Author: Marcia Smith

NASA Media Teleconference Today on Changes to ISS Launch Schedule

NASA Media Teleconference Today on Changes to ISS Launch Schedule

NASA will hold a media teleconference at 2:00 pm Central Time (3:00 pm ET) this afternoon to discuss changes to the International Space Station (ISS) schedule.

NASA says the teleconference at Johnson Space Center will discuss “progress toward an updated schedule.”   The next crew launch to the ISS has been delayed because the Russian Soyuz spacecraft that was to take the crew into space was damaged during testing and is unusable.  Russia will provide a replacement spacecraft, but the launch will be delayed from March 30 until the end of April or middle of May.

Meanwhile, the next test launch of the SpaceX Dragon spacecraft and its Falcon 9 launch vehicle already had been delayed because more work was needed.  That test is intended to demostrate Dragon’s ability to berth with the ISS as part of SpaceX’s effort to provide earth-to-ISS cargo services for NASA.

The teleconference will be streamed live at http://www.nasa.gov/newsaudio.

Suffredini: Space Station Launch Delays Will Have Little Impact on Overall Operations-Correction

Suffredini: Space Station Launch Delays Will Have Little Impact on Overall Operations-Correction

Correction:  An earlier verison of this posting misspelled Mr. Suffredini’s name as Sufferdini.

NASA International Space Station (ISS) program manager Mike Suffredini said today that although the launch of the next crew to the ISS will be delayed and other aspects of the schedule juggled, overall there will be virtually no impact on ISS operations.

The next crew was supposed to be launched to ISS on March 30.   Last week, however, their Soyuz descent capsule was badly damaged in a testing accident.  Russia has decided to use an entirely different Soyuz module rather than trying to replace just the descent part of it and is pulling up the next Soyuz that already is in manufacturing.   That will delay the launch until May 15.

Consequently, the ISS partners are making modest changes to the crew rotation schedule that will also impact when the next automated Russian cargo spacecraft, Progress, is launched.   ISS crews rotate on a roughly six month schedule, with three astronauts ferried to and from ISS on a single Soyuz spacecraft.  With a regular crew complement of six, that means four Soyuz spacecraft are docking with and undocking from the ISS every year.  Added to that are the automated cargo spacecraft — Russia’s Progress, which are launched between four and six times a year, plus Europe’s ATV and Japan’s HTV, each about once a year.   Thus, ISS is a traffic hub, with complicating factors such as sun angles dictating when certain launch and docking operations occur.

Suffredini played down the idea that the changes due to the Soyuz testing failure problem would have any long term impact on ISS operations and the scientific research the crews are conducting.   What affects scientific research is the number of crew aboard.   A hiccup last year because of a Russian launch failure (of a Progress cargo spacecraft in August) meant only three instead of six crew members were aboard for longer than expected, reducing scientific output.   Now that the six-person complement has been restored, astronauts are working hard to make up the difference so the goal of an average of 35 hours per week over the course of an “expedition” is maintained.   Right now, the astronauts are spending more than that on science to make up for the lost time last fall.

He also expressed confidence in the part of the Russian space program that produces the Soyuz and Progress spacecraft and their launch vehicles.   In response to a question from a reporter about other failures, such as the Phobos-Grunt Mars mission, Sufferdini said that was outside his area of expertise.   He stressed that he is confident of the Russian company, Energia, that manufactures the spacecraft for the ISS program and of its ability to investigate and remedy failures when they occur.

On a separate but related issue, he also talked about the upcoming launch of SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft to ISS.   The next test launch of Dragon and its Falcon 9 launch vehicle recently slipped from February 7 to March 20.  It will demonstrate the ability of Dragon to berth with ISS.   Dragon is designed to be used as a cargo spacecraft for ISS and NASA has Space Act Agreements with SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corp. to help them develop “commercial cargo” systems.  They were supposed to be operational by this year, as NASA’s contract with Russia to take cargo to the ISS runs out.  (Its contract to take crews to and from ISS is separate.)

Suffredini expressed no surprise that the SpaceX test launch slipped to March 20 and said that his personal belief is that it will slip to the first week in April while stressing that was not a firm statement, just his expectation based on years of experience.    Delaying until early April is not a problem in his view.    The key is to avoid a conflict with the next Progress launch and docking in mid-April.  He said that all the ISS partners, not only Russia, must agree to the SpaceX test berthing and they had just had a meeting in which they all said they were “comfortable” with the plan.

He added that because of the Russian cargo spacecraft failure last fall,  Russia owes NASA a certain amount of cargo capacity to the ISS.  If the U.S. commercial cargo efforts of SpaceX and Orbital are delayed, that should buy NASA some time into the early part of 2013.

