The patient is more dead than alive
The Federal Space Agency has been trying to restore control of the Phobos-Grunt probe and to obtain coherent telemetry data for the past two days. This is needed in order to understand the developments aboard the probe when it could not be tracked by radar, when its sustainer engine was to have switched on, and when it was supposed to enter an escape orbit. But none of this happened.

By November 10, officials made some statements implying that the results of the communications sessions were not yet known. These statements gradually became more pessimistic, indicating that no communication had actually been established with the spacecraft, and that no telemetry data was available. It appears that an attempt to communicate with the probe from the Guiana Space Center near Kourou in French Guiana has also failed, and that no telemetry data has been received.

"In my opinion, the Phobos-Grunt probe has been lost. This probability is very high. At any rate, it is much higher than the chances for reactivating the probe," Major General Vladimir Uvarov, a former top space expert in the Russian Armed Forces, told the Rossiiskaya Gazeta newspaper.

Loss of communications means loss of control
It would be a mistake to explain the Phobos-Grunt fiasco by a mere equipment failure. The problem runs much deeper. This failure is the result of negative trends in the management of the space program, which have been developing over the past 20 years, and, it seems, are not directly linked with specific issues of technical reliability.

"What do we have? The probe has entered a parking orbit, but no communications have been established. The probe circles the Earth at a rate of 16 revolutions per day, but there has been only one communication session during that entire time," independent analyst Vadim Lukashevich, creator of the Buran.Ru portal, told RIA Novosti.

If Russia wants to conduct comprehensive long-range space missions, then it must first deploy at least two or three tracking/data-relay satellites in geostationary orbits, Lukashevich said. The previous Mars probe fiasco in 1996 can be explained by the fact that the ground radar stations were unable to track it.

Lukashevich also deems it necessary to reinstate a fleet of space control-monitoring ships for tracking these launches. "China has three or four ship-borne tracking stations, while Russia has none," Lukashevich noted.

Clench your teeth and go on
It is unclear whether the Phobos-Grunt mission will be reactivated or not, but Russia's unmanned space program has been dealt a serious blow. Against the backdrop of the first emotional reaction, analysts note that it would be wiser to postpone ambitious interplanetary projects and focus on simpler near-Earth objectives.

"We cannot compromise our ideals, and we must get rid of this defeatist attitude. We face a very serious problem: we have spent five billion rubles to develop a spacecraft, more or less. A new, Russian, engineering school has evolved during the project, although its mistakes are evident here," said Vadim Lukashevich, who disagrees with the pessimists.

In Lukashevich's estimation, R and D spending accounts for the bulk of the Phobos-Grunt allocations. The spacecraft itself costs just over a billion rubles. The main R and D projects have already taken place. Consequently, a second such probe will cost less to build under conditions of strict disbursement oversight.

This would make it possible to prioritize equipment tests on the ground. "To be honest, we need to repeat the very same mission and its objectives, with due consideration for the exposed drawbacks," Lukashevich believes.

Equipment failure raises new questions

Russian-made space equipment is less reliable than Western equipment because the electronics are less stable due to weaker componentry and lower radiation resistance.

After scoring successes on the Moon and Venus, Soviet probes suffered repeated setbacks during the longer flights to Mars. U.S. Mars probes were more successful, although they too were not without problems.

In this particular case, we are not dealing with equipment degradation in conditions of a long-duration mission. Therefore, this either implies substandard software and algorithms or equipment failure.

Analysts say this may have been caused by insufficient testing, including a decision not to test-launch the probe's full-size mock-up.

"What prevented orbital tests of this control-and-guidance system and propulsion unit a year ago?" Vadim Lukashevich asks.

He recalled that the Federal Space Agency missed a 2009 launch window after the Russian Academy of Sciences said the probe was not ready for lift-off. The resulting two-year lull in the project could have been used to upgrade launch technology.

Considering the fact that new systems developed under the Phobos-Grunt project account for 90% of the probe's systems (as mentioned by the Federal Space Agency's Chief Vladimir Popovkin at a recent State Duma meeting), it is important that the probe's mock-up be used to test launch sequences prior to the installation of expensive scientific equipment onboard.

"They should buy another Zenit launch vehicle, fit it with rocket-accelerator components, including the engine, the fuel system and star trackers, and follow through with a launch. If everything is OK, then the next launch would involve the instrument-packed module. But this was not done," Lukashevich notes.

