Space

a-taller,-heavier,-smarter-version-of-spacex’s-starship-is-almost-ready-to-fly

A taller, heavier, smarter version of SpaceX’s Starship is almost ready to fly

artemis, moon, NASA, Science, Space, spacex, starship / /

Starship will test its payload deployment mechanism on its seventh test flight.

SpaceX’s first second-generation Starship, known as Version 2 or Block 2, could launch as soon as January 13. Credit: SpaceX

An upsized version of SpaceX’s Starship mega-rocket rolled to the launch pad early Thursday in preparation for liftoff on a test flight next week.

The two-mile transfer moved the bullet-shaped spaceship one step closer to launch Monday from SpaceX’s Starbase test site in South Texas. The launch window opens at 5 pm EST (4 pm CST; 2200 UTC). This will be the seventh full-scale test flight of SpaceX’s Super Heavy booster and Starship spacecraft and the first of 2025.

In the coming days, SpaceX technicians will lift the ship on top of the Super Heavy booster already emplaced on the launch mount. Then, teams will complete the final tests and preparations for the countdown on Monday.

“The upcoming flight test will launch a new generation ship with significant upgrades, attempt Starship’s first payload deployment test, fly multiple reentry experiments geared towards ship catch and reuse, and launch and return the Super Heavy booster,” SpaceX officials wrote in a mission overview posted on the company’s website.

The mission Monday will repeat many of the maneuvers SpaceX demonstrated on the last two Starship test flights. The company will again attempt to return the Super Heavy booster to the launch site and attempt to catch it with two mechanical arms, or “chopsticks,” on the launch tower approximately seven minutes after liftoff.

SpaceX accomplished this feat on the fifth Starship test flight in October but aborted a catch attempt on a November flight because of damaged sensors on the tower chopsticks. The booster, which remained healthy, diverted to a controlled splashdown offshore in the Gulf of Mexico.

SpaceX’s next Starship prototype, Ship 33, emerges from its assembly building at Starbase, Texas, early Thursday morning. Credit: SpaceX/Elon Musk via X

For the next flight, SpaceX added protections to the sensors on the tower and will test radar instruments on the chopsticks to provide more accurate ranging measurements for returning vehicles. These modifications should improve the odds of a successful catch of the Super Heavy booster and of Starship on future missions.

In another first, one of the 33 Raptor engines that will fly on this Super Heavy booster—designated Booster 14 in SpaceX’s fleet—was recovered from the booster that launched and returned to Starbase in October. For SpaceX, this is a step toward eventually flying the entire rocket repeatedly. The Super Heavy booster and Starship spacecraft are designed for full reusability.

After separation of the booster stage, the Starship upper stage will ignite six engines to accelerate to nearly orbital velocity, attaining enough energy to fly halfway around the world before gravity pulls it back into the atmosphere. Like the past three test flights, SpaceX will guide Starship toward a controlled reentry and splashdown in the Indian Ocean northwest of Australia around one hour after liftoff.

New ship, new goals

The most significant changes engineers will test next week are on the ship, or upper stage, of SpaceX’s enormous rocket. The most obvious difference on Starship Version 2, or Block 2, is with the vehicle’s forward flaps. Engineers redesigned the flaps, reducing their size and repositioning them closer to the tip of the ship’s nose to better protect them from the scorching heat of reentry. Cameras onboard Starship showed heat damage to the flaps during reentry on test flights last year.

SpaceX is also developing an upgraded Super Heavy booster that is slightly taller than the existing model. The next version of the booster will produce more thrust and will be slightly taller than the current Super Heavy, but for the upcoming test flight, SpaceX will still use the first-generation booster design.

Starship Block 2 has smaller flaps than previous ships. The flaps are located in a more leeward position to protect them from the heat of reentry. Credit: SpaceX

For next week’s flight, Super Heavy and Starship combined will hold more than 10.5 million pounds of fuel and oxidizer. The ship’s propellant tanks have 25 percent more volume than previous iterations of the vehicle, and the payload compartment, which contains 10 mock-ups of Starlink Internet satellites on this launch, is somewhat smaller. Put together, the changes add nearly 6 feet (1.8 meters) to the rocket’s height, bringing the full stack to approximately 404 feet (123.1 meters).

This means SpaceX will break its own record for launching the largest and most powerful rocket ever built. And the company will do it again with the even larger Starship Version 3, which SpaceX says will have nine upper stage engines, instead of six, and will deliver up to 440,000 pounds (200 metric tons) of cargo to low-Earth orbit.

Other changes debuting with Starship Version 2 next week include:

• Vacuum jacketing of propellant feedlines

• A new fuel feedline system for the ship’s Raptor vacuum engines

• An improved propulsion avionics module controlling vehicle valves and reading sensors

• Redesigned inertial navigation and star tracking sensors

• Integrated smart batteries and power units to distribute 2.7 megawatts of power across the ship

• An increase to more than 30 cameras onboard the vehicle.

Laying the foundation

The enhanced avionics system will support future missions to prove SpaceX’s ability to refuel Starships in orbit and return the ship to the launch site. For example, SpaceX will fly a more powerful flight computer and new antennas that integrate connectivity with the Starlink Internet constellation, GPS navigation satellites, and backup functions for traditional radio communication links. With Starlink, SpaceX said Starship can stream more than 120Mbps of real-time high-definition video and telemetry in every phase of flight.

These changes “all add additional vehicle performance and the ability to fly longer missions,” SpaceX said. “The ship’s heat shield will also use the latest generation tiles and includes a backup layer to protect from missing or damaged tiles.”

Somewhere over the Atlantic Ocean, a little more than 17 minutes into the flight, Starship will deploy 10 dummy payloads similar in size and weight to next-generation Starlink satellites. The mock-ups will soar around the world on a suborbital trajectory, just like Starship, and reenter over the unpopulated Indian Ocean. Future Starship flights will launch real next-gen Starlink satellites to add capacity to the Starlink broadband network, but they’re too big and too heavy to launch on SpaceX’s smaller Falcon 9 rocket.

SpaceX will again reignite one of the ship’s Raptor engines in the vacuum of space, repeating a successful test achieved on Flight 6 in November. The engine restart capability is important for several reasons. It gives the ship the ability to maneuver itself out of low-Earth orbit for reentry (not a concern for Starship’s suborbital tests), and will allow the vehicle to propel itself to higher orbits, the Moon, or Mars once SpaceX masters the technology for orbital refueling.

Artist’s illustration of Starship on the surface of the Moon. Credit: SpaceX

NASA has contracts with SpaceX to build a derivative of Starship to ferry astronauts to and from the surface of the Moon for the agency’s Artemis program. The NASA program manager overseeing SpaceX’s lunar lander contract, Lisa Watson-Morgan, said she was pleased with the results of the in-space engine restart demo last year.

“The whole path to the Moon, as we are getting ready to land on the Moon, we’ll perform a series of maneuvers, and the Raptors will have an environment that is very, very cold,” Morgan told Ars in a recent interview. “To that, it’s going to be important that they’re able to relight for landing purposes. So that was a great first step towards that.

“In addition, after we land, clearly, the Raptors will be off, and it will get very cold, and they will have to relight in a cold environment (to launch the crews off the lunar surface),” she said. “So that’s why that step was critical for the Human Landing System and NASA’s return to the Moon.”

“The biggest technology challenge remaining”

SpaceX continues to experiment with Starship’s heat shield, which the company’s founder and CEO, Elon Musk, has described as “the biggest technology challenge remaining with Starship.” In order for SpaceX to achieve its lofty goal of launching Starships multiple times per day, the heat shield needs to be fully and immediately reusable.

While the last three ships have softly splashed down in the Indian Ocean, some of their heat-absorbing tiles stripped away from the vehicle during reentry, when it’s exposed to temperatures up to 2,600° Fahrenheit (1,430° Celsius).

Engineers removed tiles from some areas of the ship for next week’s test flight in order to “stress-test” vulnerable parts of the vehicle. They also smoothed and tapered the edge of the tile line, where the ceramic heat shield gives way to the ship’s stainless steel skin, to address “hot spots” observed during reentry on the most recent test flight.

“Multiple metallic tile options, including one with active cooling, will test alternative materials for protecting Starship during reentry,” SpaceX said.

SpaceX is also flying rudimentary catch fittings on Starship to test their thermal performance on reentry. The ship will fly a more demanding trajectory during descent to probe the structural limits of the redesigned flaps at the point of maximum entry dynamic pressure, according to SpaceX.

All told, SpaceX’s inclusion of a satellite deployment demo and ship upgrades on next week’s test flight will lay the foundation for future missions, perhaps in the next few months, to take the next great leap in Starship development.

In comments following the last Starship test flight in November, SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk posted on X that the company could try to return the ship to a catch back at the launch site—something that would require the vehicle to complete at least one full orbit of Earth—as soon as the next flight following Monday’s mission.

“We will do one more ocean landing of the ship,” Musk posted. “If that goes well, then SpaceX will attempt to catch the ship with the tower.”

Photo of Stephen Clark

Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet.

A taller, heavier, smarter version of SpaceX’s Starship is almost ready to fly Read More »

italy’s-plan-to-buy-starlink-data-deals-a-serious-blow-to-european-space-network

Italy’s plan to buy Starlink data deals a serious blow to European space network

elon musk, italy, Space, spacex, starlink / /

Developed by the European Union and European Space Agency, with Italian participation, this constellation of 290 satellites is planned to come online by 2030 at a development cost of $10.5 billion. During the lengthy negotiations, Italy even managed to secure one of the three primary ground stations in the Abruzzo region of the country.

The response from some Italian and European officials to the potential agreement between Italy and SpaceX has been ferocious.

Antonio Misiani, former deputy finance minister for Italy and senator for the opposition Democratic Party, told Politico that a completed agreement would represent an “unacceptable sell-out of national sovereignty.”

