Posted on by Ian O'Neill

Could Conflict in Georgia Block US Access to the Space Station?

The Georgia conflict causes more controversy for the ISS (Telegraph/NASA)

[/caption]
The conflict between Georgia and Russia over the disputed region of South Ossetia may have huge consequences for NASA’s ability to send astronauts to the International Space Station in the future. The US has criticised the Russian military action, prompting concerns for the future NASA use of the Russian Soyuz space vehicle. This comes at a particularly critical time, as concerns were already high due to the Shuttle decommissioning in 2010. The US is only allowed to use Soyuz up until 2011 as that is when the exemption from the Iran Non-Proliferation Act runs out. If US-Russian relations turn even more sour, an extension to the exemption may not be allowed, freezing the US out of any involvement with routine manned access into space. US Senator Bill Nelson (Democrat), an outspoken critic of the government’s funding of the US space program, has brought these concerns to light blaming the Bush administration for an over reliance on Russia for future space access…

The Iran Non-Proliferation Act of 2000 was signed by US Congress as a means to encourage Russian involvement in the nuclear ambitions of Iran to cease. The Act restricts US funding to Russia by limiting all purchasing of technology and services relating to the Space Station. A waiver was granted to NASA so the US could make use of the Russian Soyuz space vehicle, and it was hoped that the waiver would be renewed in 2011 so the US could still have manned access to space during the “5-year gap” between Shuttle decommissioning and Constellation completion. However, the lawmakers in Congress will be very reluctant to renew the waiver if relations between the US and Russia degrade, throwing NASA into a very difficult situation once the Shuttle is mothballed. This concern has been amplified since the military action in the disputed region of South Ossetia in Georgia, a US ally.

Regardless of whether the waiver gets renewed, Senator Nelson is deeply suspicious of Russia’s intentions when NASA will need to take Soyuz flights after 2010. Deteriorating US-Russia politics may result in “Russia denying us rides or charging exorbitant amounts for them,” he said on Tuesday. In response to the problem with the renewing of the Act waiver in light of the recent Georgia violence, he stated:

“It was a tough sell before [to Congress], but it was doable simply because we didn’t have a choice. We don’t want to deny ourselves access to the space station, the very place we have built and paid. It’s going to be a tougher sell now unless there are critical developments during the next 48 to 72 hours.” – US Sen. Bill Nelson

So have there been any critical developments in Georgia? Today, US Defence Chief Robert Gates warned that relations between the US and Russia will be damaged “for years” if Russia does not step down from aggressive operations in the region. The Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov responded by saying the rebelling Abkhazia and South Ossetia regions will never integrate back under Georgian rule. He also stated that the military has started to hand back the Georgian town of Gori, although a military presence will remain. So no, although the brunt of the military action by Russia appears to have calmed, there will still be huge pressure on the region and innocent civilians will be caught in the middle for some time to come.

The Polish missile system would be similar to the systems in California and Alaska (BBC News)
The Polish missile system would be similar to the systems in California and Alaska (BBC News)

As if to make matters worse the US and Poland have just signed a defence deal, hosting part of the US missile shield to protect against rogue states launching missiles into Europe and the US. Russia has outright rejected the US proposal, saying that a US controlled system near its border will destabilize the military balance in the region. Today’s signing will only contribute to the tension between the two nations.

For further details on the US-Poland missile plans, see Poland “agrees” to host controversial US missile defence system.

Nelson strongly believes the Iran Non-Proliferation Act waiver is “dead on arrival. Nobody thinks it’s going to happen, and the reality is there is no back-up plan for the space station.” Many critics believe the Act will have a self-defeating effect as it will stop NASA from accessing the $100 billion ISS investment. “There will be consequences not just for Russia but for the U.S. too,” Nelson added.

