Webb Cost Overruns Concern AAS Members (Update)

Letter From American Astronomical Society Solar Physics Division Regarding NASA James Webb Space Telescope Costs

"The AAS should continue to be a strong advocate of the JWST, while being mindful of the concerns of all its divisions. I know from your activities in support of the various decadal surveys that all of the divisions are well represented by the society. However, the cost of the JWST threatens to swamp us all and the AAS should be careful, as a multi-disciplinary organization, to balance the various concerns of each of its constituents and to work towards a solution that does not promote one division's interests at the expense of another's. The SPD is anxious to work together with all of our AAS colleagues to find an effective and equitable way forward."

Earlier posts about James Webb Space Telescope Issues

Keith's update: Acccording to Kevin Marvel at the AAS "I think that is an irresponsible position to take and believe that you should reveal the source of the letter, who is likely conflicted due to financial ties to future heliophysics missions. The source is not AAS." I don't get it. The letter is on AAS SPD letterhead from the head of a AAS division. See for yourself: Download the original letter on AAS SPD letterhead. And this is not from an individual, Kevin - it is from a committee whose membership was elected by the AAS SPD membership. As for this Marvel's absurd suggestion that there is a conflict of interest with regard to the author of this letter, this is a classic case of pot-kettle-black. Gee, as if there are no members of the AAS who have a vested interest in seeing JWST funded. This is just blatant, transparent hypocrisy.

Keith's further update: Kevin Marvel just sent this statement:

"The American Astronomical Society represents more than 7500 astronomers, planetary scientists, heliophysicists and others connected to the research endeavor broadly labeled as 'astronomy'. To best represent the interests of these specialized fields, the Society grants its Divisions the ability to print their own letterhead. SpaceRef earlier today (September 8, 2011) posted a letter, which was a communication from the leadership of the Solar Physics Division to the leadership of the Society. SpaceRef claims the source of the letter is the Society in its online posting. It is correct that the Society's name is printed on the letterhead, but it is also true that the letter was not forwarded to SpaceRef from any member of the AAS leadership who were the recipients of the letter. It is difficult to understand how the 'source' of a letter could be the organization listed as the recipient of the letter. The authorship of the letter rests firmly with the Solar Physics Division of the organization. The source who provided the letter to SpaceRef remains unidentified. The Society and its Divisions will continue to work actively to support the Decadal Priorities for all of our Divisions and all of our members."

This gets goofier by the minute. It matters not whether AAS sent this to NASA Watch/SpaceRef formally or not, the source is the AAS. It would seem that AAS allows people to use its letterhead who (apparently) do not represent the AAS (at least when they say things that diverge from the official AAS position that is). But wait - this is from the chair of the AAS SPD - part of the AAS. I am confused. So is the AAS.

There are deep and growing divisions within the AAS - and the space/planetary science community - with regard to JWST and Kevin Marvel is obviously afraid to admit this. I'll bet that this letter - written by the Chair of the AAS SPD to the AAS will never make it onto the AAS website with all the glowing pro-Webb commentary.

Planetary Scientists Express Concern Over Webb Cost Overruns

James Webb Space Telescope Threatens Planetary Science (with signatures), Planetary Exploration Newsletter

"JWST has, however, been a priority in the NRC Astrophysics Decadal Surveys. When JWST was ranked as the top major initiative for NASA astrophysics in the 2001 NRC Astronomy Decadal Survey, it was estimated to cost $1B and launch by 2011. NASA has now spent $3.5B on JWST and it is now projected to cost a minimum of $8.7B for a launch no earlier than late 2018. As a result, JWST's cost increases have outstripped the resources of the NASA Science Mission Directorate's Astrophysics Division, and NASA leadership has now declared JWST an "agency priority." Resources of other NASA programs, including the Agency's Planetary Sciences Division within the Science Mission Directorate, are now threatened to cover current and future JWST cost overruns."

