JULY / AUGUST 2008 - American Astronautical Societydev.astronautical.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/spacetimes_47-4.… · JULY / AUGUST 2008. 2 SPACE TIMES • July/August 2008 THE

SPACE TIMES • July/August 2008 1

THE MAGAZINE OF THE AMERICANASTRONAUTICAL SOCIETYISSUE 4 VOLUME 47

JULY / AUGUST 2008

2 SPACE TIMES • July/August 2008

T H E M A G A Z I N E O F T H E A M E R I C A N A S T R O N A U T I C A L S O C I E T Y

JULY / AUGUST 2008

ISSUE 4–VOLUME 47

AAS OFFICERSPRESIDENT

Frank A. Slazer, SBD ConsultingEXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT

Lyn D. Wigbels, RWI International Consulting ServicesVICE PRESIDENT–TECHNICAL

Srinivas R. Vadali, Texas A&M UniversityVICE PRESIDENT–PROGRAMS

Mary L. Snitch, Lockheed MartinVICE PRESIDENT–PUBLICATIONS

David B. Spencer, Penn State UniversityVICE PRESIDENT–MEMBERSHIP

J. Walter Faulconer, Applied Physics LaboratoryVICE PRESIDENT–EDUCATION

Kirk W. Kittell, SAICVICE PRESIDENT–FINANCE

Carol S. Lane, Ball AerospaceVICE PRESIDENT–INTERNATIONAL

Clayton Mowry, Arianespace, Inc.VICE PRESIDENT–PUBLIC POLICY

William B. Adkins, Adkins Strategies, LLCVICE PRESIDENT–STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONSAND OUTREACH

Mary Lynne Dittmar, Dittmar AssociatesLEGAL COUNSEL

Franceska O. Schroeder, Fish & Richardson P.C.EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

James R. Kirkpatrick, AAS

AAS BOARD OF DIRECTORSTERM EXPIRES 2008Peter M. Bainum, Howard UniversityDavid A. Cicci, Auburn UniversityLynn F.H. ClineNancy S.A. Colleton, Institute for Global

Environmental StrategiesMark K. Craig, SAICRoger D. Launius, Smithsonian InstitutionJonathan T. Malay, Lockheed MartinKathy J. Nado, L-3 CommunicationsRichard M. Obermann, House Committee on Science

& TechnologyTERM EXPIRES 2009Marc S. AllenSteven Brody, International Space UniversityAshok R. Deshmukh, Technica, Inc.Graham Gibbs, Canadian Space AgencySteven D. Harrison, BAE SystemsSue E. Hegg, The Boeing CompanyArthur F. ObenschainIan Pryke, CAPR, George Mason UniversityRonald J. Proulx, Charles Stark Draper LaboratoryTrevor C. Sorensen, University of Hawaii

TERM EXPIRES 2010Linda Billings, SETI InstituteRonald J. Birk, Northrop GrummanRebecca L. Griffin, Griffin AerospaceHal E. Hagemeier, National Security Space OfficeDennis Lowrey, General DynamicsMolly Kenna Macauley, Resources for the FutureErin Neal, ATKLesa B. RoeRosanna Sattler, Posternak Blankstein & Lund LLPRobert H. Schingler, Jr.Woodrow Whitlow, Jr.

SPACE TIMES EDITORIAL STAFFEDITOR, Jeffrey P. Elbel

PHOTO & GRAPHICS EDITOR, Dustin DoudPRODUCTION MANAGER, Diane L. Thompson

BUSINESS MANAGER, James R. Kirkpatrick

SPACE TIMES is published bimonthly by the AmericanAstronautical Society, a professional non-profit society. SPACETIMES is free to members of the AAS. Individual subscriptionsmay be ordered from the AAS Business Office. © Copyright 2008by the American Astronautical Society, Inc. Printed in the UnitedStates of America. ISSN 1933-2793.

PERIODICALSSPACE TIMES, magazine of the AAS, bimonthly, volume 47,2008—$80 domestic, $95 foreignThe Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, quarterly, volume 56,2008—$170 domestic, $190 foreignTo order these publications, contact the AAS Business Office.

REPRINTSReprints are available for all articles in SPACE TIMES and all pa-pers published in The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences.

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGEThe Banality of Success 3

FEATURESLessons from Apollo, Space Shuttle, International Space Station,and the Hubble Space Telescope: Learning from These GreatLegacies 4A key theme enunciated by the White House in directing NASA’sfuture is to achieve major national goals in space using humans,along with robots and autonomous systems.by Frank J. Cepollina

Sea Launch Regains Launch Tempo 10Against considerable odds, Sea Launch returned to launch operationswith the launch of the Thuraya-3 mobile communications satellite onJanuary 15, 2008.

by Paula Korn

Feedback Forum 14NASA’s FY2009 appropriation and future appropriations will mostlikely not permit current programs to be achieved - including the returnof astronauts to the Moon.by Donald Beattie

AAS NEWSFourth CanSat Competition a Success 15

26th International Symposium on Space Technology andScience 16

F. Landis Markley Astronautics Symposium 16

AAS CORPORATE MEMBER PROFILEEdge Space Systems, Inc. 17

CALL FOR PAPERSThe 32nd Annual Guidance and Control Conference 18Breckenridge, Colorado

UPCOMING EVENTS 21

NOTES ON A NEW BOOKIs Pluto a Planet? A Historical Journey through the Solar System 23Reviewed by Mark Williamson

6352 Rolling Mill Place, Suite 102Springfield, VA 22152-2354 USATel: 703-866-0020 Fax: [email protected] www.astronautical.org


PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE

AAS – Advancing All Space

Frank A. [email protected]

FRONT: A delicate ribbon of gas floats eerily in our galaxy. This image, taken by NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope, is a very thinsection of a supernova remnant caused by a stellar explosion which occurred over 1,000 years ago. The image is a composite ofobservations captured in 2006 and 2008 using the Advanced Camera for Surveys and the Wide Field Planetary Camera 2. (Source:W. Blair (JHU), NASA, ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA))BACK: Lightning from storms in late June sparked dozens of wildfires in California. This image by the MODIS instrument on theTerra satellite shows the fires on July 8, 2008. The red dots show the locations of active fires. Many of the fires have visible grayplumes of smoke rising from them, and a great deal of smoke has drifted over the Pacific Ocean. (Source: Jeff Schmaltz/MODISLand Rapid Response Team/NASA GSFC)

ON THE COVER

The Banality of SuccessLike many others involved in space activities, I have found it discouraging to

see the waning of our nation’s attention given to space events. As shown on therecent Discovery channel miniseries When We Left Earth, in the Apollo era,hundreds of thousands would converge on Cape Canaveral to witness America’searliest efforts to send humans into space. A Shuttle launch will still draw a decentcrowd these days, but they are nothing like they used to be. The missions andspacewalks performed by astronauts at the International Space Station rarelygenerate significant public attention. Interplanetary probes continue to makeamazing discoveries long after the initial flush of attention has faded.

To be certain, new developments such as the Phoenix lander’s arrival on Marsdo generate flurries of twittering and increased hits at the JPL web site. Still, suchactivity pales against what would have occurred in the past. Does this lack ofexcited interest mean that our nation is less supportive of NASA’s space explorationefforts and other space activities?

I would strongly argue that this is not the case. In fact, I believe that the public’sapparently blasé attitude towards space should be a source of pride. In the early years of the twentieth century, thousands woulddescend on fields to witness the arrival of airplanes and the often dramatic aerial acrobatic performances by barnstormers. Now,aircraft many times faster and larger routinely take off and land with zero public attention - unless they are meeting someone on adelayed flight.

Does this mean the American people do not support air travel? Of course not. It merely indicates that in the early years of thetwenty-first century, air transportation is a mature means of conveyance. It is consequently unremarkable, just as the modern equivalentsof the ships that would have once attracted large crowds to the port of colonial Jamestown are now confined to port areas miles awayfrom cities.

We in the AAS and other space supporters are, in reality, victims of our own success. We are often frustrated when we cannotgenerate the same excitement in space activities as our predecessors did. It is important to recognize, however, that our inability to doso is not failure. Rather, it is a measure of our success. Space transportation has become so routine that we expect it to work everytime, despite physical realities which have not changed, and still cause space travel to be difficult.

I recently took my two young children to watch the launch of a Delta II rocket at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. I haveseen dozens of launches, but this was the first for my children. Despite how much my children have heard (and also viewed on TV,DVD, and video) about launches, it was remarkable to witness their astonishment at what most now take for granted – that is, whatgoes up does not necessarily come down. Most people may now see space travel as routine, which is progress. In witnessing itthrough the eyes of my children, though, I was reminded of its wonder.


