Author Archives: Gray Rinehart

Strategic Space Symposium, Day Two

By | |
Comments Off on Strategic Space Symposium, Day Two

(Abbreviated from the full entry in the Space Warfare Forum.)

The second day of the 2009 Strategic Space Symposium was just as good as the first, and in some ways better. Highlights:

  • NGA Director VADM Robert Murrett, discussed NGA’s partial reliance on commercial satellites like GeoEye
  • I found myself slowly becoming an ORS convert, as the vision explained was different from the old “rapid space reconstruction” idea
  • I was pleased to learn that the ORS program will probably call for launching stored spacecraft before they become obsolete, which will be important for developing and sustaining a viable industrial base
  • I began to think that ORS might better be called ODS: “operationally deployable space” instead of “operationally responsive space”
  • The “Industry Perspectives” panel discussed how disruptive unstable funding can be to the aerospace supply chain, and how changing a system’s requirements usually dooms all efforts to complete acquisition programs on time and under budget
  • I was pleasantly surprised by the mild industry response to an ITAR question: maybe industry’s usual negative reaction is not to the idea behind the ITAR but rather to specific items on the USML and the MCTL (some items could probably be removed from the lists, if doing so doesn’t jeopardize national security)
  • The luncheon speakers gave excellent presentations on the warfighters’ perspective on space systems and space support, but I was surprised that neither of them mentioned the recent Chinese statement about developing offensive and defensive space capabilities

As on day one, I had some great conversations with company representatives and old Air Force colleagues, so for me the symposium ended as well as it began. Well done!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

My Day at the Strategic Space Symposium

By | |
Comments Off on My Day at the Strategic Space Symposium

Coming to Omaha for the 2009 Strategic Space Symposium seemed like a good time to revive the Space Warfare Forum, so yesterday I posted a long report about day one at the symposium.

I made some good contacts with company representatives and saw some of my old colleagues, so it was a good day at the symposium. Highlights:

  • The symposium is extremely well-run (in large part by one of my former students): good facilities, exhibits, and speakers
  • NE Governor Heineman mentioned their “Nebraska Advantage” program to bring military contractors to the state … I’ll investigate it when I get back to NC
  • USSTRATCOM Commander, General Kevin Chilton, outlined his “wish list” of space capabilities … one key item was improved space situational awareness, which could be a real opportunity for some ambitious technology companies
  • The combatant commands agreed on the importance of space systems and space support to their operations
  • I’m going to start distinguishing between macro-targeting (looking at large areas, for strategic purposes) and micro-targeting (looking at smaller, precise targets for tactical purposes)
  • The NRO plans to reinvigorate their science and technology efforts, which should spawn some new opportunities for industry
  • Building any kind of Operationally Responsive Space capability will require a new business model for acquisition, which also means lots of potential for contractors throughout the supply chain

Here’s hoping day 2 will be as good, or better!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

In Space History: a Pioneer Approaches Jupiter, and Atlantis Launches

By | |
Comments Off on In Space History: a Pioneer Approaches Jupiter, and Atlantis Launches

Thirty-five years ago today — November 3, 1974 — while on approach to its December flyby of Jupiter, the Pioneer-11 spacecraft sent back the first polar images of Jupiter, according to this NASA site.


(First image of Jupiter’s polar region, by Pioneer-11. NASA image from the National Air & Space Museum.)

We’ll have more about the Pioneer-11 flyby in December, when it made its closest approach to Jupiter.

And 15 years ago today — November 3, 1994 — the Space Shuttle Atlantis launched from the Kennedy Space Center on mission STS-66.


(STS-66 mission patch. NASA image.)

U.S. astronauts Donald R. McMonagle, Curtis L. Brown, Jr., Ellen Ochoa, Scott E. Parazynski, and Joseph R. Tanner, along with French astronaut Jean-Francois Clervoy, conducted a variety of experiments on the third flight of the Atmospheric Laboratory for Applications and Sciences (ATLAS) payload. The mission landed at Edwards Air Force Base on November 14.

Of note: since shuttle pilot Curtis Brown hails from North Carolina, his STS-66 mission is also featured on the North Carolina Aerospace Initiative web site, specifically on this November history page. (Full disclosure: I’m the Associate Director of the NCAI, and built the web pages in question.)

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Space History Sadness: First Astronaut Fatality

By | |
Comments Off on Space History Sadness: First Astronaut Fatality

On October 31, 1964 — 45 years ago today — NASA astronaut Theodore Freeman died when his T-38 crashed at Ellington Air Force Base, Texas. He had been selected in October 1963 as one of the third group of NASA astronauts, and was the first astronaut or astronaut-trainee to lose his life.


(Theodore Freeman. NASA image from Wikimedia Commons.)

Freeman’s official astronaut biography is here. You can also read about him at the Astronauts Memorial Foundation.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Lunar Landing Research, 45 Years Ago

By | |
Comments Off on Lunar Landing Research, 45 Years Ago

Forty-five years ago today — October 30, 1964 — NASA pilot Joseph Walker took off from the South Base area of Edwards Air Force Base on the first flight in a Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (LLRV).