Sources: Florida Today, Orlando Sentinel, BBC

Posted on by Nancy Atkinson

Have a Question About Space? Ask an Astronaut

Astronaut Greg Chamitoff on board the ISS. Credit: NASA

[/caption]

Astronauts are usually gregarious and quite pleasant people who like to share their experiences of living and working in space. Current International Space Station resident Greg Chamitoff is no different, and he is now ready and waiting to answer any burning questions you may have about human space flight. NASA offers a “Ask the Expert” website for many of its human missions, where the public can submit questions and astronauts or other NASA personnel answer with written and/or audio replies. But the past few space shuttle missions have been so jam-packed with ISS construction activities, there hasn’t been time in the schedule for astronauts to answer any questions from the public. However, Chamitoff will be on board the ISS for a couple of months, and he has some time to answer a few questions. Questions will be transmitted to Greg from Mission Control each week and his answers to a few of them will be available here.


Don’t know what to ask? NASA has a few guidelines:

Try to avoid asking a question that has been answered often on previous missions.

Normally the questions most often answered are those more specific to the current crew and mission.

Do your homework and review information about the station and current activities when you compose your question.

Check out the archives of past questions answered here. There you can even listen to audio of questions answered by the STS-107 crew of Columbia. They really were a great crew.

NASA also has a few rules about asking questions:

Stay on topic.

No profanity, sexually explicit or discriminatory material.

Basically, be nice. So, ask away!

News Source: NASA

Posted on by Ian O'Neill

Constellation Project Parachute Tests: Ares I Success, Orion Failure

An early parachute drop test for the Constellation Project (NASA)

[/caption]
At the end of last month, the Orion crew module and the Ares I rocket parachute systems underwent a series of drop tests. The “drogue parachute” that will gently slow the descent of the spent first-stage motor of the Ares vehicle appeared to function as expected over the Arizona skies. However, an Orion test failed, “programmer parachute” failing to correct the orientation of the test crew module, allowing the module to drop through the sky upside-down. The programmer parachute is intended to inflate before the main three parachutes are deployed to bring the re-entering Orion astronauts to land safely. This news has come from an internal memo referring to the Orion test drop back on July 31st; the successful Ares I drogue parachute drop was carried out on July 24th. So what went wrong with the Orion test-drop?

NASA engineers are continuing a series of parachute tests on Orion and Ares. The first parachute system to be employed in any given launch will be the Ares parachute recovery system (assuming the emergency jettison motor isn’t fired before then). At approximately 126 seconds into flight and at an altitude of 189,000 feet (58,000 m), the first Ares I stage will separate, letting the spent booster drop through the atmosphere. To ensure the engine can be re-used by subsequent Constellation launches, the booster’s nose cap will be jettisoned at 15,740 feet (4800 m), releasing a small pilot parachute, dragging a larger drogue parachute out to slow down the rapidly falling first stage.

The Ares I components (NASA)
The Ares I components (NASA)

The drogue is smaller than a conventional parachute and it is intended to slow the booster from 402 mph (647 km/hr) to 210 m/hr (338 km/hr), positioning the cylinder vertically. Only when this slowdown is achieved that the main three cluster of parachutes can be deployed to complete the descent and plunge into the Atlantic Ocean for retrieval.

It would appear that the essential drogue testing of the first stage Ares I booster worked flawlessly when tested by NASA at the U.S. Army’s Yuma Proving Ground near Yuma, Arizona on July 24th. The next drogue test is scheduled for October.

However, during the July 31st Orion parachute test-run, there was a slight technical hitch that gave the Parachute Test Vehicle (PTV) a violent spin and then thud into the ground. The “programmer” parachute is intended to “right” the orientation of the re-entering crew module as it descends, an essential task before the drogue parachutes can be deployed to rapidly slow the module (in a similar way to the Ares I system). Unfortunately, during this PTV test-drop, problems arose very quickly. As soon as the programmer parachute was deployed, it failed to inflate and therefore did not cause any drag. This happened as the programmer parachute was being buffeted by the turbulence in the wake of the PTV and stabilization parachutes. The PTV was therefore allowed to fall ungracefully, upside-down.

