A French Arian rocket launched the "world's largest commercial communications satellite" from French Guiana on Wednesday. The rocket released into orbit the TerreStar-1 satellite designed to provide hybrid telecommunications to satellite and cellular handsets about the same size as a conventional smartphone.
TerreStar weighed 6.9 tonnes (15,200 lb) at lift-off and was built by U.S. satellite manufacturer Loral Space & Communications In. Loral also manufactured the Sirius FM5 satellite.
Why are the Russians and the French launching US satellites. It's because George W. Bush contracted out the US Space Industry and also started plans to suspend the Space Shuttle Program.
MOSCOW - Russia will charge U.S. astronauts $51 million per return trip to the International Space Station (ISS) from 2012 and will also sell seats to space tourists, Russian news agencies reported on Wednesday. George W. Bush decided to mothball the Space Shuttle in 2010, so the US government now depends on the Russians for space travel and satellite launches.
US space program dependent on Russia launches
NASA needs to use the Russian Soyuz capsule because the Space Shuttle will be retired next year after nearly 3 decades in service. A replacement is not due until 2014.
Russia's own plans for a new spacecraft are running behind schedule according to Anatoly Perminov head of Russian space agency Roskosmos as saying.
He did not specify how much astronauts will be charged from 2010 to 2012. In 2006 Russia charged the United States $21.8 million per return flight to the ISS. Since then the price for of a space tourist ticket to the ISS has climbed from $20 million to $35 million.
The Bush reboot
In January 2004, President George W. Bush decided to "reboot" the space program, announcing his "Vision for Space Exploration" to go back to the moon and to eventually send humans to Mars.
There was a catch to the Bush plan: As part of the ambitious new program, the 30-year-old space-shuttle program will end next year, saving NASA $3 billion a year to spend on new spacecraft, the first of which is scheduled to fly in late 2015.
But that has created a gap in America's ability to launch astronauts and cargo to the International Space Station (ISS). For at least five years, NASA will depend primarily on Russia to get Americans into space, which doesn't sit well with many space experts and politicians.
As a result, NASA quickly became much friendlier to commercial ventures. In late 2005, then-agency Administrator Michael Griffin announced that NASA was considering buying crew and cargo transportation services to the ISS from private industry. Micheal Griifin is no longer tha NASA administrator.
Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, or SpaceX for short, founded by PayPal entrepreneur Elon Musk, was already hard at work on its Falcon series of rockets. It is trying to get NASA to fund the D-phase of COTS or COTS-D.
It also had done preliminary design work on a multipurpose capsule called the Dragon, which could be adapted to carry either crew or cargo to the ISS on a Falcon 9.
SpaceX was funded mostly by Musk's personal fortune, but also had a small number of contracts to launch satellites for the Defense Department and from overseas.
NASA, meanwhile, is racing to complete its last nine missions. In late 2005, then-agency Administrator Michael Griffin announced that NASA was considering buying crew and cargo transportation services to the ISS from private industry.
Another $170 million disbursement was awarded to Orbital Sciences Corporation of Dulles, Va., for its Taurus 2 launcher and Cygnus capsule combination.
Orbital, one of the few entrepreneurial space firms that have successfully gone from start-up to billion-dollar status, not only builds the Pegasus and Taurus launchers, but also has established a decent reputation building small-to-medium-sized commercial and scientific satellites and space probes.
Most importantly, both SpaceX and Orbital Sciences are well-funded and commercially viable, a crucial factor to NASA.
What next with a new NASA staff?
But not everyone in NASA's is pleased with this approach and President Obama is hiring a new NASA director and administrator.
"In order to preserve U.S. leadership in space, it would be better to invest in a lifting body lander, a spaceplane that would land on a runway like the Shuttle does now," Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin, the second man to walk on the moon, told FoxNews.com. "There is a [NASA] design called the HL-20 that could be launched on an existing reliable rocket and could be ready for a demonstration flight in 2013."
Republicans have been selling us the privatization bill of goods for a long time. Do we really want private industry competing with NASA? In the long term there is little evidence that privatization saves money.
Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955
Contact Rightardia: eelder1@gmail.com
Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/blogspot/Onjs
US space program dependent on Russia launches
NASA needs to use the Russian Soyuz capsule because the Space Shuttle will be retired next year after nearly 3 decades in service. A replacement is not due until 2014.
Russia's own plans for a new spacecraft are running behind schedule according to Anatoly Perminov head of Russian space agency Roskosmos as saying.
He did not specify how much astronauts will be charged from 2010 to 2012. In 2006 Russia charged the United States $21.8 million per return flight to the ISS. Since then the price for of a space tourist ticket to the ISS has climbed from $20 million to $35 million.
The Bush reboot
In January 2004, President George W. Bush decided to "reboot" the space program, announcing his "Vision for Space Exploration" to go back to the moon and to eventually send humans to Mars.
