The planned February 7 launch of Space Shuttle Endeavour on its STS-130 mission may slip due to a problem with a hose in the Tranquility module that the shuttle is taking up to the International Space Station (ISS).

NASA reported that “a high-pressure ammonia jumper hose assembly failed during a prelaunch test Thursday.” Four such hoses are to be connected to the ISS cooling system once the module is in orbit. NASA says that engineers are analyzing the situation and will know in “several days” whether the launch date will be affected.

Tranquility — formerly known as “Node 3” — will provide additional living space for the crew. It is perhaps best known for the naming contest NASA held for it. Comedian Stephen Colbert rallied his fans to send in his name and he won, but NASA decided to name it Tranquillity instead. As a consolation prize, the agency named a treadmill after Colbert and sent astronaut Sunita Williams to deliver the news on Colbert’s Comedy Central program, Colbert Nation. The Combined Operational Load-Bearing External Resistance Treadmill (COLBERT) was installed aboard the ISS last year.

The following events may be of interest in the coming week. For further information, see our calendar on the right menu or click on the links below. Note that times, dates and witnesses for congressional hearings are subject to change. Check the committee’s website for up-to-date information.

In Washington, DC

Thursday, January 14

• Seminar on Human Spaceflight and the Future of Space Science sponsored by the Space Policy Institute and the Universities Space Research Association. Madison Hotel, 1:00-5:30 pm.

Friday, January 15

• Space Transportation Association breakfast meeting with Jeff Hanley, manager of NASA’s Project Constellation. 7:30-9:00 am. To register, contact Rich Coleman at STA (see our calendar for an email link).

In Palo Alto, CA, Friday, January 15

• House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on “The Impact of Export Controls on National Security, Science and Technological Leadership,” Stanford University, 11:00 am PST (2:00 pm EST)

In Irvine, CA, during the week

• Three panels of the NRC’s Decadal Survey on Biological and Physical Sciences in Space will meet at the NRC’s Beckman Center during the week. Some or all of the sessions may be closed. Our calendar on the right menu has links to NRC websites with further information.
  • Panel on Integrative and Translational Research for the Human System, January 12-14
  • Applied Physical Sciences Panel, January 13-14
  • Plant and Microbial Biology Panel, January 13-15

President Obama has only kept seven of the 19 space-related promises he made during his campaign according to Politifact’s “Truth-O-Meter.” Eight others are “in the works” and four are “stalled.” Politifact is a project of the St. Petersburg Times that tracks whether politicians are good to their word. As the President’s first year in office comes to a close, Politifact has finished rating his performance on promises about the space program to date. Here’s the scorecard. For more details and the reasoning behind the ratings, see the Politifact website.

Promises Kept (7)

• Add another space shuttle flight
• Use the private sector to improve space flight
• Partner to enhance the potential of the International Space Station
• Use the International Space Station for fundamental biological and physical research
• Explore whether International Space Station can operate after 2016
• Work toward deploying a global climate change research and monitoring system
• Enhance earth mapping

Promises “In the Works” (8)

• Speed up development of the next-generation space vehicle
• Work with international allies on Space Station
• Support human mission to moon by 2020
• Improve climate change data records
• Increase commercialization benefits from space technology
• Support commercial access to space
• Revise regulations for export of aerospace technology
• Establish school programs to highlight space and science achievements

Promises Stalled (4)

• Seek code of conduct for space-faring nations
• Re-establish the National Aeronautics and Space Council
• Conduct robust research and development on future space missions
• Increase spending to prepare for longer space missions

UPDATE: Gen. Bolden’s written speech is now available on NASA’s website and his actual presentation is on YouTube. Here is the paragraph that promises not to rob science to pay human space flight:

“I’m sure all of you would like to know what direction President Obama will choose for the future of our space program. All I can say for now is that NASA is working closely with the Executive Office of the President in helping him determine the best path forward. What I know, however, is that science is important to the President, important to NASA, and crucial to whatever way forward we are to follow. I can make you this commitment: the future of human spaceflight will not be paid for out of the hide of our science budget.”