An Atlantic Council senior fellow and former policy advisor to the Italian government, Beniamino Irdi, told the Financial Times, “It sends a political signal to the EU,” Irdi said. “Iris² is a symbol of Europe’s strategic autonomy, and a key EU member shifting to a different solution can be interpreted as a sign of divestment from that.”

There are multiple layers of frustration here beyond Iris². One concerns Musk, who, since the election of Trump, has turned his attention toward advancing far-right political causes in Europe, particularly in Germany and the United Kingdom. Meloni, a conservative leader of Italy, considers Musk a friend and ally. Andrea Stroppa, one of Musk’s advisers in Italy, explained in September that “Elon recognizes Giorgia Meloni’s leadership. And he sees in her the same thing he sees in Donald Trump, someone who can defend Western values ​​in danger.”

Battling with Breton

Musk has also had a long-running feud with French businessman Thierry Breton, who was Commissioner for the Internal Market of the European Union for five years until last September. Breton spearheaded the Iris² initiative to provide secure communications from low-Earth orbit. He also championed the Digital Services Act, which aims to curb misinformation published online in Europe. The European Commission has been energetically investigating Musk’s social media site X under the law.

Italy’s plan to buy Starlink data deals a serious blow to European space network Read More »

nasa-defers-decision-on-mars-sample-return-to-the-trump-administration

NASA defers decision on Mars Sample Return to the Trump administration

jet propulsion laboratory, Mars, Mars Sample Return, NASA, planetary science, Science, solar system, Space / /

“We want to have the quickest, cheapest way to get these 30 samples back.”

This photo montage shows sample tubes shortly after they were deposited onto the surface by NASA’s Perseverance Mars rover in late 2022 and early 2023. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS

For nearly four years, NASA’s Perseverance rover has journeyed across an unexplored patch of land on Mars—once home to an ancient river delta—and collected a slew of rock samples sealed inside cigar-sized titanium tubes.

These tubes might contain tantalizing clues about past life on Mars, but NASA’s ever-changing plans to bring them back to Earth are still unclear.

On Tuesday, NASA officials presented two options for retrieving and returning the samples gathered by the Perseverance rover. One alternative involves a conventional architecture reminiscent of past NASA Mars missions, relying on the “sky crane” landing system demonstrated on the agency’s two most recent Mars rovers. The other option would be to outsource the lander to the space industry.

NASA Administrator Bill Nelson left a final decision on a new mission architecture to the next NASA administrator working under the incoming Trump administration. President-elect Donald Trump nominated entrepreneur and commercial astronaut Jared Isaacman as the agency’s 15th administrator last month.

“This is going to be a function of the new administration in order to fund this,” said Nelson, a former Democratic senator from Florida who will step down from the top job at NASA on January 20.

The question now is: will they? And if the Trump administration moves forward with Mars Sample Return (MSR), what will it look like? Could it involve a human mission to Mars instead of a series of robotic spacecraft?

The Trump White House is expected to emphasize “results and speed” with NASA’s space programs, with the goal of accelerating a crew landing on the Moon and sending people to explore Mars.

NASA officials had an earlier plan to bring the Mars samples back to Earth, but the program slammed into a budgetary roadblock last year when an independent review team concluded the existing architecture would cost up to $11 billion—double the previous cost projection—and wouldn’t get the Mars specimens back to Earth until 2040.

This budget and schedule were non-starters for NASA. The agency tasked government labs, research institutions, and commercial companies to come up with better ideas to bring home the roughly 30 sealed sample tubes carried aboard the Perseverance rover. NASA deposited 10 sealed tubes on the surface of Mars a couple of years ago as insurance in case Perseverance dies before the arrival of a retrieval mission.

“We want to have the quickest, cheapest way to get these 30 samples back,” Nelson said.

How much for these rocks?

NASA officials said they believe a stripped-down concept proposed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California, which previously was in charge of the over-budget Mars Sample Return mission architecture, would cost between $6.6 billion and $7.7 billion, according to Nelson. JPL’s previous approach would have put a heavier lander onto the Martian surface, with small helicopter drones that could pick up sample tubes if there were problems with the Perseverance rover.

NASA previously deleted a “fetch rover” from the MSR architecture and instead will rely on Perseverance to hand off sample tubes to the retrieval lander.

An alternative approach would use a (presumably less expensive) commercial heavy lander, but this concept would still utilize several elements NASA would likely develop in a more traditional government-led manner: a nuclear power source, a robotic arm, a sample container, and a rocket to launch the samples off the surface of Mars and back into space. The cost range for this approach extends from $5.1 billion to $7.1 billion.

Artist’s illustration of SpaceX’s Starship approaching Mars. Credit: SpaceX

JPL will have a “key role” in both paths for MSR, said Nicky Fox, head of NASA’s science mission directorate. “To put it really bluntly, JPL is our Mars center in NASA science.”

If the Trump administration moves forward with either of the proposed MSR plans, this would be welcome news for JPL. The center, which is run by the California Institute of Technology under contract to NASA, laid off 955 employees and contractors last year, citing budget uncertainty, primarily due to the cloudy future of Mars Sample Return.

Without MSR, engineers at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory don’t have a flagship-class mission to build after the launch of NASA’s Europa Clipper spacecraft last year. The lab recently struggled with rising costs and delays with the previous iteration of MSR and NASA’s Psyche asteroid mission, and it’s not unwise to anticipate more cost overruns on a project as complex as a round-trip flight to Mars.

Ars submitted multiple requests to interview Laurie Leshin, JPL’s director, in recent months to discuss the lab’s future, but her staff declined.

Both MSR mission concepts outlined Tuesday would require multiple launches and an Earth return orbiter provided by the European Space Agency. These options would bring the Mars samples back to Earth as soon as 2035, but perhaps as late as 2039, Nelson said. The return orbiter and sample retrieval lander could launch as soon as 2030 and 2031, respectively.

“The main difference is in the landing mechanism,” Fox said.

To keep those launch schedules, Congress must immediately approve $300 million for Mars Sample Return in this year’s budget, Nelson said.

NASA officials didn’t identify any examples of a commercial heavy lander that could reach Mars, but the most obvious vehicle is SpaceX’s Starship. NASA already has a contract with SpaceX to develop a Starship vehicle that can land on the Moon, and SpaceX founder Elon Musk is aggressively pushing for a Mars mission with Starship as soon as possible.

NASA solicited eight studies from industry earlier this year. SpaceX, Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, and Lockheed Martin—each with their own lander concepts—were among the companies that won NASA study contracts. SpaceX and Blue Origin are well-capitalized with Musk and Amazon’s Jeff Bezos as owners, while Lockheed Martin is the only company to have built a lander that successfully reached Mars.

This slide from a November presentation to the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group shows JPL’s proposed “sky crane” architecture for a Mars sample retrieval lander. The landing system would be modified to handle a load about 20 percent heavier than the sky crane used for the Curiosity and Perseverance rover landings. Credit: NASA/JPL

The science community has long identified a Mars Sample Return mission as the top priority for NASA’s planetary science program. In the National Academies’ most recent decadal survey released in 2022, a panel of researchers recommended NASA continue with the MSR program but stated the program’s cost should not undermine other planetary science missions.

Teeing up for cancellation?

That’s exactly what is happening. Budget pressures from the Mars Sample Return mission, coupled with funding cuts stemming from a bipartisan federal budget deal in 2023, have prompted NASA’s planetary science division to institute a moratorium on starting new missions.

“The decision about Mars Sample Return is not just one that affects Mars exploration,” said Curt Niebur, NASA’s lead scientist for planetary flight programs, in a question-and-answer session with solar system researchers Tuesday. “It’s going to affect planetary science and the planetary science division for the foreseeable future. So I think the entire science community should be very tuned in to this.”

Rocket Lab, which has been more open about its MSR architecture than other companies, has posted details of its sample return concept on its website. Fox declined to offer details on other commercial concepts for MSR, citing proprietary concerns.

“We can wait another year, or we can get started now,” Rocket Lab posted on X. “Our Mars Sample Return architecture will put Martian samples in the hands of scientists faster and more affordably. Less than $4 billion, with samples returned as early as 2031.”

Through its own internal development and acquisitions of other aerospace industry suppliers, Rocket Lab said it has provided components for all of NASA’s recent Mars missions. “We can deliver MSR mission success too,” the company said.

Rocket Lab’s concept for a Mars Sample Return mission. Credit: Rocket Lab

Although NASA’s deferral of a decision on MSR to the next administration might convey a lack of urgency, officials said the agency and potential commercial partners need time to assess what roles the industry might play in the MSR mission.

“They need to flesh out all of the possibilities of what’s required in the engineering for the commercial option,” Nelson said.

On the program’s current trajectory, Fox said NASA would be able to choose a new MSR architecture in mid-2026.

Waiting, rather than deciding on an MSR plan now, will also allow time for the next NASA administrator and the Trump White House to determine whether either option aligns with the administration’s goals for space exploration. In an interview with Ars last week, Nelson said he did not want to “put the new administration in a box” with any significant MSR decisions in the waning days of the Biden administration.

One source with experience in crafting and implementing US space policy told Ars that Nelson’s deferral on a decision will “tee up MSR for canceling.” Faced with a decision to spend billions of dollars on a robotic sample return or billions of dollars to go toward a human mission to Mars, the Trump administration will likely choose the latter, the source said.

If that happens, NASA science funding could be freed up for other pursuits in planetary science. The second priority identified in the most recent planetary decadal survey is an orbiter and atmospheric probe to explore Uranus and its icy moons. NASA has held off on the development of a Uranus mission to focus on the Mars Sample Return first.

