Category The International Space Station

The new second stage will be developed specifically for the Ares-I launch vehicle and will be powered by a single J-2X rocket motor burning liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen to produce 1,300 kN of thrust. The second stage will lift its payload to an altitude of 116km before shutting down and being jettisoned. The Orion spacecraft’s service module propulsion system will complete the climb into a circular orbit at an altitude of 340 km. Boeing has been awarded a $515 million contract to support the NASA-led development of the Ares-I second stage and then produce the stage once definition is complete. Under the contract, Boeing will produce a single Ground Test Article, three Flight Fest Articles, and six production stages.

The second stage will be manufactured in the standard pattern, with the pro­pellant tanks positioned one on top of the other and joined by an aluminium skirt. The main stir-welded aluminium stage structure and propellant tanks will be covered by insulating foam similar to that currently employed on the Shuttle’s External Tank. The Shuttle’s ever-present risk of damage from insulation foam falling off of the External Tank is negated by the fact that at launch the Orion spacecraft will sit at the top of the Ares-I launch vehicle. As a result any insulation foam shed from the exterior of the second stage during launch will already be beneath the spacecraft and should therefore be carried away by the launch vehicle’s slipstream and not impact on the Orion spacecraft.

The J-2X is derived from the original J-2 re-startable rocket motor used on the Saturn-V’s S-IVB third stage. The original motor could not be used because the aluminium alloy employed in its construction is no longer available, and some com­ponents used in the J-2 motor have since been banned for environmental reasons. The J-2X was originally part of a dual study with the J-2XD. The J-2X was to have served on the Ares-V launch vehicle and the J-2XD on the second stage of the Ares-I. The decision to use the J-2X on both vehicles was made in July 2007. On July 17, 2007, NASA awarded Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (P&WR) a $1.2 billion design and development contract to develop, produce, and test the first eight J-2X rocket motors. Only one will be a flight engine, with another serving as the motor for the Ares-I second-stage Propulsion Test Article, and six ground test articles. The contract runs through the end of December 2012.

In June 2007, NASA announced a contractor competition for the Ares-1 guidance avionics package, with bids to be submitted by July 30, and the contract expected to be awarded in November. The guidance package would prove inflight guidance to both Ares-I stages during the power flight phase. The package would be mounted on the second stage at Boeing’s Michoud facility, where that stage will be manufactured.

Progress M-58 was launched from Baikonur at 09:41, October 23, 2006 and climbed into orbit. The spacecraft performed a standard rendezvous before docking to Zvezda’s wake at 10: 29, October 26. As Progress M-58 approached Zvezda, telemetry failed to confirm that a KURS antenna on the front of the spacecraft had retracted as scheduled. If it had not retracted then it would interfere with the docking latches. Following soft-docking, Russian controllers in Korolev spent 3.5 hours trying to confirm the antenna had retracted. During this period the station’s attitude control systems were powered off and the station was allowed to drift so as not to disturb the Progress vehicle and misalign it. In this period the station’s drift led to a misalignment of the SAWs and a drop in electrical power. Following routine procedures, the crew powered off non-critical items to conserve power. Finally, the docking probe on the Progress was retracted and the docking latches engaged, securing a hard-dock at 14: 00. After hard-docking, the station’s attitude control systems were powered on and the station brought back to its correct attitude. The non-critical items were then powered on once more. Among its 2,393 kg of cargo, Progress M-58 carried replacement parts for the Elektron oxygen generator as well as 2.5 tonnes of food, water, propellant, oxygen, spare parts, supplies, and personal items for the crew.

The non-confirmation of the KURS antenna folding on the new Progress continued to worry Russian controllers in Korolev and they began planning a Stage EVA to confirm it was correctly stowed. Lopez-Alegrla and Tyurin would make the EVA on November 22. Tyurin would also hit a golf ball away from the Pirs docking compartment in a commercial “experiment” designed to result in the longest golf strike in history. Meanwhile, Reiter began packing material planned to be returned to Earth on STS-116, the Shuttle flight that would bring his 6-month stay on ISS to an end. As the preparations for the next Shuttle launch continued, the Expedition-14 crew continued with their experiments. In preparing for their EVA, Lopez-Alegrla and Tyurin attached American EVA lights to the helmets of their Orlan pressure suits. Meanwhile, controllers in Houston continued to test CMG-3, which had shown unplanned vibrations prior to being shut down on October 9. Tyurin repaired the Elektron unit in Zvezda on October 30, after which it was powered on and began supplying oxygen to the station’s atmosphere once more.

Lopez-Alegrla walked the SSRMS end over end from its position on the exterior of Destiny to the MT, which had been positioned at Workstation 4 on the ITS, on November 1. After manoeuvring the SSRMS so that both end-effectors could be photographed, the MT was moved to the far end of the P-4, where the SSRMS would be used to install the P-5 ITS during the flight of STS-116. Meanwhile, Reiter began preparing for his return to Earth. He would be relieved by American Sunita Williams. Even so, the European experiment programme on ISS continued unabated. The Elektron unit malfunctioned again, developing an internal water leak on November 7. Five days later, the crew began shifting their sleep pattern to match that of the STS-116 crew, then due for launch on November 22. They also closed the hatches between Pirs and Progress M-57.

At 19:17, November 22, Lopez-Alegria and Tyurin exited Pirs wearing Orlan suits. Expedition-14’s first Stage EVA began 1 hour late, after Tyurin had to deal with a pinched cooling hose in his suit. He had had to climb out of his suit and reposition the hose in order to release the pinch. Having re-entered the suit, closed the hinged Portable Life Support System behind him, and repressurised the suit he was finally ready to proceed. Once outside, Tyurin mounted a З-gramme golf ball on a spring mounted tee which he attached to the ladder on the exterior of Pirs. With his booted feet on the ladder he used a gold-plated six-iron to strike the ball away, towards Zvezda’s wake. Tyurin remarked, “There it goes, and it went pretty far, I can still see it as a little dot, moving away from us.’’

Controllers estimated that the ball would re-enter the atmosphere and burn up in three days. Tyurin said he was pleased with the shot and controllers chose not to have him make a second shot. The golf shot was paid for as a commercial venture by a Canadian golf company.

Moving to Zvezda’s wake, where Progress M-58 was docked, Tyurin attempted to release a latch on the KURS antenna that had failed to retract. Despite his best efforts using both his gloved hands and a crowbar, alongside commands radioed up from Korolev, the antenna continued to refuse to retract. The two men took a series of digital photographs, which would show that the antenna’s dish was stuck behind one of Zvezda’s EVA handrails. A tool to remove the antenna would be delivered on STS-116. Moving on, the two men relocated a communications antenna that would be used by the European ATV. By moving the antenna just 0.З m from its original location it no longer impeded the cover of one of Zvezda’s rocket motors. It was this antenna that had prevented an attitude control burn taking place on April 19, 2006, because the cover on the rocket motor could not be opened to its full extent. At Zvezda’s ram they installed the BTN-Neutron experiment, designed to record the flux of neutron particles found in low-Earth orbit following solar particle events. Their final task was to jettison a pair of thermal covers for the experiment. The EVA ended after 5 hours З8 minutes.

The last week of November was spent preparing for the arrival of STS-116, Discovery. The Expedition-14 crew prepared Quest for three planned EVAs and they prepared the equipment that would be returned to Earth. On November 29, Tyurin changed out batteries in both Zvezda and Zarya. On the same day, an attempt to re-boost the station using the thrusters on a Progress spacecraft was cut short due to a software problem. Over-sensitive software shut down the thrusters after detecting motion caused by the planned manoeuvre. The planned 18-minute 22-second burn lasted just З minutes 16 seconds. The manoeuvre was completed on December 4, and placed ISS in the correct orbit for Discovery’s rendezvous.

Tyurin and Reiter disassembled the Matryoshka human torso experiment in Pirs, to remove the З60 internally mounted radiation sensors. They also removed the KURS avionics packages from Progress M-57 and Progress M-58 and stowed them for return to Earth.

As November ended, the US National Research Council released a report criticising NASA for failing to obviously redirect the ISS science programme to meet the needs of Project Constellation, and in particular human flights to Mars, saying, “The panel saw no evidence of an integrated resource utilization plan for the use of the ISS in support of the Exploration Missions.” It continued, “The ISS may prove the only facility with which to conduct critical operation demonstrations needed to reduce risk and certify advanced systems.”

