Saturday, February 28, 2015

Retro Saturday: Moon Mission


Click the arrow to watch the film. Video source: sdasmarchives YouTube channel.

This week's Retro Saturday is an undated film produced by NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center simply titled, “Moon Mission.”

The film appears to have been produced during the Kennedy Administration circa 1963, and features an introduction by Wernher von Braun, who at the time was MSFC's director and chief architect of the Saturn V moon rocket.

Because this is still early in the Apollo program, some concepts familiar to today's audiences were yet to be finalized at the time of this film. At the end, it shows the Apollo crew vehicle landing in the desert, not in the ocean.

Friday, February 27, 2015

A Long and Prosperous Life


Click the arrow to watch astronauts Luca Parmitano and Mike Fincke comment on the passing of Leonard Nimoy. Video source: ReelNASA YouTube channel.

The planet lost Leonard Nimoy today.

His death was not unexpected.

For years, Leonard had warned on his Twitter account @TheRealNimoy and in other media about the consequences of his lifelong smoking. He'd quit decades ago, but suffered from Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD).

I never knew Leonard personally, but was friends with people who did.

Some of you know that, when I lived in California, for many years I had a part-time gig working as a free-lance writer and consultant for Star Trek licensees. This was in the 1990s, during the heyday of The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine. I don't recall ever meeting Leonard personally, but saw him speak often at conventions and followed his work in various media.

His character Spock influenced many people, including me, to be passionate about space exploration.

That wasn't necessarily Leonard, at least in his early years playing the role. Actors for the most part simply perform the lines written for them by someone else. If they're lucky, they work for a production that allows actors to participate in evolving their characters.

Gene Roddenberry had the original idea for Star Trek, and wrote the first pilot “The Menagerie,” but Spock had many voices. Also deserving credit are staff writers Gene Coon and D.C. Fontana, as well as professional science fiction writers such as Theodore Sturgeon (“Amok Time”) and Jerome Bixby (“Mirror, Mirror”) who wrote episodes that contributed to the Spock mythos.

It's well documented that Leonard created the Vulcan salute, recalling as a child a secret gesture he saw Kohanim priests make during Jewish holy days.

But it wasn't Spock who passed away today. It was Leonard Nimoy.

Pardon the use of the adjective, but Leonard was a fascinating individual.


Leonard Nimoy as Spock poses circa 1966 on the Desilu back lot with his 1964 Buick Riviera.

He had a lifelong interest in photography. Among his published works was The Full Body Project: Photographs by Leonard Nimoy, a collection of monochromatic images of full-bodied women.

Leonard was a patron of the Griffith Observatory. The Leonard Nimoy Event Horizon Theater was named after him due to a $1 million donation Leonard and his wife Susan made when the observatory was undergoing renovation.


Click the arrow to watch “Destiny in Space.” It has foreign language subtitles. Video source: robirus YouTube channel.

He also narrated the 1994 IMAX documentary, Destiny in Space. The National Air and Space Museum released a teacher's resource guide to accompany the film.

If you've read his 1975 book I Am Not Spock and its 1995 sequel I Am Spock, you know that Leonard had a lifelong dubious relationship with the Spock character. Most actors hate being stereotyped. He found work after the original series ended, appearing on Mission Impossible in 1969-1971, developing a TV movie and later a one-man play based on Vincent Van Gogh, and even released musical albums.

His character was killed off at the end of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, but Leonard was beginning to have his second thoughts so a tease was tacked at the end to show Spock's burial tube had soft-landed on the Genesis planet. He agreed to return for Star Trek III — if he could direct.

In my opinion, the three Star Trek films with which Leonard had significant creative input were the best.

Star Trek III: The Search for Spock explored just how far our heroes would go to save their friend — the cost included Kirk's son, the U.S.S. Enterprise, and their careers.

The more light-hearted Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home was a mainstream hit, but it helped spread global awareness of the threat posed to whales and other threatened species. It was inspired by Biophilia written by Edward O.Wilson. The biophilia hypothesis suggests that there is an instinctive bond between human beings and other living systems.

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country was the final film to feature the complete cast. Leonard and director Nicholas Meyer hastily came up with the idea of using the end of the Cold War as a metaphor for a rapprochement between the Federation and the Klingon Empire. Nimoy was the executive producer, building on his successful directing career.

These three films were about something, which is what made Star Trek good when it was really, really good. For all his faults, Gene Roddenberry's genius was that he conceived Star Trek as a crucible for examining the human condition. I think Leonard Nimoy understood that better than anyone else who helmed the franchise, including Gene himself in his declining years.

