While Saturn is far away from us, scientists have just found a way to make the journey there easier. A new technique pinpointed the position of the ringed gas giant to within just two miles (four kilometers).
It’s an impressive technological feat that will improve spacecraft navigation and also help us better understand the orbits of the outer planets, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) said.
It’s remarkable how much there is to learn about Saturn’s position given that the ancients discovered it, and it’s easily visible with the naked eye. That said, the new measurements with the Cassini spacecraft and the Very Long Baseline Array radio telescope array are 50 times more precise than previous measurements with telescopes on the ground.
“This work is a great step toward tying together our understanding of the orbits of the outer planets of our solar system and those of the inner planets,” stated study leader Dayton Jones of JPL.
Saturn and its rings, as seen from above the planet by the Cassini spacecraft. Credit: NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute/Gordan Ugarkovic
What’s even more interesting is scientists have been using the better information as it comes in. Cassini began using the improved method in 2013 to improve its precision when it fires its engines.
This, in the long term, leads to fuel savings — allowing the spacecraft a better chance of surviving through the end of its latest mission extension, which currently is 2017. (It’s been orbiting Saturn since 2004.)
The technique is so successful that NASA plans to use the same method for the Juno spacecraft, which is en route to Jupiter for a 2016 arrival.
Juno will repeatedly dive between the planet and its intense belts of charged particle radiation, coming only 5,000 kilometers (about 3,000 miles) from the cloud tops at closest approach. (NASA/JPL-Caltech)
Scientists are excited about Cassini’s mission right now because it is allowing them to observe the planet and its moons as it reaches the summer solstice of its 29-year orbit.
This could, for example, provide information on how the climate of the moon Titan changes — particularly with regard to its atmosphere and ethane/methane-riddled seas, both believed to be huge influencers for the moon’s temperature.
Beyond the practical applications, the improved measurements of Saturn and Cassini’s position are also giving scientists more insight into Albert Einstein’s theory of general relatively, JPL stated. They are taking the same techniques and applying them to observing quasars — black-hole powered galaxies — when Saturn passes in front of them from the viewpoint of Earth.
Bearing the CRS-5 Dragon cargo craft within its nose, the Falcon 9 v1.1 stands patiently to execute the United States’ first mission of 2015. Photo Credit: Mike Killian/AmericaSpace
Liftoff is currently targeted for 4:47 a.m. EST Saturday, Jan. 10, from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida following a postponement from Friday, Jan. 9.
The launch was unexpectedly scrubbed with one minute, 21 seconds left on the countdown clock for technical reasons earlier this week just prior to the targeted blastoff time of 6:20 a.m. EST on Tuesday, Jan. 6.
A thrust vector control actuator for the Falcon 9’s second stage failed to perform as expected, resulting in a launch abort, said NASA.
NASA and SpaceX decided to take another day to fully evaluate the issue and ensure a launch success.
The launch will be the first Falcon 9 liftoff for 2015.
The overnight launch should put on a spectacular sky show for spectators along the Florida space coast.
There is only an instantaneous launch window available, meaning that the blastoff must proceed at that exact instant. Any delays due to technical issues or weather would force a scrub until at least Tuesday, Jan. 13.
SpaceX drone ship sailing at sea to hold position awaiting Falcon 9 rocket landing. Credit: Elon Musk/SpaceX
Overall, CRS-5 is the company’s fifth commercial resupply services mission to the International Space Station.
The rocket recovery and landing attempt is a key step towards carrying out SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s bold vision of rocket reusability.
Towards that end, SpaceX dispatched the “autonomous spaceport drone ship” sailing at sea towards a point where Musk hopes it will serve as an ocean going landing platform for the precision landing of his firm’s Falcon 9 rocket after it concludes its launch phase to the ISS.
Testing operation of Falcon 9 hypersonic grid fins (x-wing config) launching on next Falcon 9 flight, CRS-5. Credit: SpaceX/Elon Musk
The “autonomous spaceport drone ship” departed the port of Jacksonville, FL, on Saturday, Jan. 3, heading to a point somewhere around 200 to 250 miles or so off the US East coast in a northeasterly direction coinciding with the flight path of the rocket.
However, the absolute overriding goal of the mission is to safely deliver NASA’s contracted cargo to the ISS, emphasized Hans Koenigsmann, VP of Mission Assurance, SpaceX, at a media briefing on Jan. 5 at the Kennedy Space Center.
Landing on the off-shore barge is just a secondary objective of SpaceX, not NASA, he repeated several times.
The Dragon CRS-5 spacecraft is loaded with over 5108 pounds (2317 kg) of scientific experiments, technology demonstrations, crew supplies, spare parts, food, water, clothing, and assorted research gear for the six person crew serving aboard the ISS.
Student Space Flight teams at NASA Wallops – Experiments Will Refly on SpaceX CRS 5. Science experiments from these students, representing 18 school communities across America, were selected to fly aboard the Orbital Sciences Cygnus Orb-3 spacecraft bound for the ISS and which were lost when the rocket exploded unexpectedly after launch from NASA Wallops, VA, on Oct. 28, 2014, as part of the Student Spaceflight Experiments Program (SSEP). The students pose here with SSEP program director Dr. Jeff Goldstein prior to Antares’ launch. The experiments will be re-flown aboard SpaceX CRS-5. Credit: Ken Kremer – kenkremer.com
Among the payloads is the Cloud-Aerosol Transport System (CATS), a remote-sensing laser instrument to measure clouds and the location and distribution of pollution, dust, smoke, and other particulates and aerosols in the atmosphere.
Also loaded onboard are 17 student experiments known collectively as the “Yankee Clipper” mission. The experiments are sponsored by the National Center for Earth and Space Science Education which oversees the Student Spaceflight Experiments Program (SSEP) in partnership with NanoRacks LLC.
They had been selected to fly aboard the Orbital Sciences Cygnus Orb-3 spacecraft bound for the ISS, but were all lost when the rocket exploded unexpectedly after launch from NASA Wallops, VA, on Oct. 28, 2014.
The experiments have been reconstituted to fly on the CRS-5 mission.
The US supply train to the ISS is now wholly dependent on SpaceX until Cygnus flights are resumed hopefully by late 2015 on an alternate rocket, the Atlas V.
CRS-5 marks the company’s fifth resupply mission to the ISS under a $1.6 Billion contract with NASA to deliver 20,000 kg (44,000 pounds) of cargo to the station during a dozen Dragon cargo spacecraft flights through 2016 under NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contract.
