Hat Rick's Blog

Failure to Launch

2010-08-11T08:27:00.000-07:00

Dr. Stephen Hawking has once again emphasized that humanity's future is in the exploration and colonization of outer space. It's partly because of Dr. Hawking's repeated statements that I have such strong beliefs about our urgent need to expand further into the universe.

I think that this country emphasizes trivialities far more than it should. Instead of entertainment news programs on television, for example, there should be documentaries that show how vast remain the frontiers of knowledge, and what greatness awaits us if we maintain a pioneering spirit.

But both the right and the left have failed us in this respect. The right tells us that we should let capitalistic imperatives determine the aims of progress -- for example, what shows survive on television. The left tells us that science is not as important as it seems and that mankind's technology is the cause of great harm. No wonder NASA is left to fend for itself.

This is not the future I wanted for myself or posterity -- a future of scientific muddling and mere consumerist pandering. While there are great minds and great discoveries made daily in our fine laboratories and universities, and in research institutes of all kinds far and wide, we live in an era when Earth remains the primary, and apparently only, concern. From the standpoint of our species' future in space, or perhaps our future of any kind as a species, more's the pity, indeed.

Kirk. James Kirk.

2010-07-24T13:45:00.001-07:00

Is James T. Kirk the 23d Century version of James Bond?

A recent article suggests that the new cinematic version of the Star Trek icon should be more in keeping with a "bad boy" image infused with humor. But how faithful would this be to the original Kirk? Does this remind anyone of the perennial Bond debate over Connery versus Moore? Who, exactly, should James Kirk, once described as a stack of books on legs, be?

A valid consideration is to make Kirk more in keeping with cultural mores. Today's action hero isn't devoted to books as much as to street smarts and derring-do. And if you think about it, most action heroes even in the past were two-fisted hell-raisers as much as not.

Let's compare Kirk to the cinematic James Bond, for example. Connery's early James Bond was nothing if not a slightly roguish bar-brawler who, however, had the consummate appearance of polish and intellect. I'm sure Bond was, in fact, quite intelligent, but his exploits were not celebrated for their Sherlockianism. The literary Bond might have even less disinclined toward physical action.

The same might be said for Indiana Jones, who was, in fact, a college professor. Quite the intellect, he, but again, the fun in his movies is expressed other than through implementing strategem through his wit and more toward strafing the villain with his whip.

What we should keep in mind, of course, is that Kirk is a much more complex character than those described above. Kirk is at all times in actual command of a starship and all hands aboard; he is looked up to by hundreds as a leader and must stand as a moral example. At times, he must be a diplomat representing the interests of billions -- an ambassador, or a President.

There is therefore a balance that must be struck between Kirk-as-Bond and Kirk-as-President. The cinematic Bond must never make us lose sight of the fact that Kirk, even in this universe, is far more than just a bad-boy-made-good. He is, in fact, a good-boy-turned-bad-boy-turned-paragon -- something more difficult to convey, but far truer to his original character than anything lesser can service.

America and Trek

2010-07-05T16:17:00.000-07:00

Star Trek is one of the few cultural phenomena of its kind and scope that goes beyond nationalism and tries to apply human ideals to the entire world. Like anything else in a deterministic universe, it is a product of its American origin. That fact is a credit to America.

It is true that the United States itself does not exist in a vacuum. Its ideals are also found in countries that sparked the Enlightenment, and in cultures, East and West, that have shared similar values, such as respect for life, compassion, automony, and kindness toward others. Contrast our highest values as a culture with that of totalitarian cults, for example, of whatever scope, place and time, and the difference is unmistakable.

To quote Kirk in Star Trek VI, some (Francis Fukuyama, for instance) say that we have reached the end of history, but we haven't run out of history quite yet. History abides. We make it, because we are a beneficiary of it. The historical threads that have built our civilization, and that has allowed this country to spread a positive influence across the world, are maintained by the values our country, and others, continue to express.

We may falter, and indeed we have. But the good thing about the universe is that for all intents and purposes, time is infinite. Every moment is a promise of hope.

America, and Trek, tell us that it is up to us to promote that hope and make it real, through word and deed, in every moment that lies before us, in the undiscovered country.

Neil Armstrong, James Lovell, and Eugene Cernan Denounce Proposed Fate of Constellation

2010-04-13T17:13:00.000-07:00

Here is the reported text of a letter from Neil Armstrong, the first human being on the Moon, and two other Apollo commanders:

The United States entered into the challenge of space exploration under President Eisenhower’s first term, however, it was the Soviet Union who excelled in those early years. Under the bold vision of Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon, and with the overwhelming approval of the American people, we rapidly closed the gap in the final third; of the 20th century, and became the world leader in space exploration.

America’s space accomplishments earned the respect and admiration of the world. Science probes were unlocking the secrets of the cosmos; space technology was providing instantaneous world wide communication; orbital sentinels were helping man understand the vagaries of nature. Above all else, the people around the world were inspired by the human exploration of space and the expanding of man’s frontier. It suggested that what had been thought to be impossible was now within reach. Students were inspired to prepare themselves to be a part of this new age. No government program in modern history has been so effective in motivating the young to do “what has never been done before.”

World leadership in space was not achieved easily. In the first half century of the space age, our country made a significant financial investment, thousands of Americans dedicated themselves to the effort, and some gave their lives to achieve the dream of a nation. In the latter part of the first half century of the space age, Americans and their international partners focused primarily on exploiting the near frontiers of space with the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station.

As a result of the tragic loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia in 2003, it was concluded that our space policy required a new strategic vision. Extensive studies and analysis led to this new mandate: meet our existing commitments, return to our exploration roots, return to the moon, and prepare to venture further outward to the asteroids and to Mars. The program was named 'Constellation'. In the ensuing years, this plan was endorsed by two Presidents of different parties and approved by both Democratic and Republican congresses.

The Columbia Accident Board had given NASA a number of recommendations fundamental to the Constellation architecture which were duly incorporated. The Ares rocket family was patterned after the Von Braun Modular concept so essential to the success of the Saturn 1B and the Saturn 5. A number of components in the Ares 1 rocket would become the foundation of the very large heavy lift Ares V, thus reducing the total development costs substantially. After the Ares 1 becomes operational, the only major new components necessary for the Ares V would be the larger propellant tanks to support the heavy lift requirements.

The design and the production of the flight components and infrastructure to implement this vision was well underway. Detailed planning of all the major sectors of the program had begun. Enthusiasm within NASA and throughout the country was very high.

When President Obama recently released his budget for NASA, he proposed a slight increase in total funding, substantial research and technology development, an extension of the International Space Station operation until 2020, long range planning for a new but undefined heavy lift rocket and significant funding for the development of commercial access to low earth orbit.

Although some of these proposals have merit, the accompanying decision to cancel the Constellation program, its Ares 1 and Ares V rockets, and the Orion spacecraft, is devastating.

America’s only path to low Earth orbit and the International Space Station will now be subject to an agreement with Russia to purchase space on their Soyuz (at a price of over 50 million dollars per seat with significant increases expected in the near future) until we have the capacity to provide transportation for ourselves. The availability of a commercial transport to orbit as envisioned in the President’s proposal cannot be predicted with any certainty, but is likely to take substantially longer and be more expensive than we would hope.

It appears that we will have wasted our current ten plus billion dollar investment in Constellation and, equally importantly, we will have lost the many years required to recreate the equivalent of what we will have discarded.

For The United States, the leading space faring nation for nearly half a century, to be without carriage to low Earth orbit and with no human exploration capability to go beyond Earth orbit for an indeterminate time into the future, destines our nation to become one of second or even third rate stature. While the President's plan envisages humans traveling away from Earth and perhaps toward Mars at some time in the future, the lack of developed rockets and spacecraft will assure that ability will not be available for many years.

Without the skill and experience that actual spacecraft operation provides, the USA is far too likely to be on a long downhill slide to mediocrity. America must decide if it wishes to remain a leader in space. If it does, we should institute a program which will give us the very best chance of achieving that goal.

Source: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/92035-neil-armstrong-criticizes-obamas-space-plan

The House May Oppose Proposed NASA Budget

2010-02-26T06:02:00.001-08:00

President Obama's proposed budget for NASA is encountering significant opposition in House committee hearings and may not pass as is.

See:

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20100226/NEWS02/2260327/1006/news01/Budget+plan+may+not+pass+committee+as+is

Hope and Nobility

2010-02-15T09:21:00.000-08:00

What is hope? What is nobility?

Nobility? It's not the fake kind with titles, but the real kind that actually matters. Nobility of the spirit -- nobility in the sense of that rareness of human nature that rises about the common, the ordinary, the mundane, the everyday.

