New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#3126 Re: Unmanned probes » Mars Science Lab getting cuts ? » 2006-03-26 11:43:34
MSL is going ahead no matter what, there have been cuts in the Mars missions but they are really keen on getting MSL to the red-planet and they have been recently bleeding money out of the rest of the Mars program to make sure this happens. MSL will fly you can be 99.99% sure of that ! However cuts are starting to run deep so anything beyond 2009 or other probes beyond 2011 such as MSR might not be going.
What do you know that we don't? 
The budget for MSL is already at $1327 million and the project has not yet begun development. The track record is not good for expensive missions and a major escalation in cost will kill it. Griffin has shown that he is very serious about cost, and so he should be. This rover will use an entirely new landing technology, will be nuclear powered and more complex than any unmanned lander ever built. On the positive side it does have a lot of heritage from MER and Pathfinder, and a highly experienced team working on it.
BTW MSR is not in the budget plans at all. If it happens it will be 2013 or later. However the AO for the 2011 mission was recently released, details are in this thread, so there does seem to be 'life' after MSL ...
#3127 Re: Liberum Olympia » A wiki that is not a wiki » 2006-03-26 10:53:01
The New Mars Wikipedia does not intend to become yet another bland Wikipedia ripoff. Instead, here you will not only find hard facts about Mars, but also various forms of fiction, poetry, philosophy and much much more.
Given the dominance of Wikipedia can the new mars wiki really compete with hard facts about Mars? This seems unlikely and perhaps not even desirable; if it does it will detract from wikipedia and if it doesn't it will be 'yet another bland Wikipedia ripoff'.
So what can new mars offer that is not already being done in Wikipedia? Fiction, poetry and philosophy. Yes these topics could work, in fact anything that is not "factual" should. There may be another area in between too for soft specialized facts, I've added a List of mars events to the main page. More ideas are needed if this is to work!
#3128 Re: Liberum Olympia » Some issues » 2006-03-26 10:26:36
I don't understand why he can't post here. Looking in to it.
edit: okay I fixed it, I guess I had membership closed to get people to ask to join the usergroup, but that must not have been clear. Sorry.
posting verified :>
#3129 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Falcon 1 Launch Failure » 2006-03-26 10:14:05
"all vehicle systems, including the main engine, thrust vector control, structures, avionics, software, guidance algorithm, etc. were picture perfect" - Elon Musk
#3130 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Falcon 1 Launch Failure » 2006-03-25 08:34:47
Well, if they are a public company, that would kill their stock price.
SpaceX is currently a privately held company
#3131 Re: Unmanned probes » Phoenix - North Pole Region Lander (PHX) » 2006-03-24 09:49:49
Now this thread deserves an update!
Phoenix is the next mission to Mars. It is approved and fully funded and on target for launch 2 Aug 2007.
It is also good to see the Project engineers and scientists blogging read them here
#3132 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Ares I (CLV) - status » 2006-03-24 09:12:11
The NASA contract for who builds the capsule should be awarded by the end of the year at latest. It has taken a little while because of CLV changes (J-2X for SSME, five segment for four segment SRB, moved roll control to interstage), which would influence the capsule's design too. Booster first, capsule second.
That seems backwards. The purpose of the CLV is to launch crew, so logically shouldn't they be first, then their capsule and lastly the booster?
#3133 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Ares I (CLV) - status » 2006-03-24 01:28:00
I hope it's okay to start a new thread as CLV stuff is spread around the forum.
This is a project of vital importance for RTTM and hopefully Mars.
Ed Kyle has an excellent summary of the baseline concept released by NASA 20 March 2006
The new design, though heavier and taller than the old concept, provides a better balance of work between the first and second stages. The design offers potential cost advantages by using a lower-cost upper stage engine, by making the most costly part of the rocket, the upper stage, smaller, and by creating a single five-segment RSRM production line for both the crew launcher and the proposed heavy lift cargo launch vehicle..
#3134 Re: Life on Mars » Meteorite with carbon from Mars » 2006-03-23 22:57:47
#3135 Re: Human missions » The First to Mars - Who will it be? » 2006-03-23 11:03:21
I cast my vote and tipped the result to predict an International Cooperation being the first to Mars. If I could vote in order I would say:
1. International
2. American
3. Russian
4. European
5. China
6. Private
The International group would be very similar to the ISS cooperation namley: led by NASA with specialized contributions from RSA, ESA, JAXA and CSA, perhaps with India and Brasil. And China if they can escape from totalitarian government.
