Space Launch System – Scienceandsf -A Blog Published by Robert A. Lawler

Space News for April 2022

It’s on the launch pad, years late and billions of dollars over budget but the Space Launch System (SLS), the most powerful rocket since the venerable Saturn 5 that took astronauts to the moon is finally at Pad 39B at Cape Kennedy, ready for lunch. Well almost ready because the engineers and scientists at both NASA and prime contractor Boeing still have a long list of tests and safety checks to perform before the actual first flight in the space agency’s Artemis program begins. The biggest test, known as the Wet Dress Rehearsal or WDR, is now scheduled for the 1-3 of April.

NASA made a big deal out of the rollout of the SLS to its launch pad, even streaming the entire event. The rocket still has problems however and will soon be taken back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs. (Credit: Forbes)

The rollout of the massive SLS with its Orion, man capable capsule took place on March 17th as the door of the Vehicle Assembly Building opened and the SLS began its long, slow journey to the launch site. The current schedule is for launch to take place no earlier than sometime in May. That first flight will be unmanned, with the second Artemis mission, and the first mission that will actually take astronauts back to orbiting the Moon, coming no sooner than 2024.

The Orion Capsule on top of the SLS. NASA plans to use Orion to take astronauts back to the Moon and even beyond but without the SLS its going nowhere fast. (Credit: EarthSky)

Update: The SLS was on its launch pad but after failing to complete the WDR three times NASA has decided to return the rocket to the Vehicle Assembly Building for repairs. Just another in a long series of delays and problems for the Artemis program that is years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget.

The rollback of the SLS itself been delayed by weather, just more delays. The current schedule is for a rollback on 26April. (Credit: Spaceflight Insider)

And even as NASA begins the Artemis program to take human beings back to the Moon the space agency is making plans to also return to a destination much further away, the outer planets of Uranus and Neptune. The only space probe to have visited those cold, dark worlds was Voyager 2, which flew past them in the late 1980s. At the time the data sent back by Voyager taught us more about the two outermost planets in our Solar System than we’d learned in more than a hundred years of observing them by Earth bound telescopes. In the years since Voyager however astronomers have come up with thousands of questions about conditions on Uranus and Neptune that they’d love to see answered.

Currently the Voyage 2 probe is the only spacecraft to visit the planet Uranus. Now NASA has made the decision to return to this icy world in the next decade. (Credit: Drew Ex Machina)

So plans are now being discussed for a joint NASA-ESA mission to the outer planets. Details are sketchy at the moment, even so far as to which planet will be visited, or maybe both. The best upcoming launch window for Uranus is 2030-2034 while that for Neptune is 2029-2030 so the particulars for the mission along with the basic space probe design will probably have to be finalized in the next year or so. One thing that has been decided is that the main probe will carry with it a smaller ‘entry probe’ like the Huygens probe that landed on Titan after being carried to Saturn by the Cassini spacecraft.

Conceptual design for the proposed Uranus probe. The spacecraft will include a separate probe to be dropped into the atmosphere of Uranus. (Credit: Spaceflight Now)

The journey to Uranus or Neptune will be a long one, anywhere from 11 to 15 years depending on the specifics of both the probe and the mission. Because the journey will take so long, and will take the probe so far away from the Sun, using solar arrays to power the spacecraft will be impossible, sunlight simply isn’t strong enough that far from the Sun. So therefore the Uranus / Neptune probe will have to get it’s power from radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) just as both Voyagers along with Cassini and the Galileo probe to Jupiter did.

Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs) have powered many space probes but they have also been used here on Earth to power instruments in very isolated areas. (Credit: Bellona.org)

Sounds like an exciting mission, wouldn’t it be nice if they could find the money to send identical probes to each planet!

The planet Neptune hasn’t had a visitor for a long time either. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could send a probe to both of them! (Credit: NASA)

A sad note before I sign off. Eugene Parker died on March 15th at the age of 94. The highly regarded NASA astrophysicist is best remembered for his 1957 prediction of the solar wind, the stream of charged particles that are constantly being emitted from the Sun’s atmosphere. That prediction was confirmed just five years later when the Mariner 2 space probe was constantly bombarded during its journey to Venus by just the sort of radiation that Parker had predicted.

In many ways the life of Eugene Parker was a mission to touch the Sun. That’s why it’s so appropriate for NASA’s solar probe to be named for him. (Credit: SciTechDaily)

Eugene Parker is also remembered as the namesake of NASA’s Parker Solar Probe which since its launch in 2018 has now approached closer to the Sun than any other man made object. The Parker probe was the first, and thus far only space probe to be named for a living scientist. A fitting tribute to a man who advanced our knowledge of the Sun so much.

Space News for March 2022: Plans being Finalized for the End of the International Space Station and what will come Thereafter.

The International Space Station (ISS) has been the mainstay of manned space flight now for more than twenty years but the venerable space base is currently beginning to show its age. Occasional air leaks are becoming more and more of problem while the power system is in need of constant repair; even the smell of the station is becoming a problem. Think about how your house would smell if you couldn’t open a window for twenty years to let in some fresh air!