Leonard's multiple artistic talents, as well as his personal interest in astronomy, are what I found to be so fascinating about him.

During his final years, he finally embraced his Spock alter ego. As the COPD slowly confined him to home, Leonard used Twitter to interact with the fans who loved him so much.

One of those fans was President Barack Obama, who issued this statement today.

Long before being nerdy was cool, there was Leonard Nimoy. Leonard was a lifelong lover of the arts and humanities, a supporter of the sciences, generous with his talent and his time. And of course, Leonard was Spock. Cool, logical, big-eared and level-headed, the center of Star Trek’s optimistic, inclusive vision of humanity’s future.

I loved Spock.

In 2007, I had the chance to meet Leonard in person. It was only logical to greet him with the Vulcan salute, the universal sign for “Live long and prosper.” And after 83 years on this planet — and on his visits to many others — it’s clear Leonard Nimoy did just that. Michelle and I join his family, friends, and countless fans who miss him so dearly today.

Thursday, February 26, 2015

XCOR Heads for Texas


Click the arrow to watch the KGET-TV report. You may be subjected to an ad first.

KGET-TV in Bakersfield, California reported February 24 on XCOR plans to slowly fold operations at the Mojave Air and Spaceport, and establish primary operations in Midland, Texas.

The XCOR move to Midland was announced in 2012, so this news isn't new. But it does make clear yet again how Texas Governor Rick Perry stepped up personally to court XCOR, just as he did with Elon Musk and SpaceX.

The Spirit of Innovation


Click the arrow to watch on the KGET-TV web site. You may be subjected to an ad first.

On January 30, KEGT-TV in Bakersfield, California aired an 11-minute program on the various NewSpace companies at the Mojave Air and Spaceport.

Click here for the accompanying article.

It's a great overview of significant players such as Virgin Galactic, XCOR, Stratolaunch, and Masten Space Systems — most of whom have plans to one day operate on the Space Coast.

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

The Pork is Falling!


Click the arrow to watch the February 25, 2010 House Science Committee hearing.

On February 1, 2010, the Obama administration released its proposed Fiscal Year 2011 NASA budget.

The most controversial proposal was to cancel Constellation, a project that was years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget.

A July 2006 Government Accountability Office audit concluded that Constellation lacked a sound business case. Three years later, an August 2009 GAO Audit repeated the warning:

NASA estimates that Ares I and Orion represent up to $49 billion of the over $97 billion estimated to be spent on the Constellation program through 2020. While the agency has already obligated more than $10 billion in contracts, at this point NASA does not know how much Ares I and Orion will ultimately cost, and will not know until technical and design challenges have been addressed.

The Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee report issued in October 2009 concluded that Ares I would not deliver crew to the International Space Station until at least 2017, and perhaps 2019. Yet Ares I would be funded by deactivating the ISS in 2016, meaning Ares I would have nowhere to go.

Although on paper Constellation was to evolve an Ares V booster to send people back to the Moon by 2020, in the real world Ares V wouldn't fly until at least 2028 — and there was no budget for a lunar lander to take the crew to the surface.

The report's executive summary began with these words:

The U.S. human spaceflight program appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory. It is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources.

So the Obama administration proposed cancelling Constellation. The savings would be used to extend the International Space Station through 2020, to fund a commercial crew program to transport astronauts to the ISS, and to invest in new launch technologies.

The members of the House and Senate space subcommittees were outraged — primarily because some of them represented districts, or came from states, that had Constellation-related contracts. Others appeared to sincerely believe the rhetoric that NASA is a major engine for American technological innovation. That assumption was questioned in 1977 by the U.S. Comptroller General, and is still questioned in the modern era.

Five years ago today, the House Science Committee held a hearing to discuss the Obama proposal released three weeks before. For more than two hours, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden was the target of accusations and distortions. Many of them falsely claimed that the Administration had proposed the end of U.S. human spaceflight. In reality, the Administration proposed cancelling a boondoggle program to replace it with one that introduced competition and innovation to reduce the cost and open space to the private sector, so more people could go into space.

Some panelists proposed that Constellation be saved by increasing its annual budget by billions of dollars — billions that, conveniently, would be spent in their districts.

If you want to watch the above video, see if you can count how many times the words “jobs” or “workforce” are uttered, which will give you a good idea of what all the outrage really is about.

Here are some of the more apocalyptic claims by those on the panel ...


