NASA and the Private Sector - Page 171

For the better part of a decade, the world has waited for SpaceX to deliver on its promise to provide high-speed internet from space. The wait is finally over.

Broadband satellite internet is here ... or will be before the year is out.

Satellites galore

Over time, SpaceX intends to launch at least 12,000 -- and possibly as many as 42,000 -- "Starlink" internet satellites. Granted, this is a long-term, stretch goal, and it will take years to orbit all of the (tens of) thousands of satellites envisioned. But Elon Musk says Starlink will be able to begin delivering at least "moderate" internet coverage to many locations on Earth once SpaceX has gotten 800 satellites into orbit.

How close is SpaceX to that goal?

On Monday evening, January 6, SpaceX successfully launched its second "official" Starlink mission, carrying 60 satellites into orbit aboard a Falcon 9 rocket. In addition to the 115 operational satellites put into orbit on previous launches, this gives the company about 175 operational internet satellites in orbit today.

Assuming SpaceX continues putting satellites in orbit at a rate of 60 satellites per launch (and doesn't attempt to accelerate deployment by using bigger Falcon Heavy or Starship rockets), 11 more Falcon 9-Starlink missions should suffice to surpass the 800-sat threshold for "moderate" internet coverage. At a planned launch rate of two Falcon 9 launches per month, therefore, Starlink should reach this goal by the end of June 2020. By the end of the year, Starlinks in orbit should reach 1,500.

Incidentally, at that point, about 40% of all operational satellites (launched by anybody, anywhere, ever) in orbit will be SpaceX Starlink satellites -- a pretty amazing statistic.

A busy year for SpaceX

And here's another stat for you: Because of Starlink, 2020 promises to be SpaceX's most prolific year yet for rocket launches.

2019, you see, was actually kind of a slow year for SpaceX. The 13 rocket launches the space company conducted were its fewest since 2016, the year when an anomalous on-ground test-firing destroyed a SpaceX Falcon 9, requiring an investigation of the rocket's construction and putting an abrupt end to launches for the year.

Racing to catch up on overdue launches propelled SpaceX to set new records: 18 rockets launched in 2017, and then 21 launches in 2018. But faced with a slump in demand for large satellite launches, and having worked through its backlog, 2019 became a down year for SpaceX.

That demand for large government and commercial space launches hasn't subsided in 2020, with only about a dozen customer-sourced launches planned this year. Nevertheless, NASASpaceflight.com reports that this year could see SpaceX smash all previous records by launching perhaps three dozen times -- two dozen of which will be launches of its own Starlink satellites.

What it means to SpaceX

Launching so often, SpaceX is creating the kind of business "scale" that rivals United Launch Alliance, Roscosmos, and Arianespace can only dream of. This allows SpaceX to amortize its fixed manufacturing, labor, and overhead costs over a huge number of launches, driving down the average cost of each individual launch for both itself and its customers.

In turn, this should give SpaceX an advantage when bidding for government launch contracts (and astronaut missions) and advertising its services to commercial customers. SpaceX should enjoy cost advantages, too, in deploying its Starlink satellite network, helping it compete with rival satellite networks planned by OneWeb, Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN), and Telesat. None of these worthies, after all, owns its own rocket with which to put satellites in orbit (although Amazon's CEO, Jeff Bezos, is working on building an orbital rocket at his space company, Blue Origin). In racing SpaceX to orbit, therefore, they're going to have to choose between paying higher prices to fly with another launch provider and subsidizing their competitor by buying flights from SpaceX.

Of course, the most important advantage SpaceX should get from its rapid rate of rocket launches this year is also the most obvious: less time to market.

A more rapid launch pace means faster deployment of SpaceX's Starlink satellites to orbit. That means the company can begin reaping the 60% operating profit margin that SpaceX expects to earn from providing broadband internet service from space sooner. By 2025, internal SpaceX documents show the company hoping to earn as much as $22 billion in annual operating profit -- most of it from selling satellite internet service.

And 2020 is the year it all starts to happen.

On January 15 2020 00:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
What does the collapsing of the test tank mean?

Virgin Galactic Holdings Inc. has surged 29% since Jan. 1 as the company prepares to fly its first space tourists in 2020.

