Category: Military

One Up, One Down — X-37B Lands at Vandenberg

One Up, One Down — X-37B Lands at Vandenberg

By Marcia Smith | Posted: June 16, 2012 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: June 16, 2012 12:14 pm ET

While most of the space world’s attention was focused on China and its successful launch of the Shenzhou-9 mission early this morning (Eastern Daylight Time), another interesting event was taking place at Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA.   The Air Force’s X-37B automated space plane returned home after 469 days in orbit.

The reusable space vehicle landed at 5:48 am Pacfic Daylight Time (8:48 am EDT).  It was launched on March 5, 2011 atop an Atlas V rocket. 

The X-37B’s mission is highly classified.  What it’s been doing for the past 15 months is not known publicly.   A press release from Vandenberg today says only that it “performs risk reduction, experimentation and concept of operations development for reusable space vehicle technologies.”  

At least two X-37B Orbital Test Vehicles (OTVs) have been built.  The first, OTV-1, flew a successful 224-day mission in 2010.   The vehicle that landed today is OTV-2.   The Air Force announced today that OTV-1 will be launched again “sometime in Fall 2012.”

Photo of X-37B OTV-1.  Photo Credit:  Boeing (via Spaceflightnow.com  http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1012/12x37gallery/)

The vehicle resembles a small space shuttle and the program was actually inherited by the Department of Defense from NASA.   It originally was designed by NASA as a test vehicle as part of its Orbital Space Plane (OSP) program.   OSP was going to be a crew return vehicle (“lifeboat”) for the International Space Station, and eventually a two-way transportation system.   NASA cancelled the program in 2004, however, after President George W. Bush announced plans to focus NASA’s human spaceflight program on a return to the Moon instead of extended operations of the ISS.   The X-37B does not carry people.

 

Last Updated: Jun 16, 2012 12:14 pm ET
China Readies to Launch Space Station Crew-update

China Readies to Launch Space Station Crew-update

By Marcia Smith | Posted: June 10, 2012 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: June 10, 2012 5:43 pm ET

UPDATE:  Dragon-in-Space, a website devoted to China’s space program that it says is not affiliated with any government agencies or private organizations, reports that the Shenzhou 9 launch will take place at 10:41 GMT on June 16 and it will carry a female taikonaut. Wang Ya-ping. Bob Christy has updated his website to also indicate that June 16 is the first likely launch date, with 10:39 GMT as the launch time.  Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) is four hours behind GMT, so that would make it 6:41 am or 6:39 am EDT.  These are not official Chinese government launch dates or times, however.

ORIGINAL STORY: China still has not put an official date on it, but Xinhua reported yesterday that the first Chinese space station crew will be launched in “mid-June” as the Shenzhou-9 spacecraft and its rocket were moved to the launch pad.

China launched its first space station, Tiangong-1 (Heavenly Palace), last September.  An automated spacecraft, Shenzhou 8, tested rendezvous and docking operations with it twice in November.   China said at the time it planned to launch two more missions to Tiangong-1 and at least one would involve a crew and that crew likely would include China’s first female taikonaut.

China indicated months ago that the launch would be this summer, but has not been specific about the date.  Bob Christy, an amatuer space observer in the United Kingdom, initially calculated June 17 as a likely launch date based on Tiangong-1’s orbital maneuvers.  He has refined his analysis and now assesses that the launch could take place on alternate days beginning June 14.  His website, zarya.info, lists the likely launch times on June 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, and 24.

The Shenzhou-9 spacecraft and its Long March 2F rocket were moved to the launch platform at the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center yesterday according to Xinhua.  China still did not commit to launching a woman on the mission, insisting that the decision on crew members will not be made until closer to launch.

One of the three crew members apparently will not enter the space station, but remain in Shenzhou 9.   Xinhua quoted a spokesman as having said in February that “[o]ne of the three Shenzhou-9 crew members will not board the Tiangong-1 space module lab, but will remain inside the spacecraft as a precautionary measure in case of an emergency.”

