NASA Planning to Ditch Boeing and Airbus - http://clapway.com/2016/01/07/nasa-planning-to-ditch-boeing-and-airbus-123/

Many transportation modes have been introduced to the world of hybrid or turboelectric. NASA is now looking to put commercial planes in the mix. If they manage to achieve this, they could ditch partners like Boeing and Airbus and make their own aircraft.

Glenn Research Center to Develop Low Carbon Propulsion Technology for Airplanes

Since their inceptions, airplanes have run on some kind of carbon-based fuel. Most commonly, it relies on gasoline or kerosene. NASA is looking to bring in electricity to propel jumbo jets. This would make planes greener than they’ve ever been. It would cut down worldwide emissions, noise pollution and energy consumption as a whole. NASA hopes to start by redesigning generators and motors. This would help them figure out which electrical system configurations would be good enough to handle the kind of voltage that keeps a plane in the air.

Is A Hybrid or Electric Airplane Even Possible?

The innards of a plane use electric motors and generators to spread power through the bus in order to reduce the drag for a certain amount of fuel consumed. NASA’s plan is making lightweight parts and new electrical systems that can keep the level of fuel burned low. Eventually, they want to make it so that they don’t consume coal fuel at all.

A Serious Upgrade to the Wright Brothers’ Invention

Engineers from the NASA Glenn Research center want to upgrade the mechanisms used for insulation and conducting. They are also looking into upgrading the magnetic materials and semiconductors that will make their new motors as efficient as possible.

Planes are hard machines to tackle, being so complex. Making them able to run on fuel alternatives will take quite a long time. If achieved, it can actually revolutionize the way transportation works. It could also greatly impact the environment in a positive way.

Will NASA Have Their Own Airline?

NASA has partners like Boeing and Airbus to help develop commercial travel. It’s possible that they also use this partnership to explore how to develop hybrid or all-electric aircraft. We may even reach a point where NASA has no need for Boeing or Airbus and monopolizes Western commercial flight. They might not only handle a flight to space but also between Earthly lands.

https://twitter.com/NASAglenn/status/684509699228700672/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

NASA Planning to Ditch Boeing and Airbus

NASA, SpaceX and Boeing Are Laughing at Russia Soyuz Rocket - http://clapway.com/2015/12/18/nasa-spacex-boeing-laughing-at-russia-soyuz-rocket-123/

There is a chance that NASA will be able to send astronauts from US soil by 2017, contrary to popular belief. The Obama administration has granted the agency with $1.24 billion for their Commercial Crew Program to build private rockets.

NASA Has An Extra $1.3 on Its Hands

Compared to the previous fiscal year, NASA has some pocket money to pursue their private rocket-building initiative, which is looking to replace space shuttles. Their new budget will finally allow for them to be able to send astronauts to ISS within the next two years.

This isn’t exactly NASA’s ideal plan. They actually want to get out of ISS as soon as possible in order to explore new ground, but that won’t happen anytime soon. Meanwhile, NASA is joining hands with SpaceX and Boeing to make space taxis and privatize space travel.

Right Now, Any Trip to the ISS From the US Costs Russian Taxpayers $70 Million

You read that right. Before you complain about your taxes, think about the Russians. They have to pay $70 million every single time the US needs to take a Soyuz rocket to the orbiting lab. Russia will actually benefit from this budget increase as it can focus on doing other things like breaking new ground in the new space race.

There’s currently a lot of tension between Moscow and Congress, and if Boeing, SpaceX, and NASA do privatize space travel, it’ll be a relief.

In Any Case, NASA Got What it Asked For

With the new budget, NASA will be able to please all American political interests. They will be able to develop a deep space rocket to explore Mars in the next twenty years, and they can get more people at ISS within two.

Before the compromise spending deal reached Wednesday, the GOP-controlled Congress seemed willing to go only as high as $1 billion. Republican lawmakers were concerned — despite NASA’s denials — that money to replace the space shuttle was coming at the expense of their top priority: a deep-space rocket and capsule to take astronauts to Mars within two decades.

The New Budget Also Includes Other Fun Ventures

With the new dollar amount, NASA gets $2 billion for the Space Launch System, a deep space rocket project for future crewed NASA missions. It also gives NASA $1.27 billion for the Orion spacecraft, which will carry the SLS. $5.6 billion are also available for science missions to explore and study space and the Earth.

The bill that specifies the expenses has one odd clause. NASA is banned from cooperating with China on space technology or missions. Why exactly this is the case isn’t very clear, but it’s a fascinating topic to explore. A collaboration with China could change everything relating to space exploration. Why exactly can’t they collaborate?

