Skip to comments.
Report: China to Orbit Human on Oct. 15
yahoo.comnews ^
| October 8, 2003
| Ted Anthony
Posted on 10/08/2003 2:11:08 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
To: Cincinatus' Wife
NASA needs to be restructured and gear up for a partnership with the military if it wants to stay alive. There is at present no apparent or mandated need for a US military manned space capability in space.
The need is to get cargo and humans into space and back, and using the Russians to supply crew transfer capability for the forseable at a reasonable cost is viable option.
To: All
NASA Changes The Focus Of Future ISS Cargo Delivery Plans NASA has decided to dramatically alter its approach to developing new means of cargo transport to the International Space Station (ISS). In a meeting held at NASA headquarters on Tuesday, four companies under contract to study so called "Alternate Access" ("Alt Access") concepts, were given details of NASA's new direction.
The initial idea of Alt Access was to find ways to augment the planned cargo capability for the Space Shuttle, Europe's ATV (Automated Transfer Vehicle), Japan's HTV (H-II Transfer Vehicle) and Russia's Progress vehicles.
NASA now uses the phrase "Assured Access" to supplant "Alternate Access" to describe its interest in new cargo capabilities to the ISS.
The companies originally under contract to participate in the Alt Access effort (funded out to the Space Launch Initiative - SLI) were: Andrews Space and Technology ($2.9 million); Lockheed Martin,($3 million); Boeing ($2.6 million); and Constellation Services International ($2.3 million).
These contracts were set to expire in July 2003. After concerns over this termination were raised in Congress, NASA decided to extend these contracts. $4 million in additional funds was divided among these companies for additional work to be performed in 2003. Data is due to be delivered to NASA no later than the end of December regarding cost and performance concepts. Final contract deliverables are due to NASA In January 2004.
NASA is now interested in having a reliable or "assured" means of delivering cargo to the ISS in the 2011 time frame. "Alternate" means of delivering cargo is no longer the highest driver - making sure that cargo can be delivered is. This "assured" capability is needed to replace the cargo carrying capability of the Space Shuttle which NASA now feels pressured to retire (at least as a vehicle carrying humans) much sooner than it had planned to - and to replace its human transport capabilities with the Orbital Space Plane (OSP).
In essence NASA is now looking to replace the capability of the Shuttle immediately aft of the crew compartment bulkhead - the trailer behind the cab, if you will.
Studies are reportedly under way at Code B at NASA Headquarters which look at the implications of halting shuttle missions sooner rather than later. At Tuesday's meeting NASA made mention of the fact that Congress and the CAIB were indeed calling for NASA to stop flying the Shuttle as soon as possible.
However strong the call NASA hears to stop flying humans aboard Space Shuttles, NASA still sees the need to have a heavy cargo carrying capacity in place - just in case future projects should require it. As such, NASA is still reluctant to do away with the Shuttle system entirely. Alas, NASA has no identified heavy lift requirements after the ISS is completed to actually drive future planning. Discussions are being held at the White House on possible new directions - but so far these discussions are, only discussions.
Providing this Assured Access capability will be run under a separate budget than the OSP - that of the NGLT (Next Generation Launch Technology). Moreover, the additional funds to develop this capability, (certainly to be in the billions) will also have to be found since no mention is made in current budget projects.
Dennis Smith from NASA MSFC as making the rounds on Capitol Hill last week and told Congressional staff that the cost of getting to a CRV (crew return) capability for the OSP - by 2008 - will cost between $11-12 billion. The cost to get the OSP to have a CTV (crew transport) capability atop an EELV (Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle) is still not known - at least Smith has not been able to provide those numbers to Congress.
Attendees at Tuesday's meeting were provided with details of a Design Reference Mission (DRM) which is based upon the needs of the ISS program. The DRM calls for the transport of 48,700 kg (107,140 lbs) in upmass and packing and 34,800 (76,560 lbs.) in downmass and packing every year. There also needs to be the capability to carry at least two ISPRs (international Standard Payload Racks) up and down on any given flight. NASA claims that such a downmass requirement is needed in case there is a shortage of ORU's (Orbital Replacement Units) in the future - things that might no longer be manufactured by the original vendors.