In the wake of a December 7 launch attempt that had been cancelled, due to low cloud, the fact that the ET had been filled with fuel demanded that the next launch attempt could not take place for a further 48 hours. On the second attempt, STS-116 lifted off from Kennedy Space Centre at 20: 47, December 9, 2006. In the minutes before launch, Polansky told the launch team, “We look forward to lighting up the night sky.” It was the first Shuttle night launch in over four years. He also told the media, “There are always inherent risks when you take people off the planet and try to propel them a couple of hundred miles into space. We try to mitigate the risk as much as possible. If anyone says we can take all the risk out, they are just blowing smoke.”

Fuglesang was pragmatic, saying, “I hope this will increase interest in space for Sweden, and actually for science and technology in general. This flight is a small step in the assembly of the Space Station. The station is a small step toward the Moon and Mars.”

Meanwhile, Space Station Manager Mike Suffrendi told a press conference, “Many of us consider this the most challenging Space Station flight we’ve done since we began the assembly effort. When the Shuttle leaves, ISS will not look much different than when Discovery got there, but it will be a dramatically different vehicle inside.’’

Discovery’s seven-person crew would complete three EVAs, during which they would install the port-5 (P-5) ITS and then re-wire the station’s electrical system, bringing on-line the SAWs delivered by STS-115. Sunita Williams would join Expedition-14 crew members Lopez-Alegria and Tyurin, while Thomas Reiter would return to Earth in Discovery with the STS-116 crew. The Shuttle also carried a SpaceHab pressurised module full of equipment and supplies for the station. Asked about the mid-term hand-over Lopez-Alegria explained:

“Well, I think it all stems from the notion that the Russian Space Agency,

Roscosmos, would like to have the third seat in the Soyuz available for a paying

passenger… and so the third person can’t rotate there and he or she will rotate on Shuttle. So, that’s… the scheme that we have evolved to.’’

He continued:

“I think there are certain disadvantages, certainly. If you were to build a true Expedition crew, you’d like them to be sort of lockstep with each other all the time. I think this is a little bit different because we do have a fair amount of access to the ground, talking to people, e-mailing friends and family, using the internet protocol phone to be able to converse with people. That probably eases the difficulty in being isolated somewhat that is so specific to certain types of expedi­tions. I think that the result is that the need to bond really as a single unit is not as stringent as it might be if we were going to live that kind of an experience. However, it does bring up some interesting challenges. I think there’s also some advantages because six months with the same two faces all the time, if you don’t like one of those two faces it could get old. At least, in this fashion, we will have the opportunity to change those faces once in a while.’’

Commander of Expedition-15 Fyodor Yurchikhin would express a different point of view, which I quote on p. 277.

On reaching orbit, Discovery was configured for flight and her payload bay doors were opened to expose the vital radiators mounted on their interiors. During the first day in orbit the crew powered up the RMS, and lifted the OBSS from the payload bay door hingeline. They then used the OBSS cameras and lasers to inspect Discovery’s heatshield and the leading edges of the wings. Houston confirmed, “There is nothing anyone is excited about so far.’’ The crew also installed the usual selection of rendezvous equipment and cameras and checked the EMUs they would wear during their three EVAs.

Following a standard rendezvous. Williams got her first view of the station and reported excitedly, “Tally-ho on my new home. It’s beautiful. The solar arrays are glowing.’’ After the now routine r-bar pitch manoeuvre, Discovery docked to ISS at 17: 12, December 11. As usual, the station’s bell was rung to welcome the visitors. Following pressure checks, the hatches between the two spacecraft were opened and the Shuttle’s crew were welcomed aboard the station at 18: 54. As the hatches were swung open Lopez-Alegria joked, “We’re having a ball already.’’

The first order of business was to inspect the tip of Discovery’s port wing with the cameras on the RMS, after a vibration was picked up by the wingtip sensor 18 minutes after docking. The additional inspection delayed the crew using the RMS to un-berth the P-5 ITS from its position in Discovery’s payload bay. The P-5 ITS was subsequently handed over from the Shuttle’s RMS to the SSRMS and was then positioned over Discovery’s port wing, where it was left overnight. Williams described the P-5 ITS in the following terms:

“P-5 (and S-5) is a part, that goes between the two major solar array wings. Without them, the two wings would be too close together to actually operate.

They’re a pass-through for all of the thermal, electrical lines going out to the end of the truss and absolutely critical… to make sure that the two big solar array wings will be able to operate.’’

At 01:00, Williams installed her couch liner in Soyuz TMA-9 and transferred her Sokol pressure suit from Discovery, thus transferring herself to the Expedition-14 crew. At the same time Reiter transferred his equipment to Discovery and became part of the STS-115 crew. For her first two weeks on the station Williams would spend 1 hour each day, in order to familiarise with the station and the Expedition-14 crew’s routines. These hours were unstructured, allowing Williams to concentrate on whatever she felt was necessary to bring her up to speed. Williams has described the advantages of a mid-term crew exchange:

“I think I’m really lucky… they’re going to be there to help me with any… turnover things that I don’t understand. I’m a rookie; never flown before. These two are both experienced space fliers; and them, having lived there for about three months before I get there, I think if I have any questions, they’ll be the perfect people to show me the way.’’

Prior to retiring for the night, the STS-116 crew reviewed the procedures for their first EVA, planned for the following day. Curbeam and Fuglesang sealed themselves in Quest and reduced the pressure in order to “camp out’’ in the airlock overnight, as part of their EVA pre-breathing regime.

Williams, who would operate the RMS during the P-5 installation, explained:

“The first EVA, which is the P-5 install. Me and Joanie Higginbotham will be operating the robotic workstations. We’ll be taking the P-5 Truss from a handoff position from the Shuttle robotic arm and we’ll be moving it to the end of P-3/P-4 for the installation. It’s a little bit of a tricky installation because the clearances to get the P-5 into its position are pretty tight, about three inches or so. Some of the issues with that is the P-3/P-4 solar array wing is live at the time, so there’s going to be some black boxes on the end of P-3/P-4 that are live powered. And so with that clearance, the biggest worry is that you don’t hit the box that has the live power on it, ’cause that’s going to cause a lot of problems. So, we’ve practiced this very intensely with the spacewalkers Bob Curbeam and Christer Fuglesang. They’ll be out on opposite ends of the P-3/P-4 truss, guiding us in. So this is a very complicated, entire-crew-involved event to try to get this guy installed… Part of that EVA is also starting up the main bus power switching units, MBSU, and while we’re making sure that that’s all starting up correctly, the two space- walkers, Bob Curbeam and Christer Fuglesang, will be moving the CETA carts to the opposite side that they’re on, in preparation for the next solar array, which is the S-3/S-4 installation. So, we’ll be working with the spacewalkers again as we’ll be picking them up and driving them over to the truss, while they’ll be grabbing on to the CETA carts. We’ll be flying them over to the other side of the MBS.’’

The first EVA began at 15:31, December 12, when Curbeam and Fuglesang transferred their suits from external power to internal batteries. Exiting Quest, they prepared their tools and then made their way across to the P-5 ITS. The two astronauts guided Higginbotham as she lifted the P-5 ITS into its installation position at 17:45. With the new ITS section in place, the two EVA astronauts bolted it into position, completing the task at 18: 21. Moving on, the two astronauts replaced a failed camera, removed the launch restraints and an RMS grapple fixture from the P – 5 ITS as well as a cover that would allow the P-6 ITS to be bolted to it when it relocated from its present position on the Z-1 Truss’ zenith. With the two astronauts back inside the airlock the EVA ended at 22:07, after 6 hours 36 minutes. During the day mission managers confirmed that Discovery’s heatshield was in good condition for re-entry at the end of the flight.

After a night’s sleep, phase two of the flight’s objectives got underway. The crew spent 6 hours, beginning at 18: 17, December 13, sending a series of over 40 com­mands to retract the port SAW on the P-6 ITS, which had been in place on the station since it was deployed in 2000. The retraction did not go well and the arrays had to be partially retracted, re-deployed, and retracted again. Despite everything, they failed to retract as planned. The guidewires became snagged with only 17 of 31 panels retracted, but it was enough to allow the day’s work to continue. At 20: 00, the P-4 SAWs began rotating to their operational position. When the ITS was complete and all the SAWs were deployed, they would be able to rotate to track the Sun as ISS orbited Earth. On the evening of December 13, 2006, P-4 became the first SAW to rotate. The manoeuvre was completed without difficulty, and just before 23: 00 the valves were opened to allow ammonia to flow into the ITS and the huge radiators mounted there. This was the first stage towards providing permanent cooling for the avionics and electronics on ISS. Inside, the two crews spent the day transferring equipment from Discovery’s SpaceHab module and mid-deck to the station.