Phobos highlights the problems of long-range space research
Vladimir Popovkin has prioritized unmanned long-range scientific missions, even sidetracking the stated intention to boost commercial profits. However, Russian research programs are too meager. Consequently, it is impossible to view the impending failure of the Phobos-Grunt mission as a minor setback.

After the '96 Mars disaster, this is Russia's first attempt in 15 years to launch a research probe beyond near-Earth space. And this is bound to be the last attempt for a long time. The launch of the Luna-Glob (Lunar Sphere) probe was rescheduled for 2015 the other day. It appears that the 2015 launch deadline will inevitably be reset for a later date.

Actually, Phobos-Grunt is part of Russia's long-range space program as directed by the head of the Federal Space Agency. Another Phobos-Grunt mission will become the cheapest and most effective way of supporting this aspect of the research, if a miracle does not happen in the next few hours or days, and if control over the probe, now flying in a parking orbit, is not reestablished.

The specific drawbacks of the Phobos-Grunt probe could be exposed and eliminated during a repeat launch. But the mission will not be confined to this. The entire national space program, which, in its current form, provokes isolated technical mishaps, is in for a major reorganization.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

]]> Thu, 09 FEB 2012 08:59:17 AEST Boulder CO (SPX) Nov 09, 2011 - The end of the Space Shuttle program this summer caused the US to voluntarily give up its capability to put our own astronauts into orbit. By doing so before a new human spaceflight launch system is in place, the nation created a Russian dependency to sustain our $100-billion space station investment, and relinquished our role as the leader in human space exploration to Russia.

When policy makers accepted this bad situation, it was expected to persist for only two or three years, making a bad situation perhaps palatable given the tough fiscal times.

But now, barely 100 days into our human spaceflight access gap, it's looking more and more like the gap will lengthen to five or six or even more years to 2016 or 2017-possibly even to 2018-or beyond.

Why is this happening?
Congress is to blame for this by planning to gut the Administration's request of $850 million for its Commercial Crew program-the fastest paced and surest effort within NASA to restore US human space access to orbit.

Forces within NASA are also to blame, for saddling the Commercial Crew program with costly and schedule-stretching delays created by complex and onerous contracting methods and project oversight practices, which themselves add several years to the gap.

What are our trusted stewards of this great nation's civil space program thinking? Consider, for as long as the US is in this gap:

+ All access to the International Space Station (ISS) is dependent on a problem-prone Russian transportation system, jeopardizing our ability to staff the station. Both Proton and Soyuz have had technical mishaps in recent years, including two launch failures in the past few months that, if repeated, could very realistically create the need to abandon the ISS.

+ The high cost of US astronaut transport aboard Russia's Soyuz is draining our human spaceflight budget and costing thousands of American jobs at home. These costs, estimated to be two to three times as expensive per seat as what US commercial crew systems will cost, are also significantly slowing our ability to begin exploring beyond Earth orbit.

+ Our astronaut corps is limited to two or three people being launched every year, and our ability to fully utilize our $100-billion space station is severely hampered. Only when the gap ends can we expect to resume a significant rate of astronaut launches and substantially greater research utilization of space station.

+ Our perception as the world's leader in human spaceflight is damaged, for no nation that is wholly dependent on another nation for its human access to space can be considered the world leader in spaceflight.

None of this is good. There is no silver lining here: not for our economy, not for our standing as a world leader, not for our investment in the ISS, and certainly not for NASA's role in inspiring science, technology, education, and mathematics (STEM) education.

What should be done? We believe that Congress, the Administration, and NASA must come to consider our gap in human launch capabilities a matter too debilitating to extend by any amount, and take the following actions:

+ Congress, for its part, should fund the development of commercial crew launch capabilities to orbit at the requested level of $850 million, even if that means slowing other development efforts within NASA.

+ NASA, for its part, should streamline the business and technical processes it imposes on its commercial crew providers with the goal of ending our human space launch capability gap as soon as is practically feasible.

+ And the Administration, for its part, should be urging Congress to fully fund commercial crew programs and directing NASA administrator Charles Bolden to mobilize NASA to achieve the fastest possible commercial crew launch capability to ISS.

It is time for elected leaders, NASA, and the nation's space community to wake up to the urgency of this situation. It is time for action on each of their parts. It is time for leadership.

It is time for the great institutions of this great nation to respond by shrinking, rather than lengthening, our human spaceflight launch capability gap.

