Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

January 29 2012

15:07

Russian Rockets Face Competition From Vega

Vega's upper composite, comprising LARES, ALMASat-1, seven CubeSats and the fairing, was transferred to the pad on 24 January and added to the vehicle at Europe's Spaceport in French Guiana. Credits: ESA - M. Pedoussaut, 2012

Space News reports that nine years of European effort coupled with a bout of inflation have produced a Vega rocket that can compete with Russian boosters for launching small payloads:

Europe’s Vega small-satellite launcher, whose inaugural flight is scheduled for mid-February, will be sold commercially for about 32 million euros ($42 million) per launch — a price that can compete with converted Russian ballistic missiles, Vega officials said Jan. 23.

In briefings at Europe’s Guiana Space Center spaceport here on the northeast coast of South America, where Vega is nearing the end of nine years of development, program managers said the rocket’s competitive position is even better than it was at the start of development.

“Our belief is that we can charge up to 20 percent more per launch than our biggest competitors and still win business because of the value we provide at the space center here and with Arianespace,” said Francesco De Pasquale, managing director of ELV SpA, the Italian company that is Vega’s prime contractor….

A wave of inflation in Russia has driven up the prices of both rockets “radically” in recent years, according to Antonio Fabrizi, head of the launcher division for the 19-nation ESA. Fabrizi said a recent ESA decision to assign Vega the launch of two European Sentinel Earth observation satellites was only made after a competition with Rockot. “We believe in competition in the sector,” Fabrizi said.

Rockot, which is a German-Russian joint venture, is one of a trio of converted Soviet ICBMs vying for a piece of the small launch market. The other two are Dnepr, which is a Russian-Ukrainian collaboration; and Cyclone-4, which is a Ukrainian rocket set to launch from Brazil in 2013.

India’s PSLV booster also serves this market, as do some Chinese Long March rockets. SpaceX’s Falcon 1e would have competed in this market segment, but the company has placed development on hold.

Meanwhile, RIA Novosti is reporting that Russia has decided to continue launching Dnepr rockets, which are decommissioned SS-18 Satan ICBMs. It is not clear why Russia might have been considering retiring the program.

The SS-18 missiles are gradually being retired from Russia’s Strategic Missile Force (SMF) and converted into launch vehicles. There are 52 missiles remaining in the SMF.

The story quotes Ukrainian space agency head Yuri Alekseyev as saying two launches are planned this year. The first, set for April or May, will carry Korea’s KOMSAT-5 satellite. The second rocket will launch a cluster of Arab satellites in September or October.

January 28 2012

23:00

La maison d’Atlantis

La maison d’Atlantis
La navette de la NASA sera exposée au public dans un bâtiment spécifique au sein du Vistor Complex du centre Kennedy en Floride. Le 18 janvier, des officiels et, à droite, Chris Ferguson, le dernier commandant d’Atlantis (vol STS-135, également ultime mission du programme navette), donnaient symboliquement les premiers coups de pelle de la construction. L’ouverture de la «maison d’Atlantis» est prévue pour l’été 2013.
Crédit : NASA/Kim Shiflett

20:27
RT @E_Mehdi: La finesse légendaire des supporters de football http://t.co/dNSvhgoA
Hamsek
17:48

Next Crew Launch to ISS Delayed By Soyuz Flaw

International Space Station

More quality control problems with Russia’s human spaceflight program.

A planned March 30 launch of a new three-man crew to the International Space Station could be delayed about a month due to an air leak discovered during vacuum testing of the crew’s Soyuz capsule, RIA Novosti reports.

The new crew of Gennady Padalka, Sergei Revin and Joseph Acaba was set to dock at the station on April 1. They would replace Anton Shkaplerov, Anatoly Ivanishin, and Dan Burbank, who were schedule to leave the station before the new crew’s arrival. The Padalka crew would join a three-member team launched in December and  return the station contingent to six members.

An official told RIA Novosti that Burbank’s crew would probably extend its mission. That team was launched in mid-November, meaning it has until mid-May before its Soyuz return vehicle reaches its six-month limit in space.

14:44

ESA’s Vega Launcher Ready to Go

Vega on the launch pad. (Credits: ESA - S. Corvaja, 2012)

ESA PR – ESA’s new Vega rocket is now fully assembled on its launch pad. Final preparations are in full swing for the rocket’s inaugural flight from Europe’s Spaceport. The launch window opens on 9 February.