Meanwhile, in Houston, mission managers met to discuss the various options for completing the retraction of the P-6 SAW. One option was to assign additional EVA tasks, to be performed by the Expedition-14 crew after Discovery’s return to Earth, in order to carry out the task manually. The meeting concluded that the partially retracted P-6 port array was in a safe configuration to be left for the remainder of the STS-115 flight and, if necessary, the arrival of the next Progress, planned for launch in January 2007. Despite the difficulties with the P-6 SAW the management team agreed to proceed with the second EVA as planned. As a result, Curbeam and Fuglesang spent a second night camping out in Quest under reduced atmospheric pressure. The two crews began their sleep period leaving the P-4 array rotating as it tracked the Sun and the ammonia flowing through the new cooling system, while they slept. Attempts to transfer orientation of the station back to the CMGs failed, possibly due to increased atmospheric drag as a result of increased solar activity. Discovery remained in control of the combination for the time being.

December 14 began with a planned major power-down of many of the ISS’ electrical systems. The systems were powered down because the electrical system that supplied them with power was about to be switched from the P-6 ITS SAWs to the P-4 ITS SAWs. Orientation of the Shuttle/ISS combination was controlled by

Discovery, which maintained orientation by firing the orbiter’s thrusters as demanded by its own attitude control system. Curbeam and Fuglesang began their second EVA at 14:41, approximately 30 minutes ahead of schedule. During their 5-hour EVA they worked swapping cable connectors to establish the station’s permanent cooling and power systems. By 16: 30, one of the external cooling loops was shedding heat into space and the direct-current-to-direct-current converter units were regulating electrical power. By 16: 45, controllers were applying power to Channels 2 and 3 for the first time. Additional tasks included relocating one of the CETA handcarts that would run along the ITS. Having caught up a further 30 minutes by performing their tasks more quickly than planned, the two astronauts returned to Quest and ended their EVA at 19: 41. Williams and Higginbotham had operated the SSRMS throughout the EVA.

December 15 was a day of internal work. During the first half of the day the crews transferred equipment between the two spacecraft. Following that work they performed two press conferences before taking the remainder of the day off. At 21: 04, Williams commanded the stuck P-6 SAW to deploy slightly and then retract by the same amount. The attempt left the SAW in exactly the same position as it was when she started, with just 17 of its 31 panels folded. In Houston, mission managers were still discussing the possibility of a fourth, unplanned EVA to try to complete the folding up of the P-6 SAW. Curbeam and Williams camped out in Quest during the night with the pressure reduced, in preparation for their third EVA the following day.

The flight’s third EVA began at 14: 25, December 16, but not before controllers in Houston had shut down half of the station’s electrical systems: the opposite half to that shut down on December 14. Curbeam and Williams left Quest and prepared their tools. They spent their time swapping electrical connectors once more to bring the station’s electrical system to its final configuration. In future, when additional ITS elements were added no new reconfiguration of the electrical and cooling system would be required, except to connect the new ITS elements to the existing system. By 16: 18, controllers in Houston were applying power to Channels 1 and 4 for the first time, as they brought the station’s electrical and cooling systems back on-line. Their primary task complete, the two astronauts fitted a grapple fixture to the SSRMS and positioned three bundles of radiation shielding for the Russian sector on the exterior of the station. The shielding would be installed in its final locations on a later EVA. Their final task was to position themselves on either side of the partially retracted P-6 photovoltaic array and take turns to shake their respective sides of the SAW while their colleagues inside the station attempted to retract it. Looking at the guidewires on the SAW, Curbeam reported, “It’s definitely hanging up.’’ He shook the array and it cleared temporarily allowing it to be further retracted before it snagged again. It was a frustrating procedure that had to be repeated several times.

“This is definitely the right approach. I think we are starting to get there,’’ encouraged Lopez-Alegria from inside the station.

In the control room in Houston, Steve Robinson watched the live television pictures and remarked, “That is an impressive amount of motion and very effective.’’ Curbeam replied, “I’m here to serve.’’

Curbeam shook the array 19 times and Williams 13 times while the retract command was issued 8 times. At the end of their efforts only 11 panels on the array remained unfolded. The EVA ended at 21:56, after 7 hours 31 minutes.

Whilst the third EVA was underway, mission managers in Houston confirmed that Discovery’s flight would be extended by one day to allow Curbeam and Fuglesang to make an unscheduled fourth EVA, in an attempt to finish the retraction of the P-6 SAW.

Working inside the station on December 17, the crews were slightly ahead of schedule in their work to transfer equipment between the two spacecraft. As a result, they spent much of the day preparing for the fourth EVA. Work included positioning the SSRMS and Discovery’s RMS to support the EVA. Cameras on the latter would be used to video the astronauts’ actions. Discovery’s crew also transferred two EMUs to Quest for use during the EVA. Curbeam and Fuglesang spent the night camped out in Quest with the airlock’s pressure reduced.

Curbeam and Fuglesang left Quest at 14: 12, December 18. Having collected their tools Curbeam mounted the SSRMS and was lifted over to the balky array. Fuglesang made his way manually to the P-6 ITS. Curbeam would attempt to free the stuck guidewires and push on hinges to ensure that they folded the correct way while Fuglesang would stand behind the “blanket box’’, into which the array was being folded and push it in an attempt to encourage retraction. With the manual work on­site completed controllers in Houston sent commands to retract the SAW one panel at a time. The SAW was finally fully retracted at 18: 54, and the two blanket boxes were locked at 19: 34. The EVA ended at 20: 50, after 6 hours 38 minutes. In making this unscheduled EVA, Curbeam became the first Shuttle crewmember to make four EVAs during a single flight.

During the farewell ceremony held on the station as Discovery’s crew prepared to return to Earth, Polansky said, “It’s always a goal to leave a place in better shape than it was when you came. I think we have accomplished that.’’

Williams told Reiter, “I hope Discovery takes you home as smoothly and safely as it brought me here.’’

With Oefelein at the controls Discovery undocked from ISS at 17: 10, December 19, and completed a half-circuit fly-around before finally manoeuvring away. During the fly-around the crew photographed the station in its new configuration. On the following day, Polansky, Oefelein, and Patrick used the RMS-mounted OBSS to survey Discovery’s heat protection system. The remainder of the crew began stowing equipment for landing. On the ground, NASA’s Phillip Engelhauf remarked, “We are assuming the vehicle is in a ‘go’ condition for landing unless somebody illuminates an issue out of that data. The assumption is that everything is fine.’’

At 19: 19, December 20, a pair of coffee cup-size Micro-Electromechanical System Based PICOSAT Inspector (MEPSI) satellites were launched from Discovery’s payload bay as a single unit, which then separated into its component parts. The technology was designed to allow similar satellites to photograph/film the larger vehicle from which they are launched. A pair of Radar Fence Transponder (RAFT) satellites were launched from the payload bay at 20: 58, the same day. They were designed by a group of students at the US Naval Academy to test the American

Space Surveillance Radar Fence designed to identify hostile objects approaching the continental United States from space.

Preparations for returning to Earth began in earnest on December 21. Oefelein and Curbeam tested Discovery’s aerodynamic surfaces and manoeuvring thrusters. Polansky and Oefelein practised simulated landings on a laptop computer. At 12: 23, Fuglesang and Higginbotham launched the Atmospheric Neutral Density Experiment (ANDE) micro-satellite from Discovery’s cargo bay.

On December 22, the first opportunity to land at KSC was waved off due to the stormy weather conditions there. An opportunity to land at Edwards Air Force Base, California was also waved off due to gusty winds. As the day continued weather in Florida improved and Discovery was able to utilise the second landing opportunity at that site. Polansky glided his spacecraft to a perfect touchdown, just after sunrise, at 05: 32, having spent 12 days 20 hours 44 minutes in flight. Reiter had been in space for 171 days. NASA Administrator Michael Griffin was present to greet the crew. He told the assembled crowd,

“This was a big year… I’ve said if we could take the time to get things going properly, we could get back to an operational tempo and finish the station by the time it’s necessary to retire the Shuttle… We have a new understanding in this country that each and every time we do this, it’s a minor miracle.’’

On returning to JSC, Polansky told gathered workers and their families, “It’s awesome to see so many people. This is not about us, it’s not about this crew. This is about everybody that shares the same dream, the same drive and really believes in what we are doing with human space flight.’’

After a review process in which contractor alliances, led by Lockheed-Martin and Boeing, produced designs for the CEV, Lockheed-Martin was named prime contractor for the new spacecraft on August 31, 2006. The Lockheed spacecraft was promptly named “Orion”. Development of the new spacecraft was spread over three schedules.