Science and geopolitics

Whether it’s with robots or humans, there’s a strong case for bringing pristine Mars samples back to Earth. The titanium tubes carried by the Perseverance rover contain rock cores, loose soil, and air samples from the Martian atmosphere.

“Bringing them back will revolutionize our understanding of the planet Mars and indeed, our place in the solar system,” Fox said. “We explore Mars as part of our ongoing efforts to safely send humans to explore farther and farther into the solar system, while also … getting to the bottom of whether Mars once supported ancient life and shedding light on the early solar system.”

Researchers can perform more detailed examinations of Mars specimens in sophisticated laboratories on Earth than possible with the miniature instruments delivered to the red planet on a spacecraft. Analyzing samples in a terrestrial lab might reveal biosignatures, or the traces of ancient life, that elude detection with instruments on Mars.

“The samples that we have taken by Perseverance actually predate—they are older than any of the samples or rocks that we could take here on Earth,” Fox said. “So it allows us to kind of investigate what the early solar system was like before life began here on Earth, which is amazing.”

Fox said returning Mars samples before a human expedition would help NASA prioritize where astronauts should land on the red planet.

In a statement, the Planetary Society said it is “concerned that NASA is again delaying a decision on the program, committing only to additional concept studies.”

“It has been more than two years since NASA paused work on MSR,” the Planetary Society said. “It is time to commit to a path forward to ensure the return of the samples already being collected by the Perseverance rover.

“We urge the incoming Trump administration to expedite a decision on a path forward for this ambitious project, and for Congress to provide the funding necessary to ensure the return of these priceless samples from the Martian surface.”

China says it is developing its own mission to bring Mars rocks back to Earth. Named Tianwen-3, the mission could launch as soon as 2028 and return samples to Earth by 2031. While NASA’s plan would bring back carefully curated samples from an expansive environment that may have once harbored life, China’s mission will scoop up rocks and soil near its landing site.

“They’re just going to have a mission to grab and go—go to a landing site of their choosing, grab a sample and go,” Nelson said. “That does not give you a comprehensive look for the scientific community. So you cannot compare the two missions. Now, will people say that there’s a race? Of course, people will say that, but it’s two totally different missions.”

Still, Nelson said he wants NASA to be first. He said he has not had detailed conversations with Trump’s NASA transition team.

“I think it was a responsible thing to do, not to hand the new administration just one alternative if they want to have a Mars Sample Return,” Nelson said. “I can’t imagine that they don’t. I don’t think we want the only sample return coming back on a Chinese spacecraft.”

Photo of Stephen Clark

Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet.

NASA defers decision on Mars Sample Return to the Trump administration Read More »

nearly-two-years-after-its-radical-pivot,-fidelity-slashes-relativity’s-valuation

Nearly two years after its radical pivot, Fidelity slashes Relativity’s valuation

relativity space, Space / /

For several years, an innovative, California-based launch company named Relativity Space has been the darling of investors and media.

Relativity promised to disrupt launch by taking a somewhat niche technology in the space industry at the time, 3D printing, and using it as the foundation for manufacturing rockets. The pitch worked. Relativity’s chief executive Tim Ellis liked to brag that his first investor call was to Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, who cut the company’s first check. Cuban invested half a million dollars.

That was just the beginning of the torrent of fundraising by Ellis, who, by November 2023, turned the privately held Relativity into a $4.5 billion company following its latest, Series F funding. This was an impressive start for the company founded by Ellis and Jordan Noone, both engineers, in 2016.

A big bet

The Series F round occurred as Relativity was amid a bold gamble that, in hindsight, may have been a poor bet. In March 2023, the company launched its Terran 1 rocket for the first—and only—time. After this flight, Ellis announced that the company was pivoting immediately to developing the much larger and more capable Terran R rocket.

“It’s a big, bold bet,” Ellis said in an interview. “But it’s actually a really obvious decision.”

With an advertised capacity of more than 1 metric ton to low-Earth orbit and a “backlog” of launch contracts valued in the hundreds of millions of dollars, according to Ellis, Terran 1 had the potential to draw significant revenue. It could also have nabbed a share of launch contracts that have since been snared by competitors such as Rocket Lab, with its smaller Electron vehicle, and Firefly, with its comparably sized Alpha rocket.

Nearly two years after its radical pivot, Fidelity slashes Relativity’s valuation Read More »

rocket-report:-avio-named-top-european-launch-firm;-new-glenn-may-launch-soon

Rocket Report: Avio named top European launch firm; New Glenn may launch soon

rocket report, Space / /

“We are making it simpler for new competitors to get consistent access to the spectrum they need.”

A Falcon 9 rocket lofts a Starlink mission on Dec. 30, the final SpaceX mission of 2024, completing the company’s 134th orbital launch. Credit: SpaceX

A Falcon 9 rocket lofts a Starlink mission on Dec. 30, the final SpaceX mission of 2024, completing the company’s 134th orbital launch. Credit: SpaceX

Welcome to Edition 7.25 of the Rocket Report! Happy New Year! It’s a shorter edition of the newsletter this week because most companies (not named Blue Origin, this holiday season) took things easier over the last 10 days. But after the break we’re back in the saddle for the new year, and eager to see what awaits us in the world of launch.

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.

Avio lands atop list of European launch firms. You know it probably was not a great year for European rocket firms when the top-ranked company on the continent is Avio, which launched a grand total of two rockets in 2024. The Italian rocket firm earned this designation from European Spaceflight after successfully completing the final flight of the Vega rocket in September and returning the Vega C rocket to flight in December.

Three European launches in 2024 … The only other firm to launch a rocket on the list was ArianeGroup, which had a single launch last year. Granted, it was an important flight, the successful debut of the Ariane 6 rocket. Germany-based Isar Aerospace came in third place, followed by a company I had never heard of, Germany-based Bayern-Chemie. It builds solid-fuel upper stages for sounding rockets. It’s hard to disagree with too much on the list, although it certainly demonstrates that Europe could do with more companies launching rockets, and fewer only talking about it.

India launches space docking demonstration mission. The Indian Space Research Organization launched a space docking experiment on a PSLV rocket at the end of the year, NASASpaceflight.com reports. This SpaDeX mission—yes, the name is a little confusing—will demonstrate the capability to rendezvous, dock, and undock in orbit. This technology is important for the country’s human spaceflight plans as well as future missions to the Moon.

Target and chaser … The SpaDeX experiment will be conducted around 10 days following launch when the two satellites, the SDX01 “Chaser” and the SDX02 “Target,” will be released with a small relative velocity between them. The pair will drift apart for around a day until they are separated by a distance of around 10 to 15 km. Once this is achieved, Target will eliminate the velocity difference between itself and Chaser using its propulsion system.

The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s and Stephen Clark’s reporting on all things space is to sign up for our newsletter. We’ll collect their stories and deliver them straight to your inbox.

Sign Me Up!

HyPrSpace conducts hot-fire test. French launch services startup HyPrSpace has completed the first test of its second hot fire test campaign for its subscale Terminator stage demonstrator, European Spaceflight reports. HyPrSpace is developing a two-stage launch vehicle called Orbital Baguette One (OB-1) that will be capable of delivering up to 250 kilograms to low Earth orbit.

Like a finely baked bread … In July, the company completed an initial hot fire test campaign of Terminator, an eight-tonne demonstrator of a hybrid rocket stage. Over the course of this first test campaign, HyPrSpace completed a total of four hot fire tests. HyPrSpace CEO Alexandre Mangeot said the company achieved an average engine efficiency of 94 percent during the latest test. Mangeot added that this represented the “propulsive performance we need for our orbital launcher.”

A new annual record for orbital launches. The world set another record for orbital launches in 2024 in a continuing surge of launch activity driven almost entirely by SpaceX, Space News reports. There were 259 orbital launch attempts in 2024, a 17 percent increase from the previous record of 221 orbital launch attempts in 2023. That figure does not include suborbital launches, such as four SpaceX Starship/Super Heavy test flights or two launches of the HASTE suborbital variant of Rocket Lab’s Electron.

SpaceX v. world … That increase in overall launches matches the increase by SpaceX alone, which performed 134 Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches in 2024, up from 96 in 2023. The company performed more orbital launches than the rest of the world combined. China performed 68 launches in 2024, breaking a record of 67 launches set in 2023. Russia performed 17 launches, followed by Japan (7), India (5), Iran (4), Europe (3) and North Korea (1).

Russian family of rockets reaches 2,000th launch. The Russian space program reached a significant milestone over the holidays with the 2,000th launch of a rocket from the “R-7” family of boosters. The launch took place on Christmas Day when an R-7 rocket lifted off, carrying a remote-sensing satellite from the Baikonur Cosmodrome, Ars reports. This family of rockets has an incredible heritage dating back nearly six decades. The first R-7 vehicle was designed by the legendary Soviet rocket scientist Sergei Korolev. It flew in 1957 and was the world’s first intercontinental ballistic missile.

Good and bad news … Although it’s certainly worth commemorating the 2,000th launch of the R-7 family of rockets, the fleet’s longevity also offers a cautionary tale. In many respects, the Russian space program continues to coast on the legacy of Korolev and the Soviet space feats of the 1950s and 1960s. That Russia has not developed a more cost-competitive and efficient booster in nearly six decades reveals the truth about its space program: It lacks innovation at a time when the rest of the space industry is rapidly sprinting toward reusability.

Overview of Chinese launch plans for 2025. New Long March rockets and commercially developed launch vehicles are expected to have their first flights in 2025, boosting China’s overall launch capabilities, Space News reports. The launchers will compete for contracts to launch satellites for China’s megaconstellation projects—Thousand Sails and Guowang—space station cargo missions and commercial and other contracts, helping to boost the country’s overall access to space and launch rate in the coming years.