(LLRV in flight. NASA image ECN-506, from the NASA Dryden photo collection.)

Walker flew the vehicle three times that day; his total flight time was just under 60 seconds, and he reached a peak altitude of about ten feet. That may not sound too impressive, but think about how difficult the thing must have been to fly:

Built of aluminum alloy trusses and shaped like a giant four-legged bedstead, …. the LLRV had a General Electric CF-700-2V turbofan engine mounted vertically in a gimbal, with 4,200 pounds of thrust. The engine got the vehicle up to the test altitude and was then throttled back to support five-sixths of the vehicle’s weight, simulating the reduced gravity of the moon. Two hydrogen peroxide lift rockets with thrust that could be varied from 100 to 500 pounds handled the LLRV’s rate of descent and horizontal movement. Sixteen smaller hydrogen peroxide rockets, mounted in pairs, gave the pilot control in pitch, yaw and roll.

And remember, all of this was done with primitive computers by today’s standards. Today, we might build it so that a control computer would measure the vehicle’s movements and its shifting center of gravity, and compensate automatically; they didn’t have that luxury, which to me makes their accomplishment even more impressive.

Eventually the three LLRVs were sent to Houston, and joined by two Lunar Landing Training Vehicles (LLTVs), which lunar module pilots used to train for the descent to the moon. Without them, the Apollo lunar landings would have been much more difficult — maybe impossible.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Healthcare: Necessities and Luxuries

By | |
Comments Off on Healthcare: Necessities and Luxuries

I’ve been mulling this over for a few days, and haven’t come to any conclusions: what part of healthcare (or health care, if you prefer) is necessity, and what part is luxury? Can any part be considered a luxury?

From the standpoint of the patient, if you need some particular medicine or procedure to recover fully, then by definition it would be a necessity.

But I wonder, how much of the price escalation in healthcare is because tests and treatments that once were extraordinary are now commonplace, i.e., once were luxuries but now are considered necessities?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Once again, I am a Relic

By | |
Comments Off on Once again, I am a Relic

A few years ago, when they shut down the 55th Mobile Command & Control Squadron at Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska, I became a relic of the Cold War. Later, when the last Titan rocket launched, I became a relic of the space program.

Now, again, it seems I am a relic: this time of the attempt to keep militarily critical U.S. technology in U.S. hands.

At the Defense Technology Security Administration from 2001-04, I recommended provisos for hundreds of State Department export licenses and agreements, to ensure U.S. companies didn’t reveal design methodologies or other insights into U.S. capabilities. I reviewed reams of technical data to ensure the companies didn’t go beyond the restrictions in their licenses. And I monitored dozens of face-to-face meetings between U.S. and foreign companies to ensure all parties stayed in bounds. It was often fascinating, sometimes frustrating work that was born out of the Cox Commission and the defense authorization that, among other things, had moved export authority for communications satellites from the Commerce Department to the State Department (see below).

Now we find out that, by executive fiat, our President delegated his responsibility for certifying critical space exports to the Commerce Department. It was actually done back on September 29th, via this Presidential Determination.

The responsibility is found in Section 1512 of the 1999 National Defense Authorization Act:

The President shall certify to the Congress at least 15 days in advance of any export to the People’s Republic of China of missile equipment or technology (as defined in section 74 of the
Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2797c)) that —
(1) such export is not detrimental to the United States space launch industry; and
(2) the missile equipment or technology, including any indirect technical benefit that could be derived from such export, will not measurably improve the missile or space launch capabilities of the People’s Republic of China.

So now, rather than the President making such certifications to Congress, the Commerce Department will do so. If I recall, people complained because George W. Bush seemed to delegate things instead of tending to them himself; but according to this Washington Times article, neither he nor Bill Clinton ever delegated this particular responsibility.

Thankfully, the determination did not seem to immediately get around Section 1513 of the 1999 NDAA, which states,

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all satellites and related items that are on the Commerce Control List of dual use items in the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR part 730 et seq.) on the date of the enactment of this Act shall be transferred to the United States Munitions List and controlled under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).

But how long until that gets changed? There are a lot of rumblings in the aerospace industry about rescinding some of the current export controls, as if the reason U.S. companies have lost market share to foreign satellite makers is that they can’t tell foreign customers why U.S. satellites work so well. It’s not price, it’s not that foreign manufacturers build fine spacecraft, it’s lack of technology transfer? The notion is ridiculous, but the impulse to blame our lack of competitiveness on anything other than internal business practices runs very deep in this country — witness the U.S. auto industry. Disturbingly, this “determination” seems to indicate that the Administration is willing to entertain the idea of sacrificing national security in order to make a quick buck.

I found that attitude among representatives of some of the companies I monitored: the short-sighted notion that it didn’t matter if they transferred technology to another country, as long as the other country paid well. The possibility that a foreign company might end up as their competitor in the future, and take away their customers using adapted U.S. technology, never seemed to occur to them.