Investors are also betting that Virgin Galactic, founded by entrepreneur Richard Branson, will be one of the first companies to offer point-to-point hypersonic travel, one day potentially reducing intercontinental flights to less than three hours. In a December report, Morgan Stanley analysts valued that market at $800 billion by 2040, dwarfing the space tourism business.

Virgin announced last week that its second commercial ship had reached a “weight on wheels” assembly milestone considerably faster than it took to get to the same stage with its first spaceship. Work on a third ship has begun, the company said.

Virgin Galactic aims to have five spacecraft in service by the end of 2023 operating from its base at Spaceport America in southern New Mexico. That’s where customers will gather later this year to board the company’s first commercial flight.

On Wednesday, the company named Enrico Palermo as its chief operating officer. Palermo was president of its manufacturing unit, Spaceship Co.

Virgin Galactic rose 0.7% to $14.94 Thursday in trading in New York.

The company debuted on the public markets on Oct. 28 and rose to more than $12 before dipping to a low of $7.22 in late November. The stock began rising again in mid-December, finishing the year at $11.55. Morgan Stanley assigned a $22 target price for the shares on Dec. 19.

The surge last month came after the management team made the rounds of analysts to tell its story, Alex King, founder of Cestrian Capital Research, wrote in a Jan. 13 note. King owns Virgin Galactic shares personally.

The company has been doing a good job highlighting its future opportunities, said Steven Jorgenson, general partner at Starbridge Venture Capital.

“Talking about strong customer demand and of opening up ticket reservations again has been a good strategy while they’re still in a bit of an operational grace period ahead of regular customer launches later this year,” he wrote in an email.

The company has a backlog of 600 people who have placed deposits for a trip on a spaceship, and collected information from another 3,500 potential customers who have expressed interest in the flights, Palermo said in an interview.

“We continue to see that number tick up every month,” he said. “We’re very comfortable with demand for that market.”

Virgin Galactic hasn’t decided whether it will resume taking reservations before or after the commercial flights commence, Palermo said.

In November, Virgin reported losing about $128 million for the period through Sept. 30. King labeled the stock “speculative” given the company’s early stage. Virgin Galactic has raised more than $1 billion since it was founded in 2004, initially from Branson, with an Abu Dhabi investment company taking a stake in 2010.

Two SpaceX Falcon 9 rockets are currently on track to launch back-to-back missions just a handful of days from now, potentially supporting Crew Dragon’s second flight test ever and yet another Starlink satellite launch a little over two days from now.

Known as Crew Dragon’s In-Flight Abort (IFA) test, the first mission is scheduled to lift off from Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A (KSC LC-39A) no earlier than (NET) 8 am EST (13:00 UTC), January 18th and will almost certainly produce some spectacular fireworks (even more so than usual). During the test, SpaceX’s newest flightworthy Crew Dragon spacecraft will attempt to escape from a supersonic Falcon 9 rocket, exceptionally challenging conditions that will almost certainly result in the immediate (intentional) destruction of Falcon 9’s upper stage and booster.

A few miles to the north, SpaceX is preparing an entirely different Falcon 9 rocket for the third launch of 60 upgraded Starlink v1.0 satellites in barely two months, scheduled to lift off NET 12:20 pm EST (17:20 UTC), January 20th from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) Launch Complex 40 (LC-40). While the duo of launches will break no records for SpaceX, they will certainly set the tone the company is aiming to keep throughout the rest of 2020.

On January 11th, SpaceX successfully fired up Falcon 9 B1046 at Pad 39A, performing the booster’s fifth routine static fire test (if not more) in approximately two years. The first Block 5 booster built and flown by SpaceX, B1046 has performed three orbital-class launches since it debuted in May 2018 and even became the first Falcon 9 booster to launch three times in December 2018.

Since that milestone, B1046 spent several months at SpaceX’s Hawthorne, CA factory undergoing inspections and refurbishment. At some point, SpaceX assigned the thrice-flown booster to support Crew Dragon’s In-Flight Abort (IFA) test – effectively a death sentence – and shipped the booster to Florida, where it publicly appeared for the first time in months on October 3rd, 2019. Given that four more Falcon 9 boosters have now successfully performed three (or even four) orbital-class launches each, B1046’s now-imminent demise is certainly disappointing but remains extremely pragmatic.