With all due apologies to every glittering generality that has ever been the moral of any film, and any tale that has ever been told of which Hollywood and Broadway and Stratford-upon-Avon have been exponents.... And with every bit of good faith from the majestic heights of the Fugues of Bach and the Symphonies of Beethoven and the glorious sounds of Copland and Gershwin, and the speeches of Jefferson and Lincoln and Kennedy and King....

With all that I ask, humbly, that may we remember:

Absolute perfection is for the Borg, and for the angels, but not for us.

We are told to fight for what is right, to fight for justice, to fight against the dying of the light, to give of ourselves, to never surrender and never retreat except where to do so lets us fight another day. We are told that love is greater than war, that humanity will conquer adversity, that hate must be defeated by love, that in the Manichean opposition of virtue and vice we must make our choice, and that this choice is ours to make of our free will.

In these troubled times, we are called to choose wisely, to give the devil his due, but no more, and above all, to have hope.

Where the future is concerned, I choose to have hope. For it is the noblest trait of all.

Supporting Project Constellation

2010-02-14T13:06:00.000-08:00

In addition to writing and calling your Congressional Representatives and Senators, you may also participate in websites dedicated to the support of Project Constellation. One such website is run by Michael and Denise Okuda, who are longtime supporters of the space program. In addition to his highly respected work in affiliation with the Star Trek franchise, Mr. Okuda has designed the official NASA emblems for Project Constellation.

The link for their website is:

http://web.me.com/michaelokuda/CONSTELLATION/GO_BOLDLY.html

Please note that this Blog is not affiliated in any way with the Okudas or the above website.

An Open Letter to NASA

2010-02-14T13:03:00.000-08:00

NOTE: Please feel free to use this letter for your own efforts to support Project Constellation. It may also be appropriately modified for use in letters to the President, Members of Congress, and Senators.

February 14, 2010

The Honorable Charles Bolden
Administrator
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
300 E Street, SW
Washington, DC 20546-0001

Dear Administrator Bolden:

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the Agency's reported actions that have the effect of terminating Project Constellation.

For the last five decades, an enduring national consensus has been achieved that the United States must lead in the development and implementation of the means to send astronauts to explore outer space. President Kennedy's clarion call to land a man on the Moon before the decade was out resulted in the realization of mankind's long-held dream of setting foot on another world. Regardless of political party, millions of Americans and billions of others around the world stand in awe of NASA's achievements showing that our civilization, and indeed our species, need not be limited to Earth. The investment in technology developed in support of our manned efforts have yielded untold tangible benefits to our economy through basic science followed programmically by innovation and invention. For a time, the promise of exploiting the infinite resources of the universe loomed large in the national consciousness.

Recently, however, this promise has been betrayed as decisions by successive Presidential Administrations have kept NASA limited to low-Earth orbit. Resources that could have been productively used to extend the reach of humanity have instead been diverted to the construction of a space station whose utility has been widely questioned. After the termination of the Apollo program and until the development of vehicles for Project Constellation, spearheaded by NASA and supported by a bipartisan Congressional consensus for five years, the United States now lacks any means of enabling astronauts to break the bonds of Earth orbit.

While promised programs to develop "next generation" propulsion technologies may appear attractive, merely increasing the outlay for research and development toward their realization is a far cry from the actual construction of human-rated vehicles, such as the Orion and Ares, based on mature technologies already developed and successfully implemented for the Space Transportation System. As several former astronauts and many others with an abiding interest and expertise in our national objectives in space have observed, cancelling Project Constellation in the hopes that such "next generation" programs will yield results represents a giant step backward from what has already been achieved.

On behalf of millions of others who share my sentiments, I strongly urge that you heed the calls of Members of Congress and others to stop the damage to Project Constellation before it's too late.

While most Americans would agree with the need for financial responsibility in the expenditure of Federal funds, plans to terminate Project Constellation in favor of new objectives are not the way to achieve it. Our future depends on continuing the path toward success represented by Project Constellation, Ares, and Orion.

Thank you.

New NASA Would Not Be Worthy of a Great Nation

2010-02-13T00:25:00.000-08:00

Seeking a Human Flightflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation

The Augustine Commission, whose above-entitled work is cited by the Obama Administration in attempting to justify the cancellation of Project Constellation, noted in its final report, in relevant part:

"A human landing and extended human presence on Mars stand prominently above all other opportunities for exploration. [...] Mars is unquestionably the most scientifically interesting destination in the inner solar system. It possesses resources which can be used for life support and propellants. If humans are ever to live for long periods with intention of extended settlement on another planetary surface, it is likely to be on Mars. But Mars is not an easy place to visit with existing technology and without a substantial investment in resources."

The Commission then extensively examined options for human spaceflight beyond low-Earth orbit, settling on the Flexible Path option, which at a minimum preserved the Orion aspect of Project Constellation.

Under President Obama's proposal, Orion, along with the rest of Project Constellation, would be cancelled.

It is worth noting that the cancellation would change NASA's direction yet again despite substantial developmental costs already expended toward implementation of Project Constellation. Although it said that sunk costs can only be one factor to be considered, the Commission warned against constant changes in NASA's objectives:

"Significant space achievements require continuity of support over many years. One way to assure that no successes are achieved is to continually introduce change. Changes to ongoing programs should be made only for compelling reasons. NASA and its human spaceflight program are in need of stability, having been redirected several times in the last decade."

The Commission warned that changes to Project Constellation carried significant risks, and, among other consequences, entail the loss of existing workforce resources and human expertise. Significantly, despite its concerns about the escalating costs of Ares I, it flatly noted that terminating Ares I would cause programmatic disruption.

Alternatives to Project Constellation?

The Commission's report emphasized that a super-heavy lifter with a rating similar to Ares V would be required. By contrast, the President's proposal omits any programmatic funding for any such lifter other than a vague aspiration toward "next-generation" technologies.

The Commission's recommendations on commercial spaceflight made no mention of private provision of such launchers, and for good reason: Most of those knowledgeable in the field admit that commercial spaceflight cannot operate beyond low-Earth orbit and, moreover, have no generally recognized investment interest to in doing so. Development of an Ares V-class launcher would have no basis in private industry. Even the claims of a private industry lobbying group draw the line at going beyond a few hundred miles beyond the Earth:

"We have a tremendous opportunity here to jump-start private activity in low-Earth orbit that will further lower the cost of access to space and unleash the economic potential of space long promised."

Even aside from considerations relating to super-heavy lift vehicles, commercial options for low-Earth orbital operations, the Commission noted, should be pursued only if there is accelerated development toward a human-rated heavy-lift vehicle.

Contrary to the Commission's findings, the Administration's proposal for NASA, however, contains no such acceleration and in fact would terminate the Ares program without providing for any substitute.

The Commission also noted that a commonly cited alternative to Project Constellation, reliance on the Defense Department's Delta IV and Atlas V vehicles (also known as Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles, or EELV's), incurred significant costs:

"Because of these realignment costs, the EELV-heritage super heavy does not become available significantly sooner than the Ares V or Shuttle-derived families of launchers. The transition to this way of doing business would come at the cost of cutting deeply into a the internal NASA capability to develop and operate launchers, both in terms of skills and facilities."

Nor does the Administration's proposal contain any funding for even this alternative.

Not Worthy

In short, President Obama's budgetary proposal would cancel NASA's means to achieve the goals cited by the Augustine Commission. It would seek private means of achieving low-Earth orbital operations but essentially delay programmatic commitment toward any human spaceflight beyond that threshold.

If the Administration had its way, NASA would no longer have in mind the objectives the Commission saw were worthy of a great nation.

Sources consulted:

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/396093main_HSF_Cmte_FinalReport.pdf

http://www.commercialspaceflight.org/?cat=27

Text of Letter from Members of Congress to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden

2010-02-12T23:53:00.001-08:00

(Source: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=33477 with minor editing.)

February 12, 2010

The Honorable Charles Bolden
Administrator
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
300 E Street, SW
Washington, DC 20546-0001

Dear Administrator Bolden:

We are writing to express strong concern about NASA Headquarters actions and comments regarding the Constellation programs, the programs which together form the human spaceflight programs authorized by Congress in 2005 and in 2008, under Republican and Democrat control, respectively.

As you are aware, the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 10 contained bill language prohibiting NASA from terminating current programs which are part of Constellation and also from initiating new programs. The clear purpose of including such unusual language was to give Congressional authorizers and appropriators, indeed Congress as a whole, an opportunity to examine the Administration's budget proposal for FY11.

NASA officials provided several Congressional briefings during the week of February 1. NASA officials have also commented to luncheon groups and to the media about the new plan proposed by the President. We have become aware of the formation by NASA Headquarters of at least five "tiger teams," the job of which is to shut down Constellation and to transition to the new program. We understand that those teams are already strongly engaged at the Center level. Additionally, we are aware of NASA's approval, then disapproval on January 23, of at least one major contract related to Ares I, which impacts many subcontractors as well as the prime contractor of that particular contract. Finally, there are disturbing reports of verbal instructions to Program Managers to begin the shutdown of Constellation programs.