Lessons from Apollo, Space Shuttle, InternationalSpace Station, and the Hubble Space Telescope:Learning from These Great Legaciesby Frank J. Cepollina

Figure 1. Modifying the Apollo LunarModule to permit astronaut-tendedscientific missions. The Apollo ApplicationsProgram in 1965 and 1966 developedconcepts that broadened the applicabilityof hardware developed primarily forsending humans to the lunar surface.(Source: NASA)

“Make no little plans. They have no magicto stir men’s blood. ... Make big plans;aim high in hope and work.” –Daniel H.Burnhan, Architect

“It is dumb to launch complicated,expensive telescopes into space thatcannot be serviced.” –Michael Griffin,NASA Administrator

The advent of NASA’s ConstellationProgram offers great opportunities for thespace science communities. Now is thecritical point when the ConstellationProgram can become even more broadlyrelevant than originally planned throughthe incorporation of on-orbit servicing intoits mission. The Shuttle (STS) program hasdemonstrated the feasibility andimportance of on-orbit servicing, as wellas criticality of the human factor inmaintaining, repairing, and upgradingvaluable space assets. The lessons learnedfrom the Shuttle program, and particularlyfrom the Hubble Telescope servicingmissions, should be incorporated into theConstellation Program to providesignificant benefits to the scientificcommunity and to broaden the publicappeal of human spaceflight.

In 2004, President George W. Bushannounced the Vision for SpaceExploration (VSE). He directed NASA tocomplete the International Space Station(ISS), return humans to the lunar surfacein preparation for the long voyage to Mars,embark on a long-term human and roboticprogram to explore the Solar System, andsearch the universe for Earth-like worlds.

This article examines a key themeenunciated by the White House in directingNASA’s future. That theme is to achievemajor national goals in space usinghumans, whether in space or on the Earth’ssurface, along with robots and autonomoussystems. In addition, I identify how earlyinvestments and modest augmentations willmake NASA’s Constellation architecturemore widely useful and publicallyappealing than is presently the case. Theseinvestments and augmentations will alsolay the groundwork for further, moreambitious goals for NASA. In essence, Iam advocating an additional, valuableemphasis for the Constellation Program.

A Bit of HistoryNASA recognized the adaptability of

human spaceflight vehicles to achievemultiple goals early in the Apollo Program.In the mid-1960s, a variant of the LunarModule (LM) was proposed to the ApolloApplications Program as an Earth-orbitingscientific laboratory. This version of theLM had its engines and propellant tanksremoved (see Figure 1) to provide spacefor experiments and as many as ten tons ofscientific equipment. Its estimated two-week low-Earth orbit (LEO) missionlifetime was comparable to that of the lunarsurface missions of the time. During theproposed mission, astronauts could carryout numerous stellar and solar experiments,most of which would take advantage ofhaving humans to operate the complexinstruments proposed for this facility.

Due to fading public interest in (andpolitical support for) the Apollo program,

this configuration never flew, although avariant became the Apollo TelescopeMount for the Skylab mission in 1973.Skylab successfully demonstrated howastronauts and augmented humanspaceflight hardware could achievemultiple major science goals whilesimultaneously functioning as a “steppingstone” for even more ambitious in-spaceoperations. A similar philosophy has beenadopted more recently by several ad hocworking groups around the country:achieving important goals not originallyincorporated within the human spaceflightprogram via adaptation of the newhardware.

As the Apollo program was completedand Skylab became operational, NASAbegan the Space Shuttle program. As was


the case with the Apollo vehicles, membersof the science and human spaceflightcommunities urged early investment inShuttle capabilities that would broaden thatvehicle’s value beyond its most immediateand narrowly defined goals. Figure 2 showsan early satellite-servicing concept. Byadopting capabilities such as special tools,a highly capable robotic arm, the abilityto approach and rendezvous with a varietyof spacecraft, and especially thedemonstrated adaptability of astronauts,NASA developed a spacecraft thatachieved far more than its originaldesigners had conceived.

The Shuttle offered very large mass-return and volume-return capabilities,enabling scientific and human spaceflightexperiments requiring return to Earth (e.g.,SpaceLab, SpaceHab). These enhancedcapabilities allowed for the on-orbit rescueand significant upgrade of numeroussatellites, most notable of which is theHubble Space Telescope (HST). Therepeated on-orbit servicing of Hubble is

Figure 2. Early design for augmenting theSpace Shuttle for satellite servicing.Capabilities not originally planned for theprogram were made possible bycoordinated advocacy by the science andhuman spaceflight communities. Theseaugmentations broadened the value of thevehicle to NASA and achieved majorscience goals not otherwise possible.(Source: NASA)

NASA’s most dramatic, publicly engaging,and scientifically valuable example ofemploying humans in space to achievescience goals. The lessons for NASA seemclear.

But interestingly, the Shuttle in its initialdesign architecture had very few servicesit could provide to payloads. For example,it had only one power and data umbilical,no latchdown provisions and no means ofgrappling a spacecraft in flight (no RMSarm). It was not until the advent of apayload pathfinder mission for Shuttle thatprovisions began to be incorporated inorder to make STS more user-compatible.Solar Max was the pathfinder modularspacecraft for STS. Four years later, HSTincorporated many of the same modularityand external carrier and interface featuresof Solar Max and became the flagshipmission for STS repair and upgradecapabilities.

From 1976 to 1984, modularity ofsystems and external interfaces were theprimary catalysts for on-orbit satelliteservicing. From 1985 to 2002, there werenine servicing missions—Solar Max,Syncom IV, Westar/Palapa, ComptonGRO, Intelsat IV, and four to Hubble SpaceTelescope. In late 2008, the fifth servicingmission to Hubble Space Telescope willdemonstrate the improved ExtravehicularActivity (EVA) efficiencies, includingadvanced, miniature tools, equipmentcaddies and tool boards, quick releaselatches, tool-less latches, and on-orbitrepair that has progressed to the circuitboard level. These missions show thatarchitecture, incorporating standardizedmodularity, is the single most significantaspect of cost.

Since 1984, we have learned the valueof repair in orbi,t and have evolved humaninteraction to ever more demanding andcomplex tasks. We have discovered that ittruly does not cost more money to makeserviceable telescopes. Modulararchitecture results in lower groundground-based I&T costs and easier in-flighthardware upgrades. Historically, no funds

for servicing were in the budget duringdevelopment, yet Solar Max, Weststar/Palapa, Syncom IV, Compton Gamma RayObservatory, Intelsat VI were successfullyserviced.

Thus, every major human spaceflightprogram since the mid-1960s has beensignificantly modified and upgraded toachieve multiple goals beyond thoseoriginally planned. Each leap in technologyspringboards the next leap in technology.The concept of close collaborativeprograms of scientific discovery andhuman exploration, enabled by long-termtechnology investments, were the basis ofa series of “stepping stones” developedabout a decade ago for NASA seniormanagement by the Decadal PlanningTeam (DPT) and its successor, the NASAExploration Team (NExT).

Contrast with Current PlansBeginning in the late summer of 2004,

small NASA, academic, and industrialteams have proposed options,augmentations, and upgrades to the earlydesigns of the Orion/Crew ExplorationVehicle (CEV) that would permit in-spaceservicing and replace some of thecapabilities that will be lost when theShuttle is retired in a few years. Theseproposals from NASA’s stakeholders andlikely international partners often includedevelopment plans for near-termtechnology investment, precursors,demonstration missions, and pathfinderprograms to achieve critical goals over thenext few years. They also seek to extendhuman activities beyond the ISS, evenbefore humans are returned to the lunarsurface.

NASA’s implementation plan of theVision for Space Exploration is theConstellation Program. This program isstrictly focused on replacing the agingSpace Shuttle and retaining a nationalcapability to ferry astronauts to theInternational Space Station. About adecade from now, according to currentplans, this capability will be expanded to


return humans to the lunar surface. Thecomponents of the Constellationarchitecture consist of the Ares I and V,the Orion/Crew Exploration Vehicle, thein-space transfer stage, and the Altair lunarlanding system.

Orion, the Crew Exploration Vehicle,will be capable of carrying crew and cargoto the ISS. It will be able to rendezvouswith a lunar landing module and an Earthdeparture stage in low-Earth orbit to carrycrews to the Moon and, far in the future,to Mars-bound vehicles assembled in low-Earth orbit. Orion will be the Earth-entryvehicle for returns from the Moon andMars.

Altair will be capable of landing fourastronauts on the Moon, providing lifesupport and a base for week-long surfaceexploration missions. It shall also returnthe crew to the Orion spacecraft, whichwill bring them home to Earth. Altair willlaunch aboard an Ares V rocket into lowEarth orbit, where it will rendezvous withthe Orion crew vehicle.