Sure, B1046 could have theoretically flown several more orbital-class launches before it might have otherwise been quietly retired, but it is still the first Falcon 9 Block 5 booster qualified for flight. Although SpaceX and CEO Elon Musk were explicit that Block 5 would be the last major design iteration for the Falcon family of launch vehicles, that definitely doesn’t rule out tweaks – minor to major – that have likely been implemented since the rocket’s flight debut. In the 20 months since that debut, Falcon 9 and Heavy Block 5 boosters have performed more than two dozen launches and landings and checked off several reusability milestones.

In simple terms, those dozens of flights and reuses all translate to lots and lots (and lots) of high-fidelity data. That data – and often the hardware it’s connected to – can be used to extensively cross-check and improve the Falcon 9 and Heavy engineering models SpaceX created while designing, producing, and ground testing the Block 5 upgrade prior to its flight debut. It can also be used to upgrade to the rocket where needed, especially useful when it comes to reusability.

Although Falcon Block 5 boosters already appear to be exceptionally reliable and reusable, having checked off multiple third-flight and fourth-flight milestones in the last year, there is always room for improvement – especially if Musk is still serious about his long-held goal of launching the same Falcon 9 booster twice in ~24 hours. Along those lines, it’s safe to assume that at least some of the boosters that come off the assembly line after B1046 feature design tweaks meant to optimize for reliability and reusability, among other things.

For the most part, it seems that SpaceX is no longer aggressively pursuing ~24-hour booster turnaround, although they very likely intend to continue cutting the work hours required for (and thus the cost of) each reuse. B1046’s demise may shrink SpaceX’s reusable rocket fleet by one but the company will continue to debut the occasional new booster throughout 2020, ultimately ensuring that the fleet grows over time. Ultimately, if SpaceX only needs to spend a week or two inspecting and refurbishing each Block 5 booster and has a fleet of 10-20 or more, 24-hour turnaround may not even be necessary to achieve the desired results it was meant to represent.

Finally, SpaceX aims to launch its fourth batch of 60 Starlink satellites overall as few as ~52 hours after Falcon 9’s Crew Dragon In-Flight Abort mission and nextspaceflight.com reports that Falcon 9 B1051 will support the Starlink V1 L3 mission – the booster’s third orbital-class launch in ~10 months. Thankfully, B1051 – formerly tasked with supporting Crew Dragon’s Demo-1 orbital launch debut in March 2019 and Canada’s Radarsat Constellation Mission (RCM) in June 2019 – will almost certainly be attempting its second drone ship landing and third recovery overall.

Nearly one month ago, Boeing completed the first orbital test flight of its Starliner spacecraft with a near-perfect landing at White Sands Space Harbor in New Mexico.

The mission had to be cut short due to a well-publicized timing error that delayed the spacecraft's service module from performing an orbital insertion burn. This caused the thrusters on board the service module, which provides power to Starliner during most of its mission, to fire longer than expected. As a result, the spacecraft did not have enough fuel to complete a rendezvous with the International Space Station, a key component of the test flight in advance of crewed missions.

Since providing some initial information during a post-flight news conference, NASA and Boeing have gone mostly quiet about the investigation into the timing error. Two weeks ago, the space agency said it had initiated two investigations. One would find the root cause of the "mission elapsed timer anomaly" over the course of about two months, and the second will determine whether another uncrewed test flight of Starliner is required before astronauts fly on the vehicle.

The NASA release did not mention thruster performance, but an agency source told Ars that engineers are looking closely at the performance of the Starliner propulsion system. In addition to four large launch abort engines, the service module has 28 reaction control system thrusters, each with 85 pounds of thrust and 20 more-powerful orbital maneuvering thrusters, each with 1,500 pounds of thrust.

