NASA

nasa-still-doesn’t-understand-root-cause-of-orion-heat-shield-issue

NASA still doesn’t understand root cause of Orion heat shield issue

artemis, artemis II, human spaceflight, Lockheed Martin, moon, NASA, orion, Space / /

Flight rationale —

“When we stitch it all together, we’ll either have flight rationale or we won’t.”

–

NASA's Orion spacecraft descends toward the Pacific Ocean on December 11, 2021, at the end of the Artemis I mission.

Enlarge / NASA’s Orion spacecraft descends toward the Pacific Ocean on December 11, 2021, at the end of the Artemis I mission.

NASA

NASA officials declared the Artemis I mission successful in late 2021, and it’s hard to argue with that assessment. The Space Launch System rocket and Orion spacecraft performed nearly flawlessly on an unpiloted flight that took it around the Moon and back to Earth, setting the stage for the Artemis II, the program’s first crew mission.

But one of the things engineers saw on Artemis I that didn’t quite match expectations was an issue with the Orion spacecraft’s heat shield. As the capsule streaked back into Earth’s atmosphere at the end of the mission, the heat shield ablated, or burned off, in a different manner than predicted by computer models.

More of the charred material than expected came off the heat shield during the Artemis I reentry, and the way it came off was somewhat uneven, NASA officials said. Orion’s heat shield is made of a material called Avcoat, which is designed to burn off as the spacecraft plunges into the atmosphere at 25,000 mph (40,000 km per hour). Coming back from the Moon, Orion encountered temperatures up to 5,000° Fahrenheit (2,760° Celsius), hotter than a spacecraft sees when it reenters the atmosphere from low-Earth orbit.

Despite heat shield issue, the Orion spacecraft safely splashed down in the Pacific Ocean. Engineers discovered the uneven charring during post-flight inspections.

No answers yet

Amit Kshatriya, who oversees development for the Artemis missions in NASA’s exploration division, said Friday that the agency is still looking for the root cause of the heat shield issue. Managers want to be sure they understand the cause before proceeding with Artemis II, which will send astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Jeremy Hansen on a 10-day flight around the far side of the Moon.

This will be the first time humans fly near the Moon since the last Apollo mission in 1972. In January, NASA announced a delay in the launch of Artemis II from late 2024 until September 2025, largely due to the unresolved investigation into the heat shield issue.

“We are still in the middle of our investigation on the performance of the heat shield from Artemis I,” Kshatriya said Friday in a meeting with a committee of the NASA Advisory Council.

Engineers have performed sub-scale heat shield tests in wind tunnels and arc jet facilities to better understand what led to the uneven charring on Artemis I. “We’re getting close to the final answer in terms of that cause,” Kshatriya said.

NASA officials previously said it is unlikely they will need to make changes to the heat shield already installed on the Orion spacecraft for Artemis II, but haven’t ruled it out. A redesign or modifications to the Orion heat shield on Artemis II would probably delay the mission by at least a year.

Instead, engineers are analyzing all of the possible trajectories the Orion spacecraft could fly when it reenters the atmosphere at the end of the Artemis II mission. On Artemis I, Orion flew a skip reentry profile, where it dipped into the atmosphere, skipped back into space, and then made a final descent into the atmosphere, sort of like a rock skipping across a pond. This profile allows Orion to make more precise splashdowns near recovery teams in the Pacific Ocean and reduces g-forces on the spacecraft and the crew riding inside. It also splits up the heat load on the spacecraft into two phases.

The Apollo missions flew a direct reentry profile. There is also a reentry mode available called a ballistic entry, in which the spacecraft would fly through the atmosphere unguided.

Ground teams at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida moved the Orion spacecraft for the Artemis II mission into an altitude chamber earlier this month.

Enlarge / Ground teams at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida moved the Orion spacecraft for the Artemis II mission into an altitude chamber earlier this month.

The charred material began flying off the heat shield in the first phase of the skip reentry. Engineers are looking at how the skip reentry profile affected the performance of the Orion heat shield. NASA wants to understand how the Orion heat shield would perform during each of the possible reentry trajectories for Artemis II.

“What we have the analysis teams off doing is saying, ‘OK, independent of what the constraints are going to be, what can we tolerate?” Kshatriya said.

Once officials understand the cause of the heat shield charring, engineers will determine what kind of trajectory Artemis II needs to fly on reentry to minimize risk to the crew. Then, managers will look at building what NASA calls flight rationale. Essentially, this is a process of convincing themselves the spacecraft is safe to fly.

“When we stitch it all together, we’ll either have flight rationale or we won’t,” Kshatriya said.

Assuming NASA approves the flight rationale for Artemis II, there will be additional discussions about how to ensure Orion heat shields are safe to fly on downstream Artemis missions, which will have higher-speed reentry profiles as astronauts return from landings on the Moon.

In the meantime, preparations on the Orion spacecraft for Artemis II continue at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center. The crew and service modules for Artemis II were mated together earlier this year, and the entire Orion spacecraft is now inside a vacuum chamber for environmental testing.

NASA still doesn’t understand root cause of Orion heat shield issue Read More »

nasa-knows-what-knocked-voyager-1-offline,-but-it-will-take-a-while-to-fix

NASA knows what knocked Voyager 1 offline, but it will take a while to fix

jet propulsion laboratory, memory, NASA, Science, Space, Voyager, Voyager 1 / /

Hope returns —

“Engineers are optimistic they can find a way for the FDS to operate normally.”

–

A Voyager space probe in a clean room at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in 1977.

Enlarge / A Voyager space probe in a clean room at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in 1977.

Engineers have determined why NASA’s Voyager 1 probe has been transmitting gibberish for nearly five months, raising hopes of recovering humanity’s most distant spacecraft.

Voyager 1, traveling outbound some 15 billion miles (24 billion km) from Earth, started beaming unreadable data down to ground controllers on November 14. For nearly four months, NASA knew Voyager 1 was still alive—it continued to broadcast a steady signal—but could not decipher anything it was saying.

Confirming their hypothesis, engineers at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in California confirmed a small portion of corrupted memory caused the problem. The faulty memory bank is located in Voyager 1’s Flight Data System (FDS), one of three computers on the spacecraft. The FDS operates alongside a command-and-control central computer and another device overseeing attitude control and pointing.

The FDS duties include packaging Voyager 1’s science and engineering data for relay to Earth through the craft’s Telemetry Modulation Unit and radio transmitter. According to NASA, about 3 percent of the FDS memory has been corrupted, preventing the computer from carrying out normal operations.

Optimism growing

Suzanne Dodd, NASA’s project manager for the twin Voyager probes, told Ars in February that this was one of the most serious problems the mission has ever faced. That is saying something because Voyager 1 and 2 are NASA’s longest-lived spacecraft. They launched 16 days apart in 1977, and after flying by Jupiter and Saturn, Voyager 1 is flying farther from Earth than any spacecraft in history. Voyager 2 is trailing Voyager 1 by about 2.5 billion miles, although the probes are heading out of the Solar System in different directions.

Normally, engineers would try to diagnose a spacecraft malfunction by analyzing data it sent back to Earth. They couldn’t do that in this case because Voyager 1 has been transmitting data packages manifesting a repeating pattern of ones and zeros. Still, Voyager 1’s ground team identified the FDS as the likely source of the problem.

