Category: Civil

NASA and USGS Planning for "Sustained and Sustainable" Landsat Program

NASA and USGS Planning for "Sustained and Sustainable" Landsat Program

As the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) took command of Landsat 8 yesterday, USGS and NASA officials stressed that planning already is underway for follow-on satellites.   NASA’s Mike Freilich vowed that the agencies will pursue a “sustained and sustainable” program for obtaining Landsat-like data for decades to come.

Landsat 8 is the most recent in a 40-year series of satellites collecting medium-resolution imagery of the Earth’s surface.  The program has had a tortuous path since the first five were built and launched by NASA in the 1970s and early 1980s.   An effort to privatize Landsat in the Carter and Reagan Administrations failed as did the launch of Landsat 6.  The program was brought back into the government under the joint auspices of NASA and DOD, but DOD withdrew, leaving NASA to pay for Landsat 7 and Landsat 8 (formerly the Landsat Data Continuity Mission),   Meanwhile, USGS took responsibility for operating the satellites once in orbit in addition to its long-standing role in disseminating the data from the Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center in Sioux Falls, SD.  In 2008, the decision was made to make the data available for free, dramatically increasing its utilization.

The Obama Administration wanted USGS to take over responsibility for the Landsat program in its entirety, including funding future satellites, but Congress said no because it was concerned the costs would overwhelm other USGS priorities.   In the FY2014 budget request, the Administration is proposing that NASA take the lead in ensuring there is no break in the 40-year (to date) continuous data set provided by Landsat satellites.

At a press conference at the EROS center yesterday marking USGS assuming control of Landsat 8, USGS Associate Director for Climate and Land Use Matt Larsen said the FY2014 budget request demonstrates that the Obama Administration “fully supports an ongoing, sustained Landsat program.”    

Freilich went further, emphasizing that the Administration is “committed to a sustained and sustainable global land imaging program” that will “draw upon the ideas and approaches that the NASA and USGS team, singular, working together have developed… as we engineer over the next several months the plan for this sustainable, multi-decadal program.”   Future satellites will have “at least the capabilities that Landsat 7 and now Landsat 8 are providing,” he added.

Acting USGS Director Suzette Kimball noted that it is a significant change to move from a program that has existed one satellite at a time to a “programmatic focus” where they are working not just on Landsat 9, but “to continue this decades into the future.”

Freilich said NASA and USGS already have held discussions and identified people to serve on a steering committee to determine how to proceed with the future of the program.

Landsat 8 was launched in February.  It has been undergoing an on-orbit checkout phase under NASA’s direction for the past three months, but yesterday moved into its operational phase with USGS now in control.

Landsat 8 Goes Operational Today; Press Conference This Afternoon

Landsat 8 Goes Operational Today; Press Conference This Afternoon

NOTE:  USGS has clarified that the press conference is at 1:30 pm Central Time (2:30 pm Eastern).

Landsat 8 officially becomes operational today as the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) takes over operations from NASA.  The satellite was launched in February.

NASA launched the first Landsat (then called ERTS-1) in 1972.   Subsequent satellites have provided a continuous stream of land remote sensing imagery that is maintained at and distributed for free by the USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center in Sioux Falls, SD.   

A press conference is scheduled there today at 1:30 pm Central Time (2:30 pm Eastern) to mark the handover of operations.  Participants include:

  • Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD)
  • Mike Freilich, NASA Earth Science Division Director
  • Suzette Kimball, USGS Acting Director
  • Colleen Hartman, NASA-Goddard Deputy Director for Science, Operations and Performance Management
  • Frank Kelly, EROS Director

NASA referred to the satellite prior to launch as the Landsat Data Continuity Mission (LDCM), but its official name now is Landsat 8.  NASA built and launched Landsat 8; USGS only operates it, as well as Landsat 7, which was launched in 1999 and is still functioning although a line scan error problem means a loss of 22 percent of data on each image.

The Obama Administration wanted to transfer the entire Landsat program to USGS, but Congress said no because of concern that the funding requirements would overwhelm other USGS priorities.  In the FY2014 budget request, the Administration is proposing that NASA take the lead in ensuring continuity of this type of data.

GOES-13 Reactivated for Troubleshooting, but GOES-14 Still on Duty

GOES-13 Reactivated for Troubleshooting, but GOES-14 Still on Duty

NOAA announced today that it has reactivated GOES-13, but only to allow engineers to troubleshoot what happened to the spacecraft on May 22.   GOES-14, an on-orbit spare, will continue to fill in for GOES-13 in an operational capacity.