ISS National Laboratory’s Odd Media Practices

Update: NASA Provides Media Interviews For Space Station National Lab Award

"NASA has canceled the previously scheduled news conference on Friday, Sept. 9, about the award of the organization that will manage the portion of the International Space Station operated as a U.S. national laboratory. The briefing was canceled because the launch of the agency's GRAIL mission has been postponed until Friday morning. NASA will offer in-person media interview opportunities at 10 a.m. EDT on Friday at NASA Kennedy Space Center's Press Site in Florida"

Keith's Note: This is odd. The only reason why an ISS project is to be discussed with the media is at a SMD launch. When the launch is scrubbed, they decide not to allow remote participation (as had been the original plan) - just chit chat with media present to cover a moon mission launch. If the ISS National Laboratory folks really wanted to interact with the media then they'd set up their own event independent of someone else's launch. Then again Mark Uhran (departing NASA in a few weeks anyway) et al simply do not care about interacting with the public or the media about the ISS National Laboratory.

Steve Isakowitz Joins Virgin Galactic

Virgin Galactic Appoints Steven J. Isakowitz as Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer

"Virgin Galactic is pleased to announce the appointment of former NASA, White House and Department of Energy official Steven J. Isakowitz as Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer. In his role, Isakowitz will have leadership responsibilities across a range of areas as the company prepares to begin commercial operation of its space vehicles. Specifically, he will lead technical oversight of key programs, development and management of new programs, government and industry business development, government affairs, advanced technologies, and strategic analysis."

Live Video from CosmoCam Aboard a High Altitude Balloon

CosmoCam is an internet interactive video camera system designed for use onboard satellites and stratospheric balloon missions. Cosmocam is being offered as a tool for both inflight monitoring of satellite structure deployment as well as the enlightenment of students and others who are outside the professional scientific community.

Live video from CosmoCam aboard a balloon in flight via NASAHackSpace

Virgin Galactic’s Industry Day

Virgin Galactic and The Spaceship Company seek suppliers as era of commercial space travel approaches

"Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic, LLC, the world's first commercial spaceline, and sister aerospace production company, The Spaceship Company (TSC), in cooperation with the New Mexico Spaceport Authority, today announced that they will host their first-ever "Industry Day" on Oct. 18., 2011 at Spaceport America near Las Cruces, N.M. The inaugural event marks a major milestone in the advent of commercial space travel. While the event is designed to educate potential suppliers on what sorts of goods and services will be needed by both companies, the underlying message is that widespread, commercial space travel will soon be a reality."

P&W Might Sell Rocketdyne

Pratt might jettison Rocketdyne, CTpost.com

"With support to explore outer space waning in Congress, Pratt & Whitney's president said the company is considering a sale of its Rocketdyne division. David Hess, president of East Hartford-based Pratt & Whitney, told reporters at Reuters annual Aerospace and Defense Summit, that Pratt had fielded interest in the California rocket-making division. Later, Hess clarified that the sale was not imminent, but was a possible option, matching comments by a local analyst that does not expect Pratt to let the company go at a bargain price."

Smart Phones in Space

Students, teachers, and commercial companies have been taking advantage of the International Space Station's (ISS) unique environment for years. One of those companies, Houston-based Odyssey Space Research, plans to bring the experience to the rest of us via our mobile devices.

NRC Report on NASA’s Astronaut Corps Released

NASA Needs to Preserve Skilled Astronaut Corps In Post-Shuttle Era, Says New Report

"NASA should take steps to ensure that it maintains a highly trained astronaut corps to meet International Space Station (ISS) crew requirements while accounting for unexpected attrition or demands of other missions, says a new report by the National Research Council. NASA's current plans for staffing the U.S. astronaut corps do not provide sufficient flexibility to reliably meet projected ISS mission needs."

Blue Origin Suffers Major Accident (Update)

Keith's 24 Aug note: According to a FAA NOTAM (Notice To Airmen): "FDC 1/3552 ZAB TX.. TEMPORARY FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS VAN HORN, TX. EFFECTIVE 1108241200 UTC UNTIL 1108241700 UTC. PURSUANT TO 14 CFR SECTION 91.143 TEMPORARY FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT DUE TO ROCKET LAUNCH ACTIVITY WITHIN A 17 NM RADIUS OF 312706N/1044546W OR THE SALT FLAT /SFL/ VORTAC 125 DEGREE RADIAL AT 24.3 NAUTICAL MILES SFC TO 18000 MSL. BLUE ORIGIN LLC, TELEPHONE 253-347-2821, IS IN CHARGE OF THE OPERATION. ALBUQUERQUE /ZAB/ ARTCC, 505-856-4500, IS THE FAA COORDINATION FACILITY."

Keith's 25 Aug update: Well, nothing was apparently launched - and if you go to the FAA NOTAM webpage the request from Blue Origin has mysteriously disappeared.

Bezos-Funded Spaceship Misfires, WS Journal

"An unmanned spaceship funded by Internet billionaire Jeff Bezos suffered a major failure during a recent test flight, according to U.S. government and industry officials, highlighting the dramatic risks of private space ventures. The vertical takeoff and landing spacecraft, developed by closely held Blue Origin LLC, was on a suborbital flight from the company's West Texas spaceport last week, these officials said, when ground personnel lost contact and control of the vehicle. The exact nature and cause of the failure were unclear, but remnants of the spacecraft could provide clues for investigators. Parts of the vehicle were recovered on the ground and are now being analyzed by company experts, according to government and industry officials."

Keith's 2 Sep update: One would expect that Blue Origin would post an update on its website after an accident of this sort. Here it is:

"Successful Short Hop, Set Back, and Next Vehicle - Three months ago, we successfully flew our second test vehicle in a short hop mission, and then last week we lost the vehicle during a developmental test at Mach 1.2 and an altitude of 45,000 feet. A flight instability drove an angle of attack that triggered our range safety system to terminate thrust on the vehicle. Not the outcome any of us wanted, but we're signed up for this to be hard, and the Blue Origin team is doing an outstanding job. We're already working on our next development vehicle."

Photos from earlier "hop"

Bolden’s ISS Update

NASA Administrator's Update on Space Station

"There has been a lot in the news recently about the International Space Station (ISS) and our astronauts aboard this orbiting outpost, and I wanted to take a moment to give you an update. Last week, our Russian partners lost a Progress cargo vehicle during launch. The cargo lost, although important, can be replaced. All of us are focused on determining the cause of the Soyuz booster anomaly so we can resolve it and get back to flying crew safely to the ISS. Our first priority is to keep everyone safe and the station crewed. Keeping the crew on-board allows us to continue the scientific research mission planned for the ISS and to help make the breakthroughs that will make our missions to farther destinations possible."

Alabama Vs Florida Food Fight Over SLS Funds

Florida senators dispute Sen. Richard Shelby's criticism of spending at Kennedy Space Center, Huntsville Times

"Florida's senators share the frustration. So do Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and more than a few House representatives. They've all pressed NASA and the White House this year to get started on SLS. But the Shelby/Sessions letter went further and accused NASA of wrongly shifting some $341 million to Kennedy Space Center in Florida for improvements that they say should go to SLS. Those improvements at Kennedy are only "tangentially" related to the heavy-lift rocket project, according to the Alabama senators. Florida's senators sent their own letter to the White House 11 days later on Aug. 26 saying "there appears to be a misunderstanding." Democrat Sen. Bill Nelson and Republican Sen. Marco Rubio say they wrote to "clarify the intent of the law." Spending for improvements at Kennedy was always part of SLS, the Florida senators said."

Apollo 18 Review: Good Fun. Go See It.

Apollo 18: A Review And Interview With Technical Advisor Gerry Griffin

"I just had a chance to see the new film "Apollo 18". As I am certain is the case with all of my fellow space cadets, I felt some intellectual trepidation in advance of seeing this film. How anyone could launch a Saturn V without the folks in Cocoa Beach noticing on Christmas day 1974 being one of the more improbable things. But you get past those nagging little facts at the very onset of the film. Through a deft use of real Apollo era footage and re-created footage (they keep telling you it is real), the film really manages to suspend lingering disbelief rather quickly. Often times its like watching the old grainy 70s era NASA features that NASA TV runs after midnight."

New Magazine: Space Quarterly

Keith's note: We are very pleased today to release the first issue of Space Quarterly Magazine with both the U.S. and Canadian editions now available

We are also pleased to announce that the first issue is available for FREE as a digital PDF download. We sincerely hope you'll like our first issue and consider subscribing to future editions. We are also launching the SpaceRef Forum in the next couple of days. 