The Flight Data Subsystem was an innovation in computing when it was developed five decades ago. It was the first computer on a spacecraft to use volatile memory. Most of NASA’s missions operate with redundancy, so each Voyager spacecraft launched with two FDS computers. But the backup FDS on Voyager 1 failed in 1982.

Due to the Voyagers’ age, engineers had to reference paper documents, memos, and blueprints to help understand the spacecraft’s design details. After months of brainstorming and planning, teams at JPL uplinked a command in early March to prompt the spacecraft to send back a readout of the FDS memory.

The command worked, and Voyager.1 responded with a signal different from the code the spacecraft had been transmitting since November. After several weeks of meticulous examination of the new code, engineers pinpointed the locations of the bad memory.

“The team suspects that a single chip responsible for storing part of the affected portion of the FDS memory isn’t working,” NASA said in an update posted Thursday. “Engineers can’t determine with certainty what caused the issue. Two possibilities are that the chip could have been hit by an energetic particle from space or that it simply may have worn out after 46 years.”

Voyager 1’s distance from Earth complicates the troubleshooting effort. The one-way travel time for a radio signal to reach Voyager 1 from Earth is about 22.5 hours, meaning it takes roughly 45 hours for engineers on the ground to learn how the spacecraft responded to their commands.

NASA also must use its largest communications antennas to contact Voyager 1. These 230-foot-diameter (70-meter) antennas are in high demand by many other NASA spacecraft, so the Voyager team has to compete with other missions to secure time for troubleshooting. This means it will take time to get Voyager 1 back to normal operations.

“Although it may take weeks or months, engineers are optimistic they can find a way for the FDS to operate normally without the unusable memory hardware, which would enable Voyager 1 to begin returning science and engineering data again,” NASA said.

NASA knows what knocked Voyager 1 offline, but it will take a while to fix Read More »

trash-from-the-international-space-station-may-have-hit-a-house-in-florida

Trash from the International Space Station may have hit a house in Florida

Florida, international space station, NASA, Science, Space, space debris, space junk / /
This cylindrical object, a few inches in size, fell through the roof of Alejandro Otero's home in Florida last month.

Enlarge / This cylindrical object, a few inches in size, fell through the roof of Alejandro Otero’s home in Florida last month.

A few weeks ago, something from the heavens came crashing through the roof of Alejandro Otero’s home, and NASA is on the case.

In all likelihood, this nearly two-pound object came from the International Space Station. Otero said it tore through the roof and both floors of his two-story house in Naples, Florida.

Otero wasn’t home at the time, but his son was there. A Nest home security camera captured the sound of the crash at 2: 34 pm local time (19: 34 UTC) on March 8. That’s an important piece of information because it is a close match for the time—2: 29 pm EST (19: 29 UTC)—that US Space Command recorded the reentry of a piece of space debris from the space station. At that time, the object was on a path over the Gulf of Mexico, heading toward southwest Florida.

This space junk consisted of depleted batteries from the ISS, attached to a cargo pallet that was originally supposed to come back to Earth in a controlled manner. But a series of delays meant this cargo pallet missed its ride back to Earth, so NASA jettisoned the batteries from the space station in 2021 to head for an unguided reentry.

Otero’s likely encounter with space debris was first reported by WINK News, the CBS affiliate for southwest Florida. Since then, NASA has recovered the debris from the homeowner, according to Josh Finch, an agency spokesperson.

Engineers at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center will analyze the object “as soon as possible to determine its origin,” Finch told Ars. “More information will be available once the analysis is complete.”

Ars reported on this reentry when it happened on March 8, noting that most of the material from the batteries and the cargo carrier would have likely burned up as they plunged through the atmosphere. Temperatures would have reached several thousand degrees, vaporizing most of the material before it could reach the ground.

The entire pallet, including the nine disused batteries from the space station’s power system, had a mass of more than 2.6 metric tons (5,800 pounds), according to NASA. Size-wise, it was about twice as tall as a standard kitchen refrigerator. It’s important to note that objects of this mass, or larger, regularly fall to Earth on guided trajectories, but they’re usually failed satellites or spent rocket stages left in orbit after completing their missions.

In a post on X, Otero said he is waiting for communication from “the responsible agencies” to resolve the cost of damages to his home.

Hello. Looks like one of those pieces missed Ft Myers and landed in my house in Naples.

Tore through the roof and went thru 2 floors. Almost his my son.

Can you please assist with getting NASA to connect with me? I’ve left messages and emails without a response. pic.twitter.com/Yi29f3EwyV

— Alejandro Otero (@Alejandro0tero) March 15, 2024

If the object is owned by NASA, Otero or his insurance company could make a claim against the federal government under the Federal Tort Claims Act, according to Michelle Hanlon, executive director of the Center for Air and Space Law at the University of Mississippi.

“It gets more interesting if this material is discovered to be not originally from the United States,” she told Ars. “If it is a human-made space object which was launched into space by another country, which caused damage on Earth, that country would be absolutely liable to the homeowner for the damage caused.”

This could be an issue in this case. The batteries were owned by NASA, but they were attached to a pallet structure launched by Japan’s space agency.

Trash from the International Space Station may have hit a house in Florida Read More »

after-concorde,-a-long-road-back-to-supersonic-air-travel

After Concorde, a long road back to supersonic air travel

Features, NASA, Science, supersonic, supersonic boom, supersonic flight / /

shhh —

Supersonic flight without loud booms? NASA is working on that.

–

NASA's and Lockheed Martin's X-59 experimental supersonic jet is unveiled during a ceremony in Palmdale, California, on January 12, 2024.

Enlarge / NASA’s and Lockheed Martin’s X-59 experimental supersonic jet is unveiled during a ceremony in Palmdale, California, on January 12, 2024.

Robyn Beck/AFP via Getty Images

When Chuck Yeager reached Mach 1 on October 14, 1947, the entire frame of his Bell X-1 aircraft suddenly started to shake, and the controls went. A crew observing the flight in a van on the ground reported hearing something like a distant, rolling thunder. They were probably the first people on Earth to hear a boom made by a supersonic aircraft.

The boom felt like an innocent curiosity at first but soon turned into a nightmare. In no time, supersonic jets—F-100 Super Sabers, F-101 Voodoos, and B-58 Hustlers—came to Air Force bases across the US, and with them came the booms. Proper, panes-flying-off-the windows supersonic booms. People filed over 40,000 complaints about nuisance and property damage caused by booming jets, which eventually ended up with the Federal Aviation Administration imposing a Mach 1 speed limit for flights over land in 1973.

Now, NASA wants this ban to go. It has started the Quesst mission to go fast over American cities once more. But this time, it wants to do it quietly.

Breaking the sound barrier

The reason Yeager’s X-1 was so difficult to control at Mach 1 was not an actual “sound barrier” the plane broke. The “barrier” aspect is purely metaphorical. While Yeager’s plane experienced turbulence and shaking, it was due to rising drag and aircraft design.