No specific direction has been given by NASA as to whether such an Assured Access cargo capability is - or should be - a derivation of OSP systems - or of existing Shuttle systems. However, it is clear that NASA is looking to replace the a cargo bay of a Shuttle orbiter - and its ability to bring things back to Earth while human transport responsibilities are to be assigned to the OSP.
Also, instead of embracing the notion of multiple capabilities to deliver cargo to the ISS (as was the implication under Alt Access) NASA is now clearly looking in the direction of a capability that would have a single implementation.
To: Fitzcarraldo
There is at present no apparent or mandated need for a US military manned space capability in space. Well, let's see, what is more important and will get congressional funding, searching for bugs on Mars or national security? Hummmmmmmm?
China Waging War on Space-Based Weapons***The PLA also is experimenting with other types of satellite killers: land-based, directed-energy weapons and "micro-satellites" (search) that can be used as kinetic energy weapons. According to the latest (July 2003) assessment by the U.S. Defense Department, China will probably be able to field a direct-ascent anti-satellite system (search) in the next two to six years.
Such weapons would directly threaten what many believe would be America's best form of ballistic-missile defense: a system of space-based surveillance and tracking sensors, connected with land-based sensors and space-based missile interceptors. Such a system could negate any Chinese missile attack on the U.S. homeland.
China may be a long way from contemplating a ballistic missile attack on the U.S. homeland. But deployment of American space-based interceptors also would negate the missiles China is refitting to threaten Taiwan and U.S. bases in Okinawa and Guam. And there's the rub, as far as the PLA is concerned.
Clearly, Beijing's draft treaty to ban deployment of space-based weapons is merely a delaying tactic aimed at hampering American progress on ballistic-missile defense while its own scientists develop effective countermeasures.
What Beijing hopes to gain from this approach is the ability to disrupt American battlefield awareness--and its command and control operations--and to deny the U.S. access to the waters around China and Taiwan should the issue of Taiwan's sovereignty lead to conflict between the two Chinas.
China's military thinkers are probably correct: The weaponization of space is inevitable. And it's abundantly clear that, draft treaties and pious rhetoric notwithstanding, they're doing everything possible to position themselves for dominance in space. That's worth keeping in mind the next time they exhort "peace-loving nations" to stay grounded.***
China's PLA Sees Value in Pre-emptive Strike Strategy [Full Text] WASHINGTON, Aug. 11, 2003 - The military strategy of "shock and awe" used to stun the Iraqi military in the opening campaign of Operation Iraqi Freedom might be used by the Chinese if military force is needed to bring Taiwan back under communist control.
According to the released recently The Annual Report on the Military Power of the People's Republic of China, the country's military doctrine now stresses elements such as "surprise, deception and pre- emption." Furthermore, the report states that Beijing believes that "surprise is crucial" for the success of any military campaign. Taiwan, located off the coast of mainland China, claimed independence from the communist country in 1949. The island has 21 million people and its own democratic government.
China, with 1.3 billion people, claims sovereignty over the tiny island, sees Taiwan as a breakaway province and has threatened to use military force against Taiwan to reunify the country. And China's force against Taiwan could come as a surprise attack.
But "China would not likely initiate any military action unless assured of a significant degree of strategic surprise," according to the report.
The report states that Lt. Gen. Zheng Shenxia, chief of staff of the People's Liberation Army's Air Force and an advocate of pre-emptive action, believes the chances of victory against Taiwan would be "limited" without adopting a pre-emptive strategy.
The report says that China now believes pre-emptive strikes are its best advantage against a technologically superior force. Capt. Shen Zhongchang from the Chinese Navy Research Institute is quoted as saying that "lighting attacks and powerful first strikes will be widely used in the future."
China's new military thinking has evolved over the past decade. PLA observers have been studying U.S. military strategies since the first Gulf War, when they noticed how quickly U.S. forces using state-of-the-art weapons defeated Iraqi forces that in some ways resemble their own.