 

NRC Prioritizes 16 Technologies for NASA Development, Calls Again for Pu-238 Restart

NRC Prioritizes 16 Technologies for NASA Development, Calls Again for Pu-238 Restart

The National Research Council (NRC) released the final report from its committee that has been reviewing NASA’s technology roadmaps for the past year.  The roadmaps were developed by NASA’s Office of Chief Technologist (OCT), then headed by Bobby Braun.  Braun returned to Georgia Tech shortly after the NRC committee released an interim report last fall.  This final report identifies 16 high priority technologies for NASA investment over the next five years.

The technology priorities in the report are not tied to specific NASA missions, but instead to one of three “technology objectives” — extend and sustain human activities beyond low Earth orbit, explore the evolution of the solar system and the potential for life elsewhere, and expand our understanding of Earth and the universe in which we live.   The NRC committee stressed that the “objectives are not independent, and more than one objective may be addressed by a single mission….”

Taking into account the constrained budget environment NASA faces in the years ahead, the committee selected a “short list” of 16 technologies that need investment in the next five years.   (The table in the report showing the 16 technologies is arranged by the three technology objectives.  Some technologies appear under more than one objective, however, so there are 16 rather than 23 as a quick reading might infer.)  The committee believes the 16 could be “reasonably accommodated within the most likely expected funding level available for technology development by OCT (in the range of $500 million to $1 billion annually).”  The 16 are:

  • Radiation Mitigation for Human Spaceflight
  • Long-Duration Crew Health
  • ECLSS
  • GN&C
  • (Nuclear) Thermal Propulsion
  • Lightweight and Multifunctional Materials and Structures
  • Fission Power Generation
  • EDL TPS
  • Solar Power Generation (Photovoltaic and Thermal)
  • Electric Propulsion
  • In-Situ Instruments and Sensors
  • Extreme Terrain Mobility
  • Optical Systems (Instruments and Sensors)
  • High Contrast Imaging and Spectroscopy Technologies
  • Detectors and Focal Planes
  • Active Thermal Control of Cryogenic Systems

The committee identified two technologies that it considered to be at a “tipping point” where a relatively small investment could produce a large payoff in readiness:  Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generators (ASRG) and On-Orbit Cryogenic Storage and Transfer.

ASRGs require less plutonium-238 (Pu-238) than today’s radioistope power systems, but still require some, and the committee emphasized that restarting Pu-238 production is still “urgently needed.”  The NRC already highlighted the need for restarting Pu-238 production in two earlier reports — one specifically addressing the Pu-238 issue in 2009 and the planetary science decadal survey published in 2011.   Congress has provided NASA with its half of the funding needed to restart production, but the other half is in the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) budget and DOE’s appropriators remain unconvinced that DOE should pay any of those costs.  DOE owns the facilities where the production would take place, but it is NASA that needs the Pu-238. 

Phobos-Grunt Failure: Cosmic Rays or Counterfeit Chips?

Phobos-Grunt Failure: Cosmic Rays or Counterfeit Chips?

The Russian media have been reporting today on their interpretation of the results of the investigation into the failure of the Phobos-Grunt (Phobos-soil) mission.   Itar-Tass, the official news service of the Russian government, says it was a computer problem, but was the real culprit cosmic rays or counterfeit computer chips?

Itar-Tass reported that the computer system did a double re-start, as explained yesterday on RussianSpaceWeb.com.  The Itar-Tass story says the double-restart caused the spacecraft to go into a standby mode and was caused by the “local influence of heavy charged particles” or because the computer chips “may have been counterfeit.”   Sticking to the charged-particle explanation,  Itar-Tass goes on to say that the institute that built the spacecraft, NPO Lavochkin, should have taken these particles — cosmic rays — into account in designing the system, and Lavochkin officials were “administratively punished” as a result.  Another Itar-Tass story blamed computer programmers.

Another important Russian media outlet, RIA Novosti, added  that counterfeit computer chips  “may have been imported” and were to blame.  But it goes on to say that the commission that investigated the failure “ruled out any ‘external or foreign influence”” as the reason for the failure.  Some Russian officials had blamed a U.S. radar in the Marshall Islands for inadvertently damaging the spacecraft as it flew overhead.

Russian space agency director Vladimir Popovkin is looking towards the future, not the past.  He told RIA Novosti that Russia might build a replacement for Phobos-Grunt if the European Space Agency decides not to include Russia in its upcoming Mars mission, ExoMars.