During one briefing to Congressional staff, the phrase "setting aside" was used, with regard to FY10 Constellation funds. NASA officials have also been fairly open about their desire to use FY10 funds to help meet shutdown costs which are a standard part of large, multi-year contracts.

We are compelled to remind you that setting aside funds may be a direct violation of the Impoundment Control Act (as well as of the appropriations language for FY10). That act resulted from the refusal of the Nixon Administration to allot funds to activities specified by Congress. According to GAO, the Act was also used to confirm Congressional authority at least twice during the Administration of President George W. Bush.

As you are aware, the series of contracts required to maintain a program such as Ares and Orion require long-lead agreements as far as 36 months into the future. The disruption, therefore, of those contracts can be viewed, with strong legitimacy, as a termination of a program.

The termination of the Constellation programs is a proposal by the President, but it is Congress who will accept or reject that proposal. In the meantime, FY10 funds for the Constellation programs are to be spent as if the program will continue -that is the clear intent of the specific language in the Consolidated Appropriations Act. Finally, it is important to note that premature disruptions of the Constellation program contracts by NASA Headquarters may result in the dissolution of critical engineering teams in a matter of a few weeks, and that significant restart costs and program delays may also result from that if Congress decides to continue the Constellation programs. Such unnecessary costs created by NASA Headquarters will result in those costs having to be absorbed by other budget accounts and programs within NASA, including headquarters. Likewise, if Congress approves the President's new plan, the appropriate funds for contract shutdowns will be provided in the FY11 appropriations acts, not from FY10 funds.

Given these facts, we ask that you immediately cease all activity of the tiger teams. We understand from the Chief Financial Officer at NASA that the safety criteria list for the new "commercial" programs proposed by NASA (in the new sense of being the primary means of human spaceflight) are still weeks away from being finished, and that those criteria have an enormous impact on the real budget cost of the President's new plan. We urge you to accelerate the reports to Congress regarding this plan.

Secondly, we urge you to reconfirm the approval of the major contract which you placed on hold on January 23. This plan, we understand, is a routine update of work plans last revised in 2008; it is needed for Constellation work to proceed in a normal way per FY10 funding plans.

Finally, we ask for your personal assurance that there will be no instructions to contractors or to Center Directors to slow down or to terminate contracts related to the Constellation programs. Most reassuring would be a letter from you to the Center Directors, and a copy of that provided to the House Science and Technology Committee and to the House Committee on Appropriations.

We ask for your response no later than March 1. We believe these matters are crucial to the viability of the U.S. Human Spaceflight program. We also wish to point out that the bipartisan support for the Constellation plan may be extremely difficult to repeat for a new plan, even among long-time Congressional supporters, not to mention Members who are under strong grassroots pressure to support other programs as a higher funding priority than NASA. We support NASA missions and look forward to working with you during the hearings process and the FY11 appropriations process, as well as a possible Space Act bill this year.

Sincerely,

Cc: Rep. Alan Mollohan, Chairman, Committee on Appropriations Rep. Frank Wolf, Ranking Member, Committee on Appropriations

Signers: Robert Aderholt (R-AL) Ralph Hall(R-TX) Spencer Bachus (R-AL) Jo Bonner (R-AL) Pete Sessions (R-TX) Gene Green (D-TX) Steven LaTourette (R-OH) Anli Cao (R-LA) Bill Posey (R-FL) Michael McCaul (R-TX) Ken Calvert (R-CA) Kevin Brady (R-TX) Mike Rogers (R-AL) Ron Paul (R-TX) Charles Gonzalez (D-TX) Al Green (D-TX) Mike Coffman (R-TX) Steven Rothman (D-NJ) John Culberson (R-TX) Pete Olson (R-TX) Parker Griffith (R-AL) Lamar Smith (R-TX) Bobby Bright (D-AL) Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) Rob Bishop (R-UT) Artur Davis (D-AL) Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL)

Congressman Claims NASA's Constellation Letter Broke the Law

2010-02-12T23:32:00.000-08:00

NASA's cancellation of a call for solicitation of ground services in support of Project Constellation was a violation of federal law, according to Member of the House of Representatives whose district includes the Kennedy Space Center in Orlando, Florida.

According to the Orlando Sentinel, Congressman Bill Posey said today in a press statement, "The Administration’s unilateral decision to cancel contracts associated with the Constellation program, absent Congressional consent is a direct violation of the law and of Congressional intent."

Source: http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/2010/02/nasa-cancels-ksc-contract-prompting-angry-response.html

NASA's Bolden Warned to Preserve Constellation

2010-02-12T23:15:00.000-08:00

A letter written by Members of the House of Representatives has warned NASA Administrator Charles Bolden to stop damaging Project Constellation, according to a recent article in the Orlando Sentinel. Bolden was told that instructions that have the effect of terminating Constellation may be unlawful.

"In the four page letter, made available to the Orlando Sentinel, the members said they were disturbed by reports that NASA was working behind the scenes to turn off contracts for Constellation’s Ares I rocket and Orion capsule in violation of Congressional wishes," the article said.

The letter stated that federal law specifically prohibits the termination of any NASA program, including Constellation, without the approval of Congress. Further, if the President attempts to do so by unilaterally withholding funds, he may be in violation of a law passed by Congress during the Nixon Administration, the article continued.

The letter was signed by:

Robert Aderholt, R-AL
John Culbertson R-TX
Ralph Hall, R- TX
Pete Olson, R-TX
Spencer Bachus, R-AL
Parker Griffith, R-AL
Jo Bonner, R-AL
Lamar Smith, R-TX
Pete Sessions, R-TX
Bobby Bright, D-AL
Gene Green, D-TX
Jason Chaffetz, R-UT
Rob Bishop, R-UT
Steven LaTourette, R-OH
Anh Cao, R-LA
Artur Davis, D-AL
Bill Posey, R-FL
Suzanne Kosmas, D-FL
Michael McCaul, R-TX
Ken Calvert, R-CA
Kevin Brady, R-TX
Charles Gonzalez, D-TX
Al Green, D-TX
Mike Coffman, R-TX
Steven Rothman, D-NJ
Mike Rogers, R-AL
Ron Paul, R-TX

Source:

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/2010/02/reps-tells-nasas-bolden-stop-damaging-constellation.html

The Eagle and the Falcon ... and the Rest

2010-02-06T19:42:00.000-08:00

Now that NASA is apparently giving up on the human spaceflight business and turning it over to private industry, it bears questioning how some of our most promising aerospace companies are actually faring.

I have long held a fascination for Boeing, whose 747 (originally developed in anticipation of an order for a large military airlifter) long held the title, "Queen of the Skies." Before that, its 707 revolutionized air travel. How is Boeing doing these days?

The picture is decidedly mixed. Boeing's 787, the Dreamliner, is a success -- thus far. It is the most successful new airliner model in recent memory, with over eight hundred orders to date. Airbus's proposed competitor, the A350, was beaten -- badly -- and the European consortium has had to redesign it into the A350XWB. The latter is, at best, a "paper airplane," and Airbus, knee-deep in its A400 airlifter fiasco, simply doesn't have the funds to assure its success. However, the Dreamliner's introduction has been beset with delays which have cost Boeing billions.

Furthermore, Boeing's other new aircraft, the 747-8 Intercontinental, is underperforming in its passenger version. Boeing's corporate blogger, Randy Tinseth, has admitted that the business case for the Intercontinental is not what was anticipated. Airbus's A380 may have its problems, but beating the Intercontinental in orders is not one of them. The superjumbo already has over 200 orders. The Intercontinental has 32. It's the freighter version of the 747-8 that's garnered the lion's share of orders, and it's the freighter version that can be deemed successful. But the passenger version is a great disappointment, and up until recently, it had had only one customer.

What about Lockheed Martin? One would think that America's largest defense contractor and the prime contractor for Project Constellation's Orion spaceship must benefit from privatization? But in fact, one of its officials has castigated the cancellation of Project Constellation, whose test flight of Ares I, which was to have carried Orion into space, was recently hailed as a great success.

SpaceX, a newcomer to the industry, has potential. It's sent an unmanned rocket into low-Earth orbit. And yet, the company's most promising design, the Falcon 9, is unproven. Even were it to launch successfully, the best the booster could currently do is loft a pressurized cargo container into space to supply the International Space Station. The capsule, known as the Dragon, would require extensive modifications and testing in order to carry astronauts -- akin to transforming a semi trailer into a bus, except that the bus would have to fly in space.