Three Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES) are in geostationary orbit, a particularly good vantage point for studying the development of tropical storms.  Two are maintained in an operational mode — designated GOES-East and GOES-West for the geographical areas of the United States and nearby waters they observe — while the third is a spare, ready to be moved into position if either fails.  GOES-13 is in the GOES-East position (75 degrees West longitude), GOES-15 in the GOES-West position (135 degrees W), and GOES-14 is the spare, positioned in between them at 105 degrees W.

On May 22, GOES-13 stopped producing imaging and sounding data.  NOAA put the satellite into storage mode and activated GOES-14.  The decision to reactivate GOES-13 now is to allow engineers to analyze spacecraft and instrument data to determine the source of a change in motion that caused the instruments to automatically shut down.  If the spacecraft cannot be recovered, NOAA will move GOES-14 into the 75 degrees W orbital slot to ensure coverage of severe weather that could impact the East Coast.

This is the second GOES-13 service interruption.  GOES-14 took over temporarily for GOES-13 last September as well, but engineers were able to get GOES-13 working again after several weeks.

White House to Explain New STEM Strategy to House Committee Next Week

White House to Explain New STEM Strategy to House Committee Next Week

The Obama Administration’s new STEM education strategy, which would move many NASA education activities to other agencies, will be explained to the House Science, Space and Technology Committee next week.

The White House proposal, included in its FY2014 budget request, to restructure the government’s Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education programs is very controversial in the space community.    Under the Obama plan, STEM programs in 13 agencies would be consolidated into three: the National Science Foundation (NSF) for activities aimed at undergraduate and graduate students, the Department of Education for K-12 students, and the Smithsonian Institution for informal and in-situ education.

Many of NASA’s STEM and Education and Public Outreach (EPO) activities would be reassigned to one of those agencies.  NASA would retain control of four programs aimed at special groups (MUREP, Space Grant, EPSCoR, and GLOBE), but other programs would be dispersed to the other agencies or NASA offices would have to compete for any funds that remain in NASA’s Office of Education.   In NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD), 1 percent of each project’s cost must be set aside for EPO activities related to that project, but under the new plan, that funding would no longer be under SMD control.   Many in the space science community argue that they would not be willing to volunteer their time to work with students through the EPO efforts if they are managed by the Department of Education, for example, since that department lacks expertise in space science specifically and STEM generally.

The hearing on June 4, 2013 at 2:00 pm ET in 2318 Rayburn features three witnesses to explain the proposal:

  • John Holdren, Director, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and Science Adviser to the President
  • Joan Ferrini-Mundy, Assistant Director, Directorate for Education and Human Resources, NSF
  • Leland Melvin, Associate Administrator for Education, NASA
Space Policy Events for the Weeks of May 27-June 7, 2013 – update

Space Policy Events for the Weeks of May 27-June 7, 2013 – update

UPDATE, May 27:  Planetary Resources announced a second event on Wednesday, and NASA will hold a media telecon on Thursday on Curiosity’s radiation findings.

The following events may be of interest in the next two weeks.  Congress is in recess for the Memorial Day holiday this coming week (May 27-31), but will be back in action the week of June 3.

Tuesday, May 28

Wednesday, May 29

Wednesday-Friday, May 29-31

Thursday, May 30

Monday-Wednesday, June 3-5

Tuesday, June 4

Wednesday, June 5

 

 

NASA To Hold June 18 Public Forum on Asteroid Retrieval Mission

NASA To Hold June 18 Public Forum on Asteroid Retrieval Mission

NASA will hold a public forum in Washington, D.C. on June 18 to provide an update on its planning for the new Asteroid Retrieval Mission.  Although the announcement says the meeting will “encourage feedback and ideas from the global community and the public,” the half-day agenda is filled by briefings to the audience by NASA officials except for the final 10 minutes.

The meeting is from 9:15 am – 12:00 pm ET in the James E. Webb auditorium at NASA Headquarters and will be streamed live.  The announcement, which refers to it more generally as the “asteroid initiative,” shows the agenda as follows.  (The announcement is in the Federal Register that is dated May 28, but is available already electronically.)