The weather forecast stands at 80% GO for favorable conditions at launch time.
NASA Television live launch coverage begins at 3:30 a.m. EST on Jan. 10 at: http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/
SpaceX also will webcast the launch at: http://www.spacex.com/webcast/
Stay tuned here for Ken’s continuing Earth and planetary science and human spaceflight news.
New countdown clock at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center displays SpaceX Falcon 9 CRS-5 mission and recent Orion ocean recovery at the Press Site viewing area on Dec. 18, 2014. Credit: Ken Kremer – kenkremer.com
We’ve seen volcanoes or geysers erupting on the moons of Io and Enceladus. Volcanic remnants remain on Mars and the Moon. But it’s tough for rovers to get inside these challenging environments.
So NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory is trying out a new robot here on Earth to one day, they hope, get inside volcanoes elsewhere in the Solar System.
The series is called VolcanoBot. The first prototype was tested last year inside the the active Kilauea volcano in Hawaii, and a second is set for further work later this year.
As you can see in the picture below, VolcanoBot has a set of small wheels and a host of electronics inside. The goal is to create 3-D maps of the environments in which they roam. And early results are showing some promise, NASA noted in a press release: VolcanoBot discovered the fissure it was exploring did not completely close up, which is something they did not expect.
The Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s VolcanoBot 1 inside a lava tube at the Kilauea volcano in Hawaii. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech
“We don’t know exactly how volcanoes erupt. We have models but they are all very, very simplified. This project aims to help make those models more realistic,” stated Carolyn Parcheta, a NASA postdoctoral fellow at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California who is leading the research.
“In order to eventually understand how to predict eruptions and conduct hazard assessments, we need to understand how the magma is coming out of the ground,” she added. “This is the first time we have been able to measure it directly, from the inside, to centimeter-scale accuracy.”
The research will continue this year with VolcanoBot 2, which has less mass, less size and has an advanced “vison center” that can turn about.
Artist’s impression of the Cassini spacecraft making a close pass by Saturn’s inner moon Enceladus to study plumes from geysers that erupt from giant fissures in the moon’s southern polar region. Copyright 2008 Karl Kofoed/NASA. Click for full size version.
Parcheta’s research recently attracted the attention of visitors to National Geographic’s website, who voted her #2 in a list of “great explorers” on the Expedition Granted campaign.
Remember that this is early-stage research, with no missions outside of Earth yet assigned. But this is a small step — or roll, in this case — to better understanding how volcanoes work generally, whether on our own planet or other locations.
NASA astronaut Greg Chamitoff during a 2011 spacewalk on the International Space Station. Reflected in his visor is NASA crewmate Mike Fincke. Both astronauts were mission specialists aboard shuttle mission STS-134. Credit: NASA
Did you know it’s been nearly 50 years since the first spacewalk? On March 18, 1965, Russian Alexei Leonov ventured from the safety of his Russian spacecraft for the first attempt for a person to survive “outside” in a spacesuit. While Leonov had troubles returning to the spacecraft, his brave effort set off a new era of spaceflight. It showed us it was possible for people to work in small spacesuits in space.
Think about what spacewalks have helped us accomplish since then. We’ve walked on the Moon. Constructed the International Space Station. Retrieved satellites. Even flew away from the space shuttle in a jetpack, for a couple of flights in the 1980s.
Chris Cassidy with Earth as a backdrop during the EVA on May 11, 2013. Credit: NASA.Ed White did the first American spacewalk in 1965. Obviously, he wore a spacesuit. Credit: NASA“Knocking on the door to come back in from space after yesterday’s spacewalk,” said Ron Garan via Twitter. Credit: NASAAstronaut Eugene Cernan from Apollo 17, the last mission to the Moon (NASA)Astronaut Drew Feustel reenters the space station after completing an 8-hour, 7-minute spacewalk at on Sunday, May 22, 2011. He and fellow spacewalker Mike Fincke conducted the second of the four EVAs during the STS-134 mission. Credit: NASANASA astronaut Garrett Reisman takes a self-portrait visor while participating in the first of three spacewalks. Credit: NASANASA Astronaut Bruce McCandless flying in the Manned Maneuvering Unit in 1984. Image Credit: NASAAstronaut Richard Arnold during the mission’s first spacewalk. Credit: NASADust flies from the tires of a moon buggy, driven by Apollo 17 astronaut Gene Cernan. These “rooster-tails” of dust caused problems. Credit: NASA
Student Space Flight teams at NASA Wallops - Will Refly on SpaceX CRS 5. Science experiments from these students representing 18 school communities across America were selected to fly aboard the Orbital Sciences Cygnus Orb-3 spacecraft bound for the ISS and which were lost when the rocket exploded uexpectedly after launch from NASA Wallops, VA, on Oct. 28, 2014, as part of the Student Spaceflight Experiments Program (SSEP). The students pose here with SSEP program director Dr. Jeff Goldstein prior to Antares launch. The experiments will be re-flown aboard SpaceX CRS-5. Credit: Ken Kremer - kenkremer.com
Student Space Flight teams at NASA Wallops – Will Refly on SpaceX CRS 5
Science experiments from these students representing 18 school communities across America were selected to fly aboard the Orbital Sciences Cygnus Orb-3 spacecraft bound for the ISS and which were lost when the rocket exploded uexpectedly after launch from NASA Wallops, VA, on Oct. 28, 2014, as part of the Student Spaceflight Experiments Program (SSEP). The students pose here with SSEP program director Dr. Jeff Goldstein prior to Antares launch. The experiments will be re-flown aboard SpaceX CRS-5. Credit: Ken Kremer – kenkremer.com[/caption]
When it comes to science and space exploration, you have to get accustomed to a mix of success and failure.
If you’re wise you learn from failure and turn adversity around into a future success.
Such is the case for the resilient student scientists who learned a hard lesson of life at a young age when the space science experiments they poured their hearts and souls into for the chance of a lifetime to launch research investigations aboard the Antares rocket bound for the International Space Station (ISS) on the Orb-3 mission, incomprehensibly exploded in flames before their eyes on Oct. 28, 2014.
Those student researchers from across America are being given a second chance and will have their reconstituted experiments re-flown on the impending SpaceXCRS-5 mission launch, thanks to the tireless efforts of NASA, NanoRacks, CASIS, SpaceX and the Student Spaceflight Experiments Program (SSEP) which runs the program.