The upper composite, comprising LARES, ALMASat-1, seven CubeSats, the payload adapter and the fairing, was moved to the pad late Monday night. A night transfer is the standard practice in Kourou to avoid overheating the payloads.

The move ended early Tuesday morning with its installation on the dedicated stand inside the mobile gantry to await mating with the launcher.

The composite was then added on top of Vega’s AVUM fourth stage to finalise electrical connections and verify links, concluding with the final mechanical connection.

The main remaining steps to the maiden flight are the final checkout of the assembled vehicle, the full launch countdown rehearsal and the fuelling of the restartable AVUM.

Vega's upper composite, comprising LARES, ALMASat-1, seven CubeSats and the fairing, was transferred to the pad on 24 January and added to the vehicle at Europe's Spaceport in French Guiana. Credits: ESA - M. Pedoussaut, 2012

Vega qualification flight

This first flight, dubbed VV01, marks the end of nine years of development by ESA and its partners, Italian space agency ASI, French space agency CNES and industry.

It will lift off from the new Vega launch site at Europe’s Spaceport in Kourou, French Guiana, carrying nine satellites into orbit. The launch window opens on 9 February and ends a few days later.

The mission will qualify the overall Vega system, including the vehicle, the ground infrastructure and operations from the launch campaign to the payload separation and disposal of the upper module.

In particular, it will demonstrate the vehicle’s performances and payload services in flight.

A flexible mission

Vega will provide Europe with a safe, reliable and competitive capacity to carry science and Earth observation satellites into orbit, while perfectly complementing the heavy Ariane 5 and medium Soyuz rockets already launched from the spaceport.

The rocket is designed to cope with a wide range of missions and payload configurations in order to respond to different market opportunities and provide great flexibility.

Unlike most small launchers, Vega is able to place multiple payloads into orbit. In particular, it offers configurations able to handle payloads ranging from a single satellite up to one main satellite plus six microsatellites.

It is compatible with payload masses ranging from 300 kg to 2500 kg, depending on the type and altitude of the orbit required by the customers. The benchmark is for 1500 kg into a 700 km-altitude polar orbit.

More information on Vega and updates are available on the new launch website here

Vega slideshow on Flickr available here

04:28

Video: Romney Talks Space and Says Nothing — Again

Mitt Romney talks at a rally in Brevard County in Florida. And for the third time this week, he says nothing substantive about space policy.

Apparently, Mitt Romneybot (a.k.a., #Mittbot) has been running for President for at least five years and has no idea what he wants to do in space yet. Nor can he describe in any detail what is wrong with the current administration’s policies.

But, he’s brought in a bunch of experts to figure it all out. And he’ll get back to us with the details. At some point. That should warm the hearts of laid off workers on the Space Coast looking for some clues as to what might happen next year.

In the meantime, Romney wants everyone to impressed by the process he’s going to use. And his Challenger story. And his love for the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. And America. And veterans. And…lots of other platitudes.

Oh, and one of those guys who’s figuring out Romney’s space plan is Mike Griffin, who was working toward a $200 billion lunar base program while he was NASA administrator. Romney said he would fire anyone who brought him a lunar base plan costing hundreds of billions of dollars just last night. Better get started, #Mittbot. At least firing people is something you’re good at. Unlike space policy.

Obama has a clear plan that was, sadly, mangled by Congress. Gingrich has an ambitious agenda that is probably not very realistic, but many of his goals are sound and he has a clear vision. Romney is offering blanket condemnations instead of a detailed critique, a process rather than specific solutions, and an advisory board whose most prominent member devised a program that was the opposite of what the candidate claims he supports.

This is sad. It’s lazy. It’s insensitive. There are people who are really suffering in Florida, and they don’t want to hear about a process for figuring out what Mitt Romney’s space policy will be. That’s not leadership.

04:16
03:34

SFF to Romney: Fire Mike Griffin From Space Advisory Board

Mitt Romney. (Credit: Gage Skidmore)

SFF PR — Jacksonville, FL – During last night’s Republican presidential debate, Governor Mitt Romney stated that “a moonbase would be an enormous expense,” and later stated that if someone had come to him saying they had wanted to spend a few hundred billion dollars to put a colony on the moon, he would’ve said “You’re fired.”