Since then, the report states the PLA has shifted its war approach from "annihilative," where an army uses "mass and attrition" to defeat an enemy, to more "coercive warfighting strategies."
The PLA now considers "shock power" as a crucial coercion element to the opening phase of its war plans and that PLA operational doctrine is now designed to actively "take the initiative" and "catch the enemy unprepared."
"With no apparent political prohibitions against pre- emption, the PLA requires shock as a force multiplier to catch Taiwan or another potential adversary, such as the United States, unprepared," the report states.
Ways the PLA would catch Taiwan and the U.S. off guard include strategic and operational deception, electronic warfare and wearing down or desensitizing the opponent's political and military leadership. Another objective would be to reduce any indication or warning of impending military action, the report states.
Preparing for a possible conflict with Taiwan and deterring the United States from intervening on Taiwan's behalf is the "primary driver" of China's military overhaul, according to this year's report. Over the course of the next decade the country will spend billions to counter U.S. advances in warfare technology, the report states. [End]
Manned space flight worth the risks By Jake Garn *** HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT is not a luxury. Nor is it a whim, passing fad or eccentric hobby. Make no mistake, human space flight is critical to the future well-being of the United States and, ultimately, the world. The continuation of human space flight is a necessity.
For those who accept that premise, it is vital that we get the space shuttle flying again as safely and as quickly as possible. Our very future may depend on it.
To not understand or acknowledge that Earth is but a stepping stone for humankind is to ignore history, reality and Manifest Destiny. Through age, natural catastrophe or by our own hand, life on Earth has a finite amount of time left. For the human species to go on, we must go out into the far and promising reaches of space. We will do this, or we will eventually perish on the stepping stone adjacent to endless possibilities and salvation.
....Human space flight is not a luxury, and the People's Republic of China, above all others, seems to recognize that. The PRC is poised to launch its first astronauts, and with them launch potentially the most ambitious plan ever for humans in space.
They have their eyes on the moon, Mars and beyond. The question for our country is: Do we cede the future of human space flight, and the future in general, to them or another nation?***
To: Cincinatus' Wife
Well, let's see, what is more important and will get congressional funding, searching for bugs on Mars or national security? Hummmmmmmm? Don't see the need for manned systems in space defense. Great strides can be made in remote operated system for inspection/defense in Earth orbit.
I'm not against manned exploration, but a key factor is expense and given the trend in outsourcing evident in the electronics and aircraft industry, its not a stretch to see Russia continuing to provide taxi survice to low earth orbit.
In the longer term we will have to access the cost and risks of contracting deep space manned systems to Russia.
To: Fitzcarraldo
We better start focusing on the long term.
To: Cincinatus' Wife
We better start focusing on the long term. In the long term, all the engineering jobs will be in Asia, given the present trends, until American and Asian wages reach parity!
I don't like it either, but the driver is cost and if a system can be built for less, the taxpayers and govt. will have the job go to the lowest bidder.
At present, Russia has the most experience with low cost manned space systems. With occasional system upgrades, the Soyuz "taxi" is highly competitive with any Orbital space Place we can devise in a purely American market for the task of ferrying astronauts to and from orbit.
*Orbital Space Plane
To: Cincinatus' Wife
>"For the human species to go on, we must go out into the far and promising reaches of space"
This sounds romantic
and us science fiction fans
always get perked up
hearing rhetoric
like this, but some fans grow up
and ask tough questions
about the harshness
of outer space, about the
underlying thoughts
to living in space.
And the answers appear bad.
Conditions in space
are so extreme that
you might just as well dream of
big "colonies" in
deep ocean trenches --
extreme physics makes both schemes
unlikely, even
though the trenches are
"close" at hand. Extreme physics
trumps romantic dreams.
To: Cincinatus' Wife
I don't feel good about this.
29
posted on
10/08/2003 7:45:18 AM PDT
by
joyful1
To: theFIRMbss
deep ocean trenches -- extreme physics makes both schemes unlikely, even In deep space there are the problems of resources, radiation and reliability. The cost of sending things from Earth is prohibitive, therefore a new infrastructure for almost everything has to be created from scratch on Mars (or beyond) if we're talking about supporting human life for long periods or indefinitely.
