Private Sector Space Dreams

The American bureaucracy of which NASA is a part of, has by force of congressional decree and presidential inattention except in election years, become affraid to take any bold moves in manned spaceflight.

They talk a good game, the public takes it hook, line, and sinker, and nothing really ever becomes of it. The shuttle was just suppose to be a part of a shuttle-station program. Towards the end of its career, it finally did that job. But in the beginning, it was nothing more than a glorified dump truck.

And it was paid for by the American taxpayer.

Back in the 1990s, there was a chance to replace the shuttle with a newer spacecraft. The VentureStar from Lochkeed Martin or the DC-X vertical take-off/landing, single-stage to orbit spacecraft. The DC-X was a sub-scale, flight tested piece of hardware. The VentureStar was a computer animation only. Guess which one the Clinton Administration went with? That's right: VentureStar.

Then Columbia broke up on reentry.

President Bush proposed shutting down the shuttle program and replacing it with the Apollo on steroids program known as Constellation. Now President Obama will cancel even that and hope that the private sector will take over.

Well, I (slightly) agree with President Obama that it would be better for the private sector to come into its own as far as transporting folks up into Low Earth Orbit (LEO). But, the government should have kept the Constellation Program going.

I remember in a Air Force ROTC classroom in my college days, my instructor was describing the problem faced by FDR in the Pacific War. He had General MacArthur promoting a campaign that would go through the Philippines. Admiral Nimitz wanted to go straight across the Pacific to the China coast cutting the Japanese supply line in two.

President Roosvelt decided that it would be in the best interest of the war effort to go with BOTH strategys.

I submit to the reader that the same thing could have been applied to the Constellation Program. I'm on record opposing the idea of Super-Apollo, but NO American manned spaceflight program is even worse to think about.

So where this this lead us to? Private Space Industry.

In fact, I think it is going to be up to men like Bigelow and Rutan to get American civilians back up into space (without government aid). And more important, get them to the surface of the moon and back to Earth on a regular flight schedule.

Eventually, a lunar base will be built. And maybe then, NASA will get funding from Congress to lease a base on the moon.

So, are there enough deep pockets in the worldwide civilian sector to make it possible for the non-government space program to make it to the moon and Mars ? And do it before the Chinese gets there.

Check out the article "Moon dreams" from The Economist website(February 18, 2010) for the article that inspired me to write this posting.

___

Ref. The Economist, February 18, 2010, "Private-sector space flight. Moon dreams" (http://www.economist.com/science-technology/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15543675).

Blue Origin's New Shepard Rocketship

Billionaire Jeff Bezos of Amazon.com fame has been putting his money into a new project for several years now – Blue Origin is the name of this company and they are developing a reusable spaceship known as “New Shepard” that looks like a egg standing on four legs. It is in fact – a Dropship. Please go back to the September archive on this blog to look for a article about the 10th anniversary of the First Single-Stage-to-Orbit test vehicle – “DC-X What the Future SHOULD Have Been” (September 10, 2008).

The New Shepard is designed to fly multiple astronauts into suborbital space at very competitive prices. First tests of the vehicle have been staged at their private launch site in West Texas, not too far from El Paso, Texas. Blue Origins plan, aside from offering flights to tourists, would provide opportunities for scientists to fly their experiments into space and in a microgravity environment. And they have been getting some help from NASA's Alan Stern, the former chief of space science. First remotely controlled or unpiloted flights can begin as early as 2011 with the first manned launches to follow within a year of that target date.


The New Shepard vehicle consist of a pressurized Crew Capsule carrying the experiments and astronauts atop the Propulsion Module. Once in space, the Crew Capsule separates from the Propulsion Module and the two craft will reenter the atmosphere separately. The Crew Capsule will land softly under a parachute at the launch site. The Crew Capsule is reported to be able to carry three of more astronauts depending on the mission profile.


Ref. : Space.com ( http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/081208-blue-origin-stern.html ). Article by Leonard David posted December 8, 2008. “Secretive Space Vehicle Tested at Private Texas Site”

A New Means of Getting to Space

Last month, I pointed out a article about the anniversary of the DC-X(Single-Stage-To-Orbit, Vertical Take-Off, Vertical Landing) demonstrator technology. After reading about it in Space.com, I was looking around on that website and there was a link to a new book entitled: Floating To Space. The Airship To Orbit Program by John M. Powell. Looking at their website and the photographs there, I decided to order the book and read it.

I was impressed. The book includes a DVD and I watched that first. It was film clips of their test flights and airship to orbit proposal. All of this comes from a company called JP AEROSPACE. And going by the time line in the appendix, this began all the way back in December of 1993 with suspended rocket test launch series (as in firing a rocket suspended from a line connected to a launch balloon).

Now the concept of using balloons to get to outer space has been around for a long time and Mr. Powell cites a 1913 book by B. Krasnogorskii called “On the Waves of the Ether.” There are other examples in science fiction of floating cities such as the Cloud City in the Original Star Trek TV series (Stratos) and in the Star Wars movie “The Empire Strikes Back” the cloud city of Bespin.

