Commercial space

Rocket Report: Sneak peek at the business end of New Glenn; France to fly FROG

astra, blue origin, china, Commercial space, launch, new glenn, new shepard, rocket report, Science, Space, starship, united launch alliance, vulcan / Kris Guyer / October 26, 2024

“The vehicle’s max design gimbal condition is during ascent when it has to fight high-altitude winds.”

Blue Origin’s first New Glenn rocket, with seven BE-4 engines installed inside the company’s production facility near NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Credit: Blue Origin

Welcome to Edition 7.17 of the Rocket Report! Next week marks 10 years since one of the more spectacular launch failures of this century. On October 28, 2014, an Antares rocket, then operated by Orbital Sciences, suffered an engine failure six seconds after liftoff from Virginia and crashed back onto the pad in a fiery twilight explosion. I was there and won’t forget seeing the rocket falter just above the pad, being shaken by the deafening blast, and then running for cover. The Antares rocket is often an afterthought in the space industry, but it has an interesting backstory touching on international geopolitics, space history, and novel engineering. Now, Northrop Grumman and Firefly Aerospace are developing a new version of Antares.

As always, we welcome reader submissions. If you don’t want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.

Astra gets a lifeline from DOD. Astra, the launch startup that was taken private again earlier this year for a sliver of its former value, has landed a new contract with the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) to support the development of a next-gen launch system for time-sensitive space missions, TechCrunch reports. The contract, which the DIU awarded under its Novel Responsive Space Delivery (NRSD) program, has a maximum value of $44 million. The money will go toward the continued development of Astra’s Launch System 2, designed to perform rapid, ultra-low-cost launches.

Guarantees? … It wasn’t clear from the initial reporting how much money DIU is actually committing to Astra, which said the contract will fund continued development of Launch System 2. Launch System 2 includes a small-class launch vehicle with a similarly basic name, Rocket 4, and mobile ground infrastructure designed to be rapidly set up at austere spaceports. Adam London, founder and chief technology officer at Astra, said the contract award is a “major vote of confidence” in the company. If Astra can capitalize on the opportunity, this would be quite a remarkable turnaround. After going public at an initial valuation of $2.1 billion, or $12.90 per share, Astra endured multiple launch failures with its previous rocket and risked bankruptcy before the company’s co-founders, Chris Kemp and Adam London, took the company private again this year at a price of just $0.50 per share. (submitted by Ken the Bin and EllPeaTea)

Blue Origin debuts a new New Shepard. Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin space venture successfully sent a brand-new New Shepard rocket ship on an uncrewed shakedown cruise Wednesday, with the aim of increasing the company’s capacity to take people on suborbital space trips, GeekWire reports. The capsule, dubbed RSS Karman Line, carried payloads instead of people when it lifted off from Blue Origin’s Launch Site One in West Texas. But if all the data collected during the 10-minute certification flight checks out, it won’t be long before crews climb aboard for similar flights.

Now there are two … With this week’s flight, Blue Origin now has two human-rated suborbital capsules in its fleet, along with two boosters. This should allow the company to ramp up the pace of its human missions, which have historically flown at a cadence of about one flight every two to three months. The new capsule, named for the internationally recognized boundary of space 62 miles (100 kilometers) above Earth, features upgrades to improve performance and ease reusability. (submitted by Ken the Bin and EllPeaTea)

The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s and Stephen Clark’s reporting on all things space is to sign up for our newsletter. We’ll collect their stories and deliver them straight to your inbox.

Sign Me Up!

China has a new space tourism company. Chinese launch startup Deep Blue Aerospace targets providing suborbital tourism flights starting in 2027, Space News reports. The company was already developing a partially reusable orbital rocket named Nebula-1 for satellite launches and recently lost a reusable booster test vehicle during a low-altitude test flight. While Deep Blue moves forward with more Nebula-1 testing before its first orbital launch, the firm is now selling tickets for rides to suborbital space on a six-person capsule. The first two tickets were expected to be sold Thursday in a promotional livestream event.

Architectural considerations … Deep Blue has a shot at becoming China’s first space tourism company and one of only a handful in the world, joining US-based Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic in the market for suborbital flights. Deep Blue’s design will be a single-stage reusable rocket and crew capsule, similar to Blue Origin’s New Shepard, capable of flying above the Kármán line and providing up to 10 minutes of microgravity experience for its passengers before returning to the ground. A ticket, presumably for a round trip, will cost about $210,000. (submitted by Ken the Bin)

France’s space agency aims to launch a FROG. French space agency CNES will begin flight testing a small reusable rocket demonstrator called FROG-H in 2025, European Spaceflight reports. FROG is a French acronym that translates to Rocket for GNC demonstration, and its purpose is to test landing algorithms for reusable launch vehicles. CNES manages the program in partnership with French nonprofits and universities. At 11.8 feet (3.6 meters) tall, FROG is the smallest launch vehicle prototype at CNES, which says it will test concepts and technologies at small scale before incorporating them into Europe’s larger vertical takeoff/vertical landing test rockets like Callisto and Themis. Eventually, the idea is for all this work to lead to a reusable European orbital-class rocket.

Building on experience … CNES flew a jet-powered demonstrator named FROG-T on five test flights beginning in May 2019, reaching a maximum altitude of about 100 feet (30 meters). FROG-H will be powered by a hydrogen peroxide rocket engine developed by the Łukasiewicz Institute of Aviation in Poland under a European Space Agency contract. The first flights of FROG-H are scheduled for early 2025. The structure of the FROG project seeks to “break free from traditional development methods” by turning to “teams of enthusiasts” to rapidly develop and test solutions through an experimental approach, CNES says on its website. (submitted by EllPeaTea and Ken the Bin)

Falcon 9 sweeps NSSL awards. The US Space Force’s Space Systems Command announced on October 18 it has ordered nine launches from SpaceX in the first batch of dozens of missions the military will buy in a new phase of competition for lucrative national security launch contracts, Ars reports. The parameters of the competition limited the bidders to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance (ULA). SpaceX won both task orders for a combined value of $733.5 million, or roughly $81.5 million per mission. Six of the nine missions will launch from Vandenberg Space Force Base, California, beginning as soon as late 2025. The other three will launch from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida.

Head-to-head … This was the first set of contract awards by the Space Force’s National Security Space Launch (NSSL) Phase 3 procurement round and represents one of the first head-to-head competitions between SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and ULA’s Vulcan rocket. The nine launches were divided into two separate orders, and SpaceX won both. The missions will deploy payloads for the National Reconnaissance Office and the Space Development Agency. (submitted by Ken the Bin)

SpaceX continues deploying NRO megaconstellation. SpaceX launched more surveillance satellites for the National Reconnaissance Office Thursday aboard a Falcon 9 rocket, Spaceflight Now reports. While the secretive spy satellite agency did not identify the number or exact purpose of the satellites, the Falcon 9 likely deployed around 20 spacecraft believed to be based on SpaceX’s Starshield satellite bus, a derivative of the Starlink spacecraft platform, with participation from Northrop Grumman. These satellites host classified sensors for the NRO. This is the fourth SpaceX launch for the NRO’s new satellite fleet, which seeks to augment the agency’s bespoke multibillion-dollar spy satellites with a network of smaller, cheaper, more agile platforms in low-Earth orbit.

The century mark … This mission, officially designated NROL-167, was the 100th flight of a Falcon 9 rocket this year and the 105th SpaceX launch overall in 2024. The NRO has not said how many satellites will make up its fleet when completed, but the intelligence agency says it will be the US government’s largest satellite constellation in history. By the end of the year, the NRO expects to have 100 or more of these satellites in orbit, allowing the agency to transition from a demonstration mode to an operational mode to deliver intelligence data to military and government users. Many more launches are expected through 2028. (submitted by Ken the Bin)

ULA is stacking its third Vulcan rocket. United Launch Alliance has started assembling its next Vulcan rocket—the first destined to launch a US military payload—as the Space Force prepares to certify it to loft the Pentagon’s most precious national security satellites, Ars reports. Space Force officials expect to approve ULA’s Vulcan rocket for military missions without requiring another test flight, despite an unusual problem on the rocket’s second demonstration flight earlier this month, when one of Vulcan’s two strap-on solid-fueled boosters lost its nozzle shortly after liftoff.

Pending certification … Despite the nozzle failure, the Vulcan rocket continued climbing into space and eventually reached its planned injection orbit, and the Space Force and ULA declared the test flight a success. Still, engineers want to understand what caused the nozzle to break apart and decide on corrective actions before the Space Force clears the Vulcan rocket to launch a critical national security payload. This could take a little longer than expected due to the booster problem, but Space Force officials still hope to certify the Vulcan rocket in time to support a national security launch by the end of the year.

Blue Origin’s first New Glenn has all its engines. Blue Origin published a photo Thursday on X showing all seven first-stage BE-4 engines installed on the base of the company’s first New Glenn rocket. This is a notable milestone as Blue Origin proceeds toward the first launch of the heavy-lifter, possibly before the end of the year. But there’s a lot of work for Blue Origin to accomplish before then. These steps include rolling the rocket to the launch pad, running through propellant loading tests and practice countdowns, and then test-firing all seven BE-4 engines on the pad at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida.

Seven for seven … The BE-4 engines will consume methane fuel mixed with liquid oxygen for the first few minutes of the New Glenn flight, generating more than 3.8 million pounds of combined thrust. The seven BE-4s on New Glenn are similar to the BE-4 engines that fly two at a time on ULA’s Vulcan rocket. Dave Limp, Blue Origin’s CEO, said three of the seven engines on the New Glenn first stage have thrust vector control capability to provide steering during launch, reentry, and landing on the company’s offshore recovery vessel. “That gimbal capability, along with the landing gear and Reaction Control System thrusters, are key to making our booster fully reusable,” Limp wrote on X. “Fun fact: The vehicle’s max design gimbal condition is during ascent when it has to fight high-altitude winds.”

Next Super Heavy booster test-fired in Texas. SpaceX fired up the Raptor engines on its next Super Heavy booster, numbered Booster 13, Thursday evening at the company’s launch site in South Texas. This happened just 11 days after SpaceX launched and caught the Super Heavy booster on the previous Starship test flight and signals SpaceX could be ready for the next Starship test flight sometime in November. SpaceX has already test-fired the Starship upper stage for the next flight.

Great expectations … We expect the next Starship flight, which will be program’s sixth full-scale demo mission, will include another booster catch back at the launch tower at Starbase, Texas. SpaceX may also attempt to reignite a Raptor engine on the Starship upper stage while it is in space, demonstrating the capability to steer itself back into the atmosphere on future flights. So far, SpaceX has only launched Starships on long, arcing suborbital trajectories that carry the vehicle halfway around the world before reentry. In order to actually launch a Starship into a stable orbit around Earth, SpaceX will want to show it can bring the vehicle back so it doesn’t reenter the atmosphere in an uncontrolled manner. An uncontrolled reentry of a large spacecraft like Starship could pose a public safety risk.

Next three launches

Oct. 26: Falcon 9 | Starlink 10-8 | Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida | 21: 47 UTC

Oct. 29: Falcon 9 | Starlink 9-9 | Vandenberg Space Force Base, California | 11: 30 UTC

Oct. 30: H3 | Kirameki 3 | Tanegashima Space Center, Japan | 06: 46 UTC

Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet.