Additional opportunities enabled by theConstellation architecture are beingactively explored by the sciencecommunity to achieve major science goalsthat are not otherwise possible. Examplesof these efforts include workshopssponsored by the Space Telescope ScienceInstitute, a workshop supported by theNASA Advisory Committee (NAC) inTempe, Arizona in March, 2007, andinternational conferences in the UnitedKingdom and France during the past year.Furthermore, the National ResearchCouncil is currently considering a largenumber of formal concepts for majorscience goals enabled by the Constellationarchitecture.

A consensus is emerging that, althoughhuman operations on the lunar surface offerdistinct advantages for a handful ofimportant science programs, theConstellation architecture has potential toenable very major science facilitiesthroughout the Earth-Moon system.Consequently, most of the

recommendations developed via thesemultiple meetings encourage NASA tobegin to assess in a substantive way howthe Constellation Architecture might beevolved to achieve multiple goals, buildingupon the costly and hard-won experiencewith construction of ISS and servicing ofHST. This experience shows that rapidimprovement in technology leads to bigscience discoveries - but only if we canget this new technology to orbit quickly.

In our experience, the most significantcontributions of major science discoverieshave occurred as humans worked togetherduring the Telescope servicing missions,and when advanced detector and spacecrafthardware were brought to orbit for thoseservicing missions. For example, newtechnology has transformed HST’scapabilities with all four servicing missionsto date. This technology includes:

- 4,754% increase in detector technology - 2,400% increase in computational power - 1,633% increase in onboard data storage - 455% increase in infrared science - 150% increase in number of scientific instruments operating simultaneously - 00% increase in gyros flex lead life - 57% increase in safemode energy margin - 50% increase in gyro redundancy margin - 35% increase in power generation - 30% gain in Fine Guidance Sensor performance - 10% increase in thermal margin for electrical units.

Also, by using new application-specificintegrated circuit (ASIC) technology, de-tector noise-limited observations for HST’sAdvanced Camera for Surveys will poten-tially double following its repair.The improvements to Hubble over its life-time include eleven new and three repairedscience instruments. This fresh, sophisti-cated technology brought to orbit in three-or four-year cycles is what has enabled new

scientific discoveries.To date, NASA has carried out rela-

tively limited assessments regarding howits Constellation architecture could extendhuman and robot capabilities in free space.Here I describe some concepts that havebeen presented to NASA by teams thathave adopted the philosophies of innova-tors working with the human spaceflightprogram for the past 40 years. Thesephilophies include building upon existingexperience, adapting new facilities toachieve multiple goals, and beginningearly! NASA has taken a very positive firststep by incorporating a Soft CaptureMechanism on the back end of Hubble toeffect soft capture by an Orion-type vehiclein the future for either de-orbit or emer-gency repair capability. This mechanismis shown in Figure 3.

Enabling the Future: Augmenting theConstellation Architecture

The Vision for Space Exploration di-rects NASA to operate very large opticalsystems in space to search for Earth-likeworlds. This technological goal was alsoincluded by the National Research Coun-cil in its last decadal review for astronomyand astrophysics. Large optics, either assegmented, filled apertures or as spatial in-

Figure 3: The Soft Capture Mechanismwill be installed on the back end of Hubbleduring SM4 to effect soft capture by anOrion-type vehicle in the future for eitherde-orbit or emergency repair capability. Itis circled in red for ease of identification.(Source: HST Development Office, NASA)


terferometers, are also highlighted as tech-nological goals in the most recent (2007)Science Plan for NASA’s Science MissionDirectorate. A large optical system (and itsprecursors) in space would constitute per-haps the premier astronomical observatoryof the 21st Century, able to carry out nu-merous science programs in addition tothose identified for NASA in the VSE.

Such future telescopes may be far largerthan can be launched as a single monolith,so the capability to assemble in space willbe highly desirable. Furthermore, expen-sive and complex facilities, whether in freespace or on the lunar surface, are likely torequire significant external involvement byastronauts and/or robots to ensure that tax-payer investment will be well used. Afteryears of assessment and discussion, theastronomy community is concentrating onthe second Sun-Earth libration point (S-EL2) as the optimum site for major obser-vatories for the foreseeable future. Conse-quently, the capability to operate with ro-bots and/or astronauts throughout cis-lu-nar space seems to be an essential opera-tional capability in achieving future prior-ity astronomical goals.

In addition, operating with humans androbots at the Earth-Moon libration pointsmay provide valuable support for contin-gencies or emergencies on the lunar sur-face. This could spell the difference be-tween success and failure for major sci-ence missions, just as has been the casefor terrestrial exploration programs. Re-pair equipment and back-up systems thatmay not need to be immediately availablemay more cost-effectively be “ware-housed” in space until needed. Similarly,serious medical emergencies on the lunarsurface appear to be far better treated on-site, within a gravity well, without subject-ing patients to brutalizing transportationback to Earth. Hypothetically, a well-stocked “emergency-room-in-a-can” maybe kept on-orbit, perhaps never to be used,but ready to be sent to the lunar surface ifrequired. Thus, for example, a single stor-age and work site at one of the Earth-Moon

libration points may make more logisticalsense than landing expensive, rarely usedresources at multiple locations where as-tronauts or robots are working.

One measure of the relative value ofvarious locations in the Earth-Moon sys-tem is the velocities required to travel fromone location to another. NASA’s DecadalPlanning Team in 1999-2000 examined aseries of architectures for human explora-tion beyond the immediate vicinity of theEarth with an emphasis on flexibility toachieve multiple goals, as opposed to trav-eling to a single destination.

A near-future application of hardwaredeveloped for the Constellation programmay be in-space telerobotics operated fromthe Earth’s surface, or from a modestly

modified Orion/Crew Exploration Vehicle(CEV). One capable concept is shown inFigure 4. The Orion/CEV in this conceptis launched with two astronauts to lowEarth orbit, where it later docks to a Cen-taur/servicing node assembly launched bya second Ares I vehicle. The combined pro-pulsion of the Centaur and Orion servicemodule is sufficient for the stack to travelthroughout cis-lunar space. This is one ofa series of variants of the Orion system thathave been proposed over the years to en-able astronaut-based servicing withtelerobotics assistance at, for example, anEarth-Moon libration point jobsite.

To cover the entire span from 2015 to2035, I have suggested a phased approach,shown below, in Table 1.

Figure 4. An Orion/Crew Exploration Vehicle that would be able to operatethroughout cis-lunar space (Thronson, Lester, and Budinoff, 59th InternationalAstronautics Conference). From left to right, a Centaur transfer stage, a servicingnode designed around the Altair airlock system, and an Orion CEV. The Centaurand Servicing Node are launched by an Ares I vehicle to rendezvous with anOrion already in LEO via a previous Ares I launch. (Source: Thronson et al.,59th International Astronautical Congress)

Table 1. Phased Approach


Figure 5. Instrument Stowage, a telescoping arm, and a modified door are notcurrently a part of the Orion baseline (Source: HST Development Office, NASA)

Orion/CEV alone is limited to contin-gency or emergency EVA. In any case, itis a very constrained environment with alimited lifetime. To enable extended capa-bilities, Thronson, et al., have proposedadapting a servicing node designed aroundthe airlock system that will be developedfor the Altair lunar lander. This will pro-vide additional pressurized volume, stor-age areas, consumables, and an airlock forastronaut EVA. The design also uses theNASA GSFC-developed “carriers” con-cept intended to permit modest additionalcargo on Orion. A very preliminary esti-mate of the combined Orion-servicing nodesuggests that 14–21-day missions can besupported for two astronauts.

With the capability to carry things toan orbiting facility - whether with robotsor the Constellation crew vehicle - changes,upgrades, servicing, repair, recovering, andrescue can be accomplished. With carefulmanagement, brand new technologies canbe taken to orbit on a planned, periodic ba-sis. Hardware wears out, and technologybecomes outdated. The ability to upgradeis a real asset, because technology for itemssuch as detectors, optics, electronics, com-puters, and communication systems con-tinues to improve exponentially. As wehave learned through Hubble and other on-orbit servicing, astronomical observatoriesor other satellites can be kept useful andrelevant. They can be brought to the cut-ting edge of technology in order to addressthe latest scientific questions.

Just as was the case with the ApolloApplications Program forty years ago,NASA must continue to think ahead. Manyof us believe that the Constellation archi-tecture is capable of more than merely be-ing a ferryboat from the Earth’s surface.NASA needs to start thinking now abouthow to modify and augment Orion to makein-space servicing possible. A grapple armfixture and a storage location to carry rea-sonably sized instruments can be designedinto Orion now, as shown in Figures 5.Trying to do it ten years from now, whenthe hardware is built and moving out to

the Kennedy Space Center, will be too lateand too expensive. If the investment is al-ready being made for transportation, weshould ensure that the capabilities for ser-vicing are also present.