 

Russian Officials Confirm Delay in Next ISS Crew Launch

Russian Officials Confirm Delay in Next ISS Crew Launch

Russian space officials confirmed today that the next launch of a Soyuz spacecraft to the International Space Station (ISS) will be delayed until the end of April or mid-May.   The delay is due to a testing failure of the Soyuz descent module last week.

Russian space agency (Roscosmos) director Vladimir Popovkin said the launch would be postponed until the end of April.  The mission, Soyuz TMA-04M, was supposed to be launched March 30.   Alexei Krasnov, the head of human spaceflight programs at Roscosmos, told RIA Novosti that the launch would be delayed 30-45 days, or possibly until mid-May, and the exact date would be established after consultation with NASA.

The ISS is a partnership among the United States, Russia, Japan, Canada and several European countries, with NASA and Roscosmos holding the key roles in ISS operations.

The three crew-members who will be launched on this mission are Russians Gennady Padalka and Sergei Revin and NASA’s Joseph Acaba.

According to RussianSpaceWeb.com, the Soyuz descent capsule was subjected to higher pressures than expected during a test last week and a weld ruptured making the capsule unusable.

NRC Lukewarm About NASA's Proposed Space Radiation Cancer Risk Model

NRC Lukewarm About NASA's Proposed Space Radiation Cancer Risk Model

The National Research Council (NRC) issued a report today evaluating changes NASA is proposing to make on how it estimates the risk that astronauts could develop cancer because of exposure to radiation in space.   The report concluded that the proposed changes are better than the current model NASA is using, but still needs improvements.

The study committee, chaired by R. Julian Preston of the Environmental Protection Agency, assessed changes NASA is proposing to its current model for estimating the risk of radiation-induced cancer in astronauts.   The existing model was most recently updated in 2005.  Last year NASA proposed changes based on new findings from a number of sources. 

Overall, the NRC committee concluded that the proposed changes represent the state-of-the-art, but  “There remains a need for additional data to be developed to enhance the current approach and to reduce uncertainty in the model.”

The committee complained that “NASA’s proposed model and associated uncertainties are complex” and “require a very clear and precise set of descriptions,” that were not provided in NASA’s published report.  Thus, the committee found it difficult to review, and while it asked NASA for clarifications throughout its deliberations, not all of the ambiguities were resolved.

“The overall evaluation of the committee is that NASA’s proposed model represents a definite improvement over the previous one. However, the committee urges that the necessary improvements identified by the specific recommendations provided [herein] be incorporated before the proposed integrated model is implemented.”

 

 

 

 

Zak: Phobos-Grunt Doomed by Computer Design, Testing Flaws, Not U.S. Radar

Zak: Phobos-Grunt Doomed by Computer Design, Testing Flaws, Not U.S. Radar

The Russian commission investigating the failure of the Phobos-Grunt (Phobos-soil) Mars mission concluded that computer design error and insufficient testing were the reasons the probe never left Earth orbit, not interference from a U.S. radar according to Anatoly Zak at RussianSpaceWeb.com.  Zak summarizes the commission’s findings on his website today.   Russia’s news agency Itar-Tass reported over the weekend that the findings would  be presented to Russia’s space agency director yesterday and made public this week, but neither it nor other leading Russian media sources have published anything yet today.

Zak reports on his website that the “most probable cause … was a simultaneous robooting of two operational processors in the main computer….  The computers could crash as a result of errors in their software or as a result of some external reasons, such as electromagnetic incompatibility, industry sources said.  The mentioning of this last point … apparently became a basis for numerous reports in the Russian press blaming the failure on various improbable external reasons, such as foreign radars or solar flares.”

“Foreign radars” refers to assertions by some Russian officials that a U.S. radar based in the Marshall Islands inadvertently damaged Phobos-Grunt while it was being used to study asteroids and the orbiting spacecraft passed through the beam.  Yuri Koptev, former head of the Russian space agency who chaired the commission investigating the Phobos-Grunt failure, said that his group would conduct an experiment to prove or disprove the theory.

Zak reports that tests were conducted by NPO Lavochkin, which manufactured Phobos-Grunt, to determine if the computer could have been affected “by interference from the probe’s own power supply or from unlikely external sources, such as a narrow powerful beam of a ground radar.  During these tests, the computer withstood all simulations without any problems.”

Therefore, “[w]ith all external failure scenarios effectively debunked, the most probable cause of the failure was narrowed down to the lack of integrated testing” of the computer, Zak states.

Events of Interest: Week of Jan. 30-Feb. 3, 2012

Events of Interest: Week of Jan. 30-Feb. 3, 2012

The following events may be of interest in the coming week.

During the Week:   The House and Senate are in session this week.   The World Radiocommunications Conference continues in Geneva, Switzerland.   The conclusions of the Russian commission that investigated the Phobos-Grunt failure are supposed to be made public this week.