Rocket Report: Sneak peek at the business end of New Glenn; France to fly FROG Read More »

Boeing is still bleeding money on the Starliner commercial crew program

Boeing, commercial crew, Commercial space, human spaceflight, NASA, Science, Space, starliner / Rejus Almole / October 24, 2024

“We signed up to some things that are problematic.”

Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft backs away from the International Space Station on September 6 without its crew. Credit: NASA

Sometimes, it’s worth noting when something goes unsaid.

On Wednesday, Boeing’s new CEO, Kelly Ortberg, participated in his first quarterly conference call with investment analysts. Under fire from labor groups and regulators, Boeing logged a nearly $6.2 billion loss for the last three months, while the new boss pledged a turnaround for the troubled aerospace company.

What Ortberg didn’t mention in the call was the Starliner program. Starliner is a relatively small portion of Boeing’s overall business, but it’s a high-profile and unprofitable one.

Mounting losses

Boeing has reported recurring financial losses on the program and added $250 million to the tally with Wednesday’s quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. This brings the company’s total losses on Starliner to $1.85 billion, recorded in increments over the last few years as the program has faced technical problems and delays.

In its SEC filing, Boeing wrote: “Risk remains that we may record additional losses in future periods.”

Boeing runs the Starliner program under a fixed-price contract with NASA, meaning the government pays the contractor a set amount of money, and the company is on the hook for any cost overruns. These are favorable terms for the government because they divert financial risk to the contractor, usually resulting in lower costs if the program is successful.

Since the last Starliner test flight ended in a disappointing fashion, Boeing has released no updates on its plans for the future of the spacecraft. The company released a short written statement after Starliner landed in early September, saying managers would review data and “determine the next steps for the program.”

A week after Starliner landed, Boeing’s chief financial officer, Brian West, echoed that line. “There is important work to determine any next steps for the Starliner program, and we’ll evaluate that,” he said at a conference sponsored by Morgan Stanley.

A member of the Starliner recovery team removes cargo from the spacecraft after landing in New Mexico on September 6, without its two-person crew. Credit: NASA/Aubrey Gemignani

Starliner concluded its third test flight a little more than six weeks ago, leaving behind the two astronauts the craft ferried to the International Space Station earlier in the year. This was the first time people flew into orbit on a Starliner spacecraft.

NASA, which partnered with Boeing to develop the Starliner spacecraft, decided the Boeing capsule should return to Earth without its crew after the test flight encountered problems with overheating thrusters and helium leaks. The spacecraft safely reached the space station with NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams in June, but agency officials were not comfortable with risking the crew’s safety on Starliner for the trip home. Instead, the duo will return to Earth on a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft early next year.

Boeing managers had a different opinion and lobbied for Starliner to return to Earth with Wilmore and Williams. Ultimately, the Starliner spacecraft parachuted to a successful landing at White Sands Space Harbor, New Mexico, on September 6, but there’s a lot of work ahead for Boeing to fix the thruster problems and helium leaks before the capsule can fly with people again. This will take many months—potentially a year or more—and will cost Boeing hundreds of millions of dollars, as shown in Wednesday’s SEC filing.

Doing less

In response to questions Wednesday from Wall Street investment firms, Ortberg, who took the CEO job in August, suggested it’s time for Boeing to look at cutting some of its losses and recalibrate how it pursues new business opportunities. Boeing’s previous CEO, Dave Calhoun, said last year the company would no longer enter into fixed-price development contracts.

“I think that that we’re better off being doing less and doing it better than doing more and not doing it well,” Ortberg said. “So we’re in the process of taking an evaluation of the portfolio. It’s something a new CEO always does when you come into a business.”

Most of Boeing’s financial loss in the third quarter of this year came from the company’s commercial airplane business. Beset by safety concerns with its 737 Max aircraft and a labor strike that has halted production at many of its airplane factories, Boeing posted its worst quarterly performance since the height of the COVID pandemic in 2020.

Even before the strike, the Federal Aviation Administration capped Boeing’s production rate for the 737 Max, limiting revenue for the commercial airplane business.

Ortberg didn’t specify any programs that Boeing might consider trimming or canceling, but said the company’s “core” business of commercial airplanes and military systems will stay.

“There are probably some things on the fringe there that we can be more efficient with, or that just distract us from our main goal here. So, more to come on that,” Ortberg said. “I don’t have a specific list of things that we’re going to keep and we’re not going to keep. That’s something for us to evaluate, and the process is underway.”

Kelly Ortberg, Boeing’s new CEO, is pictured in 2016 during his tenure as chief executive of Rockwell Collins. Credit: Daniel Acker/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Apart from technical execution, Ortberg identified Boeing’s errors in cost and risk estimation as other reasons for the company’s poor performance on several fixed-price government contracts, including Starliner.

“We’re not going to be able to just wave the wand and clean up these troubled contracts,” he said. “We signed up to some things that are problematic.”

Ortberg said he is reluctant to ditch all of Boeing’s troubled contracts. “Even if we wanted to, I don’t think we can walk away from these contracts,” he said. “These are our core customers that need this capability. We’ve got long-term commitments to them. So walking away isn’t an answer to this.”

However, Orberg added that Boeing could reassess programs as they shift from one contract phase to the next. NASA’s commercial crew contract with Boeing has a maximum value of $4.6 billion, but that assumes the agency gives Boeing the green light to fly six operational Starliner missions.

So far, NASA has only authorized Boeing to begin detailed preparations for three. The latter half of the commercial crew contract remains a question mark, and could be an opportunity for Boeing to reevaluate the Starliner program without breaking its obligations to NASA. This is especially salient because NASA plans to decommission the International Space Station in 2030, and it’s not clear Boeing could fly all six of its Starliner missions before then while still alternating with SpaceX for crew transportation duties.

“We do have to get into a position where we’ve got a portfolio much more balanced with less risky programs and more profitable programs, and we’re going to be working that,” Ortberg said. “But I don’t think a wholesale walkaway is in the cards.”

This statement makes it sound like Boeing isn’t going to pull the plug on Starliner immediately. Still, Boeing hasn’t laid out its specific plans for Starliner, or even confirmed its intention to keep working on the program. This is puzzling.

Saying nothing

Ortberg was not asked about Starliner in Wednesday’s investor call. After the call, Ars asked a Boeing spokesperson if the company still has a long-term commitment to the Starliner program. The spokesperson replied that the company has nothing to share on the topic.

The Starliner test flight this year was supposed to pave the way for NASA to officially certify the Boeing crew capsule to begin flying in a slate of up to six operational crew rotation flights to the space station. Once certified, Boeing will become NASA’s second crew transportation provider alongside SpaceX, which has now launched nine operational crew missions for NASA, plus a handful more all-private astronaut missions.

NASA still wants to certify Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft to provide the agency with a second commercial option for getting astronauts into orbit. A fundamental goal set out for NASA’s commercial crew program more than a decade ago was to develop two dissimilar human-rated transportation systems for access to low-Earth orbit. The idea here is competition will drive down costs, and NASA will have a backup option if one of the commercial crew providers runs into difficulties.

However, NASA has not announced whether it will require Boeing to complete another test flight to achieve the certification milestone with Starliner. NASA is looking at slots to fly an unpiloted Starliner spacecraft on a cargo mission to the space station next year, perhaps to verify modifications to the ship’s propulsion system really fix the problems discovered on the test flight this year.

NASA is making moves while assuming Boeing will stay in the game. Astronauts are still assigned to train for the first operational Starliner mission, although it’s not likely to happen until the end of next year or in 2026. Earlier this month, NASA announced SpaceX will launch a four-person crew to the International Space Station no earlier than July of next year, taking a slot that the agency once hoped Boeing would use.

Bill Nelson, NASA’s administrator, told reporters in late August that he received assurances from Ortberg that Boeing intends to “move forward and fly Starliner in the future.” At the time, Ortberg was just a couple of weeks into his tenure at Boeing.

Two months later, Nelson’s secondhand assertion is still all we have.

Boeing is still bleeding money on the Starliner commercial crew program Read More »

After seeing hundreds of launches, SpaceX’s rocket catch was a new thrill

Commercial space, launch, Science, Space, spacex, Starbase, starship, super heavy / Rejus Almole / October 21, 2024

For a few moments, my viewing angle made it look like the rocket was coming right at me.

Coming in for the catch. Credit: Stephen Clark/Ars Technica

BOCA CHICA BEACH, Texas—I’ve taken some time to process what happened on the mudflats of South Texas a little more than a week ago and relived the scene in my mind countless times.

With each replay, it’s still as astonishing as it was when I saw it on October 13, standing on an elevated platform less than 4 miles away. It was surreal watching SpaceX’s enormous 20-story-tall Super Heavy rocket booster plummeting through the sky before being caught back at its launch pad by giant mechanical arms.

This is the way, according to SpaceX, to enable a future where it’s possible to rapidly reuse rockets, not too different from the way airlines turn around their planes between flights. This is required for SpaceX to accomplish the company’s mission, set out by Elon Musk two decades ago, of building a settlement on Mars.

Of course, SpaceX’s cameras got much better views of the catch than mine. This is one of my favorite video clips.

The final phase of Super Heavy’s landing burn used the three center Raptor engines to precisely steer into catch position pic.twitter.com/BxQbOmT4yk

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) October 14, 2024

In the near-term future, regularly launching and landing Super Heavy boosters, and eventually the Starship upper stage that goes into orbit, will make it possible for SpaceX to achieve the rapid-fire launch cadence the company needs to fulfill its contracts with NASA. The space agency is paying SpaceX roughly $4 billion to develop a human-rated version of Starship to land astronauts on the Moon under the umbrella of the Artemis program.

To make that happen, SpaceX must launch numerous Starship tankers over the course of a few weeks to a few months to refuel the Moon-bound Starship lander in low-Earth orbit. Rapid reuse is fundamental to the lunar lander architecture NASA chose for the first two Artemis landing missions.

SpaceX, which is funding most of Starship’s development costs, says upgraded versions will be capable of hauling 200 metric tons of payload to low-Earth orbit while flying often at a relatively low cost. This would unlock innumerable other potential applications for the US military and commercial industry.

Here’s a sampling of the photos I captured of SpaceX’s launch and catch, followed by the story of how I got them.

The fifth full-scale test flight of SpaceX’s new-generation Starship rocket lifted off from South Texas at sunrise Sunday morning. Stephen Clark/Ars Technica

Some context

I probably spent too much time watching last week’s flight through my camera’s viewfinder, but I suspect I’ll see it many more times. After all, SpaceX wants to make this a routine occurrence, more common than the landings of the smaller Falcon 9 booster now happening several times per week.

Nine years ago, I watched from 7 miles away as SpaceX landed a Falcon 9 for the first time. This was the closest anyone not directly involved in the mission could watch as the Falcon 9’s first stage returned to Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida, a few minutes after lifting off with a batch of commercial communications satellites.

Citing safety concerns, NASA and the US Air Force closed large swaths of the spaceport for the flight. Journalists and VIPs were kept far away, and the locations on the base where employees or special guests typically watch a launch were off-limits. The landing happened at night and played out like a launch in reverse, with the Falcon 9 booster settling to a smooth touchdown on a concrete landing pad a few miles from the launch site.

The Falcon 9 landing on December 21, 2015, came after several missed landings on SpaceX’s floating offshore drone ship. With the Super Heavy booster, SpaceX nailed the catch on the first try.

