American Space Preeminence

Tuesday, June 2, 2015

The last attempt at a strategy was George Mueller's shuttle, the concept for which originated with Noordung in WWII, but which Mueller started talking about in 1968; virtually all of the great 60s leaders in manned space flight, by 1968 or 69, were in agreement that a flyback vehicle which could be reused in order to save on manufacturing costs was a necessity. It was a necesity because they needed something to replace Saturn and Apollo, which were unaffordable, and it was a necessity because they needed something to loft the modular components of space platforms since without a Saturn they had no other way. The Shuttle that was built wound up being pretty close to what was envisioned in terms of functionality, but the big problem was that it was too expensive and took too much time to turnaround between missions. In large measure because of the expense and preparation time, Shuttle never turned into the DC-3 it was intended to be. It was more like a Boeing 247; not really practical. The Vision of 2004 was an attempt at a strategy, and it is the best thing we have, but noone ever laid out the requisite steps within the Vision. The first step NASA should have turned to was an R&D effort, to use and improve upon what was learned on the Shuttle; the big strategic mistake was in not trying to improve on Shuttle's performance and reduce its expense by moving towards an improved Shuttle 2. I think that Admiral Steidle may have been on that path, but when Griffin came in he tossed it all aside in an effort to try and re-create Apollo. Apollo was never sustainable or affordable and it wasn't with Constellation either.

Sent from my iPad

Fly Back Vehicle

A failure of leadership !

What is missing are the grand strategists and visionary leaders of the earlier generations. In the beginning there was Tsiolkovsky. Later Noordung (Potocnik) really gave us many of the plans and rationale for what to do in space and on a space station. Then there were Ley and Oberth. Many people put von Braun into this category, though really he was more a popularizer of those who preceded himself (popularizing and public engagement is also a very important job, though current NASA management does not recognize it as such). The last attempt at a strategy was George Mueller's shuttle, the concept for which originated with Noordung in WWII, but which Mueller started talking about in 1968; virtually all of the great 60s leaders in manned space flight, by 1968 or 69, were in agreement that a flyback vehicle which could be reused in order to save on manufacturing costs was a necessity. It was a necesity because they needed something to replace Saturn and Apollo, which were unaffordable, and it was a necessity because they needed something to loft the modular components of space platforms since without a Saturn they had no other way. The Shuttle that was built wound up being pretty close to what was envisioned in terms of functionality, but the big problem was that it was too expensive and took too much time to turnaround between missions. In large measure because of the expense and preparation time, Shuttle never turned into the DC-3 it was intended to be. It was more like a Boeing 247; not really practical. The Vision of 2004 was an attempt at a strategy, and it is the best thing we have, but no one ever laid out the requisite steps within the Vision. The first step NASA should have turned to was an R&D effort, to use and improve upon what was learned on the Shuttle; the big strategic mistake was in not trying to improve on Shuttle's performance and reduce its expense by moving towards an improved Shuttle 2. I think that Admiral Steidle may have been on that path, but when Griffin came in he tossed it all aside in an effort to try and re-create Apollo. Apollo was never sustainable or affordable and it wasn't with Constellation either. Basically most of the senior experienced people were tossed aside, and for Constellation a bunch of mid-career inexperienced people all anxious to show they could lead were brought in to carry out Griffin's wishes. No one dared to speak up to Griffin and tell the emperor he had no clothes. And it seems like none of these people ever thought about whether what they were doing was the right thing to do in the first place. So the idea of strategy was lost. We've not yet recovered from this today. We are still focused on an Orion,which has a questionable mission and questionable design, and which is seemingly taking decades to develop even though it involves no newtechnology. There is something wrong with this picture and yet no corrective measures have been taken. This is also a failure of leadership. If you take a look at today's human space flight "leaders" (I use the term loosely), absolutely none of them have any serious experience at developing anything new and different, and absolutely none of them have shown themselves to be visionary leaders. Those who have any experience have been mired in the day-to-day focus of implementing an 'operational' flight program and most have probably never sat back to think about tactics, strategy or policy. A sure sign of non-visionary managers are people who point fingers towards Congress or the President and who say 'we're just doing what they want'; as though the Congress or the President are going to show visionary leadership in space exploration. Tactics would have been ensuring the Shuttle is maintained until a replacement is ready. Tactics would have been ensuring that the systems experts on Shuttle would have been gathered together to define what was needed in a follow-on Shuttle II that could improve on cost and performance. Tactics would have looked at an Orion and said, OK, if we are doing another capsule (a throwback) as an interim replacement, how do we get it into orbit in 3 years so that at least it meets our near term needs? Strategy would have been defining how Shuttle, Orion, and Shuttle II fit into the Vision. Policy would have been defining whether commercial entities had a role and in what areas. NASA leadership would have/should have been laying all of this out and embracing it, and telling the Congress and the President, this is the Vision, and this is how we can make the Vision happen. O'Keefe defined the Vision by January of 2004; he showed some real leadership; and Bush spelled out the Vision but there has not been any subsequent work to carry it out. So now NASA has lost the ability to field a Shuttle II; Orion is so far behind required plans and schedules that a lot of negative learning is going on with it. There is no transportation capability whether interim or permanent, to replace Shuttle, and won't be for several years. There is some hope that a couple of the commercial contenders might do better in re-establishing technical capabilities both with capsules and with fly-back vehicles. NASA is leaderless and has nothing beyond the 2004 Vision to point to. There is no stated or embraced strategy, or a plan, or a mission. Some of us, who thought we were the senior experienced and visionary leaders, are still out here, and we are watching what is happening, but we have little or no voice. We've been marginalized. We are watching to see whether NASA human space flight can survive and whether anyone can put together a meaningful plan.