ORIGINAL STORY:

NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden told the American Astronomical Society (AAS) today that NASA’s human space flight program– whatever it turns out to be — will not be paid for by cutting NASA’s science programs according to Science magazine’s blog, ScienceInsider. Bolden spoke at the AAS annual meeting being held this week in Washington, D.C. While he reportedly provided no specifics about the ongoing debate about the future of the human space flight program, ScienceInsider quoted him as saying that “I don’t think this president wants to be the president who presided over the end of (American) space flight.” As he has in most of his speeches, Bolden also highlighted the need to focus on science education.

The National Research Council’s (NRC’s) three “Decadal Surveys” appear to be on track for release this year or next. Astro2010 is expected to be released this summer, Biological and Physical Sciences in Space at the end of the year, and Planetary Sciences in spring 2011.

NRC Decadal Surveys prioritize scientific research in specific disciplines and recommend missions and related activities to be conducted within a budget envelope provided by the agencies that sponsor the studies. The studies are conducted by committees of experts appointed by the NRC who work over a period of about two years to reach consensus on the most compelling areas of science to pursue. The recommendations are followed pretty faithfully by the agencies requesting the studies. For more information on the history and purpose of Decadal Surveys, see “National Research Council” on our left menu.

• Astro2010 (astronomy and astrophysics). Chaired by Roger Blandford (Stanford), this study appears to be on track for release this summer. It is sponsored by NASA, NSF, and the Department of Energy’s Office of High Energy Physics. All of the committee’s panels have completed their meetings. Two closed meetings of the overarching “survey committee” – which writes the report – are scheduled for January 25-27 and February 28-March 2 at the NRC’s Beckman Center in Irvine, CA. As Dr. Blandford said in what he predicted would be his last “bulletin” to the community in September 2009:

… the deliberations of the panels and the survey committee remain confidential under the usual operational procedures of the NRC. With that in mind it seems unlikely further community bulletins will be necessary until the survey reports are published — scheduled for next summer. Once again, I must ask for your forbearance to be patient and respect this process. While I am sure many of us serving on various committees would like to tell you more about what is going on behind the scenes, the NRC process precludes us from doing so.

• Biological and Physical Sciences in Space. Co-chaired by Betsy Cantwell (Oak Ridge National Laboratory) and Wendy Kohrt (University of Colorado, Denver), the “microgravity” decadal appears to be on track for release at the end of the year. Sponsored by NASA, it is looking at research that needs to be conducted in microgravity (e.g., on the International Space Station) as well as partial gravity (e.g., on the lunar surface).

  In addition to meetings of the steering committee and seven panels, the committee has been holding “town hall” meetings to obtain input from a broad spectrum of researchers in these fields. The fourth and last will be held on January 6, 2010 in conjunction with the AIAA’s Aerospace Sciences meeting in Orlando, FL. Most of the panels will meet in person or via teleconference during January (see our calendar on the right menu for more details). The steering committee will meet from February 15-17 and March 31-April 2 at the NRC’s Beckman Center in Irvine, CA, probably in closed session.

• Planetary Sciences. Steve Squyres (Cornell) is chair of this third Decadal Survey, which is expected to be released in spring 2011. Dr. Squyres provides updates to the planetary sciences community, most recently on December 1 where he announced that the Aerospace Corporation had been selected to perform the Independent Cost Estimates (ICEs) now required for Decadal Surveys that recommend spacecraft missions. (Aerospace also is conducting the ICEs for Astro2010.)

  Representatives of each of the five panels provided updates on their activities at the December 2009 American Geophysical Union (AGU) meeting in San Francisco. The Powerpoint slides from three of the five panels are available at SpacePolicyOnline.com (the others will be added when they become available). The panels will continue to meet through the spring, as will the steering committee. The meetings are listed on our calendar on the right menu and at the NRC’s website. The Planetary Sciences Decadal Survey is sponsored by NASA and NSF.

NRC reports are subject to extensive, confidential, external peer review after they are drafted by the relevant study committee, meaning that the draft report must be completed many months before a report is finally released. It is always difficult to guess when a report will be released.

The NRC’s Report Review Committee (RRC) is the only entity that approves a report for release, not the committee writing it. Composed of members of the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine, the RRC only signs off when it is satisfied the committee has produced a report worthy of the NRC imprimatur. Many find the NRC review process frustrating – especially since it takes place behind closed doors and people want to know what the report will say – but it is arguably one of the keys to the NRC’s reputation for excellence.