Many new faces on the launch pad … Among the highlights for the coming year is the Long March 8A rocket, a variant of the existing Long March 8, but with a larger, more powerful second stage, boosting payload capacity to a 700-kilometer Sun-synchronous orbit from 5,000 kilograms to 7,000 kg. It is likely to be a workhorse for megaconstellation launches. The Long March 12A rocket could undergo vertical takeoff and landing tests. And the privately developed Zhuque-3 rocket could make its first orbital launch this year.

To deal with more launches, FCC adds spectrum. The Federal Communications Commission has formally allocated additional spectrum for launch applications, fulfilling a provision in a bill passed earlier this year, Space News reports. The FCC published December 31 a report and order that allocated spectrum between 2360 and 2395 megahertz for use in communications to and from commercial launch and reentry vehicles on a secondary basis. That band currently has a primary use for aircraft and missile testing communications.

Keep rockets talking to the ground … Both the FCC and launch companies have said the additional spectrum was needed to accommodate growth in launch activities. “By identifying more bandwidth for vital links to launch vehicles, we are making it simpler for new competitors to get consistent access to the spectrum they need,” Jessica Rosenworcel, chairwoman of the FCC, said in a December 19 statement calling for approval of the then-proposed report and order.

New Glenn completes static fire test. On Friday, December 27, Blue Origin successfully ignited the seven main engines on its massive New Glenn rocket for the first time, Ars reports. Blue Origin said it fired the vehicle’s engines for a duration of 24 seconds. They fired at full thrust for 13 of those seconds. Additionally, several hours before the test firing, the Federal Aviation Administration said it had issued a launch license for the rocket.

New Glenn wen? … These two milestones set up a long-anticipated launch of the New Glenn rocket in January. Although the company has yet to announce a date publicly, sources indicate that Blue Origin is working toward a launch time of no earlier than 1 am ET (06: 00 UTC) on Monday, January 6, from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida, though it could slip a few days. If all goes well with the debut flight of the vehicle, Blue Origin will also attempt to recover the first stage of the rocket on a drone ship down range in the Atlantic Ocean. (submitted by Jay5000001)

Next three launches

Jan. 4: Falcon 9 | Thuraya 4-NGS | Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida | 01: 27 UTC

Jan. 6: New Glenn | Blue Ring pathfinder | Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida | 06: 00 UTC

Jan. 6: Falcon 9 | Starlink 12-11 | Kennedy Space Center, Florida | 16: 19 UTC

Photo of Eric Berger

Eric Berger is the senior space editor at Ars Technica, covering everything from astronomy to private space to NASA policy, and author of two books: Liftoff, about the rise of SpaceX; and Reentry, on the development of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon. A certified meteorologist, Eric lives in Houston.

Rocket Report: Avio named top European launch firm; New Glenn may launch soon Read More »

elon-musk:-“we’re-going-straight-to-mars-the-moon-is-a-distraction.”

Elon Musk: “We’re going straight to Mars. The Moon is a distraction.”

musk, NASA, pence, Space, space policy, spacex, Trump, vance / /

To a large extent, NASA resisted this change during the remainder of the Trump administration, keeping its core group of major contractors, such as Boeing and Lockheed Martin, in place. It had help from key US Senators, including Richard Shelby, the now-retired Republican from Alabama. But this time, the push for change is likely to be more concerted, especially with key elements of NASA’s architecture, including the Space Launch System rocket, being bypassed by privately developed rockets such as SpaceX’s Starship vehicle and Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket.

Not one, but both

In all likelihood, NASA will adopt a new “Artemis” plan that involves initiatives to both the Moon and Mars. When Musk said “we’re going straight to Mars,” he may have meant that this will be the thrust of SpaceX, with support from NASA. That does not preclude a separate initiative, possibly led by Blue Origin with help from NASA, to develop lunar return plans.

Isaacman, who is keeping a fairly low profile ahead of his nomination, has not weighed in on Musk’s comments. However, when his nomination was announced one month ago, he did make a germane comment on X.

“I was born after the Moon landings; my children were born after the final space shuttle launch,” he wrote. “With the support of President Trump, I can promise you this: We will never again lose our ability to journey to the stars and never settle for second place. We will inspire children, yours and mine, to look up and dream of what is possible. Americans will walk on the Moon and Mars and in doing so, we will make life better here on Earth.”

In short, NASA is likely to adopt a two-lane strategy of reaching for both the Moon and Mars. Whether the space agency is successful with either one will be a major question asked of the new administration.

Elon Musk: “We’re going straight to Mars. The Moon is a distraction.” Read More »

a-cold-war-mystery:-why-did-jimmy-carter-save-the-space-shuttle?

A Cold War mystery: Why did Jimmy Carter save the space shuttle?

Jimmy Carter, NASA, Science, Space, Space shuttle / /

Ars solves the mystery by going directly to a primary source—the president himself.

The first launch of the space shuttle finally came on April 12, 1981. Credit: NASA

The first launch of the space shuttle finally came on April 12, 1981. Credit: NASA

With 39th President Jimmy Carter passing away at the age of 100, we are revisiting this story of how he unexpectedly saved the space shuttle.

We’d been chatting for the better part of two hours when Chris Kraft’s eyes suddenly brightened. “Hey,” he said, “Here’s a story I’ll bet you never heard.” Kraft, the man who had written flight rules for NASA at the dawn of US spaceflight and supervised the Apollo program, had invited me to his home south of Houston for one of our periodic talks about space policy and space history. As we sat in recliners upstairs, in a den overlooking the Bay Oaks Country Club, Kraft told me about a time the space shuttle almost got canceled.

It was the late 1970s, when Kraft directed the Johnson Space Center, the home of the space shuttle program. At the time, the winged vehicle had progressed deep into a development phase that started in 1971. Because the program had not received enough money to cover development costs, some aspects of the vehicle (such as its thermal protective tiles) were delayed into future budget cycles. In another budget trick, NASA committed $158 million in fiscal year 1979 funds for work done during the previous fiscal year.

This could not go on, and according to Kraft the situation boiled over during a 1978 meeting in a large conference floor on the 9th floor of Building 1, the Houston center’s headquarters. All the program managers and other center directors gathered there along with NASA’s top leadership. That meeting included Administrator Robert Frosch, a physicist President Carter had appointed a year earlier.

Kraft recalls laying bare the budget jeopardy faced by the shuttle. “We were totally incapable of meeting any sort of flight schedule,” he said. Further postponing the vehicle would only add to the problem because the vehicle’s high payroll costs would just be carried forward.

There were two possible solutions proposed, Kraft said. One was a large funding supplement to get development programs back on track. Absent that, senior leaders felt they would have to declare the shuttle a research vehicle, like the rocket-powered X-15, which had made 13 flights to an altitude as high as 50 miles in the 1960s. “We were going to have to turn it, really, into a nothing vehicle,” Kraft said. “We were going to have to give up on the shuttle being a delivery vehicle into orbit.”

On the eve of the 40th anniversary of the first human landing on the Moon, Apollo 11 crew members, Buzz Aldrin, left, Michael Collins, and Neil Armstrong and NASA Mission Control creator Chris Kraft, right, during their visit to the National Air and Space Museum on July 19, 2009.

Credit: NASA/Getty Images

On the eve of the 40th anniversary of the first human landing on the Moon, Apollo 11 crew members, Buzz Aldrin, left, Michael Collins, and Neil Armstrong and NASA Mission Control creator Chris Kraft, right, during their visit to the National Air and Space Museum on July 19, 2009. Credit: NASA/Getty Images

Armed with these bleak options, Frosch returned to Washington. Some time later he would meet with Carter, not expecting a positive response, as the president had never been a great friend to the space program. But Carter, according to Kraft, had just returned from Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) in Vienna, and he had spoken with the Soviet leader, Leonid Brezhnev, about how the United States was going to be able to fly the shuttle over Moscow continuously to ensure they were compliant with the agreements.

So when Frosch went to the White House to meet with the president and said NASA didn’t have the money to finish the space shuttle, the administrator got a response he did not expect: “How much do you need?”

In doing so, Jimmy Carter saved the space shuttle, Kraft believes. Without supplementals for fiscal year 1979 and 1980, the shuttle would never have flown, at least not as the iconic vehicle that would eventually fly 135 missions and 355 individual fliers into space. It took some flights as high as 400 miles above the planet before retiring five years ago this week. “That was the first supplemental NASA had ever asked for,” Kraft said. “And we got that money from Jimmy Carter.”

As I walked out of Kraft’s house that afternoon in late spring, I recall wondering whether this could really be true. Could Jimmy Carter, of all people, be the savior of the shuttle? All because he had been bragging about the shuttle’s capabilities to the Soviets and, therefore, didn’t want to show weakness? This Cold War mystery was now nearly 40 years in the past, but most of the protagonists still lived. So I began to ask questions.

Carter’s apathy toward space

At the root of my skepticism was this simple fact—Jimmy Carter was no great friend to the space program or, at least initially, the shuttle. Less than five months after he became president, on the date of June 9, 1977, Carter wrote the following in his White House Diary: “We continued our budget meetings. It’s obvious that the space shuttle is just a contrivance to keep NASA alive, and that no real need for the space shuttle was determined before the massive construction program was initiated.”

On NASA’s own 50th anniversary website, space historian John Logsdon described the Carter presidency in less than flattering terms. “Jimmy Carter was perhaps the least supportive of US human space efforts of any president in the last half-century,” Logsdon wrote.

In 1978 President Jimmy Carter visited Kennedy Space Center to check on the space shuttle’s progress and participate in an awards ceremony. Here he is greeted by Kennedy Space Center Director Lee Scherer. NASA

Then there was Carter’s vice president, Walter Mondale, who in 1972 had called the space shuttle a “senseless extravaganza.” A senator from Minnesota at the time, Mondale had vigorously opposed early funding measures to begin development of the shuttle. His views exemplified those who believed the United States had more pressing needs for its money than chasing the stars.