Near-term investments, demonstrationmissions, and pathfinders must beginwithin the next very few years to take ad-vantage of existing, perishable experience,to demonstrate the value of astronaut op-erations in free space, and to expand pub-lic support for the Constellation program.Every NASA Program and Project Man-ager, including those on the ConstellationProgram, must look toward the future asthey prepare hardware, so that they cantake advantage of systems as they comeonline. The potential for upgrading systemsmust not be precluded.

In the case of Phase III, in situ servic-ing of telescopes 16 meters or larger (Fig-ure 6), astronauts and advanced space ro-bots will operate throughout the Earth-Moon system for long periods of time, tak-ing advantage of the heavy-lift capabilityof the Ares V launch vehicle. During thesame timeframe, NASA plans to have thecapability for extended lunar-surface op-erations with astronauts. Phase III con-cepts, especially robotics to achieve ma-

jor science goals, can be used to identifypriority technologies in which NASA cur-rently can be investing.

For the Crew Exploration Vehicle, de-signers should provide points for attach-ment and the capability of controlling ro-botic systems from the vehicle. Cargo stor-age provisions need to be added to the ser-vice module. If architecture cannot be de-signed with a general purpose, widely ap-plicable system, it should at least be de-signed for easy upgradability in the future.Observatories also need to be designedwith higher degrees of modularity. For ex-ample, it makes no sense to bury a fineguidance telescope control system in themiddle of an instrument or instrument clus-ter. Program cost would skyrocket if onehad to deintegrate and reintegrate such ascience instrument to repair a failed con-trol system component on the ground. Now,imagine the cost of such a situation on or-bit.

ConclusionsNASA must begin studying how the

Orion can continue the benefits of humanexploration, and this must be done in par-allel with Orion development and a sciencepathfinder mission. But time is of the es-


Figure 6. An Orion/Crew Exploration “stack” at an Earth-Moon libration pointstands off from the Single-Aperture Far-Infrared (SAFIR) observatory, whichhas returned from its observation location at the Sun-Earth L2 location. NASA’sConstellation architecture, developed to return humans to the lunar surface,may be adapted to achieve multiple additional priority goals such as this.(Source: John Frassantio & Associates and H.A. Thronson)

Frank J. Cepollina directs the HubbleSpace Telescope Development Office atNASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center.Parts of this article were first deliveredby Mr. Cepollina at a Maryland SpaceBusiness Roundtable luncheon in June,2008.

sence. Preparations must begin now. On-orbit servicing by astronauts has savedNASA million of dollars in space assets,yet the savings of science otherwise lost ispriceless.

The nation’s leaders have directedNASA to extend human operations beyondthe Earth’s surface, complete the remark-able International Space Station, replacethe aging Space Shuttle, return humans tothe lunar surface, one day travel with hu-mans to Mars, and achieve major scien-tific goals - all within a very constrainedbudget. History has shown that the ele-ments of the human spaceflight architec-ture can be adapted to achieve goals inspace beyond those originally planned,which in turn meant that “limited re-sources” was not synonymous with “lim-ited achievement.” Although to date,NASA has concentrated its design and de-velopment work on a concept for the Con-stellation architecture that will be initiallyfocused on ferrying astronauts to the ISS,numerous ad hoc groups have exploredaugmented capabilities. These designs havein common:

1. Early detailed assessment of aug-mented capabilities offered by the Constel-lation architecture, along with a plan todeploy astronauts and robots for in-spaceservicing of expensive space assets as soonas the capability exists, presumably aroundthe middle of the next decade.

2. Extending the capabilities of the Con-stellation architecture—specifically theOrion/CEV and lunar habitation module—to operate for weeks at time throughout theEarth-Moon system, perhaps even beforehumans return to the lunar surface. Fortyyears ago, with Apollo missions 7, 8, 9,and 10, NASA’s human spaceflight lead-ers chose to assess in depth the perfor-mance of their designs before sending hu-mans into the deep gravitational well ofthe Moon.

3. Preparation for longer human voy-ages beyond the vicinity of the Earth-Moonsystem, for example to Mars or the infre-quent Near-Earth Objects (NEOs). Humanoccupation of the Moon’s surface has beenidentified as a necessary “stepping stone”before humans travel further into space. Atthe same time, successful operations with

humans in free space seems equally nec-essary before we undertake long, challeng-ing voyages of many months in duration.Increasingly capable servicing, repair, up-grade, and assembly with an augmentedConstellation system in the Earth-Moonsystem may be essential preparation foreven more ambitious human missions.

4. Initiation of a sustained program ofinvestment in the technologies necessaryfor space robotics, either with astronautpartners or increasingly autonomous. Al-though NASA has declined for some yearsto allocate significant resources to a ro-botics technology program, this promisingtechnology area has been pursued on theEarth’s surface, undersea, and in space bythe US military and numerous private in-terests. It may be possible for NASA toleverage this work and apply the capabili-ties to enable its priority missions.

5. The experience of Hubble servicingdemonstrates the scientific advantages offlying the most technologically advanceddetectors available, often within one yearof instrument flight. This is possible bybuilding modular, serviceable telescopes,which are cost-effective and scientificallybeneficial. Based on Hubble experience,the development cost of a new instrumentis typically less than five percent of thedevelopment cost of the observatory.

6. Continuous rejuvenation of knowl-edge, from old instrumentation to new, re-sults in a pace of innovation and discoveryfour to five times faster than that whichcan be achieved with expendable tele-scopes. Given the achievements accom-plished with the Space Shuttle and Hubble,why not continue the cost and time sav-ings with the Constellation system?


Sea Launch Regains Launch Tempoby Paula Korn

The Sea Launch vessels in launch position on the Equator, during countdown. The launch platform, one of the world’s largestsemi-submersible vessels, is ballasted about 65 feet for stability. The Sea Launch Commander is nearly four miles uprange,accommodating the Launch Control Center as well as remotely controlled marine operations for the platform. All personnelevacuate the platform before fueling operations are initiated. (Source: Sea Launch)

On January 15, 2008, Sea Launchaccomplished what some speculated wouldbe impossible, or at least improbable: SeaLaunch returned to launch operations withthe flawless launch of the Thuraya-3mobile communications satellite. Theachievement marked Sea Launch’s 25th

mission since the international team beganoperations with its first launch in 1999, andthe first mission since a failure one yearbefore which lost the NSS-8communications satellite. Sea Launchdescribed the recovery process after that

failure in the 2007 May/June edition ofSPACE TIMES. A year later, we look backat the return to the world stage of thedynamic launch industry.

The outstanding performance of eachindividual Sea Launch employee made avital contribution to the success of MissionRecovery, transitioning from launch failureto launch readiness in a remarkable periodof just eight months. Not only was thelaunch system ready for operations, but thelaunch team was eager to return to what itdoes best: executing flawless launches.

The diversity and experience of the SeaLaunch’s international team are the mostimportant assets of the company. Knownfor their marine expertise, the Norwegiansare well respected by their American,Russian, and Ukrainian partners alike.Likewise, the Russians and Ukrainians arehighly regarded for their experience,history, and knowledge of rockets andlaunch operations. And the Americansbring their systems integration andoperations management capabilities to aproven, working launch service and team.


Return to Launch OperationsIn September 2007, Sea Launch took

delivery of the Thuraya-3 communicationssatellite, which was processed and matedwith a Zenit-3SL rocket, in preparation forresuming launch operations. The vesselsdeparted Home Port at the end of Octoberand arrived at the launch site with allsystems and personnel ready for liftoff.

Then, a new challenge emerged: anunusual set of ocean-state conditions,including a convergence of powerfulcurrents, created difficulty in station-keeping capabilities. The Launch Platformwas subject to ocean currents of up to twicethe historical trends and normal levels,coupled with high winds. Maintaining alaunch position within established launchcommit criteria became impossible as sea-state conditions continued to deteriorate.On November 26, the team made a

The Zenit-3SL vehicle is assembled on the Sea Launch Commander andthen transferred to the Odyssey Launch Platform. This image was madefrom the stern of the ship, positioned directly in front of the platform duringthe transfer operations. The rocket is rolled onto the ship’s stern rampand then lifted 200 feet to the fore end of the hangar. Heavy cranes do thelifting and then move the rocket into the hangar, where the rocket rests onthe transporter erecter. (Source: Sea Launch)

unanimous decision to terminate thecountdown and return to Home Port.

“Notwithstanding the ingenuity andpositive attitude of every person in everysegment on this mission, and the absolutereadiness of all systems to support thelaunch of Thuraya-3, Mother Nature is notcooperating,” said Rob Peckham, presidentand general manager of Sea Launch.