The Orion crew module (HowStuffWorks.com)
The Orion crew module (HowStuffWorks.com)

Continuing to drop, the programmer and stabilization parachutes were jettisoned (having not done their job very well), and drogue parachutes were deployed. As the PTV was falling out of control, the drogue parachutes were put under immediate strain and wrapped around the PTV, dynamic pressure causing the drogue to be cut away.

Having suffered some major whiplash, the PTV’s main bag retention system was damaged and failed. Continuing to fall, the main parachutes were deployed, two were ripped from the vehicle, forcing the PTV to hit the ground with only one parachute open. There are no details as to what damage was caused by this failed test, but I think we can assume the PTV’s bodywork will be dented (and I wonder if human cadavers were used on this particular drop. If they were, I wouldn’t want to be the first engineer on the scene!).

Although an obvious set-back for the Orion parachute system, the NASA memo highlights that it was a “test technique failure” and not a failure of the technology itself. Regardless, I am sure this issue will be ironed out soon enough as the Constellation Program continues to push ahead with development…

Sources: SpaceRef, Space Travel

Posted on by Ian O'Neill

Next Generation Magnetoplasma Rocket Could be Tested on Space Station

The Vasimir experiment (Ad Astra Rocket Corporation)

[/caption]

NASA Administrator Michael Griffin has announced his intentions to send an advanced spaceship propulsion prototype to the International Space Station for advanced testing. The Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket (Vasimir) is currently in an experimental phase, but Griffin hopes that a scale model will be ready for one of the remaining Shuttle-ISS missions before 2010. The Vasimir concept bridges the gap between conventional (fuel hungry, high thrust) rockets and economical (fuel efficient, low-thrust) ion engines. Vasimir achieves this by using an ingenious method of ionizing and heating a neutral gas fuel…

It sounds like an idea from the “let’s do something useful with the Space Station” department in response to recent criticism about the quality of science that is being carried out on the $100 billion orbiting outpost. Michael Griffin, attended the July 29th AirVenture show in Oshkosh and was asked about the status of NASA’s advanced space propulsion research. In response he outlined plans to begin testing the Vasimir on board the ISS within the coming years. This possibly means that Vasimir will undergo vacuum testing on the outside of the station. (NOTE: This is not a propulsion device for the Space Station itself, it will remain in Earth orbit for the rest of its years, regardless of the optimistic idea that it could become an interplanetary space vehicle.)

Vasimir on the test-bed (Ad Astra Rocket Corporation)
Vasimir on the test-bed (Ad Astra Rocket Corporation)

The Vasimir uses a gas, like hydrogen, as a fuel. When injected, the engine turns the hydrogen into a plasma (a highly ionized state of matter). Through the use of intense radio signals emitted from powerful superconducting magnets, the engine is able to produce this plasma and energize it. The hot plasma is then focused and directed by a magnetic nozzle which creates thrust. The Vasimir turns out to be a very efficient way to get optimal thrust from minimal fuel (a quantity in rocket science known as “specific impulse”) through ionizing a fuel and accelerating it with a magnetic field. Such a technology is far more efficient than conventional rockets (as it uses less fuel) and provides more thrust than ion engines.

At the moment, the Vasimir looks as if it is in a “test-bed” phase of development, resembling something too large and unwieldy to be put into space, but Griffin is hoping a scale model may me taken to the ISS, possibly by one of the remaining Shuttle flights before 2010.

The engine itself is being developed by the Ad Astra Rocket Corporation and NASA signed a co-operation agreement with the company in 2006 in the hope of working on large-scale testing of rocket products. Naturally, Vasimir testing on board the Space Station would be of tremendous value in the research of this technology (but there is no mention that the Vasimir could be used as an ISS propulsion device, shame really).

