NASA and the Private Sector - Page 44

Last week, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) awarded big contracts to Boeing BA -0.96% and Space Exploration Technologies Corporation — SpaceX — for development of capsules that can carry U.S. astronauts into orbit. Their work will play a pivotal role in reducing U.S. reliance on Russian space technology as the human spaceflight program progresses into the post-Shuttle era. However, the capsule awards weren’t the big surprise of the week for space community insiders. That came the following day when the government’s leading provider of launch services announced it would team with a non-traditional space company started by internet entrepreneur Jeff Bezos to develop the next generation of U.S. rocket engines.

Nobody saw that coming, even though government-funded United Launch Alliance (ULA) and privately-funded Blue Origin had been working together on efforts such as NASA’s capsule program since their inception. What stunned many observers was that ULA, a Boeing-Lockheed Martin joint venture with a nearly flawless record of lofting military and intelligence satellites into orbit, would team with a relatively untested startup to replace the Russian RD-180 engines that power its most important launch vehicle. Reliance on the RD-180 became controversial following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and Congress is contemplating legislative mandates that would fast-track development of an American-built successor.

ULA didn’t just pick an unexpected partner for its future engines, it picked an unexpected technology. Like the RD-180, the BE-4 engine Blue Origin has been developing for three years would be an “oxygen-rich, staged-combustion” engine of the type that experts say represents the future of space launch (all the engines currently built in the U.S. rely on older technologies developed a generation ago). But the BE-4 would use liquefied natural gas — LNG — as its fuel in combination with liquid oxygen, and that’s something that hasn’t been done before. Blue Origin says LNG, a commercially available form of methane, would be relatively inexpensive and eliminate the need for complex pressurization systems used in existing engines.

Maybe so, but Joel Achenbach of the Washington Post captured the surprise of many space community members at the announcement of the teaming arrangement when he characterized the tie-up as “a historic partnership between ‘Old Space’ and ‘New Space’.” What he meant was that ULA traces its roots back to the early days of the Cold War and has a culture mirroring the folkways of its federal customer, whereas Blue Origin like SpaceX is an entrepreneurial enterprise that seeks to greatly reduce the cost and complexity of getting into space. Bezos and SpaceX founder Elon Musk are space enthusiasts who see a bright future for mankind beyond the Earth, at a time when the political culture is often said to be lacking in imagination. For them space isn’t just a business, it’s a calling.

Partnering with Blue Origin potentially solves a big problem for ULA by giving it an alternative to the RD-180, which is now reviled on a nearly daily basis by members of Congress despite an admirable record for reliability. It also may help the launch alliance to begin evolving its image away from that of a high-cost, bureaucratic operation that charges too much for launch services to attract commercial customers. SpaceX founder Musk has made much of how his company can deliver national security payloads into space at a lower price than ULA, and Congress typically is more attuned to cost than reliability in debating such matters.

Having lost out to Boeing and SpaceX for the lucrative Commercial Crew Program contract, Sierra Nevada's Mark Sirangelo told the Denver Post the companies plans to go forward with development of the spacecraft and bid on future contracts.

The news companies on the heals of Sierra Nevada laying off 100 people from the Dream Chaser program.

"We did do a workforce reduction, but it was a relatively minor one compared to what it might have been," Sirangelo said.

When NASA announced the winners of the Commercial Crew Program it did leave the doors open for Sierra Nevada and other companies, presumably Blue Origin, to bid on future commercial crew contracts.

A few different companies have recently announced grand plans to mine asteroids for precious metals and other materials.

But in addition to all the technological hurdles that would need to be cleared to make this possible, there's an obstacle of a much different sort: the law.

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967 — a UN treaty signed by 102 countries, including the US — bans countries from appropriating any astronomical bodies. But there's a dispute over whether this would apply to private companies mining asteroids.

Congress seems to be arguing that it does not. On Wednesday, a House subcommittee discussed a new law that would explicitly give companies ownership over any materials they extract from an asteroid.

Still, experts disagree over whether this would be compatible with international law — and whether it'd actually legalize asteroid mining. Here's a breakdown of the issue.

On September 26 2014 09:01 ShoCkeyy wrote:
Way to go US, a new way to boost it's own economy and completely by pass international law. I for one don't mind it, the more we can evolve to a space race, the better...

On September 26 2014 12:54 Millitron wrote:
If the US up and decided the Moon was ours, who could say otherwise?

On the heels of awarding groundbreaking contracts to U.S. commercial space companies to ferry American astronauts to the International Space Station, NASA has released a request for proposals (RFP) for the next round of contracts for private-sector companies to deliver experiments and supplies to the orbiting laboratory.

Under the Commercial Resupply Services 2 RFP, NASA intends to award contracts with one or more companies for six or more flights per contract. As with current resupply flights, these missions would launch from U.S. spaceports, and the contracted services would include logistical and research cargo delivery and return to and from the space station through fiscal year 2020, with the option to purchase additional launches through 2024.

Earlier this year, the Obama Administration decided to extend the life of the International Space Station until at least 2024.

On September 26 2014 12:54 Millitron wrote:
The UN has never really been able to stop anyone from doing anything. If some government says a celestial body is theirs, the UN is the last opponent said government would worry about.

If the US up and decided the Moon was ours, who could say otherwise?

On September 29 2014 13:24 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
For almost two years, an unmanned space plane bearing a remarkable resemblance to NASA’s space shuttle has circled the Earth, performing a top-secret mission. It’s called the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle — but that’s pretty much all we know for certain.

Officially, the only role the Pentagon acknowledges is that the space plane is used to conduct experiments on new technologies. Theories about its mission have ranged from an orbiting space bomber to an anti-satellite weapon.

The truth, however, is likely much more obvious: According to intelligence experts and satellite watchers who have closely monitored its orbit, the X-37B is being used to carry secret satellites and classified sensors into space — a little-known role once played by NASA’s new retired space shuttle.

For a decade between the 1980s and early 1990s, NASA’s space shuttle was used for classified military missions, which involved ferrying military payloads into space. But the shuttle’s military role rested on an uneasy alliance between NASA and the Pentagon. Even before the 1986 Challenger disaster, which killed all seven crewmembers, the Pentagon had grown frustrated with NASA’s delays.

Now, with the X-37B, the Pentagon no longer has to rely on NASA, or humans.

The X-37B resembles the shuttle, or at least a shrunken down version of the shuttle. Like the space shuttle, the X-37B is boosted into orbit by an external rocket, but lands like an aircraft on a conventional runway. But the X-37B is just shy of 10 feet tall and slightly less than 30 feet long.

Its cargo bay, often compared to the size of a pickup truck bed, is just big enough to carry a small satellite. Once in orbit, the X-37B deploys a foldable solar array, which is believed to power the sensors in its cargo bay.

“It’s just an updated version of the space shuttle type of activities in space,” insisted one senior Air Force official in 2010, the year of the first launch, when rampant speculation about the secret project prompted some to question whether it was possibly a space bomber.

Source

On September 30 2014 00:22 oBlade wrote:
Can you elaborate? I don't see the connection.