China and NASA Are Banned From Working Together

There’s probably a lot of red tape around this. China has solid footing when it comes to space exploration, but they don’t have as much reach. They have a much more concrete dominion over terrestrial technology. All of the best stems from there, and if it doesn’t, they probably have the best interpretation of a patent. That’s why everyone in China who needs a smartphone has one. They make things affordable, easy to mass produce and convenient.

Putting those hands together with NASA’s ambition could get us to Mars in the next 10 years, not 20. The Martian is fictional proof of it; a collaboration with China could make a wealth of things possible, and soon. In fact, if NASA collaborated with all space agencies in the globe, we could get to Mars in 5 years. Will this happen? Most likely no.

Read: The Soyuz Rocket lost Kanopus ST in Space

Read: NASA Pays SpaceX to Compete with Russian Soyuz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2_NeFbFcSw

NASA, SpaceX and Boeing Are Laughing at Russia Soyuz Rocket

While #NASA and its partners have suffered continuing launch failures as of late, we can now hope to enter an era of #renewedoptimism in #spaceflight. - http://clapway.com/2015/09/05/nasa-starliner-spaceship-plant-110/

While NASA and its partners have suffered continuing launch failures as of late, we can now hope to enter an era of renewed optimism in spaceflight. The transition of traditional facilities to commercial use connotes literal and new horizons. NASA unveiled the new name of Boeing’s commercial crew transportation spacecraft, dubbed the CST-100 Starliner, in addition to current plans to refit Kennedy Space Center for more continuous transport astronauts to and from the International Space Station.

NEW PLANS FOR COMMERCIAL SPACEFLIGHT WITH BOEING’S STARLINER

Starliner, Boeing’s commercial crew transportation spacecraft, was designed with a focus on automated flight, reliable operation and frequent flights carrying NASA astronauts to the space station, according to NASA. Paying customers may also have the opportunity to experience the incredible heights of low-Earth orbit and the exclusive sensation of sustained weightlessness. NASA said they plan to launch the Starliner from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station’s Space Launch Complex-41 on a United Launch Alliance (ULA) Atlas V rocket. The test version of the spacecraft will go through numerous tests until the first official pad abort test in 2017.

“One hundred years ago we were on the dawn of the commercial aviation era and today, with the help of NASA, we’re on the dawn of a new commercial space era,” said Boeing’s John Elbon, vice president and general manager of Space Exploration.

PAST FAILED LAUNCHES

If the thought of commercial spaceflight makes you worrisome, your fears are probably justified in the numerous failed launches NASA and its partners have experienced in the past. SpaceX’s recent June explosion of cargo headed for the ISS was likely caused by a faulty strut, which most believe should have been tested more carefully and efficiently. Thankfully, SpaceX said it will not be using these particular struts in any future flight applications, and will use additional hardware quality tests.

In 1998, the Mars Climate Orbiter disintegrated in Mars’ upper atmosphere before it had the chance to study the Martian climate, atmosphere and surface changes, as originally planned. The cause was due to ground-based computer software. The cause of the failure, facepalm-ingly elementary, was a momentary lapse of reason, during which calculations for atmospheric entry were input in metric, but output in non-SI units of pound-seconds instead of the metric newton-seconds, as specified in the contract between NASA and Lockheed. While these failed launches have cost NASA and its partners billions of dollars, they are steadfast in their resolve to ensure all hopes for future spaceflight plans are backed by absolutely meticulous rigor.

TRANSFORMING OLD FACILITIES INTO NEW OPPORTUNITIES

NASA has stated that the main mission for Boeing’s Starliner and the SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft is to enhance American launch capabilities such that astronauts may reach the ISS with relative ease. Boeing’s Commercial Crew Program will call Kennedy Space Center home. Robert Cabana, Kennedy’s center director, said of this empasse, “I am proud of our success in transforming Kennedy Space Center into a 21st century, multi-user spaceport that is now capable of supporting the launch of all sizes and classes of vehicles, including horizontal launches from the Shuttle Landing Facility, and spacecraft processing and landing.” As we face our mistakes with scientific cogency, we will be better prepared for the future.

---

 

OUR CHILDREN MAY EXPLORE THE FINAL FRONTIER

https://youtu.be/UdcU4nKKV2E

 

NASA Unveils Starliner Taxi at Spaceship Plant

The world"s largest aerospace company must dislike people flying #drones where they shouldn’t because #Boeing has built a #laser cannon to deal with them. - http://clapway.com/2015/08/29/boeing-laser-cannon-kill-drones-110/

Boeing must be annoyed by people flying drones where they shouldn’t be because the world’s largest aerospace company has built a laser cannon to deal with them.

DRONE RESPONSIBLY

At this point it’s clear: the world is going the way of the drone, and as much as people might kick and scream, there is nothing that’s going to stop it from happening. So, that leaves us to the next issue at hand. We need to come together and not only create laws specific to flying drones, but we also need to learn some basic drone etiquette. You know, things such as not flying your drone in flight paths, above wildfires, or on the lawn of the White House.