• Schedule-1: September 2006-September 2013, a $3.9 billion contract to support

the design, development, test, and evaluation of the Orion spacecraft.

• Schedule-2: September 2009-September 2019, a $3.5 billion contract to support

post-development orders for the spacecraft.

• Schedule-3: September 2009-September 2019, a $750 million contract to support

additional spacecraft engineering services.

Orion will be the replacement for the Shuttle when that vehicle is retired in 2010. The new spacecraft is being designed to carry four astronauts to ISS, or to the Moon, and six to Mars. It will consist of a conical crew module and cylindrical service module, which function as one spacecraft until just before re-entry, when the unpro­tected service module will be jettisoned. Only the crew module is protected to allow it to survive re-entry. Orion will have an overall appearance that is superficially similar to the Apollo Command and Service Module. The crew module will be a cone with a 5-metre diameter, a mass of 25 tonnes and 3 times the volume of the Apollo Command Module. The access hatch and windows will all be on one side of the vehicle, with a docking system and a transfer tunnel, surrounded by recovery para­chutes, in the apex. Manoeuvring thrusters will be located around the base and in the apex of the module. The rounded base of the crew module will be covered by a circular heatshield, the backshell, for which Lockheed currently intends to use the Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Thermal Protection System developed by NASA Ames Research Centre. Meanwhile, JSC has also purchased Shuttle thermal protec­tion material (blankets) for use on the sides of the cone where the heating regime is less severe. This purchase will also ensure that a Thermal Protection System is available for Orion’s early flights to ISS, if problems delay the Thermal Protection System required for the more severe re-entry from a lunar or deep-space flight. The primary recovery zone will be on land, in the open spaces of North America. Final descent will be supported by parachutes, and landing impact loads will be negated by use of retrograde rockets, or inflatable airbags. The use of airbags with their heavy deployment and inflation systems would require the spacecraft’s backshell to be jettisoned prior to their deployment, while the lighter solid propellant retrograde rockets could be mounted on the parachute harness and the backshell retained in place. Work continues to decide which of these systems will be used. A launch abort, or failed ascent to orbit would require a water landing in the Atlantic Ocean. The water-landing option will also be available as a back-up in the event that land landing is not possible at the end of a completed flight. The crew module will be reusable for up to ten flights.

The crew module will be constructed from aluminium lithium employing stir­welding technology and will provide 10.2 m3 of habitable volume. Life support systems, providing a two-gas oxygen-nitrogen environment, will be manufactured by Hamilton Standard and the flight control avionics by Honeywell, both members of

Lockheed-Martin’s original CEV alliance. The flight avionics will be based on the automated systems employed on the Boeing-787 commercial jet liner. The space­craft’s main instrument panel will be a “glass cockpit’’, employing four large computer screens to display relevant information to the crew. The screens will be accessed via computer keypads and mechanical switches will be kept to a minimum. This is in keeping with modern military jet fighter technology, with which the present and future groups of pilot astronauts will be increasingly familiar. Rather than having repeated controls on both sides of the console, or having need for crew members to swap seats in order to perform particular functions, astronauts will merely call up the relevant data on the computer screen nearest to them. The computers will display easy-to-read visual representations of major systems, rather than the endless strings of numbers so common during the Apollo Moon flights. Almost the entire flight will be automated, with manual override available at critical points. Three primary computers would provide redundancy to the point that two could fail completely and the third could still return Orion to Earth from any point on a lunar flight. A fourth emergency computer will also be installed and will be completely independent of the three primary computers, to the point that it will employ different hardware and a different electrical supply. Rendezvous and docking will employ automated systems, probably based on NASA’s Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technology (DART) technology, which was tested, not altogether successfully, in 2005. The Orion spacecraft would carry NASA’s new Low Impact Docking System (LIDS).

The Orion service module will serve a similar role to its Apollo predecessor, namely the mounting for the spacecraft’s main propulsion system and reaction control system, and storage of propellants, water, and avionics. The module will be a cylinder 5 metres in diameter and will contain the service module propulsion system, the principal propulsion system in the spacecraft. This engine, which will burn liquid methane in liquid oxygen, has yet to be developed. Manoeuvring thrusters will be mounted in clusters at 90° around the exterior of the module. The spacecraft’s electrical power will come from two large circular photovoltaic arrays mounted at the rear of the service module. These will be folded at launch and deployed once the spacecraft is in orbit. The photovoltaic arrays will provide electricity to storage batteries in the spacecraft. A completely independent battery set will provide emergency power in the event of a major power system failure.

In December 2007, NASA selected Boeing to develop the guidance system for the Orion spacecraft. Jeffrey Hanley, Constellation programme manager for NASA, told a press conference:

“Finally, with the last team in place, we can move on with the development of this new system… This last contract was a key piece that will now allow us to go to the preliminary design phase with a full team in the new year and begin to build and test this new system.’’

The new spacecraft is intended to return humans to the Moon, and then progress to Mars, but in the first instance it will be used for crew rotation on ISS. The first crewed flight to ISS is planned for no later than 2015. In comparison with the Shuttle, this new combination is estimated to be 10 times safer due to the in-line design of the stack, with the crewed spacecraft placed above the launch vehicle, rather than along­side it. The positioning of the Orion spacecraft, on top of a vertical launch vehicle, means that NASA can return to the use of the rocket-propelled Launch Abort System (LAS) to pull the crew module clear of a catastrophic launch vehicle failure during or

just prior to launch. The Orion LAS design is similar to that used for Apollo, with the Crew Module sitting beneath a Boost Protection Cover. In the event of a launch vehicle emergency just prior to launch, or during the Ares-I first-stage boost phase, the solid propellant rocket motor in the LAS would be fired to lift just the Crew Module to an altitude from which it could make a safe parachute recovery. At that point the LAS would be jettisoned and the crew module would descend under its own parachutes. In the event that the LAS was not required it would be jettisoned at the same time that the Ares-I first stage was jettisoned. In both scenarios the LAS will fall into the Atlantic Ocean and will not be recovered. In August 2007, wind tunnel testing of various LAS configurations showed that a Sear-Haack design provided considerable aerodynamic advantages over earlier designs. The LAS will be devel­oped by Orbital Sciences, while the solid propellant rocket motor for the escape rocket itself will be developed by Alliant Techsystems. In November 2007, the first boilerplate Orion spacecraft were being manufactured, for use during flight-tests of the LAS, which will be subjected to a series of pad abort and launch abort tests at the White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, starting in November 2008.

Orion was originally to be developed in three configurations.

• Block-1A: for low-Earth orbital flights.

• Block-IB: an uncrewed cargo vehicle (subsequently cancelled).

• Block 2: for crewed lunar flights.

As the Shuttle programme works towards its final flight, NASA has begun planning the changes to the Launch Complex 39 facilities that it uses at Cape Canaveral.

The Ares-I/Orion spacecraft combination will be stacked on the mobile launch platform inside the Vertical Assembly Building (VAB), just like Apollo and the Shuttle before it; that procedure will take place in High Bay I. Ares-I/Orion is 150 feet taller than the present Shuttle and will be accessed by folding work platforms similar to those used to access the Saturn/Apollo vehicles.

Apollo’s 3 Mobile Launch Platforms (MLPs) were re-configured to carry the Shuttle and will be reconfigured once more for the Ares launch vehicles. NASA is considering building a fourth MLP, so that two Ares-I and two Ares-V launch vehicles can be prepared at the same time. The new MLP design will include a Launch Umbilical Tower. The contract to design the Ares-1 MLP has been awarded to Reynolds, Smith & Hills Incorporated, a local company based in Merritt Island, Florida.

The two Apollo era Crawler Transporters that currently carry the Shuttle to the launchpad will continue in that role for the Ares launch vehicles. Although no additional work is required before the Crawler Transporter can carry the Ares-I to the launchpad, additional strengthening will be required in order to carry the Ares-V.

Launch Pad 39B will be converted to launch the Ares-I/Orion combination. Launch Pad 39A will be converted to launch the Ares-V. Work to convert Launch Complex 39, Pad B to take the Ares-I is planned to start in the spring of 2008. It will include removing the fixed and rotating service structures. A new launch tower will be constructed on the mobile launch platform, in a similar manner to that used for the Saturn/Apollo launch vehicle. Elevators and swing arms will give access to all areas of the Ares-I launch vehicle and the Orion spacecraft. The current emergency escape system, baskets sliding down a wire, will be replaced with a system that resembles a roller coaster, consisting of a car riding down a rail.