The Europeans and the Japanese can build orbital cargo ships, and, what's more, they have flown them. America has stood for far more, and it seems clear that it ought not abdicate its key responsibility to keep pushing the envelope of manned spaceflight. But now, under President Obama's plan, it has.

Some say that private space stations are the wave of the future, and to this effect, Bigelow Aerospace has sent a gigantic pressurized balloon into orbit, and has the video of floating ephemera within to prove it. That "space station," however, is far from having been proved habitable.

Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic is often cited as the model of private space development. Although I never doubted that SpaceShipOne, the prototype for its tourist ships, could achieve suborbital flight, orbital spaceflight is far beyond its ken. The company's partner, Scaled Composites, deserves praise for its success, but in fairness, NASA and the Soviet Union did much the same thing in the early 1960's. Virgin Galactic is merely a sad reminder that if President Obama has his way, the 21st Century version of NASA would no longer be able to do even this, since the NASA spacecraft capable of such flight would no longer exist.

No private spacecraft has ever achieved manned orbital flight and no private designs capable of such flight have ever left the drawing boards, let alone Earth.

To justify cancelling NASA's existing programs, the President's plan offers vague promises that the agency will seed technologies that will shorten travel time among the stars. But no such technologies are on the horizon. Breakthroughs rarely obey the requirements of political rhetoric: King Canute cannot command the invention of hyperdrive and physical reality is no respecter of hot air. In the field of manned spaceflight, President Obama's "vision" for NASA is amounts to throwing away billions in sunk funds in order to chase a dream amounting to nothing we can reliably foresee. The odds are that his latest proposal will result in little other than years or decades of delay -- all while the rest of the world races ahead.

Will Private Enterprise Destroy Human Spaceflight?

2010-02-06T17:59:00.000-08:00

The question above may seem audacious, but in view of the Wall Street meltdown that has dragged the world into the Great Recession, it is worth asking.

President Obama, channeling the Republican right wing and with the enthusiasm of a new acolyte, urges us to trust private enterprise to save the aims of spaceflight hitherto entrusted to NASA.

Some say that American industry has the expertise. Who, they ask, actually builds our spaceships but companies like Boeing and Lockheed Martin?

It is hard to argue against the fact that private enterprise has the expertise to build the hardware needed for spaceflight. The point is, however, that, private enterprise doesn't have the will to build the hardware needed for the most ambitious goals of human spaceflight.

Added to that is the recent record of private enterprise, which is far from infallible. Boeing, that much-vaunted icon of private aerospace, is more than two years behind on the Dreamliner. After making promise after promise, Boeing may have to pay billions in "make good" or compensatory payments as a result of numerous delays.

Boeing has also apparently made the wrong call on the Boeing 747-8 Intercontinental, whose orders lag far behind those of the Airbus A380.

Cumulatively, this is a mistake that may cost Boeing tens of billions of dollars in lost sales.

Boeing is a monopoly in the manufacture of large commercial airliners in the United States, having opportunistically assimilated its last remaining rival, McDonnell Douglas, in 1997. The premier commercial airliner manufacturer just a short while ago, Boeing is now falling behind Airbus, the European consortium, which until the last decade was a distant second in both orders and manufacturing.

Defense manufacturers such as Boeing and Lockheed Martin (the largest defense company in the world) have incurred billions in cost overruns over the years. Lockheed Martin's F-35 is derided as overbudget and underperforming, and even as a jack of all trades and therefore master of none. Even the F-22 Raptor, easily the best fighter aircraft in existence, was terminated by the Obama Administration partly on the basis of cost.

As I think upon it, the so-called "efficiency" of private enterprise rarely fails to incur jocularity. Prior to the Great Recession of this date, the self-avowed greatness of Wall Street should have yielded similar mirth. Much to the detriment of the world, the joke that is Wall Street is now much more tragic than not.

The economy was nearly destroyed by Wall Street greed and the machinations of private enterprise. The question now becomes, can NASA be far behind?

Destroying NASA in Order to Save It

2010-02-06T16:08:00.000-08:00

Many who may be inclined to support the so-called "privatization" of space take the view that private enterprise will find a way to get to space much more cheaply than any government program possibly could.

If so, then I have one question: Why hasn't it already?

Some may mention with pride the accomplishments of Virgin Galactic, for example. Shouldn't they and the successes of Bigelow Aerospace be seen as harbingers of a new era?

To the extent that private enterprise has ventured into spaceflight, it is, in the case of the collaboration of Scaled Composites with Virgin Galactic, in large measure because NASA did it first -- with billions of dollars of research and development (R & D) and decades of effort having already been invested.

Virgin Galactic, however, didn't need money from NASA. Why, then, deprive NASA of funding for Project Constellation on the pretext that private enterprise needs it?

To take the libertarian viewpoint, the private enterprise model really doesn't need public funding for the objectives it has it mind.

And those objectives have nothing to do with the objectives that, until now, Constellation has served. Those objectives are far loftier, far more ambitious, and far more compelling than space tourism. They are also far riskier and far more expensive. Sending human beings more than 200,000 miles away to land on the Moon is orders of magnitude more complex than sending a tourist vehicle on a ballistic trajectory or, in the case of SpaceX, even sending cargo capsules to the ISS.

The key is to realize that Project Constellation was, in essence, the ultimate R & D effort, and it served the same function that NASA's original Mercury-Gemini-Apollo programs did on a much vaster and interplanetary scale. Terminating the Mercury, Gemini, or Apollo programs would have made it much more difficult, if not impossible, for the SpaceX's of the world to exist today. Likewise, to the extent that it is terminated, the R & D toward Constellation's implementation that would give rise to future versions of SpaceX would no longer exist.

The new budget for NASA effectively terminates the ultimate R & D program on the very rationale that R & D should be increased. Apropos of an era in which Afghanistan is turning into a Vietnam, Obama is destroying NASA in order to save it.

To Boldly Mislead....

2010-02-06T15:06:00.000-08:00

Whom does NASA Administrator Charles Bolden think he's fooling? President Obama's new NASA budget is betrayal of our space program. For any serious observer, the termination of Constellation means that hardware will be replaced by hot air.

Let's look at the facts.

Bolden's position is that NASA has not abandoned human spaceflight. But the reason he claims this is true is that, under Obama's plan, there will still be astronauts who will circle our planet in low-Earth orbit. There will still be a space station and Americans will still fly a few hundred miles above the ground in a series of endless ellipses.

Excited yet? We've only been doing this since 1961.

For many in the space community, ceasely revolving above the Earth is not the kind of human spaceflight we have in mind. John Glenn and before him, Yuri Gargarin did this five decades ago. In the year 2010, our highest aspiration for human exploration of space is still only to circle the Earth?

Bolden claims that NASA's money will be used to fund new technological development. In other words, we will build castles in the air hoping that the castles will float.

Part of NASA's job already includes research and development, and very little has availed itself in that respect over the decades other than incremental improvements.

Given the track record we've seen, from the cancellation of post-Apollo flights to the termination of the aerospike-engined X-33 to the Constellation, every single program promising to develop new and radical technologies has proven to produce nothing more (or less) than evolutionary improvement.

And the majority of them, moreover, have been cancelled.

The warp engine isn't coming any time soon.

Yes, there is the ion engine, but it would take decades to develop that into a viable technology for human spaceflight. The entire weight of Deep Space 1, a demonstrator prototype, is less than the mass of the smallest engine necessary to achieve orbit, much less an entire rocket.

Bolden is taking advantage of the lack of education of many to attempt to fool them into the belief that months of manned spaceflight can be easily shortened into weeks and that NASA's new plan is to put that into effect. But we can't even do that for unmanned vehicles, let alone manned ones. And we won't, for many decades.

Bolden is, in short, spinning a line hoping that you will be fooled.

Will you?

Is President Obama prepared to tell the truth to the American people? For some reason, one is not inclined to believe he will.

Please Support NASA's Constellation Program

2010-02-02T07:32:00.001-08:00

President Obama's proposed budget for the forthcoming fiscal year is an avowed mandate to terminate NASA's Project Constellation. If adopted by Congress, it would mean the end of U.S. manned exploration of the Moon and the rest of our Solar System for the foreseeable future. Our sustained and productive efforts toward the development and demonstrated success of the Ares rocket and all that has supported it, which represent an investment of billions of dollars, will have been for naught.

Congressman Pete Olson represents NASA’s Johnson Space Center. According to news reports, he has called the elimination of Constellation “a crippling blow to American’s human space flight program. It has taken over 50 years to build and develop America’s ascension to its rightful place as the dominant player in human space flight."

“That dominance is apparently no longer desired.”

Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala) is the ranking member of the Science Appropriations Subcommittee that oversees NASA’s budget. He stated that this budget “begins the death march for the future of U.S. human space flight.”