The catch method means the rocket doesn’t need to carry landing legs, as the Falcon 9 does. This reduces the rocket’s weight and complexity, and theoretically reduces the amount of time and money needed to prepare the rocket to fly again.

I witnessed the first catch of SpaceX’s Super Heavy booster last week from just outside the restricted zone around the company’s sprawling Starbase launch site in South Texas. Deputies from the local sheriff’s office patrolled the area to ensure no one strayed inside the keep-out area and set up roadblocks to turn away anyone who wasn’t supposed to be there.

The launch was early in the morning, so I arrived late the night before at a viewing site run by Rocket Ranch, a campground that caters to SpaceX fans seeking a front-row seat to the goings-on at Starbase. Some SpaceX employees, several other reporters, and media photographers were there, too.

There are other places to view a Starship launch. Condominium and hotel towers on South Padre Island roughly 6 miles from the launch pad, a little farther than my post, offer commanding aerial views of Starbase, which is situated on Boca Chica Beach a few miles north of the US-Mexico border. The closest publicly accessible place to watch a Starship launch is on the south shore of the mouth of the Rio Grande River, but if you’re coming from the United States, getting there requires crossing the border and driving off-road.

People gather at the Rocket Ranch viewing site near Boca Chica Beach, Texas, before the third Starship test flight in March. Credit: Brandon Bell/Getty Images

I chose a location with an ambiance somewhere in between the hustle and bustle of South Padre Island and the isolated beach just across the border in Mexico. The vibe on the eve of the launch had the mix of a rave and a pilgrimage of SpaceX true believers.

A laser light show projected the outline of a Starship against a tree as uptempo EDM tracks blared from speakers. Meanwhile, dark skies above revealed cosmic wonders invisible to most city dwellers, and behind us, the Rio Grande inexorably flowed toward the sea. Those of us who were there to work got a few hours of sleep, but I’m not sure I can say the same for everyone.

At first light, a few scattered yucca plants sticking up from the chaparral were the only things between us and SpaceX’s sky-scraping Starship rocket on the horizon. We got word the launch time would slip 25 minutes. SpaceX chose the perfect time to fly, with a crystal-clear sky hued by the rising Sun.

First, you see it

I was at Starbase for all four previous Starship test flights and have covered more than 300 rocket launches in person. I’ve been privileged to witness a lot of history, but after hundreds of launches, some of the novelty has worn off. Don’t get me wrong—I still feel a lump in my throat every time I see a rocket leave the planet. Prelaunch jitters are a real thing. But I no longer view every launch as a newsworthy event.

October 13 was different.

Those prelaunch anxieties were present as SpaceX counted off the final seconds to liftoff. First, you see it. A blast of orange flashed from the bottom of the gleaming, frosty rocket filled with super-cold propellants. Then, the 11 million-pound vehicle began a glacial climb from the launch pad. About 20 seconds later, the rumble from the rocket’s 33 methane-fueled engines reached our location.

Our viewing platform shook from the vibrations for over a minute as Starship and the Super Heavy booster soared into the stratosphere. Two-and-a-half minutes into the flight, the rocket was just a point of bluish-white light as it accelerated east over the Gulf of Mexico.

Another burst of orange encircled the rocket during the so-called hot-staging maneuver, when the Starship upper stage lit its engines at the moment the Super Heavy booster detached to begin the return to Starbase. Flying at the edge of space more than 300,000 feet over the Gulf, the booster flipped around and fired its engines to cancel out its downrange velocity and propel itself back toward the coastline.

The engines shut down, and the booster plunged deeper into the atmosphere. Eventually, the booster transformed from a dot in the sky back into the shape of a rocket as it approached Starbase at supersonic speed. The rocket’s velocity became more evident as it got closer. For a few moments, my viewing angle made it look like the rocket—bigger than the fuselage of a 747 jumbo jet—was coming right at me.

The descending booster zoomed through the contrail cloud it left behind during launch, then reappeared into clear air. With the naked eye, I could see a glow inside the rocket’s engine bay as it dived toward the launch pad, presumably from heat generated as the vehicle slammed into ever-denser air on the way back to Earth. This phenomenon made the rocket resemble a lit cigar.

Finally, the rocket hit the brakes by igniting 13 of its 33 engines, then downshifted to three engines for the final maneuver to slide in between the launch tower’s two catch arms. Like balancing a pencil on the tip of your finger, the Raptor engines vectored their thrust to steady the booster, which, for a moment, appeared to be floating next to the tower.

The Super Heavy booster, more than 20 stories tall, rights itself over the launch pad in Texas, moments before two mechanical arms grabbed it in mid-air. Credit: Stephen Clark/Ars Technica

A double-clap sonic boom jolted spectators from their slack-jawed awe. Only then could we hear the roar from the start of the Super Heavy booster’s landing burn. This sound reached us just as the rocket settled into the grasp of the launch tower, with its so-called catch fittings coming into contact with the metallic beams of the catch arms.

The engines switched off, and there it was. Many of the spectators lucky enough to be there jumped up and down with joy, hugged their friends, or let out an ecstatic yell. I snapped a few final photos and returned to his laptop, grinning, speechless, and started wondering how I could put this all into words.

Once the smoke cleared, at first glance, the rocket looked as good as new. There was no soot on the outside of the booster, as it is on the Falcon 9 rocket after returning from space. This is because the Super Heavy booster and Starship use cleaner-burning methane fuel instead of kerosene.

Elon Musk, SpaceX’s founder and CEO, later said the outer ring of engine nozzles on the bottom of the rocket showed signs of heating damage. This, he said, would be “easily addressed.”

What’s not so easy to address is how SpaceX can top this. A landing on the Moon or Mars? Sure, but realistically, those milestones are years off. There’s something that’ll happen before then.

Sometime soon, SpaceX will try to catch a Starship back at the launch pad at the end of an orbital flight. This will be an extraordinarily difficult feat, far exceeding the challenge of catching the Super Heavy booster.

Super Heavy only reaches a fraction of the altitude and speed of the Starship upper stage, and while the booster’s size and the catch method add degrees of difficulty, the rocket follows much the same up-and-down flight profile pioneered by the Falcon 9. Starship, on the other hand, will reenter the atmosphere from orbital velocity, streak through the sky surrounded by super-heated plasma, then shift itself into a horizontal orientation for a final descent SpaceX likes to call the “belly flop.”

In the last few seconds, Starship will reignite three of its engines, flip itself vertical, and come down for a precision landing. SpaceX demonstrated the ship could do this on the test flight last week, when the vehicle made a controlled on-target splashdown in the Indian Ocean after traveling halfway around the world from Texas.

If everything goes according to plan, SpaceX could be ready to try to catch a Starship for real next year. Stay tuned.

After seeing hundreds of launches, SpaceX’s rocket catch was a new thrill Read More »

Biden administration curtails controls on some space-related exports

Commercial space, Export controls, ITAR, national security, Science, Space / Tim Belzer / October 19, 2024

The US Commerce Department announced Thursday it is easing restrictions on exports of space-related technology, answering a yearslong call from space companies to reform regulations governing international trade.

This is the most significant update to space-related export regulations in a decade and opens more opportunities for US companies to sell their satellite hardware abroad.

“We are very excited about this rollout,” a senior Commerce official said during a background call with reporters. “It’s been a long time coming, and I think it’s going to be very meaningful for our national security and foreign policy interests and certainly facilitate secure trade with our partners.”

Overdue reform

One of the changes will allow US companies to export more products related to electro-optical and radar remote sensing, as well as space-based logistics, assembly, or servicing spacecraft destined for Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom.

“They’re easing restrictions on some of the less sensitive space-related technologies and on spacecraft-related items going to our closest allies, like Australia, Canada, and the UK,” the senior Commerce official said. “These changes will offer relief to US companies and they’ll increase innovation without comprising the critical technologies that keep our nation safe.”

Another update to the Commerce Department’s regulations will remove license requirements for exports of “certain spacecraft components” to more than 40 allied nations, including NATO and European Union member states, Argentina, Australia, Canada, India, Israel, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, and Taiwan. This will also create more license exceptions to support NASA’s cooperative programs with other nations, officials said.

A third change, which hasn’t been finalized and must go through a public comment period, proposes to transfer some space-related item—spacecraft capable of in-space docking, grappling, and refueling, autonomous collision avoidance, and autonomous detection of ground vehicles and aircraft—from the highly restrictive State Department’s US Munitions List to the more flexible Commerce Control List.

Biden administration curtails controls on some space-related exports Read More »

Starship is about to launch on its fifth flight, and this time there’s a catch

Commercial space, launch, Science, Space, spacex, Starbase, starship, texas / Paul Patrick / October 13, 2024

“We landed with half a centimeter accuracy in the ocean, so we think we have a reasonable chance to come back to the tower,” Gerstenmaier said.

Launch playbook

The Starship upper stage, meanwhile, will light six Raptor engines to accelerate to nearly orbital velocity, giving the rocket enough oomph to coast halfway around the world before falling back into the atmosphere over the Indian Ocean.

This is a similar trajectory to the one Starship flew in June, when it survived a fiery reentry for a controlled splashdown. It was the first time SpaceX completed an end-to-end Starship test flight. Onboard cameras showed fragments of the heat shield falling off Starship when it reentered the atmosphere, but the vehicle maintained control and reignited its Raptor engines, flipped from a horizontal to a vertical orientation, and settled into the Indian Ocean northwest of Australia.

After analyzing the results from the June mission, SpaceX engineers decided to rework the heat shield for the next Starship vehicle. The company said its technicians spent more than 12,000 hours replacing the entire thermal protection system with new-generation tiles, a backup ablative layer, and additional protections between the ship’s flap structures.

From start to finish, Sunday’s test flight should last approximately 1 hour and 5 minutes.

This diagram illustrates the path the Super Heavy booster will take to return to the launch pad in Texas, while the Starship upper stage continues the climb to space. Credit: SpaceX

Here’s an overview of the key events during Sunday’s flight:

• T+00: 00: 02: Liftoff

• T+00: 01: 02: Maximum aerodynamic pressure

• T+00: 02: 33: Super Heavy MECO (most engines cut off)

• T+00: 02: 41: Stage separation and ignition of Starship engines

• T+00: 02: 48: Super Heavy boost-back burn start

• T+00: 03: 41: Super Heavy boost-back burn shutdown

• T+00: 03: 43: Hot staging ring jettison

• T+00: 06: 08: Super Heavy is subsonic

• T+00: 06: 33: Super Heavy landing burn start

• T+00: 06: 56: Super Heavy landing burn shutdown and catch attempt

• T+00: 08: 27: Starship engine cutoff

• T+00: 48: 03: Starship reentry

• T+01: 02: 34: Starship is transonic

• T+01: 03: 43: Starship is subsonic

• T+01: 05: 15: Starship landing flip

• T+01: 05: 20: Starship landing burn

• T+01: 05: 34: Starship splashdown in Indian Ocean

SpaceX officials hope to see Starship’s heat shield stay intact as it dips into the atmosphere, when temperatures will reach 2,600° Fahrenheit (1,430° Celsius), hot enough to melt aluminum, the metal used to build many launch vehicles. SpaceX chose stainless steel for Starship because it strong at cryogenic temperatures—the rocket consumes super-cold fuel and oxidizer—and has a higher melting point than aluminum.