In the LaunchControl Centre next to the VAB, Firing Room 1 will be re-fitted to handle Ares-1 launches from Pad 39B. The room is presently vacant, but will be fitted with the ground support equipment required to support the preparation and launch of the Ares-I/Orion combination. The new vehicle is much simpler than the Shuttle, and therefore NASA is looking to use a smaller launch control team than 200 people required to launch a Shuttle.

The original Orion/Ares-I launch schedule was announced as

• April 2009: un-crewed Ares-1 four-segment SRB (inert fifth segment), dummy second stage, and ballast replacing the Orion spacecraft.

• October 2009: option to repeat of first flight if original fails.

• July 2012: un-crewed Ares-1 with five-segment SRB and live second stage.

• Late 2012: un-crewed flight of Ares-1 and Orion spacecraft.

• Fall 2014: un-crewed flight of Ares-1 and Orion Spacecraft.

• September 2014: first crewed flight of Ares-1 and Orion spacecraft.

When Project Constellation was announced, President Bush promised NASA a small annual budget increase to support the programme. Congress has failed to support that budget increase almost every year since then, with the exception of FY2007, when the budget request was actually increased by Congress. In late 2007, NASA announced that the first crewed Orion/Ares-1 launch had slipped into 2015 and all subsequent launches had been delayed accordingly.

As 2008 began, NASA announced that the first two Orion spacecraft to fly to ISS would each deliver a docking adapter, one of which would be left on PMA-2 on Harmony’s ram and the other on PMA-3 at Node-3’s nadir. One end of the adapter would provide for docking with the Russian-designed Androgynous Peripheral Attach System (APAS) currently used to dock the Shuttle to ISS, while the other end would support the American-designed LIDS to be used by the Orion spacecraft. During docking with ISS the LIDS docking system would be used to mount the docking adapter at the apex of the conical Orion Crew Module. The exposed APAS docking system would then be used to dock to the relevant PMA. At undocking, the Orion spacecraft’s LIDS would be released, leaving the docking adapter mounted on the end of the PMA with its LIDS docking system exposed. Future Orion spacecraft would use their own LIDS docking systems to dock to the new adapters. The docking adapter has been named the APAS-To-LIDS Adapter System (ATLAS).

In May 2006, NASA officials and representatives of 13 other countries agreed 6 reasons that justified the Project Constellation effort to return human astronauts to the Moon. These are listed in the next section.

THE MOON’S PLACE IN A US-LED INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVE TO EXPLORE THE SOLAR SYSTEM

1. A training ground for human and robotic exploration of Mars and more distant destinations.

2. Scientific studies that answer fundamental questions about the early history of the solar system and provide sites for astronomical observatories.

3. A place to acquire the technical skills to sustain a human presence on another world.

4. A growth point for the global economy.

5. A means to forge new global partnerships and strengthen old ones.

6. A source of inspiration.

NASA’s Deputy Administrator Shana Dale told the media:

“These are huge endeavours we are embarking upon. We have seen the benefits of collaboration on the International Space Station. As we move forward, we want to make sure we are working very collaboratively with both the international and the commercial sector… In the long run it makes for a much more sustainable program. This is definitely not just the United States doing this on its own.’’

America will continue to use ISS to concentrate its research on the reactions experienced by the human body to the unique environment of long-duration space­flight. At the same time America will seek partners for Project Constellation. The new spacecraft will initially serve as the principal American crew delivery and recovery vehicle for ISS. In time it would carry humans back to the Moon. Although Orion would remain in lunar orbit while a number of Altair Lunar Surface Access Modules were used to develop a permanent base on the lunar surface, the ISS experience would not be forgotten. No doubt new hardware will be tested on ISS, but ISS will also give back to Constellation. When the Moon base is established the astronauts working on the surface would be rotated on 6-month increments, just as ISS crews are today. Their wellbeing will be supported by the medical data that today’s astronauts are collecting on ISS. Their missions will be controlled using techniques developed by NASA and the Russians over decades of human spaceflight.

With Discovery gone, the Elektron oxygen generator was powered on as ISS was reconfigured for routine operations. It had been powered off on December 10, because Discovery’s oxygen supply had been used to support the station during the joint flight. The Expedition crew had a light day on December 20. Monday, December 25, was Christmas Day and the Expedition-14 crew had the day off, before returning to work the following day. They unpacked the material delivered by Discovery, entering it in the computerised inventory, and stowing it around ISS. The crew also resumed their regular schedule of exercise, maintenance, and experiments.

Lopez-Alegria and Williams spent much of the first week of 2007 installing the Oxygen Generation System (OGS) activation kit in Unity. The American system, which would complement the Elektron oxygen generator in the Russian section of the station, was installed in preparation for the intended increase in Expedition crew to six astronauts, following the delivery of extra sleeping quarters in Node-3, by STS-132. The OGS would be activated later in the year. Meanwhile, Tyurin installed

new fans, vibration isolators, and acoustic shields in the Russian modules in order to upgrade the soundproofing there. During the week the crew installed and ran the first experiments on the Test of Reaction and Adaptation Capabilities (TRAC) experiment, in which they used a joystick to react to movements of a cursor on a computer screen. They also completed the last round of experiments with the European Modular Cultivation System taking the final round of photographs before storing the plants in the freezer for return to Earth.

The crew had a three-day rest period to mark the Russian Orthodox Christmas, before spending the week packing rubbish into Progress M-57, which would be undocked from Pirs at 18: 28, January 16, commanded to re-enter the atmosphere several hours later, where it would be heated to destruction. Progress M-59 would replace it at Pirs’ nadir. As the week progressed the crew removed the Robotics Onboard Trainer from Zvezda and relocated it to Destiny, Tyurin repaired and tested numerous pieces of equipment in the Russian modules, and Williams per­formed similar maintenance on American equipment. Automated and hands-on experiments also continued in both sectors of the station.

When David Harland wrote the Postscript for Creating the International Space Station in 2001, the Shuttle-supported ISS was the only American human spaceflight programme funded by Congress. As I complete this Postscript in 2007, that is no longer true.

Following the loss of STS-107 in February 2003, the American human space programme was given a new set of priorities by President George W. Bush. The Shuttle would be used to complete ISS and then be retired in 2010. NASA would develop two new spacecraft and two new launch vehicles in order to return astronauts to the surface of the Moon, establish a permanent base there, and ultimately send a crew to set foot on Mars. President Bush has invited other nations to join America in Project Constellation, but so far none has signed up. Russia has recently announced its national space budget for the period up to 2015. Although ISS features prom­inently in that budget, there is no mention of Project Constellation. The Russians have stated that after 2015 they may reconsider their position regarding their parti­cipation in Project Constellation, but have made no promises. ESA and JAXA are only just beginning their major participation in the ISS programme, following the delivery of their laboratory modules. The delays to the station’s construction (a two-year delay in launching Zvezda and a further three years following the loss of STS-107) have meant that those nations will not receive the length of use from their laboratories that they had originally planned. ESA and JAXA have so far not committed themselves to Project Constellation. China is the third nation to launch astronauts into orbit, and they have recently expressed an interest in becoming part of the ISS programme. In 2007, China sent a successful probe into lunar orbit, returning stunning photographs of Earth from that location. China has expressed an intention to place one of their astronauts on the lunar surface before the 13th American astronaut gets there.

NASA had originally planned to participate in the ISS programme until 2016, with the Shuttle operating throughout that period, and possibly until the mid-2020s.

The loss of STS-107 led NASA and the American government to admit the short­comings of the Shuttle system, which is basically 1970s’ technology, although some of the orbiters have undergone major upgrades. The President’s public announcement that the Shuttle would be retired in 2010 meant that it would not be available to support ISS until 2016. The new Crew Exploration Vehicle, Orion, would not be available to fly crews into Earth orbit until 2015, and only then if NASA received sufficient funding to meet its optimistic early schedules for the new programme. Those funds have not been made available and Orion’s schedule is already slipping. With no Orion spacecraft available, NASA will have no choice but to purchase seats on Russian Soyuz spacecraft in order to continue to have access to their hardware on ISS. This will be the second time that access to the station has only remained available to human crews because of Russian spacecraft and launch vehicles, and yet there are still many individual Americans who argue that the Russians should not have been invited to participate in the ISS programme and insist that Russian space hardware is antiquated, unreliable, and dangerous—for no other reason than because it is not American space hardware. They forget that Soyuz has been carrying cosmonauts into orbit since 1967 and that ISS is only permanently manned today because Zvezda is based on the Mir base block, which was itself based on the Russian experience in operating seven Salyut space stations in Earth orbit, starting in 1971. If it is not cancelled following the 2008 election, the Orion spacecraft and its Ares-I launch vehicle will be developed and its early crews will fly to ISS, where it may well replace Soyuz as the principal Crew Transfer Vehicle and CRV, holding four astronauts at a time, a task that would require two Soyuz spacecraft. American operators and any International Partners that do sign up to Project Constellation will gain confidence in the new spacecraft and its launch vehicle during those flights to ISS, while Constellation’s “Altair” Lunar Surface Access Module and its Ares-V launch vehicle is developed and flight-tested. That confidence in and flight experience with the Orion/Ares-1 combination will make it easier for programme managers to decide when Project Constellation is ready to return humans to the lunar surface.