“Therefore, the integrated team (MarineSegment, Mission Director, RocketSegment, and Spacecraft) agreed toterminate the countdown. We will nowfocus on extending the campaign andscheduling the corresponding activitiesrequired to return to the launch site andlaunch our customer’s satellite.”

As the team sailed home with itsprecious cargo, personnel quickly regainedenergy and resolve with problem-solvingtactics. Following the delays in November

and thensubsequent extensive analysis, SeaLaunch increased power and fuelcapabilities on the Launch Platform andbegan evaluating the use of existingmargins on identified launch parameters,as needed.

The Launch Platform maintains aposition that is optimal for the launchtrajectory and minimizes the loads on thelaunch vehicle. The marine crews verifyand hold the relative headings of the vesselsto ensure their exact orientation. TheLaunch Commit Criteria requires theLaunch Platform to be in position +/-50meters of the designated launch site andthe vessel’s axis must be within +/- 3degrees of the specified launch heading.Sea Launch has expanded the station-keeping capabilities of the Launch Platformby opening up the vessel’s headingrequirement and enlarging the launch sitetolerance.

The Sea Launch Commander houses itsown weather station, manned by aprofessional meteorologist. The teammonitors winds aloft by releasing weatherballoons at specific intervals prior tolaunch. They also monitor sea conditionsin real time using data acquired from theSea Launch buoy at the launch site, at 154degrees West Longitudelongitude.

But, while While buoys and Earthobserving systems track and predict manyenvironmental characteristics of the sea andair, the idiosyncrasies of deep oceancurrents remain a mystery. The teamconsulted with oceanographers and variousexperts who were studying the winter’sunusual ocean conditions at the Equator,much of which was credited to a La Ninaevent. As a result of the experience, SeaLaunch has learned a lot more about thispart of the Pacific Ocean and also aboutoptimizing capabilities for enhanced launchavailability.

As a result of the experience inNovember, Sea Launch has implementeda variety of other measures to increaselaunch availability, particularly in the eventof off-nominal environmental conditions.


The Odyssey Launch Platform enroute to the equatorial launch site at 154 degreesWest Longitude (Source: Sea Launch)

The Payload Assembly for the Thuraya-3 mission is moved out of the PayloadProcessing Facility onto a transporter that takes it to assembly with a Zenit-3SLvehicle, on the Sea Launch Commander. (Source: Sea Launch)

An additional generator on the LaunchPlatform now provideswill provide nearly20% more power for use in contingencyscenarios by reconfiguring the allocationof power generation. In addition, thevessels are now prepared for a longerstayto be at the launch site for a longerstay, as needed. Other options are understudy.

As is typical of the Sea Launch team,challenges begetChallenges begat newsolutions and enhancements, resulting innew possibilities for customers. From thestart of operations ten years ago, problem-solving capabilities and energy hashavebeen a hallmark of the Sea Launch team.Much of what this team does, has neverbeen done before. And no problem goesunsolved.

While we celebrate the 50th year ofNASA and Sputnik, all of the extraordinaryaccomplishments of the world’s launchoperations have been initiated from land-based sites. Sea Launch has the only teamin the world that assembles its rockets on

a ship and then transfers the fully integratedrocket onto a floating launch platform;. SeaLaunch also has the only team that dealswith such things as ocean currents andvessel headings to assure exact trajectoryand mission success.

Current StatusOn January 2, 2008, the Odyssey

Launch Platform and the Sea LaunchCommander ventured out to the launch siteagain for “part two” of the Thuraya-3mission. Liftoff on January 15 proceededright on schedule, and all systemsperformed nominally throughout the flight.Sea Launch has successfully launched allthree of the Thuraya spacecraft, supportingthe start of the Thuraya SatelliteTelecommunications Company’s mobilecommunications business as well as itsgrowth.

Without losing any momentum, the teamimmediately began preparations for thenext mission on the manifest, the launchof the DIRECTV 11 broadcast satellite. On


Paula Korn, former AAS VP ofPublications, is CommunicationsDirector for Sea Launch, where she isresponsible for corporatecommunications, as well as media andpublic relations, presentations,marketing materials, website,advertising, and launch coverage.

Liftoff of the EchoStar XI mission on July 15, 2008. The launch pad is located atthe stern of the launch deck on the Launch Platform. (Source: Sea Launch)

March 19, Sea Launch successfullydelivered the DIRECTV 11 satellite toorbit, marking its 4thfourth successfullaunch for DIRECTV. On May 21, SeaLaunch executed its 25th successfulmission, with the launch of the Galaxy 18telecommunications satellite for Intelsat.That was followed by another success onJuly 15, with the launch of the EchoStarXI direct broadcast satellite for DISHNetwork.

Rob Peckham congratulatedparticipants, as he often does: “Thanks to

everyone involved in achieving thissuccessful launch, particularly the peopleof Sea Launch and our partners, contractorsand families around the world whosupportAs this issue goes to press, SeaLaunch is preparing for its fifthmissionthird of the yearsix plannedmissions in 2008, the launch of the Galaxy1918 satellite for Intelsat. Sea Launch isregaining its launch tempo and is, onceagain, strongly positioned for a successfuland growing future. In addition, operationsare moving forward with the new Land

Launch system, operating out of theBaikonur Space Center in Kazakhstanin cooperation with Space InternationalServices, based in Moscow. Using theZenit-3SLB vehicle, a variant of the SeaLaunch Zenit-3SL, Land Launchprovides launch services for medium-weight commercial satellites. The firstof these missions was successfullycompleted on April 28, with thesuccessful launch of the AMOS-3communications satellite. A secondLand Launch mission, the launch of theMEASAT 1R satellite, is planned forAugust. As a result of the market’spositive response to this new service,Sea Launch is now filling manifestopportunities in 2010.

About Sea LaunchEstablished in 1995, Sea Launch

Company, LLC, is an internationalpartnership of American, Russian,Ukrainian and Norwegian businessesthat provides the most direct and costeffective route to geostationary orbit forcommercial communications satellites.With the advantage of a launch site onthe Equator, the robust Zenit-3SL rocketcan lift a heavier mass or provide longerlife on orbit, offering best value plusoptimized spacecraft orbital delivery. Inaddition to its ocean-based heavy liftlaunch service from the Equator, SeaLaunch also offers a land-based servicefor medium weight payloads, originatingfrom an existing launch site at theBaikonur Space Center in Kazakhstan.

For additional information, visit theSea Launch website at www.sea-launch.com.


Donald A. Beattie is a former NASAengineer and manager. He also directedprograms at the National ScienceFoundation, Energy Research andDevelopment Administration, and theDepartment of Energy. He currentlyworks as a private consultant. He is alsothe author of several books, includingTaking Science to the Moon andISScapades: The Crippling of America’sSpace Program.

In the March/April 2008 issue ofSPACE TIMES, John Klineberg, formerGoddard Space Flight Center Director andaerospace executive, wrote a thoughtfularticle concerning some of NASA’songoing problems. He used the allegory ofthe Emperor’s New Clothes to illustrate hisconcerns. Referring to the Vision for SpaceExploration he wrote: “We pretend we seeit and exclaim how wonderful it is, butthere’s nothing there at all.”

NASA faces two major problems, onenear term, the other longer term. The nearterm problem is the FY 2009 appropriationand whether or not NASA will be forcedto operate in FY 2009 on a continuingresolution. The longer term problem is thatregardless of the size of the FY 2009appropriation, future appropriations willalmost certainly not permit current NASAprograms to be achieved, includingreturning astronauts to the Moon.

As Klineberg pointed out, aeronauticsresearch is deficient in several areas. Inthe past decade the NASA aeronauticsbudget has declined almost 25 percent. Asan old Navy pilot, I would add that NASAhas lost its aeronautics R&D edge by notcontinuing to pursue major flightdemonstration programs as it did in thepast. NASA and DOD must decide quicklyhow to develop a long range plan that willkeep NASA involved at the cutting edgeof future flight technology, as called for inthe 2007 National Aeronautics Plan. To dothis will require a much larger fundedNASA aeronautics program.

Because NASA budgets will continueto be less than needed to carry out all theimportant work NASA should and can do,there must be a reevaluation of NASApriorities. Returning to the Moon shouldnot be at the top of the list. Besidesaeronautics, much higher priority programs

Feedback Forumby Donald Beattie

NASA Aeronautics research has tackledsome enormous aviation challenges in itshistory. Among them are technologiesdeveloped to address wake vortices -horizontal tornadoes trailing from wing tipsthat are created as a byproduct of lift. Waketurbulence has an impact on how closelyplanes can be spaced, especially duringlanding and take-off. (Source: NASA/Langley)

are not being fully funded and, in myjudgment, may never be funded if NASAcontinues to place lunar programs at thetop of the list. It is not just a case of “beenthere, done that,” though that is certainly apart of the problem.