Today, it was revealed that former NASA Administrator Mike Griffin is member of the Romney Space Policy Advisory Group. This is the same NASA Administrator who was the chief architect of an unaffordable and unsustainable plan to return humans to the Moon that would have cost about $200 Billion.

We can only assume that Gov. Romney did not know who Mike Griffin is or what he did as NASA Administrator when he asked Griffin to serve in his group of space policy leaders. At the time of its cancellation, the Augustine Committee, a national committee composed of military, civilian and commercial space leaders, concluded that Mike Griffin’s strategy would only work if NASA received a $3 Billion per year budget increase to $22 Billion. This would result in a total cost that was almost $200 Billion.

“Confronted with Mike Griffin’s plan to return to the Moon, Mitt Romney would have fired Griffin and rightly so,” said Will Watson, Executive Director of the Space Frontier Foundation.

While Romney has stated that he wants more discussion with a diversified group of professional space people to determine the future of America’s space program, the SFF is concerned that his current collection tells a very different story. It raises serious questions in the minds of space activists about whether Governor Romney fully understands the issues. Sometimes personnel reflects policy.

“While Governor Romney stated he would like to have much more commercial space participation in his government, only 1 of the 8 people on his group is a serious and credible commercial space leader,” continued Mr. Watson. “We fear that he is already being circled and trapped by unsustainable space interests.”

We are encouraged that Governor Romney realizes the importance of space. At this time however, we strongly urge Governor Romney to cast a much wider net for space policy advisors.

00:28

January 27 2012

23:34

Space Team Romney: Pace, Griffin, Cernan and Anderson

Former NASA Administrator Mike Griffin

In a move destined to anger NewSpace advocates, Mitt Romney has released a letter of support signed by eight space leaders, including prominent commercial space critics Mike Griffin, Scott Pace and Gene Cernan. Pace, in fact, is chairman of the Romney Space Policy Advisory Group.

“We have watched with dismay as President Obama dismantled the structure that was guiding both the government and commercial space sectors, while providing no purpose or vision or mission,” the signers wrote. “This failure of leadership has thrust the space program into disarray and triggered a dangerous erosion of our technical workforce and capabilities. In short, we have a space program unworthy of a great nation.”

“Restoring the U.S. space program to greatness will require the leadership, management skill, and commitment to American exceptionalism possessed by only one candidate in this race: Mitt Romney. We support Mitt’s candidacy and believe that his approach to space policy will produce results instead of empty promises,” they added.

Actually, Romney’s entire “approach to space policy” thus far has consisted of saying he would bring together a bunch of experts (presumably this group) to figure out what his space policy should be. Given the vagueness of the candidate’s statements, let’s look at who’s supporting him.

Griffin, the former NASA Administrator, has led the fight against the Obama Administrations efforts to cancel the Constellation program he began and to develop commercial transports for low Earth orbit missions. Griffin advised Cernan and fellow astronaut Neil Armstrong concerning their testimony against these policies before Congress. Pace, who heads up the Space Policy Institute at The George Washington University, has been a prominent skeptic of the Administration’s approach.

As for the other signers, the commercial side is represented by Eric Anderson, Chairman and CEO of Space Adventures. Mark Albrecht, former executive secretary of the National Space Council, is chairman of the board of a commercial space company called USSpace. Albrecht has been critical of NASA’s bureaucracy.

Others who signed the letter include:

Bob Crippen
Pilot, First Space Shuttle Mission
Former Director, NASA Space Shuttle Program

Peter Marquez

Former Director of Space Policy, National Security Council
Former Director of Special Programs, Department of Defense

William Martel

Associate Professor of International Security Studies, The Fletcher School at Tufts University
Former Alan B. Shepard Chair of Space Technology and Policy Studies, Naval War College

The presence of Anderson and Albrecht notwithstanding, this looks like a recipe for resurrecting the full Constellation program and strangling the commercial crew effort. One also wonders whether Griffin will get his old job back.

It’s not clear whether the signatories are all members of advisory board that Pace heads up. One would assume so, but this is not explicitly stated. If that is true, then Romney has released an “open letter of support” from his own handpicked advisory board. That’s unusual for open letters.