In 2007, even as Harmony was being installed on Unity in advance of its relocation on to Destiny’s ram, the first boilerplate Orion spacecraft were under manufacture. They would be used to test the Launch Abort System and the Crew Module’s parachute systems, as well as the landing system. These tests would be uncrewed. The first Solid Rocket Booster, for use on the first Ares-1 flight-test was also under development. Two successful drop tests of the parachute that would be used to recover that first stage had already taken place, using mass simulators, over the American desert.

The ISS has proved that nations with large cultural differences can work together in space in the name of science. Many of the ISS partner nations are politically opposed to the American-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, but ISS is not a machine of war. It is a place of peaceful scientific research, and therefore individual nations continue to support it without contradicting their opposition to the two wars in question. The ISS is also a great showcase for national technological achievements. As I have stated, ISS is only crewed today because of Russia’s Zvezda module and has only remained crewed throughout the past 7 years thanks to the Russian Soyuz and

Progress spacecraft and many of the routines established flying to the Russian Salyut and Mir space stations. The Pirs docking module provides EVA capability using the Russian Orlan-M pressure suit. The Russians have much to be proud of in the ISS programme.

The cargo-carrying capability of the American Shuttle has been indispensable. It has delivered the American Destiny laboratory module, the Z-1 truss with its attitude control system, and the P-6 ITS which provided temporary electrical power and ammonia cooling systems while the ITS was constructed. The large sections of the ITS have bolted together perfectly and the reconfigured electrical power and ammonia cooling systems have allowed the station to reach the point where it is now ready to support the European and Japanese laboratory modules. Shuttle can also deliver large quantities of supplies and take away equally large amounts of rubbish and unwanted items that might otherwise fill up the station making it difficult for the crew to perform their tasks. Shuttle also produces large amounts of water, just by running its fuel cells, which it does throughout each flight; that water can be bagged and left on the station each time the Shuttle visits, thus preventing the heavy liquid having to be transported to the station separately.

Canada’s RMS on the Shuttles and the SSRMS on the station, along with the MBS, have also proved indispensable. Without them the station would not have been constructed so smoothly. Europe and Japan have both produced their crewed space­craft modules to the highest standards demanded of such vehicles, and their robotic transfer vehicles will relieve the Shuttle of its cargo delivery and rubbish removal role when it is retired. All of these nations, 16 in total, have had to overcome mistrust and misgivings about working with different political, social, and even engineering and scientific cultures to make the ISS programme what it is today. The close-knit teamwork and the personal friendships that have developed across geographical and political borders are one of the greatest achievements of this multi-faceted programme.

Engineering demands during the ISS programme have included constructing the station itself, a mammoth task, and then just keeping the spacecraft systems functioning as they should. This had demanded regular maintenance and frequent repairs of equipment both inside and outside the station. On many occasions those repairs have only been possible after replacement parts have been delivered to the station on the next Progress, or the next Shuttle flight. If Project Constellation establishes a permanent base on the lunar surface that capability to supply spare parts in real time might still exist, but it will not be possible on the initial human flights to Mars. The lessons learnt from each failure on ISS must be applied in full to future spacecraft in an attempt to increase reliability to the point that the Mars crew’s lives are not put in danger because of a minor mechanical failure.

Science on ISS has proved the Russian experience on Salyut and Mir, suggesting that two crew members are required just to perform maintenance and a third to perform science, is not necessarily correct. The automation of many of the experi­ments on ISS, allowing them to run in the background, without any regular input from the crew, along with the capability to have ground controllers activate and de-activate experiments on the station has relieved the crew of many tedious tasks.

Those experiments that do require a human input are managed as part of the flight plan and performed alongside the maintenance tasks. Many of the experiments performed on ISS have possible applications in future spacecraft. These include engineering experiments, materials exposure to see which materials perform best in the space environment, and plant growth experiments which might one day provide fresh food and even a natural oxygen production system as part of a hybrid Life Support System.

Following the announcement of Project Constellation in 2004, NASA concen­trated its experiment programme on subjects directly applicable to long-duration spaceflight. This included experiments to show how the human body behaves in space and what adaptations are made naturally during long-term exposure to that environment. In short, NASA does not want to send astronauts to the surface of Mars and find that they are unable to function when they get there. Experiments on ISS might show that that will not happen or, more importantly, they might show how to prevent that from happening.

It remains to be seen if Project Constellation will be a national project by the richest and most technologically advanced nation on the Earth, or if the experience of the ISS programme will encourage other nations to join the quest. Will the human race leave Earth and explore the solar system, or will it be left to America to return to the Moon and press on to Mars alone?

America explores space because of what the space programme gives back to America. It encourages students to study the sciences and engineering, subjects that they will need if they want to be a part of the space programme. The demand for these subjects ensures that colleges and universities across the nation will teach them to the highest standards. Better educated students can only be a good thing for the future of America. In developing hardware and computer software for spaceflight, America’s private companies expand their experience and their knowledge. The demands of human spaceflight regularly lead to new manufacturing techniques and new materials. New management techniques and new skills on the shop floor, as well as technological spin-off from the original products developed for spaceflight all add to America’s manufacturing base, and that in its turn helps to improve their national economy. Large space programmes employ huge numbers of people across a vast range of skills. Those workers are paid by their companies, and they spend that money inside America, again helping to improve the national economy. Achieve­ments accomplished inside a highly visible space programme add to America’s national prestige around the world. Surely, America cannot be the only nation to see the upside of this arrangement.

So, what of ISS now that NASA is planning how to return to the Moon?

No longer is the International Space Station an end in itself, it has more meaning now than it ever did in the past. The ISS has become the Space Station that Werner von Braun foresaw in the famous articles that he wrote for Colliers Magazine in the early 1950s. The International Space Station has finally become an important step­ping stone on the long road that is the age-old human desire to leave Earth and explore the solar system.

Progress M-59 was launched from Baikonur at 21: 12, January 17, 2007, and was successfully placed into orbit. The spacecraft’s launch shroud carried a painted portrait of Sergei Korolev, the famous Soviet spaceflight pioneer, to mark the 100th anniversary of his birth. Following a standard rendezvous, the unmanned cargo vehicle docked to Pirs at 21 : 59, January 19. The arrival of 2,561 kg of new supplies was followed by a week of routine exercise, maintenance, and experiments. Lopez-Alegria, Tyurin, and Williams spent time unloading Progress M-59 and also began preparations for a Stage EVA. On January 25, controllers in Houston manoeuvred the SSRMS to the position from which it would support the first EVA, while the crew reviewed their equipment and procedures.

The 50th EVA from ISS, as opposed to from a Shuttle airlock, began at 11: 14, January 31, as Lopez-Alegria and Williams left Quest wearing American EMUs. After collecting their tools they made their way to the area between the Z-1 Truss on Unity and S-0 ITS on Destiny, at the centre of the ITS. They worked to de-mate and re-route two electrical connectors running between the Z1 Truss and S0 ITS, to Destiny. During the next EVA the electrical harness would be extended from Destiny to PMA-2. When complete, the Station-to-Shuttle Power Transfer System (SSPTS) would allow docked Shuttles to draw electrical power from the station, thereby extending their flights to 14 days in duration. The SSPTS was due to be used for the first time during the flight of STS-118, then planned for July 2007.

They also redirected four cooling lines, part of the temporary Early External Active Thermal Control System, which had been maintaining the station’s temperature since the P-6 ITS had been erected on the Z-1 Truss in 2000, and attached them to connectors for the permanent cooling system, the Low Temperature

Loop (Loop-А), which connected them to the heat exchangers in Destiny. The Low Temperature Loop carried heat away from the station’s environmental systems.

