Let's Privatize NASA

[don]

What kind of public subsidies is it taking to make this venture 'profitable'?

May 19, 2012
Launching of Rocket by SpaceX Is Aborted

By KENNETH CHANG

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — The launching of a privately owned cargo rocket heading to the International Space Station was aborted at the last second on Saturday morning.

The rocket’s nine engines had ignited, but computers detected a high pressure in the chamber of the center engine and shut them down The rocket is held down during the final engine checks and never left the launching pad.

The rocket and its cargo capsule, both built by the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation of Hawthorne, Calif., represent an important step in NASA’s evolution to rely more heavily on commercial companies for its human spaceflight program.

If the capsule, the Dragon, reaches the space station, it will be first commercial spacecraft to dock there. All previous vehicles, like NASA’s space shuttles and Russia’s Soyuz capsules, were government operated.

In the evening, SpaceX officials said they had identified a faulty valve as the problem and said the next launching attempt would be on Tuesday at 3:44 a.m.

The flight will be a second test in a $396 million program by SpaceX to develop the cargo ship. If successful, SpaceX will then enter a $1.6 billion contract for a dozen cargo flights to the station.

The SpaceX flight is carrying 1,000 pounds of nonessential cargo, mostly food and clothing.

NASA signed the development agreement with SpaceX in 2006 as part of an effort to encourage new commercial space ventures and to reduce launching costs for the space agency.

A second company with a NASA cargo contract, the Orbital Sciences Corporation of Vienna, Va., hopes to get its first test flight off the ground in the second half of this year.

The space agency now also wants to turn to commercial companies for the launching of its astronauts. SpaceX hopes an upgraded Dragon will capture at least some of that business. After the retirement of the space shuttles last year, NASA astronauts currently must ride on Russian Soyuz rockets to get into space.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/20/sc...ef=todayspaper

[Polish_Silver]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

What kind of public subsidies is it taking to make this venture 'profitable'?

That's a very good question. GPS has more and more use. I'd dare to say that if GPS stopped working, trucks and ships would get lost, and food shortages would happen.

So a lot of people are using satelites, but not directly paying for them. It's hard to collect revenues from all the people using GPS.

This may be an example of a "public good", which has to be paid from taxes rather than user fees.

That is not an argument for extravegance, such as a manned mission to mars.

[GRG55]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

What kind of public subsidies is it taking to make this venture 'profitable'?

...

Probably hard to make a profit on this venture if there was no "International Space Station" to start with ;-)

[don]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

Probably hard to make a profit on this venture if there was no "International Space Station" to start with ;-)

Wonder how far this "endeavor" has extended the space station's dubious lifespan?

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

Wonder how far this "endeavor" has extended the space station's dubious lifespan?

I wonder if they've paid much in the way of lobbying?

As we've seen, lobbying costs can be a rather lucrative "investment" category.

I do wish the private space industry well......I'd be lying if I said I didn't wish for a chance to get into orbit before I die.

And the fact that probably the ONLY shot humanity has for very long-term species continuity is to get enough monkeys off this rock someday.

[RTQ]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

Three examples of data from satellites:

1. GPS - noted above, used in everything from iPhones/iPads to surveying, and everything in between that needs precision position, velocity, and time. GPS is a constellation of 24 satellites in 6 orbital planes, plus a complex ground segment.
2. Landsat - Used for crop health and yield predictions (which in turn ties into futures markets), to land use monitoring (e.g., deforestation), to disaster recovery. Landsat is a series of satellites, and the private sector has not been able to field a system with the coverage of Landsat.
3. Weather satellites - Both the low Earth orbiting type and the geostationary time, provide input data to models that predict weather, including very dangerous weather such as tornadoes and hurricanes. LEO satellites number roughly 5, and GEO also about 5.

All of the above are government funded (funding to Air Force for GPS, funding to NOAA and USGS for weather and Landsat (but NOAA and USGS acquire satellites through NASA)), and at present, none have the 'revenue' to support a private solution, although that has been tried on Landsat (probably the easiest to try that approach on, but that did not work out).

[c1ue]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

I'd note that in urban areas, GPS is becoming less and less relevant.