At subsonic speeds, the airflow around the wings, tail, and fuselage is smooth. But at supersonic speeds, the air going over irregular shapes— the nose, canopy, and wings—accelerates to above the speed of sound. Then, where the curvature of the wing or canopy becomes less pronounced, it starts to build up pressure and decelerate back below Mach 1, a phenomenon known as “adverse pressure.” This creates shockwaves, and those are what cause supersonic booms and change the way wings, flaps, and other control surfaces behave in an airplane. The X-1 started acting so wild at Mach 1 because its aerodynamics weren’t designed for supersonic flight.

Lockheed, Bell, McDonell Douglas, and other companies that built early supersonic planes solved the control issues quickly, which made accelerating to Mach speeds pretty uneventful for the pilot. But that left two decades of booming.

A Bell Aircraft Corporation X-1 supersonic test plane, circa 1950. An X-1 was the first plane to break the sound barrier in Chuck Yeager’s flight on October 14, 1947.

Enlarge / A Bell Aircraft Corporation X-1 supersonic test plane, circa 1950. An X-1 was the first plane to break the sound barrier in Chuck Yeager’s flight on October 14, 1947.

Museum of Flight/CORBIS/Corbis via Getty Images

How loud is the boom?

A supersonic jet boom sounds like a thunder strike hitting nearby—a product of the shockwaves generated mainly by the nose and tail of the aircraft. The boom usually falls between 100 and 110 on a perceived level decibel scale (PLdB), which is used to quantify how people experience sound. A car door slam 100 feet away is 60 PLdB; distant thunder, like the one the ground crew heard during Yeager’s first supersonic flight, is around 70 PLdB. A supersonic boom is on par with a nearby thunder strike, which falls at around 105–110 PLdB.

It’s really freaking loud. And you can easily make it even louder.

This 110 PLdB is estimated for an airplane in a steady, level flight at high altitude. These conditions create what’s known as a “carpet boom” that tracks the aircraft on the ground for the entire time it flies supersonic.

Transitions from subsonic to supersonic speeds and vice versa result in so-called “focus booms,” which can be up to three to four times louder than a carpet boom. This likely gave rise to the popular misconception that the boom is heard only when a plane breaks the sound barrier.

Focus booms are also caused by maneuvers like pitch and dive, where an aircraft gains altitude, levels, and flies back down; turns made with aggressive banking angles work as well. Unlike carpet booms, the booms made by transitions and maneuvers are singular events. The military even tested whether those amplified booms could be projected at chosen spots on the ground to weaponize them. As it turned out, you could do targeted booms, but they proved more scary than lethal.

But despite all the problems with booming, the allure of superior speed was irresistible. Supersonic airplanes could cut the time of transatlantic flights by half. So back in the mid-1950s, when the FAA’s Mach 1 speed limit was still many years away, British and French engineers got to the drawing board and conceived one of the most breathtaking airliners to ever pierce the sky: Concorde.

After Concorde, a long road back to supersonic air travel Read More »

spacex’s-workhorse-launch-pad-now-has-the-accoutrements-for-astronauts

SpaceX’s workhorse launch pad now has the accoutrements for astronauts

crs-30, dragon, falcon 9, international space station, NASA, Science, slc-40, Space, spacex / /
A Falcon 9 rocket lifts off Thursday from Cape Canaveral, Florida.

Enlarge / A Falcon 9 rocket lifts off Thursday from Cape Canaveral, Florida.

Upgrades at SpaceX’s most-used launch pad in Florida got a trial run Thursday with the liftoff of a Falcon 9 rocket with a Dragon cargo ship heading for the International Space Station.

SpaceX’s Cargo Dragon spacecraft launched at 4: 55 pm EDT (20: 55 UTC) Thursday from Space Launch Complex 40 (SLC-40) at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida. This mission, known as CRS-30, is SpaceX’s 30th resupply mission to the space station since 2012.

The automated Dragon supply ship took off on top of a Falcon 9 rocket, heading for a monthlong stay at the International Space Station, where it will deliver more than 6,000 pounds of hardware, fresh food, and experiments for the lab’s seven-person crew.

In the last few months, SpaceX has outfitted the launch pad with the equipment necessary to support launches of human spaceflight missions on the Crew Dragon spacecraft. The Cargo Dragon capsule is the same size and shape as SpaceX’s Crew Dragon, but it’s filled with cargo racks and storage platforms rather than seats and cockpit displays.

This week, SpaceX technicians used the newly installed launch tower and crew access arm at SLC-40 to load time-sensitive experiments and supplies into the Cargo Dragon capsule atop the Falcon 9 rocket.

“CRS-30 will be our first Dragon to launch from Pad 40 since we put that brand-new crew tower in place,” said Sarah Walker, SpaceX’s director of Dragon mission management, in a prelaunch press conference.

Building new capability

Starting last year, construction crews at Cape Canaveral erected segments of a more than 200-foot-tall metal lattice tower at SLC-40, right next to the starting blocks for SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket. Before then, SLC-40 was based on a “clean pad” architecture, without any structures to service or access Falcon 9 rockets while they were vertical on the pad.

In November, contractors raised the crew access arm to an attach point near the top of the tower. This walkway will allow astronauts to crawl into the Crew Dragon spacecraft during a launch countdown. It also provides access to the hatch on the Cargo Dragon spacecraft for final cargo loading.

Earlier this year, SpaceX tested an escape chute at SLC-40 that would be used in an emergency to help astronauts and ground crews quickly get away from the pad. The chute is similar in function to slide-wire baskets in use for decades at LC-39A, but instead of riding a basket from the top of the tower, personnel escaping a pad emergency would slide down a chute to carry them several hundred feet from the rocket.

SpaceX employees tested the pad escape chute last month at SLC-40. Gwynne Shotwell, SpaceX’s president and chief operating officer, took the ride down the chute. “Astronaut and personnel safety is SpaceX’s highest priority, which is why I had to personally test the new slide,” she posted on X, alongside a wink emoji.

Teams test the new emergency chutes from the pad 40 crew tower in Florida pic.twitter.com/rWVj7zaHp0

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) March 19, 2024

“The team took commercially available off the shelf technology and applied it to the crew tower,” Kiko Dontchev, SpaceX’s vice president of launch, wrote on X. “You are trained on it the same way you are trained on using an emergency exit door on airplane. Only takes a couple of quick physical actions to deploy the slide and anyone can effectively do it.”

As more people travel to space, particularly on larger vehicles like SpaceX’s Starship, simplifying safety systems will be important.

“This system will help us scale to bigger towers and spaceships (think 100 people on Starship),” Dontchev wrote.

SpaceX and its contractors completed all of this work as Falcon 9s fired off SLC-40 every few days with Starlink satellites and other missions.

For the last four years, all of SpaceX’s crew and cargo launches to the space station have departed from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, a few miles up the coast from SLC-40. In 2018 and 2019, SpaceX outfitted LC-39A for Cargo Dragon and Crew Dragon missions ahead of the company’s first human spaceflight mission in 2020.

Walker said the new infrastructure added at SLC-40 is “nearly functionally identical” to the equipment for crew missions at LC-39A. The primary differences are the means of pad escape—the chute instead of slide-wire baskets—and a more robust elevator in the tower at SLC-40.