“I believe it would be unconscionable to embark on a project of such staggering cost when many of our citizens are malnourished, when our rivers and lakes are polluted, and when our cities and rural areas are dying,” Mondale argued during one debate over shuttle funding. “What are our values? What do we think is more important?”

Now these two men were responsible for establishing priorities for the government’s budget and supporting a shuttle that was already years behind schedule as it faced cost overruns of hundreds of millions of dollars. They were going to keep the program afloat?

The shuttle, canceled?

If Kraft is to be believed, cost overruns began really catching up to the shuttle program in 1978, necessitating the big meeting at Johnson Space Center. By then the Enterprise had already made its first free flight in the atmosphere, and the test vehicle was a public relations success. However, the programs to develop the space shuttle’s main engines and its thermal protective tiles remained far behind schedule. It does not seem beyond the realm of possibility that the program might be canceled altogether and that program managers might have worried about this.

John Logsdon, the eminent space historian who has written books about Nixon’s space policy and is working on one about Reagan, told Ars that as costs mounted, the White House Office of Management and Budget suggested to Carter that he might want to cancel the program in 1978 and 1979. This set off a series of White House meetings that culminated in an influential memo to Carter from Brigadier General Robert Rosenberg, of the National Security Council. Titled “Why Shuttle Is Needed,” the Rosenberg memo offered an effective counterpoint to the OMB concerns about cost, according to Logsdon. Written in November 1979, it helped lead Carter to a decision to fund the vehicle.

The crew of Star Trek gathers around space shuttle Enterprise in 1977.

Credit: NASA

The crew of Star Trek gathers around space shuttle Enterprise in 1977. Credit: NASA

“Strong national support and prestige is focused on Shuttle as a means for maintaining space dominance as evidenced by broad user interest and recent space policy statements,” Rosenberg wrote. “Significant delay or abandonment of the Shuttle and manned space capabilities at this time would be viewed as a loss of national pride and direction. The notion that we are forced for short term economic reasons to abandon a major area of endeavor in which we have achieved world leadership at great cost is simply not credible.”

A key player in the shuttle program at this time, Robert Thompson, pushed back on the idea that the shuttle was ever at any real risk of being canceled. Thompson and Kraft are contemporaries. They were classmates at Virginia Tech University in the early 1940s, and later both were original members of the Space Task Group that put together Project Mercury. When Kraft managed flight operations during the Apollo Program, Thompson was in charge of capsule recovery. Ultimately Thompson became the first shuttle program manager in 1970, a post he headed until 1981. Today, Thompson lives about a mile away from Kraft, and his home overlooks the same golf course.

“I never worried an instant about Carter cutting the funding off,” he said in an interview at his dining room table. “You’d have to be an idiot to get up in front of people and say, ‘I’m now going to trash $5 billion even though we’re that close to the finish line, and I’m going to quit human spaceflight.’ Carter was kind of an oddball guy to be president, but he wasn’t stupid.”

So why wasn’t it canceled?

Still, there seem to be valid reasons for concern about a program that would ultimately run three years behind schedule and, according to NASA’s comptroller, about 30 percent over its initial $5.15 billion estimated development cost. Why did Carter remain so steadfastly behind the shuttle? Was it really because Carter valued the shuttle in his arms control discussions with the Soviet Union? The answer appears to be yes.

“It is conceivable that one of his arguments to Brezhnev on why there should be SALT was our ability to use the shuttle to verify the agreements,” Logsdon said. Whereas the president unquestionably felt lukewarm toward spaceflight, he felt conversely strong about arms control. And to verify that the Soviet Union was complying with the treaty, the United States would need a constellation of spy satellites. Back in 1970, to win Department of Defense support at the program’s outset, NASA had redesigned the shuttle to launch national security payloads. Now, that decision paid off.

A book about Carter’s space policy, Back Down to Earth by Mark Damohn, draws this conclusion about a president who liked NASA’s robotic exploration and science but didn’t see the value of humans in space. “The ability of the shuttle to launch arms control verification satellites is what saved it during the Carter administration,” Damohn writes. His book does not recount any meetings with Brezhnev. When asked whether Carter might have discussed the shuttle with the Soviet general secretary and whether that might have influenced his decisions, Damohn replied that Kraft’s story is essentially correct except for the part of Carter bragging to Brezhnev. Bragging is not in Carter’s personality, Damohn told Ars.

Another person who could verify or debunk Kraft’s anecdote is Frosch himself, who left NASA in 1981 and remains a senior research fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. After I related Kraft’s story, Frosch said he didn’t recall a Brezhnev connection with Carter’s decision to support shuttle funding. “That does not mean it’s not true,” he added. “I just don’t remember any clear sequence like that. But it’s certainly possible if the dates fit together correctly.”

The timeline

Do the dates fit together? For some of the story, yes, and for other parts, no. Kraft recounted fiscal problems plaguing the space shuttle program in 1977 and 1978 that delayed development of the space shuttle’s main engines, thermal protection system, and other flight critical elements. According to TA Heppenheimer’s excellent History of the Space Shuttle, by May of 1979 the shuttle’s costs had already run $830 million over the initial $5.2 billion projected cost.

Moreover, by the time of Kraft’s come-to-Jesus meeting with the shuttle program managers and Frosch at Johnson Space Center, the vehicle had already missed its original March 1978 flight date. Ultimately, the vehicle would not fly until April 12, 1981.

It is also true that the White House provided additional funding when NASA needed it most. The president approved a $185 million supplemental for fiscal year 1979 to address the technical and manufacturing delays, and NASA would receive another $300 million supplemental for the fiscal year 1980 budget. The message from Carter to his OMB officials at this time regarding these supplementals was clear—“find the money.”

What is not consistent with Kraft’s narrative is the notion that Carter bragged about the shuttle to Brezhnev and then felt compelled to follow through with the shuttle’s development for this reason. The 1979 supplemental was formally signed into law by Carter on June 4, 1979, and by then he had already greenlit another supplemental for 1980. These dates are important, because Carter did not meet with Brezhnev in Vienna to sign the SALT II Treaty until June 15.

United States President Jimmy Carter, left, and Leonid Brezhnev, First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, welcomed journalists to the Soviet Embassy in Vienna, Austria, on June 17, 1979, on the eve of the signing of the SALT II treaty limiting strategic arms.

Credit: AFP/Getty Images

United States President Jimmy Carter, left, and Leonid Brezhnev, First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, welcomed journalists to the Soviet Embassy in Vienna, Austria, on June 17, 1979, on the eve of the signing of the SALT II treaty limiting strategic arms. Credit: AFP/Getty Images

This means Carter could not have “bragged” about the shuttle and then have funded it. However, this does not mean the talks with Brezhnev had zero influence on Carter’s feelings for the space shuttle during the last 18 months of his turbulent presidency.

By 1980, amid double-digit inflation, spiraling gas prices, and Ayatollah Khomeini’s revolution in Iran, the United States was slipping into another recession. As part of that year’s budget process, the president sought broad spending cuts. Administration officials told NASA to find budget cuts of $460 million to $860 million for the coming fiscal year.

But ultimately, NASA’s budget was spared. Heppenheimer’s book says this happened because “Carter exempted the Pentagon from these cutbacks, which meant that the Defense Department could stand fast in the wake of Moscow’s invasion of Afghanistan. This exemption gave Frosch an opening, as he argued that the shuttle should also be spared from cutbacks on national security grounds.” The president agreed.

Effectively, then, the shuttle program received extra funding in 1980 from a president that did not support human spaceflight and a vice president that adamantly opposed it. The funds came during a recession when the rest of the federal government was undergoing significant budget cuts. That is perhaps a greater marvel than the majestic orbiters themselves.

The ultimate source

For some perspective on all of this, Ars reached out to Carter through Steven Hochman, director of research at The Carter Center. He hadn’t heard the Brezhnev-space shuttle story, but he was happy to assist our reporting by bringing some questions to the 39th president of the United States.

Why did the president ultimately support funding the shuttle in its time of need? “I was not enthusiastic about sending humans on missions to Mars or outer space,” Carter told Ars. “But I thought the shuttle was a good way to continue the good work of NASA. I didn’t want to waste the money already invested.”

Carter also confirmed that he did, in fact, discuss the space shuttle and its capabilities with Brezhnev at the SALT II Treaty meetings in Vienna in June 1979. “I did explain to the Soviets that the space shuttle was peaceful, would not carry weapons, and would always land in the US,” Carter explained.

Finally, Hochman reviewed Carter’s schedule and found that the president had met with Frosch four times, including a brief discussion on July 11, 1979 at Camp David with the NASA administrator. This came shortly after the final treaty negotiations in Vienna. Hochman said it would not have been at all surprising if Carter discussed with Frosch that he mentioned the shuttle during the Brezhnev meeting.

From this we can draw a few conclusions—principally that despite some timeline inconsistencies, Kraft’s story appears to be mostly true. The shuttle program was in big trouble and could have been canceled or drastically modified had Carter not stepped in. Moreover, this was not a drawn out process. By all accounts Carter acted swiftly in the shuttle’s time of need. One of Carter’s primary motivations in doing so was enforcing the SALT II Treaty and, critically, Carter discussed the shuttle with Brezhnev during the treaty meetings. Important presidential decisions about the shuttle were made before and after the treaty meetings.

Perhaps what stands out most of all is the lasting, yet almost completely forgotten impact Carter had on this country’s space legacy. Despite just a passing interest in human space exploration, Carter ultimately played a pivotal role in ensuring that the longest-flying US spacecraft in history got built. That decision was instrumental, too, in development of the International Space Station. After all, NASA’s primary purpose for the shuttle was to eventually build an orbital station.

