The Constellation program originated from Bush’s “Vision for Space Exploration” instigated in 2004. Send men to the Moon in 2020, build up some sort of permanent base up there and then head for Mars! That sounded cool alright.

Yesterday, the Obama administration announced a big and difficult decision within the budget proposal for fiscal year 2011. That is, the cancellation of the entire Constellation program. The sadest part is the billions of dollars that have been virtually flushed down the drain. In fact, 2.5 billion more dollars will have to be spent to close the program.

Norman R. Augustine, chairman of the Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee, stated that the Constellation program was “highly unlikely to get humans to the International Space Station before its planned de-orbit.” Canceling the Constellation program will make more funds available to maintain the International Space Station in orbit.

Then what’s the plan for actually sending American astronauts in space? The Space Shuttle is retiring by the end of 2010. Make way for the commercial space race! NASA’s COTS (Commercial Orbital Transportation Serivices) program will seek to help the private sector develop sustainable space technologies, and will probably be expanded to cover manned space transportation systems.

As Will Whitehorn – President of Virgin Galactic – said in a commercial for SpaceShipTwo, “access to space really does matter for the future of mankind, and currently we only have fifty year-old space systems to get there, which are very expensive, and very environmentally damaging.” The Constellation Program wasn’t, in terms of propulsion systems and energetic efficiency, very innovative.

According a factsheet published yesterday on the White House’s official website, “the [Constellation] program was over budget, behind schedule, and lacking in innovation due to a failure to invest in critical new technologies.”

Obama is not planning on sinking the American aspiration to return to the moon altogether. The problem with the Constellation program was that it was meant to repeat the achievements of the Apollo program half a century later, without significantly developing sustainable systems that would actually end up benefiting the nation in a near or distant future. Obama’s plan is to shift the funds to develop new technologies, and re-boost areas such as robotic space exploration, science and Earth observations, lately underfunded because of the Constellation program.

“Imagine trips to Mars that take weeks instead of nearly a year; people fanning out across the inner solar system, exploring the Moon, asteroids and Mars nearly simultaneously in a steady stream of firsts… That is what the President’s plan for NASA will enable, once we develop the new capabilities to make it a reality,” stated NASA Administrator and ex-astronaut Charlie Bolden during yesterday’s press conference.

Obama is not proposing to cancel the Constellation program because of a lack of funds: NASA’s overall budget will see a six billion dollar increase over the five next years. In fact, while many today are lamenting this dramatic turn of direction NASA will take (if the bill makes its way through Congress), others rejoice the dawn of a new era. Bolden stated “today we are launching a bold and ambitious new space initiative to enable us to explore new worlds, develop more innovative technologies, foster new industries, increase our understanding of the earth, expand our presence in the solar system, and inspire the next-generation of explorers…”

I never actually thought against the Constellation program. After reading the news for the first time, I was outraged. Soon enough, I realized that I had never actually given a second thought on the matter. Perhaps I was excited to see past achievements re-enacted during my lifetime. The Apollo era has always fascinated me, but all I have been able to do is watch Ron Howard’s Apollo 13 countless times.

Here is a statement by one of space exploration’s most important pioneers:

“Today I wish to endorse strongly the President’s new direction for NASA. As an Apollo astronaut, I know the importance of always pushing new frontiers as we explore space. The truth is, that we have already been to the Moon – some 40 years ago. A near-term focus on lowering the cost of access to space and on developing key, cutting-edge technologies to take us further, faster, is just what our Nation needs to maintain its position as the leader in space exploration for the rest of this century. We need to be in this for the long haul, and this program will allow us to again be pushing the boundaries to achieve new and challenging things beyond Earth. I hope NASA will embrace this new direction as much as I do, and help us all continue to use space exploration to drive prosperity and innovation right here on Earth.

“I also believe the steps we will be taking following the President’s direction will best position NASA and other space agencies to send humans to Mars and other exciting destinations as quickly as possible. To do that, we will need to support many types of game-changing technologies NASA and its partners will be developing. Mars is the next frontier for humankind, and NASA will be leading the way there if we aggressively support the President’s plans.

“Finally, I am excited to think that the development of commercial capabilities to send humans into low earth orbit will likely result in so many more earthlings being able to experience the transformative power of spaceflight. I can personally attest to the fact that the experience results in a different perspective on life on Earth, and on our future as a species. I applaud the President for working to make this dream a reality.