Sent from my iPad

Monday, June 1, 2015

Fwd: This Week in The Space Review - 2015 June 1

Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: jeff@thespacereview.com (Jeff Foust)
Date: June 1, 2015 at 1:51:50 PM CDT
Subject: This Week in The Space Review - 2015 June 1
Reply-To: jeff@thespacereview.com

[ If you no longer wish to receive announcements from The Space Review,
please follow the instructions at the end of this message. ]

Welcome to this week's issue of The Space Review:

Diamonds are forever
---
The most recent International Space Development Conference, like many of its predecessors, held sessions on space based solar power. Yet, as Dwayne Day notes, there's been little progress in the field in recent years, and no sign that this long-term dream of space advocates is close to becoming reality.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2764/1

What price Europa?
---
Last week NASA announced the instruments it plans to fly on a future mission to Europa, while the House of Representatives is expected to approve a bill this week that would sharply increase funding for the mission. Jeff Foust reports, though, that as proponents attempt to make the mission more ambitious, they could also make it a target in future budget debates.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2763/1

The Moon and Mars: a flawed article's false choice
---
A recent essay argued for going to the Moon now because of the considerable challenges of sending humans to Mars. David Whitfield critiques the article and argues that there are ways to accomplish human missions to both worlds.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2762/1

Review: Spaceshots and Snapshots of Projects Mercury and Gemini
---
This week marks the 50th anniversary of Gemini 4 and the first American spacewalk, a milestone that will likely be recalled with the same, small set of images. Jeff Foust reviews a book that recalls missions like that using images not previously widely released.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2761/1

If you missed it, here's what we published in our previous issue:

A stagecoach to the stars
---
Concepts of interplanetary spacecraft often face challenges with power, propulsion, radiation shielding, and more. Brian McConnell offers a concept for a "spacecoach" spacecraft that overcomes many of those obstacles by making use of water and solar electric propulsion in unique ways.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2760/1

Congress launches commercial space legislation
---
Both the House and Senate are considering legislation to support the US commercial launch industry, including extending key provisions of current law. Jeff Foust reports on those efforts, including the contrast between the partisan debates in the House and the bipartisan effort in the Senate.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2759/1

A quick look at trade secrets in outer space
---
As commercial ventures in outer space grow, so do issues like the protection of trade secrets such companies may obtain from their space activities. Kamil Muzyka explores the issue of trade secrets and offers one approach to protecting them.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2758/1

India's GSLV Mark III: Another step ahead
---
India is making progress, albeit slowly, on the next generation of its GSLV launch vehicle designed to end the country's dependence on foreign launchers. Debalina Ghoshal examines the state of the vehicle's development.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2757/1

Review: Black Hole
---
Black holes are widely accepted today both in astrophysics and in popular culture, even though half a century ago they seemed inconceivable to many scientists. Jeff Foust reviews a book that offers a concise history of our understanding of black holes, and how they redeemed general relativity.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2756/1

We appreciate any feedback you may have about these articles as well as
any other questions, comments, or suggestions about The Space Review.
We're also actively soliciting articles to publish in future issues, so
if you have an article or article idea that you think would be of
interest, please email me.