This article first appeared in The Space Review: S. Alan Stern is a planetary scientist, aerospace consultant, the director of the Florida Space Institute, and NASA's former associate administrator in charge of science. Frank DiBello is the President and CEO of Space Florida. Formerly, he was the founder and managing partner of KPMG Peat Marwick's Commercial Space and Advanced Technologies practice.

]]> Thu, 09 FEB 2012 08:59:17 AEST Beijing (XNA) Oct 10, 2011 - The launch of the Tiangong-1 spacecraft has attracted the attention of the world and some TV viewers in some foreign countries even watched the live broadcast in late September. The public opinion is generally neutral.

Some have made objective evaluation of the event, giving good-willed blessings to China's technological progress and expressed desires to extend cooperation with China, while others have expressed concerns that their own leading space positions are being challenged.

The concerns have mostly come from the United States. Former NASA Administrator Michael Griffin recently said at a hearing of NASA's supervision committee that China has almost the same strength with the United States as a strong space competitor.

It is impossible for the world's largest developing country to have the same strength as the largest developed country. China's explorations in space technology could by no means challenge in the near future the leading position of the United States.

Americans tend to have awareness of potential dangers and inspire themselves by exaggerating rivals' strength. As a potential competitor, China's development pace is so rapid and it is so different from the United States in terms of cultural traditions and political system.

All of the aforementioned factors have turned China's launch of the Tiangong-1 into a piece of "incentive" news and even made it relevant to the evolvement of the world geopolitical landscape. The "uncertainties'" in China's development are largely generated in this way.

The concerns held by the United States run some risks. The United States has viewed China's normal development as a challenge - the negative impact of which is not limited to the false interpretation of the intentions of China's development.

Therefore, some U.S. experts with far sight are worried that if the United States really takes China as its rival, China will eventually regard the United States as its opponent.

China has long been committed to contributing to the well-being of the mankind. As a major economic power, China is bound to adopt a comprehensive development strategy, so it is natural for the country to carry out its space program and to launch the Tiangong-1 space laboratory module.

China has been paying great attention to the role of technological innovation in transforming its economic growth model. As it continues to increase input into scientific research, the country will make more breakthroughs in cutting-edge technologies in the future.

Instead of being worried about China's rising power, foreign countries should pay attention to how China uses its power. It would be unwise to regard the Tiangong-1 as a space threat because China's peaceful development strategy determines that it stands against the weaponization or any arms race in outer space.

China will not change its principle of peaceful use of outer space because of a space station. Western countries firmly believe that a major power is bound to seek hegemony, but that does not apply to China. They will make more mistakes if they continue to view China's peaceful development with their outdated mentality.

The Newsweek magzine published an article on "Ping-Pong diplomacy" about 40 years ago.

An American professor said at the end of that article that U.S.-China relations might warm up if the United States can realize that China has its own difficulties and ambitions, just like any other country in the world. Although much time has passed, the professor's words still have great practical significances.

]]> Thu, 09 FEB 2012 08:59:17 AEST Bethesda MD (SPX) Aug 30, 2011 - The long awaited 2011 edition of Futron's Space Competitiveness Index has just been released, and it does not offer good news about the U.S. space program.

While the U.S. remains in the top ranking among the 10 top leading spacefaring nations, we are losing ground to our competition. One of the prime reasons is our lackluster space policy and demise of a viable and logical approach to human space flight and exploration.

Our space leaders lack innovation, determination and direction.

The space program has become one of the discretionary "whipping boys" of the current federal budget fiasco. It is a soft target for politicians who refuse to address the bigger issue of out-of-control entitlement programs.

Futron's space competitive list includes Europe, Russia, China, Japan, India, Canada, South Korea, Israel and Brazil. Fifty metrics were examined in developing the rankings. Three important indicators dealt with government commitment, human capital and industrial base.

Only the U.S. has experienced four consecutive years of competitiveness declines. But, Russia, China and Japan have improved dramatically since 2008. Futron also found that cooperative space programs tend to intensify competition.

More importantly, global space activity drives a substantial economic engine as well as fostering national pride and advancements in science and exploration.

The U.S. economic engine is sputtering. One has to ask: Where is our national pride and leading advances in science and technology going? The answer appears to be: Nowhere.