Starship is about to launch on its fifth flight, and this time there’s a catch Read More »

SpaceX’s next Starship launch—and first catch—could happen this weekend

Commercial space, Federal Aviation Administration, launch, Science, Space, spacex, Starbase, starship / Rejus Almole / October 8, 2024

The FAA is still reviewing plans for the fifth Starship test flight, but could approve it soon.

SpaceX’s fully-stacked Super Heavy booster and Starship upper stage at the company’s launch site in South Texas. Credit: SpaceX

We may not have to wait as long as we thought for the next test flight of SpaceX’s Starship rocket.

The world’s most powerful launcher could fly again as soon as Sunday, SpaceX says, assuming the Federal Aviation Administration grants approval. The last public statement released from the FAA suggested the agency didn’t expect to determine whether to approve a commercial launch license for SpaceX’s next Starship test flight before late November.

There’s some optimism at SpaceX that the FAA might issue a launch license much sooner, perhaps in time for Starship to fly this weekend. The launch window Sunday opens at 7 am CDT (8 am EDT; 12: 00 UTC), about a half-hour before sunrise at SpaceX’s Starbase launch site in South Texas.

“The fifth flight test of Starship will aim to take another step towards full and rapid reusability,” SpaceX wrote in an update posted on its website. “The primary objectives will be attempting the first ever return to launch site and catch of the Super Heavy booster and another Starship reentry and landing burn, aiming for an on-target splashdown of Starship in the Indian Ocean.”

Stacked together, the Super Heavy booster, or first stage, and the Starship upper stage stand nearly 400 feet (121 meters) tall. The Super Heavy booster—itself bigger than the fuselage of a 747 jumbo jet—will vertically return to the Starbase launch pad guided by cold gas thrusters, aerodynamic grid fins, and propulsive maneuvers with its methane-fueled Raptor engines.

Once the booster’s Raptor engines slow it to a hover, mechanical arms on the launch pad tower will close in around the rocket and capture it in midair. If you’re into rockets, or just want to spice up your morning, you don’t want to miss this. We’ll have a more detailed story before the launch previewing the timeline of events.

Safety measures

The FAA has been reviewing SpaceX’s plans to bring the Super Heavy booster back to the Starbase launch pad for months.

Most recently, the agency’s review of SpaceX’s proposed flight plan has focused on the effects of the rocket’s sonic boom as it comes back to Earth. The FAA and other agencies are also studying how a disposable section of the booster, called a hot-staging ring, might impact the environment when it falls into the sea just offshore from Starbase, located on the Gulf Coast east of Brownsville.

During SpaceX’s most recent Starship test flight in June, the Super Heavy booster completed a control descent to a predetermined location in the Gulf of Mexico, giving engineers enough confidence to try a return to the launch site on the next mission.

SpaceX protested the length of time the FAA said it needed to review the flight plan, after the federal regulator previously told SpaceX it expected to make a license determination in September.

“Unfortunately, instead of focusing resources on critical safety analysis and collaborating on rational safeguards to protect both the public and the environment, the licensing process has been repeatedly derailed by issues ranging from the frivolous to the patently absurd,” SpaceX wrote in a statement last month.

“I think the two-month delay is necessary to comply with the launch requirements, and I think that’s an important part of safety culture,” said Michael Whitaker, the FAA administrator, in a congressional hearing September 24.

The FAA is responsible for ensuring commercial space launches do not endanger the public and comport with the US government’s national security and foreign policy interests. Earlier this year, SpaceX was also fined by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency for alleged violations of environmental regulations related to the launch pad’s water system, which cools a steel flame deflector under the 33 main engines of Starship’s Super Heavy booster.

Ars contacted an FAA spokesperson Tuesday about the status of the agency’s review of the Starship launch license request, but did not receive a response.

Artist’s illustration of SpaceX’s Super Heavy booster coming in for a catch by the launch pad’s mechanical arms. Credit: SpaceX

Teams at Starbase completed two partial propellant loading tests on the fully stacked Starship rocket in recent days. Early Tuesday, SpaceX tested the water deluge system at the launch pad two times, presumably to check the system’s ability to activate minutes apart to protect the pad during launch and recovery of the Super Heavy booster.

Later Tuesday, SpaceX removed the Starship upper stage from the Super Heavy booster. This is required for technicians to perform one of the final tasks to prepare for launch—installing the rocket’s flight termination system, which would destroy the rocket if it veers off course.

“We accept no compromises when it comes to ensuring the safety of the public and our team, and the return will only be attempted if conditions are right,” SpaceX said.

SpaceX outlined additional human-in-the-loop safety criteria for the upcoming Starship flight. SpaceX launches are typically fully automated from liftoff through the end of the mission.

“Thousands of distinct vehicle and pad criteria must be met prior to a return and catch attempt of the Super Heavy booster, which will require healthy systems on the booster and tower and a manual command from the mission’s flight director,” SpaceX wrote. “If this command is not sent prior to the completion of the boostback burn, or if automated health checks show unacceptable conditions with Super Heavy or the tower, the booster will default to a trajectory that takes it to a landing burn and soft splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico.”

Recovering the Super Heavy booster back at the launch pad is critical for SpaceX’s ambition to rapidly reuse the rocket. Eventually, SpaceX will also recover and reuse the Starship portion of the rocket, but for now, the company is sticking to water landings for the ship.

Extensive upgrades

SpaceX teams in Texas have beefed up the launch tower and catch arms in the last few months, working around the clock to add structural stiffeners and test the arms’ load-carrying capability.

“Extensive upgrades ahead of this flight test have been made to hardware and software across Super Heavy, Starship, and the launch and catch tower infrastructure at Starbase,” SpaceX said. “SpaceX engineers have spent years preparing and months testing for the booster catch attempt, with technicians pouring tens of thousands of hours into building the infrastructure to maximize our chances for success.”

It will take about seven minutes for the Super Heavy booster to climb to the edge of space, separate from the Starship upper stage, and return to Starbase for recovery. While the booster comes back to the ground, Starship will fire its six engines to accelerate to near orbital velocity, fast enough to complete a half-lap around Earth before gravity pulls it toward an atmospheric reentry over the Indian Ocean.

This is a similar trajectory to the one Starship flew in June, when it survived a fiery reentry for a controlled splashdown. It was the first time SpaceX completed an end-to-end Starship test flight.

Onboard cameras showed fragments of the heat shield falling off Starship when it reentered the atmosphere in June.

“This massive effort, along with updates to the ship’s operations and software for reentry and landing burn, will look to improve upon the previous flight and bring Starship to a soft splashdown at the target area in the Indian Ocean,” SpaceX said.

Starship won’t attempt to reignite its Raptor engines in space on the upcoming test flight. This is one of the next things SpaceX needs to demonstrate for Starship to soar into a stable orbit around Earth and guide itself to a controlled reentry to ensure it doesn’t become stranded in space or fall over a populated area. SpaceX wanted to relight a Raptor engine in space on Starship’s third test flight in March, but aborted the maneuver.

The business end of Starship’s Super Heavy booster during a launch in March. Credit: SpaceX

Once Starship is able to sustain a flight in low-Earth orbit, SpaceX can begin experiments with in-space refueling, which is required to support future Starship flights to the Moon, Mars, and other deep space destinations. Starship is a foundational element of SpaceX’s vision to create a settlement on the red planet.

NASA has a contract with SpaceX to develop a human-rated Starship to land astronauts on the Moon as part of the agency’s Artemis program. NASA’s official schedule calls for the first Artemis crew landing in September 2026. Realistically, the landing will probably happen later in the decade because the Starship lander and new lunar spacesuits likely won’t be ready in two years.

Starships will likely fly many dozens of times, if not more, before NASA approves it to land astronauts on the Moon. These flights will test the rocket’s ability to repeatedly and reliably fly to space and back, transfer cryogenic propellants in orbit, and safely land on the lunar surface without a crew.

As we’ve seen with SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket, rapidly reusing elements of a launch vehicle can enable rapid-fire launch cadences. Validating the architecture for recovering the Super Heavy booster directly on the launch pad, as SpaceX intends to do quite soon, is a key step on this path.

SpaceX’s next Starship launch—and first catch—could happen this weekend Read More »

SpaceX launches Europe’s Hera asteroid mission ahead of Hurricane Milton

asteroid, Commercial space, Dart, european space agency, falcon 9, Federal Aviation Administration, hera, launch, planetary defense, Science, Space, spacex / Rejus Almole / October 7, 2024

The launch of another important mission, NASA’s Europa Clipper, is on hold due to Hurricane Milton.

The European Space Agency’s Hera spacecraft flies away from the Falcon 9 rocket’s upper stage a little more than an hour after liftoff Monday. Credit: SpaceX

Two years ago, a NASA spacecraft smashed into a small asteroid millions of miles from Earth to test a technique that could one day prove useful to deflect an object off a collision course with Earth. The European Space Agency launched a follow-up mission Monday to go back to the crash site and see the damage done.

The nearly $400 million (363 million euro) Hera mission, named for the Greek goddess of marriage, will investigate the aftermath of a cosmic collision between NASA’s DART spacecraft and the skyscraper-size asteroid Dimorphos on September 26, 2022. NASA’s Double Asteroid Redirection Test mission was the first planetary defense experiment, and it worked, successfully nudging Dimorphos off its regular orbit around a larger companion asteroid named Didymos.

But NASA had to sacrifice the DART spacecraft in the deflection experiment. Its destruction meant there were no detailed images of the condition of the target asteroid after the impact. A small Italian CubeSat deployed by DART as it approached Dimorphos captured fuzzy long-range views of the collision, but Hera will perform a comprehensive survey when it arrives in late 2026.

“We are going to have a surprise to see what Dimorphos looks like, which is, first, scientifically exciting, but also important because if we want to validate the technique and validate the model that can reproduce the impact, we need to know the final outcome,” said Patrick Michel, principal investigator on the Hera mission from Côte d’Azur Observatory in Nice, France. “And we don’t have it. With Hera, it’s like a detective going back to the crime scene and telling us what really happened.”

Last ride before the storm

The Hera spacecraft, weighing in at 2,442 pounds (1,108 kilograms), lifted off on top of a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket at 10: 52 am EDT (14: 52 UTC) Monday from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida.

Officials weren’t sure the weather conditions at Cape Canaveral would permit a launch Monday, with widespread rain showers and a blanket of cloud cover hanging over Florida’s Space Coast. But the conditions were just good enough to be acceptable for a rocket launch, and the Falcon 9 lit its nine kerosene-fueled engines to climb away from pad 40 after a smooth countdown.

SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket lifts off from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida, with ESA’s Hera mission. Credit: SpaceX

This was probably the final opportunity to launch Hera before the spaceport shutters in advance of Hurricane Milton, a dangerous Category 5 storm taking aim at the west coast of Florida. If the mission didn’t launch Monday, SpaceX was prepared to move the Falcon 9 rocket and the Hera spacecraft back inside a hangar for safekeeping until the storm passes.

Meanwhile, at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center a few miles away, SpaceX is securing a Falcon Heavy rocket with the Europa Clipper spacecraft to ride out Hurricane Milton inside a hangar at Launch Complex 39A. Europa Clipper is a $5.2 billion flagship mission to explore Jupiter’s most enigmatic icy moon, and it was supposed to launch Thursday, the same day Hurricane Milton will potentially move over Central Florida.

NASA announced Sunday that it is postponing Europa Clipper’s launch until after the storm.