Tiangong-1 is quite modest (8.5 metric tons) compared to the International Space Station (about 400 metric tons), but nevertheless occupying a space station will be a significant achievement for China if all goes well.   As first space stations go, Tiangong-1 is just less than half the mass of the world’s first space station, the Soviet Union’s Salyut 1.  Launched in 1971, it had a mass of about 18.6 metric tons.  The first U.S. space station, Skylab, launched in 1973, had a mass of about 77 metric tons.

Last Updated: Jun 10, 2012 5:43 pm ET
DOD Tempers Language about China's Space Program, Warns it Faces Challenges

DOD Tempers Language about China's Space Program, Warns it Faces Challenges

By Marcia Smith | Posted: June 10, 2012 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: June 10, 2012 3:20 pm ET

The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) told Congress last month that while China’s space program overall continues to expand, individual programs “are facing some challenges in systems reliability.”  The increasing pace of launches “also may be taking its toll,” it adds.

DOD is required by Congress to report every year on military and security developments in China.  The report is commonly referred to as the “China military power” report, but the official title of the 2012 edition is Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China.  The report is submitted in both classified and unclassified forms; the public version upon which this article is based is the unclassified one (obviously).

This year’s report is noticeably shorter than last year’s, 52 pages compared to 94, with commensurately less detail about China’s space activities.  China’s 2011 launch of an experimental space station, Tiangong-1, is only briefly mentioned.   At a May 18 press conference, David Helvey, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (East Asia), said DOD “streamlined and consolidated the report, in keeping with DOD-wide guidance for how we’re handling reports to Congress.”

Apart from the lack of detail, the two biggest changes are the cautionary statement DOD makes about challenges China’s space program is facing and the fewer types of counterspace capabilities DOD says China is developing.

The 2011 and 2012 reports are similar in that they both say China is expanding “its space-based surveillance, reconnaissance, navigation, meteorological, and communication satellite constellations,”  and “continues to develop the Long March V  rocket,” which “will more than double the size” of payloads China can launch.

China hopes to launch its first Long March V (or Long March 5), a Delta IV-class rocket, in 2014 from a new launch site on Hainan Island.   It is designed to launch 25 tons to low Earth orbit or 14 tons to geosynchronous orbit.   

Like last year, DOD describes China’s development of counterspace capabilities as “multidimensional,” but the list of those capabilities is shorter this year.   Both reports list the direct-ascent antisatellite (ASAT) weapon China tested in 2007 that created more than 3,000 pieces of space debris, engendering international condemnation.  The 2012 edition succinctly adds “jamming, laser, microwave, and cyber weapons.”  In the 2011 version, DOD said China was “developing other kinetic and directed-energy (e.g. lasers, high-powered microwave, and particle beam weapons) technologies for ASAT weapons. Foreign and indigenous systems give China the capability to jam common satellite communications bands and GPS receivers.  China’s nuclear arsenal has long provided Beijing with an inherent ASAT capability, although a nuclear explosion in space would also damage China’s own space assets, along with whomever it was trying to target.”

This year’s report states that over the past two years China has conducted “increasingly complex close proximity operations between satellites while offering little in the way of transparency or explanation,” but does not mention the rendezvous and docking operations the automated Shenzhou 8 spacecraft conducted with Tiangong-1 last November in that context.   While the 2011 report did not discuss proximity operations, it drew a connection between China’s “manned and lunar” programs and counterspace capabilities.   It asserted that China cited requirements of its “manned and lunar space programs” as reasons for improving its abilities to “track and identify” satellites, capabilities that also are “a prerequisite for effective, precise counterspace operations.”   Also, DOD’s statement in the 2011 report that China plans a permanent space station by 2020 and landing a human on the Moon by 2030 is not repeated.