NAS/NRC Earth observationrecommendations should be at the top ofthe list, followed by NEO researchadvocated by Rusty Schweikert. The lattershould become a major international effortincluding how to divert a large object thatis or could be on a collision course withEarth. Robotic Mars sample return shouldalso have a higher priority than lunarmissions. NASA is having a hard timescheduling Mars sample return because ofbudget constraints.

Full use of the ISS beyond 2015 shouldalso have a higher priority. To do thismeans keeping the shuttle flying past 2010.

The Constellation program should betailored to missions other than returningto the Moon, and if the shuttle keeps flying(perhaps twice a year until Orion isoperational) it will take pressure off theprogram schedule - which, as GAO haspointed out, is overly optimistic. Thebudget should be reallocated to allow thisoutcome.

The problem NASA has, as I see it, iswhat to do with the astronaut corps -currently and in the past, over 60% ofNASA’s budget has been dedicated tohuman space flight. There is a solution, butit means a much less ambitious near-termhuman space flight program until all theother higher priority programs are funded.

What the next administration willendorse is anyone’s guess. My judgment,along with many others, is that federalbudgets for the foreseeable future will beso tight that NASA will not receive majorincreases.

So what should the next administrationdo? It should reprioritize programs with thehelp of experienced space and aeronauticspanelists, but not with panels dominatedby former or current astronauts. Otherwise,the new administration and congress willget the same old recommendations. Thesewill neither be sustainable nor in the bestinterests of the country.


AAS NEWS

Fourth CanSat Competition a SuccessCollege students from around the

country and Mexico gathered June 13-15in Amarillo, Texas to compete in the annualStudent CanSat Competition. In order toexperience a hands-on space program atan affordable cost, each team had to buildand launch a payload the size of a 12 ouncesoda can to an altitude of one mile. Thebasic mission required that the payloadtransmit its altitude to the ground stationat least every five seconds and land in adefined upright position, or upright itselfwithin ten minutes. Bonus points weregiven for taking panoramic images afterlanding, extracting 5 grams of soil, andmeasuring the ground surface temperature,wind speed, and direction. Each team wasalso required to write a mission proposal,generate design documentation, conductpreliminary and critical design reviewswith staff engineers, and prepare/presenta post-mission debrief.

A total of $6,500 in prize money wentto the winning CanSat teams, with theUniversity of New Hampshire taking firstplace, University of Alabama in Huntsvillesecond place, University of Michigan (withtwo teams) third and fourth places, andVirginia Tech fifth place.

This year’s competition was sponsoredby the AAS, the American Institute ofAstronautics and Aeronautics, JetPropulsion Laboratory, Naval ResearchLaboratory, Orbital Sciences Corporation,and NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.Planning for next year’s competition isalready underway. It will be held June 12-14, 2009, back in Amarillo with thecontinued support of the Panhandle ofTexas Rocketry Society (POTROCS). Toview additional photographs and video ofthis and past years’ events, visitwww.cansatcompetition.com. Forcorporate sponsorship opportunities for the2009 competition, contact the AASBusiness Office.

Teams prepare for the competition(Source: AAS)

First place team members from the University of New Hampshire(Source: AAS)

Texas-style chuckwagon barbeque(Source: AAS)

CanSat payload (Source: AAS) Mexico City team briefs their mission(Source: AAS)


Dr. Peter Bainum (right) presents the AAS Award forthe Most Innovative Application of Space Technologyto Professor Komurasaki on behalf of winning studentMr. Fukushima, both representing the University ofTokyo (Source: Dr. Hirayama/Kyushu University)

26th International Symposium on SpaceTechnology and Science

AAS NEWS

Held every two years, the International Symposium on SpaceTechnology and Science (ISTS) is the second largest internationalspace conference worldwide, second only to the annualInternational Astronautical Congresses in terms of attendance,countries represented, exhibitors, and number of papers submitted.

The theme of the 26th ISTS, held in June 2008 in Hamamatsu,Japan, was Space!! Go for it! More than 30 student papers at thePh.D. and Masters levels were submitted during the ISTS StudentConference and Competition, held in conjunction with theSymposium. Peter Bainum, who served on the ISTS OverseasProgram Committee, provided comments at the OpeningCeremony on behalf of the AAS, co-chaired three sessions duringthe Student Conference, and participated in the Student AwardCeremony during the Closing Banquet.

The 27th ISTS will break from its bi-annual tradition tocelebrate the 50th Anniversary of ISTS. This event will be heldJuly 5-12, 2009 in Tsukuba City, Japan, the location of a majorJAXA facility.

F. Landis Markley Astronautics SymposiumDr. F. Landis Markley, one of the pillars of spacecraft attitude

estimation as well as one of our most important mission engineers,was honored at a special symposium June 29–July 2, 2008 at theHyatt Regency Chesapeake Bay Golf Resort, Spa and Marina inCambridge, Maryland. Dr. Markley was specifically recognizedfor his many innovations in astronautical engineering, for his manyalgorithms and methodologies for spacecraft attitude support, andfor his numerous seminal publications. Additionally, this eventgave his many friends, colleagues, and admirers a perfectopportunity to show how much they respect and admire both himand his accomplishments.

The symposium was organized with the cooperation of the AASand sponsored by the University at Buffalo-State University ofNew York, Hubble Space Telescope Project, Computer SciencesCorporation, The Johns Hopkins University Applied PhysicsLaboratory, Spacecraft System Engineering Services, and theAmerican Institute of Aeronautics and the Astronautics (AIAA)Baltimore Section.

The well-attended symposium featured presentations of overfifty papers, as well as social events and a special banquet. It is

expected that the papers will be published by the AAS in a specialProceedings, with many appearing in a future issue of The Journalof the Astronautical Sciences.

F. Landis Markley (Source: AAS)


CORPORATE MEMBER PROFILE

Edge Space Systems, Inc.Corporate Member Profile

Edge Space Systems, Inc. is a woman-owned small business, founded in 2003 andlocated in Glenelg, Maryland. Edgespecializes in thermal and mechanicalsystems engineering for space applications,with one of the largest thermal engineeringindustry groups in the Maryland area.Customers include NASA Goddard SpaceFlight Center, NASA Kennedy SpaceCenter, the Naval Research Laboratory,Analex Corporation, Sigma SpaceCorporation, and SGT.

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO)(Source: NASA)

Edge expertise includes: thermalanalysis from back of the envelope todetailed flight and test models; design fromconcept through full integration;requirements generation/review; thermaltesting; integration; thermal requirementdefinition; hardware procurement; andventing analysis. Edge engineers supportspace science instruments, spacecraft,

launch vehicles, and flight componentssuch as electronics, structures, solar arrays,deployables, batteries, and coolingsystems. Edge has cryogenic thermalexpertise as well as extensive experiencein Structural-Thermal-Optical (STOP)analysis. The staff works with low earthorbits (LEO), geosynchronous orbits(GEO), highly elliptical orbits (HEO),interplanetary, lunar, L1 and L2, solar, andhigh altitude balloon missions. Edgethermal engineers are expert in a varietyof industry software, including ThermalDesktop, TSS, SINDA, TMG, andTRASYS, providing geometry and thermalmathematical models to meet customerneeds. Edge engineers are supporting SDO,LRO, JWST, NPP, GOES, POES, SAMand ELC.

Edge Space Systems engineers andtechnicians support the Goddard ThermalLaboratory, providing subassemblythermal design and testing, test bed design,and advanced thermal control development.

Edge believes in the continuousdevelopment and education of technicalstaff, creating an environment of

Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM)(Source: NASA)

mentoring, reviewing, and sharingknowledge. They are developing the nextgeneration of engineers by hiring collegestudents and new graduates as frequentlyas possible and encouraging all employeesto continue learning.

Edge has consistently and successfullyexpanded their capabilities and expertise,most recently with growth in mechanicalsystems. They continue to increase theircapabilities by adding and developingmechanical engineering personnel withexpertise in the areas of mechanical design,structural analysis, and mechanicalsystems.

Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO)(Source: NASA)


CALL FOR PAPERS ABSTRACT DEADLINE: September 12, 2008

Call for PapersThe 32nd Annual Guidance and Control ConferenceBeaver Run ResortBreckenridge, Colorado

The 32nd Annual Guidance and Control (G&C) Conference will be held January 30 through February 4, 2009 at the beautiful Beaver Run Resortin Breckenridge, Colorado. Attached please find the agenda for the 2009 Conference. Abstracts for potential papers to be presented at theConference are being accepted. The deadline for abstract submission is September 12, 2008.The 2009 Conference will have the following sessions. Their themes are listed as well as the session organizer(s) to contact for abstract submission.Sessions 1 through 8 are the traditional open sessions, including international participation. Session 9 will be limited to U.S. citizens andpermanent residents only.