But wait, what does floating cities have to do with airships going up to space? Simple it seems. A cloud city will serve as the second stage of a three stage system using airship technology. The first stage is a large “V” shape airship known as “Stage One Airship” which would be about 800 feet long and 150 feet tall. This makes it larger than the U.S. Navy's Macon or the German Graf Zeppelin. And with modern materials, the lifting capacity is much better than in the 1920s and 1930s. This stage has the biggest challenge. It must be able to climb up to 140,000 feet altitude to dock with the second stage.

The Second Stage of this proposal is known as the Dark Sky Station. Its a space station that floats at that altitude. Aside from docking there, it is also a research facility, shipping port, and ship yard. And that gives us the final, Third Stage of this concept – The Orbital Airship that can only exists at 140,000 feet plus altitude. And this thing is BIG. Another “V” shape craft that is 6,000 feet long!

I'll let the reader get a hold of their own copy of the book to learn little details about how a airship will be able to go supersonic, the larger Orbital Airship and the Deep Sky Station will be built while floating in the sky. How the vehicles will actually survive reentry, etc. Also, John M. Powell describes how they will go about funding this project. Now that chapter is worth getting the book anyway.

I recommend this book just for the fact it shows someone thinking outside of the conventional box.

As an aside. Seeing the cover of the book made me think about the huge UFO that was spotted over Phoenix, Arizona, back in the 1990s. After reading the book, the huge “V” shape UFO that was reported with the Phoenix Lights flew at a much lower altitude than what the Third Stage Airship could handle. Read the book to find out why the 6,000 foot long airship that JP Aerospace is working on could not be what was witness in the Phoenix Lights.

DC-X What the Future SHOULD Have Been

Recently, I was checking out Space.com and found a article by Leonard David entitled, “DC-X Honored for Its Contributions, Potential.” Dated September 1, 2008. I want to quote the opening of that article here. “Creating routine, aircraft-like, low-cost access to space is not only technologically challenging, it will require enormous tenacity to overcome the inevitable bureaucratic, political and funding hiccups. These are just a few of the lessons learned by veterans of the Delta Clipper-Experimental (DC-X) rocket ship program.” The program ran from 1991 to 1997. A unlikely (in today's climate) of government, industry, and that special group of humans called entrepreneurs. The DC-X was a technology demonstrator designed to test out concepts for a single-stage-to-orbit spacecraft that took off and landed vertically. A vehicle that had potential in both civilian and military space travel.

I personally was in my 30s, taking a airframe and power-plant mechanic course to get my license in 1990-1991. And back then, I had a subscription to Aviation Week & Space Technology which I have maintained more or less since I was in college. There were a few years where I had to do without that subscription. But getting back to the DC-X story – I just ate it up whenever something new came out about that vehicle. My personal view on the subject matter as to why DC-X failed and Lockheed/Martin's Venture Star won the Clinton's administration's decision was due to politics and campaign funding. And we all know what happened to Venture Star now don't we....

But, getting back to Leonard David's article that is paraphrased below:

Before Boeing bought out McDonnell Douglas, they were in partnership with what was known as the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization. The DC-X first flew on August 18, 1993 two years after receiving the funding go-ahead. Tests were conducted at White Sands Missile Range. The DC-X flew 8 times between August 1993 and July 1995. Then there was an advanced DC-X that flew four times in 1996 until on its last flight, the vehicle tipped over and was destroyed. The accident was due to human error dealing with one of the craft's four landing legs.

Mr. Leonard David covered their 15th anniversary reunion held on August 17-19, 2008 that was hosted by the New Mexico Museum of Space History that was the start for fund raising in order to develop a permanent DC-X/XA exhibit at that museum. David interviewed Bill Gaubatz, the former director for the Delta Clipper programs at McDonnell Douglas. He (Gaubatz) stated: “The DC-X and XA showed that a small dedicated government and industry team with focused objectives could make significant advances with the boundaries of a limited schedule and budget.” Gaubatz also added that the total amount of money spent of the DC-X/XA program was less than $100 million, including range and lab costs. We were in effect, a little entrepreneurial team working within a big company, that was working for a this-can-be-done philosophy and a vision to drive launch costs below $100.00 a pound.

Additionally, Mr. Gaubatz said, “I'm convinced that if the DC-X program hadn't been terminated, we would have been in regular trips to orbit now. We may or may not have been a single-stage-to-orbit, but we would have been totally reusable, safe, rapid-turnaround transportation system. Cheap, unsafe access is not the way to go.”

The DC-X promised aircraft like access to space operations. Rapid prototyping as shown by the DC-X program would have goaded other “older” space companies to get involved in their own development of less-expensive space vehicles.