To: Cincinatus' Wife
So China will be orbiting a human? I must make sure to stand far from this human so I don't get hit by China as it goes by.
31
posted on
10/08/2003 8:00:38 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I'm not always cranky.)
To: Cincinatus' Wife
To: Petronski
I must make sure to stand far from this human so I don't get hit by China as it goes by.It is too funny. But I think we are going to get hit by China if they take the inititative in space.
To: Cincinatus' Wife
"China's space technology has been created by China itself. We may have started later than Russia and the United States, but it's amazing how fast we've been able to do this," Sina.com quoted Xie Guangxuan, director of the government's China Rocket Design Department, as saying. "We could never have done this without the help of the US president Clinton," Xie Guangxuan said.
To: theFIRMbss
Advantages of settling moon, Mars debated [Full Text] Like a pair of heavyweight fighters, two passionate advocates for human space travel squared off at the World Space Congress on Thursday to debate the merits for settling the moon versus settling Mars.
The moon won in a close contest.
But the sparring before 130 aerospace engineers and scientists meant little. Neither the moon, just three days' travel from the Earth, nor Mars, six months away, is on NASA's or any other space agency's official celestial road map at the moment.
The exercise pitted lunar advocate Paul Spudis, a planetary geologist from the Applied Physics Laboratory at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, against Robert Zubrin, a nuclear engineer and the co-founder of the Mars Society of Denver.
In the end, both men decried the current absence of passion for space travel that had accompanied America's Cold War moon race against the former Soviet Union. The last of NASA's half-dozen Apollo moon landing missions returned to Earth nearly 30 years ago.
Zubrin claimed that spirit would be reiqnited if Mars became the next destination for human explorers.
"We will not be able to inspire another generation of youth to the same degree by presenting the challenge of duplicating what their grandparents did," Zubrin argued.
Spudis proved more convincing, though, as he argued that future settlers have much to learn by returning to the moon first, using it as a resource to test the equipment and the techniques needed for more ambitious missions to Mars.
"Congress is not real impressed by human destiny and never has been," Spudis said. "What I'm suggesting is that by going to the moon, we can use it as a resource." [End]
To: <1/1,000,000th%
, but it's amazing how fast we've been able to do this," Sina.com quoted Xie Guangxuan, director of the government's China Rocket Design Department, as saying. They just "found" billions of dollars worth of R&D lying around during the Clinton adm.
To: Fitzcarraldo
3) We will outsource manned spaceflight hardware production and operations to Russia after the Shuttle is retired. 4. Competing Chinese and Indian moon bases.
To: BlazingArizona
A Chinese-made DF-1 missile stands out among other military and space equipment on display as the Chinese Military Museum. China, whose space ambitions date back to 1970 when a Chang Zheng (Long March) rocket boosted the country's first satellite into orbit, is set to be the third country in the world to launch a manned space flight, expected to happen in mid-October, as the country continues to develop its space exploration plans.(AFP/Frederic J. Brown)
A Chinese newspaper vendor standing near the cover page of a Chinese newspaper with a photo showing the previous Shenzhou IV at a newstand in Beijing Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2003. China will send its first person into space in a single-orbit, 90-minute flight on Oct. 15, a major Chinese Web site reported in one of the most concrete signs yet that the landmark trip is imminent. (AP Photo)
mage taken by cameras on board the Cassini Orbiter spacecraft and released by NASA shows the Earth's Moon. China's space ambitions will not stop at just sending a person into space; the country plans to send astronauts to the moon, a top national defense official said, quoted by Chinese media. (AFP-NASA/File)
To: BlazingArizona
4. Competing Chinese and Indian moon bases. Do they intend to bypass the Space Shuttle / Low Earth Oribit Station phase of space exploration (that took the U.S. 30 years)?
To: Cincinatus' Wife
So---does this vindicate quidam? :-)
40
posted on
10/08/2003 9:14:15 AM PDT
by
Lakeside
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson