Beautiful picture of Jupiter.

Posted by: JohnL at 11:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 12 words, total size 1 kb.

SpaceRef posts XCOR's press release announcing that it has cleared a major regulatory hurdle.

In a letter dated October 29, 2003, the FAA's Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation (AST) informed XCOR that its launch license application had been deemed "sufficiently complete."

This means that AST has to either issue a launch license to XCOR within 180 days or explain to Congress why it has failed to do so (see 49 USC 70105).

According to the AST's letter, this is the first sufficiently complete reusable Reusable Launch Vehicle mission license application to be received and evaluated by AST. Congratulations to XCOR!

Posted by: JohnL at 10:07 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 106 words, total size 1 kb.

NRO's John Miller points out that we space geeks can expect an extra Christmas present this year: the ESA's Mars Express is scheduled to deposit the Beagle-2 lander in Mars' atmosphere on December 25.

Miller also gives a couple of favorable reviews of space-themed coffee table books. I have added Magnificent Mars to my Amazon wish list.

Posted by: JohnL at 10:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

Gary Hudson has provided testimony to the U.S. House Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics for the 5
November 2003 hearing on H.R. 3245 - The Commercial Space Act of 2003.

I have only just begun to review and digest this, so I reserve the right to update or post more later.

Hudson, who developed the concept of the Phoenix SSTO vehicle and who was a driving force behind the DC-X and was the CEO of Rotary Rocket, describes the regulatory policy hurdles faced by our nascent commercial launch industry:

"However, the desire to fulfill international treaty obligations and to protect public safety has led us to a cul-de-sac in the road to a hopeful future. We have stumbled in our ability to promote the space flight industry, imposing an unclear, overly bureaucratic regulatory environment that is stif[l]ing innovation,
progress and commerce. We need to rethink our approach from first principles; that is the purpose of this white paper. "

He first recaps the 20-year old debate regarding licensing of commercial space activities:

"The origin of the debate goes back two decades. At that time, private rocketeers faced a number of Federal Agencies each who claimed they were in charge. These ranged from the FAA, which had the legitimate authority under the existing law, to the Department of State, which wanted to regulate rocket launches under the absurd notion that they were "exports." The professed goal of the sponsors of the first Commercial Space Act was to put an end to this problem and provide a "one-stop-shop" for launch approvals. I supported that unreservedly. "

But I lost the battle to limit the scope of the Act. Instead, a completely new entity was created: the Office of Commercial Space Transportation, as well as a completely new concept: Federal launch licenses. At the time, some of us complained that the new entity wasn't needed, that the existing law was adequate with minor revisions, and that the new OCST would not be able to figure out what to do about piloted reusable rockets. Our concerns were brushed
aside. They have now emerged as crucial to the future survival of an industry in crisis."

He criticizes the launch license process as overly burdensome:

"AST has grown increasingly bureaucratic. Launch Licenses are now Major Federal Actions. In spite of my warnings and counsel of the past five years, we have now reached a crisis. Experimental flight-testing of suborbital passenger vehicles has begun. AST is not up to the challenge of this development."

He then recommends the sure-to-be-controversial disestablishment of the AST:

"Therefore, I recommend the disestablishment of AST, and the elimination of the need for US persons to seek launch licenses. In its place, I propose that we return to the pre-1984 law governed by Federal Aviation Regulations. This will be sufficient to protect the safety of third parties and to fulfill international obligations. Piloted rocket aircraft of a variety of types will then be regulated by the FAA under experimental type certificates. Several rocket aircraft already have been issued such certificates."

But he attempts to address the expected objections before they are made:

"The strongest objection to such an approach comes from colleagues who wish to begin offering immediate passenger rides who fear the cost of FAA certification. I understand their position, and sympathize. And I believe that a barnstorming era for space transportation is desperately needed. But we can reach that result by other forthright action.

"Current FAA rules generally prohibit revenue flying of experimental aircraft. I propose we simply change the rule. Congress can permit certain experimental aircraft defined as space vehicles to operate under a limited exemption for a period of time -- 20 years. Coincidentally this is the same period from the Wright Brothers first flight to the establishment of the first Civil Aeronautics Authority in 1926. Some have asked how we protect the passengers on these flights? HR 3245 correctly supplies the solution by defining "spaceflight participants" as someone who would give their informed consent to fly."

Burt Rutan's first instinct was also to treat the White Knight/SpaceShipOne as an experimental aircraft to avoid applying for a federal launch license. Rand Simberg was quite critical of this approach, even citing a description of Rutan as a "bull in a china shop."