Previously, SpaceX used both SLC-40 and LC-39A for launches of its now-retired first-generation Dragon cargo capsules, which had their final supplies loaded before SpaceX raised the rocket vertical for launch. Like regular satellite launches on Falcon 9s, both pads could support the first-generation Dragon cargo missions.

“Thanks to this new state-of-the-art crew tower required for our human spaceflight missions, that late-load cargo operation got a massive upgrade, too,” Walker said. “It is much easier to load a huge complement of time-critical NASA science into our Dragon spacecraft in the flight orientation.”

SpaceX has drastically ramped up its launch cadence since building LC-39A for Dragon missions. The company plans nearly 150 Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy launches this year. When you’re flying rockets every two or three days, it’s inevitable two missions will end up vying for the same launch slots. Most recently, that happened in February, when a NASA crew mission was ready to launch from LC-39A around the same time as a narrow launch window for Intuitive Machines’ first commercial lunar lander. Both had to go off of LC-39A.

“Historically, Pad 40 has kind of become our high rate pad,” Walker said. “We’ve gotten the time between launches down to just a couple of days.”

LC-39A has seen less use, primarily for Dragon crew and cargo flights, Falcon Heavy missions, and other “uniquely complex” missions like the Intuitive Machines lander, Walker said.

SpaceX’s workhorse launch pad now has the accoutrements for astronauts Read More »

nasa-cancels-a-multibillion-dollar-satellite-servicing-demo-mission

NASA cancels a multibillion-dollar satellite servicing demo mission

Maxar, NASA, osam-1, satellite servicing, Science, Space / /
Artist's illustration of the OSAM-1 spacecraft (bottom) linking up with the Landsat 7 satellite (top) in orbit.

Enlarge / Artist’s illustration of the OSAM-1 spacecraft (bottom) linking up with the Landsat 7 satellite (top) in orbit.

NASA

NASA has canceled an over-budget, behind-schedule mission to demonstrate robotic satellite servicing technology in orbit, pulling the plug on a project that has cost $1.5 billion and probably would have cost nearly $1 billion more to get to the launch pad.

The On-orbit Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing 1 mission, known as OSAM-1, would have grappled an aging Landsat satellite in orbit and attempted to refuel it, while also demonstrating how a robotic arm could construct an antenna in space. The spacecraft for the OSAM-1 mission is partially built, but NASA announced Friday that officials decided to cancel the project “following an in-depth, independent project review.”

The space agency cited “continued technical, cost, and schedule challenges” for the decision to cancel OSAM-1.

Mission creep

The mission’s cost has ballooned since NASA officially kicked off the project in 2016. The mission’s original scope called for just the refueling demonstration, but in 2020, officials tacked on the in-orbit assembly objective. This involved adding a complex piece of equipment called the Space Infrastructure Dexterous Robot (SPIDER), essentially a 16-foot-long (5-meter) robotic arm to assemble seven structural elements into a single Ka-band communications antenna.

The addition of SPIDER meant the mission would launch with three robotic arms, including two appendages needed to grab onto the Landsat 7 satellite in orbit for the refueling demonstration. With this change in scope, the name of the mission changed from Restore-L to OSAM-1.

A report by NASA’s inspector general last year outlined the mission’s delays and cost overruns. Since 2016, the space agency has requested $808 million from Congress for Restore-L and OSAM-1. Lawmakers responded by giving NASA nearly $1.5 billion to fund the development of the mission, nearly double what NASA said it wanted.

Restore-L, and then OSAM-1, has always enjoyed support from Congress. The mission was managed by NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. Former Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland) was a key backer of NASA missions run out of Goddard, including the James Webb Space Telescope. She was the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee when Congress started funding Restore-L in late 2015.

At one time, NASA projected the Restore-L mission would cost between $626 million and $753 million and could be ready for launch in the second half of 2020. That didn’t happen, and the mission continued facing delays and cost increases. The most recent public schedule for OSAM-1 showed a launch date in 2026.

In 2020, after reshaping the Restore-L mission to become OSAM-1, NASA formally laid out a budget for the renamed mission. At the time, NASA said it would cost $1.78 billion to design, build, launch, and operate. An independent review board NASA established last year to examine the OSAM-1 mission estimated the total project could cost as much as $2.35 billion, according to Jimi Russell, a NASA spokesperson.

The realities of the satellite servicing market have also changed since 2016. There are several companies working on commercial satellite servicing technologies, and the satellite industry has shifted away from refueling unprepared spacecraft, as OSAM-1 would have demonstrated with the Landsat 7 Earth-imaging satellite.

Instead, companies are focusing more on extending satellite life in other ways. Northrop Grumman has developed the Mission Extension Vehicle, which can latch onto a satellite and provide maneuvering capability without cutting into the customer spacecraft to refuel it. Other companies are looking at satellites that are designed, from the start, with refueling ports. The US military has a desire to place fuel depots and tankers in orbit to regularly service its satellites, giving them the ability to continually maneuver and burn propellant without worrying about running out of fuel.

NASA cancels a multibillion-dollar satellite servicing demo mission Read More »

the-world’s-most-traveled-crew-transport-spacecraft-flies-again

The world’s most-traveled crew transport spacecraft flies again

commercial crew, Commercial space, crew dragon, Crew-8, falcon 9, human spaceflight, international space station, launch, NASA, Science, Space / /
A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket lifts off with the Crew-8 mission, sending three NASA astronauts and one Russian cosmonaut on a six-month expedition on the International Space Station.

Enlarge / A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket lifts off with the Crew-8 mission, sending three NASA astronauts and one Russian cosmonaut on a six-month expedition on the International Space Station.

SpaceX’s oldest Crew Dragon spacecraft launched Sunday night on its fifth mission to the International Space Station, and engineers are crunching data to see if the fleet of Dragons can safely fly as many as 15 times.

It has been five years since SpaceX launched the first Crew Dragon spacecraft on an unpiloted test flight to the space station and nearly four years since SpaceX’s first astronaut mission took off in May 2020. Since then, SpaceX has put its clan of Dragons to use ferrying astronauts and cargo to and from low-Earth orbit.

Now, it’s already time to talk about extending the life of the Dragon spaceships. SpaceX and NASA, which shared the cost of developing the Crew Dragon, initially certified each capsule for five flights. Crew Dragon Endeavour, the first in the Dragon fleet to carry astronauts, is now flying for the fifth time.

This ship has spent 466 days in orbit, longer than any spacecraft designed to transport people to and from Earth. It will add roughly 180 days to its flight log with this mission.

Crew Dragon Endeavour lifted off from Florida aboard a Falcon 9 rocket at 10: 53 pm EST Sunday (03: 53 UTC Monday), following a three-day delay due to poor weather conditions across the Atlantic Ocean, where the capsule would ditch into the sea in the event of a rocket failure during the climb into orbit.

Commander Matthew Dominick, pilot Michael Barratt, mission specialist Jeanette Epps, and Russian cosmonaut Alexander Grebenkin put on their SpaceX pressure suits and strapped into their seats inside Crew Dragon Endeavour Sunday evening at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center. SpaceX loaded liquid propellants into the rocket, while ground teams spent the final hour of the countdown evaluating a small crack discovered on Dragon’s side hatch seal. Managers ultimately cleared the spacecraft for launch after considering whether the crack could pose a safety threat during reentry at the end of the mission.