Buzz Aldrin

Feb. 1, 2010

You have to admit, that is pretty convincing. I think this new plan has been very well thought out. Or maybe Bush’s plan wasn’t thought out at all in the first place.

There are millions of comments around the web criticizing the administration’s decision. Some of which arguing we should return to the moon as planned because the Apollo program generated 14 times more wealth than it cost by having pioneered the development of kitchen electronics and teflon frying pans. If you’re one of those who don’t agree with Buzz, I strongly recommend you read all the different statements by the various professionals out there and NASA’s official budget overview. I wasn’t convinced a few hours ago, since I am one of those crazy dudes who believe space exploration is essential to our survival on the long run. The new plans might not seem as inspiring as Bush’s “vision”, but they surely are more sustainable.

I guess I will have a long beard when man will at last set foot on the moon again. Unless he speaks Chinese.

Contact the author via email

___

Photo by Clara Molden

It’s not the first time a MER* is trapped. Opportunity had been trapped in April 2005, but JPL specialists managed to free it completely after 40 days of hard work, thanks to a lighter mock rover that was put in the same conditions in a sandbox down on earth. The model was lighter to simulate the lower gravity on Mars. They have been working the same way for Spirit during several months, but in vain. NASA announced on January 26h that Spirit had become a “stationary research platform”.

But Spirit hasn’t quite become fully stationary yet. The JPL are now concentrating all efforts on trying to give the rover a more favorable final position so that the solar panels can collect more sunlight. Manoeuvres are very difficult because only four of Spirit’s six wheels are functional. In fact, Spirit has been driving around backwards since its first wheel jammed in 2006.

So how fruitful will the Stationary Platform be? The funny thing is, Spirit has already done a great discovery while trapped in Troy. It actually made a great discovery thanks to Troy. As it was trying to break free back in December, its wheels stirred and turned some of soil beneath it upside down, thus revealing precious samples of sulfates. Why is this big? Ray Arvidson of the Washington University in St. Louis explains: “Sulfates are minerals just beneath the surface that shout to us that they were formed in steam vents, since steam has sulfur in it. Steam is associated with hydrothermal activity – evidence of water-charged explosive volcanism. Such areas could have once supported life.”

Now, NASA scientists hope to study the red planet’s core. Spirit has already begun studying tiny variations the planets rotation. While stationary, Spirit will track the motion of an exact point on the surface (its current position) over months to calculate its long-term motion with great accuracy. NASA scientists hope this will help determine the planet’s inner composition.

Spirit will also study how martian winds affects martian soil, and its composition at the particular place it is stationed.

I’m really sad for Spirit. But we can’t blame her: she landed January 4th, 2004, and the mission was planned to last only three months. Spirit, along with her sister Opportunity, have been the most successful robots ever to land on alien soil, and one of Mankind’s most incredible engineering feats.

“Spirit is not dead,” says Doug McCuistion, director of the Mars Exploration Program at NASA Headquarters in Washington. “It has just entered another phase of its long life.”

Contact the author via email

___

^*MER stands for Mars Exploration Rover. Two MERs were sent in 2004: MER-A, referred to as Spirit, and MER-B, referred to as Opportunity.

___

Source: Science@NASA

Comic courtesy of xkcd

But what has this to do with the movie review? Well, one of my favorite movies of all times, as I explained in my “Moon” review last month, is “Apollo 13″. I love the realism, the cast, the tension, the impression of distance and weightlessness that emanes from it. I love science fiction, but what I love even more are movies about high tech stuff (space, airplanes, submarines) that is actually real (or that could be real).
On my quest for similar movies I found “The Right Stuff”, which I love, and… that’s it. “Space Cowboys” is fun but absolutely unrealistic, “2001″ is gorgeous but crazy, Armageddon is crap, “Mission to Mars” started off great but a lousy ending ruined it, and I could ramble on and quote a dozen of movies that just don’t come close to what I was looking for. By the way, if you’re reading this and know about a movie that I would like, please send me an email.