9:15-9:30 Welcome–Deputy Administrator Garver
9:30-9:55 White House Perspective–Tom Kalil
9:55-10:15 Asteroid Initiative–Associate Administrator Lightfoot
10:15-10:35 Target Identification and Planetary Defense–Dr. John Grunsfeld
10:35-10:50 Mission–Technology Approach–Mike Gazarik
10:50-11:05 Mission–Human Exploration–William Gerstenmaier
11:05-11:20 Extensibility–Steve Stich
11:20-11:35 Partnership and Innovative Methods–Mason Peck
11:35-11:50 Summer Engagement Calendar–TBD

Anyone who wishes to attend must register in advance online at www.nasa.gov/asteroid (beginning May 28); seating is limited to 150 people.

GOES-14 Activated to Replace Failed GOES-13

GOES-14 Activated to Replace Failed GOES-13

The NOAA Satellite and Information Service posted a notice on its Facebook page this morning announcing that the GOES-14 satellite is now online to replace GOES-13, which failed on Tuesday.  Efforts continue to fix GOES-13.

GOES-13 failed last year and was temporarily replaced by GOES-14, an on-orbit spare that is in place for just such an eventuality.  NOAA uses two geostationary satellites, dubbed GOES-East and GOES-West because of their geographical positions, as part of its weather satellite system that also includes polar orbiting satellites.  NOAA posted imagery on Facebook of the May 20 devastating Oklahoma tornado taken by GOES-13 before the satellite failed.

NOAA strives to have spare satellites already in orbit ready to take over if one of its operational satellites fails.  GOES-13 was launched in 2006 and was itself a spare until it was placed into the GOES-East position in 2010.  GOES-14 was launched in 2009.   GOES-15 is the operational GOES-West satellite.   NOAA is developing a new generation of geostationary satellites, designated “GOES-R,” with the first launch scheduled for 2015.

NOAA engineers were able to restore GOES-13 to service last year, and GOES-14 returned to its spare status.   As of this morning, GOES-14 is back on duty while GOES-13 is in storage mode.

Little Love for Asteroid Retrieval Mission; Squyres Deeply Worried about SLS Launch Rate

Little Love for Asteroid Retrieval Mission; Squyres Deeply Worried about SLS Launch Rate

Only one of four witnesses at a congressional hearing Tuesday expressed enthusiasm for the Obama Administration’s new Asteroid Retrieval Mission (ARM).  No consensus emerged on an alternative, but ARM clearly faces an uphill battle.  Meanwhile, NASA Advisory Council Chair Steve Squyres expressed deep concern about the low expected launch rate of the Space Launch System (SLS) and implored Congress not to “pile more objectives onto NASA” unless it is prepared to provide adequate funding.

The May 21 hearing before the Space Subcommittee of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee featured four witnesses with different perspectives on the next steps in human spaceflight, even as they and the subcommittee members all seemed to agree on the eventual destination – Mars.

The debate is over the intermediate steps to get there.

Lou Friedman, Executive Director Emeritus of the Planetary Society and co-chair of the Keck Institute for Space Studies (KISS) report that proposed what morphed into ARM was the only advocate for that mission.  ARM is included in NASA’s FY2014 budget request and envisions sending a robotic spacecraft to capture an asteroid, redirect it into lunar orbit, and send astronauts there to study it.    Paul Spudis of the Lunar and Planetary Institute continued his quest for a human return to the surface of the Moon.  Cornell’s Steve Squyres, principal investigator for the Mars rovers Spirit and Opportunity and chair of the NASA Advisory Council, agreed with two parts of the ARM proposal – searching for Near Earth Asteroids and sending astronauts to cis-lunar space (between the Earth and the Moon) – but eschewed the idea of capturing an asteroid and bringing it into lunar orbit for a visit by astronauts.   Doug Cooke, a NASA veteran who retired in 2011 after heading NASA’s Exploration Systems Mission Directorate and is now a consultant, rued the lack of analysis and planning prior to announcing ARM and argued for development of a human exploration strategy that logically lays out the steps to Mars.

Subcommittee members on both sides of the aisle clearly are not convinced that ARM is the answer.   Subcommittee chairman Steve Palazzo (R-MS) said he is “not convinced this mission is the right way to go and that it may actually prove a detour for a Mars mission.”  Ranking member Donna Edwards (D-MD) avoided outright opposition to ARM, but stressed that she needs to understand how it, as opposed to alternatives like returning to the Moon, would contribute to the goal of sending humans to the surface of Mars.