#3136 Re: Human missions » Dr. Griffin's new architecture » 2006-03-22 09:22:01
He has already tried to make some key changes to the VSE or plan-Bush
Visions missions like MSR and TPF look like they will be cut
Hubble will be repaired by Shuttle
Astrobiology and LISA got cut
Griffin will try to close the 2010-2015 gap
CEV Methane engine got dropped
None of those projects/points were mentioned in the VSE. In any case there is nothing wrong and everything right with cancelling bad projects and improving plans. Just because a project was proposed or even begun doesn't make it worth doing.
#3137 Re: Unmanned probes » ST5 microsats » 2006-03-22 08:52:26
NASA TV had some great live shots of the Orbital LC-1011 air launching the Pegasus XL except for the very first moments after ignition when the picture broke up lol. All three ST5 microsats were placed in orbit, the last one 16 mins after launch. Nice job Orbital.
#3138 Re: Unmanned probes » New Horizons - mission to Pluto and the Kupier belt » 2006-03-21 13:12:47
New update from Alan Stern (20 March 2006) with a description of the new in-flight burn control system.
As you probably already know, our third and last post-launch Trajectory Correction Maneuver (TCM-3), a cleanup tweak of about 2.6 miles per hour, was successfully executed on March 9. TCM-3 featured the first in-flight closed-loop burn control, in which the onboard navigation system senses the acceleration of the vehicle and targets the burn cutoff for a precise change in velocity. This worked entirely as advertised, and it's a capability we plan to use in future burns, rather than just conducting the burn with a timer.
....
#3139 Re: Human missions » Outsourcing the VSE and Mars » 2006-03-21 10:54:26
Is there another place in New Mars where space politics can be dumped
Politics is very much part of NASA, if you would like to try and set up a totalitarian newmars where no space politics is discussed and everyone supports plan-Bush then go ahead and email your ideas to the Mods.
Thanks for the advice. BTW just for the record, this is the original text:
Is there another place in New Mars where space politics can be dumped/discussed?
Deliberate misrepresentation is one of the characteristics of a true totalitarian.
#3140 Re: Human missions » Outsourcing the VSE and Mars » 2006-03-21 02:43:25
Is there another place in New Mars where space politics can be dumped/discussed? This section of the forum is described as "Cost, logistics, funding, technology and timeframe for manned missions to Mars" can we please keep it relevant. It takes too much time to wade through pages of confused dribble and even longer to try to respond to it.
#3141 Re: Human missions » Outsourcing the VSE and Mars » 2006-03-20 02:28:18
I wouldn't put it past George Bush to try and outsource NASA overseas. But, if he try it, it will basically be the end of NASA, because congress will refuse fund NASA if it not being both managed and the equipment is being send into space is not built inside the United States. If I were a congressman and George Bush took an attitude that he was going to outsource NASA and he not coming off his position no matter what happens, then I would take the opposing view, that NASA not going to get any funding period. My personal attitudes it, finance American to build space to go into space, but I'm not going to fund other countries to build space to go into space. I live in place that has a heavy concentration of Aero-Space manufacturing companies. We have Lockeed, Boeing, Bell helicopter and other companies like that in the Dallas Fort Worth Area that could manufacture those things. If our congressman agreed to outsource those contracts overseas instead of bring them here, when he comes back to us, we would probably eat him live when we run into him.
One of the benefits of having an organization like NASA, is the fact that you will create good paying jobs in the United States. If George Bush thinks that he can outsource NASA jobs overseas and just give us the bills to pay without having the jobs that go with, well screw that. We would not be getting a return back to the US economy on money that we spend in space and would only excellarate the deficit problem that the United States currently has down hear, which is currently over 600 billion dollars a year.
As bad as the support of the American people is about the space program is, it will get whole lot worse and even I would not support it either. I’m as about pro space as you can get, but I couldn’t support something like that.