During the post-flight news conference Jim Chilton, Boeing's senior vice president of the Space and Launch division, said the service module thrusters were stressed due to their unconventional use in raising Starliner's orbit instead of performing one big burn. As a result, the company had to shut down one manifold, which effectively branches into several lines carrying propellant to four thrusters. "We even shut down one manifold as we saw pressure go low 'cause it had been used a lot," he said.

The NASA source said eight or more thrusters on the service module failed at one point and that one thruster never fired at all.

In response to a question about thruster performance, Boeing provided the following statement to Ars: "After the anomaly, many of the elements of the propulsion system were overstressed, with some thrusters exceeding the planned number of burns for a service module mission. We took a few cautionary measures to make sure the propulsion system stayed healthy for the remainder of the mission, including re-pressurizing the manifold, recovering that manifold’s thrusters. Over the course of the mission we turned off 13 thrusters and turned all but one back on after verifying their health."

Although it did not fly up to the altitude of the space station and perform a rendezvous and docking during its test flight, Starliner did fly an "abort demonstration" that simulated approaching and backing away from the space station. The NASA source said Boeing may also have failed this test due to thruster issues. Boeing denied this.

"In testing the system the spacecraft executed all the commands, but we did observe a lower than expected delta V during the backing away phase," Boeing said in a statement. "Current evidence indicates the lower delta V was due to the earlier cautionary thruster measures, but we are carefully reviewing data to determine whether this demonstration should be repeated in the subsequent mission."

A major part of the joint NASA-Boeing investigation will entail assessing the performance of the spacecraft's overall propulsion system and determining the root cause of the observed issues—be it software errors, excess stress during the orbit-raising maneuver, or some more systemic problem. In June 2018, Boeing suffered a significant setback during a ground-based test of its propulsion system. Last November, however, its four main abort engines appeared to perform nominally during a 75-second test.

Both Boeing and NASA officials said it would be premature to discuss the matter further until the investigations are complete.

During testing this evening we experienced a test anomaly resulting in a small fire on our test stand. The fire was quickly extinguished by our fire suppression systems on the stand and the local community emergency response team quickly responded. Both the test stand and our rocket are intact. At no time was there any risk to individuals on site or the community.

We apologize for any inconvenience caused and we will be working with the local emergency response team to ensure that the local community is kept aware of actions in a timely manner.

We will be hosting a community day soon to explain what happened and answer any questions.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, selected Houston-based Axiom Space to build the first "commercial launch destination" - basically a space hotel for the wealthy - that will be connected to the International Space Station (ISS). This is all part of NASA's Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) initiative, which aims to commercialize space in order to support American-made innovation in the space sector to fulfill their long-term plan to help develop commercial destinations in low-Earth orbit (LEO). In the future, space will have many space hotels by different companies that will enable humans to experience space as well as conduct research. "NASA has once again recognized the hard work, talent, and experience of Houstonians as we expand the International Space Station and promote commercial opportunities in space,” said Senator John Cornyn of Texas. “I’m proud Axiom will continue to build upon Texas’ legacy of leading the nation in human space exploration.” Then Senator of Texas Ted Cruz added, "Today’s announcement is an exciting and welcome step forward in the efforts to commercialize low-Earth orbit. This partnership between NASA and Axiom Space – a Houston, Texas original – illustrates how critically important the International Space Station is, and will continue to be, for developing new technologies for low-Earth orbit and beyond, and for continuing America’s leadership in space. Congratulations to Axiom Space on this exciting award – Houston is known as Space City for a reason, and I look forward to this great Space City company and NASA turning this announcement into reality."

Axiom will begin by adding one module to the station to eventually build a larger structure. One day, the International Space Station will be retired, NASA wants to make sure humans continue innovation to maintain a permanent presence in space around our planet. Axiom's 'hotel' module is planned to be launched in the year 2024, it will attach to the space stations Node-2 Forward Port, the module could ultimately serve as ISS' replacement in the future. The CEO of Axiom, Mike Suffredini, said:

"When ISS is retired, Axiom Station will complete construction and detach to operate into the future as a free-flying complex for living and working in space – marking humankind’s next stage of LEO settlement."

The hotel module is an 'egg-like' shape, the company describes the design as a zero gravity-friendly "nest-like cabin" featuring large windows with beautiful "unobstructed views of Earth" and "high-bandwidth communications back to home." So, the space hotel module at the space station will feature a large screen that will use internet connectivity to communicate with loved ones back on Earth.