The SpaceX CRS-5 launch to the ISS on the Falcon 9 rocket planned for this morning, Jan. 6, was scrubbed with a minute to go for technical reasons and has been reset to no earlier than Jan. 9.
SSEP Director Dr. Jeff Goldstein shows a NanoRacks Mix-Stix tube used by the student investigations on the NanoRacks/Student Spaceflight Experiments Program -Yankee Clipper mission during presentation at NASA Wallops prior to Oct. 28 Antares launch failure. 17 of 18 experiments will re-fly on SpaceX CRS-5 launch. Credit: Ken Kremer – kenkremer.com
The experiments are known collectively as the ‘Yankee Clipper’ mission.
Antares Orb-3 was destroyed shortly after the exhilarating blastoff from NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility on the Virginia shore.
Everything aboard the Orbital Sciences Antares rocket and ‘the SS Deke Slayton’ Cygnus cargo freighter was lost, including all the NASA supplies and research as well as the student investigations.
First stage propulsion system at base of Orbital Sciences Antares rocket appears to explode moments after blastoff from NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility, VA, on Oct. 28, 2014, at 6:22 p.m. Credit: Ken Kremer – kenkremer.com
“The student program represents 18 experiments flying as the Yankee Clipper,” said Dr. Jeff Goldstein, in an interview with Universe Today at NASA Wallops prior to the Antares launch. Goldstein is director of the National Center for Earth and Space Science Education, which oversees SSEP in partnership with NanoRacks LLC.
“Altogether 8 communities sent delegations. 41 student researchers were at NASA Wallops for the launch and SSEP media briefing.”
“The 18 experiments flying as the SSEP Yankee Clipper payload reflect the 18 communities participating in Mission 6 to ISS.”
“The communities represent grade 5 to 16 schools from all across America including Washington, DC; Kalamazoo, MI; Berkeley Heights and Ocean City, NJ; Colleton County and North Charleston, SC, and Knox County and Somerville, TN.”
Goldstein explains that within days of the launch failure, efforts were in progress to re-fly the experiments.
“Failure happens in science and what we do in the face of that failure defines who we are,” said Goldstein, “NASA and NanoRacks moved mountains to get us on the next launch, SpaceX CRS-5. We faced an insanely tight turnaround, but all the student teams stepped up to the plate.”
Even the NASA Administrator Charles Bolden lauded the students efforts and perseverance!
“I try to teach students, when I speak to them, not to be afraid of failure. An elementary school student once told me, when I asked for a definition of success, that ‘success is taking failure and turning it inside out.’ It is important that we rebound, learn from these events and try again — and that’s a great lesson for students,” said NASA Administrator Bolden.
“I am delighted that most of the students will get to see their investigations re-flown on the SpaceX mission. Perseverance is a critical skill in science and the space business.”
Virtually all of the experiments have been reconstituted to fly on the CRS-5 mission, also known as SpaceX-5.
“17 of the 18 student experiments lost on Orb-3 on October 28 are re-flying on SpaceX-5. These experiments comprise the reconstituted Student Spaceflight Experiments Program (SSEP) Yankee Clipper II payload for SSEP Mission 6 to ISS,” noted Goldstein.
“This shows the resilience of the federal-private partnership in commercial space, and of the commitment by our next generation of scientists and engineers.”
The wide range of experiments include microgravity investigations on how fluids act and form into crystals in the absence of gravity crystal growth, mosquito larvae development, milk expiration, baby bloodsuckers, development of Chrysanthemum and soybean seeds and Chia plants, effect of yeast cell division and implications for human cancer cells, and an examination of hydroponics.
Student experiments are aboard. Bearing the CRS-5 Dragon cargo craft within its nose, the Falcon 9 v1.1 stands patiently to execute the United States’ first mission of 2015. Photo Credit: Mike Killian/AmericaSpace
That dark day in October witnessed by the students, Goldstein, myself as a fellow scientist, and others is something we will never forget. We all chose to learn from the failure and move forward to greater accomplishments.
Don’t surrender to failure. And don’t give in to the ‘Do Nothing – Can’t Do’ crowd so prevalent today.
Remember what President Kennedy said during his address at Rice University on September 12, 1962:
“We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.”
Stay tuned here for Ken’s continuing Earth and planetary science and human spaceflight news.
NanoRacks Mix-Stix, which are used by the student investigations on the NanoRacks/National Center for Earth and Space Science Education -Yankee Clipper. Credit: Ken Kremer – kenkremer.com
Falcon 9 and Dragon on the launchpad Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. SpaceX will try again on January 9 to launch and attempt an historic first stage landing on a floating ocean platform. Credit: SpaceX.
An actuator that was “behaving strangely” on the SpaceX Falcon 9’s upper stage caused a last minute scrub for Tuesday’s attempt to launch a Dragon capsule to the International Space Station, as well as the first try at an historic first stage landing on a floating platform in the Atlantic Ocean.
Need to investigate the upper stage Z actuator. Was behaving strangely. Next launch attempt on Friday at 5am.
SpaceX will try again on Friday, January 9, 2014 at 5:09 a.m. EST. Like today’s attempt, there will be only an instantaneous launch window available, meaning that the blastoff must proceed at that exact instant. Any delays due to technical issues or weather would force further delays.
This is the commercial space company’s fifth resupply mission to the ISS and the unmanned cargo freighter is loaded with more than 5,108 pounds (2317 kg) of scientific experiments, technology demonstrations, crew supplies, spare parts, food, water, clothing and assorted research gear for the space station.
The “experiment” that has attracted the most attention, however, is the attempt to land the first stage of the two-stage rocket on a floating platform in the Atlantic Ocean, approximately 320 km (200 miles) off the coast of Florida.
This is the first attempt at such a landing. SpaceX has conducted numerous successful soft landing tests on land, and done several touchdowns on the ocean’s surface.
Elon Musk has estimated the odds of success at the landing attempt at about 50% at best.
“It’s an experiment,” said Hans Koenigsmann, VP of Mission Assurance at SpaceX, speaking at a media briefing on Jan. 5 at the Kennedy Space Center. “There’s a certain likelihood that this will not work out right, that something will go wrong.” He also added that the landing on the off shore barge is just a secondary objective of SpaceX, not NASA.