Critics are finding Griffin’s support for Romney less surprising than it is ironic. Supporters of the Obama Administration’s space policy blame Griffin for creating the hideously expensive Constellation program, which was seriously behind schedule and over budget when Obama decided to cancel it on the grounds it couldn’t be executed.

They are finding it ironic that Romney, who said he would fire anyone who proposed an expensive moon base, would be getting support from Griffin, whose own Constellation plan was completely unaffordable.

Obama’s supporters blame Congress, which acted in accordance with Griffin’s advice, for resurrecting certain elements of Constellation — mostly prominently, the expensive heavy-lift Space Launch System — and underfunding the commercial crew effort. The result, they feel, is a NASA trying to do too much with too few resources that will be dependent upon Russia for human spaceflight for far too long. They don’t see that as being a space program worthy of a great nation.

The full letter is reproduced below.

Mitt Romney. (Credit: Gage Skidmore)

ROMNEY WILL RESTORE AMERICA’S SPACE PROGRAM

The U.S. space program is a strategic national asset, which makes critical contributions to our scientific knowledge, technological innovation, economic competitiveness, national security, and international leadership.  We have watched with dismay as President Obama dismantled the structure that was guiding both the government and commercial space sectors, while providing no purpose or vision or mission. This failure of leadership has thrust the space program into disarray and triggered a dangerous erosion of our technical workforce and capabilities. In short, we have a space program unworthy of a great nation.

Restoring the U.S. space program to greatness will require the leadership, management skill, and commitment to American exceptionalism possessed by only one candidate in this race: Mitt Romney. We support Mitt’s candidacy and believe that his approach to space policy will produce results instead of empty promises. As his long record of success in both the private and public sectors attests, Mitt will do more than provide our space program with an inspiring vision and mission of exploration. He will also set aggressive yet achievable goals, adhere to realistic budgets, and execute on a carefully drawn plan.

As president, Mitt Romney will facilitate close collaboration not only within the government’s civil and national security space sectors, but also with the private sector and with research institutions. He will create conditions for a strong and competitive commercial space industry that can contribute greatly to our national capabilities and goals. And he will ensure that NASA returns its focus to the project of manned space exploration that uniquely affirms American strength and values around the globe. Under his leadership, America will once again lead the world in space.

21:34

A Sign of Things to Come: Gingrichian Accountability

For me, this was the most interesting exchange from last night’s debate in Jacksonville. Gingrich was asked to actually explain something he had said about Mitt Romney. He responded by, in essence, calling Wolf Blitzer an idiot for even asking the question and inferring that answering it was beneath his dignity and the high-minded tone of the event. He also added this little gem:

GINGRICH: I did. And I’m perfectly happy to say that on an interview on some TV show. But this is a national debate, where you have a chance to get the four of us to talk about a whole range of issues.

We should expect more of the same should Gingrich win the presidency.

As you know, Gingrich unveiled a grandiose space plan earlier this week that literally promises the moon within 9 year. Unfortunately, he will likely end up abandoning and postponing many elements of his vision when they prove to be impractical or clash with his other political and budgetary priorities.

Inevitably, someone will call him on it, and the response will probably be the same. Gingrich will call it a non-sense question that distracts from much more important issues or space accomplishments or God knows what’s going on that moment/day/week. Those promises were perfectly fine for him to make at an appearance at some campaign event, Gingrich will huff, but he’s President now and well…things are different. And you’re an idiot for even asking.

Now, it’s true that all candidates make promises that they don’t keep once in office. And that’s not always a bad thing; campaign promises can be pretty idiotic. But, with Gingrich, we’re dealing with someone whose tendency toward grandiose plans and statements is matched by his equal disdain for anyone who dares hold him accountability for them.

That’s a great way to campaign as long as your questioner backs down, as moderators Juan Williams and John King did during earlier debates. Gingrich managed to get the crowd on his side, which helped him win South Carolina. But, Blitzer held his ground, and the candidate looked much the worse for it.

Gingrich’s approach is actually a rather lousy way to actually govern. The country will get really sick of it, really fast. It was one of the reasons Gingrich lasted only four years as Speaker of the House, and why his party lost seats in Congress while President Bill Clinton was being impeached. A lot of people came to hate the speaker, and his own party was ready to vote him out of that post before he quit Congress all together.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I actually like many of Gingrich’s space ideas, although I believe the scope and time lines are beyond what we can do in the next nine years. It’s a good starting point.