]]> Thu, 09 FEB 2012 08:59:17 AEST Bethesda MD (SPX) Jul 20, 2011 - On July 13, the House passed a bill that addresses the FY12 NASA budget. The total recommended amount is $16.81 billion. Here are a few details on this budget. For FY11 the NASA appropriation was $18.448 billion. The Administration's FY12 request was $18.724 billion. But, the new recommended budget represents a decline of 8.9 percent or $1.638 billion.

The budget report includes a key statement about NASA's future: "After several years of debate and compromise, the Congress and the Administration have finally settled on a consensus program for NASA in the form of the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-278). In order to successfully accomplish everything outlined in that Act, NASA needs to develop and pursue new and different ways of operating that will promote efficiency and economy; annual budget increases can no longer be counted on as the means for achieving mission goals."

The message to NASA from the House seems clear; "Clean up your act and get more efficient."

In view of the current debt crisis, retirement of the Space Shuttle and transfer of low-orbit cargo and crew space transportation functions to the private sector, NASA is going to be pressured to skinny down to fighting weight and find ways to do more with less.

This may seem difficult for an established and bloated bureaucracy. Nevertheless, a continued viable space science program is going to have to adjust to the new reality of smaller budgets, and possibly fewer civil servants at NASA.

Remember, when times are tough and elections are approaching, the space community represents only a small part of the voting public. Without structural changes and innovative improvements in productivity within the NASA and contractor community, the future of U.S. space exploration could be very dim.

]]> Thu, 09 FEB 2012 08:59:17 AEST Washington DC (SPX) May 27, 2011 - It is hard to imagine that just 50 years ago, a young and vibrant President challenged a worried nation to reach for the seemingly impossible goal of landing humans on the moon and returning them safely to Earth. I was a teenager when President John F. Kennedy delivered his charge to Congress and the American people, but those words sparked my imagination, as they did for the millions of others who watched.

We recently completed the construction of the International Space Station and we stand at the door to closing the incredible 30 year Space Shuttle Era - a great adventure of unprecedented international cooperation in low Earth orbit. The words of President John Kennedy 50 years ago are at this time so appropriate: "...the impact of this adventure on the minds of men everywhere, who are attempting to make a determination of which road they should take."

He added, "Now it is time to take longer strides--time for a great new American enterprise--time for this nation to take a clearly leading role in space achievement, which in many ways may hold the key to our future on Earth."

And a NEW ERA began.

His inspiring words, calling on us to pursue exploration as a unified nation, to think beyond the moon and also envision the benefits of exploration for Earth, were part of a speech on "Urgent National Needs."

Today, we have another young and vibrant President who has outlined an urgent national need to out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build our competitors and create new capabilities that will take us farther into the solar system, and help us learn even more about our place in the universe.

President Barack Obama not only honors the Kennedy space legacy, but advances it for this new century with his vision for the next era of exploration and discovery. We stand at a moon shot moment once again, where we have a chance to make great leaps forward to new destinations, develop new vehicles and technologies, and new ways of exploring.

Our advantage now is that we have five decades of accomplishment and world leadership in space on which to build. The dreams President Kennedy helped make real for our world, and the dreams we still hold, may appear to be just out of reach but they are not out of our grasp.

We pause to remember the speech that launched that first moon shot moment, but we should not focus on the past. Later, we'll announce an exciting new mission that represents an important down payment on President Obama's exploration objectives.

We're making incredible progress in our goal to hand over low Earth orbit transportation services to our commercial partners, and yesterday, we announced an important next step in developing a successor to the space shuttle - a spacecraft that will carry our astronauts to new destinations away from the gravity of our home planet.

We are moving into a bright new future that builds on a challenge presented to us 50 years ago. It is important that we remember our history but we must always look forward toward a brighter future.

We want to express our thanks and appreciation to the entire Kennedy family for sharing this day with us, and I want to thank each of you who work every hour of every day to make NASA the world's preeminent space program. What began 50 years ago as a desperate race to space is now an ongoing journey to reach for new heights and new knowledge in the stars.

Charles Bolden is the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration

]]> Thu, 09 FEB 2012 08:59:17 AEST Washington DC (XNA) May 18, 2011 - U.S. space shuttle Endeavor blasted off from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida on Monday, kicking off its 25th and the last space mission in history, which draws great attention from media worldwide.

The event, of course, is also catching the eyes of media and scientists in China because the shuttle carries the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer-2 (AMS) particle detector, the mankind's most ambitious effort to date to explore the universe' origin with Nobel laureate physicist Samuel Ting as the program's principal scientist.