It would be so amazing to embark on a space voyage plus stay at a hotel at the space station to experience zero gravity and see Earth in it's full glory and magnificent beauty - unfortunately the price of a 10 day stay at Axiom's space hotel module will be so astronomically expensive. The price of booking a flight to Axiom's space hotel is $55 million, includes the cost of on-the-ground astronaut training course which costs $1 million. The price also covers the rocket flight expense to space and back to Earth. Therefore, realistically the space hotel would likely be used by only super wealthy individuals, also by manufacturers who aim to test new technology for space exploration, or by companies who need to conduct scientific experiments in space conditions.

Axiom CEO Mike Suffredini stated, "We appreciate the bold decision on the part of NASA to open up a commercial future in Low Earth Orbit. This selection is a recognition of the uniquely qualified nature of the Axiom team and our commercial plan to create and support a thriving, sustainable, and American-led LEO (Low Earth Orbit) ecosystem. Axiom exists to provide the infrastructure in space for a variety of users to conduct research, discover new technologies, test systems for exploration of the Moon and Mars, manufacture superior products for use in orbit and on the ground, and ultimately improve life back on Earth. As we build on the legacy and foundation established by the ISS Program, we look forward to working with NASA and the ecosystem of current and future international partners on this seminal effort." Axios will definitely pave the way towards space commercialization. Humanity's future in space will be exciting!

During its quarterly meeting on Thursday, NASA's Aersopace Safety Advisory Panel dropped some significant news about a critical commercial crew test flight. The panel revealed that Boeing's Starliner may have been lost during a December mission had a software error not been found and fixed while the vehicle was in orbit.

The software issue was identified during testing on the ground after Starliner's launch, said panel member Paul Hill, a former flight director and former director of mission operations at Johnson Space Center in Houston. The problem would have interfered with the service module's (SM) separation from the Starliner capsule.

"While this anomaly was corrected in flight, if it had gone uncorrected it would have led to erroneous thruster firing and uncontrolled motion during SM separation for deorbit, with the potential for catastrophic spacecraft failure," Hill said during the meeting.

Starliner's December test flight had to be cut short due to a well-publicized timing error that delayed the spacecraft's service module from performing an orbital insertion burn. This caused the thrusters on board the service module, which provides power to Starliner during most of its mission, to fire longer than expected. As a result, the spacecraft did not have enough fuel to complete a rendezvous with the International Space Station, a key component of the test flight in advance of crewed missions.

At Thursday's meeting, Hill revealed the second issue related to software and thruster performance publicly for the first time.

However, as part of reporting on a story about Starliner software and thruster issues three weeks ago, a source told Ars about this particular problem. According to the source, Boeing patched a software code error just two hours before the vehicle reentered Earth's atmosphere. Had the error not been caught, the source said, proper thrusters would not open during the reentry process, and the vehicle would have been lost.

In a response to a query about this in mid-January, a Boeing spokesperson confirmed to Ars that software uploads were sent to Starliner "near the end of the mission." However, the spokesperson then downplayed the gravity of the situation, saying, "The final upload before landing's main purpose was to ensure a proper disposal burn of the Service Module after separation and had nothing to do with Crew Module reentry." Because this made the issue sound not serious, Ars omitted it from the published story.

But the public remarks by Hill on Thursday appear to underscore the seriousness of the issue, and the safety panel recommended several reviews of Boeing. "The panel has a larger concern with the rigor of Boeing's verification processes," Hill said. "As a result, the panel recommends that NASA pursue not just the root cause of these specific flight-software anomalies but also a Boeing assessment of and corrective actions for Boeing's flight-software integration and testing processes."

The safety panel also recommended that NASA conduct "an even broader" assessment of Boeing's Systems Engineering and Integration processes. Only after these assessments, Hill said, should NASA determine whether the Starliner spacecraft will conduct a second, uncrewed flight test into orbit before astronauts fly on board. (Boeing recently set aside $410 million to pay for that contingency).