The forum provides subscribers an opportunity to view and comment on the stories in the magazine as well other topics. Non-subscribers will also be able to participate in the forum with the exception of the Space Quarterly forum.

The next issue of Space Quarterly is already being worked on for a December release.

Keith's update: NASA JSC is currently blocking access to the free downloads (both of them) of Space Quarterly. The reason given in the red banner warning is: "The WebProxy category none is FILTERED".  JSC fixed things.

NASA’s Stealth Commercial Suborbital Workshop

NASA GSFC Commercial Suborbital Vehicles Workshop

"NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Innovative Partnership Program (IPP) and Earth Science Division will be hosting a Commercial Suborbital Vehicles Workshop at the GSFC on September 7, 2011. The purpose of the proposed workshop is to provide information for Earth and Space scientists about these vehicles capabilities, and to examine and discuss science topics that might be conducted from these platforms."

Keith's 31 Aug note: On 14 August I sent several requests to NASA GSFC PAO asking for information on this meeting including media access. A representative replied "The detailed agenda is still being worked out but it is our intent to invite reporters to the event. The only factor I know of that might prevent reporters from attending the full meeting would be if some part of the presentation or discussion involves information that is of a sensitive/proprietary nature. I expect a media advisory will be issued sometime around the end of this month with full details of the agenda and how media can register."

It has been 2 weeks and I have not received any further information on this event. The event is less than a week away with a long weekend in between. For those people who have not read about this on NASA Watch, this lack of advance notice from NASA is going to decrease the number of people in attendance. I know the reps from these companies - and I have heard them all make their pitches before - and I would be astonished if one company was going to talk about their sensitive/proprietary stuff in front of their competitors. No mention of this meeting is made on the GSFC IPP website, the NASA HQ OCT website, the NASA SMD website, or NASA.gov. Given the recent Progress failure and the increased focus on commercial alternatives for ISS access I simply cannot see how NASA can afford to not make this as open as possible given that COTS and WFF launch facilities are on the agenda.

Keith's 1 Sep update: GSFC PAO finally tells me this morning that a media advisory will be out later today. Hmm, let's see - NASA is going to issue the first public mention of this event on the Thursday before Labor Day weekend - and the event is less than a week later. Talk about a perfect time to quietly announce something that no one will notice - and that many people will skip due to the cost of last minute airline tickets. It is blatantly obvious that GSFC and SMD are not interested in outside scrutiny with regard to this event.

Keith's second 1 Sep update: NASA GSFC PAO finally got around to issuing a media advisory "Media Invited to Commercial Suborbital Vehicle Workshop". But unless I missed something, they never issued a press release or announcement inviting scientists, engineers, and commercial representatives to this meeting - which is the whole point of this event to begin with. All that was issued was an email sent to a small group of individuals several weeks ago - not to the suborbital community as a whole. There is still no mention of this event on any NASA websites. How are the people involved in this area of research supposed to know about this meeting? No public information has been provided so as to allow these people to register and attend. Baffling.

NRC Report on NASA and Orbital Debris Released

NASA Needs Strategic Plan to Manage Orbital Debris Efforts; Risks Increasing for Satellites, Space Station, National Research Council

"Although NASA's meteoroid and orbital debris programs have responsibly used their resources, the agency's management structure has not kept pace with increasing hazards posed by abandoned equipment, spent rocket bodies, and other debris orbiting the Earth, says a new report by the National Research Council. NASA should develop a formal strategic plan to better allocate resources devoted to the management of orbital debris. In addition, removal of debris from the space environment or other actions to mitigate risks may be necessary."

A Fading NASA, Afraid Of Its Own Shadow

Space agencies set two courses, MSNBC

"NASA spokesman Michael Braukas told me that the roadmap was not yet available for public release, but space officials agreed that an initial version of the document would be issued sometime in the next few weeks. Based on viewgraph presentations prepared in advance of this week's meeting in Kyoto, both paths would eventually get to the moon as well as asteroids. It's more a question of which destination is targeted first."