Your passion is desperately needed. Please call your Congressman or Senator and, in firm but polite terms, state your strong support of the future of manned spaceflight and your opposition to President Obama's cancellation of Project Constellation. In a world where Near-Earth Objects may imperil mankind, development of this kind of technology may be essential to ensure our shared future on Earth.

Thank you.

The Shock of the New

2009-02-02T04:05:00.000-08:00

The perennial debate over whether the newest incarnation of Star Trek is worthy of the name rears its ugly head, and so here is my latest take on it:

I have fond memories of watching the original series, before anyone had ever imagined that there could be a sequel of any kind. However, I suppose I am peculiar in that I do not wish every kind of Trek to be exactly like the original, and — forgive me — while I think that the literalistic New Voyages series is wonderful, I do not believe it is the only legitimate approach to Trek.

When the first Trek movie was released, I remember how fantastic it looked, not how different it was from the classic series.

When the Star Trek: The Next Generation hit the airwaves, I was proud of Trek’s TV resurrection rather than irritated that Picard was nothing like Kirk.

When Star Trek: Deep Space Nine was aired, I was delighted that there were two new Trek series to watch for weeks on end.

And so on.

Maybe I’m not enough of a fan to some, but I prefer fresh new takes on classic ideas over exact imitations of that which cannot really be copied. I am enough of a rationalist to abstract out the essence of a thing, without demanding that it is the literal repetition of it.

The only way to preserve something so that it is exactly the same as it was is to imprison it under glass, hermetically sealed, in a museum, forever. And that is something that, fan or not, I do not wish for Trek.

Superbowl Advertisement for Star Trek Movie

2009-02-01T07:22:00.000-08:00

A new advertisement will air during the Superbowl today. Posted above is a scene which makes use of the Oviatt Library at California State University, Northridge. Digitally inserted modifications from the actual shoot are clear from a comparison with photographs taken during filming last year, available on this blog.

New Enterprise Revealed

2008-11-11T21:52:00.001-08:00

An image of the new starship Enterprise was revealed online for the first time today. The ship was designed for the upcoming Star Trek movie to be released in May of 2009.

Obama's New Stance on NASA

2008-08-11T09:12:00.000-07:00

Senator Obama recently stated, ""And we have to do more than provide short-term relief. We have to secure our long-term prosperity and strengthen America's competitiveness in the 21st century. One of the areas where we are in danger of losing our competitive edge is our space program. When I was growing up, NASA inspired the world with achievements we are still proud of. Today, we have an administration that has set ambitious goals for NASA without giving NASA the support it needs to reach them. As a result, they've had to cut back on research, and trim their programs, which means that after the Space Shuttle shuts down in 2010, we're going to have to rely on Russian spacecraft to keep us in orbit.

"We cannot cede our leadership in space. That's why I will help close the gap and ensure that our space program doesn't suffer when the Shuttle goes out of service by working with Senator Bill Nelson to add at least one additional Space Shuttle flight beyond 2010; by supporting continued funding for NASA; by speeding the development of the Shuttle's successor; and by making sure that all those who work in the space industry in Florida do not lose their jobs when the Shuttle is retired - because we cannot afford to lose their expertise.

"More broadly, we need a real vision for space exploration. To help formulate this vision, I'll reestablish the National Aeronautics and Space Council so that we can develop a plan to explore the solar system - a plan that involves both human and robotic missions, and enlists both international partners and the private sector. And as America leads the world to long-term exploration of the moon, Mars, and beyond, let's also tap NASA's ingenuity to build the airplanes of tomorrow and to study our own planet so we can combat global climate change. Under my watch, NASA will inspire the world, make America stronger, and help grow the economy here in Florida."

He's also reported to have said, "I know it's still being reported that we were talking about delaying some aspects of the Constellation program to pay for our early education program. I told my staff we're going to find an entirely different offset, because we've got to make sure that the money that's going into NASA for basic research and development continues to go there. That has been a top priority for us."

Source: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1298

(Emphasis added. Hyperlinks in the original. Links are the sole responsibility of SpaceRef.)

If Obama's comments are genuine, then this reflects a reversal of his earlier position which appeared to be relatively hostile to NASA's Project Constellation. Nevertheless, note that Obama is still emphasizing "basic research and development," which is conceptually different from space applications of which Project Constellation may be one.

On SpaceX and Related Matters

2008-08-06T06:12:00.000-07:00

There is much talk about harnessing the power of private industry in reaching for the stars. And yet it wasn’t private industry that got us to the Moon.

It was, however, private industry and private greed that got us into the mortgage crisis we’re in now.

For all the talk about how government agencies are inherently socialistic, NASA is no more a victim of socialism than our armed forces, and yet I find it interesting that, except for libertarians, conservatives who disparage the government always draw the line at funding the armed forces. Perhaps we could avoid all the NASA-bashing by making NASA the fifth branch of the armed services.

But to be fair, it isn’t right to say that private industry has no role in space exploration, either. Both sides of this debate have their points. It’s just that it is quite disappointing that SpaceX has failed so many times so long after NASA had already pioneered the essential aspects of spacecraft launch and staging. Must we always reinvent the wheel, after all, and exactly how many times shall we do so?

Bigger, Stronger: To the Moon, Ares!

2008-07-06T15:33:00.000-07:00

NASA has recently announced that its Ares V heavy lift vehicle will be 20 feet taller than originally planned, putting it about that much taller than the Saturn V. The Ares will also sport an additional main engine, for a total of six; its main core fuselage will be extended; and its solid rocket boosters will be lengthened by half a segment.

The Ares V has improved its lift capability by approximately 10 percent. Its six first-stage engines and two solid rocket boosters will develop a thrust of almost 8.9 million pounds.

In this new configuration, the Ares V will be capable of lifting nearly 188 metric tonnes into Low Earth Orbit and, in coordination with the Ares I, nearly 71 metric tonnes to the Moon. This far exceeds the abilities of even the venerable Saturn V, currently by far the holder of the world's record for the most powerful rocket ever to achieve operational status.

Plans call for astronauts to return to the Moon by 2020. Ralph Kramden, presumably, need not apply.

Sources: NASA, Wikipedia.

Phoenix Discovers Ice

2008-06-19T19:48:00.000-07:00

Scientists are persuaded that they have unearthed ice on Mars. Investigators at the University of Arizona have found from an examination of the spacecraft's latest imagery that white spots in a trench unearthed by the Phoenix Mars lander disappeared over the course of time, indicating that they had undergone the process of sublimination, or the evaporation of ice directly into vapor.

For an animation, see: http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/253084main_dodo_020_024.gif

TEGA Sensor Fails to Detect Mars Sample

2008-06-07T12:10:00.000-07:00

For a reason currently under investigation, none of the sample of Martian soil delivered by the Phoenix arm to the opening of one of the ovens of the TEGA instrument appears to have successfully entered the device.

The Scoop on Mars

2008-06-07T08:15:00.000-07:00

Here is a close-up of the image of the first scoop of Martian soil destined for analysis using the scientific instrument known as TEGA. (Source: NASA. Enhancement: Hat Rick.)

Heroes with Feet of Duranium

2008-06-03T09:24:00.000-07:00

As various actors and actresses in the Star Trek series of TV shows and movies write their tell-all books and memoirs, there is a natural tendency toward disappointment at the criticism they may level against each other. But cast members are as human as you and me, and we should harbor no illusions but that their story-telling is simply an exponent of their innate humanity.

I am reminded of human foibles each and every time I drive on the freeway and some inconsiderate boor cuts me off after mistaking my lane-change signal for an invitation to participate in a bout of road war. The fact that it is fallible — oh so fallible — humans that have created a wondrous myth that we see in Star Trek is perhaps mute testimony to how rare an accomplishment Trek really is.

Canton Residents Face Jail Time for Letting Grass Grow

2008-06-03T06:55:00.001-07:00

The city council of Canton, Ohio unanimously approved a law that imposes penalties of up to $250.00 and 30 days in jail on homeowners who fail to mow their lawns.

I've heard of jail time for growing grass, but this is something else!

Obama Resigns Church Membership -- CNN

2008-05-31T14:49:00.000-07:00

CNN reports that according to its contributor, Roland Martin, Senator Barack Obama has resigned his membership in a controversial Chicago-based church.

A former pastor and more recently a guest preacher at the church made news with sermons given there that some considered racist.

Foam Loss

2008-05-31T14:25:00.000-07:00

Video taken aboard the Shuttle Discovery during its ascent into space half an hour ago showed foam shedding between three and four minutes into the flight. A piece of foam from the main fuel tank appeared to glance off the orbiter just forward of one of the wings. At that altitude, risk factors from foam loss are diminished but NASA is expected to closely inspect that area of the vehicle when it reaches the International Space Station. (NASA, CNN.)