Source: Flight Global

Posted on by Ian O'Neill

The Politics of Space: Obama Wants to Increase NASA Funding

Obama wants NASA to plug the 5-year gap between the Shuttle and Constellation (NASA/AP)

[/caption]
Over the weekend, Democratic senator Barack Obama made a public statement during his presidential campaign trail in Titusville, Florida. Whilst responding to a question about oceanic research, Obama elaborated on his plans for the future of NASA. Previously, there have been hints that a possible Obama Presidency would see a reduction in space funding in favour of a boost in education spending. However, Saturday’s statement was followed by some detailed text on Obama’s campaign blog outlining his priorities for the US dominance in space, the possibility of extending the Shuttle’s operations and speeding up development of the Constellation program…

Many will argue that NASA is operating on a shoestring budget as it is under the current Republican US government, so when reports circulated that the Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama wasn’t prioritising NASA spending, many became concerned about the bleak future for the space program should Obama be voted in. Republican candidate John McCain has always said that if he is voted in that NASA funding would continue to be a priority.

However, in the most detailed statement yet about his vision for the future of NASA, Obama has stated, “we have an administration that has set ambitious goals for NASA without giving NASA the support it needs to reach them.” This sentiment will be shared by many, not least by NASA officials, who have become very worried about the US position in space. Dr. Michael Griffin, NASA’s Director, is fully aware of the international competition the US space agency is facing. In a recent interview with the BBC, Griffin was realistic about China beating the US back to the Moon. “Certainly it is possible that if China wants to put people on the Moon, and if it wishes to do so before the United States, it certainly can. As a matter of technical capability, it absolutely can.” he said.

Ultimately, NASA is overstretched and under-funded, but will Obama’s promises be followed through after the election campaign trail? Regardless, Obama has some big policy plans indicating his increased interest in space exploration. Firstly, he is highly critical of the current funding situation and voices his concern about the Shuttle-Constellation “5-year gap”:

“And we have to do more than provide short-term relief. We have to secure our long-term prosperity and strengthen America’s competitiveness in the 21st century. One of the areas where we are in danger of losing our competitive edge is our space program. When I was growing up, NASA inspired the world with achievements we are still proud of. Today, we have an administration that has set ambitious goals for NASA without giving NASA the support it needs to reach them. As a result, they’ve had to cut back on research, and trim their programs, which means that after the Space Shuttle shuts down in 2010, we’re going to have to rely on Russian spacecraft to keep us in orbit.”

These points are shared by others. U.S. Senator Bill Nelson recently headed a rally at Cape Canaveral in response to the announced Shuttle retirement job losses, voicing his opinion that once the Shuttle is shelved, NASA will rely on Russia for human space flight. This would have the effect of losing skilled spacecraft engineers in the US, only to provide jobs in Russia. Obama confronts this concern and highlights Nelson’s aims for the future of Cape Canaveral employees:

“We cannot cede our leadership in space. That’s why I will help close the gap and ensure that our space program doesn’t suffer when the Shuttle goes out of service by working with Senator Bill Nelson to add at least one additional Space Shuttle flight beyond 2010; by supporting continued funding for NASA; by speeding the development of the Shuttle’s successor; and by making sure that all those who work in the space industry in Florida do not lose their jobs when the Shuttle is retired – because we cannot afford to lose their expertise.”

Wrapping up his online statement, Obama appears to be devoted to future manned missions to the “Moon, Mars and beyond,” with increased spending toward robotic missions. He also links strong space technology development with improvements in the US economy and world inspiration:

“More broadly, we need a real vision for space exploration. To help formulate this vision, I’ll reestablish the National Aeronautics and Space Council so that we can develop a plan to explore the solar system – a plan that involves both human and robotic missions, and enlists both international partners and the private sector. And as America leads the world to long-term exploration of the moon, Mars, and beyond, let’s also tap NASA’s ingenuity to build the airplanes of tomorrow and to study our own planet so we can combat global climate change. Under my watch, NASA will inspire the world, make America stronger, and help grow the economy here in Florida.” – US Sen. Barack Obama

Whilst many may be suspicious of any Presidential candidate’s visions before they are voted in, it is a relief to know Obama has the drive to increase NASA spending and understands that this will have far-reaching benefits for the US and the world.

