Rocket Science for the Rest of Us

Please pardon me as I take a small detour into the religious realm.  I'm not asking you to believe as I do, and I won't entertain a religious argument in the comments section.  However, this was too lovely a coincidence, and I want to share it.

Most of you know I'm Catholic  (C'mon--I write about nuns in space!), and this year, I agreed to teach 4th grade religious education.  (God help the children!)  Last weekend, we read this psalm:

Praise the LORD from the heavens;

praise him in the heights.

Praise him, all you his angels;

give praise, all you his hosts. 

Praise him, sun and moon;

praise him, all shining stars.

Praise him, highest heavens,

you waters above the heavens.

Let them all praise the LORD’s name;

for he commanded and they were created

I tried to explain to the kids how all creation praises God, even if not in voices--the stars burn and the birds sing.  This led to praising God in our actions by living according to His will.  However, on the 27th, Space.com printed an article about the sounds of the magnetosphere, and how they sound like birds:



So, it seems in its own way, even the magnetosphere sings praises to God.

This has given me a great idea for a short Rescue Sisters story.  Three of my favorite characters are Sister Rita, an Earth-born woman who joins the Sisters, and Sisters Thomas and Ann, who were born in space.  Ann is a very literal person.  Rita's parents send her a recordingof the birds around her their home, and she listens to them when she's homesick.  Ann will comment that they sound "off."  She'll start listening to the recording, then tweaking it, then analyzing it...  She'll insist it's not from Earth, but it's not until one of the other sisters sees her equations that she realizes Sister Ann thinks it's the magnetosphere of a planet. 

As commercial manned space flight moves toward becoming a reality and customers start lining up for their turn at history, an important issue rises--If something terrible happens and people are injured or die, who's liable?

Oddly enough, the Federal Laws do not require liability waivers for passengers against the company--only against the US government.  I other words (as I understand it) if the flight of your life becomes the last flight of your life, your family can sue the rocket company, but not Uncle Sam.

Neither the CSLA nor the regulations promulgated thereunder require space flight participants to execute waivers in favor of the licensee or permittee or its contractors and subcontractors.[105] Space flight participants are, however, required to execute a valid and mutual waiver with the United States government.[106] Licensees and permittees are required to provide disclosures regarding the safety history and risks associated with space travel to participants,[107] and they must receive training on safety issues, including how to respond to emergency situations while in flight.[108]
Because the CSLA does not require space flight participants to waive liability for any entity other than the United States government, companies participating in manned space flights will still need to look to other means of limiting claims by space flight participants.[109] (From the law review article on Commercial Space Launch Act, http://lawreview.richmond.edu/exploring-the-commercial-space-launch-act/)

Considering how potentially dangerous space is, this sounds like a real hindrance to businesses, and considering there are liability waivers for everything from airplane flights to website tools, I'm kind of surprised there wasn't one required for commercial space flight.  However, many states (New Mexico, Texas, Virginia, Florida, California, to name a few) are jumping in with state-mandated waivers.  Here's California's, which was approved by the governor on Sept 12:

“WARNING AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT: I understand and acknowledge that, under California law, there is limited civil liability for bodily injury, including death, emotional injury, or property damage, sustained by a participant as a result of the inherent risks associated with space flight activities provided by a space flight entity. I have given my informed consent to participate in space flight activities after receiving a description of the inherent risks associated with space flight activities, as required by federal law pursuant to Section 50905 of Title 51 of the United States Code and Section 460.45 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The consent that I have given acknowledges that the inherent risks associated with space flight activities include, but are not limited to, risk of bodily injury, including death, emotional injury, and property damage. I understand and acknowledge that I am participating in space flight activities at my own risk. I have been given the opportunity to consult with an attorney before signing this statement.”

So when you're about to strap yourself onto a 70-meter explosive device and get yourself shot out of the atmosphere--remember: Space is dangerous.  You want to ride?  Accept the risks, adn sign the waiver.

Lesson link here:  http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/basics/bsf11-2.php

This lesson looks at systems that control the spacecraft's position in space, and it's ability to communicate with earth.  I think the thing to take away from this is that it takes constant work to keep the spacecraft properly oriented.  If you're like me and have a hard time visualizing how some of these systems work, I'm found a couple of videos:

Simple attiude control demonstrated here:

Here's an interesting one demonstrating gyroscope control. 

For the communications, the thing to remember is high gain=more power, more focus; low gain=low power, wider focus.

3D printing technology has been around for only a few years, but the possibilities are fantastic!  NASA has been experimenting with 3D printers to make spare parts in the ISS, and now they've funded a project to build spacecraft in space out of materials from space.



"The "SpiderFab" project received $100,000 from NASA's Innovative Advanced Concepts program to hammer out a design and figure out whether spacecraft self-construction makes business sense. Practical planning and additional funding could lead to the launch of a 3D-printing test mission within several years," according to Space News.