There was a catch to the Bush plan: As part of the ambitious new program, the 30-year-old space-shuttle program will end next year, saving NASA $3 billion a year to spend on new spacecraft, the first of which is scheduled to fly in late 2015.
But that has created a gap in America's ability to launch astronauts and cargo to the International Space Station (ISS). For at least five years, NASA will depend primarily on Russia to get Americans into space, which doesn't sit well with many space experts and politicians.
As a result, NASA quickly became much friendlier to commercial ventures. In late 2005, then-agency Administrator Michael Griffin announced that NASA was considering buying crew and cargo transportation services to the ISS from private industry. Micheal Griifin is no longer tha NASA administrator.
NASA and all other partners will be solely dependent on Russia for crew transport after the shuttle ceases operations.
End of the space shuttle
End of the space shuttle
NASA plans to replace the shuttles with Apollo-style capsules that in addition to traveling to the space station will be able to fly astronauts to the moon's surface.
The lay-offs began even as Congress recently approved a budget provision to keep the shuttle flying until 2011. The White House and NASA have identified 2010 as the end of the program. The lay-offs will have a big effect on space launches from Cape Canaveral, FL. Civilian contractors have already been laid off there.
Former President Bush ordered the 2010 retirement of the shuttle fleet in the aftermath of the 2003 Columbia disaster. The Space Shuttle is an expensive program and many critics have suggested it would be cheaper to use one way rocket like the Russians and French do.
The deadline was necessary to meet the schedule of the Constellation program that aims to develop a shuttle replacement and return astronauts to the moon. The first scheduled manned Constellation launch is scheduled for 2015.
Privatization of the space industry
As a result, NASA quickly became much friendlier to commercial ventures. In late 2005, then-agency Administrator Michael Griffin announced that NASA was considering buying crew and cargo transportation services to the ISS from private industry.
The Republican Administration and its NASA director thought it could contract out the US space industry.
In 2006, the first round of the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) contracts was won by SpaceX corporation of Hawthorne, Calif., which received a contract worth $278 million, and by Rocketplane Kistler of Oklahoma City, which was supposed to get $207 million.Former President Bush ordered the 2010 retirement of the shuttle fleet in the aftermath of the 2003 Columbia disaster. The Space Shuttle is an expensive program and many critics have suggested it would be cheaper to use one way rocket like the Russians and French do.
The deadline was necessary to meet the schedule of the Constellation program that aims to develop a shuttle replacement and return astronauts to the moon. The first scheduled manned Constellation launch is scheduled for 2015.
Privatization of the space industry
As a result, NASA quickly became much friendlier to commercial ventures. In late 2005, then-agency Administrator Michael Griffin announced that NASA was considering buying crew and cargo transportation services to the ISS from private industry.
The Republican Administration and its NASA director thought it could contract out the US space industry.
Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, or SpaceX for short, founded by PayPal entrepreneur Elon Musk, was already hard at work on its Falcon series of rockets. It is trying to get NASA to fund the D-phase of COTS or COTS-D.
It also had done preliminary design work on a multipurpose capsule called the Dragon, which could be adapted to carry either crew or cargo to the ISS on a Falcon 9.
SpaceX was funded mostly by Musk's personal fortune, but also had a small number of contracts to launch satellites for the Defense Department and from overseas.
NASA, meanwhile, is racing to complete its last nine missions. In late 2005, then-agency Administrator Michael Griffin announced that NASA was considering buying crew and cargo transportation services to the ISS from private industry.
Another $170 million disbursement was awarded to Orbital Sciences Corporation of Dulles, Va., for its Taurus 2 launcher and Cygnus capsule combination.
Orbital, one of the few entrepreneurial space firms that have successfully gone from start-up to billion-dollar status, not only builds the Pegasus and Taurus launchers, but also has established a decent reputation building small-to-medium-sized commercial and scientific satellites and space probes.
Most importantly, both SpaceX and Orbital Sciences are well-funded and commercially viable, a crucial factor to NASA.
What next with a new NASA staff?
But not everyone in NASA's is pleased with this approach and President Obama is hiring a new NASA director and administrator.
"In order to preserve U.S. leadership in space, it would be better to invest in a lifting body lander, a spaceplane that would land on a runway like the Shuttle does now," Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin, the second man to walk on the moon, told FoxNews.com. "There is a [NASA] design called the HL-20 that could be launched on an existing reliable rocket and could be ready for a demonstration flight in 2013."
Republicans have been selling us the privatization bill of goods for a long time. Do we really want private industry competing with NASA? In the long term there is little evidence that privatization saves money.
Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955
Contact Rightardia: eelder1@gmail.com
Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/blogspot/Onjs
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are not moderated but Rightardia will remove Spam, profane and abusive comments.