Over forty years separate the step made by an Apollo astronaut and the cleated wheel of the Curiosity Rover on Mars. (Photo Credits: NASA)
With robotic spacecraft, we have explored, discovered and expanded our understanding of the Solar System and the Universe at large. Our five senses have long since reached their limits and cannot reveal the presence of new objects or properties without the assistance of extraordinary sensors and optics. Data is returned and is transformed into a format that humans can interpret.
Humans remain confined to low-Earth orbit and forty-three years have passed since humans last escaped the bonds of Earth’s gravity. NASA’s budget is divided between human endeavors and robotic and each year there is a struggle to find balance between development of software and hardware to launch humans or carry robotic surrogates. Year after year, humans continue to advance robotic capabilities and artificial intelligence (A.I.), and with each passing year, it becomes less clear how we will fit ourselves into the future exploration of the Solar System and beyond.
On July 21, 1969, Neil Armstrong photographed Buzz Aldrin on the Moon. The Apollo 13 astronauts hold the record as having been the most distant humans from Earth – 249,205 miles. Since December 1972, 42 years, the furthest humans have traveled from Earth is 347 miles (equivalent to SF to LA) – to service the Hubble space telescope. The Mars Science Laboratory, Curiosity Rover resides at least 34 million miles and as far as 249 million from Earth, while the Voyager 1 probe is 12,141,887,500 miles from Earth. Having traveled billions of miles and peered into billions of light years of space, NASA robotic vehicles have rewritten astronomical textbooks.(Photo Credits: NASA)
Is it a race in which we are unwittingly partaking that places us against our inventions? And like the aftermath of the Kasparov versus Deep Blue chess match, are we destined to accept a segregation as necessary? Allow robotics, with or without A.I., to do what they do best – explore space and other worlds?
In May 1997, Garry Kasparov accepted a rematch with Deep Blue and lost. In the 17 years since the defeat, super-computing power has increased by a factor of 50,000 (FLOPS). Furthermore, Chess software has steadily improved. Advances in space robotics have not relied on sheer computing performance but rather from steady advances in reliability, memory storage, nanotechnology, material science, software and more. (Photo Credit: Reuters)
Should we continue to find new ways and better ways to plug ourselves into our surrogates and appreciate with greater detail what they sense and touch? Consider how naturally our children engross themselves in games and virtual reality and how difficult it is to separate them from the technology. Or is this just a prelude and are we all antecedents of future Captain Kirks and Jean Luc Picards?
The NASA 2015 budget passed on December 13, 2014, as part of the Continuing Resolution & Omnibus Bill (HR 83). Each chart segment lists the allocated funds, the percent of the total budget, the percent change relative to NASA’s 2014 budget and percent change relative to the 2015 White House budget request. (Credit: T.Reyes)
Approximately 55% of the NASA budget is in the realm of human spaceflight (HSF). This includes specific funds for Orion and SLS and half measures of supporting segments of the NASA agency, such as Cross-Agency Support, Construction and Maintenance. In contrast, appropriations for robotic missions – project development, operations, R&D – represent 39% of the budget.
The appropriation of funds has always favored human spaceflight, primarily because HSF requires costlier, heavier and more complex systems to maintain humans in the hostile environment of space. And while NASA budgets are not nearly weighted 2-to-1 in favor of human spaceflight, few would contest that the return on investment (ROI) is over 2-to-1 in favor of robotic driven exploration of space. And many would scoff at this ratio and counter that 3-to-1 or 4-to-1 is closer to the advantage robots have over humans.
For NASA enthusiasts, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden and Texas representative Lamar Smith, chairman of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology in the 113th Congress, have raised CSPAN coverage to moments of high drama. The lines of questioning and decision making define the line in the sand between Capital Hill and the White House’s vision of NASA’s future. (Credit: CSPAN,Getty Images)
Politics play a significantly bigger role in the choice of appropriations to HSF compared to robotic missions. The latter is distributed among smaller budget projects and operations and HSF has always involved large expensive programs lasting decades. The big programs attract the interest of public officials wanting to bring capital and jobs to their districts or states.
NASA appropriations are complicated further by a rift between the White House and Capitol Hill along party lines. The Democrat-controlled White House has favored robotics and the use of private enterprise to advance NASA while Republicans on the Hill have supported the big human spaceflight projects; further complications are due to political divisions over the issue of Climate Change. How the two parties treat NASA is the opposite to, at least, how the public perceives the party platforms – smaller government or more social programs, less spending and supporting private enterprise. This tug of war is clearly seen in the NASA budget pie chart.
The House reduced the White House request for NASA Space Technology by 15% while increasing the funds for Orion and SLS by 16%. Space Technology represents funds that NASA would use to develop the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM), which the Obama administration favors as a foundation for the first use of SLS as part of a human mission to an asteroid. In contrast, the House appropriated $100 million to the Europa mission concept. Due to the delays of Orion and SLS development and anemic funding of ARM, the first use of SLS could be to send a probe to Europa.
While HSF appropriations for Space Ops & Exploration (effectively HSF) increased ~6% – $300 million, NASA Science gained ~2% – $100 million over the 2014 appropriations; ultimately set by Capitol Hill legislators. The Planetary Society, which is the Science Mission Directorate’s (SMD) staunchest supporter, has expressed satisfaction that the Planetary Science budget has nearly reached their recommended $1.5 billion. However, the increase is delivered with the requirement that $100 million shall be used for Europa concept development and is also in contrast to cutbacks in other segments of the SMD budget.
Note also that NASA Education and Public Outreach (EPO) received a significant boost from Republican controlled Capital Hill. In addition to the specific funding – a 2% increase over 2014 and 34% over the White House request, there is $42 million given specifically to the Science Mission Directorate (SMD) for EPO. The Obama Adminstration has attempted to reduce NASA EPO in favor of a consolidated government approach to improve effectiveness and reduce government.
The drive to explore beyond Earth’s orbit and set foot on new worlds is not just a question of finances. In retrospect, it was not finances at all and our remaining shackles to Earth was a choice of vision. Today, politicians and administrators cannot proclaim ‘Let’s do it again! Let’s make a better Shuttle or a better Space Station.’ There is no choice but to go beyond Earth orbit, but where?