Based on the above, I obviously need to give this some more thought. I also need to read through the testimony of the other witnesses. You should do the same.

More later.

Posted by: JohnL at 11:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 754 words, total size 5 kb.

Rocket Man profiles TGV Rockets and their X-Prize entrant, the MICHELLE-B.

This is an interesting concept vehicle, and reminds me a bit of a cross between Roton and the DC-X, but with an aerobrake (think: upside down parachute) instead of rotors to slow the craft's reentry.

Rocket Man analyzes the design trade-offs, and particularly critiques the weight penalty of six separate propulsion and fuel systems for what he perceives to be the minimal added value of "graceful degradation." But he does have kind words for the aerobraking concept and the craft's planned method of powered landing after the manner of the DC-X. Rocket Man notes that he "would love to see a continuation of [the DC-X style of landing] testing with the MICHELLE-B." I'm sure he knows that the Japanese JAXA is in fact currently conducting experiments much like the DC-X in their reusable vehicle testing campaign.

TGV Rockets only has blueprints at this point, but they have a business plan and hint at funding to continue development of the MICHELLE-B even if another team wins the X-Prize.

Posted by: JohnL at 10:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 175 words, total size 1 kb.

According to this article, Burt Rutan's team has been using some decidely low-tech methods to identify and fix the handling anomalies discovered during the September 23, 2003 flight test.

The Scaled Composites crew used a modified Ford pickup as a mobile wind tunnel to test the aerodynamic fixes they developed to address the stall problem. The October 17 test flight demonstrated considerable improvement.

You have to love this. Can you imagine NASA ever using a pickup truck to validate tail assembly designs "on the fly" like this?

Posted by: JohnL at 10:38 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . Will be visible in North Texas this coming Saturday, 8 November 2003, with totality beginning at 7:06 PM CST and ending at 7:30 PM.

To find out when you can see the Total Lunar Eclipse in your location, check here.

When I was growing up, the few total lunar eclipses I remember took place either late at night or early in the morning. This one, by contrast, is perfectly timed to show to the kids and get them excited about something truly astronomical.

Update: This page is a good basic overview of the stages of the eclipse.

Posted by: JohnL at 10:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 112 words, total size 1 kb.

My comment to this post at Transterrestrial Musings seems to have triggered this one.

Cool.

Posted by: JohnL at 10:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

On Spaceref today, Frank Sietzen tells us that President Bush may be set to call for a resumption of manned flights to the moon "to develop advanced technologies that can support U.S. astronauts working beyond Earth orbit to not only the Moon, but eventually on near-Earth asteroids and Mars." One of the author's sources tells him that the space policy review was "not driven by any crash program mentality" but focused on how a new major manned space goal could both mobilize the U.S. space industry and boost morale at NASA.

Rand Simberg offers his views here and, as usual, I find myself largely in agreement with him.

When I was much younger, Moonbase Alpha seemed to be a long way in the future. Now I note that kids who entered college in 1999 have already graduated, and still there is no prospect of a permanent settlement on the moon. I really don't think the dysfunctional bureaucracy so skilled at flying circles in LEO for the last 20 years is the right horse to bet on to get us to the moon to stay. Nor do I think my tax dollars should be used to "boost the morale" of NASA.

Sietzen's article indicates that President Bush may wait until December 17, 2003 (the centennial of the Wright Brothers' flight) to announce this bold program. How great would it be if Burt Rutan's SpaceShipOne makes its maiden flight into space on that day, as has been speculated? (See, e.g., the third paragraph from the end of this article).

Even if Rutan does not upstage the President on that date, the X-Prize format may provide an example on how to break NASA's stranglehold on this market. Jerry Pournelle drafted the following model legislation in 1984:

"The Congress has determined that a permanent colony on the
Moon is in the national interest of the United States.
The Treasurer is directed to pay the sum of $10 billion (Ten Billion US
Dollars) to the first US-owned company that shall place 31 American
citizens on the Moon and maintain them there alive and in good health
for the period of three years and one day.
This payment shall be exempt from Federal taxation. No money shall be
paid under this act until the conditions set forth above are fulfilled."

I would write my congresscritters to support a law like that.

Posted by: JohnL at 10:22 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 401 words, total size 3 kb.

That's what this article basically says.

If you drill deeper into the article, though, you realize that the presence of large deposits of olivine on the surface of Mars only indicates the lack of recent liquid water. Since Mars' atmospheric pressure is only 0.06 bars, there shouldn't be any appreciable liquid water on the surface anyway.

I am more curious about the search for subsurface water, preferably close enough to the surface that settlers can drill for water without too much effort. Certainly other reports from Mars indicate the possibility of water close to the surface, if not on it.