Photo from Space News.  Credit Unlimited Tethers.

It could prove to be a significant cost cutter and a major step toward pushing us further into the solar system and eventually out of it.  The biggest expense and manufacturing problem with spacecraft is escaping Earth's orbit.  See The "Tyranny of the Rocket Equation" by astronaut Don Pettit in the Fall 2012 issue of Ad Astra for more details.  Not only do we end up using most of the rocket's mass for fuel to get it into space, we also have to manufacture our craft to be able to withstand Earth's gravity and the stress of leaving our atmosphere, which means sturdier and heavier than it made need for its space mission.  Build it in space, and you can build lighter--plus you need only send the building bot up, which experts say may not need to be larger than a cubesat, smaller than one of the standard $15 mailing box you get at the post office.

In theory, if you have intricate enough plans and a good enough printer with access to the correct materials, you will be able to make the entire ship from scratch.  We're a long way from that, but imagine building the structure of the ship, then astronauts finishing the job with components sent up from Earth.  It's an exciting first start.

Speaking of 3D technologies, there is a company, RocketCrafters, that is working on using 3D printers to print solid rocket fuel.  It allows for better control of the shape of the fuel, which can mean better control of the spacecraft.  More on that another time.

Find the lesson here: http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/basics/bsf11-1.php

I haven't gotten any comments on the lessons.  Keep in mind that you don't have to comment on what I post, but also if you have questions on the lesson itself.  I will get an answer for you.  However, I don't intend to rewrite the lesson if I can help it.  Perhaps I'm simply talking to myself every Tuesday?  If so, I'm still going to keep doing this, as I committed to the class, but I'll try to include something fun as well.

Looks like Chapter 11 is one for the engineers, as we start discussing the systems and subsystems of spacecraft--and like the chapter said, the definitions of system and subsystem seem to be used loosely.  We'll just go with it.  Today, we learned about the structure subsystem which includes the bus and he magnometer boom.  I'd heard the word "bus" used when discussing computers, but never really understood what it meant.  I guess you could say that like a regular bus, it carries the subsystems that "people" the spaceship. 

The data handling systems are of course, extremely important, and pretty self-explanatory.  I was especially interested in the failsafes.  It's ironic that despite our care in programming, so much can still go wrong with a spacecraft, and not even because of outside factors.  I think that as we get closer to artificial intelligence, it will become a major factor in space travel--but I suppose that's a no-brainer.  I remember reading an excellent short story about a man who was going to lose all control of his body.  The scientists wanted to make him a regular human body as a replacement, and he was furious.  He wanted them to make him an artificial body that could withstand the rigors of space and send him up so he could do something useful and incredible.  When I read it as a college Freshman, I didn't really get the point of the story, but I see it now.  Just think of how much a human mind in spacecraft body could accomplish.  (This also goes along with The Ship Who Sang, and excellent series of books by Anne McCaffery).

Something fun now--a video on folding an origami spaceship, so you can make your own.  No subsystems, though.

NASA has removed ATK Liberty Launch from the shortlist of potential carriers of crew to the ISS because of concern over the technical matters.  According to William Gerstenmaier, associate administrator for NASA’s Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate, the problem was that they didn't provide enough details to reassure NASA of the safety of their planned vehicle.  ATK did not commetn to Space News about this, and there's nothing about it on their website that I could find.  I hope that they will be able to recover from this and re-propose their plans.  If not...that's one good thing about this kind of contract system--instead of the government being stuck helping fund a program to make it work, it can choose the ones that are effective.  Right now, SpaceX and Boeing are forging ahead.  read more here: http://spacenews.com/civil/120904-nasa-dropped-atk-comm-crew.html

Good news for Florida workers in teh space industry: XCOR plans to manufacture and launch its suborbital ships our of Kennedy Space Center.  They're taking over some of the old Space Shuttle facilities for its Lynx vehicle.  The Lynx willfly tourists, researchers adn payloads into suborbital space (about 100 kilometers, although they intend to later move on to orbital vehicles.  They'll be doing test flights of the Lynx Mark 1 in 2012, and plan to build and fly the Linx Mark 2 from Florida in 2014.  Right now, the company is stationed in the Mohave, CA, but are moving research to Texas and building and flight to Florida.  the comany said they might leave some operations and test flight activities in California.  Why the move?  Money--the other states provided better incentives and better business conditions.  Read more here:  http://www.universetoday.com/96987/xcor-to-move-operations-near-kennedy-space-center/

Read the lesson here:  http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/basics/bsf10-1.php

Once again, a big lesson with a lot of terms.  A good one to bookmark for when you're reading an article or something. Here's a 7-minute summary and history of the Deep Space Network.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/lulxsz_8xNM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I'm very excited about Planetary Resources' mission for mining asteroids.  It has the potential for so much benefit for us on Earth as well as in space.  The August 2012 issue of Popular mechanics has an awesome article outlining their plan.  I'm going to hit some highlights here, but I definitely recommend reading the entire article.