From a Soyuz capsule, Space Shuttle Endeavour, during Expedition 27, is docked to the ISS, 220 miles above the Earth. Before even Apollo 11 landed on the Moon, plans were underway for the next generation spacecraft that would lower the cost of human spaceflight and make trips routine. Forty years have passed since the last Saturn rocket launch and four years since the last Shuttle. Legislators on Capital Hill appear ready to accept a replacement for the Shuttle that, while inherently safer, will cost $600 million per launch excluding the cost of the payload. The Space Launch System (SLS) is destined to serve both human spaceflight and robotic missions. (Photo Credit: NASA)
While the International Space Station program, led by NASA, now maintains a continued human presence in outer space, more people ask the question, ‘why aren’t we there yet?’ Why haven’t we stepped upon Mars or the Moon again, or anything other than Earth or floating in the void of low-Earth orbit. The answer now resides in museums and in the habitat orbiting the Earth every 90 minutes.
The retired Space Shuttle program and the International Space Station represent the funds expended on human spaceflight over the last 40 years, which is equivalent to the funds and the time necessary to send humans to Mars. Some would argue that the funds and time expended could have meant multiple human missions to Mars and maybe even a permanent presence. But the American human spaceflight program chose a less costly path, one more achievable – staying close to home.
Mars, the forbidden planet? No. The Amazing planet? Yes. Foreboding? Perhaps. Radiation exposure, electronic or mechanical mishaps and years of zero or low gravity are the perils that the first Mars explorers face. But humanity’s vision of landing on Mars remains just illustrations from the ’50s and ’60s. A select few – Mars Rover navigators – have experienced the surface of Mars in virtual reality. (Photo Credits: Franklin Dixon, June 12, 1964 (left), MGM (right))
Ultimately, the goal is Mars. Administrators at NASA and others have become comfortable with this proclamation. However, some would say that it is treated more as a resignation. Presidents have been defining the objectives of human spaceflight and then redefining them. The Moon, Lagrangian Points or asteroids as waypoints to eventually land humans on Mars. Partial plans and roadmaps have been constructed by NASA and now politicians have mandated a roadmap. And politicians forced continuation of development of a big rocket; one which needs a clear path to justify its cost to taxpayers. One does need a big rocket to get anywhere beyond low-Earth orbit. However, a cancellation of the Constellation program – to build the replacement for the Shuttle and a new human-rated spacecraft – has meant delays and even more cost overruns.
During the ten years that have transpired to replace the Space Shuttle, with at least five more years remaining, events beyond the control of NASA and the federal government have taken place. Private enterprise is developing several new approaches to lofting payloads to Earth orbit and beyond. More countries have taken on the challenge. Spearheading this activity, independent of NASA or Washington plans, has been Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX).
The launch of a SpaceX Falcon 9 is scheduled for Tuesday, December 5, 2015 and will include the return to Earth of the 1st stage Falcon core. Previous attempts landed the core into the Atlantic while this latest attempt will use a barge to attempt a full recovery. The successful soft landing and reuse of Falcon cores will be a major milestone in the history of spaceflight. (Photo Credits: SpaceX)
SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and soon to be Falcon Heavy represent alternatives to what was originally envisioned in the Constellation program with Ares I and Ares V. Falcon Heavy will not have the capability of an Ares V but at roughly $100 million per flight versus $600 million per flight for what Ares V has become – the Space Launch System (SLS) – there are those that would argue that ‘time is up.’ NASA has taken too long and the cost of SLS is not justifiable now that private enterprise has developed something cheaper and done so faster. Is Falcon Nine and Heavy “better”, as in NASA administrator Dan Golden’s proclamation – ‘Faster, Better, Cheaper’? Is it better than SLS technology? Is it better simply because its cheaper for lifting each pound of payload? Is it better because it is arriving ready-to-use sooner than SLS?
Humans will always depend on robotic launch vehicles, capsules and habitats laden with technological wonders to make our spaceflight possible. However, once we step out beyond Earth orbit and onto other worlds, what shall we do? From Carl Sagan to Steve Squyres, NASA scientists have stated that a trained astronaut could do in just weeks what the Mars rovers have required years to accomplish. How long will this hold up and is it really true?
Man versus Machine? All missions whether robotic or human spaceflight benefit mankind but the question is raised: how will human boots fit into the exploration of the universe that robotics has made possible. (Photo Credits: NASA, Illustration – J.Schmidt)
Since Chess Champion Garry Kasparov was defeated by IBM’s Deep Blue, there have been 8 two-year periods representing the doubling of transistors in integrated circuits. This is a factor of 256. Arguably, computers have grown 100 times more powerful in the 17 years. However, robotics is not just electronics. It is the confluence of several technologies that have steadily developed over the 40 years that Shuttle technology stood still and at least 20 years that Space Station designs were locked into technological choices. Advances in material science, nano-technology, electro-optics, and software development are equally important.
While human decision making has been capable of spinning its wheels and then making poor choices and logistical errors, the development of robotics altogether is a juggernaut. While appropriations for human spaceflight have always surpassed robotics, advances in robotics have been driven by government investments across numerous agencies and by private enterprise. The noted futurist and inventor Ray Kurzweil who predicts the arrival of the Singularity by around 2045 (his arrival date is not exact) has emphasized that the surpassing of human intellect by machines is inevitable due to the “The Law of Accelerating Returns”. Technological development is a juggernaut.
In the same year that NASA was founded, 1958, the term Singularity was first used by mathematician John von Neumann to describe the arrival of artificial intelligence that surpasses humans.
Unknowingly, this is the foot race that NASA has been in since its creation. The mechanisms and electronics that facilitated landing men on the surface of the Moon never stopped advancing. And in that time span, human decisions and plans for NASA never stopped vacillating or stop locking existing technology into designs; suffering delays and cost overruns before launching humans to space.
David Hardy’s illustration of the Daedalus Project envisioned by the British Interplanetary Society – a spacecraft to travel to the nearest stars. Advances in artificial intelligence and robotics leads one to wonder who shall reside inside such vessels of the future – robotic surrogates or human beings or something in between. (Credit: D. Hardy)
So are we destined to arrive on Mars and roam its surface like retired geologists and biologists wandering in the desert with a poking stick or rock hammer? Have we wasted too much time and has the window passed in which human exploration can make discoveries that robotics cannot accomplish faster, better and cheaper? Will Mars just become an art colony where humans can experience new sunrises and setting moons? Or will we segregate ourselves from our robotic surrogates and appreciate our limited skills and go forth into the Universe? Or will we mind meld with robotics and master our own biology just moments after taking our first feeble steps beyond the Earth?