According to Astronaut Scott Kelly, who spent more than a year aboard the International Space Station (ISS), the place smells just like a jail. That’s easy to understand after twenty years of human habitation without any thing like real fresh air. (Credit: Daily Mail)

More than that NASA, the American space agency, simply wants out of the business of running a station in Low Earth Orbit, preferring instead to get back to their task of exploring the solar system. Current plans are for NASA to continue to support ISS operations through the year 2030, but like any bureaucratic organization NASA has already started the process of figuring out exactly how to terminate the ISS and what will take its place.

When Skylab fell out of orbit it was an an uncontrolled reentry. Pieces of America’s first space station fell on Australia and although no one was hurt it was a real danger! NASA intends to make certain that the same thing doesn’t happen with the ISS. (Credit: NASA)

As I have mentioned in several previous posts, see posts of 29 December 2021 and 2 October 2021, NASA intends to rent space for its astronauts on future commercial space stations. Indeed the space agency is helping to fund the design phase for such a commercial space station at three aerospace corporations, Blue Origin, Northrop Grumman along with a consortium named Nanoracks that includes Lockheed Martin and Voyager Space. Once one of the designs from these corporations is chosen NASA will help fund the construction of the station, becoming the primary tenant.

Preliminary concept design for Northrup Grumman’s space station. Notice the attached Space X Dragon capsule center below and Northrup’s own unmanned cargo vessel Cygnus right above it. (Credit: Northrup Grumman)

Once that commercial station is up and operating the question then becomes what to do about the ISS, the largest and most massive structure ever placed into orbit. Since the ISS was built in pieces, one module at a time, should it be taken apart and de-orbited piece by piece? Or should it all be brought down in one piece?

Exploded view of the major components of the ISS. Since the station was built in pieces should it be brought down from orbit in pieces or in one big piece? (Credit: European Space Agency)

NASA has decided on the latter scenario with a plan to bring the station into a lower orbit slowly before using a large retro-burn to begin a re-entry designed to finally drop the whole thing into the southern Pacific Ocean. The ISS will meet it demise at a location in the ocean furthest from land called Point Nemo approximately midway between New Zealand and South America. Most of the ISS will probably burn up as it descends through the atmosphere but because it is so large undoubtedly more than a few big pieces will survive so NASA will take care to keep the falling debris as far from human habitations as possible.

Point Nemo is the name that has been given to a position in the south Pacific that is farthest from any inhabited land. (Credit: The Sun)

Now NASA will not be the only tenant in any new space station because the business of space tourism is definitely heating up. Jared Isaacman, the billionaire who funded last year’s first ever totally commercial space mission has now arranged a series of four space missions with Space X beginning with another Dragon capsule mission, perhaps as early as the end of 2022. That first mission in what Isaacman is calling the Polaris Program will last five days and take the Dragon capsule to a much higher orbit while also including the first Extravehicular Activity (EVA) for a commercial space mission.

Having funded the first all tourist space Mission Billionaire Jared Isaacman is now partnering with Space X for a series of manned mission termed the Polaris Project. (Credit: CNBC)

Details of the later three missions are sketchy at present but Isaacman hopes that the final Polaris mission will be the first manned launch of Space X’s massive Starship rocket. Funding for the Polaris Program will come from a combination of Isaacman and Space X itself and the stated goal of the missions is “…to advance long-duration spaceflight capabilities and guiding us toward the ultimate goal of facilitating Mars exploration.” According to Isaacman.

Space X is busy preparing for the first orbital test launch of their Starship rocket. (Credit: San Antonio Express)

There are a few other items of interest that I’d like to cover quickly. The schedule for NASA’s Artemis 1 mission, the first, unmanned launch of the big Space Launch System (SLS) has been pushed back once again. After years of delays and cost overruns the first launch of the SLS had originally been scheduled for late last year, only to be pushed back to the first quarter of this year. Now NASA is admitting that more time is required to complete a long list of safety checks before launch so the Artemis 1 mission is now being tentatively scheduled for sometime in the spring. Another couple of months delay in a program that is years late may seem like just a drop in the bucket but the question remains, will the SLS ever fly?

The first test vehicle of the massive Space Launch System (SLS) has been assembled in the Vehicle assembly Building at Cape Kennedy. Testing however has bee slow and the rocket is now scheduled to roll out to the launch pad before late March 2022. (Credit: Spaceflight Insider)

Mars exploration, at least robotic exploration is proceeding however. The Ingenuity helicopter, which after completing its five ‘test flights’ has since then been working as an airborne scout for the Perseverance rover. For the past several months though dust storms on the Red Planet have kept Ingenuity grounded. At the beginning of February however the skies began to clear and on February the 8th the little aircraft took off once more on a 100 second flight, its 19th flight on Mars. Not bad for a technology demonstration vehicle that was only supposed to fly five times.

It keeps going and going. An artist’s impression of the Ingenuity helicopter with the Perseverance rover in the background. After 19 flights that little aircraft shows no sign of slowing down. (Credit: SciTechDaily)

And speaking of Mars, the Perseverance Rover has been collecting rocks that NASA hopes will one day be transferred to a planned Mars Sample Return Mission, a lander on the Red Planet that will contain a rocket capable of lifting those Mars rocks off of the planet’s surface. That rocket has been given the name of the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) and the current plan is for it to rendezvous in Mars orbit with the European Space Agency’s Earth Return Orbiter (ERO) spacecraft. The ERO will acquire the samples of Martian soil from the MAV and bring them back to Earth.

