Text Fwd: Boeing Phantom Ray Completes First Flight

* Text fwd by Bruce Gagnon on May 9, 2011
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Boeing_Phantom_Ray_Completes_First_Flight_999.html
Boeing Phantom Ray Completes First Flight
by Staff Writers
St. Louis MO (SPX) May 04, 2011

The Boeing Phantom Ray unmanned [satellite directed] airborne system (UAS) successfully completed its first flight April 27 at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif.

The 17-minute flight took place following a series of high-speed taxi tests in March that validated ground guidance, navigation and control and verified mission planning, pilot interface and operational procedures. Phantom Ray flew to 7,500 feet and reached a speed of 178 knots.

"This day has been two-and-a-half years in the making," said Darryl Davis, president, Boeing Phantom Works.

"It's the beginning of providing our customers with a test bed to develop future unmanned systems technology, and a testament to the capabilities resident within Boeing. Just as follow-on tests will expand Phantom Ray's flight envelope, they also will help Boeing expand its presence in the unmanned systems market."

The flight demonstrated Phantom Ray's basic airworthiness, setting the stage for additional flights in the next few weeks.

These company-funded flights will prepare Phantom Ray to support potential missions that may include intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; suppression of enemy air defenses; electronic attack; strike; and autonomous air refueling.

"The first flight moves us farther into the next phase of unmanned aircraft," said Craig Brown, Phantom Ray program manager for Boeing. "Autonomous, fighter-sized unmanned aircraft are real, and the UAS bar has been raised. Now I'm eager to see how high that bar will go."

Phantom Ray is one of several programs in Phantom Works, including Phantom Eye, that is part of a rapid prototyping initiative to design, develop and build advanced aircraft and then demonstrate their capabilities.

Boeing's portfolio of UAS solutions also includes the A160T Hummingbird, Integrator, ScanEagle and SolarEagle.

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)


Thank God men cannot fly, and lay waste the sky as well as the earth. ~Henry David Thoreau

Text Fwd: Assange Covered Space Nukes Protest

* Text fwd by Bruce Gagnon on Feb. 12, 2011

ASSANGE COVERED SPACE NUKES PROTEST

NASA Compuers Hacked Before Galileo Plutonium Launch


The leaflet above was advertising a protest I organized at the space center in Florida in 1989. This was during the period from 1987-1997 were we held one large protest after the other against the nuclearization and weaponization of space. Sometimes there were 500 people there, frequently about 1,000 came, and our biggest ever was more than 5,000.

Just today my son Julian, who grew up attending these events during his childhood, sent me an email with a link to a book written by Suelette Dreyfus with Research by Julian Assange that was published in 1997. The book was called Underground: Front Page. You can find the book here

Julian told me, "One of the debate topics for the Harvard tournament is about WikiLeaks and I've been doing a lot of research on Julian Assange. Here's a link to a book he worked on...read the first chapter!!!"

So I dutifully clicked on the link.

Much to my surprise I found that the authors began their book with an account of the Florida Coalition for Peace & Justice's 1989 campaign to oppose NASA's launch of the Galileo plutonium-238 space probe that garnered international media coverage. This was the first of three major nukes in space campaigns that I led (the others Ulysses in 1990 and Cassini in 1997).

The authors wrote:

For weeks, the protesters had been out in force, demonstrating and seizing media attention. Things had become very heated. On Saturday, 7 October, sign-wielding activists fitted themselves out with gas masks and walked around on street corners in nearby Cape Canaveral in protest. At 8 a.m. on Monday, 9 October, NASA started the countdown for the Thursday blast-off. But as Atlantis's clock began ticking toward take-off, activists from the Florida Coalition for Peace and Justice demonstrated at the centre's tourist complex.

That these protests had already taken some of the shine off NASA's bold space mission was the least of the agency's worries. The real headache was that the Florida Coalition told the media it would `put people on the launchpad in a non-violent protest'. The coalition's director, Bruce Gagnon, put the threat in folksy terms, portraying the protesters as the little people rebelling against a big bad government agency. President Jeremy Rivkin of the Foundation on Economic Trends, another protest group, also drove a wedge between `the people' and `NASA's people'. He told UPI, `The astronauts volunteered for this mission. Those around the world who may be the victims of radiation contamination have not volunteered.'

I'll always remember the 1989 launch of Galileo because it was delayed over and over again for about a week. The international media was gathered at the Kennedy Space Center tourist area with nothing much to do so each day during that week we'd assemble as many activists as we could get and hold another vigil and news conference which helped us tremendously get the word out around the world about the deadly plutonium space launch.

In chapter 1 of this book is a whole section about a computer worm that got planted inside of NASA's computers during this very time. Was the Galileo delay due to a hacker trying to help us stop that launch? Was a hacker also trying to symbolically "sit on the launch pad"? We've got to learn more about this story. I've already pointed it out to journalist Karl Grossman who helped us break the Galileo story open in 1989.

It just goes to show that you never know who is paying attention to your efforts. Who could have known that Julian Assange, who has become such a big name due to his courageous work with Wiki Leaks, would be moved enough by our campaign to feature it in the first chapter of his book? Maybe it was because it was a classic story about out-of-control technology and the "little peoples" reaction. Any way you cut it one has to acknowledge that it has a nice twist.

One side story should be told here as well. My son Julian was nine years old in 1989 and one day I came home and he had my gas mask on. In his most serious voice he told me, "Don't worry Dad, if Galileo blows up I could wear this gas mask for the rest of my life." He was trying to make me feel better. His words cut right to my heart and my soul and virtually every day since that time I have stayed true to the cause because I believe that no child, my own or anyone else's, should ever have to think of living in a radioactive wasteland wearing a gas mask for their whole life.


Bruce K. Gagnon
Coordinator
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)


Thank God men cannot fly, and lay waste the sky as well as the earth. ~Henry David Thoreau

Text Fwd: SPACE NUCLEAR POWER - OBAMA GIVES GO AHEAD FOR MORE

* Bruce Gagnon blog
Tuesday, June 01, 2010
SPACE NUCLEAR POWER - OBAMA GIVES GO AHEAD FOR MORE

This video (all in French but with important archival film footage) is about Cosmos 954, a Soviet nuclear-powered space surveillance satellite that was launched on September 18, 1977 and crashed in the region of Great Slave Lake near Yellowknife, Canada. Canada and the U.S. launched an immediate cleanup and recovery, called "Operation Morning Light". This report was aired on Canadian Broadcasting Corporation a few months after the accident.

The Russian satellite disintegrated and rained radioactive debris which covered some 124,000 square kilometers. Two hundred and twenty Canadian Armed Forces and the U.S. Department of Energy Nuclear Emergency Search Team combed the area until October 1978, trying to salvage fragments of the satellite. But according to the Atomic Energy Control Commission (now the Canadian Nuclear Safety) only 0.1% of the atomic energy source on Cosmos 954 was recovered.

There have been several other space nuclear power accidents over the years. According to journalist Karl Grossman, "In 1964 a U.S. Navy navigational satellite with a SNAP-9A (SNAP for Systems Nuclear Auxiliary Power) nuclear generator on-board failed to achieve orbit and fell to the Earth, disintegrating upon hitting the atmosphere. The 2.1 pounds of plutonium fuel dispersed widely. A study by a group of European health and radiation protection agencies subsequently reported that 'a worldwide soil sampling program carried out in 1970 showed SNAP-9A debris present at all continents and at all latitudes.' Long linking the SNAP-9A accident to an increase of lung cancer in people on Earth was Dr. John Gofman, professor of medical physics at the University of California at Berkeley, who was involved in isolating plutonium for the Manhattan Project."

Then in 1996 the Russian Mars '96 space mission failed to achieve orbit after launch and burned up as it reentered Earth's atmosphere. The space craft was carrying 200 grams of plutonium on-board and the flaming reentry was witnessed by a NASA scientist who was on a star gazing trip as it landed in the mountains of Chile and Bolivia. Those governments, not having the capability to locate the radiological debris, asked then President Bill Clinton to send them assistance. He refused and only the Boston Globe and Christian Science Monitor reported the accident as most of the media ignored this important story.

In 2003 the NASA space shuttle Colombia burned up when it reentered Earth's atmosphere due to heat shields having blown off during launch. All the astronauts on-board were killed. The flaming reentry was watched on TV as the debris was spread across several southern states. NASA immediately sent in search teams and told the public to stay away from the debris. One local sheriff was heard on National Public Radio telling the public that NASA told him the debris could be radioactive. I myself saw NASA personnel in haz-mat suits on TV and it was clear that a nuclear generator or reactor had to have been on the shuttle. To this day NASA denies the story.

In the soon to be published Global Network newsletter, Space Alert, Karl Grossman writes about Obama's plan to restart plutonium production at the Department of Energy nuclear labs across the nation. This is being done as Obama intends to increase the use of nuclear power for missions to Mars and for nuclear rockets.