An excerpt of page 3 of NASA’s FY15 Agency Mission Planning Model (AMPM[alt]); a 20 year plan. This figure emphasizes the list of planned projects and missions for human spaceflight (HEOMD), orange, and the Science Mission Directorate (SMD), green, representing robotic development and missions. The lopsided list is indicative of the cost advantage of robotics over human spaceflight. The robotic missions will amount to hundreds of years of combined mission lifetime in comparison to the HEOMD missions that are still limited to months by individual astronauts in flight.(Credit: NASA)References:
SpaceX drone ship sailing at sea to hold position awaiting Falcon 9 rocket landing. Credit: Elon Musk/SpaceX
Aiming to one day radically change the future of the rocket business, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has a bold vision unlike any other in a historic attempt to recover and reuse rockets set for Jan. 6 with the goal of dramatically reducing the enormous costs of launching anything into space.
Towards the bold vision of rocket reusability, SpaceX dispatched the “autonomous spaceport drone ship” sailing at sea towards a point where Musk hopes it will serve as an ocean going landing platform for the first stage of his firm’s Falcon 9 rocket after it concludes its launch phase to the International Space Station (ISS).
“Drone spaceport ship heads to its hold position in the Atlantic to prepare for a rocket landing,” tweeted Musk today (Jan. 5) along with a photo of the drone ship underway (see above).
The history making and daring experimental landing is planned to take place in connection with the Tuesday, Jan. 6, liftoff of the Falcon 9 booster and Dragon cargo freighter bound for the ISS on a critical resupply mission for NASA.
No one has ever tried such a landing attempt before in the ocean says SpaceX. The company has conducted numerous successful soft landing tests on land. And several soft touchdowns on the ocean’s surface. But never before on a barge in the ocean.
The “autonomous spaceport drone ship” departed the port of Jacksonville, FL, on Saturday, heading to a point somewhere around 200 to 250 miles or so off the US East coast in a northeasterly direction coinciding with the flight path of the rocket.
SpaceX Falcon 9 first stage rocket will attempt precision landing on this autonomous spaceport drone ship soon after launch set for January 6, 2015, from Cape Canaveral, Florida. Credit: SpaceX
The SpaceX Dragon CRS-5 mission is slated to blast off at 6:20 am EST, Tuesday, Jan. 6, 2015, atop the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida.
Falcon 9 and Dragon have gone vertical in advance of the 6:20 am ET launch on Jan. 6, 2015. Credit: SpaceX.
The absolute overriding goal of the mission is to safely deliver NASA’s contracted payload to the ISS, emphasized Hans Koenigsmann, VP of Mission Assurance, SpaceX, at a media briefing today (Jan. 5) at the Kennedy Space Center. Landing on the off shore barge is just a secondary objective of SpaceX, not NASA, he repeated several times.
The Dragon CRS-5 spacecraft is loaded with over 5108 pounds (2317 kg) of scientific experiments, technology demonstrations, crew supplies, spare parts, food, water, clothing, and assorted research gear for the six person crew serving aboard the ISS.
Koenigsmann estimated the odds of success at the landing attempt at about 50% at best according to an estimate from Musk himself.
“It’s an experiment. There’s a certain likelihood that this will not work out right, that something will go wrong.”
The two stage Falcon 9 and Dragon stands 207.8 feet (63.3 meters) tall and is 12 feet in diameter. The first stage is powered by nine Merlin 1D engines that generate 1.3 million pounds of thrust at sea level and rises to 1.5 million pounds of thrust as the Falcon 9 climbs out of the atmosphere, according to a SpaceX fact sheet.
The first stage Merlins will fire for three minutes until the planned engine shutdown and main engine cutoff known as MECO, said Koenigsmann.
The rocket will be in space at an altitude of over 100 miles zooming upwards at 1300 m/s (nearly 1 mi/s).
Then, a single Merlin 1D will be commanded to re-fire for three separate times to stabilize and lower the rocket during the barge landing attempt.
Four hypersonic grid fins had been added to the first stage and placed in an X-wing configuration. They will be deployed only during the reentry attempt and will be used to roll, pitch, and yaw the rocket in concert with gamboling of the engines.
It will take about nine minutes from launch until the first stage reaches the barge, said Koenigsmann. That’s about the same time it takes for Dragon to reach orbit.
He added that, depending on the internet connectivity, SpaceX may or may not know the outcome in real time.
Testing operation of Falcon 9 hypersonic grid fins (x-wing config) launching on next Falcon 9 flight, CRS-5. Credit: SpaceX/Elon Musk
Here’s a description from SpaceX:
“To help stabilize the stage and to reduce its speed, SpaceX relights the engines for a series of three burns. The first burn—the boostback burn—adjusts the impact point of the vehicle and is followed by the supersonic retro propulsion burn that, along with the drag of the atmosphere, slows the vehicle’s speed from 1300 m/s to about 250 m/s. The final burn is the landing burn, during which the legs deploy and the vehicle’s speed is further.”
“To complicate matters further, the landing site is limited in size and not entirely stationary. The autonomous spaceport drone ship is 300 by 100 feet, with wings that extend its width to 170 feet. While that may sound huge at first, to a Falcon 9 first stage coming from space, it seems very small. The legspan of the Falcon 9 first stage is about 70 feet and while the ship is equipped with powerful thrusters to help it stay in place, it is not actually anchored, so finding the bullseye becomes particularly tricky. During previous attempts, we could only expect a landing accuracy of within 10km. For this attempt, we’re targeting a landing accuracy of within 10 meters.”
SpaceX founder and CEO, Elon Musk, briefs reporters, including Universe Today, in Cocoa Beach, FL, prior to a previous SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket blastoff from Cape Canaveral, FL. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
CRS-5 marks the company’s fifth resupply mission to the ISS under a $1.6 Billion contract with NASA to deliver 20,000 kg (44,000 pounds) of cargo to the station during a dozen Dragon cargo spacecraft flights through 2016 under NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contract.
The cargo delivery is the entire point of the CRS-5 mission.
The official CRS-5 Mission Patch
The weather odds have improved to 70% GO from 60% GO reported Major Perry Sweat, 45th Weather Squadron rep, USAF, at the briefing today at the Kennedy Space Center.
A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon cargo ship are set to liftoff on a resupply mission to the International Space Station (ISS) from launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral, Florida on Jan. 6, 2015. File photo. Credit: Ken Kremer – kenkremer.com
A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon cargo ship are set to liftoff on a resupply mission to the International Space Station (ISS) from launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral, Florida on Jan. 6, 2015. File photo. Credit: Ken Kremer – kenkremer.com
SpaceX is on track to rollout their Falcon 9 rocket carrying the Dragon cargo freighter this evening, Monday, Jan, 5, 2015 to launch pad 40 on a mission bound for the International Space Station (ISS) to deliver critical supplies.