There is an active niche called assisted GPS where cell tower triangulation plus wi-fi triangulation is combined with cell phone MEMS (basically sensor data from accelerometers, gyros, etc) can achieve pretty good results indoors. Some companies that do this: Alohar, Skyhook, Pole Star.

Unfortunately most of this technology is crap for the street - which is my personal/professional problem - but can show fairly impressive results indoors.

GPS thus is more useful for rural - and of course drone strikes.

[don]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

The US Federal Aviation Administration has cleared SpaceShipTwo, a commercial six-passenger spacecraft owned by Virgin Galactic, to begin rocket-powered suborbital test flights, the company said on Wednesday.

SpaceShipTwo manufacturer Scaled Composites of Mojave, California, received a one-year experimental launch permit on 23 May for test flights beyond the atmosphere, FAA spokesman Hank Price said.

The six-passenger, two-pilot spacecraft is based on the prototype SpaceShipOne, also built by Scaled, which clinched the $10m Ansari X Prize in 2004 for the first privately funded human spaceflights.

SpaceShipOne made three suborbital hops beyond the atmosphere, each with a solo pilot aboard, ultimately reaching an altitude of nearly 70 miles above Earth. SpaceShipOne is now on display at the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space museum in Washington.

Virgin Galactic is owned by British billionaire Richard Branson's Virgin Group and Aabar Investments PJS. Branson hired SpaceShipOne designer Burt Rutan, who has since retired from Scaled, to create a fleet of spaceships for commercial use. Virgin Galactic has taken deposits from more than 500 people for rides, which cost $200,000.

Participants will experience a few minutes of weightlessness and see the curve of Earth set against the black sky of space. NASA's first two manned spaceflights in 1961, by Mercury astronauts Alan Shepard and Virgil "Gus" Grissom were suborbital flights.
Like SpaceShipOne, Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo will be flown into the air beneath a carrier jet and released. Once separated, the spaceship's rocket engine will fire to blast it into the sky. SpaceShipTwo has completed 16 free flight tests.

The FAA permit will enable Scaled, now wholly owned by Northrop Grumman, to move on to rocket-powered flights, the first of which is expected toward the end of the year, Virgin Galactic said in a statement.

Company President George Whitesides called the permit an important milestone "that positions the company a major step closer to bringing our customers to space".

The experimental permit allows Scaled to fly only its own test pilots, not passengers, Price said.

A date for the start of Virgin Galactic's commercial spaceflights has not yet been set.

In addition to flying wealthy tourists, Scaled has signed contracts to fly researchers and science experiments.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...p-test-flights

[globaleconomicollaps]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

That's a very good question. GPS has more and more use. I'd dare to say that if GPS stopped working, trucks and ships would get lost, and food shortages would happen.

So a lot of people are using satellites, but not directly paying for them. It's hard to collect revenues from all the people using GPS.

This may be an example of a "public good", which has to be paid from taxes rather than user fees.

That is not an argument for extravagance, such as a manned mission to mars.

The GPS satellite system was commercialized precisely to prevent widespread use of ultra-accurate fiber optic gyro units that where then under development. The government wanted to have the ability to shut off the service in wartime. I remember reading this years ago in US news and world report. I can dig up a reference if you want.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

The GPS satellite system was commercialized precisely to prevent widespread use of ultra-accurate fiber optic gyro units that where then under development. The government wanted to have the ability to shut off the service in wartime. I remember reading this years ago in US news and world report. I can dig up a reference if you want.

If that's true, wouldn't a strong indicator of truth be that current/future potential opponents of the US(China/Russia/Iran/Etc) would be investing heavily in fiber optic gyro technology to prevent the US from having information dominance over them with the udiquity of and reliance on GPS?

I know the Russian had(and maybe still do have) a satellite based navigation system.....that's going back to the Soviet days though....