Discovery Expected to Launch Today

2008-05-31T13:23:00.000-07:00

The Space Shuttle Discovery is expected to depart for the International Space Station in about 35 minutes, carrying with it the orbiting installation's single largest inhabitable module, the Japanese space laboratory Kibo.

The launch will be covered live on NASA TV.

Ice Cool

2008-05-31T13:02:00.000-07:00

What's a NASA mission without a few hitches here and there? First there was the bioshield that peeked over its intended rest area; then there was a short circuit in a spectroscopic oven. Phoenix's handlers dispatched the first issue with ease and are confident they can work around the second. But compared to the returns of the mission so far, the glitches melt away, for Phoenix may already have discovered what it was intended to find, and its excavation arm hasn't even been fully used.

A day or so ago, the camera at the end of the lander's arm peered underneath the Phoenix and found what could be patches of ice -- or stone. But the latest image -- above -- seems to confirm that they are indeed ice, uncovered by the spaceship's thrusters as it made landfall. The diagnosis is not yet certain, but the odds are high that the probe's quest frozen water has already succeeded.

Martian Weather Report Sol 4

2008-05-31T09:05:00.000-07:00

I did say I'd cover the weather, didn't I?

This is the latest information on Martian weather, originally posted yesterday at NASA.com.

Viral Marketing?

2008-05-31T05:41:00.001-07:00

On the original website, clicking through the top banner, primarily written in an unknown language, results in a number of similar webpages.

(From Trekmovie.com.)

Aptera to Appear in Star Trek XI?

2008-05-31T05:34:00.000-07:00

A few months ago, yours truly witnessed a futuristic alternatively powered vehicle known as the Aptera being driven along a route, identified above, on the campus of California State University, Northridge.

The next Star Trek movie was being filmed at the time, and the blocking of a number of shots was such that the Aptera had to have been in the background.

Phoenix's Unknown Object

2008-05-30T22:04:00.001-07:00

What, exactly, is this object? According to @MarsPhoenix posted at the social-networking website, Twitter.com, it could be a pin, presumably from the spacecraft itself.

Starfleet Cadets II

2008-05-30T21:06:00.001-07:00

Gamma Ray Telescope Launch Set for June 3

2008-05-29T06:01:00.000-07:00

NASA has scheduled the launch of a new space-based observatory for June 3, 2008 from Cape Canaveral aboard a Delta II rocket, contingent upon the successful liftoff of the Discovery Space Shuttle May 31.

The Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope, or GLAST, is designed to detect high-energy cosmic radiation bursts, or GRB's, whose origins are still poorly understood. Explanations for GRB's range from the results of sudden stellar collapses into black holes within the Milky Way to even more powerful points of origin completely outside our galaxy. The scale of GRB's is such that if one were to occur anywhere near our Solar System, scientists believe that it could mean the extinction of all life on Earth.

GLAST consists of two main scientific instruments, including a Large Area Telescope and a complementary GLAST Burst Monitor, supported by an array of auxiliary sensors. The satellite has a useful lifetime of up to ten years.

Led by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, the mission represents an international collaboration of scientific and exploratory agencies and universities in the United States, Europe, and Japan.

For more information, see: http://glast.gsfc.nasa.gov/

Phoenix Unstowed -- At Last

2008-05-28T22:17:00.001-07:00

The first image is the original posted by NASA within the last hour. The second is modified with outlines delineating each position of the arm.

Europe Wants Its Own Spaceship

2008-05-28T21:31:00.000-07:00

Long relegated to a supporting role, the European Space Agency has decided that it wants a more prominent position on the final frontier. Encouraged by ESA's intention to seek independence access to space, EADS Astrium, a European consortium, has proposed a new manned space vehicle based on the Autonomous Transfer Vehicle now used to resupply the International Space Station.

NASA no longer believes that the ISS is its top priority. As soon as it is able, America will wash its hands of the entire affair and leave much of the operation of the orbital facility in the hands of its international partners. The goal these days is the implementation of the Vision for Space Exploration, also known as Project Constellation, a task that demands a shift in focus from low Earth orbit to the development of a replacement vehicle for the Space Shuttle that will be capable of returning Americans to the Moon.

But, while NASA's increasingly Constellation-centric agenda has pleased those who have made no secret of their disappointment with the ISS, it is perceived as a slap in the face of international agencies that have spent considerable energy -- decades, in some cases -- planning their own efforts and budgets around the much-delayed station. Japan, for instance, has invested billions in its centerpiece Kibo space module to be lofted this weekend aboard the Shuttle. Kibo, an ISS component so massive that it requires three Shuttle flights to orbit, has a lifetime significantly longer than the remaining commitment NASA is willing to devote to the Station. NASA prefers to spend its hard-fought budget on its Orion and Ares space vehicles and as such will phase out the Shuttle by 2010.

The EADS proposal would eventually give the continent the means to independently send humans into outer space.

See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7419793.stm

Phoenix Unstowed?

2008-05-28T18:15:00.000-07:00

Space buffs like yours truly are hanging on every word of every press release NASA deigns to issue with regard to the unstowing of Phoenix's arm. This morning's presser was frustratingly laconic with respect to same, and irritatingly brief, to boot. It lasted all of about 22 minutes, as I recall, during which a number of images were showered upon us among the great unwashed, but none that cast much more light on what the chances were that the foresaid arm would be unstowed without further ado. Yesterday's assurances that the bioshield overhang was merely an inconvenience stood unappended, suspense on this matter still hanging heavily in the air.

We are thankful, as followers of Phoenix, that MRO's radio glitch is no longer an issue, although the glitch itself remains under investigation. MRO, for the time being, is no longer being used for regular data links until the issue is resolved.

Much was explained, in fact, this morning, and we were reassured that Phoenix is in fine health and that, in light of MRO's cop-out, Mars Odyssey was more than capable of taking up the slack. These things we knew.

The unfolding of the arm, however, remains an object of greater mystery, even as I write.

NASA promises more on the arm later this evening. We shall see.

Phoenix From Above

2008-05-27T11:27:00.001-07:00

Phoenix and Parachute

2008-05-26T11:13:00.000-07:00

The first image, above, is a raw image of the Phoenix lander as it was descending via parachute to the surface of Mars was taken from an orbiting NASA spacecraft.

The image was released a few minutes ago.

The second is an annotated version.

Phoenix Live

2008-05-25T19:14:00.000-07:00

I’ve been following the Phoenix Mars mission live. I have two computer screens streaming NASA TV and one cable TV screen previously tuned to CNN’s live coverage.

The first images came in a few minutes ago and were posted right here on this blog.

Star Trek, like JPL, is all about the peaceful exploration of space. Let’s hope that future generations will see our steps as only the first in a relentless forward march into the universe.

Phoenix First Images

2008-05-25T18:58:00.000-07:00

From a few minutes ago....

Starfleet Cadets

2008-05-24T17:20:00.001-07:00

Phoenix Lands this Sunday

2008-05-22T18:33:00.000-07:00

Okay, so it's not Phoenix rising. That'd be too cliched, anyway. Instead, NASA's Phoenix space probe is due to make planetfall on Mars this Sunday. It'll be quite the nail-biter as NASA scientists will lose contact with the car-sized spacecraft, as planned, right before the most critical stages of its descent.

Stay tuned. It could be a bumpy ride.

Trek and Rebellion

2008-05-09T05:27:00.000-07:00

Let it never be said that Trek is utopian: There is, after all, trouble in paradise. Case in point: Star Trek: Insurrection.

One of the last of films set in the famous TNG era, it has been criticized for its elevation of the values of lassitude. The Bak'u, who lived in peace for years, seemed to many no more than futuristic hippies, stuck in an era of communalism and self-indulgence. But, I submit, Insurrection wasn’t about laziness or lack of ambition at all. It was more about chivalry — the defense of the weak by the powerful -- against the even more powerful.

The film’s main plot element is obvious: Insurrection. Whose insurrection, exactly? Ah, but that’s the rub. Was it insurrection against the Federation? By whom?

You could argue that Dougherty’s forces, including the Federation officials who supported him, were the ones guilty of it; it was they, after all, who defied the Federation’s highest ideals.

You could equally argue that it was Picard and crew who committed insurrection. It was they, after all, who took off their Starfleet badges in defense of the Bak’u.

The question, then, is unsettled.

The point is that there IS conflict — conflict on a very big level. It is conflict that asks you: If everything you believed in were on the line, would you commit yourself to defending the defenseless against your own government? Would you follow your own conscience over that of your official duty?

The Bak’u meant no harm. They were peaceful, pacifist people. They saw an eternity in a moment, and loved life for what it was. They were — far from the hapless hippies of “The Way to Eden” — more like cosmic Buddhists, seeking to go in the mind where few of us have gone before.

Picard saw as his overriding duty protecting the weak and following the Federation’s ideals even when the Federation did not.