READ MORE ABOUT BOEING HERE!

The issue isn’t in debating whether doing things like this are a nuisance; it’s also an issue of public safety. Now, both government and military officials are saying that it’s only a matter of time before people start using drones equipped with explosives or chemical weapons into public places. Yes, that’s fear mongering at its finest, but it’s also a realistic concern.

INTRODUCING BOEING’S PORTABLE LASER CANNON

Boeing says it has a solution to these problems and more, and it comes in the form of a portable laser cannon. Now, before you get too excited at the thought of seeing a real life laser cannon in action, this isn’t the same laser cannon you’ve seen in movies. Instead, this is a portable solution that will simply burn holes into the drones they’re targeting, leaving little behind other than burning debris.

IS IT EFFECTIVE?

In short? Yes. Wired had the opportunity to see the device up close, and they described it as “insanely precise.” In the demo shown to Wired, Boeing used the laser cannon to burn holes in a UAV. After two seconds, the UAV was already on fire. Wired said that they didn’t see anything other than the UAV bursting into flames. There was no explosion, no crazy noise, and no visible beam.

There’s no indication to how far the laser can shoot, but Boeing representatives said they’re able to hit anything they can spot with binoculars. They also commented on how cheap and easy the device was to operate once everything is set up; noting that it only costs the electricity and manpower (one person) required to operate the laser.

---

 

WANT TO ABSORB ENERGY FASTER THAN CARBS? TRY PAVLOK WITH SUSAN!

https://youtu.be/Uh73AjBjCN0

Boeing Developed a Laser Cannon to Kill Drones

Why Must NASA Rely On Russian Soyuz Rockets? - http://clapway.com/2015/08/07/nasa-russian-soyuz-rockets-101/

In a sad turn of events, NASA has continued renting seats off Russian Soyuz rockets, and recent Congress budget cuts have forced NASA to extend its contract with Russia. Let’s rephrase that: the space program of the United States — the first guys on the moon — is now piggybacking rides on Russian Soyuz rockets.

NATIONAL PRIDE FALLS TO THE WAYSIDE AS NASA CONTINUES TO RELY ON RUSSIAN SOYUZ ROCKETS

It’s no secret that Congress has cut NASA’s budget for years. Back in 2010, NASA had a budget of $19.1 billion, and in 2011 the budget was cut to $17.86 billion, a drop of $1.26 billion in just one year.

The recent funding authorization bill that Congress put together slashes NASA’s budget another $300 million. In 2015, that number sits at $18 billion, but it’s projected to drop back down to $17.6 billion next year.

What does this mean for NASA? It means that the company will need to continue renting seats aboard Russian Soyuz rockets until US commercial aerospace companies and NASA can find a way to work around NASA’s limited budget. Unfortunately, for NASA, Boeing, and SpaceX, these cuts further delay a commercial alternative.

CONGRESS’ UNDER-FUNDING NASA TO BLAME

NASA Chief Charlie Bolden wrote a letter to Congress concerning the most recent cuts:

“Unfortunately, for five years now, the Congress … has not adequately funded the commercial crew program to return human spaceflight launches to American soil this year as planned,” Bolden wrote in the letter.

The contract agreement the United States made with Russia had to be extended into 2017, which will cost American taxpayers more than $80 million per seat — totaling $490 million when all is said and done. That’s money that could be reinvested into the American economy.

“This has resulted in continued sole reliance on the Russian Soyuz spacecraft as our crew transport vehicle for American and international partner crews,” wrote Bolden.

In 2011, NASA retired its own space shuttles and partnered with two commercial companies, SpaceX and Boeing, to develop new spacecraft that could transport astronauts from Earth to the International Space Station (ISS). Five years later, the three companies are still struggling to develop a solution due to continuous resistance from Congress.

WHAT’S AHEAD

Upon hearing this stonewalling news, many scientists and politicians suspect that only an international incident involving American crew aboard Russian spacecraft will shift Congress’ mind and begin to support American industry rather than relying on Russia and Russian Soyuz rockets.

Lawmakers are looking to grant NASA between 70 and 80 percent of the funds NASA needs in order to fulfill its end of the agreement between SpaceX and Boeing (around $1.2 billion). But until more money can be attributed for American space flight the project, NASA will continue to be grounded.

---

Interested in learning about NASA, space and Russian Soyuz rockets? Pick up where NASA left off:

Why Must NASA Rely On Russian Soyuz Rockets?

The search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 has a new theory. - http://clapway.com/2015/06/10/mathematicians-malaysia-flight-370-fully-is-intact-somewhere-at-the-bottom-of-the-ocean-234/

Malaysia Flight 370 still holds public fascination over a year after its tragic and mysterious demise on their way to Beijing, China from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia last March. Air traffic control lost the flight without a trace under an hour after take-off. There were 239 heads on-board.