Friedman made his case in favor of ARM primarily on the basis that it is a mission that can be done soon and exciting missions with near-term results are needed to keep the public interested in human spaceflight.  Spudis disagreed. He thinks the point is to demonstrate there is value for the money spent and “an extensible, reusable system, a spacefaring system that allows us to do all the things we want to do at various spots in space” is the ticket.  He would start with a return to the lunar surface and utilizing the resources there.  “What we really seek is public support, not necessarily excitement,” he argued.  Squyres insisted that what is needed to win public support is an “unwavering focus on Mars as the destination,” citing the thousands of people who witnessed the landing of the Curiosity rover at 2:00 am in Times Square as evidence of enthusiasm for exploring Mars.

NASA explains ARM as part of a strategy to unite its human spaceflight, space technology and science activities in a common undertaking.  NASA Science Mission Directorate head John Grunsfeld stated flatly at the recent Humans to Mars Summit that ARM is not a science-driven mission, however.  Friedman acknowledged that sentiment at the hearing, and emphasized that it is a human spaceflight mission, but there will be benefits in the areas of searching for Near Earth Asteroids and learning about asteroids for planetary protection purposes as well as for companies that want to mine them.

Cooke’s main point was that the United States needs a logical strategy for human exploration.  Although steps are underway that support the long term goal of sending humans to Mars – such as development of SLS and Orion and robotic probes like Curiosity – an overarching “strategy does not exist today.”  He listed several questions that need to be answered as part of creating that strategy, such as what geopolitical goals the United States wants to achieve, what is our long term vision for human space exploration, and how to collaborate with international partners.  He said ARM does not have a “recognizable connection” to a long term strategy, does not appear to be based on consultation with stakeholders or international partners, and “appears to be a very complex mission with the potential for growing more complex and more costly.”

Squyres similarly finds no connection between ARM and Mars exploration, adding that he does not see the need for landing on any surface – the Moon, an asteroid or one of the moons of Mars – as preparation for landing on Mars.   He believes the capabilities needed to go to Mars can be demonstrated in cis-lunar space and, given the performance capabilities of SLS and Orion, it is the “only significant destination beyond low Earth orbit that can be reached for the foreseeable future.”  He said that although there was no consensus among the witnesses as to all the steps to Mars, he believed they did agree that cis-lunar space should be next.

His emphatic message to the subcommittee was that Congress should not specify any other destination or timetable unless it is prepared to give NASA the needed funding.  NASA is “being asked to do too much with too little” and the situation is “chronic, severe and getting worse,” he asserted.  “I beg of you not to pile more objectives on NASA because they can’t even afford what they’re doing now.”

Another concern Squyres stressed is the low flight rate for the Space Launch System (SLS).  “I’m deeply worried,” he told Edwards, because no other human spaceflight system has had such a low anticipated launch rate.  The first SLS launch is expected in 2017, the second in 2021, and then once every two years thereafter.  SLS and the Orion spacecraft need to be adequately funded “to be proven out on a pace that really supports … a safe pathway” to cis-lunar space, Squyres insisted.   Cooke agreed.  The flight rate is driven “totally” by funding, he said, and “they definitely need more funding … starting with inflation.”  NASA’s budget is currently projected to be flat, with no adjustment for inflation, which erodes buying power as the years pass.

Hale: Logistics Key To Deep Space Human Exploration, and Commercial Space Is The Answer

Hale: Logistics Key To Deep Space Human Exploration, and Commercial Space Is The Answer

Former NASA space shuttle program manager Wayne Hale told the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Science and Space Thursday that it is difficult for his generation to change its “mental model” of the NASA-funded Apollo program as the way for humans to explore space.   The reality today, he stressed, is that the government and the commercial sector must team together and leverage each other’s capabilities because taxpayers are only willing to spend half-a-percent of the federal budget on NASA, not the 3-4 percent in the Apollo era.

Hale, currently the Director of Human Spaceflight for Special Aerospace Services, was responding to a question from Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) at a May 16 hearing on advancing partnerships in the business of space.  As the hearing came to a close, Nelson wanted to know why it is so hard to get people to understand that commercial space activities will “collaborate, supplement, enhance” NASA’s program to send humans beyond low Earth orbit (LEO).

Patti Grace Smith, former FAA Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation (AST) and now a consultant, agreed that people still associate space activities with NASA and not the private sector even though commercial space launches date back to the 1980s.   “Where we sit is what we know,” she said, and because NASA holds the reputation as “the premier space agency,” it has been challenging to get people to accept that commercial space can succeed.   That perception is changing, she added, with NASA’s new partnerships with the commercial sector and the successful flight of SpaceShipOne in 2004.