NASA has awarded a contract to Lockheed Martin for a rocket to take off from the Martian surface with soil samples. The rocket will then rendezvous in Mars orbit with a European spacecraft to bring the sample back to Earth. (Credit: NASA Mars Exploration Program)

Now the contract for the Mars Ascent Vehicle has been awarded to Lockheed Martin for a potential value of $194 million dollars. The contract is slated to run for about six years and Lockheed Martin will provide several test units in addition to the actual flight vehicle. It is hoped that the Mars sample return mission will take place in the late 2020s with the actual return of the samples by 2031.

Basic Outline of the Mars Sample Return Mission. The Perseverance rover is already collecting samples that could be collected by the transfer rover shown above and brought back to Earth. If all goes according to plan we could have pieces of Mars being studied in our labouratories within the next ten years. (Credit: Nature)

Manned and unmanned there’s progress being made in man’s efforts to explore and settle our solar system.

Space News for June 2021: The Space launch System is being readied for its maiden, unmanned mission. Is this finally the return of manned space exploration to deep space, back to the Moon and then beyond?

Ever since the last of the Apollo missions to the Moon back in December of 1972, manned space exploration has been completely trapped in Low Earth Orbit (LOE). Over the last almost 50 years our robotic probes have gone on to explore every large body in the Solar System and a lot of smaller bodies. However no human being has gone further than 1000 kilometers from the surface of the Earth.

The Crew of Apollo 17, Eugene Cernan (seated), Ronald Evans (r) and Harrison Schmitt (l) were the last human beings to go further into space than Low Earth Orbit (LOE) way back in 1972. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons)

There have been a lot of proposals from NASA engineers, with plans pretty much alternating between returning to the Moon to establish a permanent base or else heading straight on to Mars. The most elaborate plan was developed during the George W. Bush administration with the ‘Constellation Program’ a scaled up version of the first Moon landings sometimes called Apollo on steroids. Constellation however was projected to be so expensive, and remember we were fighting a war on terror at that time, that it was quickly cast aside when the Obama administration took office.

Referred to as ‘Apollo on Steroids’ the Constellation Program during the George W. Bush Administration would have had a budget on steroids as well! It got canceled as soon as Obama took office! (Credit: YouTube)

Faced with the cancellation of their main human spaceflight program NASA regrouped and decided to just try and coax enough money out of congress to develop a heavy lift vehicle that could take humans back into deep space. A rocket so powerful that it would rival the Apollo Saturn V and once that was built, tested and flying it could be used for a Moon return or Mars program, whichever they could talk the politicians into. This new ‘Space Launch System’ (SLS) would be cheap to develop, the engineers assured congress, because it would be based on designs from, and actually use hardware from the now cancelled Space Shuttle program.

Much of the engineering for the Space Launch System (SLS), Block 1 (l) and Block 2 (c) is derived from the space shuttle (r). That was supposed to keep development costs low. Didn’t work out that way! (Credit: How Stuff Works)

The new mega-rocket would be designed like this. A core section consisting of tanks for liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen would be an elongated version of the big orange fuel tank used on the space shuttle. At the bottom of the core stage would be four RS-25 shuttle engines to provide 980 thousand kilograms of thrust for eight minutes. NASA actually had 16 of these engines left over at the end of the shuttle program so the first four SLSs will not even be required to have engines built for them. Then, attached to each side of the core section will be two, five section solid fuel boosters based upon the four section solid fuel boosters used for the space shuttle. With so much reuse of equipment and technology it was expected that the SLS would take very little time to develop and could be done at a reasonable cost.

Artists Impression of the SLS as it will appear on pad 39A at Kennedy before its launch. (Credit: Wikipedia)

Congress approved the SLS in 2011 with a planned first launch to occur in 2017 at a total price tag of $18 billion dollars, of which $6 billion would go to the development of a manned capsule named Orion and $2 billion for upgrades to the launch pad. In other words the SLS itself was only supposed to cost $10 billion to develop.

Developed in tandem with the SLS the Orion manned capsule had also had its share of technical problems. (Credit: Ars Techica)

It didn’t work out that way. Because of both engineering difficulties as well as dithering by congress with the appropriations the SLS has been subjected to an ongoing series of delays and cost overruns. Currently the program is four years behind schedule and will end up costing more than $18 billion dollars and we still haven’t had a single flight.

Even worse, thanks to the amazing success of Space X with their reusable Falcon 9 launch vehicle, the entire rational for a super heavy, and very costly SLS has been called into question. The SLS program has so far been saved from the budget ax however thanks to strong support from the senators and congresspersons in whose states the majority of the work is being accomplished.

The first stage of the Space X Falcon 9 launch system has now been successfully landed 81 times with 63 reuses considerably lowering the cost of getting into orbit! (Credit: Space Flight Now)

And we are now at least coming close to seeing the results of all that effort. In January of 2020 the first core stage of an SLS was completed and delivered to NASA’s test range. Again a series of minor problems caused delays so that the whole test program took nearly twice what was scheduled. The final ‘Hot Fire Test’ of the core stage of the SLS was only completed on March 18 of 2021.

The vehicle has since been sent to Kennedy Space Center to begin full assembly with first the side boosters and then an Orion capsule and service module. That first assembly step has now been completed and the most powerful rocket since the Saturn V is presently taking shape in the Vehicle Assembly Building at Cape Kennedy. The first launch of an SLS, officially designated as the ‘Artemis 1’ mission, is scheduled to take place no earlier than (NET) the 4th of November this year. That initial launch will be unmanned but it will send the man capable Orion capsule on a trans-Lunar trajectory.