This hearing is intended to help us understand the rationale for such a substantial change in direction from the approach of previous authorizations. In that regard, Administrator Bolden, there are a number of questions that I hope that you will be able to address. For example, a feature of this proposal, and one that has not garnered much support on the Hill, is a plan to rely on as yet to be developed commercial crew transportation systems with no government backup system. Leaving aside the issue of safety for the moment, do you have concrete evidence that you can provide us that shows that there will be sufficient non-NASA commercial crew transportation markets to keep these companies viable, or is NASA going to be on the hook to do whatever it takes to keep them in business since NASA will have no other means of getting into orbit?

— Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN)


I am deeply troubled by the future viability of America's human spaceflight program. On the eve of completing the International Space Station and retiring the Space Shuttle, I cannot understand how the Administration can propose such an ill-conceived decision to cancel the Constellation program without providing a compelling alternative plan with measurable goals and adequate resources. This budget proposal, relying as heavily as it does on the unproven capabilities of a nascent commercial space industry, contains very few details. At worst, I'm afraid its reliance on commercial is unfolded (sic — unfounded?!), and as a consequence it not only threatens our leadership in space and our utilization of the International Space Station, but it also risks the loss of much of our aerospace industrial base and our highly skilled work force.

— Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX)
Read in absentia by Rep. Pete Olson (R-TX)



Rep. Pete Olson's district includes neighborhoods where Johnson Space Center employees live. Image source: World News.

I've got a couple concerns and questions I'd like to ask you. One of them is, sort of the process with which this decision was made. Because, if you read some media reports, and hear some things in the community, it seemed to be made by a very small cabal, for lack of a better term, of people here in Washington, D.C. I know for a fact that no one at the Johnson Space Center was consulted about the decision to terminate the Constellation. I particularly want to make sure that you were involved in that decision. So I ask you ... I mean, this is the largest cut in the President's budget. Did you hear directly from the President on this? And again, this is important, I gotta go back home and explain to my constituents who — and many of them, in their cases, lose their jobs.

— Rep. Pete Olson (R-TX)


My concerns are many. They involve cost of this action, not only in terms of money, but also what the action will do to weaken our science and engineering workforce here in the United States, the loss of jobs and how it will affect our economy ...

As you know, the United States, Russia, Europe, Japan and China have all been, their space programs have all been government funded programs. If, in fact, the private sector could create a successful space program, I think they would have done so by now, either here in the United States or elsewhere.

— Rep. Jerry Costello (D-IL)


A refreshing whiff of blunt honesty was spoken by the next member:

Let me just note that some of the criticism that I hear of the decision that's been made here with Constellation, that the primary consideration behind that criticism seems to be not safety, and not necessarily human spaceflight, because we're talking about human spaceflight but being accomplished in a different way, but instead in maintaining NASA's workforce. Now, maintaining NASA's workforce — just to maintain the workforce — is an expensive proposition. And if maintaining a workforce that is not meeting its responsibilities, not on time, not doing things on schedule, not getting us to a place where we're going to accomplish specific missions, then that workforce is holding America back.

I can see whether it was the Space Shuttle program, or many other programs, that I've been witnessing here in the last twenty years, that maintaining the NASA workforce becomes a goal in and of itself. We've got to break ourselves from that type of thinking, or we're not going to be the leading power in space, and we should be.

— Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA)



Rep. David Wu resigned from Congress in August 2011 after allegations of unwanted sexual advances to the teenage daughter of a campaign donor. Image source: NPR.

It looks good right now to privatize. But this is the easy part. This is just the privatization step. In three, four or five years, maybe five or six years, when we really hit the hard part of getting those launch vehicles human-rated, I suspect that we might have some of the same cost problems that public launch vehicles have had, and that Ares I has ...

If we privatize this, we're still going to need a labor force. And if you think we're going to be able to afford three separate contractors for human spaceflight, I would like to see your business plan ... My apologies ... Not yours. I would like to see the Administration's business plan. Because, you know, there's the business of lifting satellites up, but I don't think there's a workable business plan for lifting humans up into low Earth orbit, at least from my business experience. It just doesn't look like it pencils out. And that's why we subsidize it with tax dollars. And we can either do it directly to NASA, or we can give the money to Boeing, to Lockheed Martin, or to SpaceX. And I just want to note that, to date, they haven't launched a human being. We talk about airlines in space. Well, when we encouraged airlines after World War II, that was the right time. If we had encouraged airlines in 1910, before World War I, it would have been significantly premature.

And I would encourage the Administration and your agency to consider whether this is premature, whether this is wise, and whether this dooms us to a future where there are no Americans in space, or at least that the dominant language in space is not English.

