Space Flight is the New Nuclear Weapon August 21, 2008
Posted by Brian Pfeifer in Future Development, India, Iran, JAXA, News and politics, Russia, South Korea.add a comment
How can you possibly compare human space flight to nuclear bombs and missiles? The link is not to be found among technologies, but rather in the quest for national prestige.
During the cold war many nations aggressively pursued nuclear development programs. Although they were always clothed in the rhetoric of national defense, nuclear weapons have never been employed for this purpose. You could argue that the US and Russia needed to counter each other’s arsenals, but millions of bullets have been fired, though not one nuclear weapon has been fired in anger since WWII. Additionally, smaller nation had no similar justification.
Iran, North Korea, South Africa, Egypt, India, and Pakistan all created nuclear programs. Were they really needed for national defense? South Africa has gone so far as dismantling their arsenal. That’s a clear sign that it wasn’t required to keep thee nation safe from outside threats. These programs were more about national prestige than about defense.
Even among the superpowers, nuclear weapons development was one way for the two nations to demonstrate their technical superiority. Because the big boys had nukes, any nation that wanted to be viewed as serious contender for regional leadership, they needed nukes too. Iran and Pakistan are both potential leaders for the Islamic world, and hence they needed to demonstrate their capabilities by developing nuclear weapons.
Today, those nukes are becoming less important. There are hints of a new space race. This time any powerful nation can participate. Even private companies can participate. Of course The US and Russia have spaceflight programs, but that’s not new. What is new is the number of other nations announcing a commitment to space flight. In recent years China leaped to the stage with two manned flights. This is a direct challenge to Japan’s quieter program launching astronauts on other nation’s vehicles and contributing serious hardware to the ISS. These two nations also happen to be the biggest powerhouses in Asia, and are flexing their space muscles for their neighbor’s benefit.
South Korea’s Yi So Yeon, who visited the ISS this year is another good example. Although she conducted experiments on orbit, the Korean scientific community was angered by the decision to spend $30 million on her flight. Their complaint is that more money was spent on this one flight than on all other government sponsored scientific projects combined. This is a clear indication that the flight was politically motivated to demonstrate that South Korea is a world player.
Now Iran has announced plans for a manned space program. The national benefits of such a program are murky at best for a nation like Iran. It’s just one more move in the game of international politics and regional control. In the next few months we can expect to hear Pakistan either make a similar announcement, or they will attempt to dismiss Iran’s claims as impossible. As I said before, space flight is the new nuclear program.
Space Yoga April 27, 2008
Posted by Brian Pfeifer in Future Development, India, NASA, Russia.3 comments
Astronauts and Cosmonauts aboard the International Space Station spend two hours a day exercising to keep bone and muscle loss to a minimum. Bones become brittle and muscles waste away in microgravity without constant work. Current exercise regimes include a bicycle ergometer (stationary bicycle), a treadmill for running, and the Resistive Exercise Device that simulates weight lifting with elastic bands. That’s not a whole lot of options. How could we increase the variety with increasing the equipment?
I would like to suggest we add yoga to the list of exercise regimes. When you think of yoga, you probably think of guys turning themselves into pretzels, but the art is really good at building a core of strength as well as flexibility.
Most yoga positions rely on gravity, but not all do. For example there is a version of uttanasana, forward bend, where you lock your fingers around your big toes before straightening your legs. No gravity needed there to stretch the back, and put stress on the leg joints and muscles. Other positions could be similarly modified to make them more effective in micro, or lunar gravity. A trained yoga instructor with a strong foundation in physiology should also be able to develop sequences to help alleviate back pain, which is a common orbital complaint.
I did a little research, looking for any references to yoga in space, or NASA studies, but there’s almost no information out there. In 1984 Squadron Leader Rakesh Sharma of India spent a little over a week on Russia’s Salyut 7. One of his experiments was using yoga to combat motion sickness. If anyone knows the results of his experiments, I’d love to hear about it.
This Year in Space January 1, 2007
Posted by Brian Pfeifer in Armadillo Aerospace, Bigelow Aerospace, ESA, India, JAXA, NASA, Orbital SCiences, Rocketplane Kistler, Russia, Space Startups, SpaceX, UP Aerospace.add a comment
2006 was a pretty good year in space. The international launch community averaged over one orbital launch per week. U.S. and Russian providers carried out the bulk of the operations but the E.U., Japan, Israel and China also had successes under their belts. With four failed launch attempts, the failure rate was a mere 6%, which is considerably better than the historical average of 10%.
Manned spaceflight had a banner year. The International Space Station returned to a three-person crew and played host to astronauts and cosmonauts from the U.S., Russia, Germany, Sweden, and Japan. Although U.S. citizens, Astronauts born in Australia and England also visited the ISS and truly put the “International” in the International Space Station. Anousheh Ansari, perhaps the most famous space tourist to date, traveled to the station on one of two Soyuz flights this year. Her blog carried many dreamers with her on the ten-day journey.
NASA also managed to conduct two ISS construction flights. Space walkers and the robotic arm installed the P4 solar arrays, the P5 spacer truss, and rewired the electrical system to its permanent configuration. For the first time several years, the ISS actually looks different from the outside. Not only that, the increased power supplied by the new photovoltaic cells sets the stage for the installation of Japanese and European modules over the course of the next two years.
The emerging aerospace companies had more of a mixed year. SpaceX attempted to launch a partly reusable Falcon 1 at the start of the year, but suffered a major engine failure. Even with the loss of the vehicle, NASA still awarded them $278 million to develop cargo delivery and possibly human taxi services to the ISS. Rocketplane-Kistler won the other COTS development contract for $207 million to develop the same services.
UP Aerospace and Armadillo Aerospace both struggled with suborbital flights. UP Aerospace lost their launcher the New Mexico’s innaugerral spaceport flight, when it veered off course and disappeared into the White Sands Missile Range. It took them over a week to recover the broken hardware so they could analyze the failure.
Armadillo conducted several spectacular flights at the X Prize Cup in October. In an attempt to secure the Lunar Lander Challenge, a golf cart sized LH/LOX rocket vehicle named Pixel had to traverse 100 feet, land, and then return to its launch pad. The team made three tries at the event, and accomplished the first half of the challenge, but suffered equipment malfunctions and other difficulties at the landing site. If their vehicle had been a bit more robust, they certainly would have succeeded.
Bigelow Aerospace impressed most space watchers with the launch of their first test of an inflatable orbital habitat. The subscale vehicle was launched on a Russian Dnepr rocket and surpassed expectations. The inflation was flawless, and the mini-space station established contact with Beigelow’s ground station. The on-board thrusters stabilized the initial tumbling, and the solar cells fed power to the systems. Video cameras mounted inside and outside let the world witness this privately funded success.
In the next installment we’ll take a look at the accomplishments of our unmanned explorers over 2006.
Future Space Leadership November 16, 2006
Posted by Brian Pfeifer in ESA, Future Development, India, JAXA, NASA, Russia, Space Startups.add a comment
A poster to a message board I regularly read asked what nation is likely to be the leader in space twenty five to fifty years from now. It was such an interesting question that I couldn’t keep my reply short enough for the message board. So I gave an abridged reply and posted the full version here.
Which Country will be the dominant Space Power in the year 2025-2049?
The Chinese have a long way to go, but at the rate their economy is expanding, they could be formidable. Anyone who watches international politics/economics views China as the next 500 lb gorilla. Of course China also has a number of handicaps and could stumble if faced with significant social change. Rapid expansion is always unstable, and could lead to social unrest or collapse as easily as it could lead to international dominance.
Russia has as much experience, if not more than the US. Today, they are successfully selling both satellite launch and manned spaceflight services around the world. They filmed commercials on Mir and are continuing that tradition on the ISS with a golf equipment commercial to be filmed during an upcoming EVA. The first space tourists flew aboard the Soyuz, and no other operator is flying yet. They are certainly the most commercial of the national programs. Unfortunately, Russia is still in financially troubled waters. They just can’t seem to gather the funding necessary to develop their next generation Kliper spacecraft. They are looking to Japan and the EU to help fund the project, but money is not easily forthcoming.
I’d love to see the EU do more, but their structure makes it difficult for them to fund any truly large projects. Because of the competing national interests within the organization, it is difficult to make any hard decision and stick to it. When the do build hardware, the work must be spread out among the participating nations, complicating the process. They are modifying one of their launch complexes to handle the Russian Soyuz/Proton, but this will not be enough to get them into the lead.
Japan and India both have interesting plans, but they are too far behind, and won’t commit the resources needed to catch up.
The US is the only nation with both the financial resources and the operational experience to be the near-term leader in space. NASA’s development plans are fairly flat without a significant increase in funding, and someone else like China could overtake them. NASA is plagued by chronic budget battles in Congress, and it’s future is always in doubt. If you look at the history of the organization, its value has been questioned from the very beginning.
So what’s the point of all of this long-winded analysis? I believe that in the next fifty years, private companies may actually take the lead in spaceflight. Not a single nation, but companies located in the US, Russia, and Canada. Multinational corporations will also make use of construction costs in one nation and favorable launch licensing in another. Private launch complexes are in the planning stages or under construction in Saudi Arabia, Australia, the US, and South East Asia. The only question is what space-based activities will generate revenue. Asteroid mining, and tourism are always cited, but their future is questionable until someone demonstrates the capability. That may be in the next five years, or not for more than two dozen more. The only business that is guaranteed to make money today is government contracts for ISS resupply and crew taxi services. Others may well evolve, but the COTS program is a good example of where the foreseeable future of private spaceflight can turn a profit, and in turn lead the international community.