On space policy, I prefer him to Romney, who has offered nothing of substance to date. His plan to get everyone together to figure out a plan later seems both naive (good luck with that — few of the parties involved agree on much of anything) and lazy campaigning. You can basically translate that as:

“I don’t really care about this issue. I haven’t really thought about it. And I figured this primary race would be over by now.”

Romney’s showing complete insensitivity to the suffering along the Space Coast. It’s a major problem in Florida, and all Romney does is bash Obama’s policy, mock Gingrich’s ideas, and brag about how he would “fire” anyone who brought a plan to settle the moon. What is it with this guy and firing people? You’d think he’s avoid such talk in a state devastated by layoffs, especially given the criticism of his tenure running  Bain Capital.

Ron Paul and Rick Santorum similarly dismissed Gingrich’s plan as being the last thing that voters want to hear about as America slowly recovers from a severe recession. Gingrich retorted that his plan would be 90 percent funded by the private sector. It’s a worthy goal, but until we see some actual figures of how that would be accomplished, it’s a good bet that he’s pulling those numbers out of his ***.

One other issue: about Gingrich’s plan to give statehood to the first lunar colony to exceed 13,000 residents. It’s really pissing me off. Not because of the weighty legal questions involved, which I’ll leave to a later discussion. But, because he’s proposing this while there are 600,000 residents in the District of Columbia who lack any voting rights in Congress.

Gingrich and his party has consistently blocked any moves toward correcting this flaw in the Constitution. They refuse to consider granting DC statehood, or a single voting member in the House, or allowing residents to vote in Maryland Senate elections. The reason is partisan: DC votes overwhelmingly Democratic. And that wouldn’t be good for the GOP.

As a former resident of Arlington, Virginia, it appalled me that I had two voting Senators and one Representative in Congress while my friends across the river had none. It’s unfair. It’s un-American. More than half a million of my fellow Americans are being treated as second class denizens.

That Gingrich can envision a fully functioning American state on the moon is great. It shows terrific vision that few other politicians have or are willing to admit publicly. That Gingrich can’t envision equal status for DC residents — the people who live outside the White House he wants to reside in — shows the flip side of the man’s grandiose personality. It would be a helluva lot easier than setting up a colony on the moon if the Republican simply dropped their opposition to some form of representation for DC.

Alas, that’s too mundane a problem for Gingrich. And it would hurt his party’s chances in Congress. So, by nature that becomes impossible while a state on the moon is not only plausible, its preferable.

And all that raises another serious question about a possible Gingrich presidency: would he be so focused on grandiose visions that he would be unable to run the government effectively?  If it’s about anything, the U.S. government is about the mundane. Lose sight of that, and you end up with disasters like the responses to hurricanes Katrine and Andrew.

20:58
19:03
14:25

NASA Safety Panel Concerned About ISS Loss of Mission

International Space Station

The Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel’s annual report includes a fascinating section about the risk of losing a mission related to the International Space Station (ISS).

“Analyses presented to the ASAP on several occasions, most recently in May 2011, stated that the probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) related to ISS Loss of Mission (LOM) was 1 in 55 for a 180-day mission. Since there are approximately 20 180-day missions in the currently projected ISS Program, this means that there is a greater-than-30-percent chance that the ISS could sustain a LOM sometime during its projected operating life,” ASAP wrote.

That’s a lot higher than you might think. And if it happened, the result could be quite dire.

“Should such an event occur, the result could arise that the ISS would have to be abandoned—potentially without the possibility of a return to nominal operation. Thus, a premature ISS de-orbit is one potential outcome. This can occur in either a controlled or an uncontrolled manner, with the latter clearly the more dangerous. While this possibility has been known for some time, NASA has not yet shared with the Panel an explicit plan to deal with this situation,” the report reads.

ASAP recommends that NASA begin immediate planning for various contingencies and that those plans be shared and coordinated with the other ISS partners.

Read the full report.

11:41
#FF @Linudy @enture_ @pgauti @Mutchat @charlottepoupon @Brigitte_Ba @vincentlieser @Philhena @jeromevallette pour des actus spatiales en FR
cpamoa
03:52
00:46
00:08

ASAP: Commercial Crew Program at Risk From Inadequate Budget, Oversight

The Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) believes that NASA’s commercial crew program is at risk from inadequate funding and the space agency’s decision budget-based decision to use less intrusive Space Act Agreements (SAA) to oversee the work of developing vehicles to replace the retired space shuttle.