— Rep. David Wu (D-OR)


Like Mr. Olson, my district, I have many NASA employees and contractors at the Johnson Space Center. Y'know, since the inception of NASA, the mission has always been human spaceflight ... and I'm concerned about the mission changing. I'm concerned about the human spaceflight mission being completely cut out of this budget, the Constellation program going away, and an increase in funding towards something I don't consider to be a core mission of NASA, and that is climate change and weather observation ... As Mr. Wu mentioned, the language, I hope it continues to be English, but I think the Chinese and Russians could overtake us.

— Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX)


There are serious, serious concerns about the President's decision to decimate our American human spaceflight program. By cancelling the program of record, we trade a program that we know will work — although it has experienced delays, and part of those delays, unfortunately, came from drastic underfunding. But it's a program that has been deemed the safest program to take our astronauts back to lower Earth orbit, and then back to the Moon, Mars, or whereever we choose to explore ...

You look at the tens of thousands of direct jobs that are going to be impacted with the sunsetting of Shuttle and with the planned termination of Constellation, but in fact hundreds of thousands of highly skilled jobs through subcontractors and indirect industries will be impacted if these decisions move forward as well.

— Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ)



Rep. Marcia Fudge's Cleveland district is within a few miles of the NASA Glenn Center. Image source: Politic365.

The lack of a clear mission with goals and milestones fails to not only inspire the current NASA workforce, but also fails to inspire the future generations of scientists and astronauts — something that is so critical at this point in American history ... Having no light at the end of the tunnel, whether Mars or the Moon, we will not serve our country well at this time. Just last week, I was at JFK High School in my district, where I was talking to a young ROTC student. I asked him what he wanted to be, and he said, “An astronaut.” I had no clue what to say to him at that point. I wanted to say to him, “Find something else to do, because the chances of becoming an astronaut or a rocket scientist are approaching zero, because NASA is cancelling its human spaceflight plan.”

— Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH)



Rep. Donna Edwards is a former NASA Goddard employee. That space center is located in her county. Image source: Flickr.com

Just in terms of risk, the commercial sector is never going to absorb the kind of risk that it really takes to get these vehicles off the ground. And at the end of the day, the taxpayer will always have to absorb that risk. And if that's true, then why not really take it on by continuing to have NASA fully engaged in human spaceflight because, when it's all said and done, it's going to be on us anyway.

— Rep. Donna Edwards (D-MD)


I think what you're doing is taking a shot in the dark. You have no way of knowing if any commercial entity will ever be able to put a man into orbit, no matter how much money you throw at them. What you're doing is you're taking NASA's manned space program and making it a faith-based initiative.

— Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL)



Rep. Suzanne Kosmas' district included Kennedy Space Center. She was defeated for re-election in November 2010. Image source: Wikipedia.

The job loss in my community, as you know, is devastating based on the impending finality of the Shuttle program, if in fact that is reality ... In the short term, we will be losing a highly skilled and competitive workforce from my community, one that is already suffering from 12% unemployment.

— Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL)



Rep. Rob Bishop's Utah district includes the company that would have manufactured the solid rocket boosters for Constellation. Image source: Salt Lake Tribune.

When you have a President, and you who said you want to encourage kids to become involved in science, math and engineering — or STEM programs — I have to really admit to you, that the Summers of Inspiration is not going to fool a kid in college or in high school or junior high right now who looks at twenty to thirty thousand private sector jobs who are involved in science and math and engineering being given a pink slip, and the kind of chaos that goes into their particular life is not going to encourage anyone else to become involved in this area or any other area. This is a negative impact, it is a negative message, that certainly has no inspiration with it. This is not a program for a bold new path. It's more like managing America's decline.

— Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT)


It's of great concern to me, of course, because I represent Marshall Space Flight. But it's not about jobs. The heart and soul of America is NASA. If we do anything, anything, to detract from that, we're gonna lose ... If the conversation could take place between you and the President, and you could say, “Mr. President, we need $3 billion a year for the next five years to make sure Constellation is on target and on time, and there's $800 billion over here in this stimulus, could you move $3 billion a year over into our space program so that we can be Number One, and we won't have to watch the Chinese land on the Moon from our living rooms?”

— Rep. Parker Griffith (R-AL)



At the time of this hearing, Rep. Bill Posey's district included only Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. Today it also includes the adjacent Kennedy Space Center. Image source: Florida Today.

When the President was campaigning in my county, he promised that he would “close the gap” between Shuttle and Constellation. And Number Two, he would keep America first in space. He didn't close the gap. He made the gap eternal. And low Earth orbit sure as hell isn't keeping us first in space.

— Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL)

I've addressed Mr. Posey's fib many times before ... Barack Obama never promised to close the gap between Shuttle and Constellation. As you can watch here, he said he would close the gap “by speeding the development of the Shuttle's successor.” He didn't say that successor would be Constellation.