Aside: Is it me or are the anti-Obama “Paid for by John McCain 2008” ads on every website these days? Perhaps Obama needs to do some “space advocacy” ads to focus on some of the positive aspects of his campaign…

Source: Obama ’08

Posted on by Nancy Atkinson

50 Years of NASA

Fifty years ago this week NASA was born. On July 29, 1958, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed into law the “National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958.” NASA replaced NACA, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, to meet the challenge of exploring beyond Earth, and in particular, to send a human into space. NASA has accomplished a lot during the last 50 years, and now its time to celebrate. To commemorate the anniversary, NASA has developed an interactive multimedia website that provides a historic tour of its first five decades of exploration. It’s a fun and interesting site that offers lots of history and a little look at the future, too. The site combines historic and current video with entertaining computer animation, and the virtual exhibit takes a World’s Fair approach to NASA history, with pavilions that host each decade of NASA’s achievements and challenges.

Begin your personal tour here….

“We’re very excited to have people come and take a look at NASA’s history,” said Brian Dunbar, NASA’s Internet services manager at Headquarters in Washington. “We’ve been able to take a wide range of material and weave it into a virtual tour that allows people to explore at their own pace.”

Here are a few things you can see in this virtual tour:
• Interior 3D views of John Glenn’s Friendship 7 Mercury spacecraft
• The original April 1959 press conference introducing the Mercury astronauts
• A tour of the International Space Station
• Video presentations about NASA’s aeronautics programs
• An interview with former CBS news journalist Walter Cronkite
• A presentation of the Voyager and Viking missions hosted by an avatar of the late Carl Sagan

Posted on by Ian O'Neill

US Signs International Deal to Collaborate on Lunar Missions

Astronaut Eugene Cernan from Apollo 17, the last mission to the Moon (NASA)

[/caption]
NASA has signed a landmark agreement to collaborate with emerging space-faring nations for the exploration of the Moon. This collaboration will include Canada, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Britain and France in the aim to work with NASA developing new technologies and send a series of robotic exploratory missions to pave the way for a manned return mission. The director of NASA’s planetary science division points out that these eight member states are keen to send their first astronauts to the lunar surface. Whilst some may view this collaboration as an attempt by NASA to ‘spread the cost’ of space travel (especially in the current climate of budget cuts), the main point of this deal is to make manned missions to the Moon more of an international effort. This will give smaller space agencies more opportunities, boost the quality of the science that can be achieved and possibly lead us to some answers about how life formed on Earth 4 billion years ago…

The deal was brokered at NASA’s Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, last Thursday, and it is expected to be finalized tomorrow. The meeting took place during the largest Moon-specific conference since the US Apollo missions, highlighting the recent drive to get man back to the lunar surface. NASA had already allocated significant funding toward four manned landers, but scientists have asked for eight, so an international collaboration is required so adequate science can be carried out.

At the centre of this renewed vigour is the quest to understand how life was kick-started on Earth. From recent analysis of Apollo rocks brought back to Earth in the 1970’s, it is thought that the early Solar System was a violent place. Scientists believe this planetary chaos may be the root cause of life on Earth; analysing the lunar surface is critical so a better picture may be created of the Earth-Moon system billions of years ago.

“What’s happening right now is that a revolution in planetary science is going on. We are taking these small pieces and we are starting to put together the puzzle, and we are surprised by what we find.” – James Green, Director of NASA’s Planetary Science Division.