Larry,
It's hard to know where to begin with this nonsense and probably masochistic to even try. NASA is a goverment agency tasked with executing policies, such as VSE or aviation safety and is funded by US tax payers. The way NASA's funding is spent is determined mainly by lobbies from US industry and US science. It's a complete misrepresentation to say that a standard bartering deal (as has been done for a long time with ISS/HST and many science missions) is outsourcing. Ask who gains from saying that flying US instruments on an Indian satellite is outsourcing, and you may have the answer. Hint: it's politics.
#3142 Re: Human missions » Outsourcing the VSE and Mars » 2006-03-19 04:16:04
Sometimes outsourcing and the private sector can produce positive results
for example SETI the search for alien life
http://www.seti.housenet.org/comm_main.htmlHowever other times outsoucring is very bad
http://www.informationweek.com/news/sho … on=Columns
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/baldwin/060318Bush went to India to defend outscourcing and they are already outscouring lunar exploration to New Delhi.
What would be the impact of trying to outsource the VSE and Mars ?
Eh? All Bush/DoS/NASA did was the standard deal to share space technology for geopolitical purposes, just as the US did with Europe for decades and more recently with Russia in the ISS project. US scientists also got more instruments flown. There is no outsourcing of lunar exploration to India lol.
#3143 Re: Human missions » Is the 'VSE' getting dimmer ? » 2006-03-19 03:34:46
Then came Bush-Jnr's plan, his 'vision' speech was something of a surprise as the man had never showed much interest in space before then. During the recent union address the phrase "NASA" didn't didn't cross Bush's lips once.
I hope the VSE isn't dimming !
but the evidence is there :
MTO is dead, TPF delayed, NASA has dropped the Methane-Engine from CEV, Shuttle delayed again, MSR looks cut, outrigger Keck telescopes are gone....
I don't think there's a need for me to continue with the list of evidence ?
VSE was never much to do with Bush; it was created by NASA and the space industry and community, using the opportunity of the Columbia accident to change direction from a passive science based agency to an active exploratory one.
MTO, MSR and TPF were all just vague plans and concepts, NASA has tons of them. The changeout of the CH4/LOX engine was an engineering decision to reduce risk and development time, it makes good sense as it is not needed for RTTM. Mars is still just as far away but the ESAS elements are now starting to be developed (CEV/CLV including the 5-stage SRB that wil be used on the HLV). Griffin has to make funds available for this work and there are lots of other demands for the budget .. STS/ISS and of course the *expanding* science program. Something had to give, unless the scientists can justify (or extract more money from congress) further expansion of their budget growth will be stopped until the STS has completed the ISS and been retired. Already that program is being zeroed out ... $12 billion has been cut from it. The scientists have controlled NASA for too long, if the STS prgram has to die, is it so unreasonable to ask the science program to delay their growth? As long as the budget holds, the VSE is safe.
#3144 Re: Unmanned probes » Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) » 2006-03-18 09:45:34
According to the MRO arrival press release, test images should have been taken on orbits 4 and 5 around March 14. Aerobraking is due to start about March 30.
Sorry about having to full in the gaps but there's no news at all from JPL or NASA since insertion.
#3147 Re: Martian Chronicles » Esquire said what......??? » 2006-03-18 03:19:23
Links would be helpful Robert
#3148 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Rocket Monopoly - United Launch Alliance » 2006-03-18 03:15:05
WASHINGTON, March 17 (Reuters) - A plan by Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research) and Boeing Co. (BA.N: Quote, Profile, Research) to merge their rocket-launch work for the U.S. government has received the Defense Department's conditional backing, defense consultant Loren Thompson said on Friday
#3149 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) - ESA ISS cargo carrier » 2006-03-17 13:31:02
At the moment the ATV does not need to fly there is nothing on the ISS for it to service a progress capsule is perfect for the supply run.
At the moment with the small crew compliment and no science modules the ATV would just be a supply run overkill. ESA just does not have to rush now does it.
A moot point as ATV has had many technical problems with its valve-actuators, solar arrays and flight software, so it can't fly anyway.
#3150 Re: Human missions » What shall I do with a billion dollars? » 2006-03-17 13:23:35
Suppose Bill Gates has a bout of temporary insanity, and offers me a billion dollars to accelerate human expansion into space. A billion dollars isn't a lot for space - but it isn't pocket change either...
Suggestions? Just in case Bill calls?
Phone Bill's business partner Paul Allen and ask him, his $20 million investment in SpaceShip One was very productive.