As someone who championed peace during his post-presidency, Carter no doubt would welcome the station’s driving idea of building an international consensus to work together in space. And ironically, after the shuttle finally stopped flying in 2011, America would come to rely on Russia to get into space. Today, we work with the very Cold War enemies with whom Carter negotiated arms treaties, contended with in Afghanistan, and vowed to watch closely from the orbital vehicle he shepherded across the finish line.

Photo of Eric Berger

Eric Berger is the senior space editor at Ars Technica, covering everything from astronomy to private space to NASA policy, and author of two books: Liftoff, about the rise of SpaceX; and Reentry, on the development of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon. A certified meteorologist, Eric lives in Houston.

A Cold War mystery: Why did Jimmy Carter save the space shuttle? Read More »

after-60-years-of-spaceflight-patches,-here-are-some-of-our-favorites

After 60 years of spaceflight patches, here are some of our favorites

mission patches, Science, Space / /

A picture’s worth 1,000 words

It turns out the US spy satellite agency is the best of the best at patch design.

NROL-61 is the iconic “Spike” patch. Credit: NRO

The art of space mission patches is now more than six decades old, dating to the Vostok 6 mission in 1963 that carried Soviet cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova into low-Earth orbit for nearly three days. The patch for the first female human spaceflight showcased a dove flying above the letters designating the Soviet Union, CCCP.

That patch was not publicly revealed at the time, and the use of specially designed patches was employed only infrequently by subsequent Soviet missions. NASA’s first mission patch would not follow for two years, but the practice would prove more sticky for missions in the United States and become a time-honored tradition.

The first NASA flight to produce a mission-specific patch worn by crew members was Gemini 5. It flew in August 1965, carrying astronauts Gordon Cooper and Pete Conrad on an eight-day mission inside a small Gemini spacecraft. At the time, it was the longest spaceflight conducted by anyone.

Robert Pearlman has the story behind the patch at Collect Space, which came about because of the wishes of the crew. During the initial Mercury missions, the pilots were able to name their spacecraft—Freedom 7, Liberty Bell 7, and so on. Cooper had named his Mercury spacecraft ‘Faith 7.’ But an increasingly buttoned-up NASA ended this practice for the Gemini missions, and when Cooper and Conrad were assigned to the third Gemini flight they considered alternatives.

Gemini 5 mission patch. Note the “8 days or bust” messaging on the wagon was covered up until after the mission was completed.

Credit: NASA

Gemini 5 mission patch. Note the “8 days or bust” messaging on the wagon was covered up until after the mission was completed. Credit: NASA

“Several months before mission, I mentioned to Pete that I’d never been in a military organization that didn’t have its own patch,” Cooper recounted in Leap of Faith, his memoir. “We decided right then and there that we were at least going to have a patch for our flight.”

They chose a covered wagon design to indicate the pioneering nature of the mission and came up with the “8 days or bust” slogan to highlight the extended duration of the flight. Since then, virtually every NASA mission has included a patch design, typically with names of the crew members. The tradition has extended to non-human missions and has generally been adopted by space agencies around the world.

As such, there is a rich tradition of space mission patches to draw on, and we thought it would be fun to share some of our favorites over the decades.

Apollo 11 mission patch. NASA

Apollo 11

The first human mission to land on the Moon is one of the only NASA mission patches that does not include the names of the crew members, Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins. This was a deliberate choice by the crew, who wanted the world to understand they were traveling to the Moon for all of humanity.

Another NASA astronaut, Jim Lovell, suggested the bald eagle could be the focus of the patch. Collins traced the eagle from a National Geographic children’s magazine, and an olive branch was added as a symbol of the mission’s peaceful intent.

The result is a clear symbol of the United States leading humanity to another world. It is simple and powerful.

Skylab rescue mission patch.

Credit: NASA

Skylab rescue mission patch. Credit: NASA

Skylab rescue mission

Skylab was NASA’s first space station, and it was launched into orbit after the final Apollo lunar landing in 1972. From May 1973 to February 1974, three different crews occupied the space station, which had been placed in orbit by a modified Saturn V rocket.

Due to some problems with leaky thrusters on the Apollo spacecraft that carried the second crew to Skylab in 1973, NASA scrambled to put together a ‘rescue’ mission as a contingency. In this rescue scenario, astronauts Vance Brand and Don Lind would have flown to the station and brought Alan Bean, Jack Lousma, and Owen Garriott back inside an Apollo capsule especially configured for five people.

Ultimately, NASA decided that the crew could return to Earth in the faulty Apollo spacecraft, with the use of just half of the vehicle’s thrusters. So Brand and Lind never flew the rescue mission. But we got a pretty awesome patch out of the deal.

Space shuttle program

With the space shuttle, astronauts and patch artists had to get more creative because the vehicle flew so frequently—eventually launching 135 times. Some of my favorite patches from these flights came fairly early on in the program.

As it turns out, designing shuttle mission patches was a bonding exercise for crews after their assignments. Often one of the less experienced crew members would be given leadership of the project.

“During the Shuttle era, designing a mission emblem was one of the first tasks assigned to a newly formed crew of astronauts,” Flag Research Quarterly reports. “Within NASA, creation of the patch design was considered to be an important team-building exercise. The crew understood that they were not just designing a patch to wear on their flight suits, but that they were also creating a symbol for everyone who was working on the flight.”

In some cases the crews commissioned a well-known graphic designer or space artist to help them with their patch designs. More typically they worked with a graphic designer on staff at the Johnson Space Center to finalize the design.

NROL-61 is the iconic “Spike” patch. NRO

National Reconnaissance Office

The activities of the US National Reconnaissance Office, which is responsible for the design and launching of spy satellites, are very often shrouded in secret.

However, the spy satellite agency cleverly uses its mission patches as an effective communications tool. The patches for the launch of its satellites never give away key details, but they are often humorous, ominous, and suggestive all at the same time. The immediate response I often have to these patches is one of appreciation for the design, followed by a nervous chuckle. I suspect that’s intended by the spy agency.

In any case, these are my choices for the best space patches ever, perhaps because they are developed with such abandon.

The Soyuz TM-24 mission to Mir in 1996 carried ESA astronaut Reinhold Ewald.

European Space Agency

The space agency that consists of a couple of dozen European nations has also created some banger patches over the years that both recognize the continent’s long history of scientific discovery—with Newton, Kepler, Galileo, and Curie to name but a few—and the potential for future discovery in space.

Attached are some of my personal favorites, which highlight the launch of European astronauts on the Russian Soyuz spacecraft to three different Russian space stations across three decades.

What I like about the European mission designs is that they are unique and not afraid to break from the traditional mold of patch design. They’re also beautiful!

The Demo-2 mission patch is iconic in every way.

SpaceX mission patches

In recent years, some of the most creative patch designs have come from SpaceX and its crewed spaceflights aboard the Dragon vehicle. Because of the spacecraft’s name, the missions have often played off the Dragon motif, making for some striking designs.

There is a dedicated community of patch collectors out there, and some of them were disappointed that SpaceX stopped designing patches for each individual Starlink mission a few years ago. However, I would say that buying two or three patches a week would have gotten pretty expensive, pretty fast—not to mention the challenge designers would face in making unique patches for each flight.

If you read this far and want to know my preference, I am not much of a patch collector, as much as I admire the effort and artistry that goes into each design. I have only ever bought one patch, the one designed for the Falcon 1 rocket’s fourth flight. The patch isn’t beautiful, but it’s got some nice touches, including lights for both Kwajalein and Omelek islands, where the company launched its first rockets. Also, it was the first time the company included a shamrock on the patch, and that proved fortuitous, as the successful launch in 2008 saved the company. It has become a trademark of SpaceX patches ever since.

Photo of Eric Berger

Eric Berger is the senior space editor at Ars Technica, covering everything from astronomy to private space to NASA policy, and author of two books: Liftoff, about the rise of SpaceX; and Reentry, on the development of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon. A certified meteorologist, Eric lives in Houston.

After 60 years of spaceflight patches, here are some of our favorites Read More »

after-a-24-second-test-of-its-engines,-the-new-glenn-rocket-is-ready-to-fly

After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

blue origin, new glenn, Space / /

After a long day of stops and starts that stretched well into the evening, and on what appeared to be the company’s fifth attempt Friday, Blue Origin successfully ignited the seven main engines on its massive New Glenn rocket.

The test firing as fog built over the Florida coast marks the final major step in the rocket company’s campaign to bring the New Glenn rocket—a privately developed, super-heavy lift vehicle—to launch readiness. Blue Origin said it fired the vehicle’s engines for a duration of 24 seconds. They fired at full thrust for 13 of those seconds.

“This is a monumental milestone and a glimpse of what’s just around the corner for New Glenn’s first launch,” said Jarrett Jones,  senior vice president of the New Glenn program, in a news release. “Today’s success proves that our rigorous approach to testing–combined with our incredible tooling and design engineering–is working as intended.”

Completion of the dynamic hot-fire test sets up a historic moment for the company founded by Jeff Bezos nearly a quarter of a century ago, the firm’s first ever orbital launch attempt. It will occur from Launch Complex-36, at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.

Blue Origin’s post-test update did not include a launch date, but based on flight advisory information, a no-earlier than launch date is likely to be January 6.

A license to fly

Friday was important for New Glenn’s debut mission in another way. Several hours before the test firing, the Federal Aviation Administration said it had issued a launch license for the rocket. The license allows Blue Origin to conduct orbital missions from Cape Canaveral with New Glenn, as well as to attempt first stage landings on a barge in the Atlantic Ocean. The license is valid for five years.

After years of waiting, the much-anticipated mission is finally coming together. The hot-fire test, taking place just two days after the Christmas holiday in the United States, reflects the urgency that Bezos has injected into his rocket company over the last 18 months. In the fall of 2023, Bezos ousted Bob Smith as chief executive of Blue Origin, and tapped a long-time Amazon executive, Dave Limp, to lead the company.