The Dragon CRS-5 mission is slated to blast off at 6:20 a.m. EST, Tuesday, Jan. 6, 2015, atop the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida.
The predawn launch should put on a spectacular sky show for spectators along the Florida space coast.
There is only an instantaneous launch window available, meaning that the blastoff must proceed at that exact instant. Any delays due to technical issues or weather would force a scrub until at least Friday, Jan. 9.
SpaceX Falcon 9 ready for rollout to launch pad for Dragon CRS-5 mission. Credit: SpaceX
The launch has already been postponed several times, most recently from Dec. 19, 2014 when a static fire test of the first stage engines on Dec. 17 shut down prematurely.
A second static fire test of the SpaceX Falcon 9 successfully went the full duration of approximately 3 seconds and cleared the path for a liftoff attempt after the Christmas holidays.
The delay allowed the teams to recoup and recover and enjoy the festive holiday season.
“It was a good decision to postpone the launch until after the holidays,” said Hans Koenigsmann, VP of Mission Assurance, SpaceX, at a media briefing today at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC).
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket completes successful static fire test on Dec. 19 ahead od planned CRS-5 mission for NASA in early January 2015. Credit: SpaceX
CRS-5 marks the company’s fifth resupply mission to the ISS under a $1.6 Billion contract with NASA to deliver 20,000 kg (44,000 pounds) of cargo to the station during a dozen Dragon cargo spacecraft flights through 2016 under NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contract
The weather odds have improved to 70% GO from 60% GO reported Major Perry Sweat, 45th Weather Squadron rep, USAF, at the briefing today at the Kennedy Space Center.
A frontal boundary has settled in over Central Florida. This front and its associated cloudiness will be very slow to move south of the Space Coast. With the clouds only slowly eroding overhead, the primary weather concern remains thick clouds, according to Sweat.
The unmanned cargo freighter is loaded with more than 5108 pounds (2317 kg) of scientific experiments, technology demonstrations, crew supplies, spare parts, food, water, clothing and assorted research gear for the space station.
The Dragon research experiments will support over 256 science and research investigations for the six person space station crews on Expeditions 42 and 43.
Among the payloads is the Cloud-Aerosol Transport System (CATS), a remote-sensing laser instrument to measure clouds and the location and distribution of pollution, dust, smoke, and other particulates and aerosols in the atmosphere.
Commander Barry “Butch” Wilmore on the International Space Station shared this beautiful image of #sunrise earlier today, 1/3/15. Credit: NASA/Barry ‘Butch’ Wilmore
Assuming all goes well, Dragon will rendezvous at the ISS on Thursday, Jan. 8, for grappling and berthing by the ISS astronauts maneuvering the 57 foot-long (17 meter-long) Canadian built robotic arm.
The SpaceX CRS-5 launch is the first cargo launch to the ISS since the doomed Orbital Sciences Antares/Cygnus launch ended in catastrophe on Oct. 28.
With Antares launches on indefinite hold, the US supply train to the ISS is now wholly dependent on SpaceX.
Orbital Sciences has now contracted United Launch Alliance (ULA) to launch the firms Cygnus cargo freighter to the ISS by late 2015 on an Atlas V rocket.
A secondary objective of SpaceX is to attempt to recover the Falcon 9 first stage on an off shore barge.
NASA Television live launch coverage begins at 5 a.m. EST on Jan. 6.
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is set to soar to ISS after completing successful static fire test on Dec. 19 ahead of replanned CRS-5 mission for NASA launching on Jan. 6, 2015. Credit: Ken Kremer – kenkremer.com
Stay tuned here for Ken’s continuing Earth and planetary science and human spaceflight news.
New countdown clock at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center displays SpaceX Falcon 9 CRS-5 mission and recent Orion ocean recovery at the Press Site viewing area on Dec. 18, 2014. Credit: Ken Kremer – kenkremer.com
One of the possible outcomes of today. Falcon 9 sits on the barge, ready to go back home. Image Credit: Reddit user zlsa (zlsa.github.io) CC-BY-SA.
Editor’s note: This guest post was written by Lukas Davia & Marijn Achternaam.
Typing “reusable rockets” into a search engine, you can’t help but be drawn to the allure of SpaceX-related links which fill the screen. In fact, the corporate brainchild of Elon Musk dominates the first few pages of results near-exclusively. The reason for this is understandable: with the death of the Space Shuttle and lack of clear planning for the future by most old players in the spaceflight field, SpaceX’s straightforward, near term plan and previous flight tests make them everyone’s favorite to drastically reduce cost to orbit with rockets which return home – ready to be reused.
And with the upcoming launch of SpaceX’s 14th Falcon 9 rocket on January 6 carrying Dragon to the ISS, the potential for true rocket reusability is certainly within reach for the first time ever in the near 90 years since Goddard launched the world’s first liquid fueled rocket from Massachusetts in 1926. Yet, now is a more important time than ever to temper our wild expectations for the possibility of rockets which fly themselves back to the launch pad. While a rocketry revolution may be among us, it is an iterative, multi-step process that transcends any single mission — and we shouldn’t expect to see regular airline-like reuse and large cost drops anytime soon.
It should be noted that Elon Musk, for all his amazing accomplishments, has never placed a hard and fast timeline on when cheap and accessible rocketry would be available, let alone a solid price. Why? Simply because we are entering territory that remains uncharted.
The only launch vehicle in history that has ever been re-flown several times after achieving orbit was the Space Shuttle. Despite reusing by far the most expensive part of any rocket — the engines and associated systems — the Shuttle cost at least $450 million to launch according to NASA, with a relatively small payload of 24 metric tons to Low Earth Orbit, or almost $19,000 per kilogram. Including development costs, summed and divided up per flight, the price to launch can average as high as $1.5 billion, or thrice NASA’s stated amount. What was supposed to drastically reduce the cost per kilogram of lifting cargo to orbit ended up being one of the most expensive launch vehicles in human history. Why did it become so expensive?