Until next week,

Jeff Foust
Editor, The Space Review
jeff@thespacereview.com
==
This is the spacereview mailing list, hosted by klx.com
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@spacesites.com with the word
unsubscribe spacereview
in the body (not subject) of the message.
For more information please visit http://www.thespacereview.com

Fwd: Will We Ever Colonize Mars?

Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: Kent Castle <kent.d.castle@hotmail.com>
Date: June 1, 2015 at 3:50:26 PM CDT
To: Patterson James <w8ljz@aol.com>, Madsen Ron <ronstar@pdq.net>, Astrology Valkyrie <astrogoddess@valkyrieastrology.com>, Chamberlain Sharon <sharon.m.chamberlain@saic.com>, Bentz Jerry <bentz@sbcglobal.net>, Reason Marilou <loganlou55@yahoo.com>, "lrodriguez@neighborhood-centers.org" <lrodriguez@neighborhood-centers.org>, Leach Larry <ljleach@tds.net>, Martin Bobby <bobbygmartin1938@gmail.com>, Williams Tom <gtomwill@att.net>, Rice Gary <whs46992@gmail.com>, Bogan Carole <bcbogan@earthlink.net>, Tetzloff Connie <owari567@comcast.net>, Brown Paul <paul.brown1@yahoo.com>, Grant Berl <berlgrant@frontier.com>, Bilger Boyd <boyd.bilger@suddenlink.net>
Subject: FW: Will We Ever Colonize Mars?

From: gjohnson144@comcast.net
To: gjohnson144@comcast.net
Subject: FW: Will We Ever Colonize Mars?
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 10:18:37 -0500