Having completed their work with the SSPTS the two astronauts joined together with controllers in Houston to continue their work on the station’s cooling system. Controllers commanded the starboard radiator, one of three, on the P-6 ITS to retract. Lopez-Alegria and Williams secured the retracted radiator in place. The second P-6 radiator would be retracted on the following EVA and the third later in the year, during the flight of STS-118. They covered the radiator to keep it at the correct temperature for the months between its retraction and re-deployment. The astronauts then turned their attention to disconnecting a fluid line to a reservoir, the Early Ammonia Servicer (EAS), on the P-6 ITS, securing it in a storage position. The Expedition-15 crew were to unbolt and jettison the EAS, but in the meantime, by securing the fluid line leading to it, the astronauts were preserving the ability to re­instate the system if needed. The two astronauts returned to Quest at 18: 09, after 7 hours 55 minutes.

After two days of rest and a third of preparations, Lopez-Alegria and Williams left Quest again, at 08:38, February 4, 2007. Once again, they made their way to the area between the Z-1 and S-0 ITS, where they had started their previous EVA. There they re-routed a further two electrical and four fluid lines. This time they reconfigured the Moderate Temperature Cooling Loop (Loop-В), which carried heat from the station’s avionics and payload racks. Next they joined with controllers in Houston to retract the P-6 aft radiator. The station’s orientation in relation to the Sun meant that the aft radiator did not require the installation of a thermal shield to maintain its temperature. With the radiator retracted, the astronauts disconnected and stowed the second EAS ammonia fluid line. Lopez-Alegria, positioned at the base of the P-6 ITS, photographed the starboard SAW and the blanket box into which it would be retracted during the flight of STS-117. With the photographs taken, both astronauts returned to re-routing the electrical system, from the S-0 ITS across the exterior of Destiny, and on to PMA-2, on the laboratory’s ram. The cables provided electrical power for the SSPTS. Three of the six cables were connected during this EVA. Lopez – Alegria also removed a sunshade from a data relay box on PMA-1, between Unity and Zarya. The EVA ended at 15: 49, after 7 hours 11 minutes, at which time Williams held the record for the total time spent in EVA by a woman.

On March 7, NASA dismissed Lisa Nowak from her position as a NASA astronaut. It was the first time that such a thing had happened. Nowak, a US Naval officer had been arrested by police following criminal allegations related to her private life that also involved astronaut William Oefelein and a female US Air Force officer. Nowak and Oefelein were both returned to service with the US Navy. Nowak had flown to ISS on STS-121, in July 2006, and Oefelein had visited ISS on STS-116, in December 2006.

MORE EXTRAVEHICULAR ACTIVITY

The next Expedition-14 EVA began at 08: 26, February 8, when Lopez-Alegria and Williams left Quest. They moved to the CETA carts on the ram face of the ITS. Placing their equipment on one cart, they moved it along the rails on the ITS, to the P-З ITS segment. There, they removed thermal shrouds from the RJMC on P-З. Next, they removed two thermal shrouds from Bay 18 and Bay 20 of the P-З ITS, to avoid them trapping heat as a result of the station’s present orientation to the Sun. Each of the RJMC shrouds was wrapped in one of the bay shrouds and thrown away, towards the station’s ram. They then deployed an Unpressurised Cargo Carrier Assembly Attachment System (UCCAAS) on the zenith face of the P-З ITS. This was done in anticipation of a cargo platform being attached during the flight of STS-118. While Lopez-Alegria worked with the UCCAAS, Williams made her way to the end of the P-5 ITS and removed two launch locks, in preparation for the re-location of the P-6 ITS on to the exposed end of the P-5 ITS. The two astronauts then completed their work, connecting the final four STSPTS electrical cables between Destiny and PMA-2. Whilst in the area they photographed a suspect communications con­nector on PMA-2 that carried communications between ISS and docked Shuttles while the hatches were closed. Communications at those times had been intermittent on recent Shuttle flights. The EVA ended at 15: 06, after 6 hours 40 minutes. Lopez-Alegria completed the EVA as the new American record holder for cumulative EVA time with 61 hours 22 minutes spent in open space.

In the very early hours of February 11, communications were lost between ISS and Houston. A switching unit had suffered a malfunction that caused a circuit breaker to trip, in turn causing a loss of power to the station. All three crew members worked to recover communications and restore power. The difficulties lasted for 90 minutes, but the work to restore the station to its normal routine and return all the affected systems to operation took the remainder of the day. NASA was at pains to point out that, “… the safety of the Expedition-14 crew and the complex was never an issue.’’ The astronauts also began their preparations for their final EVA, when Lopez-Alegria and Tyurin would work out of Pirs wearing Orlan suits. The EVA was planned for February 22, and the two men spent the week beforehand preparing their suits and other equipment, as well as going over their work schedule. Meanwhile, Atlantis was moved to the launchpad in Florida for STS-117. In prep­aration for that flight, controllers in Houston commanded the MT to move the SSRMS to the starboard side of the ITS.

At 05: 27, February 22, Lopez-Alegria and Tyurin exited Pirs to begin their EVA. Tyurin reported that the sublimator, which dumped heat from his suit to the vacuum, had failed to function. As a result, the inside of his faceplate had fogged over. NASA, engineers suggested that the problem was caused by activating the sublimator in the airlock before it was at full vacuum. Tyurin turned the sublimator off and then reactivated it, after which it functioned correctly and cleared his faceplate. Making their way to the stuck KURS antenna on Progress M-58, they cut one of four supporting struts and pulled it back, thus ensuring that it would not impair the spacecraft’s undocking. The antenna had become stuck behind one of Zvezda’s EVA handrails during docking, but it was now 6 inches clear of that rail.

Their next task was to photograph a Russian satellite navigation antenna, before they changed a Russian materials exposure experiment. They also photographed docking targets and an antenna intended for use by the European ATV when it approached and docked to ISS, then scheduled for later in the year. Photographs were also taken of a German experiment and portions of the Strela-2 crane mounted on the exterior of Pirs. A series of other tasks completed the EVA, which ended at 11:45, after the pair had stowed two foot restraints on the ladder outside Pirs; it had lasted 6 hours 18 minutes, 15 minutes longer than planned. The week following the recordbreaking fifth EVA was spent cleaning up and performing routine experiments and maintenance.

When a thunderstorm passed over KSC on February 26, hail damaged the foam at the top of STS-117’s ET as it stood on the launchpad. The Shuttle stack was rolled back to the VAB for inspection and repair. The planned March 15 launch was cancelled and rescheduled for no earlier than May 11, but more likely June. Soyuz TMA-10, carrying the Expedition-15 crew was planned for lift-off on April 7. To raise ISS to the correct orbit to support the rendezvous and docking, two Progress engine burns would be made on March 16 and 28. The Expedition-14 crew’s schedule was changed to make the most of the available time before the delayed Shuttle launch. On the last day of the month Williams used a simulation on her laptop to maintain her skills with the SSRMS. She also joined Lopez-Alegria and Tyurin in their experiment programme.

On March 1, the crew was woken up by a caution and warning alarm, when the signals from the RJMC to the Thermal Radiator Rotary Joint (TRRJ) dropped out. The TRRJ, which turned the radiator to the best attitude for heat loss, automatically switched to another command link and operations were not affected. As the month continued, Lopez-Alegria and Williams completed setting up the American OGS in Destiny. Tyurin spent part of the week performing maintenance in the Russian segment. In Zvezda he set up equipment to allow ground controllers to test the satellite navigation system to be used by the European ATV, stowed spare liquids for the Elektron oxygen generator, and installed a new liquid crystal display for the TORU manual docking system for Progress spacecraft. They also completed a series of Russian and American experiments. In Korolev, Russian programme managers agreed to have the crew relocate Soyuz TMA-9 from Zarya’s nadir to Zvezda’s wake, on March 29. Before that could happen, Progress M-58 would be undocked from Zvezda’s wake on March 27. In the meantime, work began to load Progress M-58 with rubbish.

The crew installed a new window with a camera berth in Unity’s port-side hatch on March 14. The starboard hatch window had been installed by the Expedition-6 crew, the work being part of the preparation for the relocation of PMA-3 to Unity’s nadir, later in the year. A number of water bags had to be relocated to give the crew access to the interior of PMA-3, where they installed upgraded computer cabling. They also cleared everything out from PMA-3, with the exception of a Bearing Motor and Roll Ring Module, which they secured in place, so they would not be lost when

the PMA was relocated. The crew also completed packing rubbish into Progress M-58, in preparation for its disposal. As planned, the Progress M-58 thrusters were fired on March 15 to raise the station’s orbit.