“We are confident that we understand the issue and can still fly the whole mission safely,” a member of SpaceX’s mission control team told the crew inside Dragon.

This mission, known as Crew-8, launched on a brand-new Falcon 9 booster, which returned to landing a few minutes after liftoff at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. The Falcon 9’s upper stage released the Dragon spacecraft into orbit about 12 minutes after liftoff. The four-person crew will dock at the space station around 3 am EST (0800 UTC) Tuesday.

Crew-8 will replace the four-person Crew-7 team that has been at the space station since last August. Crew-7 will return to Earth in about one week on SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Endurance spacecraft, which is flying in space for the third time.

The Crew-8 mission came home for a reentry and splashdown off the coast of Florida in late August of this year, wrapping up Crew Dragon Endeavour’s fifth trip to space. This is the current life limit for a Crew Dragon spacecraft, but don’t count out Endeavour just yet.

Fleet management

“Right now, we’re certified for five flights on Dragon, and we’re looking at extending that life out,” said Steve Stich, NASA’s commercial crew program manager. “I think the goal would be for SpaceX to say 15 flights of Dragon. We may not get there in every single system.”

One by one, engineers at SpaceX and NASA are looking at Dragon’s structural skeleton, composite shells, rocket engines, valves, and other components to see how much life is left in them. Some parts of the spacecraft slowly fatigue from the stresses of each launch, reentry, and splashdown, along with the extreme temperature swings the capsule sees thousands of times in orbit. Each Draco thruster on the spacecraft is certified for a certain number of firings.

Some components are already approved for 15 flights, Stich said in a recent press conference. “Some, we’re still in the middle of working on,” he said. “Some of those components have to go through some re-qualification to make sure that they can make it out to 15 flights.”

Re-qualifying a component on a spacecraft typically involves putting hardware through extensive testing on the ground. Because SpaceX reuses hardware, engineers can remove a part from a flown Dragon spacecraft and put it through qualification testing. NASA will get the final say in certifying the Dragon spacecraft for additional flights because the agency is SpaceX’s primary customer for crew missions.

The Dragon fleet is flying more often than SpaceX or NASA originally anticipated. The main reason for this is that Boeing, NASA’s other commercial crew contractor, is running about four years behind SpaceX in getting to its first astronaut launch on the Starliner spacecraft.

When NASA selected SpaceX and Boeing for multibillion-dollar commercial crew contracts in 2014, the agency envisioned alternating between Crew Dragon and Starliner flights every six months to rotate four-person crews at the International Space Station. With Boeing’s delays, SpaceX has picked up the slack.

The world’s most-traveled crew transport spacecraft flies again Read More »

humanity’s-most-distant-space-probe-jeopardized-by-computer-glitch

Humanity’s most distant space probe jeopardized by computer glitch

interstellar space, jpl, NASA, Space, Voyager, Voyager 1 / /
An annotated image showing the various parts and instruments of NASA's Voyager spacecraft design.

Enlarge / An annotated image showing the various parts and instruments of NASA’s Voyager spacecraft design.

Voyager 1 is still alive out there, barreling into the cosmos more than 15 billion miles away. However, a computer problem has kept the mission’s loyal support team in Southern California from knowing much more about the status of one of NASA’s longest-lived spacecraft.

The computer glitch cropped up on November 14, and it affected Voyager 1’s ability to send back telemetry data, such as measurements from the spacecraft’s science instruments or basic engineering information about how the probe was doing. So, there’s no insight into key parameters regarding the craft’s propulsion, power, or control systems.

“It would be the biggest miracle if we get it back. We certainly haven’t given up,” said Suzanne Dodd, Voyager project manager at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, in an interview with Ars. “There are other things we can try. But this is, by far, the most serious since I’ve been project manager.”

Dodd became the project manager for NASA’s Voyager mission in 2010, overseeing a small cadre of engineers responsible for humanity’s exploration into interstellar space. Voyager 1 is the most distant spacecraft ever, speeding away from the Sun at 38,000 mph (17 kilometers per second).

Voyager 2, which launched 16 days before Voyager 1 in 1977, isn’t quite as far away. It took a more leisurely route through the Solar System, flying past Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, while Voyager 1 picked up speed during an encounter with Saturn to overtake its sister spacecraft.

For the last couple of decades, NASA has devoted Voyager’s instruments to studying cosmic rays, the magnetic field, and the plasma environment in interstellar space. They’re not taking pictures anymore. Both probes have traveled beyond the heliopause, where the flow of particles emanating from the Sun runs into the interstellar medium.

There are no other operational spacecraft currently exploring interstellar space. NASA’s New Horizons probe, which flew past Pluto in 2015, is on track to reach interstellar space in the 2040s.

State-of-the-art 50 years ago

The latest problem with Voyager 1 lies in the probe’s Flight Data Subsystem (FDS), one of three computers on the spacecraft working alongside a command and control central computer and another device overseeing attitude control and pointing.

The FDS is responsible for collecting science and engineering data from the spacecraft’s network of sensors and then combining the information into a single data package in binary code—a series of ones and zeros. A separate component called the Telemetry Modulation Unit actually sends the data package back to Earth through Voyager’s 12-foot (3.7-meter) dish antenna.

In November, the data packages transmitted by Voyager 1 manifested a repeating pattern of ones and zeros as if it were stuck, according to NASA. Dodd said engineers at JPL have spent the better part of three months trying to diagnose the cause of the problem. She said the engineering team is “99.9 percent sure” the problem originated in the FDS, which appears to be having trouble “frame syncing” data.

A scanned 1970s-era photo of the Flight Data Subsystem computer aboard NASA's Voyager spacecraft.

Enlarge / A scanned 1970s-era photo of the Flight Data Subsystem computer aboard NASA’s Voyager spacecraft.

So far, the ground team believes the most likely explanation for the problem is a bit of corrupted memory in the FDS. However, because of the computer hangup, engineers lack detailed data from Voyager 1 that might lead them to the root of the issue. “It’s likely somewhere in the FDS memory,” Dodd said. “A bit got flipped or corrupted. But without the telemetry, we can’t see where that FDS memory corruption is.”

When it was developed five decades ago, Voyager’s Flight Data Subsystem was an innovation in computing. It was the first computer on a spacecraft to make use of volatile memory. Each Voyager spacecraft launched with two FDS computers, but Voyager 1’s backup FDS failed in 1981, according to Dodd.

The only signal Voyager 1’s Earthbound engineers have received since November is a carrier tone, which basically tells the team the spacecraft is still alive. There’s no indication of any other major problems. Changes in the carrier signal’s modulation indicate Voyager 1 is receiving commands uplinked from Earth.

“Unfortunately, we haven’t cracked the nut yet, or solved the problem, or gotten any telemetry back,” Dodd said.

Humanity’s most distant space probe jeopardized by computer glitch Read More »

nasa-urged-astrobotic-not-to-send-its-hamstrung-spacecraft-toward-the-moon

NASA urged Astrobotic not to send its hamstrung spacecraft toward the Moon

astrobotic, Commercial space, moon, NASA, Space / /
A camera on Astrobotic's Peregrine spacecraft captured this view of a crescent Earth during its mission.