[RTQ]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding. The Global Positioning System (GPS) is a government-funded (via the Air Force) satellite constellation of navigation beacons, it is not privatized. Regarding fiber optic gyros, a number of countries use them in satellites and launch vehicles, nothing special these days. The micro-machined gyros in hand-held devices are also ubiquitous, enabling quite a range of capabilities from Wii games to commanding hand-held devices.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding. The Global Positioning System (GPS) is a government-funded (via the Air Force) satellite constellation of navigation beacons, it is not privatized. Regarding fiber optic gyros, a number of countries use them in satellites and launch vehicles, nothing special these days. The micro-machined gyros in hand-held devices are also ubiquitous, enabling quite a range of capabilities from Wii games to commanding hand-held devices.

It's been a while since I recall reading about non-GPS navigation(besides the use of map/protractor, etc) was inertial navigation systems(INS). I think I recall something about lasers or some such techy words used to describe the latest and greatest versions...but this is going back a few decades.

I wonder if INS systems can be shrunk in size and cost to make GPS irrelevant.....at least for parties concerned about the leverage the US holds over the system.

[c1ue]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

If that's true, wouldn't a strong indicator of truth be that current/future potential opponents of the US(China/Russia/Iran/Etc) would be investing heavily in fiber optic gyro technology to prevent the US from having information dominance over them with the udiquity of and reliance on GPS?

Frankly I am unclear just how accurate fiber optic gyro technology is. GPS is actually not at all that accurate either - at least not with consumer technology. No doubt much more sophisticated military systems can do better.

I know the Russian had(and maybe still do have) a satellite based navigation system.....that's going back to the Soviet days though....

In fact there are something like 7 different competing GPS systems - which was talked about here:

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...064#post186064

iPhone 4S even supports the Russian GLONASS system.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

Frankly I am unclear just how accurate fiber optic gyro technology is. GPS is actually not at all that accurate either - at least not with consumer technology. No doubt much more sophisticated military systems can do better.



In fact there are something like 7 different competing GPS systems - which was talked about here:

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...064#post186064

iPhone 4S even supports the Russian GLONASS system.

Yeah, I don't know jack about INS or it's more modern derivatives...just what little I read about them being used in military/commercial aviation.

I THINK I recall the US USED to issue notices about it's intentional degrading of GPS accuracy(while mil-spec GPS would be able to maintain high precision DGPS accuracy) during Desert Storm versions 1 and/or 2.

But I think I read or heard the US was no longer going to degrade GPS for some reason, maybe there being such high reliance on it? If true, I still reckon, never say never.

It will be interesting to see how robust, jam proof, and ubiquitous the other competing nav systems can become.

I would think anyone with aspirations of being a regional to global power there's few things as important as knowing exactly where you are at in the world as well as knowing exactly where your destination is.

There was a paper exercise not long ago to get folks thinking...it involved a hypothetical scenario of a large body of folks being sent back in time with modern gear. Blank slate, what do you do? Most assumed having a handheld GPS and some batteries would make nav easy.

They made two horrific assumptions...that batteries could be easily replaced, and that satellites existed in the past to support the receiver.

After food, water, and shelter....few things matter more than knowing where you are and where you want to go.

No matter if it's one person or one country.

It would be interesting to see if the US is doing anything to encourage or compel continued reliance on GPS or direct/oblique attacks on competing systems.

[c1ue]

Re: Let's Privatize NASA

I THINK I recall the US USED to issue notices about it's intentional degrading of GPS accuracy(while mil-spec GPS would be able to maintain high precision DGPS accuracy) during Desert Storm versions 1 and/or 2.

The degrading was real, but it was essentially the removal of a few digits from the transmitted signal.

This was dropped though, because the civilian hardware/software computational capability just started sampling 4 satellites (or more) instead of the standard 3.

After all, if you have more axes to triangulate from, you don't need as much accuracy in any given line.

As for the military angle - it is ludicrous. In the event of a real shooting war against a real opponent, the first thing done would be jamming of the GPS signals. They are very weak radio signals so aren't difficult to disrupt.

However, military systems to my knowledge don't rely on GPS alone. Once a highly accurate 3D map is created - using the GPS system - then locally placed repeaters plus inertial guidance and terrain recognition is probably sufficient for many military applications (i.e. putting gigantic warheads onto large installations).

This is why Russia for example is so paranoid about GPS surveying of its territory.