“The safety of launch team personnel is our highest priority, and all precautions will be taken to protect the Europa Clipper spacecraft,” said Tim Dunn, senior launch director at NASA’s Launch Services Program. “Once we have the ‘all-clear’ followed by facility assessment and any recovery actions, we will determine the next launch opportunity for this NASA flagship mission.”

Europa Clipper must launch by November 6 in order to reach Jupiter and its moon Europa in 2030. ESA’s Hera mission had a similarly tight window to get off the ground in October and arrive at asteroids Didymos and Dimorphos in December 2026.

Returning to flight

The Falcon 9 did its job Monday, accelerating the Hera spacecraft to a blistering speed of 26,745 mph (43,042 km/hr) with successive burns by its first stage booster and upper stage engine. This was the highest-speed payload injection ever achieved by SpaceX.

SpaceX did not attempt to recover the Falcon 9’s reusable booster on Monday’s flight because Hera needed all of the rocket’s oomph to gain enough speed to escape the pull of Earth’s gravity.

“Good launch, good orbit, and good payload deploy,” wrote Kiko Dontchev, SpaceX’s vice president of launch, on X.

This was the first Falcon 9 launch in nine days—an unusually long gap between SpaceX missions—after the rocket’s upper stage misfired during a maneuver to steer itself out of orbit following an otherwise successful launch September 28 with a two-man crew heading for the International Space Station.

The upper stage engine apparently “over-burned,” and the rocket debris fell into the atmosphere short of its expected reentry corridor in the Pacific Ocean, sources said. The Federal Aviation Administration grounded the Falcon 9 rocket while SpaceX investigates the malfunction, but the FAA granted approval for SpaceX to launch the Hera mission because its trajectory would carry the rocket away from Earth, rather than back into the atmosphere for reentry.

“The FAA has determined that the absence of a second stage reentry for this mission adequately mitigates the primary risk to the public in the event of a reoccurrence of the mishap experienced with the Crew-9 mission,” the FAA said in a statement.

Members of the Hera team from ESA and its German prime contractor, OHB, pose with the spacecraft inside SpaceX’s payload processing facility in Florida. Credit: SpaceX

This was the third time the FAA has grounded SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket fleet in less than three months, following another upper stage failure in July that caused the destruction of 20 Starlink Internet satellites and the crash-landing of a Falcon 9 booster on an offshore drone ship in August. Federal regulators are responsible for ensuring commercial rocket launches don’t endanger the public.

These were the first major anomalies on any Falcon 9 launch since 2021.

It’s not clear when the FAA will clear SpaceX to resume launching other Falcon 9 missions. However, the launch of the Europa Clipper mission on a Falcon Heavy rocket, which uses essentially the same upper stage as a Falcon 9, is not licensed by the FAA because it is managed by NASA, another government agency. NASA will have final authority on whether to give the green light for the launch of Europa Clipper.

Surveying the damage

ESA’s Hera spacecraft is on course for a flyby of Mars next March to take advantage of the red planet’s gravity to slingshot itself on a trajectory to intercept its twin target asteroids. Near Mars, Hera will zoom relatively close to the planet’s asteroid-like moon, Deimos, to obtain rare closeups.

Then, Hera will approach Didymos and Dimorphos a little more than two years from now, maneuvering around the binary asteroid system at a range of distances, eventually moving as close as about a half-mile (1 kilometer) away.

Italy’s LICIACube spacecraft snapped this image of asteroids Didymos (lower left) and Dimorphos (upper right) a few minutes after the impact of DART on September 26, 2022. Credit: ASI/NASA

Dimorphos orbits Didymos once every 11 hours and 23 minutes, roughly 32 minutes shorter than the orbital period before DART’s impact in 2022. This change in orbit proved the effectiveness of a kinetic impactor in deflecting an asteroid that threatens Earth.

Dimorphos, the smaller of the two asteroids, has a diameter of around 500 feet (150 meters), while Didymos measures approximately a half-mile (780 meters) wide. Neither asteroid poses a risk to Earth, so NASA chose them as the objective for DART.

The Hubble Space Telescope spotted a debris field trailing the binary asteroid system after DART’s impact. Astronomers identified at least 37 boulders drifting away from the asteroids, material ejected when the DART spacecraft slammed into Dimorphos at a velocity of 14,000 mph (22,500 kmh).

Scientists will use Hera, with its suite of cameras and instruments, to study how the strike by DART changed the asteroid Dimorphos. Did the impact leave a crater, or did it reshape the entire asteroid? There are “tentative hints” that the asteroid’s shape changed after the collision, according to Michael Kueppers, Hera’s project scientist at ESA.

“If this is the case, it would also mean that the cohesion of Dimorphos is extremely low; that indeed, even an object the size of Dimorphos would be held together by its weight, by its gravity, and not by cohesion,” Kueppers said. “So it really would be a rubble pile.”

Hera will also measure the mass of Dimorphos, something DART was unable to do. “That is important to measure the efficiency of the impact… which was the momentum that was transferred from the impacting satellite to the asteroid,” Kueppers said.

This NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope image of the asteroid Dimorphos was taken on December 19, 2022, nearly three months after the asteroid was impacted by NASA’s DART mission. Hubble’s sensitivity reveals a few dozen boulders knocked off the asteroid by the force of the collision. Credit: NASA, ESA, D. Jewitt (UCLA)

The central goal of Hera is to fill the gaps in knowledge about Didymos and Dimorphos. Precise measurements of DART’s momentum, coupled with a better understanding of the interior structure of the asteroids, will allow future mission planners to know how best to deflect a hazardous object threatening Earth.

“The third part is to generally investigate the two asteroids to know their physical properties, their interior properties, their strength, essentially to be able to extrapolate or to scale the outcome of DART to another impact should we really need it one day,” Kueppers said.

Hera will release two briefcase-size CubeSats, named Juventas and Milani, to work in concert with ESA’s mothership. Juventas carries a compact radar to probe the internal structure of the smaller asteroid and will eventually attempt a landing on Dimorphos. Milani will study the mineral composition of individual boulders around DART’s impact site.

“This is the first time that we send a spacecraft to a small body, which is actually a multi-satellite system, with one main spacecraft and two CubeSats doing closer proximity operations,” Michel said. “This has never been done.”

Artist’s illustration of the Hera spacecraft with its two deployable CubeSats, Juventas and Milani, in the vicinity of the Didymos binary asteroid system. The CubeSats will communicate with ground teams via radio links with the Hera mothership. Credit: ESA-Science Office

One source of uncertainty, and perhaps worry, about the environment around Didymos and Dimorphos is the status of the debris field observed by Hubble a few months after DART’s impact. But this is not likely to be a problem, according to Kueppers.

“I’m not really worried about potential boulders at Didymos,” he said, recalling the relative ease with which ESA’s Rosetta spacecraft navigated around an active comet from 2014 through 2016.

Ignacio Tanco, ESA’s flight director for Hera, doesn’t share Kuepper’s optimism.

“We didn’t hit the comet with a hammer,” said Tanco, who is responsible for keeping the Hera spacecraft safe. “The debris question for me is actually a source of… I wouldn’t say concern, but certainly precaution. It’s something that we’ll need to approach carefully once we get there.”

“That’s the difference between an engineer and a scientist,” Kuepper joked.

Scientists originally wanted Hera to be in the vicinity of the Didymos binary asteroid system before DART’s arrival, allowing it to directly observe the impact and its fallout. But ESA’s member states did not approve funding for the Hera mission in time, and the space agency only signed the contract to build the Hera spacecraft in 2020.

ESA first studied a mission like DART and Hera more than 20 years ago, when scientists proposed a mission called Don Quijote to get an asteroid deflection. But other missions took priority in Europe’s space program. Now, Hera is on course to write the final chapter of the story of humanity’s first planetary defense test.

“This is our contribution of ESA to humanity to help us in the future protect our planet,” said Josef Aschbacher, ESA’s director general.

SpaceX launches Europe’s Hera asteroid mission ahead of Hurricane Milton Read More »

ULA hasn’t given up on developing a long-lived cryogenic space tug

Centaur, Commercial space, launch, military space, Science, Space, united launch alliance, vulcan / Kris Guyer / October 3, 2024

On Friday’s launch, United Launch Alliance will test the limits of its Centaur upper stage.

United Launch Alliance’s second Vulcan rocket underwent a countdown dress rehearsal Tuesday. Credit: United Launch Alliance

The second flight of United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan rocket, planned for Friday morning, has a primary goal of validating the launcher’s reliability for delivering critical US military satellites to orbit.

Tory Bruno, ULA’s chief executive, told reporters Wednesday that he is “supremely confident” the Vulcan rocket will succeed in accomplishing that objective. The Vulcan’s second test flight, known as Cert-2, follows a near-flawless debut launch of ULA’s new rocket on January 8.

“As I come up on Cert-2, I’m pretty darn confident I’m going to have a good day on Friday, knock on wood,” Bruno said. “These are very powerful, complicated machines.”

The Vulcan launcher, a replacement for ULA’s Atlas V and Delta IV rockets, is on contract to haul the majority of the US military’s most expensive national security satellites into orbit over the next several years. The Space Force is eager to certify Vulcan to launch these payloads, but military officials want to see two successful test flights before committing one of its satellites to flying on the new rocket.

If Friday’s test flight goes well, ULA is on track to launch at least one—and perhaps two—operational missions for the Space Force by the end of this year. The Space Force has already booked 25 launches on ULA’s Vulcan rocket for military payloads and spy satellites for the National Reconnaissance Office. Including the launch Friday, ULA has 70 Vulcan rockets in its backlog, mostly for the Space Force, the NRO, and Amazon’s Kuiper satellite broadband network.

The Vulcan rocket is powered by two methane-fueled BE-4 engines produced by Jeff Bezos’ space company Blue Origin, and ULA can mount zero, two, four, or six strap-on solid rocket boosters from Northrop Grumman around the Vulcan’s first stage to propel heavier payloads to space. The rocket’s Centaur V upper stage is fitted with a pair of hydrogen-burning RL10 engines from Aerojet Rocketdyne.

The second Vulcan rocket will fly in the same configuration as the first launch earlier this year, with two strap-on solid-fueled boosters. The only noticeable modification to the rocket is the addition of some spray-on foam insulation around the outside of the first stage methane tank, which will keep the cryogenic fuel at the proper temperature as Vulcan encounters aerodynamic heating on its ascent through the atmosphere.

“This will give us just over one second more usable propellant,” Bruno wrote on X.

There is one more change from Vulcan’s first launch, which boosted a commercial lunar lander for Astrobotic on a trajectory toward the Moon. This time, there are no real spacecraft on the Vulcan rocket. Instead, ULA mounted a dummy payload to the Centaur V upper stage to simulate the mass of a functioning satellite.

ULA originally planned to launch Sierra Space’s first Dream Chaser spaceplane on the second Vulcan rocket. But the Dream Chaser won’t be ready to fly its first mission to resupply the International Space Station until next year. Under pressure from the Pentagon, ULA decided to move ahead with the second Vulcan launch without a payload at the company’s own expense, which Bruno tallied in the “high tens of millions of dollars.”

Heliocentricity

The test flight will begin with liftoff from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida, during a three-hour launch window opening at 6 am EDT (10: 00 UTC). The 202-foot-tall (61.6-meter) Vulcan rocket will head east over the Atlantic Ocean, shedding its boosters, first stage, and payload fairing in the first few minutes of flight.