The massive core stage of the SLS being lifted inside the Vehicle Assembly Building at Cape Kennedy for insertion between its two solid fuel boosters. (Credit: Space Flight Now)

Assemble completed on the core stage and boosters of the SLS. (Credit: Space Flight Insider)

The first manned launch of the SLS, designated as ‘Artemis 2’ is scheduled to take place NET September 2023. Artemis 2 will carry astronauts back to the Moon for the first time in more than 50 years on a mission that will resemble Apollo 8, orbiting but not landing on the Lunar surface. The actual first landing of the Artemis program is scheduled for NET October 2024 with the Artemis 3 mission but considering construction of the Artemis Lunar landing module has not even begun that date can best be described as tentative.

The Artemis 1 mission scheduled for later this year will be unmanned but will return a manned capable spacecraft to Lunar orbit for the first time in 49 years. (Credit: SciTech daily)

And over the next several years there is the potential for more changes, more deviations from NASA’s planned path for the SLS. The space agency still wants to build the Lunar Gateway space station in orbit around the Moon but it is quite possible that most of the modules for Gateway may be launched on commercial rockets rather than the SLS.

NASA still hopes to build its Lunar Gateway Space Station as a part of its Artemis program. (Credit: YouTub)

And Mars? Well that’s so far down the road that the SLS could be totally obsolete by then. In fact, if you want my opinion the odds are that in the end the thirteen launches of the Saturn V will outnumber those of the SLS.

The 13 launches of the Saturn 5 rocket. Will the SLS succeed in eclipsing that number? (Credit: Space Exploration Stack Exchange)

Still, come this fall, cross your fingers, we will get to see a sight that hasn’t been seen for nearly 50 years, the launch of a really big, Moon capable rocket!

Space News for September 2020.

There are a number of small but nevertheless important items that have happened over the last month which deal with NASA’s Artemis program. So let’s get started.

If NASA’s Artemis program is going to successfully put Americans back on the Moon by 2024, or indeed ever, it is going to need a big rocket to put all of that hardware into space. The big rocket that NASA has been building now for nine years is called the Space Launch System (SLS) and although it may look superficially like the old Saturn V it is in fact a completely new design based on Space Shuttle hardware.

Artist’s impression of NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS). (Credit: NASA)

In fact the SLS employs four shuttle main engines in its first stage and in addition has two shuttle solid fuel boosters attached. Since the SLS is making use of a fair amount of existing components you’d think that the design cost and schedule would be reasonable compared to those for a completely new large launch vehicle, say Space X’s Falcon 9.

The first core stage of the SLS nearing completion. Those four big engines are identical to the engines used on the Space Shuttle. (Credit: NASA Spaceflight.com)

Well you’d be wrong, in fact the original cost of the central core first stage of the SLS was estimated at $6 billion. That amount was already ‘readjusted’ back in 2017 to $7.17 billion and now NASA has quietly increased that amount to $9.1 billion. And as to schedule, the original launch date for an unmanned flight of the SLS was supposed to be back in 2017, a date that was later pushed back to December of 2019 to June of 2020. Needless to say June has come and gone and the current schedule now for the first, unmanned launch of the SLS is November of 2021.

Even that is not certain however, because the SLS still has quite a lot of testing to finish first. In fact one big test, a static firing of one of the big solid fuel boosters, was carried out successfully on 2 September. During the test the 53m long booster burned for the full 126 seconds required for an actual flight. See image below. While the data from the test is still being analyzed the initial results indicated a very successful test.

Test of the SLS solid booster rocket, also based on Space Shuttle technology. Currently all indications are that the test was a complete success. (Credit: Spaceflight101)

The biggest test still remaining before next year’s unmanned flight is called ‘Green Run Hot Fire’ and may possibly occur as early as next month in October. For the Green Run Hot Fire test the entire rocket, except for the solid boosters, is held down to a test stand and the four main engines are fired for eight minutes, the time simulating a normal launch. Although all of the different subsystems of the SLS have been tested separately this will be the first time the entire rocket will be tested together.

Testing status for the core section of the SLS as of 10 July 2020. Test 8 could occur as early as late October. (Credit: NASA)

If any problems occur during the Green Run Hot Test it would almost certainly cause yet another delay in that first unmanned test flight. And if that first test flight gets pushed back any further there’s little hope of Artemis reaching the Moon by 2024. In fact because some members of congress are just getting sick and tired of the delays and cost overruns associated with the SLS it might just mean the end of the Artemis program entirely.

Mission plan for the unmanned Artemis 1 flight to the Moon. (Credit: NASA)

Thankfully there’s a bit of better news for Artemis. One of the aerospace companies that are preparing bids for the contract to build the Lunar lander that will actually take the Artemis astronauts down to the Moon’s surface is Blue Origin, the other two being Space X and Dynetics. In late August Blue Origin delivered to NASA’s Johnson Manned Spaceflight Center in Houston a full-scale model of their planned lander.