Enlarge / A camera on Astrobotic’s Peregrine spacecraft captured this view of a crescent Earth during its mission.

Astrobotic knew its first space mission would be rife with risks. After all, the company’s Peregrine spacecraft would attempt something never done before—landing a commercial spacecraft on the surface of the Moon.

The most hazardous part of the mission, actually landing on the Moon, would happen more than a month after Peregrine’s launch. But the robotic spacecraft never made it that far. During Peregrine’s startup sequence after separation from its United Launch Alliance Vulcan rocket, one of the spacecraft’s propellant tanks ruptured, spewing precious nitrogen tetroxide into space. The incident left Peregrine unable to land on the Moon, and it threatened to kill the spacecraft within hours of liftoff.

“What a wild adventure we were just on, not the outcome we were hoping for,” said John Thornton, CEO of Astrobotic.

Astrobotic’s control team, working out of the company’s headquarters in Pittsburgh, swung into action to save the spacecraft. The propellant leak abated, and engineers wrestled control of the spacecraft to point its solar arrays toward the Sun, allowing its battery to recharge. Over time, Peregrine’s situation stabilized, although it didn’t have enough propellant remaining to attempt a descent to the lunar surface.

Peregrine continued on a trajectory out to 250,000 miles (400,000 kilometers) from Earth, about the same distance as the Moon’s orbit. Astrobotic’s original flight plan would have taken Peregrine on one long elliptical loop around Earth, then the spacecraft would have reached the Moon during its second orbit.

On its way back toward Earth, Peregrine was on a flight path that would bring it back into the atmosphere, where it would burn up on reentry. That meant Astrobotic had a decision to make. With Peregrine stabilized, should they attempt an engine burn to divert the spacecraft away from Earth onto a trajectory that could bring it to the vicinity of the Moon? Or should Astrobotic keep Peregrine in line to reenter Earth’s atmosphere and avoid the risk of sending a crippled spacecraft out to the Moon?

Making lemonade out of lemons

This was the first time Astrobotic had flown a space mission, and its control team had much to learn. The malfunction that caused the propellant leak appears to have been with a valve that did not properly reseat during the propulsion system’s initialization sequence. This valve activated to pressurize the fuel and oxidizer tanks with helium.

When the valve didn’t reseat, it sent a “rush of helium” into the oxidizer system, Thornton said. “I describe it as a rush because it was very, very fast. “Within a little over a minute, the pressure had risen to the point in the oxidizer side that it was well beyond the proof limit of the propulsion tank. We believe at that point the tank ruptured and led to, unfortunately, a catastrophic loss of propellant … for the primary mission.”

Thornton described the glum mood of Astrobotic’s team after the propellant leak.

“We were coming from the highest high of a perfect launch and came down to the lowest low, when we found out that the spacecraft no longer had the helium and no longer had the propulsion needed to attempt the Moon landing,” he said. “What happened next, I think, was pretty remarkable and inspiring.”

In a press briefing Friday, Thornton outlined the obstacles Astrobotic’s controllers overcame to keep Peregrine alive. Without a healthy propulsion system, the spacecraft’s solar panels were not pointed at the Sun. With a few minutes to spare, one of Astrobotic’s engineers, John Shaffer, devised a solution to reorient the spacecraft to start recharging its battery.

As Peregrine’s oxidizer tank lost pressure, the leak rate slowed. At first, it looked like the spacecraft might have only hours of propellant remaining. Then, Astrobotic reported on January 15 that the leak had “practically stopped.” Mission controllers powered up the science payloads aboard the Peregrine lander, proving the instruments worked and demonstrating the spacecraft could have returned data from the lunar surface if it landed.

The small propulsive impulse from the leaking oxidizer drove Peregrine slightly off course, putting it on a course to bring it back into Earth’s atmosphere. This set up Astrobotic for a “very difficult decision,” Thornton said.

Astrobotic's first lunar lander, named Peregrine, at the company's Pittsburgh headquarters.

Enlarge / Astrobotic’s first lunar lander, named Peregrine, at the company’s Pittsburgh headquarters.

Nudging Peregrine off its collision course with Earth would have required the spacecraft to fire its main engines, and even if that worked, the lander would have needed to perform more maneuvers to get close to the Moon. A landing was still out of the question, but Thornton said there was a small chance Astrobotic could have guided Peregrine toward a flyby or impact with the Moon.

“The thing we were weighing was, ‘Should we send this back to Earth, or should we take the risk to operate it in cislunar space and see if we can send this out farther?'” Thornton said.

NASA urged Astrobotic not to send its hamstrung spacecraft toward the Moon Read More »

rocket-report:-a-new-estimate-of-starship-costs;-japan-launches-spy-satellite

Rocket Report: A new estimate of Starship costs; Japan launches spy satellite

artemis, elon musk, impulse space, Japan, launch, Momentus, NASA, orbex, Space, space launch system, spacex, starship, tiangong, tianzhou / /

A bigger tug —

One space tug company runs into financial problems; another says go big or go home.

–

An H-IIA rocket lifts off with the IGS Optical-8 spy satellite.

Enlarge / An H-IIA rocket lifts off with the IGS Optical-8 spy satellite.

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries

Welcome to Edition 6.27 of the Rocket Report! This week, we discuss an intriguing new report looking at Starship. Most fascinating, the report covers SpaceX’s costs to build a Starship and how these costs will come down as the company ramps up its build and launch cadence. At the other end of the spectrum, former NASA Administrator Mike Griffin has a plan to get astronauts back to the Moon that would wholly ignore the opportunities afforded by Starship.

As always, we welcome reader submissions, and if you don’t want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets, as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.

The problem at America’s military spaceports. The Biden administration is requesting $1.3 billion over the next five years to revamp infrastructure at the Space Force’s ranges in Florida and California, Ars reports. This will help address things like roads, bridges, utilities, and airfields that, in many cases, haven’t seen an update in decades. But it’s not enough, according to the Space Force. Last year, Cape Canaveral was the departure point for 72 orbital rocket launches, and officials anticipate more than 100 this year. The infrastructure and workforce at the Florida spaceport could support about 150 launches in a year without any major changes, but launch activity is likely to exceed that number within a few years.

Higher fees incoming … Commercial launch companies operating from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida, or Vandenberg Space Force Base, California, pay fees to the Space Force to reimburse for direct costs related to rocket launches. These cover expenses like weather forecast services, surveillance to ensure airplanes and boats stay out of restricted areas, and range safety support. “What that typically meant was anything we did that was specifically dedicated to that launch,” said Col. James Horne, deputy commander of the Space Force’s assured access to space directorate. This is about to change after legislation passed by Congress in December allows the Space Force to charge indirect fees to commercial providers. This money will go into a fund to pay for maintenance and upgrades to infrastructure used by all launch companies at the spaceports.