As for the challenges DOD says China is facing, the report reveals that communications satellites using China’s DFH-4 platform “have experienced failures leading to reduced lifespan or loss of the satellite.”  It also mentions the failure of a Chinese Long March 2C in August 2011.  That was the third satellite launch in seven days for China, and DOD comments that “The recent surge in the number of China’s space launches also may be taking its toll.”  

China conducted 18 successful space launches in 2011, a new record for China, and more than any other country except Russia.

At the May 18 press conference, Helvey said that DOD sees areas where the United States and China can work together on common threats, such as piracy, and wants to have a conversation with China about that, but is also concerned about Chinese activities that would make cooperation difficult, such as its investments in counterspace capabilities.  He cited the Strategic Security Dialogue as a “platform” for such discussions.

Last Updated: Jun 10, 2012 3:20 pm ET
Events of Interest: Week of June 11-15, 2012

Events of Interest: Week of June 11-15, 2012

By Marcia Smith | Posted: June 10, 2012 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: June 10, 2012 4:17 pm ET

The following events may be of interest in the coming week.   The Senate is in session; the House is in recess.

Monday, June 11

Tuesday, June 12

Tuesday-Thursday, June 12-14

Wednesday, June 13

 

Last Updated: Jun 10, 2012 4:17 pm ET
SASC Report Lifts Veil on Commercial Satellite Imagery Rift

SASC Report Lifts Veil on Commercial Satellite Imagery Rift

By Marcia Smith | Posted: June 10, 2012 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: June 12, 2012 5:00 pm ET

Insight into the battle over whether the government should continue to support two commercial companies to provide electro-optical satellite imagery emerged with the release of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) report on DOD’s FY2013 authorization bill.  GeoEye and DigitalGlobe sell imagery to the government under the EnhancedView contract administered by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA).  The government contracts are a significant part of their businesses.  Substantial cutbacks in government purchases could mean that only one company would survive.

Rumors have been rampant for months that the government plans to scale back its commercial satellite imagery purchases because of reduced requirements and a decision to rely more on the government’s own satellites.   The spy satellites built and operated by the government’s National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) produce images with better resolution, but are highly classified and thus difficult to share with allies, for example.  The satellites also are costly.

After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, U.S. government demands for imagery burgeoned to support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Decisions were made to contract for imagery from commercial companies to supplement NRO’s products.  While not as good as NRO imagery, commercial imagery is good enough for many purposes.

The EnhancedView contract NGA awarded to GeoEye and DigitalGlobe in 2010 is a follow-on to previous contracts called ClearView and NextView.  The EnhancedView contract is valued at $7.3 billion combined for the two companies if all options are exercised.  The 10-year contract is structured as a one-year contract with nine one-year options.

NGA’s budget is classified, so how much it is requesting for commercial imagery for FY2013 is unavailable, although the EnhancedView contract called for payments of $250 million per year for the first four years to the two companies.  SASC wants to add $125 million to whatever amount NGA requested to ensure that the government continues to support both companies.  Section 930 of SASC’s version of the FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) also requires two studies — one by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and another by the Congressional Budget Office — on the need for and cost effectiveness of commercial imagery. 

A lengthy section in SASC’s report (S. Rept. 112-173) explains the committee’s action, shedding light on how the debate has evolved.   Pieces of the story have been reported in a few media sources, notably an April 19, 2012 New York Times article, but this is the most detailed account to appear publicly in an official government document.

The debate intermixes three questions:  how much electro-optical satellite imagery does the U.S. government need;  what is the most cost-effective means for filling those requirements –  with the government’s own systems, by purchasing commercial imagery, or both; and what obligation does the government have to ensure the business success of the companies.

GeoEye and DigitalGlobe sell imagery with 0.5 meter resolution, though many say the images are better than that and the companies degrade the data for sale on the open market to abide by government policy requirements on what can be disseminated.   NGA’s purchases underpin the business models of the two companies, although they do have other customers such as Google.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan drove the govenrment’s need for more satellite imagery that could be easily shared with others.  With those conflicts ended or ending, the question arises as to how much imagery the government now needs and how best to obtain it. 