“It appears to the ASAP that the fiscal year (FY) 2012 funding level approved by Congress, which was less than half of what was requested by the Administration, will not allow commercial crew transportation to the ISS by 2016,” ASAP said in its annual report released this week. “In fact, if the new funding level continues into the future, it is the ASAP’s belief that the program is in jeopardy, thus extending the current lack of a U.S. human spaceflight capability and resulting in no alternative to reliance on Russia to obtain access to the ISS.”

After Congress provided less money for the program than requested, NASA decided to continuing using SAAs, reversing an earlier decision to use the more rigorous Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)-based contracting approach. Space agency officials said it was the only way they could fund multiple vehicles.

“We believe that the sudden change in acquisition strategy in an effort to salvage the CCP may have significantly increased the risk to safety that the previous plan had begun to address,” ASAP said. “The lack of the ability to incorporate firm safety requirements using an SAA procurement exposes NASA to new risks if, at the conclusion of the developmental phase, the proposed designs do not meet minimum safety requirements. In that event, NASA will have to either (1) expend additional time and money having the designs modified and retested or (2) accept the risk associated with flying its astronauts on systems that do not meet the currently articulated minimum safety requirements….

“If NASA is deciding to take on more risk because the cost is otherwise prohibitive, then the Agency should be clear about that increased level of risk acceptance and develop approaches to manage that risk,” the panel added. “While it is possible that NASA can find a way to accomplish the assigned mission with the available budget, at this point in time the Panel has serious concerns about the likelihood of such an outcome. The ASAP plans to closely examine the SAA approach in 2012 and will be most interested in the plan for transitioning the designs into certified systems before their use as crew transport.”

Read the full report here.

January 26 2012

23:42

Guest Opinion: Road to the White House Runs Through Florida Space Coast

Vehicle Assembly Building at Kennedy Space Center

Florida Primary Important Asset to Presidential Hopefuls
Space must be a platform candidates stand on
by Lynda Weatherman

President & CEO,
Economic Development Commission of Florida’s Space Coast

As the GOP primary looms over Florida, the Space Coast must be at the forefront of the candidates’ minds for both the future of aerospace and our broader high-tech community.

Over the last 20 years, the road to the White House has run through the 1-4 Corridor.  More late money, attention and campaign resources have been directed to this region than any other part of the country.  This area’s importance to the presidential race has intensified now that Florida has 29 Electoral College votes, compared to 27 in 2008.  Florida is the largest swing state in the country and, therefore, has never been more important.

Because of this political fortitude, and as a matter of national security and global competitiveness, the candidates must make space a formidable part of their respective platforms.  The space industry was Florida’s first high profile, high-wage industry and launched the high-tech juggernaut that the Space Coast, and much of Florida, is today.  Secondly, as was made painfully evident with Sputnik and the start of the space race, space is the military high ground and it is surrendered at our peril.  Finally, much of America’s technological prowess of the last generation was the product of the space program. To abandon that capability is to condemn this nation to a second class status.

The future of space needs to include a definitive program that we know will succeed.  Whether this is the Space Launch System (SLS) or commercial space, we need commitment and sustained appropriation.  The Constellation program was cancelled due to inadequate funding.  We cannot continue to invest our future in similar programs that we know will suffer the same fate.  Candidates must commit to assuring adequate funding for SLS, or offer us a compelling Plan B.  This community, and this nation, cannot endure another cancellation, followed by confusion.  Other countries will continue to look to the U.S. for leadership in space exploration.  We need to ensure our space program stays intact to live up to our reputation.

With the Space Coast still reeling from job loss, this region has emerged as the face of challenges in national space policy.  The candidates want and need our votes, so it is incumbent upon each of them to demonstrate his understanding of the issues surrounding the Space Coast and our high-tech companies, and how this fits into the bigger issues of national security and global leadership.  We need a vision that illustrates space as a national priority.  We have the delegates; each candidate needs to demonstrate why he should get them.

23:00

Lune et Terre

Lune et Terre
Depuis la Station Spatiale Internationale, l’équipage a réalisé cette photographie montrant la Lune avec une portion de Terre en avant-plan.
Crédit : NASA

Lien vers l’image originale

Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.