SESSION I - Recent ExperienceTheme: Lessons learned through experience prove most valuable when shared with others in the G&C community. This session, which is a traditionalpart of the conference, provides a forum for candid sharing of insights gained through successes and failures. Past conferences have shown this sessionto be most interesting and informative.Organizers:Dave Chart, Lockheed Martin Space Systems, [email protected], 303-977-6875Ian Gravseth, Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp., [email protected], 303-939-5421National Chairperson:Owen Brown, DARPA, [email protected], 571-218-4206

SESSION II - Technical ExhibitsTheme: The Technical Exibits Session is a unique opportunity to observe displays and demonstrations of state-of-the-art hardware, design andanalysis tools, and services applicable to advancement the of guidance, navigation, and control technology. The latest commercial tools for GN&Csimulations, analysis, and graphical displays are demonstrated in a hands-on, interactive environment, including lessons learned and undocumentedfeatures. Associated papers not presented in other sessions are also provided and can be discussed with the author. Come enjoy an excellent complimentarybuffet and interact with the technical representatives and authors. This session takes place in a social setting, and family members are welcome.Organizers:Scott Francis, Lockheed Martin Space Systems, [email protected], 303-977-8253Kristen Terry, Lockheed Martin Space Systems, [email protected], 303-971-7450Vanessa Baez, Lockheed Martin Space Systems, [email protected], 303-971-6481

SESSION III - Advances in G&C (includes Smart Sensors)Theme: Many programs depend on heritage, but the future is advanced by those willing to design and implement new and novel architectures,technologies, and algorithms to solve the GN&C problems. This session is open to papers with topics ranging from theoretical formulations toinnovative systems and intelligent sensors that will advance the state of the art, reduce the cost of applications, and speed the convergence tohardware, numerical, or design trade solutions.Organizers:Jay Speed, Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp., [email protected], 303-939-5322Shawn McQuerry, Lockheed Martin Space Systems, [email protected], 303-971-5262National Chairperson:Stephen Airey, European Space Agency, stephen.airey@esa,int, +31 (0) 710 565 5295

SESSION IV - N&C of Earth and Space Observing Environmental SpacecraftTheme: There are unique guidance navigation and control challenges in the design, development, and operations of earth orbiting observations thatmonitor earth and space weather. These challenges increase as requirements for long-term climate monitoring are added, with GNC implications oninstruments and the bus. This session will cover such aspects for operational and experimentsl observations in low earth geosynchronous orbits. Thisincludes GN&C design, image navigation and registration (INR), pointing stability, geo-location, station keeping, and end-to-end calibration andvalidation.Organizers:Bill Emery, University of Colorado, [email protected], 303-492-8591Bill Frazier, Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp., [email protected], 303-939-4986National Chairperson:TBD


CALL FOR PAPERS

SESSION V - Lunar and Martian NavigationTheme: This session focuses on navigation in orbit, during entry descent and landing, and on the surface of the Moon and Mars. Papers may includediscussion of precision gravity models, atmospheric models, entry descent and landing (EDL) developments, autonomous rover navigation, and others.Organizer:Mary Klaus, Lockheed Martin Space Systems, [email protected], 303-971-2724National Chairperson:Steve Lee, JPL, [email protected], 818-393-6685

SESSION VI - Rendezvous ManagementTheme: While rendezvous between two objects in space has begun to seem almost common place in recent years, the technology to accomplish thisfeat has become increasingly complex. Greater autonomy and tighter constraints drive to more specialized systems. This session will explore currentrends in rendezvous, including sensor technology, navigation methodology, and flight demonstrations.Organizers:Michael Osborne, Lockheed Martin Space Systems, [email protected], 303-977-5867Larry Germann, Left Hand Design, [email protected], 303-652-2786National Chairperson:Jack Brazzel, NASA, [email protected]

SESSION VII - Geriatric SpacecraftTheme: Despite the harsh environment in which spacecraft must function from the beginning of their operational lives, many will finish theirintended missions successfully, possibly experiencing only the occasional hiccup. However, either by design or luck, some of these spacecraft willoutlive their contemporaries and remain useful for many years to decades. Even then, these extended missions will face their own challenges asactuator and sensor components begin to deteriorate and propellant is depleted, among other potential issues. This session will explore the orbitemaintenance and attitude control issues faced by these spacecraft and the unique and often clever efforts devised by their operators to seek out everybit of operational life and, in some cases, to give them a fitting retirement.Organizers:Heidi Hallowell, Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp., [email protected], 303-939-6131Zack Wilson, Lockheed Martin Space Systems, [email protected], 303-971-4799National Chairperson:Phil Sabelhaus, Goddard Space Flight Center, [email protected], 301-286-5712

SESSION VIII - CubeSats and NanosatsTheme: A number of recent commercial and university efforts have taken advantage of the reduced resources required to develop small, secondary-payload spacecraft. The CubeSat initiative in particular, with standardized design guidelines and logistics support for picosats constrained to a 1-litervolume, has proven highly successful in providing space access to resource-constrained university research labs. The first CubeSat launch occurred ini2003, and today the collaboration includes more than 60 universities and high schools. These programs have benefited from a remarkable level ofcollaboration among the participants, and have produced some noteworthy achievements. This session highlights creative guidance and controlapproaches for CubeSats and other small spacecraft, where the performance goals may be modest, but the innovation and learning experiences can beexceptional.Organizer:Jim Chapel, Lockheed Martin Space Systems, [email protected], 303-977-9462National Chairpersons:Jordi Puig-Suari, Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, [email protected], 805-756-6479Therese Moretto Jorgensen, National Science Foundation, [email protected], 703-292-8518

SESSION IX - Orion Navigation (U.S. only)Theme: This session will address the challenges and recent advances associated with U.S. investment to develop a new manned space vehicle, theOrion Crew Exploration Vehicle. Topcis include guidance and control during ascent, rendezvous and docking, transit to the moon, landing and hazardavoidance technologies, sensors, situation awareness systems, and considerations for humans in the control loop.Organizer:Ed Friedman (acting), Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp., [email protected], 303-939-5701National Chairpersons:Tim Crain, NASA Johnson Space Flight Center, [email protected], 281-244-5077

For additional information, including Conference registration and Beaver Run reservation information, local attractions and activities, the latestupdates for the 2009 G&C Conference, and much more, please visit our website at www.aas-rocky-mountain-section.org.Thank you in advance. We look forward to your participation and seeing you at the Conference!Ed Friedman Jay Brownfield2009 Conference Chair Rocky Mountain Section SecretaryBall Aerospace & Technologies Corp. Honeywell Defense & Space303-939-5701 303-681-3316


AAS Corporate MembersThe Aerospace CorporationAir Force Institute of Technologya.i. solutions, inc.Analytical Graphics, Inc.Applied Defense Solutions, Inc.Applied Physics Laboratory / JHUArianespaceAuburn UniversityBall Aerospace & Technologies Corp.The Boeing CompanyBraxton Technologies, Inc.Carnegie Institution of WashingtonComputer Sciences CorporationEdge Space Systems, Inc.Embry-Riddle Aeronautical UniversityGeneral Dynamics AISGeorge Mason University, CAPRHoneywell Technology Solutions, Inc.International Space UniversityJacobs Technology, Inc.Jet Propulsion LaboratoryKinetX, Inc.

Lockheed Martin CorporationLunar Transportation Systems, Inc.N. Hahn & Co., Inc.NoblisNorthrop Grumman Space TechnologyOrbital Sciences CorporationThe Pennsylvania State UniversityRaytheonSAICThe Tauri GroupTechnica, Inc.Texas A&M UniversityUnited Launch AllianceUnivelt, Inc.Universal Space NetworkUniversities Space Research AssociationUniversity of FloridaUtah State University / Space Dynamics LaboratoryVirginia TechWomen in AerospaceWyle Laboratories

WELCOME NEW CORPORATE MEMBER

Universities Space Research Association


UPCOMING EVENTS

AAS Events ScheduleAugust 18-21, 2008*AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics SpecialistConferenceHilton Hawaiian VillageHonolulu, Hawaiiwww.aiaa.org

October 21-22, 2008*Special Symposium"Building on the Past to Power the Future"Von Braun CenterHuntsville, Alabama703-866-0020

November 17-19, 2008AAS National Conference and55th Annual Meeting"Space Exploration and Science in the NextDecade"Pasadena HiltonPasadena, Californiawww.astronautical.org

January 30-February 4, 2009AAS Guidance and Control ConferenceBeaver Run Resort and Conference CenterBreckenridge, ColoradoAbstract Deadline: September 15, 2008www.aas-rocky-mountain-section.org