All we need is one failed rocket, or one falling nuclear powered spacecraft, to spread deadly plutonium-238 across the planet. This stuff lasts for thousands of years and we can't take a chance by playing space nuclear Russian roulette.

Text Fw:US to launch secret 'space warplane'

*Image source: same as the link
An artist's conception of the X-37B

* Forwarded by Bruce Gagnon on April 21, 2010

US to launch secret 'space warplane'
Mon, 19 Apr 2010
Press TV

The United States Air Force has announced that it will launch a secret space plane that has sparked speculation about the militarization of space.

The Pentagon has set April 21 [delayed until April 22] as the date for the launch of the robotic space plane known as the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV), which is a reusable unmanned plane capable of long outer space missions at low orbits.

Since the nature of the project is shrouded in mystery, defense analysts allege that the US military is building the first generation of US 'space Predator drones' that will build up the United States' space armada, the Christian Science Monitor wrote in a recent article.

Military experts argue that the US Department of Defense would not have saved NASA's costly X-37B project, which had been scrapped, if it did not have a military application.

They say the US wants to maintain a leading role in space via the development of the new 'space weapon' at a time when other countries like China are expanding their space programs.

However, US military officials maintain that the X-37B will only be used for transporting payloads and facilitating space experiments.

The OTV is capable of supporting a range of tests, the Air Force spokesperson for the project said earlier at the 26th National Space Symposium.

"The first mission will emphasize proving technologies necessary for long duration reusable space vehicles with autonomous reentry and landing capabilities," Angie Blair added.

She went on to say that the "specific details of the OTV capabilities, limitations and vulnerabilities" remain classified.

The X-37B can stay at an orbit between 200 and 800 kilometers for around 270 days before landing automatically at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, reports say.

The location of the mission control center for the Boeing-made space vehicle is also a classified secret, but Blair says that Air Force Space Command's 3rd Space Experimentation Squadron (AFSPC) will run the operation.

Military space specialist Professor Roger Handberg, who is the chair of the Department of Political Science at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, told Space.com that the X-37B project may signify continued U.S. Air Force interest in a rapid response vehicle along the lines of the long-proposed space maneuver vehicle.

He added that the project could be viewed "as the logical extension of the push into unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) where vehicles used for observation have moved into weapon carriers and various other missions, many classified."

"From the perspective of international observers, especially in space-aspiring states such as China, the X-37B program just reinforces their view that the U.S. is pushing to gain first mover advantage in rapid response, including possible weaponization of space using this vehicle or a derivative," Handberg noted.

Political analysts say that the X-37B project could be interpreted as a violation of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 if the space plane is used for military purposes.

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, officially known as the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, states that the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind; states shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner; the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes; astronauts shall be regarded as the envoys of mankind; states shall be liable for damage caused by their space objects; and states shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies.

Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty states: "A State Party to the Treaty which has reason to believe that an activity or experiment planned by another State Party in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, would cause potentially harmful interference with activities in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, may request consultation concerning the activity or experiment."

In addition, a proposal has been put forward for a Space Preservation Treaty that would ban all space weapons, but no country has signed the treaty so far.

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

Text Fw:Why Mislead About Pentagon-NASA Connection?

* Image source: same as the link

Bruce Gagnon blog

Wednesday, April 21, 2010-04-22
Why Mislead About Pentagon-NASA Connection?

I was a bit surprised to hear Obama last week promote the Mars missions with such vigor. His call for manned missions to the red planet won't be cheap and you wonder how the nation can afford to pay for them. He intends to increase NASA funding by $6 billion over the next five years - one of the few budget increases in government discretionary funding.

Democracy Now did a short story on the Obama announcement and had Victoria Samson from the Secure World Foundation on to talk about it. Amy Goodman asked her about the military connection to NASA and she denied there was one. Anyone who follows the space program knows differently. Here is what she said.

AMY GOODMAN: We should say we’re talking to Victoria Samson at the Denver airport. She’s just coming from Colorado Springs from this meeting [annual aerospace corporation "National Space Symposium"]. Can you talk about the meeting and the uses that the Pentagon has for NASA? And when we talk about $6 billion, is some of that actually military spending but just sort of under the guise of giving it to NASA?

VICTORIA SAMSON: Well, no, I don’t think so. There’s a real separation of church and state between the United States Pentagon and NASA. They’re very careful not to combine the two. But on the other hand, you know, NASA uses rockets that the Pentagon uses for other sort of options, so when you look at the investment on heavy-lift sort of vehicles, solid rocket motors, things like that, there is sometimes a benefit for both sides. But I don’t think—the $6 billion over five years, that’s NASA funding. And if you look at it compared to what the United States Department of Defense gets, it’s a drop in the bucket compared to their annual budget.

Let me just list a couple of examples of the Pentagon-NASA connection:

1) NASA's space shuttle for years has put military satellites into orbit

2) NASA for years has done Star Wars technology and other military tests on-board the International Space Station

3) The 1994 Clementine mission to the moon, ostensibly to map the surface of the moon, tested Star Wars sensors for the Pentagon. The mission was jointly sponsored by the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization and NASA.

4) The space shuttle Endeavour, launched on January 31, 2000 from Cape Canaveral, did an 11-day radar Earth topology mapping mission that created high resolution 3-dimensional maps for 80% of the Earth’s surface. Few in the corporate dominated media though mentioned the fact that the Pentagon gave NASA over $200 million for the shuttle flight. Most of the high resolution maps created by the mission were classified TOP SECRET and were put under the control of the military. Most likely these maps have been used since in the 2003 "shock and awe" attack of Iraq and the war in Afghanistan to help direct targeting.

5) On April 22 the Pentagon will launch a test of the new military robot space plane, the X-37B, from Cape Canaveral in Florida. According to media sources, "The X-37B initiative leverages extensive and early NASA, DARPA, Air Force, as well as investments by its builder – Boeing Phantom Works. The funding level for the overall project is within the Air Force's classified budget."

There are zillions more examples of NASA-Pentagon collaboration. For Ms. Samson to claim there is a "real separation of church and state between the U.S. Pentagon and NASA" is an outright distortion of reality. Democracy Now should do a correction of this kind of serious misinformation.

There is no doubt that Ms. Samson knows better than this and one can only wonder if the Secure World Foundation has gotten so far into bed with the aerospace industry that they have no shame about becoming apologists for the military takeover of the space program.

Text Fw: OBAMA PROPOSES MARS MISSIONS - OF THE NUCLEAR VARIETY

* Image source: same as the below link

Bruce Gagnon blog

Thursday, April 15, 2010

OBAMA PROPOSES MARS MISSIONS - OF THE NUCLEAR VARIETY

Obama went to the space center in Florida today and made a proposal to send humans to asteroids by 2025 and to Mars by the mid-2030's.

In an interview on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews I heard Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) talking about the plasma rocket that they hope can get astronauts to the red planet in just 39 days. See the interview here.

Sen. Nelson mentions former astronaut Franklin Chang-Diaz who is working to develop the plasma rocket. In an interview published in 2009 Chang-Diaz talks about the absolute need for nuclear power in space in order to make the trip to Mars. Here are some excerpts:

Seed: We’ve been sending people and machines into space for more than half a century, but we’re still mostly using chemical rockets.

FCD: Well, part of the problem with electric propulsion back then, and to a lesser degree today, is that it’s hard to get enough electricity to power the rocket. Typically, electricity in space comes from sunlight, solar power. That works okay in Earth orbit and other places close to the Sun. But people have to realize sooner or later that, if we’re ever going to explore Mars and beyond, we have to make a commitment to developing high-power electricity sources for space. What we really need is nuclear power to generate electricity in space. If we don’t develop it, we might as well quit, because we’re not going to go very far. Nuclear power is central to any robust and realistic human exploration of space. People don’t really talk about this at NASA. Everybody is still avoiding facing this because of widespread anti-nuclear sentiment [the legacy of the 1997 Cassini campaign].

Seed: What has to happen to make that change?

FCD: In 1958, the first nuclear submarine, the USS Nautilus, was able to actually navigate under the north polar cap and surface on the other side. No other submarine had ever been able to do that before. It was an eye-opener, a game-changer, a paradigm shift. The idea was that nuclear power enabled a completely different class of missions for these types of ships. Now, nuclear submarines are common. Something similar has to happen in space.

In fact, with the power close to what a nuclear submarine generates, you could use VASIMR [plasma rocket] to fly humans to Mars in 39 days. A chemical rocket makes the trip in eight months. That’s eight months of exposing your astronauts to debilitating cosmic radiation and weightlessness. By the time they get to where they’re supposed to work, they’re gonna be in bad shape—almost invalids! They’ll have to spend a big chunk of their time just recovering from the trip. That’s simply not a smart way to conduct an exploration program. By not addressing the key problems of limited power and propulsion, NASA is forced to work with extremely complicated and expensive mission architectures that are very limited in capability.