The first civilian director of the SDI was Ambassador Henry Cooper who helped provided the funding needed to get the program started back in 1990. Mr. Cooper said “That he thought the step-by-step DC-X rocket program would pay for itself during its development by launching suborbital targets for missile defense interceptors. (Note: President Bill Clinton's administration cut funding in 1993 in order “to take the stars out of star wars.” That decision that resulted in the cancellation of the DC-X program and turned off all innovative technological progress within the Strategic Defense Initiative). Ambassador Cooper added, “The regrettable part is that we knew how to do this job 15 years ago. It can be done better today. The technology has moved on in spite of the government not investing in it in some cases... or not investing as much as in it.” Bill Gaubatz provided some additional thoughts, “That DC-X termination brought about two great losses, dispersal of the team that worked on it and the loss of time.”

Jess Sponable, U.S. Air Force (retired) was the USAF program manager for the SSTO (Single-Stage-To-Orbit) technology program. He stated that the DC-X focus was demonstrating a reusable rocket that operates with aircraft-like operability. “We learned a lot about what to do... but we learned a lot about what not to do.” Sponable offered up the concept of the transportable elements of the DC-X, including the trailer-filled flight operations control center. “There's no reason we can't take a similar approach in the future for how we do launch systems.” This underscored that the cost per flight was generally in the $200,000 to $300,000 range. “We were the last program to actually combine and accomplish faster, cheaper, and better... all at the same time. The seeds have been planted. The future is coming and it won't be stopped by bureaucratic setbacks. Low cost space access is coming and it will happen.” Jess Sponable told Mr. David.

Several attendees pointed to Scaled Composites and its work on the White Knight Two – the flying launch pad to support, in part, suborbital, passenger-carrying space liner operations, as well as efforts now under way at XCOR Aerospace, Armadillo Aerospace, and Masten Space Systems among others.

Rick Bachtel, general manager of operations for Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne of Huntsville, Ala. Said, “What I see in the future is not government funding as much as it is going to be commercial.” Bachtel told reporter Mr. David, that his company has spun off a smaller group called Power Innovations to harness inventive and entrepreneurial ideas. The approach is to tap the firm's 3,000 to 4,000 engineers and bring ideas into the smaller group to spin off innovative technologies.

Leonard David goes on with his article by speaking with NASA administrator Mike Griffin, the former deputy for the SDI organization and a leader in the DC-X program. Taking the title from a popular book and HBO series about a group of soldiers, Mike Griffin referred to those who worked on the DC-X as a “Band of Brothers.” It is people that make the hard work of aerospace engineering indistinguishable from magic.” Griffin told attendees to this event. “Today a small private team can accomplish suborbital human spaceflight, a feat that once took the resources of a government to achieve. I'm personally convinced that manned orbital flight is within reach just barely of private enterprise today.” He went on referring that the United States has not followed up the DC-X with the kinds of technology that could revolutionize space transportation. “We need better propulsion, better materials, we need more investment into the technology of operations, which is at least half the cost. We need to create new paradigms in thinking of how we operate, just the way DC-X did. That doesn't come for free. And right now, policy makers don't seem to be willing to allocate that kind of money.”

Former SDI and shuttle astronaut Gary Payton, now deputy undersecretary of the Air Force for space programs compared DC-X to what is now know as Operationally Responsive Space. Payton was also NASA's deputy associate administrator for space transportation technology where he initiated, planned and lead the Reusable Launch Vehicle technology demonstration program which included the DC-XA flight test project. “The military needs short noticed, quick response, easy changes to the launch vehicle's ascent guidance in order to reconstitute lost space assets – sounds like it fits some of the things we were doing in DC-X.” Parts of the DC-X program are finding their way into the Operationally Responsive Space.

Well, that's Mr. David's article pretty much. Too much information to actually try to summarize although I probably could have if I really tried. I pretty much quoted the entire article because I really believed in the whole concept behind DC-X. In fact, when speaking with friends, I would refer to this vehicle as the “First Dropship.” For those of you who have ever played the game Battletech, you will know what that means. Those of you who have not – Battletech is a game set in the 31st century and the Inner Sphere is always at war with one another. Jumpships travel between start systems. They carry Dropships. A Dropship is a huge vessel capable of transporting several military vehicles known as BattleMechs, giant, robot like in appearance; they each have as much or more firepower than a 20th century tank platoon.

But, getting back to the DC-X. The U.S. Government is now stuck with Orion. They got their blinders on and cannot think of something else to do. Not that Congress would provide the funding anyway. It is going to take some future Virign Galactic/Scale Composites or some other company partnership to get Boeing off it's rear end and create the DC-X2 – the second generation.

Finally, I don't know if anybody else thought of this but, the DC-X could form the core element for a future Mars Lander. Maybe I can live long enough to witness the DC-X Phoenix class dropships traveling to Mars. I hope that it could be true.


(Ref. Space.com. September 1, 2008 “DC-X Honored for Its Contributions, Potential.” by Leonard David, Special Correspondent for Space.com. Dateline was Alamogordo, NM.).