*AAS Cosponsored Meetings

February 8-12, 2009*AAS/AIAA Space Flight MechanicsWinter MeetingHilton Savannah DeSotoSavannah, GeorgiaAbstract Deadline: October 6, 2008www.space-flight.org

March 10-12, 200947th Robert H. Goddard MemorialSymposiumGreenbelt MarriottGreenbelt, Maryland703-866-0020

May 26-29, 2009*12th International Space Conferenceof Pacific-basin Societies (ISCOPS)Holiday Inn SelectMontreal, Canada703-866-0020

June 12-14, 2009*5th Student CanSat CompetitionAmarillo, Texaswww.cansatcompetition.com

August 9-13, 2009*AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics SpecialistConferenceRenaissance Pittsburgh HotelPittsburgh, Pennsylvaniawww.space-flight.org

Charitable Giving and the AASA popular way of donating to an organization is through a gift by means of a will (i.e., to make a bequest). You may decide to

consider either a general bequest to the AAS or a bequest targeted to an existing or new AAS scholarship or an award fund. Thesebequests are deductible against estate and inheritance taxes. There are also tax advantages when making charitable donations tothe AAS while you are living. Such gifts could contribute to the memory of someone who has passed away or be made in the honorof a person who is still alive. In addition, special occasions offer opportunities for gifts to be directed to the Society. As a final note,although the AAS is able to provide suggestions for charitable giving, your financial or legal advisor should be consulted aboutsuch actions.


Membership Benefits Include: Subscriptions to the quarterly TheJournal of the Astronautical Sciences and the bi-monthly SPACETIMES magazine, as well as reduced rates at all AAS conferences.Visit the AAS website for additional information about benefits.

___________________________________________________________________________________Mr./Ms./Dr. Last Name First Name

___________________________________________________________________________________Title Company

___________________________________________________________________________________Address

___________________________________________________________________________________City State Zip Code

___________________________________________________________________________________Phone E-mail

Membership Application703-866-0020

www.astronautical.org

Membership Type! Member .............................. $85! Affiliate ........................... $85! Senior Member ............ $100! Retired ............................. $35! Teacher (K-12) .............. $35! Student (full-time) ....... $35

Payment Method❒ Check Enclosed❒ Credit Card

❒ Visa ❒ Amex ❒ MasterCard

________________________________________Credit Card Number

________________________________________Expiration Date

________________________________________Signature

Mail to: AAS6352 Rolling Mill PlaceSuite 102

Springfield, VA 22152-2354

Fax to: 703-866-3526

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

""""""""""

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

SPACE TIMES Article Submission GuidelinesFeature articles of 1500 to 3000 words, op-eds of 500 to 1500 words, and book reviews of 600 words or less are encouraged and

accepted by the AAS for production in SPACE TIMES magazine. Exceptions to the length of any article must be discussed inadvance with the editor. Articles may cover virtually any topic involving space science, technology, exploration, law, policy, orissues relevant to the civil, commercial, and military and intelligence space sectors.

SPACE TIMES is a magazine, as opposed to a technical journal, with a well-educated audience that has a great interest in spacetopics but may not necessarily be familiar with your specific topic. Therefore, write with an active voice and provide a clearexplanation of technical concepts. Conversational rather than formal is the preferred tone.

Submission deadlines are the 15th of the month prior to the first month of the issue (i.e., August 15 for the September/Octoberissue). Articles should be submitted in Microsoft Word format and Times New Roman font, with a title, subtitle, or one to twosentence summary of the subject matter for use in the index, subheadings for separation between major sections of the article, and aone to two sentence author biography to appear at the end of the article. Also, please provide a mailing address for shipment ofcomplimentary copies of the issue in which your article appears.

Photos or other visual support are encouraged, although not required, and must be provided in high resolution (at least 300 dpi)and JPG or TIF format, separate from, not imbedded in, the article. Proof of permission to reproduce from the owner of any photosor visuals must be provided. Contact information of the owner will be accepted if permission has not already been obtained prior tosubmission of an article.

Units of measurement should be conveyed in metric, not English, terms, acronyms should be used sparingly, and numbers onethrough one hundred should be spelled out. In addition, names of specific spacecraft (e.g., Columbia) should be italicized, butgeneral spacecraft names (e.g., space shuttle Delta) should not be.

Contact: Jeffrey Elbel, Editor ([email protected])


NOTES ON A NEW BOOK

Reviewed by Mark Williamson

Is Pluto a Planet? A Historical Journeythrough the Solar System? by David A.Weintraub, Princeton University Press, 254pages, 2007, $27.95 (hardback), ISBN: 978-0-691-12348-6

Mark Williamson is an independentspace technology consultant and author.

Is Pluto a Planet? A HistoricalJourney through the Solar System

Is Pluto a planet? More or less anyoneyou asked prior to 2006, amateur orprofessional, would have frowned inresponse, “Well, of course it is...unlessyou’re talking about that cartoon dog!” Thevery fact that the answer, which has beenmore or less the same since Clyde Tombaughdiscovered Pluto in 1930, is now less clearindicates that something momentous – interms of astronomical definitions - happenedin 2006. Indeed, it was on August 24 of thatyear, at the 26th General Assembly of theInternational Astronomical Union (IAU),that a majority of the 424 members presentpassed a resolution defining “planet” in away that appeared to exclude Pluto.

There followed a ripple of dissent, fuelledby inaccurate media reports, that grew intoa tide of indignation within the astronomicalcommunity, and, among other things,produced this book by David Weintraub,himself a professor of astronomy atVanderbilt University. Like all gooddetective stories, this one does a good job ofnot revealing the conclusion until the end.

In fact, the author concentrates onproviding a detailed historical backgroundto the Pluto issue by tracing the way our viewof what constitutes a planet has evolved sincethe Mayans and the Babylonians began toobserve the heavens. Some of his chaptertitles, such as “The Earth Becomes a Planet”and “Not Everything That Orbits the Sun isa Planet,” tell a story in themselves. Others,such as “Uranus!,” “The Celestial Police,”and “Goldilocks,” are perhaps more

enigmatic, but the book itself is writtenin an engaging and accessible way.

The author explains that scientists, incommon with the rest of us, like tocategorize things, as a way ofunderstanding them and placing them intheir correct context. But what does theastronomer do if he observes three brightpoints in the sky, which differ only in theircolour? Are they individual examples ofobjects in three separate categories (redstars, blue stars and yellow stars), orthree examples of the same category(stars) that “differ only in the incidentalquality of color?” Although he doesn’tdraw the analogy, the question is commonto broader human issues such as class andrace.

Weintraub goes on to analyze someancient and modern definitions of theword ‘planet’ and concludes that he is“very dissatisfied [with the OxfordEnglish Dictionary] definitions,”labelling them “essentially worthless.”It’s not clear how many other dictionarieshe might have consulted, but that’s notthe point. If even professionalastronomers can’t decide what constitutesa planet, what hope is there for dictionarywriters?

Readers who enjoy immersingthemselves in the history of astronomy,however many times they’ve read ofAristotle, Copernicus, and Kepler, willlike this book. In fact, Pluto doesn’t getmuch of a mention until about half waythrough, when it is introduced as “thefourth ninth planet,” a reference to howplanetary definitions have changed in thepast. According to Weintraub, “Plutogenerated controversy” almost from theday its discovery was announced. “Was

it Lowell’s Planet X or Pickering’s PlanetO? Was it neither?” (You will have to readthe book to find out).

As the author states, whether Pluto is aplanet or the largest Kuiper Belt Object(KBO), or, indeed, part of a KBO subgroupknown as the Plutinos, is “a scientificquestion, not a matter of public opinion ora decision to be made by NASA or a panelof distinguished astronomers.” (No doubthe has in mind that the IAU’s decision wasmade among a group of just over 400 of atotal of 10,000 members.) Following adiscussion of many of the factors by whichplanets might be defined (size, mass, orbit,roundness, etc.), he comes to the surprisingconclusion that “The solar system has morethan twenty planets!...Pluto is a planet anda Plutino and a KBO.” An arguably moreimportant conclusion is that the jury is stillout on the status of Pluto.

Is Pluto a Planet? is well illustratedwith black and white photos and diagrams,and comes complete with an index, chapternotes, and an appendix on “What we knowabout Pluto.” Perhaps unsurprisingly, thereis no glossary of terms. Offering a list ofdefinitions would be a ‘can of worms’beyond that already opened.


6352 Rolling Mill PlaceSuite 102Springfield, VA 22152-2354

Address Service Requested

Non Profit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDPermit #565

Springfield, VA

Documents

JULY / AUGUST 2008 - American Astronautical Societydev.astronautical.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/spacetimes_47-4.… · JULY / AUGUST 2008. 2 SPACE TIMES • July/August 2008 THE