Will We Ever Colonize Mars?
by Matt Williams on May 31, 2015
Artist illustration of a Mars Colony. Image credit: NASA
Mars. It's a pretty unforgiving place. On this dry, dessicated world, the average surface temperature is -55 °C (-67 °F). And at the poles, temperatures can reach as low as -153 °C (243 °F). Much of that has to do with its thin atmosphere, which is too thin to retain heat (not to mention breathe). So why then is the idea of colonizing Mars so intriguing to us?
Well, there are a number of reasons, which include the similarities between our two planets, the availability of water, the prospects for generating food, oxygen, and building materials on-site. And there's even the long-term benefits of using Mars as a source of raw materials and terraforming it into a liveable environment. Let's go over them one by one…
Benefits:
As already mentioned, there are many interesting similarities between Earth and Mars that make it a viable option for colonization. For starters, Mars and Earth have very similar lengths of days. A Martian day is 24 hours and 39 minutes, which means that plants and animals – not to mention human colonists – would find that familiar.
Diagram showing the habitable zones of the Solar System (upper row) and the Gliese 581 system (lower row). Based on a diagram by Franck Selsis, Univ. of Bordeaux. Credit: ESO
Mars also has an axial tilt that is very similar to Earth's, which means it has the same basic seasonal patterns as our planet (albeit for longer periods of time). Basically, when one hemisphere is pointed towards the Sun, it experiences summer while the other experiences winter – complete with warmer temperatures and longer days.
This too would work well when it comes to growing seasons and would provide colonists with a comforting sense of familiarity and a way of measuring out the year. Much like farmers here on Earth, native Martians would experience a "growing season", a "harvest", and would be able to hold annual festivities to mark the changing of the seasons.
Also, much like Earth, Mars exists within our Sun's habitable zone (aka. "goldilocks zone"), though it is slightly towards its outer edge. Venus is similarly located within this zone, but its location on the inner edge (combined with its thick atmosphere) has led to it becoming the hottest planet in the Solar System. That, combined with its sulfuric acid rains makes Mars a much more attractive option.
Additionally, Mars is closer to Earth than the other Solar planets – except for Venus, but we already covered why it's not a very good option! This would make the process of colonizing it easier. In fact, every few years when the Earth and Mars are at opposition – i.e. when they are closest to each other – the distance varies, making certain "launch windows" ideal for sending colonists.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MpOJ6fQ0roI
For example, on April 8th, 2014, Earth and Mars were 92.4 million km (57.4 million miles) apart at opposition. On May 22nd, 2016, they will be 75.3 million km (46.8 million miles) apart, and by July 27th of 2018, a meager 57.6 million km (35.8 million miles) will separate our two worlds. During these windows, getting to Mars would be a matter of months rather than years.
Also, Mars has vast reserves of water in the form of ice. Most of this water ice is located in the polar regions, but surveys of Martian meteorites have suggested that much of it may also be locked away beneath the surface. This water could be extracted and purified for human consumption easily enough.
In his book, The Case for Mars, Robert Zubrin also explains how future human colonists might be able to live off the land when traveling to Mars, and eventually colonize it. Instead of bringing all their supplies from Earth – like the inhabitants of the International Space Station – future colonists would be able to make their own air, water, and even fuel by splitting Martian water into oxygen and hydrogen.
New estimates of water ice on Mars suggest there may be large reservoirs of underground ice at non-polar latitudes. Credit: Feldman et al., 2011
Preliminary experiments have shown that Mars soil could be baked into bricks to create protective structures, which would cut down on the amount of materials needed to be shipped to the surface. Earth plants could eventually be grown in Martian soil too, assuming they get enough sunlight and carbon dioxide. Over time, planting on the native soil could also help to create a breathable atmosphere.
Challenges:
Despite the aforementioned benefits, there are also some rather monumental challenges to colonizing the Red Planet. For starters, there is the matter of the average surface temperature, which is anything but hospitable. While temperatures around the equator at midday can reach a balmy 20 °C, at the Curiosity site – the Gale Crater, which is close to the equator – typical nighttime temperatures are as low as -70 °C.
The gravity on Mars is also only about 40% of what we experience on Earth's, which would make adjusting to it quite difficult. According to a NASA report, the effects of zero-gravity on the human body are quite profound, with a loss of up to 5% muscle mass a week and 1% of bone density a month.
Naturally, these losses would be lower on the surface of Mars, where there is at least some gravity. But permanent settlers would still have to contend with the problems of muscle degeneration and osteoporosis in the long run.
The Biosphere 2 project is an attempt to simulate Mars-like conditions on Earth. Credit: Science Photo Library
And then there's the atmosphere, which is unbreathable. About 95% of the planet's atmosphere is carbon dioxide, which means that in addition to producing breathable air for their habitats, settlers would also not be able to go outside without a pressure suit and bottled oxygen.
Mars also has no global magnetic field comparable to Earth's geomagnetic field. Combined with a thin atmosphere, this means that a significant amount of ionizing radiation is able to reach the Martian surface.
Thanks to measurements taken by the Mars Odyssey spacecraft's Mars Radiation Environment Experiment (MARIE), scientists learned that radiation levels in orbit above Mars are 2.5 times higher than at the International Space Station. Levels on the surface would be lower, but would still be higher than human beings are accustomed to.
In fact, a recent paper submitted by a group of MIT researchers – which analyzed the Mars One plan to colonize the planet beginning in 2020 – concluded that the first astronaut would suffocate after 68 days, while the others would die from a combination of starvation, dehydration, or incineration in an oxygen-rich atmosphere.
Artist's concept of a Martian astronaut standing outside the Mars One habitat. Credit: Bryan Versteeg/Mars One
In short, the challenges to creating a permanent settlement on Mars are numerous, but not necessarily insurmountable.
Terraforming:
Over time, many or all of the difficulties in living on Mars could be overcome through the application of geoengineering (aka. terraforming). Using organisms like cyanobacteria and phytoplankton, colonists could gradually convert much of the CO² in the atmosphere into breathable oxygen.
