SpaceX is the second guaranteed order for an ISS crew mission. The agency granted the first mission to Boeing earlier this year.

"It’s really exciting to see SpaceX and Boeing with hardware in flow for their first crew rotation missions," NASA Commercial Crew Program director Kathy Lueders said.

SpaceX President and CEO Gwynne Shotwell responded to the mission order stating that the company’s Crew Dragon Capsule is "one of the safest, most reliable spacecraft ever flown."

The United States has been entirely dependent on the Russian Soyuz shuttle to get into low Earth orbit, after retiring its shuttle fleet in 2011. Both Boeing and SpaceX must complete certification and other requirements before flying the missions, which are scheduled to take place sometime in 2017.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/science/20151121/1030489093/nasa-orders-spacex-iss.html#ixzz3s4qRzqSA

Cygnus Cargo Spacecraft Launched From Florida Towards ISS

NASA reported that orbital ATK on Sunday launched its Cygnus cargo ship from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida to resupply astronauts at the International Space Station after postponing the launch twice over weather conditions.

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — Orbital ATK on Sunday launched its Cygnus cargo ship from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) in Florida to resupply astronauts at the International Space Station (ISS) after postponing the launch twice over weather conditions, the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) said.

​The United Launch Alliance (ULA) Atlas V rocket was initially scheduled to take the Cygnus spacecraft to the ISS at 5:55 p. m. EST (22:55 GMT) on Thursday. The launch was then rescheduled for Friday 5:33 p.m. EST (22:33 GMT), but was cancelled again because of poor weather conditions.

The spacecraft is expected to dock with the ISS on Wednesday.

The delayed mission is Orbital ATK’s fourth to the ISS under NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services contract with the company. According to NASA, this will be the first flight of an "enhanced" Cygnus spacecraft, which has a higher payload capacity and new fuel tanks.

The improvements come after the October 2014 accident, when an Orbital ATK Antares rocker that was to deliver a Cygnus spacecraft to the ISS crashed six seconds after launch. Orbital ATK suspended deliveries to the ISS after the crash.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/science/20151207/1031336188/cygnus-launched-iss.html#ixzz3taa1sZPi

NASA Orders Second Boeing Crew Mission to International Space Station

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/science/20151219/1032008074/space-nasa-boeing-iss.html#ixzz3urkMTV4L


Spacecraft for Mars Mission Sent to California Launch Site

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/science/20151217/1031931364/lockheed-mars-spacecraft.html#ixzz3urkSdzHK

U.S. space firm’s success may threaten Russian satellites

The daily newspaper Vzglyad reports that U.S. company SpaceX's success in bringing back to Earth a unit from the Falcon-9 rocket in functioning condition is something really unimaginable. Now the delivery of cargo to near-earth orbit will be at least 10 times cheaper, writes the publication. Does this mean that the Russian Proton and Soyuz satellites will be left without a job?

Experiments on returning the first unit of the Falcon-9 had been carried out since 2010. Only the eighth attempt, conducted on Dec. 21, 2015, was absolutely successful.

The cost of the Falcon-9 launch is currently estimated at about $60 million. The unit returned costs $54 million. SpaceX will therefore lose only $6 million on the Falcon-9 if the unit is able to land by itself for further use.

This could lead to a real revolution in the world space market since the delivery cost of one kilogram of cargo onto the Earth's orbit could fall to $1,100, which on average is 20 times less than on other one-time carriers.

This would leave the Proton, Soyuz, Arian and Atlas satellites out of work, if it were not for one "but." Despite its variety, the Falcon-9 cannot replace, for example, the Proton, since the load-bearing capacity of the Russian carrier is 10 tons more.

However, if the matter involved a large space apparatus weighing 20 tons, two Falcon-9s could deliver a 26-ton object into orbit at a cost of $12 million. One Proton can deliver a 23-ton object for $100-120 million. Therefore, using two Falcon-9s is more advantageous than one Proton, writes Vzglyad.

Project Canada wrote:U.S. space firm’s success may threaten Russian satellites

The daily newspaper Vzglyad reports that U.S. company SpaceX's success in bringing back to Earth a unit from the Falcon-9 rocket in functioning condition is something really unimaginable. Now the delivery of cargo to near-earth orbit will be at least 10 times cheaper, writes the publication. Does this mean that the Russian Proton and Soyuz satellites will be left without a job?

Experiments on returning the first unit of the Falcon-9 had been carried out since 2010. Only the eighth attempt, conducted on Dec. 21, 2015, was absolutely successful.

The cost of the Falcon-9 launch is currently estimated at about $60 million. The unit returned costs $54 million. SpaceX will therefore lose only $6 million on the Falcon-9 if the unit is able to land by itself for further use.

This could lead to a real revolution in the world space market since the delivery cost of one kilogram of cargo onto the Earth's orbit could fall to $1,100, which on average is 20 times less than on other one-time carriers.

This would leave the Proton, Soyuz, Arian and Atlas satellites out of work, if it were not for one "but." Despite its variety, the Falcon-9 cannot replace, for example, the Proton, since the load-bearing capacity of the Russian carrier is 10 tons more.

However, if the matter involved a large space apparatus weighing 20 tons, two Falcon-9s could deliver a 26-ton object into orbit at a cost of $12 million. One Proton can deliver a 23-ton object for $100-120 million. Therefore, using two Falcon-9s is more advantageous than one Proton, writes Vzglyad.

Someone is channelling Musks propaganda as this is the usual hyper-optimistic fan-boi garbage.  It remains to be seen if a pre-flown F9 can be reused with anything like the reliability of a brand new unit fresh off the assembly line.  Given the experience with operating "reuseable" shuttles (which in reality were "refurbishable" shuttles requiring huge expenses between launches) I personally doubt that recovery of F9 stage will change the dynamics in a significant way.