After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly Read More »

how-might-nasa-change-under-trump?-here’s-what-is-being-discussed

How might NASA change under Trump? Here’s what is being discussed

commercial space flight, NASA, Space, space policy, trump administration / /

One source said the space transition team has been working off of ideas that Trump has talked about publicly, including his interest in Mars. For example, during a campaign speech this fall, Trump referenced SpaceX founder Elon Musk, who played a significant role during the campaign both in terms of time and money, and his desire to settle Mars.

“We are leading in space over Russia and China… It’s my plan, I’ll talk to Elon,” Trump said in September. “Elon get those rocket ships going because we want to reach Mars before the end of my term, and we want also to have great military protection in space.”

Ideas under consideration

The transition team has been discussing possible elements of an executive order or other policy directives. They include:

  • Establishing the goal of sending humans to the Moon and Mars, by 2028
  • Canceling the costly Space Launch System rocket and possibly the Orion spacecraft
  • Consolidating Goddard Space Flight Center and Ames Research Center at Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama
  • Retaining a small administration presence in Washington, DC, but otherwise moving headquarters to a field center
  • Rapidly redesigning the Artemis lunar program to make it more efficient

“Is any of this written in stone? No,” a source told Ars.

Additionally, substantive changes will need to be worked through the White House Office of Management and Budget, and negotiated with Congress, which funds NASA.

Previously, Trump has announced that entrepreneur and commercial astronaut Jared Isaacman will be nominated to serve as NASA Administrator. Although he has been working to create a staff for his administration, Isaacman has not been involved in the transition team discussions, sources said. Rather, after he is confirmed, Isaacman is likely to be given authority to review major programs at the space agency “at the speed of light.”

How might NASA change under Trump? Here’s what is being discussed Read More »

rocket-report:-ula-has-a-wild-idea;-starliner-crew-will-stay-in-orbit-even-longer

Rocket Report: ULA has a wild idea; Starliner crew will stay in orbit even longer

rocket report, Science, Space / /

ULA’s Vulcan rocket is at least several months away from flying again, and Stoke names its engine.

Stoke Space’s Zenith booster engine fires on a test stand at Moses Lake, Washington. Credit: Stoke Space

Welcome to Edition 7.24 of the Rocket Report! This is the last Rocket Report of the year, and what a year it’s been. So far, there have been 244 rocket launches to successfully reach orbit this year, a record for annual launch activity. And there are still a couple of weeks to go before the calendar turns to 2025. Time is running out for Blue Origin to launch its first heavy-lift New Glenn rocket this year, but if it flies before January 1, it will certainly be one of the top space stories of 2024.

As always, we welcome reader submissions. 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.

Corkscrew in the sky. A Japanese space startup said its second attempt to launch a rocket carrying small satellites into orbit had been terminated minutes after liftoff Wednesday and destroyed itself again, nine months after the company’s first launch attempt in an explosion, the Associated Press reports. The startup that developed the rocket, named Space One, launched the Kairos rocket from a privately owned coastal spaceport in Japan’s Kansai region. Company executive and space engineer Mamoru Endo said an abnormality in the first stage engine nozzle or its control system is likely to have caused an unstable flight of the rocket, which started spiraling in mid-flight and eventually destroyed itself about three minutes after liftoff, using its autonomous safety mechanism.

0-for-2 … The launch failure this week followed the first attempt to launch the Kairos rocket in March, when the launcher exploded just five seconds after liftoff. An investigation into the failed launch in March concluded the rocket’s autonomous destruct system activated after detecting its solid-fueled first stage wasn’t generating as much thrust as expected. The Kairos rocket is Japan’s first privately funded orbital-class rocket, capable of placing payloads up to 550 pounds (250 kilograms) into low-Earth orbit. (submitted by Jay500001, Ken the Bin, and EllPeaTea)

A fit check for Themis. ArianeGroup has brought the main elements of the Themis reusable booster demonstrator together for the first time in France during a “full-fit check,” European Spaceflight reports. This milestone paves the way for the demonstrator’s inaugural test, which is expected to take place in 2025. Themis, which is funded by the European Space Agency, is designed to test vertical launch and landing capabilities with a new methane-fueled rocket engine. According to ESA, the full-fit check is one of the final steps in the development phase of Themis.

Slow progress … ESA signed the contract with ArianeGroup for the Themis program in 2020, and at that time, the program’s schedule called for initial low-altitude hop tests in 2022. It’s now taken more than double the time officials originally projected to get the Themis rocket airborne. The first up-and-down hops will be based at the Esrange Space Center in Sweden, and will use the vehicle ArianeGroup is assembling now in France. A second Themis rocket will be built for medium-altitude tests from Esrange, and finally, a three-engine version of Themis will fly on high-altitude tests from the Guiana Space Center in South America. At the rate this program is proceeding, it’s fair to ask if Themis will complete a full-envelope launch and landing demonstration before the end of the decade, if it ever does. (submitted by Ken the Bin)

The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s and Stephen Clark’s reporting on all things space is to sign up for our newsletter. We’ll collect their stories and deliver them straight to your inbox.

Sign Me Up!

Baguette One is going critical. French launch startup HyPrSpace has announced that it has completed preliminary design reviews for its Baguette One and Orbital Baguette One (OB-1) rockets, European Spaceflight reports. Baguette One will be a suborbital demonstrator for the OB-1 rocket, designed to use a hybrid propulsion system that combines liquid and solid propellants and doesn’t require a turbopump. With the preliminary design complete, HyPrSpace said it is moving on to the critical design phase for both rockets, a stage of development where detailed engineering plans are finalized and components are prepared for manufacturing.

Heating the oven … HyPrSpace has previously stated the Orbital Baguette One rocket will be capable of delivering a payload of up to 550 pounds (250 kilograms) to low-Earth orbit. Last year, the startup announced it raised 35 million euros in funding, primarily from the French government, to complete the critical design phase of the OB-1 rocket and launch the Baguette One on a suborbital test flight. HyPrSpace has not provided an updated schedule for the first flight of either rocket. (submitted by Ken the Bin)

A new player on the scene. RTX weapons arm Raytheon and defense startup Ursa Major Technologies have completed two successful test flights of a missile propelled by a new solid rocket motor, Breaking Defense reports. The two test flights, held at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake in California, involved a Raytheon-made missile propelled by an Ursa Major solid rocket motor measuring less than 10 inches in diameter, according to Dan Jablonsky, Ursa Major’s CEO. Details about the missile are shrouded in mystery, and Raytheon officials referred questions on the matter to the Army.

Joining the club … The US military is interested in fostering the development of a third supplier of solid rocket propulsion for weapons systems. Right now, only Northrop Grumman and L3Harris’s Aerojet Rocketdyne are available as solid rocket vendors, and they have struggled to keep up with the demand for weapons systems, especially to support the war in Ukraine. Ursa Major is one of several US-based startups entering the solid rocket propulsion market. “There is a new player on the scene in the solid rocket motor industry,” Jablonsky said. “This is an Army program that we’ve been working on with Raytheon. In this particular program, we went from concept and design to firing and flight on the range in just under four months, which is lightning fast.” (submitted by Ken the Bin)

SpaceX’s rapid response. In a mission veiled in secrecy, a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket lifted off Monday from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida, sending a military Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite to a medium orbit about 12,000 miles above Earth, Space News reports. Named Rapid Response Trailblazer-1 (RRT-1), this mission was a US national security space launch and was also intended to demonstrate military capabilities to condense a typical two-year mission planning cycle to less than six months. The payload, GPS III SV-07, is the seventh satellite of the GPS III constellation, built by Lockheed Martin. The spacecraft was in storage awaiting a launch on United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan rocket.

Tightening the timeline … “We decided to pull SV-07 out of storage and try to get it to the launch pad as quickly as possible,” Col. James Horne, senior material leader for launch execution at the US Space Force’s Space Systems Command, told Space News. “It’s our way of demonstrating that we can be responsive to operator needs.” Rather than the typical mission cycle of two years, SpaceX, Lockheed Martin, and the Space Force worked together to prep this GPS satellite for launch in a handful of months. Military officials decided to launch SV-07 with SpaceX as ULA’s Vulcan rocket faced delays in becoming certified to launch national security payloads. According to Space News, Horne emphasized that this move was less about Vulcan delays and more about testing the boundaries of the NSSL program’s flexibility. “This is a way for us to demonstrate to adversaries that we can be responsive,” he said. Because SV-07 was switched to SpaceX, ULA will get to launch GPS III SV-10, originally assigned to SpaceX. (submitted by Ken the Bin and EllPeaTea)

An update on Butch and Suni. NASA has announced that it is delaying the SpaceX Crew-10 launch, a move that will keep astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams—who already had their stay aboard the International Space Station unexpectedly extended—in orbit even longer, CNN reports. Williams and Wilmore launched to space in June, piloting the first crewed test flight of Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft. Their trip, expected to last about a week, ballooned into a months-long assignment after their vehicle experienced technical issues en route to the space station and NASA determined it would be too risky to bring them home aboard the Starliner.

Nearly 10 months in orbit … The astronauts stayed aboard the space station as the Starliner spacecraft safely returned to Earth in September, and NASA shuffled the station’s schedule of visiting vehicles to allow Wilmore and Williams to come home on a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft with two crewmates to end the Crew-9 mission in February, soon after the arrival of Crew-10. Now, Crew-10 will get off the ground at least a month later than expected because NASA and SpaceX teams need “time to complete processing on a new Dragon spacecraft for the mission,” the space agency said. (submitted by Ken the Bin)

Stoke Space names its engine. Stoke Space, the only other company besides SpaceX developing a fully reusable orbital rocket, has revealed the name of the methane-fueled engine that will power the vehicle’s booster stage. “Say hello to Zenith, our full-flow staged-combustion booster engine, built to power Nova to orbit,” Stoke Space wrote in a post on X. The naming announcement came a few days after Stoke Space said it hot-fired the “Block 2” or “flight layout” version of the main engine on a test stand in Moses Lake, Washington.