Why is the Moon so special anyway? Surely most of the answers can be found down here on Earth? Well, that’s not entirely correct. The Moon is an open history book of the Solar System’s evolution. Its surface has not been altered by plate tectonics, volcanoes or atmospheric erosion processes (unlike the terrestrial surface); ancient events are etched in its rock, waiting to be read by future lunar explorers. This was the conclusion reached by National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences last year. From the evidence stored in lunar rock, it is hoped that the “terminal cataclysm hypothesis” may be proven or disproved. This theory suggests that Uranus and Neptune once orbited within the orbit of Jupiter. The cataclysm occurred when the powerful Jovian gravitational field flung the smaller gas giants to the outer reaches of the Solar System.

But where is the Earth-Moon connection? This turmoil in the Solar System will have displaced huge numbers of asteroids and comets, scattering them toward the inner planets. This event may have been the trigger of the “late heavy bombardment” between 3.8 to 4 billion years ago which coincided with the formation of life on Earth. This period of time can be studied in great depth on the Moon.

This increased interest in lunar science and the emergence of Japan, China and India create an opportunity NASA will not want to miss. This new international collaboration may be exactly what NASA needs to invigorate funding and help us understand how life was sparked on our blue planet.

Source: Mercury News

Posted on by Ian O'Neill

Bad Idea: Blowing Up Asteroids with Nuclear Missiles

On 4 July 2005, NASA collided a projectile with comet Tempel 1. Should a nuclear warhead be used in the future to deflect asteroids? (NASA)

[/caption]
The first thing that comes to mind when someone asks: “How do we deflect a near Earth asteroid?” is “Fire some nuclear missiles at it.” However, this might not be the best course of action. Akin to opening a walnut with a sledgehammer, there might be a better, less messy option. This is what Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart thinks at least. Last year, NASA issued a report suggesting they were seriously considering a nuclear option should an asteroid threaten Earth. However, the ex-lunar module pilot believes this decision was manipulated by political pressure, possibly indicating the asteroid threat was being used to speed up nuclear proliferation in space…

When ex-Apollo astronauts express an opinion, people tend to sit up and listen. After all, the astronauts throughout the space race years in the latter half of the 20th Century (from the USA and Russia) were the ultimate explorers, going above and beyond the call of duty, putting their lives on the line for their countries. Several of the retired Apollo astronauts have come forward over the years with their opinions on modern NASA, concerns for the future of the US position in space exploration and their belief in extraterrestrial cover-ups (!). And last Wednesday, during a public lecture in San Francisco, legendary astronaut Rusty Schweickart voiced his opinion about NASA’s decision to use nuclear technology when faced with an asteroid threat.

Schweickart has expressed concern with the possibility of using nuclear weapons to destroy, or deflect Earth-bound asteroids, pointing out there are many other less harmful ways of dealing with the asteroid threat. At the moment he points out that we are completely unprepared to deal with asteroids, but by 2015, we should have developed a gentler means of deflection. Simply blowing asteroids up have many knock-on implications. First and foremost, Schweickart believes that NASA may be open to manipulation to put forward the proliferation of space-based nuclear weapons under the guise of international “safety.” Another problem I can see is blowing up a large piece of rock only to create many smaller (but just as deadly) pieces of rock, doesn’t really extinguish the destructive power of an asteroid on collision course, in fact, it might increase it.

Schweickart’s organization, the B612 Foundation examines other, more subtle ways of deflecting dangerous asteroids are examined (nuclear warheads not included). Decisions such as when to take action, how to better track asteroids and how to deflect them should be an international effort and not one nation’s decision to detonate a nuclear bomb in space.