The 7,000-kg AMS worth 2 billion U.S. dollars will be placed in the International Space Station (ISS) and an international team of more than 600 scientists, including many from China's mainland and Taiwan, have joined Ting's exhausting but respectable AMS program.

China's scientists have played a crucial role in designing and manufacturing some core parts of the device. However, Chinese journalists who hoped to cover the launching of Endeavor were simply denied entry to the site by a ban initiated by Frank Wolf, chairman of the Committee of Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies in the House of Representatives.

The United States' National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) revoked the media passes granted to journalists from China due to the ban, or the "Wolf Clause", which was regarded as "discriminative" by even Americans themselves.

On April 15, U.S. President Barack Obama signed into law the budget bill for fiscal year 2011 which will end on Sept. 30 after the House of Representatives passed it.

The bill included a clause which bans any China-U.S. joint scientific research activities related to NASA or coordinated by the White House's Science Policy Office.

Under the clause in the budget bill, none of the Congress-approved funds for the U.S. government "may be used for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or the Office of Science and Technology Policy to develop, design, plan, promulgate, implement, or execute a bilateral policy, program, order, or contract of any kind to participate, collaborate, or coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or any Chinese-owned company."

It also applies the limitation "to any funds used to effectuate the hosting of official Chinese visitors at facilities belonging to or utilized" by NASA.

As a result, Chinese journalists were denied the opportunity to make live coverage of the shuttle's blast-off, just as their peers from other countries have done. The Chinese journalists were also kept away from NASA's press conferences.

Obviously, the "Wolf Clause" runs counter to the trend that both China and the United States are trying to push ahead their exchanges and cooperation in science and technology.

During the third round of the China-U.S. Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S and ED) held in Washington earlier this month, the two sides published accomplishments of the dialogue, which includes the cooperation in science and technology.

Moreover, China and the U.S. this year renewed their bilateral agreements on scientific and technological cooperation.

The Obama administration also attached importance to the current development and trend of scientific and technological cooperation between China and the U.S. and realized the nature of mutual benefit brought about by such cooperation.

John P.Holdren, director of the Science and Technology Policy Office of the White House, has told Xinhua that the cooperation on science and technology was one of the most dynamic fields in bilateral relations between China and the United States.

The "Wolf Clause" exposed the anxiety of hawkish politicians in the United States over China's peaceful development in recent years, and it also demonstrated their shortsightedness to the whole world.

The "Wolf Clause" was a result of compromise made by Obama to Republicans to avoid possible bankruptcy of the U.S. government.

It is also a concession between U.S. Republicans and Democrats, but the "clause" will not in any way change the trend of the increasingly closer scientific and technological cooperation between China and the U.S.

In fact, the "Wolf Clause" has incurred criticism, even from some U.S. scientists.

Richard Milner, director of Laboratory for Nuclear Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), thought China's contribution to the project was "crucial".

The professor believed that the "Wolf Clause" was a "discriminative decision" and it would eventually hurt the U.S. itself.

As the unpopular clause came into effect, China's journalists became the first victims of the discriminative legislation by being turned away from the Kennedy Space Center.

Although the clause will terminate as the fiscal year 2011 ends in September, Wolf seemed unreconciled and claimed he will work to extend the ban to next year.

Today, while the Chinese and U.S. governments are deepening their cooperation, Wolf acted against the trend with a cold war mentality. This is something that should raise the vigilance of peace-loving people in the world.

]]> Thu, 09 FEB 2012 08:59:17 AEST Bethesda MD (SPX) May 17, 2011 - A Symbol: An in-space ballerina and hypersonic flying marvel, the Space Shuttle Orbiter is almost impossible for others to duplicate and continues to generate international admiration and respect for U.S. technical capabilities.

Full Potential Not Yet Realized: The multi-functional Orbiter has performed "as designed" on all assignments including reentry and a key role in the International Space Station (ISS) assembly. Like any new manned system, as crews and engineers become more familiar (like a helicopter) performance "in the box" improves and extending-the-box opportunities are identified. So far the Orbiter has operated generally within the box.

Too Young For Retirement: Each remaining Orbiter has many missions and years of life remaining. The Orbiter was designed for a one hundred mission life with a factor of four (i.e. 400 flight potential). It has experienced low flight rates and has not been structurally overloaded (maximum loads occur during the boost phase and high wind shear situations have been avoided through pre-flight meteorological observations) and receives a complete examination and any necessary refurbishment between each flight.