The Centaur upper stage will fire its RL10 engines two times, completing the primary mission within about 35 minutes of launch. The rocket will then continue on for a series of technical demonstrations before ending up on an Earth escape trajectory into a heliocentric orbit around the Sun.

“We have a number of experiments that we’re conducting that are really technology demonstrations and measurements that are associated with our high-performance, longer-duration version of Centaur V that we’ll be introducing in the future,” Bruno said. “And these will help us go a little bit faster on that development. And, of course, because we don’t have an active spacecraft as a payload, we also have more instrumentation that we’re able to use for just characterizing the vehicle.”

The Centaur V upper stage for the Vulcan rocket. Credit: United Launch Alliance

ULA engineers have worked on the design of a long-lived upper stage for more than a decade. Their vision was to develop an upper stage fed by super-efficient cryogenic liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen propellants that could generate its own power and operate in space for days, weeks, or longer rather than an upper stage’s usual endurance limit of several hours. This would allow the rocket to not only deliver satellites into bespoke high-altitude orbits but also continue on to release more payloads at different altitudes or provide longer-term propulsion in support of other missions.

The concept was called the Advanced Cryogenic Evolved Stage (ACES). ULA’s corporate owners, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, never authorized the full development of ACES, and the company said in 2020 that it was no longer pursuing the ACES concept.

The Centaur V upper stage currently used on the Vulcan rocket is a larger version of the thin-walled, pressure-stabilized Centaur upper stage that has been flying since the 1960s. Bruno said the Centaur V design, as it is today, offers as much as 12 hours of operating life in space. This is longer than any other existing rocket using cryogenic propellants, which can boil off over time.

ULA’s chief executive still harbors an ambition for regaining some of the same capabilities promised by ACES.

“What we are looking to do is to extend that by orders of magnitude,” Bruno said. “And what that would allow us to do is have a in-space transportation capability for in-space mobility and servicing and things like that.”

Space Force leaders have voiced a desire for future spacecraft to freely maneuver between different orbits, a concept the military calls “dynamic space operations.” This would untether spacecraft operations from fuel limitations and eventually require the development of in-orbit refueling, propellant depots, or novel propulsion technologies.

No one has tried to store large amounts of super-cold propellants in space for weeks or longer. Accomplishing this is a non-trivial thermal problem, requiring insulation to keep heat from the Sun from reaching the liquid cryogenic propellant, stored at temperatures of several hundred degrees below zero.

Bruno hesitated to share details of the experiments ULA plans for the Centaur V upper stage on Friday’s test flight, citing proprietary concerns. He said the experiments will confirm analytical models about how the upper stage performs in space.

“Some of these are devices, some of these are maneuvers because maneuvers make a difference, and some are related to performance in a way,” he said. “In some cases, those maneuvers are helping us with the thermal load that tries to come in and boil off the propellants.”

Eventually, ULA would like to eliminate hydrazine attitude control fuel and battery power from the Centaur V upper stage, Bruno said Wednesday. This sounds a lot like what ULA wanted to do with ACES, which would have used an internal combustion engine called Integrated Vehicle Fluids (IVF) to recycle gasified waste propellants to pressurize its propellant tanks, generate electrical power, and feed thrusters for attitude control. This would mean the upper stage wouldn’t need to rely on hydrazine, helium, or batteries.

ULA hasn’t talked much about the IVF system in recent years, but Bruno said the company is still developing it. “It’s part of all of this, but that’s all I will say, or I’ll start revealing what all the gadgets are.”

A comparison between ULA’s legacy Centaur upper stage and the new Centaur V. Credit: United Launch Alliance

George Sowers, former vice president and chief scientist at ULA, was one of the company’s main advocates for extending the lifetime of upper stages and developing technologies for refueling and propellant depot. He retired from ULA in 2017 and is now a professor at the Colorado School of Mines and an independent aerospace industry consultant.

In an interview with Ars earlier this year, Sowers said ULA solved many of the problems with keeping cryogenic propellants at the right temperature in space.

“We had a lot of data on boil-off, just from flying Centaurs all the way to geosynchronous orbit, which doesn’t involve weeks, but it involves maybe half a day or so, which is plenty of time to get all the temperatures to stabilize at deep space levels,” Sowers said. “So you have to understand the heat transfer very well. Good models are very important.”

ULA experimented with different types of insulation and vapor cooling, which involves taking cold gas that boiled off of cryogenic fuel and blowing it on heat penetration points into the tanks.

“There are tricks to managing boil-off,” he said. “One of the tricks is that you never want to boil oxygen. You always want to boil hydrogen. So you size your propellant tanks and your propellant loads, assuming you’re going to have that extra hydrogen boil-off. Then what you can do is use the hydrogen to keep the oxygen cold to keep it from boiling.

“The amount of heat that you can reject by boiling off one kilogram of hydrogen is about five times what you would reject by boiling off one kilogram of oxygen. So those are some of the thermodynamic tricks,” Sowers said. “The way ULA accomplished that is by having a common bulkhead, so the hydrogen tank and the oxygen tank are in thermal contact. So hydrogen keeps the oxygen cold.”

ULA’s experiments showed it could get the hydrogen boil-off rate down to about 10 percent per year, based on thermodynamic models calibrated by data from flying older versions of the Centaur upper stage on Atlas V rockets, according to Sowers.

“In my mind, that kind of cemented the idea that distribution depots and things like that are very well in hand without having to have exotic cryocoolers, which tend to use a lot of power,” Sowers said. “It’s about efficiency. If you can do it passively, you don’t have to expend energy on cryocoolers.”

“We’re going to go to days, and then we’re going to go to weeks, and then we think it’s possible to take us to months,” Bruno said. “That’s a game changer.”

However, ULA’s corporate owners haven’t yet fully bought into this vision. Bruno said the Vulcan rocket and its supporting manufacturing and launch infrastructure cost between $5 billion and $7 billion to develop. ULA also plans to eventually recover and reuse BE-4 main engines from the Vulcan rocket, but that is still at least several years away.

But ULA is reportedly up for sale, and a well-capitalized buyer might find the company’s long-duration cryogenic upper stage more attractive and worth the investment.

“There’s a whole lot of missions that enables,” Bruno said. “So that’s a big step in capability, both for the United States and also commercially.”

ULA hasn’t given up on developing a long-lived cryogenic space tug Read More »

SpaceX launches mission to bring Starliner astronauts back to Earth

commercial crew, Commercial space, crew dragon, dragon, falcon 9, human spaceflight, international space station, launch, NASA, roscosmos, russia, Science, Space, spacex, starliner / Mike M. / September 28, 2024

Ch-ch-changes —

SpaceX is bringing back propulsive landings with its Dragon capsule, but only in emergencies.

Stephen Clark – Updated Sep 28, 2024 7: 29 pm UTC

SpaceX's Crew Dragon spacecraft climbs away from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida, on Saturday atop a Falcon 9 rocket. — Enlarge / SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft climbs away from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida, on Saturday atop a Falcon 9 rocket.

NASA/Keegan Barber

NASA astronaut Nick Hague and Russian cosmonaut Aleksandr Gorbunov lifted off Saturday from Florida’s Space Coast aboard a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft, heading for a five-month expedition on the International Space Station.

The two-man crew launched on top of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket at 1: 17 pm EDT (17: 17 UTC), taking an advantage of a break in stormy weather to begin a five-month expedition in space. Nine kerosene-fueled Merlin engines powered the first stage of the flight on a trajectory northeast from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, then the booster detached and returned to landing at Cape Canaveral as the Falcon 9’s upper stage accelerated SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Freedom spacecraft into orbit.

“It was a sweet ride,” Hague said after arriving in space. With a seemingly flawless launch, Hague and Gorbunov are on track to arrive at the space station around 5: 30 pm EDT (2130 UTC) Sunday.

Empty seats

This is SpaceX’s 15th crew mission since 2020, and SpaceX’s 10th astronaut launch for NASA, but Saturday’s launch was unusual in a couple of ways.

“All of our missions have unique challenges and this one, I think, will be memorable for a lot of us,” said Ken Bowersox, NASA’s associate administrator for space operations.

First, only two people rode into orbit on SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft, rather than the usual complement of four astronauts. This mission, known as Crew-9, originally included Hague, Gorbunov, commander Zena Cardman, and NASA astronaut Stephanie Wilson.

But the troubled test flight of Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft threw a wrench into NASA’s plans. The Starliner mission launched in June with NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams. Boeing’s spacecraft reached the space station, but thruster failures and helium leaks plagued the mission, and NASA officials decided last month it was too risky to being the crew back to Earth on Starliner.

NASA selected SpaceX and Boeing for multibillion-dollar commercial crew contracts in 2014, with each company responsible for developing human-rated spaceships to ferry astronauts to and from the International Space Station. SpaceX flew astronauts for the first time in 2020, and Boeing reached the same milestone with the test flight that launched in June.

Ultimately, the Starliner spacecraft safely returned to Earth on September 6 with a successful landing in New Mexico. But it left Wilmore and Williams behind on the space station with the lab’s long-term crew of seven astronauts and cosmonauts. The space station crew rigged two temporary seats with foam inside a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft currently docked at the outpost, where the Starliner astronauts would ride home if they needed to evacuate the complex in an emergency.

Enlarge / NASA astronaut Nick Hague and Russian cosmonaut Aleksandr Gorbunov in their SpaceX pressure suits.

NASA/Kim Shiflett

This is a temporary measure to allow the Dragon spacecraft to return to Earth with six people instead of the usual four. NASA officials decided to remove two of the astronauts from the next SpaceX crew mission to free up normal seats for Wilmore and Williams to ride home in February, when Crew-9 was already slated to end its mission.

The decision to fly the Starliner spacecraft back to Earth without its crew had several second order effects on space station operations. Managers at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston had to decide who to bump from the Crew-9 mission, and who to keep on the crew.

Nick Hague and Aleksandr Gorbunov ended up keeping their seats on the Crew-9 flight. Hague originally trained as the pilot on Crew-9, and NASA decided he would take Zena Cardman’s place as commander. Hague, a 49-year-old Space Force colonel, is a veteran of one long-duration mission on the International Space Station, and also experienced a rare in-flight launch abort in 2018 due to a failure of a Russian Soyuz rocket.

NASA announced the original astronaut assignments for the Crew-9 mission in January. Cardman, a 36-year-old geobiologist, would have been the first rookie astronaut without test pilot experience to command a NASA spaceflight. Three-time space shuttle flier Stephanie Wilson, 58, was the other astronaut removed from the Crew-9 mission.

The decision on who to fly on Crew-9 was a “really close call,” said Bowersox, who oversees NASA’s spaceflight operations directorate. “They were thinking very hard about flying Zena, but in this situation, it made sense to have somebody who had at least one flight under their belt.”

Gorbunov, a 34-year-old Russian aerospace engineer making his first flight to space, moved over to take pilot’s seat in the Crew Dragon spacecraft, although he remains officially designated a mission specialist. His remaining presence on the crew was preordained because of an international agreement between NASA and Russia’s space agency that provides seats for Russian cosmonauts on US crew missions and US astronauts on Russian Soyuz flights to the space station.

Bowersox said NASA will reassign Cardman and Wilson to future flights.

Enlarge / NASA astronauts Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore, seen in their Boeing flight suits before their launch.