Stoked by the progress … “As we build towards the future of space mobility, we’re building on top of the pinnacle–the zenith–of rocket engine cycles: full-flow staged combustion,” Stoke Space said. Only a handful of rocket engines have been designed to use the full-flow staged combustion cycle, and only one has actually flown on a rocket: SpaceX’s Raptor. Seven Zenith engines will power the first stage of the Nova rocket when it takes off from Cape Canaveral, Florida. A hydrogen-fueled propulsion system will power the second stage of Nova, which is designed to launch up to 5 metric tons (11,000 pounds) of payload to low-Earth orbit.

Upgrades coming for Vega. The European Space Agency (ESA) has signed 350 million euros in contracts with Avio to further evolve the Vega launcher family,” Aviation Week & Space Technology reports. The contracts cover the development of the Vega-E and upgrades to the current Vega-C’s ground infrastructure to increase the launch cadence. Vega-E, scheduled to debut in 2027, will replace the Vega-C rocket’s third and fourth stages with a single methane-fueled upper stage under development by Avio. It will also offer a 30 percent increase in Vega’s payload lift capability, and will launch from a new complex to be built on the former Ariane 5 launch pad at the European-run Guiana Space Center in South America.

Adaptations … The fresh tranche of funding from ESA will also pay for Avio’s work to “adapt” the former Ariane 5 integration building at the spaceport in French Guiana, according to ESA. “This will allow technicians to work on two rockets being assembled simultaneously–one on the launch pad and one in the new assembly building–and run two launch campaigns in parallel,” ESA said. (submitted by Ken the Bin and EllPeaTea)

New Glenn coming alive. In a widely anticipated test, Blue Origin will soon ignite the seven main engines on its New Glenn rocket at Launch Complex-36 in Florida, Ars reports. Sources indicated this hot-fire test might occur as soon as Thursday, but it didn’t happen. Instead, Blue Origin’s launch team loaded cryogenic propellants into the New Glenn rocket on the launch pad, but stopped short of igniting the main engines.

Racing the clock … The hot-fire is the final test the company must complete before verifying the massive rocket is ready for its debut flight, and it is the most dynamic. This will be the first time Blue Origin has ever test-fired the BE-7 engines altogether. Theoretically, at least, it remains possible that Blue Origin could launch New Glenn this year—and the company’s urgency certainly speaks to this. On social media this week, some Blue Origin employees noted that they were being asked to work on Christmas Day this year in Florida.

China begins building a new megaconstellation. The first batch of Internet satellites for China’s Guowang megaconstellation launched Monday on the country’s heavy-lift Long March 5B rocket, Ars reports. The satellites are the first of up to 13,000 spacecraft a consortium of Chinese companies plans to build and launch over the next decade. The Guowang fleet will beam low-latency high-speed Internet signals in an architecture similar to SpaceX’s Starlink network, although Chinese officials haven’t laid out any specifics, such as target markets, service specifications, or user terminals.

No falling debris, this time … China used its most powerful operational rocket, the Long March 5B, for the job of launching the first 10 Guowang satellites this week. The Long March 5B’s large core stage, which entered orbit on the rocket’s previous missions and triggered concerns about falling space debris, fell into a predetermined location in the sea downrange from the launch site. The difference for this mission was the addition of the Yuanzheng 2 upper stage, which gave the rocket’s payloads the extra oomph they needed to reach their targeted low-Earth orbit. (submitted by Ken the Bin and EllPeaTea)

Elon Musk’s security clearance under review. A new investigation from The New York Times suggests that SpaceX founder Elon Musk has not been reporting his travel activities and other information to the Department of Defense as required by his top-secret clearance, Ars reports. According to the newspaper, concerns about Musk’s reporting practices have led to reviews by three different bodies within the military: the Air Force, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, and the Defense Department Office of Inspector General. However, none of the federal agencies cited in the Times article has accused Musk of disclosing classified material.

It won’t matter … Since 2021, Musk has failed to self-report details of his life, including travel activities, people he has met, and drug use, according to the Times. The government is also concerned that SpaceX did not ensure Musk’s compliance with the reporting rules. Musk’s national security profile has risen following his deep-pocketed and full-throated support of Donald Trump, who won the US presidential campaign in November and will be sworn into office next month. After this inauguration, Trump will have the power to grant security clearance to whomever he wishes.

ULA’s CEO has a pretty wild idea. Ars published a feature story last week examining the US Space Force’s new embrace of offensive weapons in space. In the story, Ars discusses concepts for different types of space weapons, including placing roving “defender” satellites into orbit, with the sole purpose of guarding high-value US satellites against an attack. Tory Bruno, CEO of United Launch Alliance, wrote about the defender concept in a Medium post earlier this month. He added more detail in a recent conversation with reporters, describing the defender concept as “a lightning-fast, long-range, lethal, if necessary, vehicle to defend our assets on orbit.” And guess what? The Centaur upper stage for ULA’s own Vulcan rocket could do the job just fine, according to Bruno.

Death throes or a smart pivot? … A space tug or upper stage like the Centaur could be left in orbit after a launch to respond to threats against US or allied satellites, Bruno said. These wouldn’t be able to effectively defend a spacecraft against a ground-based anti-satellite missile, which can launch without warning. But a space-based attack might involve an enemy satellite taking days or weeks to move close to a US satellite due to limitations in maneuverability and the tyranny of orbital mechanics. Several launch companies have recently pitched their rockets as solutions for weapons testing, including Rocket Lab and ABL. But the concept proposed by Bruno would take ULA far from its core business, where its efforts to compete with SpaceX have often fallen short. However, the competition is still alive, as shown by a comment from SpaceX’s vice president of Falcon launch vehicles, Jon Edwards. In response to Ars’s story, Edwards wrote on X: “The pivot to ‘interceptor’ or ‘target vehicle’ is a common final act of a launch vehicle in its death throes.” (submitted by Ken the Bin)

Vulcan is months away from flying again. Speaking of ULA, here’s an update on the next flight of the company’s Vulcan rocket. The first national security mission on Vulcan might not launch until April 2025 at the earliest, Spaceflight Now reports. This will be the third flight of a Vulcan rocket, following two test flights this year to gather data for the US Space Force to certify the rocket for national security missions. On the second flight, the nozzle fell off one of Vulcan’s solid rocket boosters shortly after liftoff, but the rocket successfully continued its climb into orbit. The anomaly prompted an investigation, and ULA says it is close to determining the root cause.

Stretching the timeline … The Space Force’s certification review of Vulcan is taking longer than anticipated. “The government team has not completed its technical evaluation of the certification criteria and is working closely with ULA on additional data required to complete this evaluation,” a Space Force spokesperson told Spaceflight Now. “The government anticipates completion of its evaluation and certification in the first quarter of calendar year 2025.” The spokesperson said this means the launch of a US military navigation test satellite on the third Vulcan rocket is now slated for the second quarter of next year. (submitted by Ken the Bin and EllPeaTea)

Next three launches

Dec. 21: Falcon 9 | “Astranis: From One to Many” | Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida | 03: 39 UTC

Dec. 21: Falcon 9 | Bandwagon 2 | Vandenberg Space Force Base, California | 11: 34 UTC

Dec. 21: Electron | “Owl The Way Up” | Māhia Peninsula, New Zealand | 13: 00 UTC

Photo of Stephen Clark

Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet.

Rocket Report: ULA has a wild idea; Starliner crew will stay in orbit even longer Read More »

we’re-about-to-fly-a-spacecraft-into-the-sun-for-the-first-time

We’re about to fly a spacecraft into the Sun for the first time

Parker Solar Probe, Space / /

Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the Solar cycle,

Not a sunspot was stirring, not even a burst;

The stockings were all hung by the corona with care,

In hopes that the Parker Solar Probe would soon be there. 

Almost no one ever writes about the Parker Solar Probe anymore.

Sure, the spacecraft got some attention when it launched.  It is, after all, the fastest moving object that humans have ever built. At its maximum speed, goosed by the gravitational pull of the Sun, the probe reaches a velocity of 430,000 miles per hour, or more than one-sixth of 1 percent the speed of light. That kind of speed would get you from New York City to Tokyo in less than a minute.

And the Parker Solar Probe also has the distinction of being the first NASA spacecraft named after a living person. At the time of its launch, in August 2018, physicist Eugene Parker was 91 years old.

But in the six years since the probe has been zipping through outer space and flying by the Sun? Not so much. Let’s face it, the astrophysical properties of the Sun and its complicated structure are not something that most people think about on a daily basis.

However, the smallish probe—it masses less than a metric ton, and its scientific payload is only about 110 pounds (50 kg)—is about to make its star turn. Quite literally. On Christmas Eve, the Parker Solar Probe will make its closest approach yet to the Sun. It will come within just 3.8 million miles (6.1 million km) of the solar surface, flying into the solar atmosphere for the first time.

Yeah, it’s going to get pretty hot. Scientists estimate that the probe’s heat shield will endure temperatures in excess of 2,500° Fahrenheit (1,371° C) on Christmas Eve, which is pretty much the polar opposite of the North Pole.

Going straight to the source

I spoke with the chief of science at NASA, Nicky Fox, to understand why the probe is being tortured so. Before moving to NASA headquarters, Fox was the project scientist for the Parker Solar Probe, and she explained that scientists really want to understand the origins of the solar wind.

We’re about to fly a spacecraft into the Sun for the first time Read More »