The System is Safe for Continued Man Flights: No critical failures have originated from within the triply redundant Orbiter itself but like any spacecraft designed for light-weight, it is vulnerable to abuse (e.g. SRB O rings, ET insulation debris); these are now known and addressable problems. The Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSME)s were my principal safety concern through the development years but their flight record has been excellent and it may be that the integrity of recovered, refurbished rocket engines is as good as or even better than new ones. Some rocket engine incipient failures may lie undetected in ocean graves.

Real Usability Through "Landing With Dignity": Turnaround man hours are costly for the Orbiter, not the least demanding being the heat shield preparation and changes are continually being made to improve the situation. Even so, this relatively light-weight, first generation radiant heat shield is itself reusable and obviates having to pay for a new vehicle and other ancillary costs such as ocean recovery for every flight. Note: In depth reviews of "flown" Apollo command modules concluded that second flights of the hardware would be too costly at that time.

New Space Initiatives Depend On The Orbiter For Identification and Pursuit: The on-orbit assembly option for a deep space manned system became more viable upon completion of the International Space Station (ISS) using the Orbiter. An "Orbiter" segment of a deep space system would be used in assembly activities, on-orbit transfers, tug functions and most importantly for the crew Earth-to-orbit and orbit-to-Earth transfer. Reliance on an Orbiter for re-entry would eliminate configuration constraints on size and shape and the weight of items such as parachutes, heat shields and landing impact structure and the energy needed to transport this otherwise useless added weight throughout the entire deep space mission. This approach essentially would trade-off these advantages against the development of an additional propulsion module for return from deep space to high/low Earth orbit. The present Orbiter would be a key mechanism in the early development of such an on-orbit assembled system.

The Shuttle Continues to Be An Intriguing Candidate For "Commercialization": The system is presently operational. Its payload-to-orbit delivery and other capabilities are well documented. Its risks are known and assessable for payload insurance and crew-safety considerations and industrial elements are already doing much of the work in many areas. Bailing, leasing and/or other type of agreement for use of government equipment (Orbiters, pads, control centers, etc.) is probably feasible in some arrangement. Needed is an industry, NASA-government, Congressional meeting of the minds on all related elements including government flight requirements, (e.g. ISS servicing) and commercial pricing policies. If such a government hand-off to industry could be affected it would, of course, keep the Shuttle Program available for another decade or two should presently unforeseen government needs arise (even today it would be most helpful to have Apollo supply and rescue vehicles that serviced Skylab available for use on the ISS).

U. S. Taxpayers Have Not Yet Realized Their Full Return-on-Investment (ROI) From the Shuttle System:

+ It really works; it is not just a briefing chart promise.

+ It has much life remaining and could be the key to the identification and development of new systems.

+ It is man-rated and safe--probably as safe as any manned system will be-no others will get over one hundred flights down the learning curve.

+ The infrastructure is in place and operational and has provided industry through extensive, hands-on participation with the depth of training necessary to assume total system accountability.

+ To replace the Orbiter capabilities will take decades and billions.

Decommissioning the Space Shuttle should be postponed indefinitely.

George W. Jeffs is the former President of Space and Energy Operations [including Shuttle Orbiter, Integration and Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSMEs)] at Rockwell International. He is also the former President of the Space Division, North American Aviation-Rockwell International [including Apollo Command and Service Modules and the Space Shuttle Orbiter]. He is also a helicopter and fixed-wing pilot with multiengine and instrument ratings.

]]> Thu, 09 FEB 2012 08:59:17 AEST Moscow, Russia (RIA Novosti) Apr 29, 2011 - China's permanent space station, the Heavenly Palace, is to be launched into orbit within a decade. According to Chinese media reports, the 60-ton craft will include a central module and two laboratories, for a crew of three. So, it's really more like a country cottage than a palace.

This all-Chinese project was unveiled earlier this week in the capital, Beijing. To the public at home, the announcement is no big news. In the West, by contrast, it has created a strong, largely negative, response. Let's try to find out why.

Technology catch-up
Does the Heavenly Palace project indicate China's technological supremacy? Not yet. Rather, it suggests the country is focused on catching up with its (more advanced) Western competitors.

China's space program kicked off in 1956, a year after Qian Xuesen returned home.

Born and raised in Hangzhou, Qian enrolled in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), in the United States. He then completed a research program at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) and was awarded his doctorate there.