Eight months before President Obama was elected, I expressed concerns about his national (in)security rhetoric. I didn’t foresee this potential relaxation of export controls, but I can’t say I’m very surprised.

And I’m still concerned. But I would be: after all, I’m a relic.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Galileo in Space, Twenty Years Ago

By | |
Comments Off on Galileo in Space, Twenty Years Ago

Twenty years ago today — October 18, 1989 — Space Shuttle Atlantis launched from Kennedy Space Center on mission STS-34. Astronauts Donald E. Williams, Michael J. McCulley, Franklin R. Chang-Diaz, Shannon W. Lucid and Ellen S. Baker launched the Galileo spacecraft shortly after arriving in orbit.

(STS-34 mission patch. Click to enlarge.)

Nearly six years later, on July 13, 1995, Galileo rendezvous with the planet Jupiter and released its descent probe into the Jovian atmosphere.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Soviet Firsts in October Space History

By | |
Comments Off on Soviet Firsts in October Space History

Forty-five years ago today — October 12, 1964 — the Soviet Union placed the first three-man crew in space when cosmonauts Vladimir M. Komarov, Konstantin P. Feoktistov, and Boris B. Yegorov launched aboard Voshkod-1. In addition, Feoktistov was the first civilian in space.

And forty years ago yesterday — October 11, 1969 — the Soviets started a three-day launch series that resulted in the first time that three different spacecraft, with seven cosmonauts total, were in orbit simultaneously. Soyuz-6 was launched on the 11th, carrying cosmonauts Georgi S. Shonin and Valeri N. Kubasov. Soyuz-7 launched 40 years ago today, carrying Anatoliy V. Filipchenko, Vladislav N. Volkov and Viktor V. Gorbatko. And then on the 13th, Vladimir A. Shatalov and Aleksei S.Yeliseyev launched on Soyuz-8. All of these missions launched from Baikonur, in what is now Kazakhstan.

Two thoughts:

1. Considering that the latest crew to depart the International Space Station landed in Kazakhstan over the weekend, and that Soyuz rockets and capsules will soon be the only man-rated system to ferry people to and from the ISS, it’s safe to say that the “workaday” approach of the Soviet space program has proved very robust indeed.

2. Do you think they planned these missions for October in honor of the Bolshevik Revolution?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

When Religions Grow Up

By | |
Comments Off on When Religions Grow Up

If part of growing up is realizing that you can’t realistically expect to get everything you want, what happens to religions when they grow up?

Is it a mark of maturity for a religion that it accepts that not everyone will (or will want to) adhere to it?

I think about Jesus and the rich man — sometimes described as a “rich young ruler” — who asked him what he needed to do to gain eternal life (Matthew 19:16-22). The man walked away from the opportunity, and what did Jesus do? Did Jesus chase the man down, berate him for his stubbornness, or threaten to take his life if he didn’t repent and convert? Not at all. Jesus let him go, and used the event as a teachable moment for his disciples.

When Christianity was in its infancy, still an underground movement, it brought in Jews and Gentiles by way of powerful testimonies and the awesome revelation that God had made a way for people to be saved and changed. Coercion never seemed to come into play, for two reasons. One, because the faith (and the nascent Church) was relatively powerless to coerce anyone to join. Second, and to my thinking more interesting, is because the faith was based on traditional Jewish belief and Judaism, being already a venerable religion, was a mature faith and one that valued being set apart, a small island of monotheistic faith in the ocean of pagan humanity.

As the capital-C Church grew into what I consider its adolescent years, and especially as it obtained official status in the Roman Empire under Constantine, it became much more belligerent. Coercion became more acceptable to church leaders, both as a means to convince people to join and as a means to enforce adherence to doctrine. (We may remember that Judaism’s early days — its adolescence, if you will — also had its coercive phase, when the Jews established themselves as a nation through military victory.)

This leads to the question of Islam, which appears to be a religion still in its adolescence. It went through an adolescent phase before, spreading through coercion and conquest and gaining worldly power that it wanted to protect and expand. Faced with mounting opposition, it retreated into relative isolation; in its recent rise to prominence (or notoriety), however, it seems again to be going through adolescent tantrums, only this time with suicide bombers and AK-47s instead of dervishes and scimitars. The question in my mind is whether Islam as a religion will grow up, will grow out of this petulant and demanding phase, and how long it may take. It seems that it will take the Muslim equivalent of Martin Luther, someone who can initiate an Islamic Reformation, in order for Islam as a religion to mature beyond the need to spread itself by intimidation. That would be a wonder to behold; remember what Luther went through, and think what a Muslim reformer would face.

It also raises the question, to me, of whether the Christian Church is growing old gracefully. It’s one thing for us as Christians to eschew violence (Jesus, you may recall from Matthew 5:38-42, didn’t go in for “eye for an eye”) and to accept that some people will hear the Gospel and remain unmoved. But it would be a shame if we became so “mature,” so insular, so content in the old-folks’-homes of our churches, that we stopped caring about and for the world around us. May it never be.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather