[ad_1]
With increasing cadence, humans from several nations are launching into orbit around Earth, and soon some will be heading outward towards the moon. With the rise of commercial and government flights, the chances of a stranded crew needing a rescue in space are on the rise.
But the United States government and commercial spaceflight providers have no plans in place to perform a timely rescue of a distressed low-altitude spacecraft crew. Earth orbit, or anywhere else in space. Without orchestrated rescue planning, today’s space travelers will travel at their peril.
For example, this week Inspiration4 mission is the world’s first fully civilian orbit trip. It will transport four private citizens into Earth orbit aboard a SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft for a three-day jaunt.
Then there is the dear moon project, a lunar tourism mission and an artistic project conceived and financed by the Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezawa. It will use a SpaceX spacecraft on a private space flight making a circumlunar trajectory around the moon. This week-long trip of Maezawa and his teammates is not expected to take place until 2023.
Related: Inspiration4: When to watch and what to know
Live Updates: SpaceX’s Inspiration4 Fully Civilian Private Orbital Mission
Current posture
As private space tourism are flourishing and other nations are perfecting their own manned space travel adventures, it’s time to revisit space rescue policies and put in place measures to address this, some experts say. They argue that the current position – not planning a space rescue and not having reactive space rescue capabilities – must be addressed before the need for a rescue materializes.
A report released last month titled “The gap in rescue capability in space“seeks to raise awareness of the need to review space rescue policies and put in place measures to address this problem.
The author of the 21-page report, Grant Cates, is a senior project manager for the space architecture department at The Aerospace Corporation. Previously, he was NASA’s “flow director” for the Space Shuttle Columbia, integrating, programming and performing ground processing for the vehicle. He was the flow director for Columbia from 1995 to 2001, before the craft’s tragic disintegration on February 1, 2003, as it re-entered the atmosphere, killing all seven crew members.
Colombia broke due to damage sustained during launch, when the insulating foam dislodged from the shuttle’s external fuel tank struck the shuttle wing. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board concluded that had NASA recognized the damage early on in the mission, a rescue mission using the next space shuttle slated for launch, Atlantis, would have been possible, Cates told Space.com.
This rescue would have involved maneuvering Atlantis alongside Columbia and then transferring the crew members via individual spacewalks. “This rescue was considered difficult but achievable,” the Columbia Accident Investigation Board wrote in the first volume of its report.
Related: No launch day shake for SpaceX Inspiration4 civilian astronauts
Human nature
Fighting the fog of history is difficult to do.
“It is human nature to be optimistic and have confidence in the systems, especially when the latest accident, Columbia, is deeper and deeper into the past,” Cates said. The orbit rescue puzzle piece is where more attention needs to be paid, he added.
“If something is wrong in orbit, we haven’t really thought about all the ways we might need to do a rescue, and how might we do that rescue,” Cates said.
“A space rescue capability is likely to be highly synergistic with the long sought-after capability of having a reactive launch capability, ”Cates wrote in“ The In-space Rescue Capability Gap ”.
Both of these goals are achievable with the right political goals, he added.
“It should be the policy of the United States to develop and implement a rapid launch capability as needed to support: the timely rescue of astronauts in cis-lunar space; the rapid recovery of space resources of national importance; and the ability to implement new space capabilities in response to emerging threats in near real time, ”Cates wrote.
Imagine the public outcry, Cates added, that could arise if Inspiration4, dearMoon, or a similar crewed mission were stranded in low Earth orbit or cislunar space by a disabled spacecraft. How long could a crew survive in their shattered spaceship?
In his report, Cates noted that the plan for the Inspiration4 Crew Dragon spacecraft involved removing the docking port from the International Space Station and replace it with a viewing window. “Removal of the mooring port negates any potential for salvage,” he wrote.
If a crewed cis-lunar mission had trouble near the moon, it could potentially make its way to the bridge, a small space station in lunar orbit that NASA plans to build in the next few years, and is waiting to be rescued there.
“But in the short term, the only suggestion is to consider sending people beyond low earth orbit with spacecraft with self-rescue capability,” Cates said. Or we could potentially send multiple ships traveling together in a flotilla, like the old sailors did, he said.
Negative impact
“Whether it is a mission where NASA astronauts, private astronauts or so-called space tourists are flying, if there is an incident it will have a negative impact on the industry in the short term. “said Cates. There would be a suspension until an investigation into the crash was completed, he said, and mitigating measures were put in place to prevent a similar calamity from happening again in the ‘to come up.
“Avoiding that sort of thing in the first place seems like the best course of action to me. That’s what motivated the document. Let’s try to understand space rescue before we actually need it,” Cates said. .
Cates points to historical analogues, such as ocean explorers who embarked on epic voyages with multiple ships; successful underwater rescue operations; and the rich history of human spaceflight.
The article offers a series of conclusions:
The United States currently has no capacity or policy to conduct rescues in space. This situation exists today although experts have studied evacuation and rescue systems in space since 1959; despite NASA demonstrating self-rescue capability during abortion Apollo 13 mission to the moon in 1970; despite the installation by NASA of rescue capabilities for the Skylab project carried out from 1973 to 1974; and despite the loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia and its crew of seven, a tragedy that could have been avoided had a rescue capability been available.
Rescue and return
The 1967 Outer Space Treaty alludes to the potential need to save astronauts in space. The following year a second treaty entered into force, known as the 1968 Rescue Agreement. However, the latter treaty focused primarily on the rescue and return of astronauts who had made emergency landings some time ago. leaves on dry land.
“What the treaty does not do,” Cates said, “is that it does not force anyone to develop capabilities to do space rescue.”
A key point that Cates emphasizes is the ability to launch on demand. And this ability is at your fingertips. “Basically, somebody somewhere on this planet is launching something into orbit about every three days, on average. And it’s going to increase,” he said.
With more and more nations sending people into space, the need for rescue capabilities will become more evident, Cates said. Second, the possibility of implementing space rescue measures will probably become easier. “It’s one way to close the current gap,” he said.
Another area that requires special attention is the review of international standards for mooring systems. Are the mooring mechanisms used by various countries fully compliant, allowing them to connect not only with the International space station but also with each other? Cates said there appears to be some debate over this compatibility issue.
Related: Construction of the International Space Station (photos)
And now ?
One option is not to have a centralized government space rescue capability. Since crewed commercial launches from the United States are authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), that agency could perhaps invoke rules and regulations to mandate a space rescue requirement.
Perhaps an international consortium approach should be considered, having all space nations pool their collective resources to develop and maintain rescue capabilities.
What about the extension of the rights of the United States Space force include space rescue responsibilities? Suggestions were also made that the United States could create a Coast Guard-like “Space Guard” to implement space rescue.
The report points to the fact that the United States, as the dominant space nation, has the means to establish space rescue capabilities “and to do so with a sense of urgency.”
These skills will undoubtedly be developed in the future. “The only question is whether they will be developed before or after the next crisis that requires this capacity,” the report concludes.
Leonard David is the author of the book “Moon Rush: The New Space Race”, published by National Geographic in May 2019. A longtime writer for Space.com, David has reported on the space industry for more than five decades. Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom or Facebook.
[ad_2]
Source link