Keith's note: "Not yet available". More NASA PAO deflection and answer dodging because no one at the agency wants to take a stance - about anything. This is getting to be pathetic. NASA cannot say what it means - or mean what it says anymore. By the way, has anyone heard Charlie Bolden say anything about this topic - or anything else for that matter - for several months - other than a bland statement in Huntsville the other night (which NASA has yet to post online)NASA leadership, wherefore art thou? Sounds like Charlie is in chronic bunker mode to me.

Oddly enough, while NASA is shy about talking about anything remotely bold these days, DARPA (of all places) is enlightened enough to be looking ahead to interstellar travel - and what technology would be required - and how this could have applications on Earth. Sounds like NASA's job - you know, "spinoffs", etc. Of course, NASA Headquarters is trying to stomp this out behind the scenes.

Why is Charlie Bolden so afraid to stand up and speak out? Is the White House telling him to be silent? Does he not care? Or does he simply not 'get it'?

We've already wasted 10% of the 21st century trying to figure out what we are going to do in space.

NASA is in wander mode - absent a "leader".

Speaking as just one taxpayer, I want more - much more - from my nation's space agency - than this diffuse, 'we'll get back to you - maybe', space "policy".

As the Gen Y kids say , "FAIL"

Apollo 18: NASA PAO Will Be Busy

NASA reaches its outer limit, LA Times

"But after initially touting "Apollo 18" as one of its upcoming fiction film collaborations, NASA -- which, for the record, says the last manned mission to the moon was Apollo 17 in 1972 -- has begun to back away from the movie. "Apollo 18 is not a documentary," said Bert Ulrich, NASA's liaison for multimedia, film and television collaborations. "The film is a work of fiction, and we always knew that. We were minimally involved with this picture. We never even saw a rough cut. The idea of portraying the Apollo 18 mission as authentic is simply a marketing ploy. Perhaps a bit of a 'Blair Witch Project' strategy to generate hype."

Apollo 18: Internal Nasa Memos Hint At Problems On Lunar Surface

"For the viral campaign, the film's official website has a subpage that updates periodically with several documents from before, after, and during the mission. The latest documents are internal memos at NASA that show how they knew something was up."

DARPA’s 100 Year Starship

DARPA 100 Year Starship Solicitation Announcement

"The 100 Year StarshipTM (100YSSTM) is a project seeded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), with NASA Ames Research Center as executing agent, to develop a viable and sustainable non-governmental organization for persistent, long-term, private-sector investment into the myriad of disciplines needed to make long-distance space travel viable. The goal is to develop an investment vehicle--with the patronage and guidance of entrepreneurs, business leaders, and technology visionaries--which provides the stability for sustained investment over a century-long time horizon, concomitant with the agility to respond to the accelerating pace of technological, social, and other change."

Confusion About Russian Space Policy

Russia may curtail permanently inhabited orbital stations program - Roscosmos deputy chief (Part 2), Interfax

"The Russian Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) could phase out its program of building orbiting stations permanently inhabited by crews in favor of unmanned stations regularly visited by crews, Roscosmos Deputy Chief Vitaly Davydov told journalists."

Human flight to Mars could be accomplished beyond 2040 - Roscosmos

"A flight to Mars is the strategic goal of Russia's space exploration programs, but the journey to Mars lies through the moon, Nikolai Panichkin, the first deputy director of the Central Research Institute of Machine-Building, told journalists on Wednesday."

Russia may put space program under state defense order, RIA Novosti

"The Russian Federal Space Agency Roscosmos said on Wednesday it is considering returning the federal space program to the framework of the state defense order to ensure steady financing and reduce the number of accidents with space launches. "It would be beneficial to return the federal space program and the Glonass program to the framework of the state defense order," said Vitaly Davydov, deputy head of Roscosmos."

Keith's note: One Russian news service (Interfax) quotes Davydov from Roscomos as saying that there may be a shift from manned to unmanned programs while Panichkin from Central Research Institute of Machine-Building talks about sending humans to Mars. Then RIA Novosti, another Russian news service quotes Davydov as saying that their space program may be shifted to a new agency. And people think U.S. space policy is confusing ...