The conception of the Space Shuttle was a result of a marriage between NASA, the Air Force, and other partners. Each wanted their own design specifications, which ended up producing a wieldy vehicle with no well-defined purpose, and it became the “catch all” of the space industry. Mainly, it was that the amount of maintenance required after every mission was greatly underestimated by NASA. After each flight, the entire vehicle had to be essentially rebuilt: tiles replaced, engines inspected, boosters refurbished. In particular, the trio of RS-25 main engines had to be taken apart and checked for every possible defect that could cause a failure, and when things broke, there wasn’t a healthy supply-line that could replace them easily, causing the cost of spare parts to skyrocket, and maintaining a workforce ready and able to refurbish the Shuttle quickly became a money-sink that NASA was never able to recover.
SpaceX isn’t NASA though. They’ve introduced a more agile, responsive development approach to their products which has been overwhelmingly successful. They also have years of prior projects (from multiple sources) to learn from that NASA didn’t. However, these aren’t problems that can be simply waved away. Rather, they are fundamental issues that need addressing: there is no escaping the confines of physics.
A common theme of Musk’s statements is the audacious aspiration to revolutionize the “one use and throw it away” model that has dominated the rocket industry since the beginning, morphing it into something more closely related to a service-based airline model. This is a big task, even by Iron Man’s standards.
Reusable rockets could well become the norm, but when? Image Credit: SpaceX.
Many fans show an under appreciation of the barriers to entry. In fact, in a recent survey conducted on the SpaceX fan community at Reddit.com, when asked to place an educated guess on the price of a Falcon 9 rocket launch in 5 years time, a significant portion of the nearly 600 respondents selected a value beneath $20,000,000. Some even selected prices below $10,000,000. Although COO of SpaceX, Gwynne Shotwell has mentioned in passing that reusable Falcon 9 launches could eventually command a $5-7 million price tag, this is likely far in the future, far past merely the dawn of reusable rockets. For some perspective, five years ago in 2010, SpaceX launched two Falcon 9 rockets. Last year, they launched six, and suddenly, by 2020, the cost of a standard Falcon 9 launch will be three times as cheap? Where has this extra acceleration in development come from? Possibly it comes from the minds of some slightly too-optimistic fans.
In fact, something even as basic as long-term engine maintenance is still relatively unknown. Previously, SpaceX has clarified that each engine has a life of approximately 40 firings, and a casual observer would assume this results in an engine that can be used on 40 missions. However, with three engine test fires prior to each launch, the launch itself, and the three burns required to complete the reentry and re-landing process, the center engine is in fact required to fire 7 times to complete a mission, and with nine engines on every lower stage – even with most only firing a few times, that results in quite a number of parts that can break down after every flight. Checking for these failures and repairing them could become a lot more costly and time consuming than one might hope.
For example, with a diameter of 3.66m, and a height of approximately 42 meters, there is nearly 500 square meters of first stage surface that has been exposed on one side to the frigid temperatures of liquid oxygen and chilled kerosene, and on the other, various temperatures from reentry into the soupy lower atmosphere. In fact, even the ice buildup on the outer skin of the vehicle alone is significant enough to substantially alter the vehicle’s mass! Within that large area, tensile, thermodynamic, and pressure-related fatigue has the potential to accumulate. Striations could nucleate and form hairline cracks. This is a hazard that could lead to a critical failure on an operational mission, and such an event could permanently ingrain an association between the nascent reusable rocket and instability in the minds of satellite operators and the insurance industry. And although Falcon 9 could be considered over-engineered, it is unlikely SpaceX will play rocket roulette.
Although the rocket’s chief engineer estimated a coin toss’s probability of success, upon the hopeful propulsive landing of CRS-5 on the recently christened “autonomous drone landing ship,” the empty first stage will likely be shipped back to SpaceX’s Hawthorne, California headquarters and inspected with various methods of destructive and non-destructive analysis to quantify how the rigors of accelerating to a velocity of nearly 2 kilometers per second in less than three minutes and then decelerating enough, reentering through the atmosphere, to land in close proximity to sea and salt, affect the vehicle.
Another example of a potential refurbishment cost lies in SpaceX’s fuel of choice, kerosene. It burns relatively dirty, as evidenced by the translucent pillar of brown-black soot that Falcon 9 ascends on, a throwback to the days of early aircraft. This leads to an effect predominantly associated with kerolox engines known as “coking” – where incompletely combusted soot adheres to the near-molten engine and nozzle, reducing its ability to radiate away heat. Clean it off, you say? Congratulations, you’ve just introduced refurbishment into the equation, something that SpaceX is striving to avoid. It’s not just rockets that are expensive. There are other costs too… Image Credit: SpaceX.
Even ignoring the vehicle itself, launches and the chemicals needed are expensive! There’s the exorbitantly-priced helium which is required to keep the tanks pressurized, and the pyrophoric TEA-TEB ignition fluid used to begin the explosive marriage between the RP-1 & LOX. It’s not just chemicals either. There’s ground launch operation costs too, ranging from employee wages, to the dull process of permit applications, to the slightly more interesting ablative paint that coats the Transporter-Erector structure which holds Falcon 9 vertical, to transportation and relocation costs. In all likelihood, the current capital expenses of a single launch alone, ignoring the obvious value of the rocket itself, total in the region of $3 million plus.
Fundamentally, we must decouple re-landing, refurbishment, reusability, and financially viable and rapid reuse from each other. It can be a difficult concept to grasp that all four are distinct, and the success of one does not imply the next step is guaranteed. Because of this, question marks still remain over the cost, time, and complexity of the final steps necessary for SpaceX to complete its reusable rocket master plan. For example: re-landing a rocket does not necessarily make refurbishment nonexistent. This is the take home story of the Space Shuttle.
A landing alone doesn’t revolutionize rocketry; rather, we may only realize the revolution of refining rocketry into an airline-like model has occurred well only by looking back in the rear view mirror.
We live in hope that SpaceX achieves what it originally set out to do nearly 13 years ago. SpaceX has come far, far closer than anyone else to this goal, but as Musk himself has said, “Rockets are hard”. Good luck to the team at SpaceX for their upcoming CRS-5 launch and landing attempt, it’s the beginning of something far bigger.
Written by Lukas Davia & Marijn Achternaam
Bios: When not juggling being a software engineering student & full time web developer in New Zealand, Lukas Davia is a self professed SpaceX-addict, and can be found contributing to Reddit community /r/SpaceX, adding to his website SpaceXStats.com, and creating infographics. Believe it or not he does find time to go outside and hike in his spare time too!
Marijn Achternaam is a Dutch student, self proclaimed armchair engineer and spaceflight fanatic who can frequently be found contributing to the /r/space and /r/SpaceX Reddit communities.