Mock up of the Blue Origin’s planned Lunar lander is delivered to NASA. (Credit: Tech Explorist)

The model is 12 meters in height and consists of both a planned descent and ascent stage. Although the mock-up does not in any sense function it will allow NASA astronauts to simulate getting down from the crew cabin in the ascent stage to the ground with all of their equipment, and back again. This sort of ergonomic testing is important at this stage because it will not only allow the astronauts to become familiar with the vehicle but if any design flaws are discovered during these tests they can be corrected before construction of the first lander begins.

Artists’s impression of the Blue Origin Lander on the Moon. (Credit: Blue Origin)

Although Blue Origin will be the prime contractor should they win the contract the lander design will actually be a team effort including Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Draper. While Blue Origin concentrates its efforts on the descent stage it is Lockheed Martin who will be primarily responsible for the ascent stage. The team members hope that by splitting up the design efforts it will speed up the design and development of the separate components.

So work is progressing, however slowly on the hardware needed to get Americans back to the Moon, but what about the equipment they’ll be using while on the Moon. For example the old Apollo astronauts had a small Lunar rover vehicle that allowed them to explore more of the Moon’s surface than they could on foot. Are there any plans for an updated Lunar Rover?

The last three Apollo missions, 15-17, took a small Lunar Rover along with them. This is Apollo 15’s. (Credit: The Detroit Bureau)

Well it turns out that it’s the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) who has been given the task of developing the rover as a part of their effort toward the Artemis program. As you might guess JAXA turned to a Japanese company well known for their expertise in motor vehicles, Toyota for help in developing an initial Lunar rover design.

Artist’s impression of Toyota’s concept for a new Lunar Rover. Looks a lot more comfortable! (Credit: Space News)

Named the Lunar Cruiser after Toyota’s famous Land Cruiser the proposed rover would be considerable larger than the Apollo rover. Equipped with a pressurized cabin so that the astronauts can remove their spacesuits while driving across the Moon’s surface the rover will be powered by hydrogen fuel cells and is expected to have a range as much as 10,000 kilometers.

Currently all of these design specifications are preliminary; after all we still a lot of work to do just getting back to the Moon. The eventual goal of the Artemis program is to establish a permanent base on the Moon and that’s when the Lunar Cruiser would become an important piece of equipment.

In 15-20 will we have a Moon Base resembling this artist’s impression? (Credit: European Space Agency)

Still it is nice to speculate about what kind of Lunar Base we may have in about another ten years. I do hope that NASA gets the Artemis program on track. It’s been almost 50 years since the last human set foot on the Moon, when Artemis succeeds in getting us back I hope this time its for good.

Space News for September 2019.

There have been several interesting developments is the exploration of space this past month. Most deal with the discoveries made by unmanned probes but one deals with NASA’s Artemis program, the space agency’s plan for returning astronauts to the Moon. I think I’ll start with Artemis.

NASA’s logo for its planned Artemis Program back to the Moon. (Credit: NASA)

You’ll recall that in several posts I have mentioned that NASA intends to build a space station called the Lunar Gateway in orbit around the Moon to use as a depot and waystation for lunar exploration. See posts of 30Sept2017, 24Mar2018, 14Oct2018, 31Dec2018, 6Mar2019 and 29May2019. Additionally NASA hopes to use the Gateway as a platform for studying long-term human occupation of deep space, i.e. space outside of Low Earth Orbit (LOE).

Planned configuration of the Lunar Gateway. (Credit: Spacenews.com)

Currently NASA intends to use a mixture of rocket types to construct the Gateway and the proposed Lunar Lander. This plan would include the massive Space Launch System (SLS) still under development as well as Space X’s Falcon Heavy reusable rocket. The use of reusable rockets as much as possible is thought to be essential for a program that is already grossly underfunded.

Unlike the SLS, Space X’s Falcon Heavy is a reusable rocket and therefore MUCH CHEAPER!!!! (Credit: The Verge)

Well it is starting to appear that some members of congress may not be such big supporters of the Gateway and for once there’s bipartisan agreement. At a recent meeting of the House subcommittee on space both committee chair Oklahoma democrat Kendra Hall and Alabama republican Mo Brooks strongly questioned NASA’s planned use of private rockets at all.

Instead Hall and Brooks want NASA to accelerate the development of the SLS’s ‘Exploration Upper Stage’ (EUS), which is planned to increase the payload that the SLS can deliver to Lunar orbit from 26 to 37 tons. This EUS is a part of NASA’s long term goals for the SLS but it is scarcely beyond the design stage and its development would cost billions and add years to a program that is already well over budget and behind schedule. However the use of the EUS would allow NASA to send a crew directly to the Moon’s surface without the need of a Lunar Gateway. Exactly the way the Apollo program did it back in 1969.

NASA is Currently developing the SLS as configured in the two versions on the left. The EUS would allow the four versions on the right which are capable of delivering much more payload into lunar orbit. (Credit: Vox)

None of this has anything to do with science or engineering or even budget, it’s all about corporate rivalry. You see Boeing is the prime contractor of the current version of the SLS, and would be prime on the development of the EUS. Add to that the fact that Boeing is getting tied of Space X grabbing its market share just because reusable rockets are so much cheaper and you have Boeing trying to use a little political muscle to push Space X out of the Artemis program.

With every bit of news I hear about the Artemis program the more convinced I become that it will achieve nothing except a huge waste of resources. I’m very much afraid that the manned space program will achieve nothing until either the Chinese or perhaps private space companies like Space X are about to land on the Moon. We Americans don’t actually care about exploring space; we just have to be first.