In addition, it is estimated that there is a significant amount of carbon dioxide (CO²) in the form of dry ice at the Martian south pole, not to mention absorbed by in the planet's regolith (soil). If the temperature of the planet were raised, this ice would sublimate into gas and increase atmospheric pressure. Although it would still not be breathable by humans, it would be sufficient enough to eliminate the need for pressure suits.
A possible way of doing this is by deliberately triggering a greenhouse effect on the planet. This could be done by importing ammonia ice from the atmospheres of other planets in our Solar System. Because ammonia (NH³) is mostly nitrogen by weight, it could also supply the buffer gas needed for a breathable atmosphere – much as it does here on Earth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2Y5_wJwaEGc
Similarly, it would be possible to trigger a greenhouse effect by importing hydrocarbons like methane – which is common in Titan's atmosphere and on its surface. This methane could be vented into the atmosphere where it would act to compound the greenhouse effect.
Zubrin and Chris McKay, an astrobiologist with NASA's Ames Research center, have also suggested creating facilities on the surface that could pump greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, thus triggering global warming (much as they do here on Earth).
Other possibilities exist as well, ranging from orbital mirrors that would heat the surface to deliberately impacting the surface with comets. But regardless of the method, possibilities exist for transforming Mars' environment that could make it more suitable for humans in the long run – many of which we are currently doing right here on Earth (with less positive results).
Another proposed solution is building habitats underground. By building a series of tunnels that connect between subterranean habitats, settlers could forgo the need for oxygen tanks and pressure suits when they are away from home.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=i5D8e71c75U
Additionally, it would provide protection against radiation exposure. Based on data obtained by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, it is also speculated that habitable environments exist underground, making it an even more attractive option.
Proposed Missions:
NASA's proposed manned mission to Mars – which is slated to take place during the 2030s using the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) and the Space Launch System (SLS) – is not the only proposal to send humans to the Red Planet. In addition to other federal space agencies, there are also plans by private corporations and non-profits, some of which are far more ambitious than mere exploration.
The European Space Agency (ESA) has long-term plans to send humans, though they have yet to build a manned spacecraft. Roscosmos, the Russian Federal Space Agency, is also planning a manned Mars mission, with simulations (called Mars-500) having been completed in Russia back in 2011. The ESA is currently participating in these simulations as well.
In 2012, a group of Dutch entrepreneurs revealed plans for a crowdfunded campaign to establish a human Mars base, beginning in 2023. Known as MarsOne, the plan calls for a series of one-way missions to establish a permanent and expanding colony on Mars, which would be financed with the help of media participation.
Mars-manned-mission vehicle (NASA Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0) Feb 2009. Credit: NASA
Other details of the MarsOne plan include sending a telecom orbiter by 2018, a rover in 2020, and the base components and its settlers by 2023. The base would be powered by 3,000 square meters of solar panels and the SpaceX Falcon 9 Heavy rocket would be used to launch the hardware. The first crew of 4 astronauts would land on Mars in 2025; then, every two years, a new crew of 4 astronauts would arrive.
On December 2nd, 2014, NASA's Advanced Human Exploration Systems and Operations Mission Director Jason Crusan and Deputy Associate Administrator for Programs James Reuthner announced tentative support for the Boeing "Affordable Mars Mission Design". Currently planned for the 2030s, the mission profile includes plans for radiation shielding, centrifugal artificial gravity, in-transit consumable resupply, and a return-lander.
SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk has also announced plans to establish a colony on Mars with a population of 80,000 people. Intrinsic to this plan is the development of the Mars Colonial Transporter (MCT), a spaceflight system that would rely of reusable rocket engines, launch vehicles and space capsules to transport humans to Mars and return to Earth.
As of 2014, SpaceX has begun development of the large Raptor rocket engine for the Mars Colonial Transporter, but the MCT is not expected to be operational until the mid-2020s. In January 2015, Musk said that he hoped to release details of the "completely new architecture" for the Mars transport system in late 2015.
A few "fan-based" Mars Colonization Transport (MCT) design concepts, which Musk hopes to use to ferry colonists to Mars 100 people at a time. Credit: Reddit
There may come a day when, after generations of terraforming and numerous waves of colonists, that Mars will begin to have a viable economy as well. This could take the form of mineral deposits being discovered and then sent back to Earth for sale. Launching precious metals, like platinum, off the surface of Mars would be relatively inexpensive thanks to its lower gravity.
But according to Musk, the most likely scenario (at least for the foreseeable future) would involve an economy based on real estate. With human populations exploding all over Earth, a new destination that offers plenty of room to expand is going to look like a good investment. And once transportation issues are worked out, savvy investors are likely to start buying up land.
Plus, there is likely to be a market for scientific research on Mars for centuries to come. Who knows what we might find once planetary surveys really start to open up!
In short, one day, there could be real Martians – and they would be us!
Universe Today has many interesting articles about the possibility of humans living on Mars. Here's a great article written by Nancy Atkinson about the possibility of a one-way, one-person trip to Mars
What about using microbes to help colonize mars? And if you want to know the distances between Earth and Mars, check it out here.
For more information, check out Mars colonies coming soon, Hubblesite's News Releases about Mars, and NASA's Quick Facts
The Mars Society is working to try and colonize Mars. And Red Colony is a great resource of articles about colonizing Mars.
Finally, if you'd like to learn more about Mars in general, we have done several podcast episodes about the Red Planet at Astronomy Cast. Episode 52: Mars, Episode 91: The Search for Water on Mars, and Episode 94: Humans to Mars – Part 1, Scientists.
Reference:
NASA Quest: Possibility of colonizing Mars