Whether the slowly changing paradigm will help win support for NASA’s FY2014 request of $831 million for the commercial crew program, however, is an open question as Nelson made clear. He said that he and Ranking Member Ted Cruz (R-TX) will be working on a new NASA authorization act this year and “in the past, it sure has been difficult to get people to recognize” the value and necessity of the commercial and government space sectors partnering together in human space exploration.

Many in Congress are determined to restore a U.S. capability for launching people into space by 2017, but have not provided NASA with the requested funds for its approach to achieving that goal – the commercial crew program.  The $831 million request is more than $300 million above what Congress provided for FY2013.  Finding that extra money will not be easy, especially since policy issues such as how many companies to support have not been settled and some influential Members remain highly skeptical of commercial crew overall.  The alternative would be using the Space Launch System and Orion spacecraft, but that system is oversized (and thus expensive) for ferrying crews to and from the International Space Station (ISS).

More generally, Hale connected the dots between today’s commercial crew and cargo efforts to support the ISS and the longer term future of human space exploration.   ISS itself is crucial for testing technologies needed for long duration spaceflight and ISS needs commercial cargo and commercial crew, he said.  For missions to the Moon and Mars, the key will be logistics, he continued, quoting Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf as saying “armchair generals study tactics, real generals study logistics.”  Lowering the cost of getting mass into LEO will be crucial to supplying logistics for long duration flights beyond LEO.  “Getting mass to [LEO] is halfway to anywhere in the universe.  And if we can supply equipment, fuel, even crews cheaply to [LEO] that has got to be a vital link in ensuring that whatever deep space” missions are mounted will be successful.  “Low cost transportation enables all of that.  That’s what we’re all about in the commercial space enterprises.”

Commercial Spaceflight Federation President Michael Lopez-Alegria was asked about the size of the market for suborbital and orbital commercial human space flight, or space tourism as it often is called.  He cited a 2012 report by The Tauri Group that the suborbital market could be $600 million over the next decade, but said there is no equivalent study of the orbital market.   He is convinced a sizeable market will develop, but could not say when:  “It’s hard to predict markets that don’t exist yet, but … all I can say, like the famous movie quote … ‘build it and they will come.’”

Lopez-Alegria, a former astronaut who made four trips to space, including commanding the ISS, argued strongly in favor of the commercial crew program as well as extending ISS operations to 2028.  Currently the United States and its ISS partners (Russia, Europe, Japan and Canada) have agreed to operate it only until 2020, though NASA believes it technically could remain operational through 2028, 30 years after the first module was launched.

Purdue University’s Steven Collicott testified about the research opportunities enabled by commercial suborbital vehicles, noting that Purdue has a down payment on a spot on a Virgin Galactic flight.   The university does not plan to fly a person, but “200 pounds of automated payload to advance high-tech Indiana industry.”   He also is building payloads to fly on suborbital systems offered by Armadillo, Blue Origin, Masten, and XCOR, as well as a high altitude balloon company, Near Space.  He believes these types of flight opportunities will encourage students to study Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM).

Smith also argued for extending the FAA’s authority to indemnify commercial space launch services companies against certain amounts of losses if there is an accident for at least 10 years, and for keeping AST within the FAA for the time being.

Prepared statements of the witnesses and a webcast of the hearing are on the committee’s website.

Patti Grace Smith: Extend Indemnification for 10 Years, At least

Patti Grace Smith: Extend Indemnification for 10 Years, At least

Patti Grace Smith called on Congress last week to extend the FAA’s authority to provide third party indemnification for commercial launch services companies for 10 years or, better yet, permanently.

After lengthy debate last year, Congress extended the indemnification authority for only one year – through December 31, 2013 — so the topic is back on the table for consideration this year.

Smith was a witness at a May 16 Senate Commerce subcommittee hearing on advancing partnerships in the business of space.   Much of the hearing focused on the nexus between government and commercial space activities in future human space exploration, but she also raised narrower issues important to the commercial space launch industry. 

A former head of the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST), she is now a consultant to the commercial space industry and chairs the Commercial Space Committee of the NASA Advisory Council.  She also advised the subcommittee that AST should remain a part of the FAA rather than reporting directly to the Secretary of Transportation as it did when it was created in 1984.  She believes that by keeping the office within the FAA, aviation officials are forced to deal with questions about how to integrate commercial space launches into the National Airspace System (NAS) rather than ignoring them.

Eventually AST should “take its rightful, its logical place as another transportation mode” separate from the FAA, but in her view it is better situated within the FAA for now.

Prepared statements of the witnesses and a webcast of the hearing are available on the committee’s website.