Operational flexibility

This was also the first launch of astronauts from Space Launch Complex-40 (SLC-40) at Cape Canaveral, SpaceX’s busiest launch pad. SpaceX has outfitted the launch pad with the equipment necessary to support launches of human spaceflight missions on the Crew Dragon spacecraft, including a more than 200-foot-tall tower and a crew access arm to allow astronauts to board spaceships on top of Falcon 9 rockets.

SLC-40 was previously based on a “clean pad” architecture, without any structures to service or access Falcon 9 rockets while they were vertical on the pad. SpaceX also installed slide chutes to give astronauts and ground crews an emergency escape route away from the launch pad in an emergency.

SpaceX constructed the crew tower last year and had it ready for the launch of a Dragon cargo mission to the space station in March. Saturday’s launch demonstrated the pad’s ability to support SpaceX astronaut missions, which have previously all departed from Launch Complex-39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, a few miles north of SLC-40.

Bringing human spaceflight launch capability online at SLC-40 gives SpaceX and NASA additional flexibility in their scheduling. For example, LC-39A remains the only launch pad configured to support flights of SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket. SpaceX is now preparing LC-39A for a Falcon Heavy launch October 10 with NASA’s Europa Clipper mission, which only has a window of a few weeks to depart Earth this year and reach its destination at Jupiter in 2030.

With SLC-40 now certified for astronaut launches, SpaceX and NASA teams are able to support the Crew-9 and Europa Clipper missions without worrying about scheduling conflicts. The Florida spaceport now has three launch pads certified for crew flights—two for SpaceX’s Dragon and one for Boeing’s Starliner—and NASA will add a fourth human-rated launch pad with the Artemis II mission to the Moon late next year.

“That’s pretty exciting,” said Pam Melroy, NASA’s deputy administrator. “I think it’s a reflection of where we are in our space program at NASA, but also the capabilities that the United States has developed.”

Earlier this week, Hague and Gorbunov participated in a launch day dress rehearsal, when they had the opportunity to familiarize themselves with SLC-40. The launch pad has the same capabilities as LC-39A, but with a slightly different layout. SpaceX also test-fired the Falcon 9 rocket Tuesday evening, before lowering the rocket horizontal and moving it back into a hangar for safekeeping as the outer bands of Hurricane Helene moved through Central Florida.

Inside the hangar, SpaceX technicians discovered sooty exhaust from the Falcon 9’s engines accumulated on the outside of the Dragon spacecraft during the test-firing. Ground teams wiped the soot off of the craft’s solar arrays and heat shield, then repainted portions of the capsule’s radiators around the edge of Dragon’s trunk section before rolling the vehicle back to the launch pad Friday.

“It’s important that the radiators radiate heat in the proper way to space, so we had to put some some new paint on to get that back to the right emissivity and the right reflectivity and absorptivity of the solar radiation that hit those panels so it will reject the heat properly,” said Bill Gerstenmaier, SpaceX’s vice president of build and flight reliability.

Gerstenmaier also outlined a new backup ability for the Crew Dragon spacecraft to safely splash down even if all of its parachutes fail to deploy on final descent back to Earth. This involves using the capsule’s eight powerful SuperDraco thrusters, normally only used in the unlikely instance of a launch abort, to fire for a few seconds and slow Dragon’s speed for a safe splashdown.

Enlarge / A hover test using SuperDraco thrusters on a prototype Crew Dragon spacecraft in 2015.

SpaceX

“The way it works is, in the case where all the parachutes totally fail, this essentially fires the thrusters at the very end,” Gerstenmaier said. “That essentially gives the crew a chance to land safely, and essentially escape the vehicle. So it’s not used in any partial conditions. We can land with one chute out. We can land with other failures in the chute system. But this is only in the case where all four parachutes just do not operate.”

When SpaceX first designed the Crew Dragon spacecraft more than a decade ago, the company wanted to use the SuperDraco thrusters to enable the capsule to perform propulsive helicopter-like landings. Eventually, SpaceX and NASA agreed to change to a more conventional parachute-assisted splashdown.

The SuperDracos remained on the Crew Dragon spacecraft to push the capsule away from its Falcon 9 rocket during a catastrophic launch failure. The eight high-thrust engines burn hydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide propellants that combust when making contact with one another.

The backup option has been activated for some previous commercial Crew Dragon missions, but not for a NASA flight, according to Gerstenmaier. The capability “provides a tolerable landing for the crew,” he added. “So it’s a true deep, deep contingency. I think our philosophy is, rather than have a system that you don’t use, even though it’s not maybe fully certified, it gives the crew a chance to escape a really, really bad situation.”

Steve Stich, NASA’s commercial crew program manager, said the emergency propulsive landing capability will be enabled for the return of the Crew-8 mission, which has been at the space station since March. With the arrival of Hague and Gorbunov on Crew-9—and the extension of Wilmore and Williams’ mission—the Crew-8 mission is slated to depart the space station and splash down in early October.

This story was updated after confirmation of a successful launch.

SpaceX launches mission to bring Starliner astronauts back to Earth Read More »

The war of words between SpaceX and the FAA keeps escalating

Commercial space, Federal Aviation Administration, launch, Science, Space, spacex, starship, texas / Rejus Almole / September 26, 2024

Elon Musk, SpaceX's founder and CEO, has called for the resignation of the FAA administrator. — Enlarge / Elon Musk, SpaceX’s founder and CEO, has called for the resignation of the FAA administrator.

The clash between SpaceX and the Federal Aviation Administration escalated this week, with Elon Musk calling for the head of the federal regulator to resign after he defended the FAA’s oversight and fines levied against the commercial launch company.

The FAA has said it doesn’t expect to determine whether to approve a launch license for SpaceX’s next Starship test flight until late November, two months later than the agency previously communicated to Musk’s launch company. Federal regulators are reviewing changes to the rocket’s trajectory necessary for SpaceX to bring Starship’s giant reusable Super Heavy booster back to the launch pad in South Texas. This will be the fifth full-scale test flight of Starship but the first time SpaceX attempts such a maneuver on the program.

This week, SpaceX assembled the full Starship rocket on its launch pad at the company’s Starbase facility near Brownsville, Texas. “Starship stacked for Flight 5 and ready for launch, pending regulatory approval,” SpaceX posted on X.

Apart from the Starship regulatory reviews, the FAA last week announced it is proposing more than $633,000 in fines on SpaceX due to alleged violations of the company’s launch license associated with two flights of the company’s Falcon 9 rocket from Florida. It is rare for the FAA’s commercial spaceflight division to fine launch companies.

Michael Whitaker, the FAA’s administrator, discussed the agency’s ongoing environmental and safety reviews of SpaceX’s Starship rocket in a hearing before a congressional subcommittee in Washington Tuesday. During the hearing, which primarily focused on the FAA’s oversight of Boeing’s commercial airplane business, one lawmaker asked Whitaker the FAA’s relationship with SpaceX.

Public interest

“I think safety is in the public interest and that’s our primary focus,” said Michael Whitaker, the FAA administrator, in response to questions from Rep. Kevin Kiley, a California Republican. “It’s the only tool we have to get compliance on safety matters,” he said, referring to the FAA’s fines.

The stainless-steel Super Heavy booster is larger than a Boeing 747 jumbo jet. SpaceX says the flight path to return the first stage of the rocket to land will mean a “slightly larger area could experience a sonic boom,” and a stainless-steel ring that jettisons from the top of the booster, called the hot-staging ring, will fall in a different location in the Gulf of Mexico just offshore from the rocket’s launch and landing site.

The FAA, which is primarily charged with ensuring rocket launches don’t endanger the public, is consulting with other agencies on these matters, along with issues involving SpaceX’s discharge of water into the environment around the Starship launch pad in Texas. The pad uses water to cool a steel flame deflector that sits under the 33 main engines of Starship’s Super Heavy booster.

SpaceX says fines levied against it this year by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) related to the launch pad’s water system were “entirely tied to disagreements over paperwork” and not any dumping of pollutants into the environment around the Starship launch site.

SpaceX installed the water-cooled flame deflector under the Starship launch mount after the engine exhaust rocket’s first test flight excavated a large hole in the ground. Gwynne Shotwell, SpaceX’s president and chief operating officer, summed up her view of the issue in a hearing with Texas legislators in Austin on Tuesday.

“To protect that from happening again, we built this kind of upside-down shower head to basically cool the flame as the rocket was lifting off,” she said. “That was licensed and permitted by TCEQ. The EPA came in afterwards and didn’t like the license or the permit that we had for that, and wanted to turn it into a federal permit, which we are working on now.”

“We work very closely with organizations such as TCEQ,” Shotwell said. “You may have read a little bit of nonsense in the papers recently about that, but we’re working quite well with them.”

The war of words between SpaceX and the FAA keeps escalating Read More »

Navy captains don’t like abandoning ship—but with Starliner, the ship left them

Boeing, commercial crew, Commercial space, international space station, NASA, Science, Space, starliner / Paul Patrick / September 14, 2024

NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams wave to their families, friends, and NASA officials on their way to the launch pad June 5 to board Boeing's Starliner spacecraft. — Enlarge / NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams wave to their families, friends, and NASA officials on their way to the launch pad June 5 to board Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft.

NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams are no strangers to time away from their families. Both are retired captains in the US Navy, served in war zones, and are veterans of previous six-month stays on the International Space Station.

When they launched to the space station on Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft on June 5, the astronauts expected to be home in a few weeks, or perhaps a month, at most. Their minimum mission duration was eight days, but NASA was always likely to approve a short extension. Wilmore and Williams were the first astronauts to soar into orbit on Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft, a milestone achieved some seven years later than originally envisioned by Boeing and NASA.

However, the test flight fell short of all of its objectives. Wilmore and Williams are now a little more than three months into what has become an eight-month mission on the station. The Starliner spacecraft was beset by problems, culminating in a decision last month by NASA officials to send the capsules back to Earth without the two astronauts. Rather than coming home on Starliner, Wilmore and Williams will return to Earth in February on a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft.

Grateful for options

On Friday, the two astronauts spoke with reporters for the first time since NASA decided they would stay in orbit until early 2025.

“It was trying at times,” Wilmore said. There were some tough times all the way through. Certainly, as the commander or pilot of your spacecraft, you don’t want to see it go off without you, but that’s where we wound up.”

Both astronauts are veteran Navy test pilots and have previous flights on space shuttles and Russian Soyuz spacecraft. Captains never want to abandon ship, but that’s not what happened with Starliner. Instead, their ship left them.

Williams said she and Wilmore watched Starliner’s departure from the space station from the lab’s multi-window cupola module last week. They kept busy with several tasks, such as monitoring the undocking and managing the space station’s systems during the dynamic phase of the departure.

“We were watching our spaceship fly away at that point in time,” Williams said. “I think it’s good we had some extra activities. Of course, we’re very knowledgeable about Starliner, so it was obvious what was happening at each moment.”

NASA’s top managers did not have enough confidence in Starliner’s safety after five thrusters temporarily failed as the spacecraft approached the space station in June. They weren’t ready to risk the lives of the two astronauts on Starliner when engineers weren’t convinced the same thrusters, or more, would function as needed during the trip home.