Source: Wired

Posted on by Nancy Atkinson

NASA to Develop GPS-Like System for the Moon

Future astronauts may use GPS-like system. Credit: The Ohio State University

During the second moonwalk of the Apollo 14 mission, Alan Shepard and Edgar Mitchell were hoping to walk to the 300 meter (1,000 feet) wide Cone Crater on the moon, not far from their landing site. However, the two astronauts were not able to find the crater’s rim amid the rolling, repetitive terrain. Later analysis using pictures the two astronauts took determined they had come within 65 feet of the crater. People are used to having certain visual cues to judge distances, such as the size of a building or another car on the horizon, said Ron Li, who has been awarded a $1.2 million grant to develop a navigation system to be used on the moon. Since the moon has no landmarks or cues to help determine distance, getting lost, or misjudging a distant object’s size and location would be easy, and extremely dangerous. New technology like sensors, inertial navigation systems, cameras, computer processors, and image processors will make the next trip to the moon easier for astronauts.

Li, from The Ohio State University, developed software for the Mars rovers Spirit and Opportunity, which has helped him learn a lot about navigation. The navigation system to help future astronauts find their way around moon won’t use satellites; instead the system will rely on signals from a set of sensors including lunar beacons, stereo cameras, and orbital imaging sensors.

Images taken from orbit will be combined with images from the surface to create maps of lunar terrain. Motion sensors on lunar vehicles and on the astronauts themselves will allow computers to calculate their locations. Signals from lunar beacons, the lunar lander, and base stations will give astronauts a picture of their surroundings similar to what drivers see when using a GPS device on Earth. The researchers have named the entire system the Lunar Astronaut Spatial Orientation and Information System (LASOIS).

Astronauts will have a keypad and screen, possibly right on their spacesuits, to view their location and search for new destinations.

Keeping astronauts safe will be a top priority for Li’s team, which includes experts in psychology and human-computer interaction as well as engineering.

“We will help with navigation, but also with astronauts’ health as well,” Li said. “We want them to avoid the stress of getting lost, or getting frustrated with the equipment. Lunar navigation isn’t just a technology problem, it’s also biomedical.”

News Source: The Ohio State University

Posted on by Ian O'Neill

Successful Test Firing of Orion Jettison Motor (Video)

Successful test-firing of Orion's jettison engines (Aerojet)

[/caption]
It looks like the hardware is gradually slotting into place for the development of the Orion capsule in NASA’s Constellation Program. On July 17th, the ultimate “ejection seat” was tested by NASA and rocket contractor Aerojet: The Orion jettison motor. Should there be an emergency during Ares rocket/Orion capsule during launch, the Orion capsule will have the capability to eject (whether it is on the launchpad or travelling through the atmosphere), ensuring the safety of the crew. This is the first safety measure of its kind, so a successful engine test can only help to boost confidence in the technology behind Orion…

Although there are concerns for the Constellation Program funding and technology-wise, there is good news coming from the development of NASA’s new Orion crew module. The first full-scale test firing of the jettison motor was successful, boosting confidence in the new safety system the capsule will have installed. Later this year, a full-scale “Pad Abort-1” test is scheduled in the New Mexico desert, where a mock Orion will be blasted clear of a model launchpad (up to a mile in altitude) to test the effectiveness of the system. Tests are already under way to deduce whether a dry or wet touch-down will be carried out by the Orion capsule using cadavers (human corpses) as crash-test dummies.

The jettison motor was tested at the Astrojet facility in Sacramento, California, which marks the start of a series of developmental tests before the finished article is integrated into the mock Orion module to begin the New Mexico tests. During last weeks test firing, engineers were testing acoustic, vibration and shock effects on the engines. It appears everything ran smoothly, indicating the jettison system is close to system-level demonstration.

View the test-firing on the Constellation Project site »

This is a critical stage in the development of Orion. Since the Columbia disaster in 2003, NASA has felt pressure to ensure the safety of their astronauts. Although strict guidelines are in place, space travel remains a risky business where tough decisions need to be made. Installing an Orion jettison system will be a huge piece of mind for mission controllers and Constellation astronauts should there be launch complications on the pad or as Ares powers through the atmosphere.

Source: NASA