Tuesday, January 31

Wednesday, February 1

  • Screening of film Article of Hope, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 10:00 am EST

Wednesday-Friday, February 1-3

Friday, February 3

More Russian Space Woes Likely to Delay Next ISS Crew Launch, Commercial Proton Launches

More Russian Space Woes Likely to Delay Next ISS Crew Launch, Commercial Proton Launches

Problems in Russia’s aerospace sector are still hampering its space program on which the United States and global commercial satellite companies increasingly rely.   The next Soyuz spacecraft slated to launch a crew to the International Space Station (ISS) apparently was damaged beyond repair during recent testing, while commercial Proton launches are on hold because of technical issues.

Last year, Russia experienced five launch failures, including a Soyuz rocket that was intended to send a Progress cargo spacecraft to the ISS.   A multi-week delay in launching a three-person ISS crew resulted as Russian experts worked to ensure that a very similar Soyuz rocket was indeed safe to take people into space.

The spacecraft that carries crew members is also named Soyuz, and on Friday Russia announced that the Soyuz spacecraft assigned for the next crew launch, expected on March 30, failed a test.  Anatoly Zak at RussianSpaceWeb.com reports today that Russian industry sources and the website Novosti Kosmonavtiki (Space News) are indicating that during testing the spacecraft was pressurized “up to 3 atmospheres, instead of the nominal 1.3-1.5 atmospheres….The bad quality of materials in the spacecraft…had also been suspected.  Another report surfaced on January 29, 2012 … that a welding line on the descent module had broken as a result of the internal pressure” and the “descent module was damaged beyond repair.”  Zak estimates that the next launch might be delayed until the end of April at the earliest if a decision is made to use a replacement descent module.

At the same time, a Proton rocket had to be rolled back from the launch pad days before launch for a second time.   Intended to launch a commercial communications satellite, SES-4 (or NSS-14), the launch was supposed to take place in December.  A day before before launch, a problem was detected that required the rocket to be removed from the pad for repair.  The launch was rescheduled for January 28, but once again had to be scrubbed.  This time it reportedly is a problem with a transit cable in the Proton’s first stage that will require partial disassembly of the vehicle per RussianSpaceWeb.com and the rocket again must be rolled back from the pad.  A new date for the SES-4 launch has not been announced. The date of the next commercial Proton launch, of a Sirius radio broadcasting satellite, is also in doubt.

Until recently, Russian rockets and spacecraft had a reputation for reliability.  The number of problems now surfacing raises serious questions about the health of the Russian aerospace industry just when the United States has become completely reliant on Russia to keep the ISS crewed.  The U.S. government’s decision to terminate the space shuttle last year with no U.S. system to replace it means that NASA must purchase services from Russia for crew transportation to and from the ISS and for providing a “lifeboat” capability so crews can escape in an emergency.   The commercial satellite sector also relies heavily on Russia’s commercial launch services.  In 2010, Russia conducted 13 commercial launches, compared to six for Europe’s Arianespace and four for the United States, according to The Space Report 2011.

Last month, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin appointed Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin to investigate the problems in the Russian space industry and determine solutions.  Russia’s space agency, Roscosmos, was due to report to Rogozin at the end of last week on the space industry’s challenges, but no stories have appeared in the Russia media yet to indicate that such meetings took place.   The commission investigating the failure of the Phobos-Grunt Mars mission also was supposed to issue its conclusions last week.  On January 26, Russia’s news agency Itar-Tass said the report was completed and would be submitted to Roscosmos director Vladimir Popovkin today (Sunday) and made public this coming week.

NRC Welcomes Suggestions for Committee Members-But Hurry

NRC Welcomes Suggestions for Committee Members-But Hurry

The National Research Council’s (NRC) Space Studies Board welcomes recommendations for members of three standing committees that are being formed, but suggestions must be submitted by close of business tomorrow, January 30, 2012.

In addition to the ad hoc study committees that the NRC creates to provide advice on particular topics, permanent standing committees also may be formed on broader subjects that provide a mechanism for ongoing interaction with members of various segments of the science and engineering communities.

The Space Studies Board (SBB) is currently forming or re-forming three of its standing committees:  the Committee on Astronomy and Astrophysics (joint with the NRC’s Board on Physics and Astronomy); the Committee on Astrobiology and Planetary Science (a merger of the SSB’s former Committee on the Origins and Evolution of Life and the Committee on Planetary and Lunar Exploration); and the Committee on Earth Sciences and Applications from Space (formerly the Committee on Earth Science).

More information on the role of standing committees at the NRC and how to send in your suggestions are on the SSB website under “Other News.”