The SASC report traces the history of defense and Intelligence Community (IC) decision-making on the need for commercial imagery.  It points to a rift between the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), who oversees the 17 organizations, including NRO, that comprise the IC.

The report states that the DNI rejected a Joint Staff proposal that commercial satellites be the primary means for collecting electro-optical imagery.  The DNI instead wanted to rely on NRO to enhance existing government systems and build new ones.  That dispute reached the White House, but at the last minute the DNI and the Secretary of Defense agreed to do both — buy commercial imagery and new government satellites.  With that settled, GeoEye and DigitalGlobe “proceeded towards adding the equivalent of two more satellites that would be available to meet government needs,” SASC says. 

The DNI, however, apparently did not want to stick with that agreement and the dispute escalated to Congress.  SASC relates that the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence conducted a study concluding “enhanced commercial satellites could meet or exceed the overwhelming majority of electro-optical imaging requirements at less cost and risk” and would “provide greater resilience and survivability, and a broader, competitive industrial base.”  DNI countered with its own study asserting that more, smaller commercial satellites would not be less expensive than NRO’s satellites.   SASC says that it responded in the classified annex to last year’s report on the FY2012 NDAA by directing DOD — specifically the Joint Staff and DOD’s Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office — to conduct another analysis, but “DOD declined” to do so.

Instead, late last year at least one part of DOD, the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, and the DNI reached agreement to reduce funding for commercial imagery.  SASC complains the decision was not based on new analysis, but was simply included in the FY2013 budget request.   SASC emphasizes that the decision “would result in the elimination” of one of the two commercial companies competing for government contracts, thereby imperiling that company’s business.    The government’s “wild swing in demand has exposed two healthy companies to financial risk,” SASC charges.

For now, SASC wants to maintain the status quo while two new studies are completed.   In addition to adding the $125 million for FY2013, SASC directs the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff  to do a comprehensive analysis of DOD’s imagery requirements and the role of commercial imagery in meeting them and report to Congress by April 1, 2013.  It also directs the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to report by September 15, 2013 on whether the proposed action is consistent with Presidential policy, Federal Acquisition Regulations, and law. 

Uncertainty about the government’s intentions already has impacted the companies.   GeoEye made an unsolicited offer to buy DigitalGlobe last month, which was summarily rejected by DigitalGlobe.  Both reported they have been assured of their promised EnhancedView funding for FY2012.   The question is what will happen in FY2013 and beyond.

SASC’s counterpart, the House Armed Services Committee (HASC), also noted the debate over commercial imagery in its report on the FY2013 NDAA (H.R. 4310, H. Rept. 112-479).  HASC, however, only included report language directing the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress by December 1, 2012 on the validated requirements for imagery and how DOD plans to meet them.  Unlike bill language, report language is not legally binding (though agencies are well advised to follow it).  SASC’s report requirements are in the bill itself.

Authorization bills like the NDAA set policy and recommend funding levels.   Only appropriations bills actually provide money, however.   The House Appropriations Committee did not mention commercial imagery in its report (H.R. 5856, H. Rept. 112-493) on the FY2013 defense appropriations bill.  The Senate Appropriations Committee has not acted on the bill yet.   Its defense subcommittee will hold a hearing tomorrow morning with Secretary of Defense Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dempsey.  It would be unusual for a detailed issue like this to arise at such a hearing, however.

Last Updated: Jun 12, 2012 5:00 pm ET
NRO Gifts NASA Two Leftover Space Telescopes, Euclid to Cost NASA $40-50 Million, GEMS Not Confirmed

NRO Gifts NASA Two Leftover Space Telescopes, Euclid to Cost NASA $40-50 Million, GEMS Not Confirmed

By Marcia Smith | Posted: June 4, 2012 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: June 4, 2012 9:55 pm ET

NASA revealed today that the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) gave it two leftover space telescopes.  NASA is looking at using one of them and must determine how much it would cost to build, launch and operate a spacecraft that would incorporate it.  NASA also must decide what other instruments may be needed to achieve the scientific objectives in the most recent National Research Council (NRC) decadal survey for astronomy and astrophysics.

NASA astrophysics division director Paul Hertz told a meeting of the NRC’s Committee on Astronomy and Astrophysics (CAA) about the gift this morning.   His short talk was followed by a more lengthy explanation by Dr. Alan Dressler of the Observatories of the Carnegie Institution.  Dressler chaired the panel of the NRC’s 2010 astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey, New Worlds, New Horizons (NWNH), that recommended a mission called the Wide-Field InfraRed Survey Telescope (WFIRST) as the top priority for a large space mission for the next decade of space-based astrophysics research. 

WFIRST is a multi-purpose telescope that would study dark energy, search for exoplanets, and survey the universe in the infrared wavelengths.  Budget constraints exacerbated by significant overruns on the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) have pushed WFIRST well into the 2020s.  

NRO builds and operates the nation’s spy satellites.  NASA officials said today that NRO contacted the agency over a year ago to see if NASA wanted the two 2.4 meter diameter space-qualified telescopes because they were no longer needed.  NASA said yes and the telescopes are now its property.  They have been declassified, but are still subject to export control restrictions.  Although NASA inherited two telescopes, it is only talking about using one, at least for now.   Hertz said they are calling it the NEW mission — NWNH Enabling Wide-field — with the idea that it could enable the science envisioned in New Worlds, New Horizons for a wide-field infrared telescope.

Dressler was one of a small group of scientists asked by NASA to review the potential of achieving the science objectives of WFIRST by using one of the NRO telescopes.  The study group also included CAA co-chair David Spergel.  WFIRST was designed as a 1.5 meter diameter telescope, while the NRO telescopes are 2.4 meters.  Dressler said that NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center and Jet Propulsion Laboratory have known about the telescopes for some time and several mission designs have emerged.   For him, the starting point would be to use the mirrors as they currently exist, although he expressed a strong preference for adding a coronograph to the mission.  He said that his preliminary answer is that an NRO-based mission could accomplish the WFIRST science goals perhaps better than WFIRST itself.   While stressing that more work is needed, he expressed his personal view that “the potential exists to have greater capability for the WFIRST science, enable additional scientific opportunities, match or reduce cost, and improve schedule, and that this possibility should be pursued as vigorously as possible by the astronomical community.”

The NRC conducts Decadal Surveys for each of NASA’s space and earth science disciplines.  Performed every 10 years, they look out to the next 10 years (hence the term decadal) to determine the most compelling scientific questions and what missions are needed to answer them within a budget envelope NASA provides.  Because they represent a consensus of the relevant discipline, they are closely followed by NASA and highly respected by Congress.  The NRC has standing committees that keep track of what NASA (and other agencies as appropriate) are doing to achieve the Decadal Survey’s recommendations.   CAA oversees compliance with the astronomy and astrophysics Decadal Survey, which also includes recommendations to the National Science Foundation and Department of Energy’s Office of Science.

The CAA’s response to the news was rather muted.  The reaction was surprisingly flat for a community that received a fairly valuable gift.  At a media teleconference later in the day, NASA’s Michael Moore, deputy astrophysics division director, estimated that about $250 million in mission costs could be avoided by using one of the NRO telescopes.  He added that the telescopes cost about $75,000-$100,000 to store at the manfacturer’s (ITT Excelis) facilities in Rochester, NY.   In response to a question at the media teleconference, Hertz said he thought CAA members were “excited at the possibilities,” while Dressler acknowledged that some people “need to have a lot more time” to consider the situation.  This is a “sharp right turn,” he added, compared to what was recommended in NWNH.

Some CAA members wanted to know if NASA should now reconsider its participation in the European Space Agency’s (ESA’s) Euclid mission, apparently on the assumption that with the gift of the telescopes NASA might be able to move out more quickly with a WFIRST-like mission.  Euclid will study dark energy, which also is one of the goals of the WFIRST mission.   Hertz said that NASA was already committed to its participation in Euclid.   In fact, he informed the committee that the cost of NASA’s contribution to Euclid will be $40-50 million instead of $20 million as recommended by another NRC committee.   NASA agreed to provide near infra-red detectors for Euclid, but ESA convinced NASA that it also needed the associated electronics, which increased the cost to NASA.

Hertz also emphasized repeatedly that NASA currently does not have the money to build, launch and operate a spacecraft that would use one of the NRO telescopes.   The telescope may be free, but NASA must pay for everything else.  Launch of JWST is an agency priority and until that happens, the budget for astrophysics at NASA is highly constrained.   Hertz also stressed that obtaining permission from the White House and Congress for NASA to begin another large mission like JWST should not be taken for granted.   Until NASA demonstrates that it can complete JWST on its new baseline budget and schedule, he does not expect policy-makers to have confidence that NASA can perform on time and cost.

Separately, Hertz told the committee that NASA had “not confirmed” the Gravity and Extreme Magnetism (GEMS) Small Explorer mission because it experienced unacceptable cost increases during its early formulation stage.  NASA missions must pass through certain “gates,” one of which is a confirmation review.  GEMS did not pass that gate.  NASA will reallocate those funds for other Explorer missions.

Editor’s Note:  Although the announcement about the NRO telescopes came as a surprise to many, at least two news outlets – the New York Times and Washington Post — clearly were told about it earlier.   Each published stories including quotes from people who were not at the CAA meeting very shortly after Hertz spoke.  NASA also did not inform all journalists about the media teleconference.  SpacePolicyOnline.com thanks NASAWatch for publicizing it.

Last Updated: Jun 04, 2012 9:55 pm ET
Events of Interest: Week of June 4-8, 2012

Events of Interest: Week of June 4-8, 2012

By Marcia Smith | Posted: June 3, 2012 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: June 3, 2012 6:09 pm ET

The following events may be of interest in the coming week. The House and Senate both are in session.

During the Week

The space policy world returns to its routine this week after an exciting SpaceX mission that kept everyone’s rapt attention from launch on May 22 to splashdown on May 31.  Dragon successfully returned to port in Los Angeles and flown to SpaceX’s facilities near Waco, TX over the weekend.  The final objective to be met is turning the cargo it returned from the International Space Station (ISS) over to NASA.  A NASA official said on May 31 that he did not expect it to take long to agree on a launch date for the first of 12 Commercial Resupply Service (CRS) missions to ISS SpaceX is expected to provide to NASA between now and 2015.

In the more humdrum world of Washington space policy, however, there still are events of interest upcoming.   Among them are the first meeting of the rejuvenated National Research Council (NRC)’s Committee on Astronomy and Astrophysics that will take place Monday-Wednesday.  A standing committee overseen jointly by the Space Studies Board and Board on Physics and Astronomy, CAA looks after ground- and space-based astronomy issues for the NRC in-between decadal surveys. 

Also of special interest, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee’s Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee will hold a hearing on government indemnification of launch service providers.   The 1988 Commercial Space Launch Act Amendments created the original authority for the government to indemnify launch service providers from third party claims between $500 million and $2 billion.  The companies must get their own insurance for up to $500 million and over $2 billion.   The authority was granted for 5 years and has been repeatedly extended over the decades.  It is currently set to expire on December 31, 2012.   Each time the authority is up for renewal, Congress asks whether the launch service industry still requires indemnification.  To date, Congress has always agreed to extend the authority, usually on the basis that other countries indemnify their providers so U.S. companies must have the same protection in order to be competitive.  There has yet to be a third-party claim since there have been no commercial launch accidents that injured the general public.

Though it is not policy-related, don’t miss the Venus Transit on June 5.  Be sure to get your special glasses out, or watch it on NASA TV.  This is the last time Venus will pass between Earth and the Sun until 2117, so for most us, this will be our last chance.  And for everyone interested is what’s going on with the Sun and how it affects Earth, check out the Space Weather Enterprise Forum also on Tuesday.

Monday, June 4

Monday-Wednesday, June 4-6

Tuesday, June 5

  • Space Weather Enterprise Forum, National Press Club, Washington, DC, 8:00 am – 5:00 pm
  • Venus Transit (Venus passes between the Earth and the Sun), different times around the globe, NASA TV will host a special at 5:30 pm ET

Wednesday, June 6

 

Last Updated: Jun 03, 2012 6:09 pm ET
Secretive Military X-37B Spaceplane Headed Back to Earth

Secretive Military X-37B Spaceplane Headed Back to Earth

By Marcia Smith | Posted: June 1, 2012 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: June 1, 2012 8:02 pm ET

The Air Force’s X-37B spaceplane is headed back to Earth in the next few days or weeks after more than a year in orbit.   What X-37B has been doing is unknown — except in classified circles.

The Air Force’s 30th Space Wing at Vandenberg Air Force Base revealed on May 30 that it is preparing for X-37B’s landing in the early-to-mid June timeframe.  The exact date will “depend on technical and weather considerations,” it said.

The Boeing-built winged spacecraft is formally called X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV).  OTV-1 was launched in 2010 and landed after 224 days.   This vehicle, OTV-2, was launched by an Atlas V rocket on March 5, 2011 for the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office.  Its mission, like that of OTV-1, is shrouded in secrecy.  It passed the one-year milestone more than two months ago. 

Photo Credit:  Boeing (via Spaceflightnow.com   http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1012/12x37gallery/)

The Department of Defense (DOD) inherited the automated, reusable, winged spaceplane design from NASA in 2004.  NASA originally designed X-37 as a test vehicle intended to lead to an Orbital Space Plane (OSP).   A prime goal of the OSP program was to build a “crew return vehicle” for the International Space Station (ISS).   Launched to the ISS atop an Atlas V rocket, OSP would have remained attached to ISS and used as a lifeboat in an emergency.  Eventually it would have evolved into a taxi to take crews to and from the ISS.  NASA canceled its X-37 program in 2004 after President George W. Bush announced the Vision for Space Exploration with a focus on returning astronauts to the Moon instead of long-term utilization of the ISS.  NASA pays Russia to provide ISS crew return services using Russia’s Soyuz spacecraft.

X-37 found new life after being transferred to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).  It successfully tested an Approach and Landing Test Vehicle version and transferred the program to the Air Force in 2006. 

The classified nature of the OTV-1 and OTV-2 missions lends an air of mystery to these flights and prompts much speculation on the utility of such a vehicle, including whether it has a weapons capability though experts generally dismiss that notion.

 

Last Updated: Jun 01, 2012 8:02 pm ET
SASC Adds Funds for ORS, STP and Commercial Imagery Purchase

SASC Adds Funds for ORS, STP and Commercial Imagery Purchase

By Marcia Smith | Posted: May 25, 2012 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: May 25, 2012 4:32 pm ET

The Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) completed markup of its version of the FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act yesterday.  Among its actions, SASC added funds for the Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) program and Space Test Program (STP) as well as for the government to purchase commercial satellite imagery.

Overall, the committee kept the total funding authorized in its version of the bill (S. 2467) to the same level requested by the Obama Administration, unlike the companion measure (H.R. 4310) passed by the House on May 18, which is $4 billion above the request.

Among the many changes to the President’s request within that topline, the committee added money to and changed the reporting structure of the Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) program instead of eliminating the program as the Obama Administration proposed.  SASC also directed that money be transferred into ORS from DOD’s now-cancelled Defense Weather Satellite System so the ORS program can develop a low cost weather satellite instead.  According to the committee’s press release, its bill —

  • “Moves the Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) Office from reporting to the Executive Agent for Space to the Commander of Air Force Space and Missile Center; requires the Office to be geographically separate from the headquarters Space and Missile Center; has the Program Element Officer for Space as the acquisition executive for ORS; establishes an Executive Committee of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)), Commander U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM), Commander AF Space Command and the Executive Agent for Space and authorizes a transfer up to $60.0 million in FY 2012 funds (subject to appropriation acts) from the Weather Satellite Follow on program for the ORS Office to build a low cost high technology readiness level weather satellite,” and
  • “Restores $10.0 million proposed by the DOD to be taken from the ORS program, adds $35.0 million to restore funding at $45.0 million to continue working with the combatant commands (COCOM)s, and U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) in particular, on low cost responsive satellites similar to ORS-1.”

The House authorization bill added $25 million for ORS (the request was zero), but does not include the other provisions.

As for STP, which the Obama Administration also wants to end, SASC added $35 million to the $10 million requested, identical to the House authorization action.

The House Appropriations Committee, however, did not restore funding for either program.  The Senate Appropriations Committee has not acted on its bill yet.

SASC also added $125 million for the government to purchase commercial satellite imagery from GeoEye and DigitalGlobe to keep funding level at FY2012 levels, according to the press release.   SASC also is requiring a study by the Joint Staff and the Congressional Budget Office “on the requirements for, and the role of, commercial imagery.”   Rumors have been rampant that cuts are in store for the EnhancedView contract under which the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) purchases imagery from the two companies, whose business prospects are highly dependent on the arrangement.  NGA’s budget is classified, so detailed information has been difficult to obtain.  Both companies reported earlier this month that their FY2012 EnhancedView funding was secure, but GeoEye’s sudden public offer to buy DigitalGlobe, almost immediately rebuffed, fueled concern that the companies’ government funding beyond FY2012 was in jeopardy.

Other space-related provisions mentioned in SASC’s press release include the following:

  • “Ensures that before any major satellite acquisition program is undertaken schedules are developed that integrate the satellite and its ground systems”;
  • “Authorizes private entities using DOD ranges or launch facilities to contribute up-keep and maintenance of the ranges and facilities”;
  • “Authorizes the Air Force to procure block buys of satellites 5 and 6 over 6 years, including advanced procurement of 3.9 billion,” an apparent reference to Space-Based InfraRed Satellite (SBIRS) geostationary (GEO) satellites; and
  • “Ensures the Department of Defense is represented adequately at all dispute resolution forums for spectrum that it must relocate from.”

The press release makes no mention of including language to ease export controls on commercial satellites.   Such a provision was added to the House version of the bill as an amendment during floor debate.   Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO) recently introduced a bill with the same goal that theoretically could be offered as an amendment when this bill is considered in the Senate.  The schedule for floor action on this bill was not announced.  

Last Updated: May 25, 2012 4:32 pm ET
Sen. Bennet Introduces Satellite Export Control Reform Bill

Sen. Bennet Introduces Satellite Export Control Reform Bill

By Marcia Smith | Posted: May 24, 2012 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: May 24, 2012 8:49 am ET

Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO) introduced legislation Tuesday to ease export controls on commercial satellites.   The House passed a bill last week that included similar language.

Bennet’s bill, the Safeguarding United States Leadership and Security Act of 2012 (S. 3211), would restore to the President the authority to transfer certain satellites and their components from the strict U.S. Munitions List (USML) and its International Traffic and Arms Regulations (ITAR) to the less restrictive Commerce Control List (CCL) and its Export Administration Regulations (EAR).  Congress took away that authority in the FY1999 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) after it concluded that two U.S. satellite manufacturers had aided China’s missile development efforts by advising them on the causes of launch failures of U.S.-built satellites on Chinese rockets.

Last week the House passed the FY2013 NDAA including a provision that similarly would restore to the President the authority to decide which of the two export control regimes governs commercial satellites.   Satellite exports to China and several other countries will remain off limits under both bills. 

Last Updated: May 24, 2012 8:49 am ET

SPACEPOLICYONLINE.COM

About | Contact | Privacy