It turned out the suspect thrusters on Starliner worked after it departed the space station and headed for reentry on September 6. One thruster on Starliner’s crew module—different in design from the thrusters that previously had trouble—failed on the return journey. Investigating this issue is something Boeing and NASA engineers will add to their to-do list before the next Starliner flight, alongside the earlier problems of overheating thrusters and helium leaks.

“It’s a very risky business, and things do not always turn out the way you want,” Wilmore said. “Every single test flight, especially a first flight of a spacecraft or aircraft that’s ever occurred, has found issues … 90 percent of our training is preparing for the unexpected, and sometimes the actual unexpected goes beyond what you even think that could happen.”

Navy captains don’t like abandoning ship—but with Starliner, the ship left them Read More »

Leaving behind its crew, Starliner departs space station and returns to Earth

Boeing, commercial crew, Commercial space, human spaceflight, international space station, NASA, Science, Space, starliner / Paul Patrick / September 7, 2024

It worked —

“We will review the data and determine the next steps for the program,” says Boeing’s Starliner manager.

Stephen Clark – Sep 7, 2024 11: 08 am UTC

Boeing's Starliner spacecraft after landing Friday night at White Sands Space Harbor, New Mexico. — Enlarge / Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft after landing Friday night at White Sands Space Harbor, New Mexico.

Boeing

Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft sailed to a smooth landing in the New Mexico desert Friday night, an auspicious end to an otherwise disappointing three-month test flight that left the capsule’s two-person crew stuck in orbit until next year.

Cushioned by airbags, the Boeing crew capsule descended under three parachutes toward an on-target landing at 10: 01 pm local time Friday (12: 01 am EDT Saturday) at White Sands Space Harbor, New Mexico. From the outside, the landing appeared just as it would have if the spacecraft brought home NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, who became the first people to launch on a Starliner capsule on June 5.

But Starliner’s cockpit was empty as it flew back to Earth Friday night. Last month, NASA managers decided to keep Wilmore and Williams on the International Space Station (ISS) until next year after agency officials determined it was too risky for the astronauts to return to the ground on Boeing’s spaceship. Instead of coming home on Starliner, Wilmore and Williams will fly back to Earth on a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft in February. NASA has incorporated the Starliner duo into the space station’s long-term crew.

The Starliner spacecraft began the journey home by backing away from its docking port at the space station at 6: 04 pm EDT (22: 04 UTC), one day after astronauts closed hatches to prepare for the ship’s departure. The capsule fired thrusters to quickly back away from the complex, setting up for a deorbit burn to guide Starliner on a trajectory toward its landing site. Then, Starliner jettisoned its disposable service module to burn up over the Pacific Ocean, while the crew module, with a vacant cockpit, took aim on New Mexico.

After streaking through the atmosphere over the Pacific Ocean and Mexico, Starliner deployed three main parachutes to slow its descent, then a ring of six airbags inflated around the bottom of the spacecraft to dampen the jolt of touchdown. This was the third time a Starliner capsule has flown in space, and the second time the spacecraft fell short of achieving all of its objectives.

Not the desired outcome

“I’m happy to report Starliner did really well today in the undock, deorbit, and landing sequence,” said Steve Stich, manager of NASA’s commercial crew program, which manages a contract worth up to $4.6 billion for Boeing to develop, test, and fly a series of Starliner crew missions to the ISS.

While officials were pleased with Starliner’s landing, the celebration was tinged with disappointment.

“From a human perspective, all of us feel happy about the successful landing, but then there’s a piece of us that we wish it would have been the way we had planned it,” Stich said. “We had planned to have the mission land with Butch and Suni onboard. I think there are, depending on who you are on the team, different emotions associated with that, and I think it’s going to take a little time to work through that.”

Nevertheless, Stich said NASA made the right call last month when officials decided to complete the Starliner test flight without astronauts in the spacecraft.

“We made the decision to have an uncrewed flight based on what we knew at the time, and based on our knowledge of the thrusters and based on the modeling that we had,” Stich said. “If we’d had a model that would have predicted what we saw tonight perfectly, yeah, it looks like an easy decision to go say, ‘We could have had a crew tonight.’ But we didn’t have that.”

Boeing’s Starliner managers insisted the ship was safe to bring the astronauts home. It might be tempting to conclude the successful landing Friday night vindicated Boeing’s views on the thruster problems. However, he spacecraft’s propulsion system, provided by Aerojet Rocketdyne, clearly did not work as intended during the flight. NASA had the option of bringing Wilmore and Williams back to Earth on a different, flight-proven spacecraft, so they took it.

“It’s awfully hard for the team,” Stich said. “It’s hard for me, when we sit here and have a successful landing, to be in that position. But it was a test flight, and we didn’t have confidence, with certainty, of the thruster performance.”

Enlarge / In this infrared view, Starliner descends under its three main parachutes moments before touchdown at White Sands Space Harbor, New Mexico.

NASA

As Starliner approached the space station in June, five of 28 control thrusters on Starliner’s service module failed, forcing Wilmore to take manual control as ground teams sorted out the problem. Eventually, engineers recovered four of the five thrusters, but NASA’s decision makers were unable to convince themselves the same problem wouldn’t reappear, or get worse, when the spacecraft departed the space station and headed for reentry and landing.

Engineers later determined the control jets lost thrust due to overheating, which can cause Teflon seals in valves to swell and deform, starving the thrusters of propellant. Telemetry data beamed back to the mission controllers from Starliner showed higher-than-expected temperatures on two of the service module thrusters during the flight back to Earth Friday night, but they continued working.

Ground teams also detected five small helium leaks on Starliner’s propulsion system soon after its launch in June. NASA and Boeing officials were aware of one of the leaks before the launch, but decided to go ahead with the test flight. Starliner was still leaking helium when the spacecraft undocked from the station Friday, but the leak rate remained within safety tolerances, according to Stich.

A couple of fresh technical problems cropped up as Starliner cruised back to Earth. One of 12 control jets on the crew module failed to ignite at any time during Starliner’s flight home. These are separate thrusters from the small engines that caused trouble earlier in the Starliner mission. There was also a brief glitch in Starliner’s navigation system during reentry.

Where to go from here?

Three NASA managers, including Stich, took questions from reporters in a press conference early Saturday following Starliner’s landing. Two Boeing officials were also supposed to be on the panel, but they canceled at the last minute. Boeing didn’t explain their absence, and the company has not made any officials available to answer questions since NASA chose to end the Starliner test flight without the crew aboard.

“We view the data and the uncertainty that’s there differently than Boeing does,” said Jim Free, NASA’s associate administrator, in an August 24 press conference announcing the agency’s decision on how to end the Starliner test flight. It’s unusual for NASA officials to publicly discuss how their opinions differ from those of their contractors.

Joel Montalbano, NASA’s deputy associate administrator for space operations, said Saturday that Boeing deferred to the agency to discuss the Starliner mission in the post-landing press conference.

Here’s the only quote from a Boeing official on Starliner’s return to Earth. It came in the form of a three-paragraph written statement Boeing emailed to reporters about a half-hour after Starliner’s landing: “I want to recognize the work the Starliner teams did to ensure a successful and safe undocking, deorbit, re-entry and landing,” said Mark Nappi, vice president and program manager of Boeing’s commercial crew program. “We will review the data and determine the next steps for the program.”

Nappi’s statement doesn’t answer one of the most important questions reporters would have asked anyone from Boeing if they participated in Saturday morning’s press conference: Does Boeing still have a long-term commitment to the Starliner program?

So far, the only indications of Boeing’s future plans for Starliner have come from second-hand anecdotes relayed by NASA officials. Boeing has been silent on the matter. The company has reported nearly $1.6 billion in financial charges to pay for previous delays and cost overruns on the Starliner program, and Boeing will again be on the hook to pay to fix the problems Starliner encountered in space over the last three months.

Montalbano said Boeing’s Starliner managers met with ground teams at mission control in Houston following the craft’s landing. “The Boeing managers came into the control room and congratulated the team, talked to the NASA team, so Boeing is committed to continue their work with us,” he said.

Boeing's Starliner spacecraft fires thrusters during departure from the International Space Station on Friday. — Enlarge / Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft fires thrusters during departure from the International Space Station on Friday.

NASA

NASA isn’t ready to give up on Starliner. A fundamental tenet of NASA’s commercial crew program is to foster the development of two independent vehicles to ferry astronauts to and from the International Space Station, and eventually commercial outposts in low-Earth orbit. NASA awarded multibillion-dollar contracts to Boeing and SpaceX in 2014 to complete development of their Starliner and Crew Dragon spaceships.

SpaceX’s Dragon started flying astronauts in 2020. NASA would like to have another US spacecraft for crew rotation flights to support the ISS. If Boeing had more success with this Starliner test flight, NASA expected to formally certify the spacecraft for operational crew flights beginning next year. Once that happens, Starliner will enter a rotation with SpaceX’s Dragon to transport crews to and from the station in six-month increments.

Stich said Saturday that NASA has not determined whether the agency will require Boeing launch another Starliner test flight before certifying the spacecraft for regular crew rotation missions. “It’ll take a little time to determine the path forward, but today we saw the vehicle perform really well,” he said.

On to Starliner-1?

But some of Stich’s other statements Saturday suggested NASA would like to proceed with certifying Starliner and flying the next mission with a full crew complement of four astronauts. NASA calls Boeing’s first operational crew mission Starliner-1. It’s the first of at least three and potentially up to six crew rotation missions on Boeing’s contract.

“It’s great to have the spacecraft back, and we’re now focused on Starliner-1,” Stich said.

Before that happens, NASA and Boeing engineers must resolve the thruster problems and helium leaks that plagued the test flight this summer. Stich said teams are studying several ways to improve the reliability of Starliner’s thrusters, including hardware modifications and procedural changes. This will probably push back the next crew flight of Starliner, whether it’s Starliner-1 or another test flight, until the end of next year or 2026, although NASA officials have not laid out a schedule.

The overheating thrusters are located inside four doghouse-shaped propulsion pods around the perimeter of Starliner’s service module. It turns out the doghouses retain heat like a thermos—something NASA and Boeing didn’t fully appreciate before this mission—and the thrusters don’t have time to cool down when the spacecraft fires its control jets in rapid pulses. It might help if Boeing removes some of the insulating thermal blankets from the doghouses, Stich said.

The easiest method of resolving the problem of Starliner’s overheating thrusters would be to change the rate and duration of thruster firings.

“What we would like to do is try not to change the thruster. I think that is the best path,” Stich said. “There thrusters have shown resilience and have shown that they perform well, as long as we keep their temperatures down and don’t fire them in a manner that causes the temperatures to go up.”

There’s one thing from this summer’s test flight that might, counterintuitively, help NASA certify the Starliner spacecraft to begin operational flights with its next mission. Rather than staying at the space station for eight days, Starliner remained docked at the research lab for three months, half of the duration of a full-up crew rotation flight. Despite the setbacks, Stich estimated the test flight achieved about 85 to 90 percent of its objectives.

“There’s a lot of learning that happens in that three months that is invaluable for an increment mission,” Stich said. “So, in some ways, the mission overachieved some objectives, in terms of being there for extra time. Not having the crew onboard, obviously, there are some things that we lack in terms of Butch and Suni’s test pilot expertise, and how the vehicle performed, what they saw in the cockpit. We won’t have that data, but we still have the wealth of data from the spacecraft itself, so that will go toward the mission objectives and the certification.”

Leaving behind its crew, Starliner departs space station and returns to Earth Read More »