This, I believe, was the core virtue of Insurrection: Piety and faith in what is good, what is decent, and what should move us all.

The Movies of Star Trek

2008-05-08T12:10:00.000-07:00

Your mileage may vary.

Star Trek: TMP: While slow, still unmistakably grand, majestic, and cosmic in a way befitting the entire franchise. Hat Rick’s Rating: Four and one-half stars out of five. With tighter pacing, suggested in the Director’s Edition, easily five stars.

II: TWOK: Makes the top ten list of many a SF — and mainstream — movie buff. Need I say more? Five stars.

III: TSFS: A worthy adventure for a gallant crew. Three stars.

IV: TVH: See TWOK. Four stars.

V: TFF: A nice effort. Two stars.

VI: TUC: Politically relevant and engaged, Star Trek VI marked the return of the dynamism, pacing and rollicking good times we saw in TWOK. Four stars.

[VII:] Generations: A satisfying attempt to blend two separate generations in the Trek universe, this movie made a powerful statement about the importance of heroism and what it means to live life to the fullest. Four stars.

[VIII:] First Contact: Not since TWOK has a Star Trek picture had so much appeal to mainstream and Trekfan audiences alike. The cinematic centerpiece of the TNG universe, ST:FC made Trek moviewatching an experience to treasure again and again. Five stars.

[IX:] Insurrection: Marking the denouement of the TNG era, Insurrection asked the question: “When does the good of the many outweigh the good of the few?” The answer it gave brought Trekfans along for a fulfilling fight against an elusive enemy: A moustache-twirling villain -- allied with a rogue admiral within the Federation itself. Three stars.

[X:] Nemesis: While the pacing was off and dramatic elements seemingly out of order, this movie left Trekfans wondering why it couldn’t be better. Two stars.

[XI:] Star Trek: A year from this movie's debut, Trekfans discuss it with the highest of expectations.

"First Star to the Right, and Straight on 'Til Morning"

2008-05-01T07:59:00.001-07:00

Meanwhile, back in the real world....

Interstellar flight is still a dream unfulfilled, except, perhaps, in the form of erstwhile interplanetary probes like our Pioneers and Voyagers that, at this rate, will take millennia to reach our Sun's nearest neighbors.

Interested in discussing the practical aspects of interstellar flight is the Tau Zero Foundation, a group that includes scientists who write on the realities of traveling between the stars. I recently discovered their website, a lively place where our future among the stars is a constant source of contemplation and comment.

See http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=581

Love Me, Love My Robot

2008-05-01T07:37:00.000-07:00

R2D2, where are you? No, seriously. I'm looking for you. Don't play coy with me.

You don't have to be a geek to recognize the appeal of cutesy-pukesy robots. Star Wars has taken care of that department. But did you know that there are those who are actually making it their life's purpose to make you fall in love with one?

To be honest, that may be an overstatement. But according to this recent piece on people who fall in love, or at least in like, with their vacuum cleaners, scientists are hard at work making sure that your next friend and helpmate prefers engine oil to aperitifs.

See http://technology.newscientist.com/channel/tech/mg19826506.100-the-rise-of-the-emotional-robot.html

Tailgating, Officer? Why, No! I Was Just Saving Gas!

2008-05-01T00:50:00.000-07:00

So the next time the guy behind you is driving so close you can actually tell the brand of mouthwash they used that morning, keep in mind this one mantra: He's making out like a bandit on gas.

Or at least that's what the "hypermilers" say. It's the latest fad, kids (but don't try this at home! Or in your car, either).

What is "hypermiling"?

See http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080430/od_nm/hypermiling_dc;_ylt=AoQLlDmv72Y9JIssV.c8nsus0NUE

Can you say, "rear ender"?

I knew you could.

To Sleep ... Perchance, to Feed the Brain

2008-05-01T00:37:00.001-07:00

It's not often that doing something that feels good is actually good FOR you. So let's raise a drowsy cheer, in these sleep-deprived times, for the latest news about the value of sleep. It turns out, research says, that sleep actually nourishes your mind.

Napping, in other words, is brain food.

See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/04/22/DI2008042201583.html

It's May 1, 2008. Do You Know Where Your Android Is?

2008-05-01T00:13:00.000-07:00

Retrofuturism, or the future of times past, is a source of endless fascination for me. From the helmet-clad space rangers of the Forties to the polyestered denizens of Logan's Run, visions of the future have often proved absurdly inadequate as predictors of technological development. Science fiction itself has learned to look with irony at the ridiculous failings of ambitious visions of the world of tomorrow: Case in point, the deliberately corny adventures of Janeway and Paris in the world of Chaotica.

But the past, like the future, can be fertile ground for reinvention. Witness the case of Battlestar Galactica -- the “poor man’s Star Wars” that ran in the 1970’s and was replaced by the truly awful Galactica 1980 (which is a horror story in itself). Contra, “Nu” BSG — the one co-created by Ronald Moore.

Critics charged in the original run that Battlestar Galactica was a copy of Star Wars, which had proved itself the sleeper surprise hit of the decade. I suppose that it was things like the design of the giant Galactica vessel, which seemed reminiscent of a Star Destroyer, and the Vipers, which seemed similar to X-Wings, that made people think that the series was simply a pale imitation of Lucas’ film. It didn’t help things that the color scheme of the good guys’ clothing (browns and suedes) was similar to the “space cowboy” look we saw in Episode IV.

Prior to this, your typical space opera was more in line with the futuristic look of the day. Space: 1999 was a good example -- another ’70’s series set in space but one that pre-dated both Star Wars and the original Battlestar Galactica.

The point, I suppose, is that none of these aesthetics proved more durable than any other. None was adopted by Moore in the new version of Galactica, praised by critics and audiences alike.

What endures, by contrast, is the art of storytelling. And why should this be a surprise?

For the future is, in the end, unknowable, and what we tell of the future is simply what we believe of the present.

As for that android ... tell him it's time for bed.

The Reason You're High-Maintenance

2008-04-30T09:03:00.000-07:00

We all are, actually. As it turns out, anyone with a functioning brain requires a huge amount of power -- to keep our noggin healthy and ready to go.

Our brains require a great deal of energy, and much of it goes to maintenance, according to an article published on the Scientific American website.

Here it is: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=why-does-the-brain-need-s

Bring Back Kirk! (Eventually)

2008-04-30T08:03:00.000-07:00

James T. Kirk. The very name screams out, "Star Trek!" So, where's Kirk in this new Trek movie that's coming out?

Members of the BBK movement, it seems, are more than slightly annoyed that the classic exponent of the character most identified with Trek lacks any role in the forthcoming movie.

Even Chris Pine, the star who will play the young Kirk, seems missing in action. Google "Star Trek" and you'll find articles aplenty about the new Spock, the new Uhura, and the new Scotty, but where are the interviews with Pine?

Are they dissing Kirk, and if so, why?

Just speculation, and maybe it's just me, but maybe the reason we’re not seeing Chris Pine interviews is that the producers are still holding something back for when the movie actually nears its opening date. You can’t blow everything you’ve got on PR all at once. Pacing yourself and slowly building up interest is a perfectly reasonable way to go.

We haven’t heard much from Karl Urban, the new McCoy, either, and no one is complaining as much about that.

Yes, they should honor and respect the Kirk character and that Shatner should be given his due. But we’re more than a year away from the opening date, and there’s still a lot more PR to be had. We shouldn't make premature judgments at this stage of the game.

Besides, it’s not as if Bill hasn’t been in the public eye. He’s currently the only Classic Trek alum with a starring role in a first-run network show (as Denny Crane). He’s into special effects production (he has a CGI house based in Toronto), he’s got Priceline, he’s got his Trek books, he’s doing promos for other projects of his … the man — in his own words — prefers to believe that he will continue on forever. And more power to him!

So let’s dial down the negativity, if I may ask, and let’s not weep for Mr. Shatner, but hold on to hope for the franchise he obviously still loves so well. Trek.

Teleportation -- The Ultimate in Connectivity

2008-04-29T13:45:00.000-07:00

Teleporting quantized states of photons or other particles can offer a new way to process data, according to a recent article.

In theory, it would seem that changes in the quantum state of a particle at one end of any arbitrary distance would result in instantaneous changes at the other.

The article can be found here: http://www.rfglobalnet.com/content/news/article.asp?DocID=%7BC2543A11-1587-4AC8-80AD-A8881248D901%7D&Bucket=Current+Headlines&VNETCOOKIE=NO

Not the Usual Scholarship

2008-04-29T13:39:00.001-07:00

An interesting article on unique scholarships offered to those who have unusual talents or needs came to my attention recently. Did you know that Starfleet Academy offers a $500.00 scholarship? That's only one of the many strange offerings found in this April 29 article in the San Diego Union-Tribune.