I did, however, find a movie surprisingly similar to “Apollo 13″: The story of three Saturn V astronauts fighting to stay alive, three men that should have traveled to another celestial body but didn’t because of unforeseen events. Also, the global 70′s aesthetics also reminds of the Apollo era. And surprise, the movie is (indirectly) about the moon hoax. Good enough for me to give it a shot.

Capricorn One is the story of what should have become the first manned mission to Mars. When the head of NASA discovers that the capsule meant to carry the astronauts will suffer a catastrophic failure, he forces the three astronauts, minutes before launch, to participate in a hoax by broadcasting their ‘Mission’ from a studio built at a now abandoned air force base. Over the many months of the mission, the astronauts send broadcasts to Earth on their progress towards Mars, their first Mars walks, and their journey back. The hoax is sophisticated: camera tricks slow their movements down to simulate Mars’ lower gravity, whole sets are constructed and the capsule is set to deviate from its course at reentry and land 200 miles off target to allow enough time for the astronauts to reenter the space craft until the recuperation team arrives. A well oiled plan, but disaster stikes at the end of the “mission”: the capsule burns off in the atmosphere, leaving the astronauts who should be dead in a very unpleasant situation. They soon discover that the only way for the space agency to secure the secrecy of their hoax is to kill them and that the only way for them to survive is to let the world know what really happened: they run for their lives. Meanwhile, a journalist (played by Gould) is getting suspicious and every clue he uncovers seems to result in an attempt on his life.

For the sake of not spoiling, I’ll leave it there.
Now that you know about my love for moon hoax theories, you must imagine how skeptic I was when I first watched Capricorn One. I thought it would just be one of many conspiracy nut-jobs, but it had a spaceship on the cover, which meant I had to watch it.
To my surprise, the film tackled the hoax concept in a very clever way, and not one time during the movie did I have the feeling that the director, Peter Hyams, actually believed in the moon hoax theory. He just found the idea interesting and decided to make a thriller out of it. The cast is excellent (a true 70′s who’s who with Gould, Brolin, and even O.J. Simpson),  but the real star of the film is Bill Butler, the Director of Photography. What he releases on your screen is an artful array of cinema: the pull back,and cross pan shots of the in-studio Mars terrain; the terrifying out-of-control car Gould is trying to avoid being pulverized in; the quiet terror of Hal Holbrook’s office as he takes his telephone calls; those  insect-like and their menacing choreography; the dark dread in the cave as Brolin, hiding from the pursuers, confronts a nasty viper; the stark, dry brittleness of the desert that Brolin, Waterston, and Simpson must challenge; the strain and exhaustion of Waterston as he scales the dry mountain side to escape his fate, but in vain. But most of all it is the exciting, jolting aerial ballet of the helicopter and bi-plane chase, that I loved. The icing on the cake of Butler’s images and Hyam’s well written script is the pounding, driving score by Jerry Goldsmith: It’s a beautiful mix of percussion, plucks of strings and short orchestral punches, it gives a sense of impending doom, fear, conspiracy, and paranoia.

But the film also gave me some “Hollywood hates physics” moments: the inexcusable mistake was the Mars lander, the identical copy of an Apollo Lunar Module. The LM was designed as a true spacecraft – no aerodynamic design was needed to land on the Moon since the Moon does not have an atmosphere. A lander designed for Mars, however, would have to cope with a substantial atmosphere and would therefore look considerably different from that portrayed in the film. Also, several times a date is shown on the screen when  the camera enters the mission control room. At the same time a voice stating the number of days and hours since mission launch can be heard. The dates on the screen don’t correspond to the number of days said to have passed between them.
At last but not least, during the whole flight, and especially during the scenes from the “Martian surface”, the astronauts are shown conversing with Mission Control in real time. While this was possible during the Apollo moon missions, with a round-trip light speed/radio wave travel time of 2.5 seconds, on a Mars mission any transmissions to Mars would take 12.5 minutes to get there, and another 12.5 minutes to return to earth. So anyone in Mission Control speaking to a crew member on Mars would not receive an answer for at least 25 minutes, making the kinds of conversations shown in the film impossible.

The verdict? You don’t need to agree with the film’s subject to enjoy it. A good movie that will get you thinking, with great dialogs and breathtaking action sequences. Despite its few flaws, it found a place on my hard drive. Oh, and watch out for the scene in the desert where the knife isn’t handed out to O.J. Simpson.

Contact the author via email