Momentus is running out of money. Momentus, a company that specializes in “last mile” satellite delivery services, announced on January 12 that it is running out of money and does not have a financial lifeline, CNBC reports. The company was once valued at more than $1 billion before going public via a Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC) in 2021 but now has a market capitalization of less than $10 million. Momentus has developed a space tug called Vigoride, designed to place small satellites into bespoke orbits after deploying from a larger rocket on a rideshare mission, such as a SpaceX Falcon 9. Now, Momentus is abandoning plans for its next mission that was due for launch in March. In December, the company laid off about 20 percent of its workforce to reduce costs.

Fatal blow? … Momentus may have received a potentially fatal blow after losing the US Space Development Agency’s recent competition for 18 so-called Tranche 2 satellites, Aviation Week reports. Instead, the SDA made recent satellite manufacturing contract awards to Rocket Lab, L3Harris, Lockheed Martin, and Sierra Space. On Wednesday, Momentus announced it closed a $4 million stock sale. This should keep Momentus afloat for a while longer but won’t provide the level of capital needed to undertake any significant manufacturing or technical development work. (submitted by Ken the Bin)

The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s space reporting is to sign up for his newsletter, we’ll collect his stories in your inbox.

Orbex may go bigger. UK-based launch startup Orbex hasn’t yet flown its small satellite launcher, called Prime, but is already looking at what’s next, according to reports by European Spaceflight and the Financial Times. New Orbex CEO Phil Chambers, who was officially appointed earlier this month, told the Financial Times that the company was already discussing the possibility of developing a larger vehicle. Speaking to European Spaceflight, Chambers described the business model to deliver orbital launch services with Prime as “robust.” Despite this, he admitted that the small launch industry was only a small sliver of the overall launch market.

Learning to walk before running … While future growth is on Orbex’s radar, its near-term focus is completing construction of a spaceport in Scotland, launching a maiden flight of Prime, and delivering on the six flights the company has already sold. The two-stage Prime rocket, fueled by “bio-propane,” will be capable of hauling a payload of approximately 180 kilograms (nearly 400 pounds) into low-Earth orbit. But Orbex has been shy about releasing updates on the progress of the Prime rocket’s development since unveiling a full-scale mock-up of the launch vehicle in 2022. Last year, the CEO who led Orbex since its founding resigned. Its most recent significant funding round was valued at 40.4 million pounds in late 2022. (submitted by Ken the Bin)

Rocket Report: A new estimate of Starship costs; Japan launches spy satellite Read More »

axiom,-spacex-launch-third-all-private-crew-mission-to-space-station

Axiom, SpaceX launch third all-private crew mission to space station

axiom, falcon 9, human spaceflight, international space station, michael lopez-alegria, NASA, Space, spacex / /

Flying private —

A US-Spanish dual citizen commands a crew of Italian, Swedish, and Turkish astronauts.

–

A Falcon 9 rocket lifts off from NASA's Kennedy Space Center to begin the Ax-3 commercial crew mission.

Enlarge / A Falcon 9 rocket lifts off from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center to begin the Ax-3 commercial crew mission.

Stephen Clark/Ars Technica

For the third time, an all-private crew is heading for the International Space Station. The four-man team lifted off from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket Thursday, kicking off a 36-hour pursuit of the orbiting research laboratory. Docking is scheduled for Saturday morning.

This two-week mission is managed by Houston-based Axiom Space, which is conducting private astronaut missions to the ISS as a stepping stone toward building a fully commercial space station in low-Earth orbit by the end of this decade.

Axiom’s third mission, called Ax-3, launched at 4: 49 pm EST (21: 49 UTC) Thursday. The four astronauts were strapped into their seats inside SpaceX’s Dragon Freedom spacecraft atop the Falcon 9 rocket. This is the 12th time SpaceX has launched a human spaceflight mission, and could be the first of five Dragon crew missions this year.

The Falcon 9 steered northeast from the Kennedy Space Center to line up with the flight track of the International Space Station. After darting through cloud cover, the rocket’s reusable first stage detached two-and-a-half minutes after liftoff to begin a descent back to Cape Canaveral for landing. The upper stage ignited a single engine to carry the Dragon capsule into orbit.

No retirement party

In remarks radioed to the ground soon after the launch, Ax-3 commander Michael López-Alegría describe the sensations of launch as “acceleration, a little bit of vibration, just a sense that you’re going fast. Wow, what a thrill!”

López-Alegría is a Spanish-born astronaut and US Navy veteran. He is one of the most experienced astronauts in history, and Ax-3 marks his sixth flight to space. López-Alegría, 65, retired from NASA in 2012 after four space shuttle missions. He worked as a consultant and commercial spaceflight advocate, then joined Axiom in 2017, and commanded the company’s first private astronaut flight in 2022.

So why keep up a grueling training schedule at an age when most commercial airline pilots face mandated retirement?

“It never gets old,” López-Alegría said in a prelaunch press conference. “I think I have more appreciation with every launch that approaches … The first time you go, you’re just hanging on for dear life and and enjoying the ride. But I think you appreciate each one a little bit more, especially when you realize just how rare and opportunity it is, so I’m happy to keep doing this.”

He is alternating commands of Axiom missions with Peggy Whitson, another retired NASA astronaut.

“Axiom would definitely like to continue doing private astronaut missions. We’ll probably have other commanders in the future, but as long as they ask me to fly, my hand will be raised,” López-Alegría said. He’s the first astronaut to fly on SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft twice.

“I think you’re demonstrating the ultimate in reuse—a reused commander, a reused Dragon, and a reused Falcon, or maybe flight-experienced is a better word,” joked Bill Gerstenmaier, a SpaceX executive serving as chief engineer for Thursday’s launch.

Pilot Walter Villadei sat to López-Alegría’s right during the climb into orbit. He is a colonel in the Italian Air Force. Turkey’s first astronaut, Alper Gezeravcı, and Swedish test pilot pilot Marcus Wandt round out the Ax-3 crew. They will temporarily join the long-duration residents living on the space station, including four crew members who flew on a Dragon to the complex in August to begin a six-month stay.

Cornering the government market

Villadei, Gezeravcı, and Wandt are flying to the space station through contracts between their governments and Axiom. The astronauts, all military officers, will perform scientific experiments developed by their nation’s researchers, and participate in education and outreach events from orbit.

More than 30 research investigations are flying on Ax-3, ranging from biology physiology experiments looking at how microgravity affects the human body, to technology demonstrations and Earth science. For example, the Italian Air Force developed a software tool it will test on Ax-3 to provide space debris and space weather warnings to the space station. Turkey is sending up experiments in the fields of genetics and metallurgy. Sweden and the European Space Agency sponsor experiments in brain research, remote control and AI, and stem cells.

Michael López-Alegría, Alper Gezeravcı, Marcus Wandt, and Walter Villadei pose inside SpaceX's crew access arm at Launch Complex 39A in Florida.

Enlarge / Michael López-Alegría, Alper Gezeravcı, Marcus Wandt, and Walter Villadei pose inside SpaceX’s crew access arm at Launch Complex 39A in Florida.

SpaceX

But there’s an unmistakable element of national pride intertwined with these scientific objectives.

Villadei is flying under the Italian flag through an agreement between the Italian government and Axiom, whereas most Italian astronauts have historically flown under the umbrella of the European Space Agency. He previously soared into space on a suborbital flight on Virgin Galactic’s spaceplane, logging a few minutes of microgravity. He was one of three Italian Air Force service members on the Virgin Galactic flight last June.