One question that is ignored is this - how many satellite owners will be willing to risk their expensive payloads worth several $100M on a USED launcher?  Isn't it better business sense to go for superior reliability and plug for the new item?  Launcher costs are a small part of a payloads cost in any event.

Another factor that is regularly ignored is that flying back the booster is only achieved by accepting a huge penalty in weight delivered to orbit.  The core stage needs enough fuel to reverse its course, fly back to its pad, and then control its descent.  This F9 flight delivered a small payload of only 2.2T.  That's a large rocket for such a small payload.  The idea that "two Falcon-9s could deliver a 26-ton object into orbit at a cost of $12 million" is simply absurd.  There is NO WAY that an F9 with a recoverable 1st stage can lift 13T to LEO.

Reuseability is a good idea, but I think Musk is barking up the wrong tree on this one.  A large fly-back booster is the better idea as it leverages off conventional aircraft technologies and established maintenance knowledge base of commercial and heavy military aircraft.  Design it with modular propulsion plant so that engines can be changed out after each flight and returned to factory for de-coking and cleanup, retest and recertification, while the flyback vehicle is fitted with another propulsion module and reflown.

In any case, only time will tell.  The idea that Musk and his F9 will threaten Russia's space industry is simply laughable scare-mongering.

Big_Gazza wrote:

Project Canada wrote:U.S. space firm’s success may threaten Russian satellites

The daily newspaper Vzglyad reports that U.S. company SpaceX's success in bringing back to Earth a unit from the Falcon-9 rocket in functioning condition is something really unimaginable. Now the delivery of cargo to near-earth orbit will be at least 10 times cheaper, writes the publication. Does this mean that the Russian Proton and Soyuz satellites will be left without a job?

Experiments on returning the first unit of the Falcon-9 had been carried out since 2010. Only the eighth attempt, conducted on Dec. 21, 2015, was absolutely successful.

The cost of the Falcon-9 launch is currently estimated at about $60 million. The unit returned costs $54 million. SpaceX will therefore lose only $6 million on the Falcon-9 if the unit is able to land by itself for further use.

This could lead to a real revolution in the world space market since the delivery cost of one kilogram of cargo onto the Earth's orbit could fall to $1,100, which on average is 20 times less than on other one-time carriers.

This would leave the Proton, Soyuz, Arian and Atlas satellites out of work, if it were not for one "but." Despite its variety, the Falcon-9 cannot replace, for example, the Proton, since the load-bearing capacity of the Russian carrier is 10 tons more.

However, if the matter involved a large space apparatus weighing 20 tons, two Falcon-9s could deliver a 26-ton object into orbit at a cost of $12 million. One Proton can deliver a 23-ton object for $100-120 million. Therefore, using two Falcon-9s is more advantageous than one Proton, writes Vzglyad.

Someone is channelling Musks propaganda as this is the usual hyper-optimistic fan-boi garbage.  It remains to be seen if a pre-flown F9 can be reused with anything like the reliability of a brand new unit fresh off the assembly line.  Given the experience with operating "reuseable" shuttles (which in reality were "refurbishable" shuttles requiring huge expenses between launches) I personally doubt that recovery of F9 stage will change the dynamics in a significant way.

One question that is ignored is this - how many satellite owners will be willing to risk their expensive payloads worth several $100M on a USED launcher?  Isn't it better business sense to go for superior reliability and plug for the new item?  Launcher costs are a small part of a payloads cost in any event.

Another factor that is regularly ignored is that flying back the booster is only achieved by accepting a huge penalty in weight delivered to orbit.  The core stage needs enough fuel to reverse its course, fly back to its pad, and then control its descent.  This F9 flight delivered a small payload of only 2.2T.  That's a large rocket for such a small payload.  The idea that "two Falcon-9s could deliver a 26-ton object into orbit at a cost of $12 million" is simply absurd.  There is NO WAY that an F9 with a recoverable 1st stage can lift 13T to LEO.

Reuseability is a good idea, but I think Musk is barking up the wrong tree on this one.  A large fly-back booster is the better idea as it leverages off conventional aircraft technologies and established maintenance knowledge base of commercial aircraft.  Design it with modular propulsion plant so that engines can be changed out after each flight and returned to factory for de-coking and cleanup, retest and recertification, while the flyback vehicle is fitted with another propulsion module and reflown.

In any case, only time will tell.  The idea that Musk and his F9 will threaten Russia's space industry is simply laughable scare-mongering.

Excellent analysis. The other detail is that Russia's launch costs are intrinsically lower than those of the US and the EU.
I applaud the effort to build reusable rockets, but the predictions of Russia's demise are premature and idiotic.

SpaceX landed rocket? OK but why is this such a big whoop? Didn't that other dude (owns Amazon I think) already do this month ago or something?

I remember Musk being quite butthurt about it...

higurashihougi wrote:Threaten or not I don't know, but the U.S. continued to buy Russian RD-180

https://www.rt.com/usa/326955-us-russian-rocket-engines/

The US has ordered 20 additional RD-180 rocket engines from Russia, days after US Congress lifted the ban on the use of Russian engines to get American ships into space. However, the move has been lambasted by some politicians in Washington.

United Launch Alliance announced that it placed an order for more RD-180 rockets to be used by Atlas V launch vehicle, on top of 29 engines that the company has ordered before US sanctions against Russia were introduced over Crimea last year.

I guess all those Congress blowhards had to eat their shit. This is clearly not what we were promised.