With NASA's Spirit and Opportunity rovers, the ESA's Mars Express, and the Japanese Nozomi all due to arrive next year, I am looking forward to a "flood" of new data.

Posted by: JohnL at 12:11 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 152 words, total size 1 kb.

It looks like the Japanese continue to pursue the concept first demonstrated with the DC-X.

(Here are some photos from an earlier test of the Japanese vehicle).

Posted by: JohnL at 11:29 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.

Rand Simberg points to a fairly new blog on space elevators.

If you haven't run across this concept before, a space elevator is essentially a cable stretching from the equator to a counterweight/station located in the geostationary orbit above the ground station. Read this for more detail.

Arthur C. Clarke first popularized this concept in his Fountains of Paradise. Kim Stanley Robinson took the concept to Mars and graphically described its vulnerability to terrorism.

Until very recently, space elevators have been purely speculative, as no known material is strong enough to bear the cable's predicted loads. But because of advances in carbon nanotube fabrication technology, science fiction authors are no longer the only ones talking about the idea. Now scientists and researchers are starting to advance the idea that this concept is technically feasible.

Professor Hall was all over this topic when it was hot about a month ago, and provides links to more information.

Be sure to check back here periodically for further developments.

Posted by: JohnL at 12:45 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 2 kb.

And what did the space policy bloggers do while China launched its first manned mission?

Debated who they would like to be in Star Trek.

Professor Hall links to a page with the Star Trekkin song by the Firm (and a brain-damaged claymation video), but neglects to link back to Lileks' brilliant Doctor Poppycock.

Who am I in the Star Trek universe? This says I'm a Harry Kim. This says I'm Picard. And finally, this one says Kirk.

Posted by: JohnL at 10:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 86 words, total size 1 kb.

China has launched its first manned space mission.

Yang Liwei, a 38 year old lieutenant colonel in the People's Liberation Army was the sole passenger on the Shenzhou V, following in the steps of Yuri Gagarin and John Glenn as his country's first representative in orbit (remember, Alan Shepherd did not achieve orbit). Rand Simberg is ambivalent.

I am too, in a way. On the one hand, I am always excited to see more people in space. The child in me still envisions myself in the capsule of that rocket. I of course hope the mission goes well and that the Taikonaut (or, more appropriately, Yuhangyuan) returns safely to Earth.

I am happy for China and hope that, like the space race in the 1960s between the US and USSR, this is a peaceful way for China to assert its nationalism, as opposed to invading its neighbors. In a sense, this also creates competition, which is usually a good thing. But it is competition among socialist space programs (and I class NASA as a socialist space program), so I have mixed feelings about the long-term value of this venture. I am happy, paradoxically, that the Chinese effort appears to have quite a bit of involvement by the Chinese military because I would like to see the US military spurred to take more ownership of our governmental space efforts. (Others do too, perhaps. . .)

Long term, I am convinced that humans will only expand into orbit and beyond if it makes economic sense to the individuals doing it. The conventional wisdom has long been that space is too expensive or too hard for private efforts. Several entrepreneurs are out to prove that wisdom wrong. And their first flights are the ones I am truly excited to see.

Posted by: JohnL at 10:16 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 303 words, total size 2 kb.

In his usual thorough and readable style, Rand Simberg analyzes the language of HB 3245, entitled the Commercial Space Act of 2003.

If you have been following the X-Prize (and Simberg) closely, you are probably aware of the concerns about which regulatory regime would govern suborbital flights with passengers -- the fairly
mature commercial aviation regime under the FAA (complete with ruinously expensive aircraft certification) or the Commercial Space Flight administrator (formerly under the DoT, currently under the FAA, and again under DoT, if the bill passes). As Rand points out, while the bill fills gaps left open in the Commercial Space Flight Act of 1984 to specifically address the issue of carrying passengers (a/k/a "spaceflight participants") as payload, it is a bit open-ended on the compliance requirements for a vehicle operator to carry a spaceflight participant. In other words, it leaves a great deal to the discretion of the regulators.

In all, it would be an improvement over the current regime, primarily for the certainty it would bring. But I can't help wondering whether the Wright Brothers would have succeeded had they been confronted with the mass of laws and regulations we now inflict on our innovators.

Posted by: JohnL at 11:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 202 words, total size 2 kb.

Charles Johnson links to a beautiful image of the Sombrero galaxy.

I have to admit, when I first saw it, I thought "Photoshop." (As did an unfortunate troll in the comments section, who insisted that the image was faked, even after being given the link to an original, untouched photo).

Posted by: JohnL at 11:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.