“This mission is very important for Italy,” Villadei said. “It’s a fundamental step in our national space strategy.”

Gezeravcı’s flight is historic in the sense that he is the first Turkish citizen to travel into space. “We have been long waiting for this mission to become real,” he said. “I’m really honored to take this role in this mission and to be able to make it real.”

Wandt’s mission was made possible through an agreement between ESA and the Swedish National Space Agency. ESA then finalized an agreement with Axiom to secure Wandt’s seat on Ax-3.

Wandt’s presence on the crew marks a first for ESA. It’s the first time the space agency has flown one of its astronauts to orbit with a commercial company, rather than an intergovernmental agreement with the United States or Russia. He was one of 17 astronauts ESA selected in 2022, but he joined ESA’s ranks as a reserve astronaut, meaning he would continue his career as a test pilot at Saab Aeronautics until his selection for a space mission.

He didn’t have to wait long. “This additional flight came up and Sweden was very decisive in this and came together quickly with industry, the armed forces, government, and together with ESA made this happen together with Axiom,” Wandt said.

ESA has six active astronauts who have flown in space, plus five new career astronauts and 12 reserves selected in 2022. Commercial flight opportunities like this one with Axiom enable more Europeans to access space. An ESA reserve astronaut from Poland could launch on an Axiom mission later this year.

“We have our astronaut corps, who represent the spine of our activities in human spaceflight,” said Daniel Neuenschwander, ESA’s director of human and robotic exploration, in an interview with Ars on Thursday. “But we selected also these reserves, which is a kind of pool of talent, where we seize the opportunities which come on top. It allows us to do more activities in human spaceflight.”

Axiom doesn’t publicize seat prices for its missions to the space station, but in the past, they have reportedly cost around $55 million. Swedish media last year reported Sweden expanded its investment in ESA by more than 400 million Swedish krona, or more than $38 million at current exchange rates, to enable Wandt’s spaceflight opportunity.

Axiom officials view flying government-backed astronauts as a lucrative market. It’s distinct from the conventional image of wealthy space tourists who pay their own way into orbit. There is, of course, an element of that in Axiom’s business, too. Axiom’s first mission in 2022 flew three self-paying private astronauts, and Ax-2 last year flew a mixed crew consisting of an Axiom commander, a US businessman, and two Saudi astronauts flying on a government-sponsored mission.

NASA is also supporting these private astronaut missions. The US space agency opened up the International Space Station to private visitors flying on all-commercial missions in 2019. It’s a cornerstone of NASA’s strategy to foster a commercial market for human spaceflight in low-Earth orbit, with an eye toward eventually building a business case for a privately-owned space station to replace the ISS after its planned retirement in 2030.

Axiom, SpaceX launch third all-private crew mission to space station Read More »

axiom-and-spacex-are-disrupting-europe’s-traditional-pathway-to-space

Axiom and SpaceX are disrupting Europe’s traditional pathway to space

axiom, ESA, NASA, Space / /
Image of a rocket clearing the tower during liftoff.

Enlarge / A Falcon 9 rocket launches the Axiom-2 mission on May 21, 2023.

SpaceX

The European Space Agency’s (ESA) has a deal with Axiom Space to get more Europeans in orbit. But does the partnership benefit European taxpayers who fund the agency’s operations?

On Wednesday, January 17, the third privately funded mission by US commercial spaceflight company Axiom Space is set to lift off from Kennedy Space Center in Florida on SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket. Inside the Crew Dragon capsule will be a quartet of space travelers, including Swedish fighter pilot Marcus Wandt.

Wandt will be flying under the European Space Agency (ESA) flag, although he is not exactly an ESA astronaut. In the 2022 European astronaut recruitment round, Wandt didn’t make the final five of Europe’s “proper” astronaut class, who became ESA staff members and started their astronaut training in 2023. Instead, he was selected as a member of ESA’s first astronaut reserve pool, a novelty developed by ESA with an apparent goal of encouraging its member states to pay for national missions in addition to their regular contributions to ESA’s budget. Sweden was the first to jump at the opportunity in April last year and is paying for Wandt’s two-week space trip through a contract brokered by ESA as part of a Memorandum of Understanding the agency signed with the American commercial company Axiom Space in October 2023.

Ticket to ride

Wandt is the first but not the only reserve astronaut with his ticket to space while his seemingly more successful colleagues who made the proper astronaut corps are still in training. Poland, too, has signed up and expects to fly its reservist, Sławosz Uznański, on another Axiom mission later this year.

Compared to their overall investment in space activities, the price these countries pay to see their nationals float in microgravity is not negligible. At the November 2022 ESA ministerial council—the triennial member state summit that decides the agency’s budget for the following three-year period—Sweden pledged 317 million euros ($355 million).

According to a 2018 announcement, Axiom Space sells 10-day space trips for $55 million a seat. The overall cost of each mission is likely to be quite a bit higher. Last year, Hungary signed a contract directly with Axiom to send a Hungarian national to the International Space Station independently of ESA. Hungary discussed plans for a national mission back in 2022 and, at that time, estimated the project to cost about $100 million. Based on that estimate, Sweden may be easily paying an equivalent of its annual contribution into the ESA budget to get Wandt to space.

In addition to Wandt and Uznański, the ESA astronaut reserve pool includes nine other candidates, none of them officially employed by ESA. By filling this astronaut reserve pool, ESA seems to have created a market for Axiom Space, a move that might raise questions given the agency’s purpose is to promote the European space sector. In fact, the ESA’s founding Convention enshrines the principle of geo-return, which grants member states at least an 80 percent return on their contributions into ESA’s budget in the form of research and development contracts. Although the cost of the Axiom missions is paid through ESA, most of this money goes to the Texas-headquartered Axiom Space and its launch provider, SpaceX.

Secret contracts

ESA refused to disclose details of the arrangement between Axiom Space and Sweden, calling it “proprietary data as this is implemented through a confidential commercial contract.” The Swedish National Space Agency didn’t respond to Ars Technica’s request for comment.

Poland’s announcement of a national mission for Uznański arrived in August last year, accompanied by a jaw-dropping increase of the country’s contribution to ESA’s budget. At the 2022 ministerial council, Poland earmarked 197 million euros for the agency’s activities in the 2023 to 2025 period. In August, the Polish Space Agency more than doubled this contribution, committing an additional 295 million euros ($322 million). It is not clear how much of this money will go toward Uznański’s space trip.

In the months following the announcement of the astronaut reserve pool, Axiom Space began actively approaching home countries of the reservists with offers to fly those men and women to space, according to media in the Czech Republic, which has recently declined the offer.

In addition to Sweden and Poland, the UK also intends to use Axiom’s services and conduct a British-only mission that will be headed by semi-retired ESA astronaut Tim Peake. It will also include the UK’s Rosemary Coogan, newly named as one of ESA’s career astronauts, as well as reservist Meganne Christian and para-astronaut John McFall. Unlike the Swedish and Polish mission, the British mission will be funded by the private industry in the UK rather than by taxpayers, according to the BBC.

Axiom and SpaceX are disrupting Europe’s traditional pathway to space Read More »