Step One: Find a likely asteroid.  PR intends to use a small fleet of orbiting telescopes.  Because they have a more local mission--the solar system as opposed to say, Hubble's Deep Space mission, they are smaller and cheaper to make. In addition, they intend to rent time on them for other researchers to recoup their expenses.

Step Two: Assess the rock:  Once they have a likely rock, they need a closer look at its composition.  Since the most likely candidates are going to be small and have negligible gravity (PopMech says they will dock more than land), they ar taking a different approach. Instead of a penetrator craft (remember Tuesday's lesson?) they are using a LIBS, or laser-induced breakdown spectorscopy system.  Essentailly, they vaporize part of the rock with a laser and and study the light emitted by the plasma, which tells them what elements it contains.  Cool, huh?

The craft that does this will also likely place a radio transmitter on the asteroid, a way of staking PR's claim.  Honestly, I think the politics of commercial interests claiming space "real estate" and the profits thereof are going to be at least as challenging as the technological aspects of the mission.  However, they have to be addressed if we are to progress.

Step Three: Dig 'er Up!:  To mine water, which will be vital in space not only for survival but also fuel, they'll need to mine carbonaceous chondrite asteroids.  These are generally crumbly, so a fleet of mining bots will swarm the asteroid, clamp on and basically scrape and slurp, with vacuum bots to suck up any dust or debris kicked up by the process.  Mining for metals is harder, and they are still working out the details on how to do this and be cost-effective.

Step Four:  Sell It!  This, too is a rub, as the best clients would be people in space, especially for the water.  However, there are enough possible uses for asteroid-mined metals that PR sees a future.  As PopMech states: "A 500-ton asteroid with a .0015 percent platinum metals--a common percentage--would have three times the richest concentration found on Earth.  Platinum is used in everything form computers to cars to medical equipment, and with a greater and cheaper supply, there are bound to be more uses. 

Ambitious?  Sure!  Doable?  The scientists and entrepreneurs at Planetary Resources think so--and if they are right, they'll be making one of the many small steps that lead to the next Big Leap for Mankind.

Find the lesson here: http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/basics/bsf9-1.php

Robotic spacecraft are divided into eight categories, which are explained in the lesson. I thought I'd post about a current mission in each category:

Flyby spacecraft:   EPOXI, which finished its mission in 2010, flew by the Hartley 2 comet, checking out the differences between it and another comet it observed, Temple 1.  It also took reading of five distant stars to find other planets. http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/details.cfm?id=5872

Orbiter spacecraft:  The Dawn spacecraft is an orbiter, with the mission of studying two protoplanets, "baby planets whose formation was interrupted by the formation of Jupiter," according the the JPL website..  Dawn has been studying Vesta  and is moving on this week to Ceres. It uses an ion engine that generates a small but continuous amount of thrust. http://dawn.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/

Atmospheric spacecraft:  Huygens, which is mentioned in the lesson, is the latest example I found.  http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/basics/huygens.php.  There are other craft that are studying the atmosphere, like the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile EvolutioN (MAVEN), which will study Mars' atmosphere to determine how had changed over time.  http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mars/news/maven_20080915.html


Lander spacecraft: The next lander planned by NASA is InSight, which in a sense is also a penetrator, as it will drill into the surface of Mars to gain insight into its makeup and evolution.  http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/details.cfm?id=5928

Of course, the goal on the commercial side is to send some really awesome landers that will serve as habitats for humans, such as in the Mars-One mission: http://mars-one.com/en/

Penetrator spacecraft:  There haven't been any actual penetrator spacecraft missions in several years.  The latest one on the NASA site is Deep Impact, which studied the comet Tempel 1: http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/deepimpact/index.cfm


Rover spacecraft: Obviously, the spacecraft of the day, Mars Curiosity, is a rover. What I didn't realize is how slow the rover moves. On last Tuesday, it traveled 52 feet, and the goal, apparently, is a football field length a day. Check out the article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/29/mars-rover-drive-curiosity-glenelg_n_1841698.html? Did you know you can follow Curiosity on Twitter?  http://twitter.com/MarsCuriosity

Observatory spacecraft:  Hubble is an obvious example.  However, I'm going to mention Planetary Resources' ARKYD LEO spacecraft, which will be several orbiting telescopes thatwill search out asteroids for mining.  http://www.planetaryresources.com/technology/leo-space-telescope/

Communications & Navigation spacecraft:  By far, the most familiar of spacecraft, we depend on these kinds of craft daily.