You can access the article at: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/education/20080429-9999-1n29scholar.html

New Spoiler for Star Trek XI?

2008-04-29T13:31:00.000-07:00

Over at TrekMovie.com, they're posting excerpts from an interview with Zoe Saldana, who plays Lt. Uhura in the upcoming Star Trek movie.

[SPOILER BELOW.]

According to the interview, the end of the movie will feature the crew going off on their famous five year mission, presumably aboard the Enterprise.

[END OF SPOILER.]

So there. Something to look forward to.

Trek and Antinomy

2008-04-29T10:45:00.000-07:00

Immanuel Kant was always one for arguing against opposites. So if Trek is humanistic, then what would be its opposite? One could argue that Starship Troopers was basically the anti-Trek. Or one of them, at any rate.

The movie Starship Troopers took Heinlein’s already somewhat militaristic juvenile-fiction approach and brought it to life. The entire mythos of Troopers is suggested by the requirement of military service in order to become a full citizen.

Trek comes together with a completely different philosophy arising from exactly the opposite view of humanity. Whether it’s the older or the younger Roddenberry, or even the second generation (Berman, Braga, Moore) that established or expanded its premises, it’s always been that Trek is identified with humanism, self-expression, individuation, and freedom.

The question is, which universe is closer to the universe in which we live?

What Color is the Sky ... on Your Planet?

2008-04-29T10:35:00.000-07:00

Ever wonder whether the technicolor planets in science fiction universes like Star Trek have any basis on reality? Maybe a thought experiment could lead the way to an answer.

Much of Earth is forested and much of it is desert. Even so, however, the Earth appears primarily blue with white swirls because two-thirds of it is covered by water. The browns of the land areas are comparatively muted.

Star Trek has its share of multicolored planets, sometimes of colors seemingly implausible to the modern eye. How likely, for example, is a purplish planet to exist? Perhaps more likely than one would think. If the planet in an episode had only a very small proportion of land to sea ratio, and if the atmosphere or oceans were purplish, then the planet as a whole could be more or less purple when viewed from space.

The planets in our own Solar System have a diversity of colors when viewed from space. Mercury is dark grey, Venus is white (from the cloud cover), the Earth is blue-and-white, Mars is ochre, Jupiter is striped brown, Saturn is tannish, Uranus is a pastel blue, and Neptune is a deep blue. Poor, demoted Pluto (now considered a dwarf planet) is apparently pinkish, as seen in this disco ball-like mosaic of its surface:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/30/Pluto.jpg

Time For An Intervention

2008-04-29T10:24:00.000-07:00

The increasingly contentious contest between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton calls out for the intervention of elder statesmen in the Democratic Party.

The latest news is that the left is angered by Obama's appearance on Fox News, claiming that it legitimizes a news channel that bloggers have sought to marginalize.

In the meantime, Clinton's victory in winning the endorsement of Governor Easley of North Carolina adds to her momentum after a significant win in the Pennsylvania primary.

Let's not forget yesterday's news cycle, which brought us more controversy from Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, and John McCain's about-face on whether Wright's comments are fair game.

It's all looking a lot like a slow-motion train wreck, and unless the Democratic Party elders make a move, neither Obama nor Clinton will win anything but a pyrrhic victory. There is a real risk that turned-off voters will lean toward McCain in November.

Leave it to the Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

"Only An Infinity"

2008-04-29T08:07:00.000-07:00

I remember reading a piece by the great Isaac Asimov, to the effect that in mathematics, infinity was often not the end of the story. There was, in truth, not merely one infinity, but many.

A central idea of the idealism of Star Trek is the concept of Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations, or "IDIC," a supposedly Vulcan precept. But we all know that it was applied in reality to show up the homogeneity of Western culture, at least at the time it was developed. Trek's Big Idea was to show that diversity was a strength, and indeed was a core strength of civilization. But how much real diversity was there in Trek, and how much is there in it now?

I think we should all remember that Trek is an American production originally intended for American consumption. It would be unrealistic to expect any Trek program or movie to show a truly multicultural crew. However, I believe that its heart is in the right place and that it is an approximation of multicultural ideals as interpreted by its particular ethnographic circumstances -- i.e., by Hollywood.

A truly multicultural mileu would be difficult for any general audience to accept simply because the audience would be a product of its own cultural baggage. In any audience, there may be some discomfort with the real consequences of what critics deride as the “multi-culti” and, to be honest, that’s perfectly understandable. Not all aspects of multiculturalism are going to be acceptable to everyone, nor are all such aspects going to be accepted. Some will have to be modified. And who can deny that "multiculturalism” is so often maligned that it has come to be represent whatever bugaboo that certain elements want to assign to it?

But the general idea that humanity should be unified is something that I think everyone agree upon. We might not want to be unified as to everything, but on the things that truly matter, or on as much of them as possible, why on Earth, or beyond, wouldn’t we?

"A Little Modesty, Herr Mozart"

2008-04-29T08:00:00.000-07:00

Who can gainsay the brilliance of Western culture? The entire world loves it. And, despite what they say about self-loathing in Europe, no part of it loves it more than the West itself.

But to say that it is any culture — even the European-American culture — that has achieved the penultimate in civilization is to acknowledge only what is on the surface. The great Isaac Newton said that he saw much further than others not because he was, particularly, a genius, but because he stood on the shoulders of giants. (Never mind that Newton said this to disparage Leibniz; that's an entirely different story.)

Before the rise of the West, there were several civilizations that arose and maintained a degree of greatness unrivaled in their times. Leibniz aside, it is a truism that we, in the West, live in the best of worlds, since at the height of these previous civilizations, the people there, too, lived in the best of worlds — at that time. Some civilizations have endured and some rendered obsolescent, and none have attained the technological or scientific accomplishments of the West. But let us not, in our pride in what we have achieved, forget that others that have come before this civilization achieved just as much, or nearly so, and without as much the benefit of other cultures.

The West has achieved much, but at a horrendous cost. Millions have been killed in the name of progress, and the power to destroy has fast outpaced the power to create. A great imbalance exists, and an overabundance of pride can only lead to tragedy.

The ultimate in ethical development has been attained not, after all, by the West, with its history of virulent colonialism against indigenous peoples, but by the adoption of universalistic principles developed in the Middle East and elsewhere — by Jesus Christ, for example, whose people were persecuted for centuries by Europeans.

As educated people we must avoid the belief that we are so much better than anyone else. In many respects, we are not, and to pretend we are only garners resentment around the world. The sooner we humble ourselves, the less others that around the world will be inclined to maintain that resentment.

Gene Was Right

2008-04-29T07:51:00.000-07:00

Those of you who haven't been living on Mars the last four decades or so may be familiar with this little cultural current called "Star Trek," a universe based on the ideas of its creator, Gene Roddenberry. You might also recall that Roddenberry believed that a united humanity was destined to find its way to the stars, boldly going where no man had gone before. Trek is as much a philosophy of life as it is a sci-fi property, and please indulge me while I get up on my soapbox and say how much I think that the obverse of what Roddenberry said has been proven true in the last few decades.

The truth is that we haven't united as a species, and we are as riven today as a planetary civilization as we ever have been. And our cause — to become a multplanetary species, to break out of this cradle we call home — has suffered accordingly.

Everything we sink into the military, creating bombs and killing machines… it’s all money, time, and effort that produces nothing of lasting value. It gives us the illusion of safety, but it’s all just that. An illusion. Something worthy of Talos IV. The only thing that barely makes it truly valuable is the research that comes out of the military-industrial complex, and even at that, there is so much of it that is wasted.

Imagine what all that mililtary funding could do in the hands of those whose objectives are pure science, or sustained research and development into fossil fuel alternatives, health care, or space applications. Not that there wouldn’t be waste in that, too, but at least there would be less of it, because the aims would be what would benefit all of us in the long run.

We’re forced into making better spears, rather than better lives, because so many of us hate each other. We hate this tribe or that, and we fear this group or the other. We stockpile weapons we can never use, to rot away and disintegrate into radioactive dust. All that energy, all that effort, condemned to reinventing better and more efficient ways to kill off the human race.

Are our fears legitimate? Yes, they are, and that’s the tragedy of it. We have legitimate fears, and we haven’t resolved them because we haven’t resolved the problems leading to the threats that cause them.

So long as we waste our lives in the futile technological pursuit of absolute safety, it will always elude our grasp. So long as we keep our eyes low to the ground, looking out for threats and keeping what is ours, the stars will be forever beyond our reach.

As each generation is born and prospers, it needs to ask the fundamental questions of war and peace and seek to pursue what is genuine and to avoid what is futile.

It has been said before, and now it is again: If not us, who? If not now, when?

Hello

2008-04-28T22:30:00.000-07:00

Pleased to meet you.