Qian was among the founders of the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Jet Propulsion Center at Caltech. During the McCarthyist "witch hunts" of the 1950s, he faced accusations of collaborating with the Communists and was barred from further participation in jet propulsion research. On finding himself at a loose end, Qian decided to return to his native China. And so he did - to become the founding father of the country's space program.

Chinese aerospace professionals followed closely in the wake of the Soviet Union and the United States. They would send mice and dogs into outer space aboard sounding rockets before finally bringing their first satellite into orbit in 1970 and launching manned flight program. This was quickly mothballed and did not resume until 2003, when the first Chinese astronaut, or taikonaut as they are known locally, was sent on a mission.

China now has three operational launching sites and a fourth one under construction. It has made significant advances in its satellite program, and its fleet boasts remote-sensing, communications, navigation and positioning systems.

Now China looks set to delve deeper into outer space. Its lunar research program, known as Chang'e, has seen some successes since its first unmanned lunar probe was launched in 2007.

In parallel, China is pursuing a covert aerospace program to benefit its defense ministry. Naturally, this military program is of far greater concern to the West than the country's civilian space endeavors. According to U.S. media reports, in 2007 officials in Washington were deeply shocked to learn about a successful Chinese test of an anti-satellite system. In that test, a ballistic missile was used to destroy one of the country's own orbiting satellites.

Similar tests were carried out in Russia and the United States back in the 1980s (Soviet fighter satellites destroyed target systems with shrapnel whereas in American experiments, suborbital interceptors were deployed). However, those tests were eventually put on hold to prevent potential damage to military and civilian orbiting systems.

The Americans are seriously concerned by China's space ambitions, but that barely registers in China. The country is pursuing an independent space policy, and feels it can act however it sees fit. It does accept, though, that space should not be militarized. At least for the time being.

Russian experts, however, do not share U.S. concerns about China's space advances. They argue that so far, it has not come up with any fundamentally new developments in the area. The country's space program is just an epigone of the original Soviet project, and thanks to this fact the Chinese can easily avoid the mistakes made by space trailblazers in the USSR.

From rickshaws to space shuttles
It is not really China's rapid technological advances that make the West jittery. The problem lies in their mentality. Despite the demise of colonialism in the mid-20th century, Westerners still find it hard to come to terms with the fact that they are not superior in culture and intellect.

It is only a hundred years since the Chinese dethroned their last emperor. The empire was then severely degraded, and lagging a couple of centuries behind the West. It is only a century since Chinese men took to cutting their waist-long hair, traditionally worn in braids, which symbolized loyalty to the ruling dynasty.

In an effort to escape famine in their native land, many fled to nearby European colonies, where they tried to earn themselves a living by hard physical labor such as moving rocks, or pulling rickshaw carriages. Photos of China in the early 20th century that have survived to this day depict a world apart from China today.

Over the decades, the Middle Kingdom has transformed itself from a feudal backwater into a technology-oriented world power, with several manned space missions under its belt. Obviously this fact is not easy for Westerners to digest.

The importance of showing off
The Chinese are aware of the importance of "visual effects" like no other nation. July 1 of this year, China will launch its first aircraft carrier, the Shi Lang, remodeled from the Soviet ship Varyag. Online discussions about the forthcoming event suggest that it is more important psychologically than militarily. An article in the British newspaper The Guardian also raises that psychological dimension, dwelling on the importance of China's space program in bolstering national pride.

Indeed, prestige can sometimes afford a nation better protection than its very own nuclear weapons program.

Hosting the 2008 Olympics, China showed itself to the outside world as an emerging world power. These days, publicity stunts staged in Beijing tend to target domestic audiences just as much or even more than foreigners.

One of the states that China draws its inspiration from is Malaysia. In the 1970s, that Southeast Asian country decided to build an automotive industry of its own. At the time, this seemed like a crazy idea, but it did materialize, eventually.

Malaysia's Proton cars are not all that popular, especially among its rising middle class. Should the authorities decide to lift the customs barriers protecting the Proton from competition with imported brands the manufacturers will undoubtedly go bankrupt. But however inefficient, the national car industry has brought into existence a whole network of associated production lines and a generation of skilled homegrown workforce.

The self-esteem of a nation that has come to realize how much they can accomplish is itself a great driving force. And Malaysia's example shows just how important this realization may be in propelling a nation along its path toward economic prosperity.

China's entire national economy stands to benefit from the new space project. The fact that it is to be implemented without any assistance from Russia or the United States will raise the prestige of this Far Eastern nation, while also enriching it economically.

It could be interesting to assess - twenty or thirty years from now - how many dividends China's new space mission will have brought in. At this point, though, economists have no reliable methodology to make such calculations. All we can do is wait and see.

The views expressed in this article are the author's and may not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

]]> Thu, 09 FEB 2012 08:59:17 AEST Sydney, Australia (SPX) Apr 07, 2011 - Sending astronauts to Mars has been the ultimate objective of human spaceflight. But it's always been elusive. We started the space age with the knowledge that it would require a lot of preparation, and it would probably take decades to achieve. Decades have passed, and we're still a long way from achieving this goal. Sometimes, it seems that we're moving backwards instead of slowly forwards.

Nobody has walked on the Moon in almost 40 years, and soon, NASA will not even be able to independently launch astronauts into Earth orbit. In times like these, is it really possible to dream of flying to Mars?

It may still be a dream, but it's closer to reality than many people may think. We are getting closer to Mars every year, in ways that even people inside the space community don't always notice.

For a start, let's not forget that the world is still in the spaceflight business. Things are tough right now, mostly for economic reasons, but we are still going. Human and robotic spaceflight will continue to be a reality in the decades ahead. There is momentum to keep it going for mundane, practical reasons, as well as the loftier goals of reaching into the unknown.

Our basest survival instincts and higher aspirations will continue to sustain spaceflight. This ensures that the basic infrastructure of a space industry and a spaceflight community will always be in place. It will be this basis that serves as the root for a human Mars program.

We're learning a lot more about our destination, too. Successive waves of robotic Mars missions are mostly aimed at uncovering the scientific mysteries of the planet. They're answering a lot of deep questions, but they're also serving a reconnaissance function. We know the terrain. We know what to expect when we get there. This helps us to prepare for the challenges that will confront astronauts who step onto the surface.

We're also learning a lot more about ourselves. We know how to keep humans alive and well in space for long periods. We're increasing our understanding of how the space environment affects the human body. The International Space Station is a big part of this picture, both by hosting astronauts and performing biomedical research in its laboratory facilities.

On Earth, biomedical research is furthering our understanding of radiation, immunosuppression, and other challenges to space travellers.

Operating a large, complex space station for a long period also gives us practical experience when things go wrong. We know what can fail, and how to deal with it. Sometimes the solutions are choreographed. Sometimes they're made up on the spot. This sort of experience can't come from simulations.

We have also had some breakthroughs in key areas such as propulsion. Mars visionaries are gravitating toward a new generation of mission architectures that get astronauts to Mars quickly. Doing so helps to avoid a lot of the problems that would develop on long, multi-year missions. Ideas such as the VASIMIR propulsion system, which holds the potential for a fast ride, are gaining ground. The resurrection of a small NASA office for generating out-of-the-box thinking will also help to generate new ideas.

Then there's generic research into science and engineering. Many boffins are already helping us to get to Mars without even realizing it. They are developing better mechanical components, materials, electronics and other components that will probably find their way aboard a Marsbound spacecraft.

There's one barrier that will be harder to overcome. Going to Mars will be expensive, even with the most advanced technology. It will take a long time before the world is financially healthy enough to support such a mission. But we need time to hone our skills and lay the groundwork. Basic research and development in spaceflight can serve many purposes.

It helps us here and now, by supporting our near- term objectives in space. It also helps to build a foundation for going further. Furthermore, a "one brick at a time" approach will help to defray the cost. By the time we are ready to propose a Mars mission, most of the infrastructure and development should already be in place.

It's difficult to guess how long it will take us to get there. In the 1960s, most space pundits agreed that there would be footprints on Mars by the turn of the century. This didn't happen, and we will probably need to wait another 20 years for the mission. It could even take longer than that, if the world is struck by major catastrophes. But it's a long quest, and we shouldn't forget how far we have already come. Every step brings us closer to our destination.

Dr Morris Jones is an Australian space analyst and writer. Email morrisjonesNOSPAMhotmail.com. Replace NOSPAM with @ to send email.

]]> Thu, 09 FEB 2012 08:59:17 AEST Subscribe to our daily selection of space, military, environment and energy newsletters responseText http://visitor.constantcontact.com/manage/optin/ea?v=0016gbbKsaiGSpQFojVO8ZoHw%3D%3D