Finally, before the meeting ended, the chair of the safety panel, Patricia Sanders, noted yet another ongoing evaluation of Boeing. "Given the potential for systemic issues at Boeing, I would also note that NASA has decided to proceed with an organizational safety assessment with Boeing as they previously conducted with SpaceX," she said.

Boeing's Vice President and Program Manager for Starliner, John Mulholland, also elaborated on a third problem: the inability of the ground to reliably communicate with the spacecraft in the minutes after launch. He said this did not appear to be a problem with the antenna or communications system on board the spacecraft, but rather a "high noise floor" on the ground, which he attributed to frequencies associated with cell phone towers. He said this was just a preliminary finding.

Both NASA and Boeing officials declined to speculate on whether the software errors discussed Thursday—not to mention the fact that Starliner failed to accomplish its primary task, a rendezvous and docking with the International Space Station—will necessitate a second uncrewed test flight for Starliner before NASA astronauts launch on the vehicle. “I just don’t think we have enough information at this point," Bridenstine said. "We’d be very premature to make any announcements regarding that."

NASA and SpaceX are closing in on the first launch of humans into orbit from US soil since 2011, when the space shuttle made its final flight.

Although the space agency has not yet said so publicly, NASA is working toward a May 7 launch of a Crew Dragon spacecraft carrying astronauts Doug Hurley and Bob Behnken to the International Space Station.

Asked Monday about the early May launch date, the director of Johnson Space Center, Mark Geyer, said it is tentative and that no final decisions have been made. The International Space Station and Commercial Crew programs are continuing to consult with NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine and the agency's chief of human spaceflight, Doug Loverro. "That's the target the two programs have agreed is reasonable, but we're still confirming with Jim and Doug really when we think we're going to launch," he said.

It is therefore possible that the Crew Dragon mission could launch any time from the second half of April through June.

Crew Dragon

The Dragon spacecraft for the crew mission will arrive at Kennedy Space Center this month and is essentially ready to go aside from a few minor issues. Loverro said as much on Monday during a visit to Johnson Space Center.

"We have some subsystems that are in the vehicle that we think might need to be re-engineered with different kinds of metal, we have a tungsten incompatibility in one of the areas that we want to replace with different kinds of tubing," he said. "It's not major, but it's something that has to be done along the way."

NASA and SpaceX are also in final discussions about additional parachute tests to certify that system for flight. It's likely that SpaceX will conduct two additional tests of brand-new parachutes in the coming weeks to satisfy NASA's needs.

Mostly, however, Loverro said NASA needs to complete its analysis of data from Dragon's successful In-Flight Abort test in January and then complete paperwork for the mission.

"Even though it sounds mundane, there is a load of paper that has to be verified, and signed off, and checked to make sure we've got everything closed out," he said. "It is probably one of the longest things in the tent to go ahead and do. It's underappreciated but critically important. You've got to make sure you've done everything you need to do along the way."

Crew readiness

NASA is also trying to determine how long Dragon's first crewed mission will take. Initially, the space agency had planned to dock the capsule to the space station for about a week before Hurley and Behnken returned to Earth. Now it wants to extend that mission so the pair of astronauts can do more work on orbit.

Later this spring, after NASA astronauts Jessica Meir and Drew Morgan return to Earth, only Chris Cassidy will remain on board the station. NASA would like to minimize the time Cassidy remains the lone US astronaut on board the orbiting laboratory, so there is discussion of extending Hurley and Behnken's mission to six weeks, or even three months. If that happens, then the two astronauts would need some more space-station related training. Specifically, NASA would like Behnken to be capable of conducting a spacewalk if the need arises. Behnken has conducted six spacewalks over two shuttle missions, but the last was in February, 2010. He will need some spacewalk proficiency training if the Dragon mission is extended. (Hurley, a pilot on the shuttle, never performed a spacewalk.)

"We're also having a conversation because the station is about to go down to one person, and so it would make sense for this mission to stay a little longer," Geyer said Monday. "And given that, there's ISS training that we would want to give these guys, including Bob so he could help Chris if we had a contingency EVA. So that's all part of the mix, and all of that is coming together, and we'll be making decisions soon about when we think it's going to launch."