Seed: So you believe that in the long run it would be more cost-effective to develop nuclear-electric capabilities in space, even given potential regulatory difficulties?

FCD: Absolutely. People have fears of nuclear power in space, but it’s a fear that isn’t really based on any organized and clear assessment of the true risks and costs. When you send these missions based on chemical propulsion to Mars, they aren’t only going to be extremely expensive, but also extremely fragile. Imagine being on Earth, watching astronauts on an eight-month death trip from which there is no return, all because they made a small mistake or something failed. It would be an agonizing process, and there would be a lot of questions asked if you lost a crew. Well, in space, power is life. You can plan against a lot of contingencies by simply having more power available for a crew to use.

Seed: But the larger versions of VASIMR really need nuclear power to perform. What if NASA chooses not to develop space-based nuclear power?

FCD: We would hope that, if not the US, maybe the Europeans, the Chinese, the Russians, or somebody else will develop a nuclear-electric power capability that we can marry up to this rocket. We have to realize that the US is no longer the only player. The US may choose not to do this, but that doesn’t mean the rest of the world will follow—not anymore. We no longer live in a confrontational world like the one that fueled the Apollo program in the 1960s. We live in a world that has to cooperate, to collaborate. The US has a tremendous opportunity to still be the leader here, but if it isn’t, others will be. Information is traveling faster everywhere now; technology has gained a foothold and developed in the nooks and crannies of the planet. The world has changed, and the US no longer has a monopoly on knowledge. We need to collaborate to build a capable space infrastructure so that we can truly explore.See the full interview here.

UPDATE: Journalist Karl Grossman reports the following:

There was an editorial in Space News on March 1 saying that "Obama's NASA budget also includes support for nuclear thermal propulsion and nuclear electric propulsion research under a $650 million Exploration Technology and Demonstration funding line projected to triple by 2013."

It went on: "Nuclear propulsion research experienced a brief revival seven years ago when then NASA-Administrator Sean O'Keefe established Project Prometheus to design reactor-powered spacecraft capable of carrying unprecedented arrays of science instruments to the outer planets.

Mr O'Keefe's successor, Mike Griffin, wasted little time pulling the plug on NASA's nuclear ambitions -- and a billion dollars worth of other technology projects -- as he focused the agency's limited resource on getting astronauts back to the Moon.

Obama is reversing course again and resuscitating the space nuclear program.

Text Fw: Obama Pledges 2025 Mission to Asteroid

* Image source: Space News

U.S. President Barack Obama. Credit: White House photo by Pete Souza Enlarge Image

* Text informed by Bruce Gagnon on April 15, 2010

Space News
Obama Pledges 2025 Mission to Asteroid
By Brian Berger

WASHINGTON --- Pledging to send astronauts to an asteroid by 2025, U.S. President Barack Obama defended his decision to pull the plug on NASA’s Moon mission, saying the new course he has set for the U.S. space agency promises to take astronauts beyond Earth orbit farther and faster than the old plan.

“I understand that some believe we should attempt a return to the surface of the Moon first, as previously planned,” Obama told an invitation-only audience in an April 15 speech at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. “But I just have to say pretty bluntly here. We’ve been there before...there’s a lot more of space to explore, and a lot more to learn when we do. So I believe it’s more important to ramp up our capabilities to reach and operate at a series of increasingly demanding targets while advancing our technological capabilities with each step forward. And that’s what this strategy does. And that’s how we will ensure that our leadership in space is even stronger in this new century than it was in the last.”

Obama’s 2011 budget request, submitted to Congress in February, proposes the cancellation of the Moon-bound Constellation program in favor of extending NASA’s support of the international space station through at least 2020 and investing is game-changing technologies aimed at speeding the human and robotic exploration of deep space. Obama’s initiative also puts a strong emphasis on relying on an emerging commercial space sector for launching astronauts and their gear to the international space space station.

Obama said that under his plan, U.S. astronauts will venture beyond Earth’s orbit in 2025, starting with a crewed mission to an asteroid.

“Early in the next decade a set of crewed flights will test and prove the systems required for exploration beyond low-Earth orbit,” he said. “And by 2025 we expect new spacecraft designed for long journeys to allow us to begin the first ever crewed missions beyond the Moon into deep space. So we’ll start by sending astronauts to an asteroid for the first time in history.”

Obama also gave a specific timeline for embarking on human expeditions to Mars.

“By the mid-2030s I believe we can send humans to orbit Mars and return them safely to Earth,” Obama said. “And a landing on Mars will follow and I expect to be around in see it.”

Turning to jobs, Obama said his plan “will add more than 2,500 jobs along the Space Coast in the next two years compared to the plan under the previous administration” and more than 10,000 jobs nationwide.

He also said he has asked for a plan by August 15 for a $40 million initiative for economic growth and job creation in areas of Florida expected to be hard hit by the looming retirement of the space shuttle.

Some of key details of the president’s address were released by the White House April 13, including a decision to continue development of a stripped-down version of the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle to serve as a crew lifeboat at the international space station.


Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

[국문 번역] Text Fwd: Outrage Growing Over Perchlorate Contamination Of Food 음식에 스며드는 과염소산염 오염으로 인해 커지는 분노

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Source informed by Bruce Gagnon
* 자료 제공: 브루스 개그논

on March 24, 2010
2010년 3월 24일

“ [O]ne key pollution problem at the proposed Navy base on Jeju will be the fuel they put inside of the "missile defense" rockets on board the Aegis ships. All over America this rocket fuel has gotten into the ground water and contaminated it and now the fuel is showing up in milk and lettuce...it is likely that the ground water on Gangjeong would become contaminated and then the tangerines would also become contaminated as a result. The fuel is called perchlorate and we have many articles on the GN web site about it....... http://www.space4peace.org/pollution.htm “ (Bruce K. Gagnon on March 23, 2010)

제주의 제안된 해군 기지의 주요 오염 문제로는 [ 해군들이] 이지스 군함들에 승선할 “미사일 방어망” 로켓들안에 넣을 연료가 될 것입니다. 미 전역에 이 로켓 연료는 지하수들로 스며들어 그것들을 오염시키고 그 연료들은 이제 우유와 상추들에서 보여지고 있읍니다. 강정의 지하수는 오염되고 그러면 감귤 역시 그 결과로 오염될 것같습니다. 그 연료는 과염소산염으로 불리우며 우리 우주의 무기와 핵을 반대하는 웹사이트 (Global Network against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space) 에 그것에 대한 많은 기사들이 있읍니다.... http://www.space4peace.org/pollution.htm ( 2010년 3월 23일, 브루스 K.개그논 말함)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Original link 원문 링크: http://www.wisn.com/health/19040768/detail.html

Outrage Growing Over Perchlorate Contamination Of Food:
: Group Says Government Must To More To Protect Public
음식에 스며드는 과염소산염 오염으로 인해 커지는 분노
: 단체들은 정부가 대중을 보호하기 위해 더 많은 것을 해야 한다 말하다

March 23, 2010
2009년 3월 23일

MILWAUKEE -- An environmental group is accusing the government of not doing enough to protect people and the nation’s food from potentially dangerous levels of a rocket fuel ingredient.

밀워키—한 환경 단체가 정부가 사람들과 국가의 음식들을 잠재적으로 위험한 수위의 한 로켓 연료 요소부터 보호하기 위해 충분히 대응하지 않는 것에 대해 정부를 비판하고 있다.

It’s called perchlorate, and it’s a key component in rocket fuel.

그것은 과염소산으로 불리우며 로켓 연료의 핵심 요소이다.

"We don't think people realize how widespread of a contaminant it is," Environmental Working Group Dr. Anila Jacob said.

“우리는 사람들이 이 오염 물질균이 얼마나 넓게 퍼져 있는지 깨닫고 있다고 생각하지 않는다,” 고 환경 종사 단체의 아닐라 제이콥 박사는 말했다.

The group says that 20 million to 40 million Americans may be exposed to the chemical.

그 단체는 2천만~4천만의 미국인들이 그 화학 물질에 노출되어 있을 지 모른다고 말한다.

"We know that the CDC has found perchlorate in 100 percent of the people they've tested, so there's widespread exposure, through contaminated drinking water and also through contaminated food," Jacob said.

“우리는 질병 통제 예방 센터 (CDC) 가 그들이 조사한 100% [모든 사람들에게서] 과염소산이 나왔음을 발견했다. 그러므로 오염된 식수와 또한 오염된 음식을 통해 노출은 널리 퍼져 있다,” 라고 제이콥은 말했다.

The concern is that the fuel additive has seeped into the ground and water in dozens of states -- usually from old military bases or NASA sites. That's how the group said how perchlorate has ended up in the drinking water and the food supply.

우려가 되는 것은 옛 군사 기지들과 미 우주 항공국 이 있는 수십여개 주에서 연료 첨가물이 지하와 물로 스며들었다는 것이다. 그것이 그 단체가 어떻게 과염소산이 식수와 공급 음식에 스며들었는지 설명하는 이유이다.

For most people, perchlorate contamination poses almost no health risk at all.
But it can be a serious concern for certain groups. It can affect thyroid hormone levels, which in a fetus or newborn baby can inhibit brain development -- which is why advocacy groups said pregnant women and nursing moms need to be made aware.

대부분의 사람들에게 과염소산 오염은 건강에 대해 거의 영향을 전혀 끼치지 못한다. 그러나 그것은 어떤 그룹들에게는 심각한 우려가 될 수 있다. 그것은 태아나 신생 유아의 내부에서 갑상선 호르몬 수위들에 영향을 줘 뇌개발을 억제할 수 있다. – 그것이 왜 후원 단체들이 임신한 여성들과 유모들이 그것에 대해 깨달을 필요가 있다 말한 이유다.

They have called for better education and stricter food and water guidelines. Congress even held hearings into the matter but not much was happening.

그들은 좀 더 나은 교육과 엄격한 음식 및 물 가이드라인의 필요성을 외쳐왔다. 국회는 그 문제에 대한 청문회도 열었으나 많은 것들이 일어나진 않았다.

"We made very little progress, we may have even taken a step backward," Jacob said.
Five months ago, the EPA reached a decision -- to do nothing. It would not regulate perchlorate in drinking water at all.

“우리는 거의 진전을 이루지 못했으며 후퇴된 발걸음을 했을지 모른다,”라고 제이콥은 말했다.
5개월 전에 환경 보호청 (EPA) 은 아무 것도 하지 않기로 결정했다. 환경 보호청은 식수의 과염소산을 전혀 통제하지 않을 것이다.

The decision surprised many, and the resulting public outcry led the agency to re-think its position in early January, calling for more investigation.

그 결정은 많은 이들을 놀라게 했고 그로 인한 대중의 분노는 환경 보호청으로 하여금 이른 1월, 좀더 많은 조사를 요구하며 자신의 결정을 재고하게 했다.

The EWG says that's not good enough.

환경 종사 단체들은 그것이 충분하지 않다 말한다.

"We consider it to be a delay tactic -- every day that we delay in regulating this chemical, millions of people continue to be exposed," Jacob said.

“우리는 그것이 지연 전술이라 본다—우리가 이 화학물을 통제하는 것을 연기함에 따라 수백만의 사람들이 계속 노출될 것이다,” 라고 제이콥은 말했다.

Perchlorate has not shown up in Wisconsin’s groundwater.

과염소산은 위스콘신 주의 지하수에서 보여지지 않았다.

The EWG said it is concerned about food that comes from states such as California and Texas, where there is contamination.

환경 종사 단체들은 오염된 곳들이 있는 캘리포니아 텍사스등의 주들에서 오는 음식에 대해 걱정한다.

The group is also currently urging the FDA to increase its research into perchlorate contamination in the food supply, and search for news ways to reduce the risk.

그 단체는 또한 식약청(FDA) 으로 하여금 공급 음식의 과염소산 오염에 대한 조사를 강화할 것을 촉구하며 위험을 줄이기 위한 새로운 길들을 찾고 있다.

The FDA said, so far testing has turned up no need for any new guidelines or warnings about perchlorate levels in food. But the testing has been limited to small samples -- and the agency said much more needs to be done, to know how widespread the contamination may be.

식약청은 지금까지는 실험이 음식내 과염소산 수위에 새로운 가이드 라인이나 경고들을 기질 필요들을 던져주진 않았다고 말했다. 그러나 실험은 작은 샘플들로 제한되었었다—그리고 식약청은 그 오염이 얼마나 널히 퍼져 있는지 더 많은 것들이 행해질 필요가 있다 말했다.


(*Translation 번역 by No Base Stories Korea)

Text Fwd: Man-Powered Plane Undergoes Successful Test

* Image source: Wikipedia(original source: NASA)
'Daedalus - Last Dryden flight, 7 March 1988'

Korea Times
2-17-2009 21:01
Man-Powered Plane Undergoes Successful Test
By Jung Sung-ki
Staff Reporter

A domestically-built human-powered aircraft has undergone successful flight trials, the Air Force said Thursday.

The "Sky Runner," designed and developed by a team of professors and researchers from the Korea Air Force Academy, managed to fly 150 and 100 meters in its two test flights last week, Lt. Col. Choi Seong-ok, who is overseeing the development, said.

"The flying distance was short, but it can be improved through further systematic pilot training," he said.

The propeller aircraft, which weighs just 40 kilograms but has a wingspan of 30 meters, is manned by a pilot who provides thrust by pedaling during take-off and flight, Choi said.

The pilot is required to pedal to generate some 0.3 horsepower to stay in the air for up to two kilometers, he said.

Choi's team launched the $290,000 project last year to make South Korea the world's fifth country to run such a human powered aircraft (HPA).

Only four nations in the world, the United States, Britain, Japan and Germany, have succeeded in developing HPAs.

The U.S.-made HPA, Daedalus, has the world records for distance and duration for human-powered airplanes. The plane built by Massachusetts Institute of Technology flew 74 miles (119 kilometers) in 1988 from Irakilon Air Force Base on Crete, Greece, crashing into the sea just short of the island of Santorini in three hours and 54 minutes.

gallantjung@koreatimes.co.kr


* Related article

Yonhap News
2009/12/17 10:39 KST
S. Korea develops human-powered aircraft: Air Force

Text Fwd: SPACE JUNK AND SPACE DEBRIS

J. Narayana Rao(jnrao36@rediffmail.com) on Nov. 28, 2009

SPACE JUNK AND SPACE DEBRIS
J. Narayana Rao

As we are facing environmental and ecological problems on earth, similar problems are also cropping up in Space. Within a period of 52 years only ever since the first satellite Sputnik was launched by USSR in 1957 we are encountering with the danger of environmental and ecological problems in Space.Traffic congestions as on earth are also not uncommon in Space. While more and more satellites are launched in Space, the care that has to be taken for these satellites to be in orbit safely is no less important than any vehicles moving on the road on earth. Satellites colliding is also taking place in Space.It may be surprising that how accidents and traffic congestion happen in space .

At present there are 240 Civil & Military Communication Satellites and more than 800 remote sensing reconnaissance Satellites are in Space.We are launching the satellites for using in Telecommunications,weather observations, navingation, reconnaissance and many other benefits for the mankind. Accummulation of Space Junk and Space Debris are the causes of environmental and ecological damage to the space.

ACCUMMULATION OF SPACE JUNK

Space debris also known as orbital debris space junk and space waste. Spent Rocket Parts, defunct and unsed satellites, exploision fragments, paint flakes, slags from solid reocket motors, small needles, nuts and bolts are the basic source of space debris and space junk. When these objects Collide with each other or explode or blasted they get fragmented into small pices. In a mid 2009 appraisal, the NASA estimated that the number of large pices of debris of 10 cms and over at 19,000, between 1 and 10 cms at 500,000 and smaller than 1 cm probably exceed tens of millions. A 1999 study estimated that there are some 4 million pounds of space junk in the low earth orbit. During the last one decade the estimated objects of over 10 cms in the Low Earth Orbit have more than doubled from 8,500 in 1990 to 19,000 in 2009. In 17 March 1958 US launched it’s second satellite the Vanguard I. It functioned only for 6 years and remained in space. It became as one of the longest surviving piece of Space Junk. On 24 July 1996 “Cerise” a French microsatellite in the Earth Low Orbit was hit by fragments of Arian upper booster which exploded in November 1986. On 29 March 2006 the Russian Express AM II Communication satellite was struck by an unknown object which rendered it inoperative.
Rocket Boosters contribute a good number of debris. On 11 March 2000 a Chinese upper stage booster exploded in orbit and created a cloud of debris. On 19 Feb 2007 a Russian Briz. M Booster stage exploded in orbit. On 24 January 78 Cosmos 954 of the USSR, powered by an onboard Nuclear Reactor fell from orbit crashing into the northwest territories of Canada. It scattered nuclear debris over a huge area. At present there are 37 Nuclear powered satellites put in space by USSR and US.The operation of these satellites is over. But the radioactive fuel in them is still hot and lethal.These are likely to fall on earth in future.

TESTING OF ANTI SATELLITE WEAPONS

Another major source of debris is testing Anti Satellite weapons. US, USSR and China contribute to this. The Chinese test of 2007 in which a defunct satellite was blasted produced 2,300 pices of trackable pices of debris of Golf Ball size. Over 35,000 pices of 1 cm or larger and 1 million pices of 1 mm or large size. In 1985 a US test destroyed a 1 tonne Satellite orbiting at 525 km altitude. It created thousandsof pices of debris larger than 1 cm. On 20 February 2008, the US launched a SM-3 missile to destroy a defective US spy satelliteat about 250 km altitude.

MATERIAL LOST IN SPACE.

Gemini 4 Astronaut of US, Edward White who performed the first Space Walk lost a Glove in Space. It stayed in orbit circling with a speed of 28,00 kmph. Michael Collins another Astronaut lost a Camera near the Space Craft Gemini 10.Soviet Cosmonauts pushed out more than 200 garbage bags from the MIR Space Station.Sunita Williams also lost a Camera in Space.

According to a BBC study, a 1 mm metal chip could do as much damage as a 22 caliber rifle bullet.A pea sized ball moving at a speed of 36,000 kmph is as dangerous as 400 lb safe travelling at 60 mph. A metal sphere the size of a tennis ball is as lethal as 25 sticks of dynamite.

PROTECTIVE MEASURES.

Damage to the space crafts from the space debris is protected by applying a thin layer of metal foil outside of the main Space Craft body.When the debris collide with the foil with high velocity,the debris will be vaporized and the plasma spreads out quickly. By this process damage to the inner wall of the Space craft is protected. Space crafts powered by Solar Panels are liable to be affected badly because the front portion of the panels are positioned directly exosed to the Sun.As a result they get punctured by debris. When large pices of space debrice collide with space crafts the damage is much heavy.

COLLISIONS IN SPACE.

The US Olympus space craft was rendered dead after it collided with a meteor. The first major collision with space debris was on 10 February 2009 when a deactivated 950 kg Cosmos and an operational 560 kg Irridium 33 collided at an altitude of 800 km over northern Siberia. Both the satellites were destroyed scattering considerable debris. In 2006 Atalantis Shuttle of US was hit by debris and got small hole through the radiaton panel. In 2007 Endevour was hit by unknown debris which bore a hole of several centimeters in diameter through the panel.
Most debris are likely to bur up in the atmosphere.But larger objects can reach the ground and present a risk. In the 2009 European Air and Space conference at the University of Southampton, UK, Hugh Lewis a researcher predicted that the threat from space debris would rise 50 percent in the coming decade and quadruple in the next 50 years.

With the ongoing programme of weaponisation space by the US in which even Nuclear Reactors are likely to be put in space to create sufficient energy to create Laser Beams the problem of Space Junk and Space Debris will further gets accentuated,
--------

Text Fwd: NASA WILL RADIATE MONKEYS FOR MARS MISSIONS

Bruce Gagnon blog
Thursday, November 19, 2009
NASA WILL RADIATE MONKEYS FOR MARS MISSIONS

NASA says it would take almost a year using conventional rockets to get to Mars. By that time a human body would likely turn to jello due to exposure to space radiation. But the space agency has come up with a solution - in fact two of them.

First they want to build the nuclear rocket (Project Prometheus) which NASA says would cut in half the amount of time it would take to get to the red planet. With nuclear reactors for engines NASA also says they could carry heavier payloads which would make it possible to "mine the sky" for precious minerals.

The other solution to the space radiation problem seems to rely on testing monkeys by exposing them to doses of radiation so NASA can further study the effects on the human body.

The Telegraph newspaper in the UK reports, "Eleanor Blakely, a biophysicist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, said: 'Obviously, the closer we get to man, the better.'

"The researchers are to pay particular attention to the effects on the monkeys’ central nervous systems and behaviour. The monkeys, previously trained to perform a variety of tasks, will be tested to see how the exposure affects their performance.

"The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) says that the 'cruel experiments' may involve 'restraint and other cruel procedures'.

"In a statement, they say: 'Monkeys, like other primates, are highly intelligent, have strong family bonds, demonstrate empathy, and, most importantly, suffer.'"

Not only the monkeys will suffer from this NASA boondoogle to journey to Mars but the Department of Energy labs, that will be responsible for building the nuclear rockets, has shown over the years a complete lack of ability to control the deadly plutonium they will use to power the nuclear space missions. The DoE's record of worker and environmental contamination is more than shocking and they should not be trusted to now ramp up the production of plutonium for the nuclearization of space.

NASA and the DoE have little regard for animal or human life when it comes to moving nuclear power into space. The nuclear industry views space as a new and vibrant market and they could care less the consequences as long as profits can be extracted from space.

At the very time that climate change cries out for attention here on our Mother Earth we should not be wasting scarce tax dollars on planning expensive and ill-fated missions to Mars.

JUST IN: Two people have emailed me today saying that whoever in Congress votes to fund these missions should have to go along for the ride as well. Not a bad idea I'd say!

[국문]Daejeon IAC Symposium Summary대전 심포지움 요약

http://www.iac2009.kr/
대전국제우주대회 D-30 ... 우주 분야 세계 거물급 인사 대거 참석
2009-09-21

◑ NASA 국장, 국제우주연맹 회장, 국제사법재판관 등
◑ 박성효 조직위원장 “완벽한 행사로 이끌기 위해 막바지 준비에 총력”

전 세계 3천여 명의 우주전문가가 참여하는 우주 관련 세계 최대 규모, 최고 권위의 행사인 ‘2009 대전국제우주대회(IAC)’ 개최가 한 달여 앞으로 다가왔다.

; 13일 대전국제우주대회조직위는 이번 대회에 우주분야 세계 거물급 인사들이 대거 참석한다고 밝혔다.

- 이번 대회에는 NASA의 찰스 볼든 국장을 비롯한 60여명의 NASA 임직원과 UN 산하 기관인 우주의 평화적 이용을 위한 위원회(COPOUS) 회장, 전, 현직 국제우주연맹(IAF) 회장, 국제우주학회(IAA) 회장, 국제우주법협회(IISL) 회장, 국제사법재판관 3인 등 우주 분야 세계 거물급 인사들이 총출동한다.

- 특히, NASA의 찰스 볼든 국장은 학술회의의 한 세션에 패널리스트로 참여해 각국 우주청간 국제협력 방안을 논의하며 국제사법재판관 3인은 국제우주법 모의재판인 ‘IISL Moot Court'의 심사를 맡는다.

; 이번 대회에 참석하는 우주 분야 세계 거물급 인사만큼이나 세계 우주기관 및 기업들의 참여도 눈길을 끈다.

- 이번 대회에는 미 항공우주국(NASA), 유럽 우주청(ESA), 일본 우주항공연구개발기구(JAXA), 중국국가항천국(CNSA), 캐나다 우주국(CSA), 러시아 연방우주청 (Russian Federal Space Agency), 인도 우주연구기구(ISRO) 등 우주 선진국들의 우주기관 및 기업들이 대거 참여한다.

; ‘2009 대전국제우주대회(IAC)’는 사전 행사인 UN/국제우주연맹(IAF) 워크샵(10월9일~10일)을 시작으로 11일 국제우주학회(IAA) 아카데미에 이어 12일 공식 개막을 선언하며 16일까지 5일간의 공식 총회 일정에 돌입한다.

; 국제우주대회의 메인행사 격인 학술회의는 국제협력(Agency), 우주산업(Industry), 기후변화(Climate), 우주탐사(Exploration), 우주평화(Peace)등 다섯가지 주제를 바탕으로 심도 있는 강연과 토론을 펼친다.

; 더불어 IAC 역사상 처음으로 시도되는 세계의원모임, 국제우주기술(ST) Cluster Forum, 세계항공우주특성화대학 총장 포럼 등 세 가지 특별 세션도 마련된다.

- 세계의원모임은 세계 우주개발국가 국회회원간 IAC 비전을 공유함으로써 기후변화 등 글로벌 이슈에 대한 인식을 확산에 도움이 될 것으로 기대된다.

- 국제우주기술(ST) Cluster Forum은 세계 각국 우주기술 중소기업간 정보 및 경험을 공유하고 협력체계를 구축하는 장이 될 전망이다 .

- 특히 미국, 중국 등 우주선진국 항공우주특성화대학 총장들이 모이는 세계 항공우주특성화대학 총장단 포럼에서는 항공우주학과의 특성화를 통한 우주기술 인력 양성 방안을 논의한다.

; 세계 우주기관 및 기업의 우주기술을 관람할 수 있는 ‘우주기술전시회’는 국제 우주항공 전시관, 항공우주 클러스터 전시관, 세계과학도시연합 첨단기술 전시관 세 부분으로 구성되어 있다.

- 여기에는 미 항공우주국(NASA)을 비롯해 유럽 우주항공전문업체인 EADS, 프랑스의 Arianspace, 중국의 CASC , 일본의 HASTIC 등 19개국 134개 우주관련 유명 업체가 참여를 확정해 우주항공 분야 최첨단 기술을 교류할 수 있는 좋은 기회가 될 것으로 예상된다.

- 특히 NASA의 탐사 관련 우주선 및 장비 모형 등은 최초로 미국 외 국가에서 전시되는 것으로 세계의 이목을 끌 것으로 기대된다.

; 대전국제우주대회 박성효 조직위원장(대전시장)은 “이번 대회는 우리나라 우주기술 및 산업이 발전할 수 있는 좋은 기회”라며 “국가적으로 중요한 이번 행사를 완벽한 성공으로 이끌기 위해 남은 30여일 간 총력을 다할 것”이라고 말했다.


http://www.iac2009.kr/iac/INTERNATIONAL/view.jsp?boardId=10&listId=446&page=1
JoongAng Ilbo- Aug. 17, 2009

IAC 2009 Daejeon which will be held in October this year is expected to be the largest event in the history of the IAC. Daejeon City revealed on 16th that 1251 people from 49 nations, based on the result of the first pre-registration, applied for the upcoming IAC, taking up 50% of the total number of participant of 2500. This is higher than the highest pre-registration rate in the IAC 2008 Glasgow by 1.3 percentage points. The pre-registration rate of the IAC 2008 Glasgow was 37.5%.

From the perspective of number of participants by institution, applications for the upcoming IAC came from 53 people from NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), 40 from ESA (European Space Agency), 25 from CNES (Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales), 20 from JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency), 156 from KARI (Korean Aerospace Research Institute), 23 from ISRO (Indian Space Research Orgarnisation), etc.

From the continental viewpoint, 516 people from Asia including 289 Koreans, 459 people from Europe, 258 from the Americas including 198 from the U.S. and 18 from Africa have sent thier applications. The deadline for the second registration is October 5. However, some space-related organizations have already promised to appy for the IAC 2009 Daejeon. They are 40 people from CSA (Chinese Society of Astronautics), 20 from CAST (China Academy of Space Technology), 10 from IAF (International Astronautical Federation) and 100 people including students supported by NASA, CSA (Canadian Space Agency), and JAXA.

Mayor Park Seoung-hyo of Daejeon City told that "IAC 2009 Daejeon will serve as a great opportunity to rapidly develop the Korea's aerospace industry."

Reporter Seo Hyeong-sik.

http://www.koreaittimes.com/story/shoot-october-sky-daejeon
대전의 10월, 하늘을 쏜다.
2009 대전 국제 우주항해 회의(IAC), 10월 12일 개막, 2009년, 3월 1일

Text Fwd: Panel Urges NASA to Reset Priorities

Tet Fwd by Bruce Gagnon on Sept. 12, 2009

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125243322742993127.html
Wall Street Journal
September 10, 2009
By ANDY PASZTOR

A blue-ribbon panel is recommending that NASA shelve its goal of rapidly returning to the moon and instead focus on nurturing a robust commercial space industry that can handle short-term objectives of the nation's space program, such as ferrying cargo and crew to the international space station.

The panel, called the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee, headed by former Lockheed Martin Corp. Chairman Norman Augustine, was convened by the Obama administration earlier this year to provide an independent assessment of the priorities of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. It presented its findings to the White House Tuesday.

The report has already caused debate among lawmakers, the administration and aerospace contractors because it casts doubt on the budgetary and technical support underpinning many of NASA's human space programs. For example, the report concluded that now is the "appropriate time to consider" relying on private enterprise to reduce costs and accelerate access to low-earth orbit. It compares today's budding entrepreneurial space efforts to the 1920s, when government air-mail contracts sparked a boom in U.S. commercial aviation.

It calls for sweeping changes in the way NASA does business and envisions a dramatically expanded role for private enterprise in human space flight in the coming decades beyond anything proposed previously.

Some of the details of the study were reported in The Wall Street Journal last month. However, a summary and excerpt of the report became available Tuesday. The panel urged NASA to shift its goal from returning to the moon and to focus instead on the more long-term objective of reaching Mars, though it didn't set any specific time frame.

While a rapid expansion of the role of private industry in the nation's space program carries risks of technical failures or lengthy delays, the report acknowledges, it could accelerate access to space for both crews and cargo over the next decade. At the same time, it could allow NASA to devote its expertise and funds to longer-term, more cutting-edge technology aimed at deep space exploration. By following what it dubs a "flexible" exploration path building on manned and unmanned probes likely to sidestep extended stays by astronauts on the lunar surface, the report concludes NASA could build broader public and congressional support for more ambitious space endeavors.

The report stops short of explicitly rejecting the goal of launching a mission back to the moon. But the 10-member study group expressed serious misgivings about the effort.

The final report concludes that NASA's current programs are behind schedule, significantly under-financed and wouldn't necessarily provide substantial safety improvements versus alternative proposed systems, including converted military rockets.

According to the report, NASA's plans to build a new generation of rockets and space capsules to go to the space station and then the moon require $3 billion annually above current budget projections. White House and NASA press officials have declined to comment on the report, as has NASA chief Charles Bolden. Mr. Bolden is scheduled to meet Wednesday with several representatives of commercial space companies.

White House officials are expected to spend a number of weeks digesting the report before President Barack Obama makes decisions about how to proceed.

The findings have drawn criticism from various NASA officials and a number of agency suppliers seeking to protect existing contracts. These critics contend, among other things, that the study overestimates the extent of the problems confronting current programs while significantly underestimating the cost and difficulty of making alternate rockets safe to carry astronauts. Critics also argue that many of the commercial options favored by the study don't have a track record and haven't been fully tested.

Starting in 2011, when the U.S. space shuttle fleet is slated to be retired, NASA will have to start relying on the Russian government to ferry astronauts to the space station. The current price is set at about $51 million per crew member, but many U.S. government and industry officials expect it to climb.

After the report summary was released, Elon Musk, the founder of Space Exploration Technologies Corp., one of the companies vying for commercial contracts to start ferrying cargo and astronauts to the station, said sticking with NASA's current priorities "flies in the face of reason and common sense." In a teleconference with reporters, Mr. Musk also said development of his company's Falcon 9 heavy-lift launcher – which could start ferrying astronauts to the space station before the middle of the next decade for less than half of Russia's prices -- is about a year late. But "in the space business," he added, "that's early."

In addition to the emphasis on commercial solutions, the report hits heavily on the need to reorient NASA's leadership and the mindset of many of its engineers and scientists. The committee, according to the summary, "strongly believes it is time for NASA to reassume its critical role of developing new technologies" aligned with a revamped "exploration mission that will last for decades." If properly funded and executed, the report concludes, such a technical roadmap would "re-engage the minds at American universities, in industry and within NASA" for manned space efforts.

The report's opening paragraph sets the tone. America's human space flight program "appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory, " the committee found, because it is "perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources." Even before release of the summary, NASA officials were studying possible changes to existing plans, including downsizing a proposed space capsule and revising rocket programs in order to lower costs by reusing some space shuttle-derived technologies and facilities. Other NASA officials, according to a Reuters story Tuesday, have devised a 30-year stepping-stone strategy – still in its early stages -- to develop technology and generate public support with the goal of eventually reaching Mars.

The committee's recommendations assume that the U.S. will continue to funds its share of space station operations through at least 2020. The panel concluded that the international partnerships forged around station issues could lead to joint, long-term space discovery efforts with other countries. Noting that "space exploration has become a global enterprise," the summary emphasizes that international cooperation "could strengthen relationships, leverage global resources and enhance" chances of success. If foreign cooperation and commercial solutions still leave the U.S. with inadequate resources, according to the summary, "it should accept the disappointment of setting lesser goals."

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)

Text Fwd: Excerpt: MEDIA, MISSILES, AND MONEY

Bruce Gagnon Blog
Monday, July 20, 2009
MEDIA, MISSILES, AND MONEY

“Last week I heard that plans are now being made to "deorbit" the International Space Station (ISS) in 2016. The ISS was originally going to cost tax payers $10 billion, but like most high-tech space technology programs, the cost kept rising. We've now spent $100 billion on it and just as it finally gets finished it will be dropped back toward Earth where it will burn up on reentry and scatter into the Pacific Ocean. The Washington Post reports, "The rap on the space station has always been that it was built primarily to give the space shuttle somewhere to go. Now, with the shuttle being retired at the end of 2010, the station is on the spot. U.S. astronauts will be able to reach the station only by getting rides on Russia's Soyuz spacecraft."

The ISS was always fundamentally a jobs program for the Central Florida "space coast" and what an expensive one it was. When you begin to track other space projects - things like launch vehicles, military satellites, various space weapons programs - you find similar kinds of massive cost overruns. The space program is a huge boondoggle”

Text Fwd: [Korean Translated] NASA MOON BOMBING A TEST OF FIRST-STRIKE SPACE WEAPONS

Bruce Gagnon blog
Thursday, July 02, 2009
NASA MOON BOMBING A TEST OF FIRST-STRIKE SPACE WEAPONS

NASA is preparing to bomb the moon. That's right, bomb the moon from space.

On June 18 NASA launched the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) from Cape Canaveral in Florida on its journey to the moon.

When the space craft arrives near the moon it will fire a missile, at twice the speed of a bullet, from the spacecraft into the moon's surface. NASA maintains that the "test" will displace several miles of lunar material in order to find out if water is present on the moon's surface.

NASA will then have the $511 million mission's mother satellite circle the moon for at least a year creating a detailed map of the moon's surface. NASA says the new maps will be crucial for identifying possible landing sites for astronauts in future years as permanent bases are built on the moon for the eventual mining of helium-3. Scientists have long suggested that helium-3 could be used for fusion power back here on Earth and would make the profits of the oil industries pale in comparison.

NASA has publicly maintained in recent years that all of their space missions are now "dual use" - meaning that each mission they launch is both civilian and military at the same time. Thus one must consider that this LCROSS moon bombing mission is likely testing the capability of Pentagon technologies to launch missiles from space that could hit targets on Earth.

As the US and Russia enter negotiations to reduce the numbers of nuclear weapons in their stockpiles I can assure you that Russia will be thinking about this LCROSS test. They know that the US is developing "first-strike" capability from space and from Earth. Add "missile defense" into the equation, which would give the US the shield after the first-strike sword has been thrust, and one can see that these new technologies will only "complicate" hopes for the abolition of nuclear weapons.


미 우주 항공국이 달에 선제 공격 우주 무기를 실험하는 폭격을 할 것에 대해
2009 년 7 월 2 일

미 우주 항공국은 달에 폭격을 가할 계획을 갖고 있다. 맞는 말이다. 우주로부터 달에 폭격을 가할 거라 한다.

6월 18일 미 우주 항공국은 플로리다 케이프 카나비랄 제도에서 달로 가는 달의 분화구 관찰 및 탐지 위성 Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) 을 발사했다.

우주선이 달에 가까이 가면서 그것은 총알의 두 배 속도로 미사일을 발사할 것이다. 미 우주 항공국은 그 “실험”이 달 표면에 물이 존재하는지 알기 위한 것으로 몇 마일 정도 떨어진 곳에 달 물질들을 이동시킬 것 뿐이라는 주장을 펼친다.

미 우주 항공국은 그리고 나서 5억천백만 달러가 드는 임무로 1 년에 적어 한번 위성 달 표면 의 세부 지도를 그리는 주요 위성을 가질 것이다.
미 우주 항공국은 말하길 헬륨 3의 결정적 채굴을 위한 영구 기지가 달에 만들어짐에 따라 새 지도는 우주인들로 하여금 미래에 가능한 착륙 지점을 정하는데 결정적 일 거라 말한다. 과학자들은 헬륨 3가 지구의 융합력으로 쓰일 수 있고 상대적으로 전망이 희미한 석유 산업의 이윤을 대신 채워질 수 있을 가라 얘기해왔다.

미 우주 항공국은 최근 그들의 모든 우주 임무들은 현재 “이중 용도” 로 쓰이고 있다고 공개적으로 주장해왔다. – 그들의 발사가 민간 및 군사의 이중 용도로 동시에 쓰이기 위한 것이라는 주장이다. 그러므로 LCROSS 달 폭탄 투하 임무는 우주로부터 지구위 목표물들을 맞추기 위한 미 국방부의 기술 능력을 실험할 가능성을 갖고 있음을 고려해야 한다.

미국과 러시아가 그 들 재고의 핵무기를 줄이기 위한 협상에 들어감에 따라 저는 여러분들께 말할 수 있는데 러시아가 LCROSS 실험에 대해 생각할 것임을 확신있게 말할 수 있다. 러시아는 미국이 우주와 지구로부터 “선제 공격” 능력을 개발하고 있다는 것을 알고 있다. 그 등식에 미국이 선제 공격 무기로 침략 받았을 때 미국의 방패막 구실을 한다는 “미사일 방어”를 더하면 이 새 기술들이 핵무기를 폐지하기 위한 희망을 “ 복잡하게” 만들 뿐이란 것을 예상할 수 있다.


• 관련 링크
http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009906170323
로켓 달 표면을 명중하다.
아틀라스 V 는 노력의 결과물에 따를 것임
2009 년 6 월 17일, 제임스 딘, 플로리다 투데이

Text Fwd: National Reconnaissance Office’s domestic ground stations

* Image Source/description: same as below
'The NRO operates a number of ground stations, including this one in the UK, that until recently it would not even acknowledge existed.'

* Text informed by Kev Hall and Frank Cordaro on June 1, 2009

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1384/1
National Reconnaissance Office’s domestic ground stations Look! Up in the air! No, down on the ground! The NRO’s domestic ground stations by Dwayne Day Monday, June 1, 2009

In the 1950s, when the United States began developing its first reconnaissance satellite, Air Force planners and Lockheed engineers faced numerous technological challenges. What they wanted was a satellite that took pictures over the Soviet Union, developed the film onboard the satellite, scanned it with a device similar to a fax machine, and then beamed the imagery to the ground. Because of security concerns, they decided to only beam the signals to the ground inside the continental United States, and so they began planning for three ground stations—one in the northwest, one in the northeast, and one in the middle of the country, at Strategic Air Command Headquarters near Omaha, Nebraska.

According to an October 23, 2008 note from the NRO’s Director of Security and Counterintelligence, the “fact of” the NRO’s operation of three “Mission Ground Stations” could be acknowledged “as an unclassified fact.”

The plan ultimately did not work. As anybody who has tried to e-mail high-resolution scanned photos knows, photographs are full of data and suck up bandwidth. As the early reconnaissance satellite program went forward, it soon became apparent that each satellite could beam no more than two to thee dozen photographs to the ground each day, half of them obscured by clouds—nowhere near what was necessary to cover the Soviet landmass. The limitations were the narrow bandwidth then available from radio, the short amount of time that a satellite would actually be in range of a ground station, and the small number of ground stations. So they abandoned this approach in favor of satellites that returned massive numbers of pictures to the ground on film—like getting an encyclopedia via snail mail instead of e-mail.

Two decades later the techno-spooks solved these problems. They did so in a variety of ways, including using higher frequencies (hence more bandwidth), data compression, and most important of all, the use of relay satellites in higher orbits. The imaging spacecraft in its low orbit could take its pictures and beam them up to a higher satellite that then beamed it to the ground, thus increasing the amount of time that a satellite could transmit its imagery.

Of course the ground station segment was still important and for security reasons the National Reconnaissance Office, the agency that operated the satellites—and the ground stations—kept its association with various satellite control stations both in the United States and around the world secret, even after the NRO became public in the early 1990s. That has now changed, slightly.

Last October, with little fanfare, the NRO declassified the fact that it operates three ground stations within the United States, located near Washington, DC; Denver, Colorado; and Las Cruces, New Mexico. Although they declassified that fact, it has not become public until now. A source recently provided a declassified memo that outlines the declassification of these facilities. (You can download it here.)

According to an October 23, 2008 note from the NRO’s Director of Security and Counterintelligence, the “fact of” the NRO’s operation of three “Mission Ground Stations” could be acknowledged “as an unclassified fact.” However, the security director cautioned that “program specific information and associations will remain unclassified and unchanged.” In other words, nobody will tell you what goes on at these stations. The NRO also revealed its “presence” at the Royal Air Force Facility Menwith Hill, near Harrogate in the United Kingdom, and the Pine Gap facility near Alice Springs, Australia.

What exactly prompted the declassification of the “fact of” these facilities remains unknown. But it undoubtedly had something to do with making them more accessible to more civilian and military personnel.

Of course, these are not really stunning revelations. The use of these facilities as downlinks for intelligence data collected by American satellites has been reported for decades, and has appeared in such books as William Burrows’ Deep Black (1987) and Jeffrey Richelson’s America’s Secret Eyes in Space (1990). During the 1980s, Menwith Hill, whose large white domes dominate the picturesque English countryside like some alien mushroom field, served as the site of numerous protests by Britain’s nuclear disarmament movement. The Las Cruces site is collocated with NASA’s Tracking Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS) ground station on the White Sands Missile Range. TDRSS has long included “national security customers” in its operations. The NRO also operates its own fleet of data-relay satellites in both geosynchronous and highly-inclined orbits. The White Sands site grew significantly in recent years and has a lot of parking spaces outside its buildings.

What exactly prompted the declassification of the “fact of” these facilities remains unknown. But it undoubtedly had something to do with making them more accessible to more civilian and military personnel, probably those involved in aspects of homeland security. That was illustrated last July when the NRO also declassified the “fact of” its operation of radar satellites, something that had also been known for two decades. For quite a few years now the US military has been seeking to develop a new class of radar satellites to detect moving targets like tanks and trucks on the ground—as opposed to the NRO’s satellites, which essentially take radar images of small areas. Problems arose because the NRO did not even admit that it operated such satellites. Everybody involved in discussions over developing a new series of such satellites had to obtain a special security clearance simply to talk to somebody from NRO, even if the NRO systems’ technical details were not going to be discussed. Secrecy got in the way of progress at developing military capabilities.

The NRO will now acknowledge that it operates, or has a “presence” at, these ground facilities. Maybe they will even put a sign up on their gate. But don’t bother knocking at the door; they won’t let you in.

Dwayne Day can be reached at zirconic1@cox.net.

Text Fwd: Toxic Rocket Fuel Problem Being Ignored

Text Fwd from Bruce Gagnon on March 31, 2009

http://www.wisn.com/health/19040768/detail.html
Outrage Growing Over Perchlorate Contamination Of Food
Group Says Government Must To More To Protect Public
March 30, 2009

MILWAUKEE -- An environmental group is accusing the government of not doing enough to protect people and the nation’s food from potentially dangerous levels of a rocket fuel ingredient.

It’s called perchlorate, and it’s a key component in rocket fuel.

"We don't think people realize how widespread of a contaminant it is," Environmental Working Group Dr. Anila Jacob said.

The group says that 20 million to 40 million Americans may be exposed to the chemical.

"We know that the CDC has found perchlorate in 100 percent of the people they've tested, so there's widespread exposure, through contaminated drinking water and also through contaminated food," Jacob said.

The concern is that the fuel additive has seeped into the ground and water in dozens of states -- usually from old military bases or NASA sites. That's how the group said how perchlorate has ended up in the drinking water and the food supply.

For most people, perchlorate contamination poses almost no health risk at all.

But it can be a serious concern for certain groups. It can affect thyroid hormone levels, which in a fetus or newborn baby can inhibit brain development -- which is why advocacy groups said pregnant women and nursing moms need to be made aware.

They have called for better education and stricter food and water guidelines. Congress even held hearings into the matter but not much was happening.

"We made very little progress, we may have even taken a step backward," Jacob said.

Five months ago, the EPA reached a decision -- to do nothing. It would not regulate perchlorate in drinking water at all.

The decision surprised many, and the resulting public outcry led the agency to re-think its position in early January, calling for more investigation.

The EWG says that's not good enough.

"We consider it to be a delay tactic -- every day that we delay in regulating this chemical, millions of people continue to be exposed," Jacob said.

Perchlorate has not shown up in Wisconsin’s groundwater.

The EWG said it is concerned about food that comes from states such as California and Texas, where there is contamination.

The group is also currently urging the FDA to increase its research into perchlorate contamination in the food supply, and search for news ways to reduce the risk.

The FDA said, so far testing has turned up no need for any new guidelines or warnings about perchlorate levels in food. But the testing has been limited to small samples -- and the agency said much more needs to be done, to know how widespread the contamination may be.


Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)

Text Fwd: Arms Race in Space

* Text Fwd by Bruce Gagnon on March 19, 2009*

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5971

*The article was also informed in StopNATO.

Arms Race in Space
Bruce K. Gagnon | March 19, 2009

Editor: John Feffer

The new arms race in space is shaping up to be the largest industrial project in Earth's history. To pay for this project, the aerospace industry has been lobbying Washington for a dedicated funding source. Budget allocations for missile defense — Star Wars — are only part of the huge sums of money redirected toward preparations for war in space.

Since World War II, hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent on Star Wars research and development. When Bill Clinton first came into office in 1993 he ceremoniously announced that Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), at that time funded at $3.5 billion a year, was dead. Then he quietly created the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) and moved the $3.5 billion into the new space weapons development organization. George W. Bush left office having changed the name to Missile Defense Agency (MDA) with an annual budget of $10 billion per year.

Not counted in the MDA budget is the money that goes into space technology programs at the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), National Security Agency (NSA), Department of Energy, NASA, and others. Conservative numbers indicate that the total military space technology annual budget runs in the neighborhood of $75 billion per year.

From Research to Deployment

The Pentagon maintains that the Persian Gulf War in the early 1990s was the "first space war" where it was able to field test new technologies and begin implementing the doctrine of "full spectrum dominance." In the 2003 shock-and-awe invasion of Iraq, 70% of the weapons used in the initial attack were directed to their targets via military space satellites. Today, terrestrial warfare is coordinated from space.

But there's a problem: If the United States can do all of this, so could another nation. Thus the Pentagon has for years been working to create the ability to "deny" others the use of space. According to the Air Force Space Command planning document Strategic Master Plan: FY06 and Beyond, "the ability to gain space superiority (the ability to exploit space while selectively disallowing it to adversaries) is critically important and maintaining space superiority is an essential prerequisite for success in modern warfare...Simply, we must be able to quickly subjugate any space capability any adversary can field while maintaining our own."

This threat to take out the space assets of other nations is leading to a new and dangerous stage in the space arms race. China's 2007 test of a rudimentary anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon was a warning to the United States that it won't allow any one country to be "Master of Space," as the Air Force Space Command logo reads. The United States responded in 2008, using the excuse of a falling satellite, to show the world it had the capability to knock out an object in space. In this case, the Navy fired a "missile defense" system from an Aegis destroyer into space and successfully hit the doomed satellite. This test also was a clear warning to Russia and China that the ship-based Aegis "missile defense" system had offensive capabilities and could be used as part of a growing U.S. first-strike capability.

Space Race in Asia

Today, the United States and its allies Japan and South Korea are deploying Aegis destroyers to encircle China's coastline and put its small nuclear deterrent capability at risk. China also knows that the U.S. Space Command has been annually war-gaming a first-strike attack on its nation. In a computer war game set in the year 2016, the United States launches the attack, using a system now under development called the military space plane. This weapon would have the capability to take off like an airplane, fly through space to the other side of the world in one hour, drop a devastating attack on China, and then return to home base. The Pentagon is selling this space plane to the Congress and the public as the successor to the outdated, and increasingly expensive, space shuttle.

The International Herald Tribune recently reported that Gen. Valentin Popovkin, former chief of Russia's space forces, said his country must develop ASAT weapons technology as well. "We can't sit back and quietly watch others doing that, such work is being conducted in Russia," Popovkin was quoted as saying. Russia already has some "basic, key elements" of such weapons, Popovkin said.

During the tenures of both Clinton and the second Bush, Russia and China introduced to the UN General Assembly a resolution calling for a new treaty to ban weapons in space. The Prevention of an Arms Race in Space (PAROS) would outlaw all weapons in and through space, and close the barn door before the horse gets out. Sadly, the position of the United States has been consistent throughout both Democrat and Republican administrations: There are no weapons in space and thus no need for a new treaty. The United States claims that there is no problem.

The Problem with NASA

NASA was created as a civilian agency with a mission to do peaceful space exploration. But the growing influence of the military industrial complex has rubbed out the line between civilian and military programs.

When George W. Bush appointed former Secretary of the Navy Sean O'Keefe to head NASA in late 2001, the new space agency director announced that all NASA missions in the future would be "dual use." This meant that every NASA space launch would be both military and civilian at the same time. The military would ride the NASA Trojan horse and accelerate space weapons development without the public's knowledge. NASA would expand space nuclear power systems to help create new designs for weapons propulsion. Permanent, nuclear-powered bases on the moon and Mars would give the United States a leg up in the race for control of those planetary bodies. The international competition for resource extraction in space (helium-3 on the moon) is now full on.

NASA's job is to do the research and development, and then be ready to turn everything over to private corporate interests once the technology has been sorted out. The taxpayers will fund the technology investment program. The military will create the space weapons systems to ensure free corporate access to the space highways of the future. The aerospace industry is already making record profits from the ever-escalating cost of space technology systems. Virtually every system now under development is well over budget. Just one illustration is NASA's International Space Station. Originally slated to cost the taxpayers $10 billion, the project has now grown to $100 billion and is not yet finished.

High Ground in Space

A little-known congressional study from1989 called Military Space Forces: The Next 50 Years spells out much of the Pentagon's plan for achieving dominance in space. The Air Force Association published the report in book form, and congressional leaders like Representatives Ike Skelton (D-MO) and John Spratt (D-SC), Senator John Glenn (D-OH) and now-Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) signed the forward.

In the book, congressional staffer John Collins reports: "Military space forces at the bottom of the Earth's so-called gravity well are poorly positioned to accomplish offensive/defensive/deterrent missions, because great energy is needed to overcome gravity during launch. Forces at the top, on a space counterpart of 'high ground,' could initiate action and detect, identify, track, intercept, or otherwise respond more rapidly to attacks."

Collins goes on to propose to Congress that the United States needs bases on the moon, at the top of the "gravity well," and on armed space stations on either side of the lunar surface. He writes, "Nature reserves decisive advantage for L4 and L5, two allegedly stable libration points [on either side of the moon] that theoretically could dominate Earth and moon, because they look down both gravity wells. No other location is equally commanding." Collins then concludes that, "Armed forces might lie in wait at that location to hijack rival shipments on return." Space piracy is born.

Like the Pentagon, the defense industries also have a plan for space. They're working 50-75 years ahead of the rest of us. They understand the enormous costs involved. They are moving to secure a funding source and working to bring "reliable allies" into the program to help pay for Star Wars. They've learned to dress up key aspects of the program as defense, as in "missile defense."

Space is the new military frontier. It's now up to the peace movement to understand the issue and help the public do so as well. Unless this costly and destabilizing new space arms race is stopped, life on Earth will become much more difficult. We must keep space for peace.

Bruce K. Gagnon is the coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space and a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus. He can be reached at globalnet@mindspring.com.



Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)