NASA continues to have more success with its unmanned space probes. I suppose that’s because, since they are lower profile than manned missions the agency is allowed to make its decisions based on science and engineering not politics.

One of these successes is the Juno space probe currently studying the planet Jupiter. Recently the spacecraft made its 22nd close approach to the giant planet and was in the right position to take a photo of a very impressive event, an eclipse of the Sun on Jupiter caused by its innermost moon Io. See image below.

Image taken by the Juno Space probe of an eclipse of the Sun on Jupiter caused by it’s innermost moon Io. (Credit: NASA)

Now it turns out that eclipses occur on Jupiter considerably more often than they do here on Earth, after all Jupiter has four large moons all of which are capable of producing eclipses. The eclipses on Jupiter are not as impressive as ours are however because by sheer coincidence the angular size of our Moon and the Sun as seen here on Earth are nearly identical. This means that the Moon just covers the Sun’s disk leaving the entire solar corona visible. See my post of 24August 2017 for the story of my first total eclipse.

On Jupiter however the Sun is about five times further away so it’s angular diameter in Jupiter’s sky is much smaller, only about 0.1º instead of the 0.5º in our sky. That makes the Sun look smaller than any of Jupiter’s four big Moons.

Because it’s the closest, Io looks largest on Jupiter, about as large as our Moon does here on Earth. That means that Io can completely cover not only the Sun’s disk but the entire corona as well. Ganymede and Europa would probably do the same since each of them looks more than two and a half times the diameter of the Sun on Jupiter.

Only Callisto, the farthest of the four from Jupiter, would produce a show similar to that of an Earthly eclipse. Its angular diameter, as seen on Jupiter is only about 40% larger than the Sun’s so under the right conditions a good deal of the corona could probably be seen.

One more interesting fact, since Jupiter has four moons capable of producing eclipses it is quite possible for Jupiter to experience several eclipses, caused by different moons at the same time. I happened to come across an image of Jupiter, taken from Earth in 2009 of three eclipses happening at once! The moons involved are Io, Ganymede and Callisto.

Three eclipses on Jupiter happening at the same time! (Credit: NASA)

The moon Io is in the news for another reason as well. You may recall that the voyager space probes discovered that Io is the most volcanically active place in the solar system. This is because Io is being constantly pulled not only by huge Jupiter itself but by its three brother moons as well. This tugging and squeezing heats up the moon’s interior, heat that is released through volcanoes.

The largest volcano on Io, and the largest known active volcano in the solar system is called Loki after the Norse god of fire. Planetary scientists have been studying this powerful beast as best they could ever since it was first discovered. According to a paper published back in 2002 with lead author Julie Rathbun, Loki erupts on a regular basis about every 500 days.

Jupiter’s moon Io with the monster volcano Loki dead center. (Credit: NASA)

Now Rathbun, who is currently with the Planetary Science Institute, has presented at poster at the current 51st meeting of the Division for Planetary Sciences of the American Astronomical Society. Posters at conferences are a common technique for scientists to announce results of research before a formal paper is written. Doctor Rathbun’s announcement was in fact a prediction that Loki will erupt sometime in the next few days.

Doctor Julie Rathbun has predicted an eruption of Loki within the next few days. (Credit: Twitter)

Now predicting a volcanic eruption is a very risky business. Volcanologists here on Earth have been trying to find some technique for predicting eruptions for centuries now. Doctor Rathbun is confident however and thanks to her warning both telescopes here on Earth and the Juno space probe should be ready to study the event when, and if it occurs.

Photographing eclipses and predicting eruptions halfway across the solar system, we have come a long way!

Space News for May 2019: Are we on our way back to the Moon?

Hopefully it’s not just because the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 Lunar landing is coming up in a few months but I’m certain that you’ve noticed there’s been a lot of talk about humans returning to the Moon recently. With that in mind I think I’ll use this month’s installment of Space news to offer my two cents worth.

Back in March NASA was officially tasked by the Trump administration with developing a plan for returning American astronauts to the Lunar surface by the year 2024, hardly enough time to prepare a robotic mission let alone a manned one. That detailed plan has now been released and the new Lunar program has a name at least, Artemis the Greek Goddess of the Moon and the twin sister of Apollo.

NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine announces the Artemis program to take America back to the Moon (Credit: Daily Mail)

Now to be honest, this time NASA doesn’t have to start from scratch as they did back in the 1960s. With the Space Launch System (SLS) and the Orion crew vehicle the space agency has two of the three major components of an updated Apollo program almost ready to fly. Almost ready, as in both programs have encountered significant delays already and are several years behind schedule.

NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) is nearlt ready for its first test launch (Credit: NASA)

NASA’s Orion Crew vehicle is also nearly ready for its first test (Credit: Wikipedia)

Still, the SLS and Orion are expected to undertake their first missions in 2020 so really all NASA needs to put astronauts back on the Moon is a new version of the Lunar Module (LM). You would think that if they concentrate their efforts on producing a LM five years should be enough time to develop one. In fact Lockheed Martin has already prepared some initial designs for just such a Lunar lander so there would be no need to start from scratch.

Lockheed Martin’s concept for a Lunar Lander (Credit: Space News)

Problem is that NASA also wants to construct a space station in Lunar orbit called the Deep Space Gateway and building that could require several times the effort needed for just a new LM. The idea is for the Gateway to serve as a place to park a reusable LM module as well as conduct long-duration missions in deep space. See my post of 31Dec2018.

NASA’s proposed Deep Space Gateway, with an Orion Capsule docked on the left (Credit: Wikipedia)

The complete Artemis program proposed by NASA is both boldly ambitious in scope and detailed in its planning. In addition to meeting Trump’s goal of a manned landing by 2024 the plan continues beyond that with one manned landing each year and concludes in 2028 with the establishment of a semi-permanent Lunar base. The total plan requires 37 launches in all, a mixture of SLS and Commercial Launch Vehicles (CLVs) like the Space X Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy. Most of the missions will not in fact be manned but rather robotic spacecraft that will place equipment in either Lunar orbit or on the Moon’s surface.

The only thing missing now is of course the MONEY! While the full Artemis program should not cost as much as the Apollo program did, adjusting for inflation, it’s still going to require a major increase in NASA’s budget. All at a time when the Federal Government has virtually ground to a halt due to partisan bickering, a time when the yearly federal deficit is over a trillion dollars, and next year is an election year!

Recent and projected yearly Federal budget deficits (Credit: FactCheck.org)

In order to get the ball-rolling Trump has promised to add another $1.6 Billion to NASA’s 2020 budget. That could pay for perhaps one of the 37 missions but hold on, he needs congressional approval even for that small increase.

A better sign of progress was NASA’s awarding of a contract to begin construction of the first of the Gateway modules to Maxar corporation. The $375 million dollar contract is for the design and development of the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE), obviously a critical section of the planned space station.

The first section of the Deep Space Gateway to be constructed will be the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) (Credit: Daily Mail)

Still I have to admit that I don’t hold much hope for Artemis. In terms of an outline for an engineering project it’s first rate but there simply isn’t the political will in this country to get it done. We’ve been down this road before; George H. W. Bush directed NASA to go to Mars but never funded it. George W. Bush wanted to go back to the Moon but never funded it. Bill Clinton just wanted to build a Space Station but at least that got built.

Large-scale scientific project like manned exploration beyond Earth orbit require a long-term commitment by the politicians holding the purse strings. With our present political mess I see little hope of the kind of commitment needed any time soon!

What I’m most afraid of is that a year or so from now, when the hoopla and nostalgia of the 50th anniversary of Apollo 11 is past the current plans for a return to the Moon will all be forgotten and nothing will have been accomplished.

As NASA finalizes its plans for a return to the Moon is the Deep Space Gateway an unnecessary and costly complication?

This coming year, 2019 we will celebrate the 50th anniversary of Apollo 11, humanity’s first ever landing on the Moon, the first ever trip to another celestial body. It makes sense therefore to consider NASA’s current plans for manned exploration of space and in particular the current plans, now being finalized for a manned return to the Moon expected to occur in or about the year 2028.

Now when President John F. Kennedy first proposed going to the Moon all of the engineers at NASA, Werner von Braun for example, thought that they’d have to build a rocket big enough to put a spacecraft into orbit that would go directly to the surface of the Moon, land there and later blast off from the Moon to head straight back to Earth. The most simple, uncomplicated approach in other words. The problem was that such a rocket would have been so huge and expensive that it would make the Saturn V look puny in comparison. There were many at NASA who doubted that developing such a rocket was possible in Kennedy’s time frame.

It was Dr. John Houbolt, see image below, of NASA’s planning directorate who advocated for a different plan called ‘Lunar Orbit Rendezvous’ (LOR). In this idea two smaller spacecraft would be sent into orbit around the Moon. One would be a Command and Service Module (CSM) that would sustain the astronauts during their voyage while also having the rocket engine that would send the astronauts back toward Earth. Only the second module, a Lunar Module (LM) would actually set down on Moon. With this approach the size of the actual spacecraft that landed would be much smaller, see image below, and this would make every other component of the mission, all the way back to the big rocket that took off from Earth, much smaller and therefore cheaper as well.

John C. Houbolt Explaining Lunar Orbit Rendezvous (Credit: Public Domain)

Comparison of the Sizes of Lunar Landing Vehicles (Credit: Public Domain)

The problem with Lunar Orbit Rendezvous was the rendezvous part because once the astronauts had blasted back off from the Moon they would have to find and connect up with the CSM in order to get back home to Earth. The idea of two spacecraft in orbit around the Moon finding each other was scary, in 1960-62 no one knew if such a rendezvous was possible in Earth orbit let alone 400,000 km away in Lunar orbit.

Still it looked as if LOR was the only way to meet Kennedy’s deadline and NASA made it work. To the people back on Earth who watched the Apollo landings the astronauts made rendezvousing in lunar orbit seemed like a routine operation.

The Lunar Module in Lunar Orbit Preparing to Rendezvous with the Command and Service Modules (Credit:NASA)

So now NASA is planning to take us back to the Moon, again in about ten years time. This time they already have two major components of the Apollo missions designed, built and nearly ready to begin flight-testing. The Space Launch System (SLS) and Orion crew module, see images below, are obviously updated versions of the Saturn V rocket and Apollo CMS modules. So all that we need is a new, improved Lunar Module, like the one in the image below. Once we’ve developed that we’ll be ready to go right?

NASA’s Space Launch System (Credit: NASA)

Lockheed Martin’s Proposed Lunar Lander (Credit: Space News)

Not so fast, because you see NASA wants to build a space station in lunar orbit before going back down to the surface. This station is know as the Deep Space Gateway and is intended to serve as the rendezvous point for the Orion capsule and a proposed landing module. The Gateway is expected to cost about $20 billion to build and at least another $5 billion to assemble in lunar orbit. The image below shows the planned Deep Space Gateway.

NASA’s Proposed Deep Space Gateway (Credit: NASA)

Now since the Apollo astronauts demonstrated that they could rendezvous in lunar orbit without a station being there you might wonder if the Deep Space Gateway, and the $25 billion it will cost is really necessary, and you won’t be alone in asking that. In fact the National Space Council’s User’s Advisory Group has recommended that the money for Gateway be instead spent on accelerating the development of the lander which could enable NASA to put a man back on the Moon 4-5 years earlier.

So why would NASA want to spend $25 billion or more and delay getting back to the Moon by five years anyway. Well now remember its called the Deep Space Gateway not the Lunar Orbiting Station and it was originally intended to go into an extremely elongated orbit around both the Earth and Moon, an orbit that would take it as far as 5 million kilometers from Earth on voyages lasting a month or more.

In other words the Deep Space Gateway is a stepping-stone to an interplanetary spaceship, a step on the road to Mars. NASA hoped to use the Gateway as a test bed for learning how to operate with astronauts far beyond the Earth orbit for months at a time, experience they will need to begin planning for a manned trip to Mars, and they still hope to do by occasionally putting the Gateway in extremely elongated lunar orbits. In a sense NASA is using the Gateway in order to connect going back to the Moon with going on to Mars!

Personally I want NASA to just concentrate on one mission and get it done. In the past twenty years the ‘next stage of manned spaceflight’ has flipped back and forth from Mars to back to the Moon to an asteroid to back to the Moon. I say let’s just develop a lander and get back to the Moon for real and then think about something like the Deep Space Gateway.

Anyway that’s my opinion, what’s yours?

NASA at a Crossroads. On to Mars or back to the Moon.

Over the last four presidential administrations NASA’s long term goals for human spaceflight have been pulled back and forth so drastically it almost appears as if we’ve been going backward rather than forward. While Bush#1 wanted to go to Mars, Bill Clinton said let’s build the Space Station that Ronald Reagan called for (at least that actually got done). Then Bush#2 said let’s go back to the Moon while Obama only suggested going to a near Earth asteroid as a stepping stone to Mars.

Now we have a new administration, one who seems to have even less of a plan for space than the ones I’ve just mentioned, so I’m gonna give’em one.

Of course my heart says Mars. I was fourteen years old when Apollo 11 landed on the Moon and I can’t accept that we haven’t already gotten to Mars. I desperately hope that we will reach Mars during my lifetime so my heart says Mars!

My head says back to the Moon and here are my reasons why. Next year NASA will launch it’s first Space-Launch-System/Orion capsule mission and there is now talk of making that first mission a manned mission. Now the SLS launch vehicle is really just a modified version of the Ares V rocket that was conceived as a part of Bush#2’s ‘Constellation Program’ for going back to the Moon, and the Orion capsule isn’t even modified as far as I know. So, late next year we could very likely have two of the three major systems for a Moon landing. All we’d need is the lander and if NASA were given the direction and funding that could be accomplished in six years or so. The pictures below show the original Constellation Program ‘Parts’ and the, almost completed SLS-Orion for comparison.

The resemblance is obvious. Again all we need to get back to the Moon is the Altair lander shown below or a similar lander.

To go to Mars however, we would be starting from scratch. The idea of the Orion capsule taking anybody all the way to Mars is ludicrous. Not only doesn’t the combined SLS-Orion have the delta vee necessary for a Hohmann orbit to Mars (that’s the lowest energy required transfer orbit), but there’s no way for three or four astronauts to be stuck inside the small Orion capsule for the more than a year long journey to Mars.

To go to Mars we need a Spaceship, a real one. Maybe not as fancy as the Hermes in the Martian or Discovery in 2001 but still an actual spaceship! And then when we get into Mars orbit we’re going to need a lander to get down to the surface, and even before we send that spaceship everybody always assumes that there will be supplies ‘pre-positioned’ on the surface of Mars awaiting the astronauts. None of this equipment is anywhere past the drawing board, there is absolutely no hardware existing or in the process of construction or even funded. Nothing.

I have a few more reasons for recommending the Moon. As I mentioned above, NASA is studying the concept of pre-positioning equipment and supplies before astronauts land on a planet or satellite. Well we could practice that technique on the Moon a lot more cheaply than trying it on Mars. Indeed, the Moon could be a practice range for landing a big rover, a habitat module, working out regular resupply missions and lot of the techniques needed for a Mars mission could be learned on the Moon.

It’s often been said that the Moon can serve as a stepping stone to Mars and since we’re almost equipped to do that let’s just do it.

The chaotic politics of the last 30 years has resulted in a complete lack of direct in NASA’s goals for human spaceflight. If the current administration were to authorize NASA to build a lander, and provide adequate funding, we could actually accomplish something in just a few years. We could at least get back to where we were when I was a teenager.

I’m not holding my breath!