Maybe Malaysia Flight 370 Did Not Smash Apart

A mathematician and his international team of researchers (from Texas A&M University, Penn State, Virginia Tech, MIT and the Qatar Environment and Energy Research Institute) pose a new theory in hopes of solving the mystery of how we lost Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370. Employing a supercomputer, they were able to determine that the Boeing 777 probably took a nosedive into the Indian Ocean. The dive was likely to have been at a steep angle, nearly vertical. At that sharp an angle, the plane would not have smashed apart because it would have collided into the ocean with the least resistance that way. If this theory is actually the way it happened, then Malaysia Flight 370 must have sunken deep into the ocean fully in tact.

Supercomputer Allows For Simulation of Scenarios

Using their mathematician’s dream supercomputer, they were able to simulate five scenarios (like that scene in Titanic). They even simulated a gliding water entry similar to Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger, the heroic pilot who landed an emergency landing in New York City’s Hudson River, saving the heads 155 on-board US Airways 1549. Of course, that scenario would be quite an amazing miracle for Malaysia Flight 370; unfortunately, the most plausible theory is that the Malaysian Airlines plane entered the water at a very vertical angle.

In a press release, Goong Chen, of Texas A&M University at Qatar opines that the “final moments of MH370 are likely to remain a mystery until someday when its black box is finally recovered and decoded. But forensics strongly supports that MH370 plunged into the ocean in a nosedive.”

A Very Frustrating Search

The search for Malaysia flight 370, led my Australia, was the most expensive search in aviation history (even beating out Amelia Earhart’s), covering 120,000 sq. km. However, little has been found at all. Searchers had wondered why there was almost no debris whatsoever, nor oil floating around the ocean’s surface in the highly searched Southeast Asian areas. Normally, what happens is that when a plane crashes into the ocean: wings may break off, and loads of debris appear or sink to the ocean’s bottom. In the case of Malaysia flight 370, the buoyant objects like foam seat cushions, seatback tables and plastic drinking bottles did were nowhere to be found.

The researchers explain in their report, “if an aircraft stalls in a climb, or if any control surfaces—ailerons, rudder, or stabilizers— malfunction, or if it runs out of fuel and the autopilot stops working, it can fall into a steep nose-dive or even vertical drop.” The mathematicians involved in this study published their findings in the April’s Notices of the American Mathematical Society.

On a rough and vast search like this one,you’ll definitely want to protect your smartphone with Urban Armor Gear:

Mathematicians: Malaysia Flight 370 Fully is Intact Somewhere at the Bottom of the Ocean

ISS Reconfiguration Prepares Way for Future - http://clapway.com/2015/05/27/iss-reconfiguration-prepares-way-for-future-123/

The International Space Station Program is set for ISS reconfiguration of the International Space Station (ISS) so that it can be ready for future space missions and space travel crews and cargo vessels to arrive there. NASA is doing ISS reconfiguration so that the docking ports at the ISS can be remodeled to accommodate US space vessels that will be carrying such things as supplies, cargo, research tools and even astronauts.

ISS Reconfiguration Involves Permanent Multipurpose Module (PMM)

NASA is in a partnership with Boeing and SpaceX companies to provide space travel services starting in 2017. Part of that ISS reconfiguration involves the Permanent Multipurpose Module (PMM), which has been serving as a supply depot for the ISS orbital laboratory. The PMM is quite large at 22 feet long, 14 feet in diameter, with an inside volume of over 2,400 cubic feet and a weight of about 11 tons.

Rearranging the Furniture

The PMM will be taken from its current port facing the Earth and relocated with a robot to put it into the Tranquility’s forward port. Doing this will allow the port on Unity to undergo ISS reconfiguration into a spare berthing area for things like cargo vessels to be placed.

The ISS reconfiguration of the docking ports will be continued later on this year during which two International Docking Adapters (IDAs) will get there via a SpaceX cargo and resupply mission. Once the IDAs are hooked onto the ISS, which is done via Pressurized Mating Adapters 2 and 3, the space vessels that travel craft to the ISS will be able to dock and then equalize the pressure so they can be opened safely by the ISS crewmembers.

ISS Reconfiguration to Prepare for Commercial Vessel Docking

It is vital for the ISS docking ports to undergo this ISS reconfiguration so that it is ready for commercial space vessels that will travel there with supplies and materials. In the past, the ISS only needed to ready for visits from the US Space Shuttle, but after that program ended, there became a need for the ISS to have more than one docking port. The ISS reconfiguration will allow the docking of commercial craft, in which the future ISS crews will travel to and from the ISS for their space missions.

ISS Reconfiguration Prepares Way for Future