As the flight progressed, Lopez-Alegrla and Williams took part in an experiment to examine how cosmic rays affect brainwaves. For the ALTEA experiment they wore a soft cap with sensors to record brain function and a hard cap with instruments to record cosmic rays passing through the station. It was hoped that the experiment might lead to preventative measures that might be used on long-duration flights to the Moon and Mars. They also worked on a series of medical experiments studying how the human body adapts to spaceflight. With STS-117 delayed, they were able to work on establishing the station’s laptop computer network, which would employ new wireless and Ethernet connectivity to avoid cables being deployed between the American and Russian segments of the station. It was estimated that the new network would be up to ten times faster than the present system. During the week, the last propellants were pumped out of Progress M-58’s tanks and the last items of rubbish were loaded into its pressurised compartment. Progress M-58 was undocked from Zvezda’s wake at 14: 11, March 27, to make way for the Soyuz TMA-9 relocation. A few hours later the Progress was commanded to enter Earth’s atmosphere, where it burned up.

On March 29, the crew placed ISS in automatic mode and sealed themselves in Soyuz TMA-9. After undocking from Zarya’s nadir at 18: 30, they flew around the rear of the station and docked at Zvezda’s wake at 18 : 54. After pressure checks they re-entered the station and began the long job of putting it back into occupied operation. The following day was a rest day, to allow the crew to re-adjust their sleep cycle, which had been altered to facilitate the Soyuz relocation. They performed only light duties, routine maintenance, and their daily exercise regimes. The return of Soyuz TMA-9 to Zvezda’s wake, which it had only left on October 10, 2006, was to make way for Soyuz TMA-10, at Zarya’s nadir.

The crew performed the first SPHERES formation flight inside the station. The 8-inch diameter satellites were battery-powered and each used 12 carbon dioxide thrusters to manoeuvre. They were designed to test automated rendezvous, station-keeping, and docking as an experiment testing possible technologies for use on future spacecraft. The first formation-flying session was considered to be a great success.

As the Expedition-14 occupation approached its end, Lopez-Alegrla and Tyurin began preparations for their return to Earth. On April 2, Lopez-Alegrla set a new endurance record for an American astronaut on a single flight, when he passed the 196-day record held jointly by Dan Bursch (set in 2001) and Carl Walz (set in 2002). The crew also worked on experiments, repairs, and their daily fitness routines. Experiments included the Lab-on-a-Chip Application Development Portable Test System (LOCAD-PTS), a portable bacteria detector small enough to fit in a compact ice cooler. The experiment would be used five times over the coming weekend science sessions. Lopez-Alegrla and Tyurin both tested their hand-eye co-ordination on the TRAC experiment. They also completed a further session with the ALTEA experiment.

Russia, or at least the Soviet Union, placed the first cosmonaut into space in April 1961, and has maintained a human spaceflight programme and cosmonaut group since that time. While NASA’s space programme is civil in nature, with considerable assistance from the US military, Russia’s space programme has been run by the military from the beginning.

Vostok was a one-man spacecraft, which introduced Russian cosmonauts to spaceflight. After six flights the propaganda requirements of Nikita Khrushchev dictated that Vostok was stripped out in order to allow it to carry three cosmonauts, and then to take two cosmonauts and an extendable airlock to allow for the first EVA before the Americans flew the first two-man crew and attempted an EVA in Project Gemini. The refitted Vostok spacecraft was called Voskhod to give the impression that it was an entirely new design. Vostok/Voskhod was replaced by Soyuz, a space­craft designed to support an Earth orbital programme, or a human lunar landing programme, launched by the N-1. All of these programmes were developed by OBK-1, Sergei Pavlovich Korolev’s design bureau.

The earliest years of the Soviet human space programme were highlighted by a series of politically driven propaganda events, the first man in space, the first woman, the first three-man crew, the first EVA, and then it all went wrong. When the Soviet Premier changed in October 1964 and Korolev, the man in charge of the Soviet space programme, died on the operating table in January 1966, everything changed. The new premier, Leonid Brezhnev, had less interest in the space programme and Korolev’s replacement Vasili Mishin was not up to the job, faced as he was with racing America to the Moon, having started several years behind the Americans.

Meanwhile, a second design bureau, led by Valentin Chelomei, had designed the Proton launch vehicle and OKB-1 had designed the Soyuz-derived Zond to be launched on a Proton and carry a single cosmonaut on a high orbit that would pass around the far side of the Moon and fall straight back to Earth. When Apollo won the Moon race Russia cancelled both of its human circumlunar and lunar landing programmes.

Chelomei had begun a space station project in the mid-1960s, consisting of a crew/cargo ferry designated TKS and a station element designated OPS Almaz (despite this distinction, large Russian space station size modules based on the OPS Almaz element of this vehicle have generally come to be identified as “TKS modules’’ and this is the way in which the designation is used in this book). In December 1969, a decision had been made to have OKB-1 modify the OPS Almaz to operate with the Soyuz, and to serve as a scientific station rather than as a military reconnaissance platform. The scientific version of the Almaz station was originally called Zarya. Ultimately, both Almaz (military) and Zarya (scientific) versions of the station later flew under the cover name Salyut.

The first seven Salyut stations (two malfunctioned before they were occupied) supported a single Soyuz spacecraft, with their crews performing a series of record­breaking long-duration flights, but the stations were left unoccupied between crew visits, just as the American Skylab prototype space station would be. Salyut-6 introduced two docking ports, one at each end of the station’s long axis. This allowed two Soyuz spacecraft to dock at the same time, leading to permanent occupancy and crew relief on-orbit. When crew occupations surpassed the 6-month guaranteed life of a Soyuz spacecraft the Soviets introduced 10-day Soyuz taxi flights, where two-man crews delivered a new spacecraft to the station and returned to Earth in the old one. Salyut-6 also saw the introduction of the Progress delivery vehicle carrying dry cargo in a pressurised compartment as well as liquid water and rocket propellant. Once the new cargo had been transferred to the station the pressurised compartment in the Progress was filled with rubbish and the spacecraft was undocked and commanded to re-enter the Earth’s atmosphere, where it was heated to destruction. Salyut-7 also received several TKS modules, each of which completed an automated rendezvous and docking, a precursor to the construction methods used to build the next gen­eration of Soviet space stations. Indeed, in Salyut-6 and Salyut-7 the Soviets had rehearsed everything required for their third generation of space stations.

The Mir base block, launched in 1986, was the beginning of a new space station. The docking system at the module’s wake received Soyuz spacecraft, but also included the plumbing to support the liquid cargo deliveries from Progress spacecraft. At the module’s ram, the spherical node contained five docking systems. The one at the module’s ram was used for Soyuz spacecraft. When there were no Soyuz space­craft docked, the system was also used to dock automated TKS-style modules, which were then moved to the radial ports and were accessed by the crew internally, from the node. When Communism collapsed in the Soviet Union, only two of the four Mir science modules had been launched. The remaining modules were only launched after they were fitted out using American money.

After the Russians had signed up to ISS, Mir became the location for a co­operative programme with the Americans, allowing their astronauts to gain long – duration flight experience. Prior to this, Mir had been hosting European astronauts, ESA having grown frustrated by the delays in creating an American-led station. This Shuttle-Mir programme was designated Phase 1 of the ISS programme. By the time the first ISS module was launched the Russians already had nearly 30 years of space station, long-duration flight experience.

The Russians have provided three major ISS modules:

• Zarya was built by the Russians under contract to Boeing, NASA’s primary ISS contractor. The module provided attitude control until later American modules were docked to it, after which it became a storage area. Zarya was designated as an American module, although it is now seen as part of the Russian sector of ISS.

• Zvezda was originally an all-Russian module, but lack of funding from the Russian government meant that it was only completed, two years late, after an injection of NASA’s cash. Basically similar to the Mir base block, and the Salyut stations that had preceded it, Zvezda was the control centre of the Russian sector of ISS, and the social centre of the station, as it contains the food prep­aration area and a galley table, as well as a waste management facility (toilet). Zvezda allowed the permanent occupation of ISS from the earliest days of its activation. Under the original plans for Space Station Freedom the station would not have been permanently occupied until the very last module was in place. Zvezda re-wrote the flight plan, but only with help from the other two vital elements in the Salyut/Mir programme!

• Soyuz was Russia’s human-carrying spacecraft. As such, it could deliver crews to ISS, docking to the Russian modules. A Soyuz spacecraft always remained docked to ISS, serving as a Crew Return Vehicle (CRV), in case of an emergency evacuation. Ten-day taxi flights, often with commercial occupants in the third couch, replaced the Soyuz attached to the station approximately every six months. The ISS was originally serviced by the Soyuz TM spacecraft, but this was replaced by the upgraded Soyuz TMA.

• Progress carried dry cargo, propellants, water, and, in the Progress M, air (oxygen and nitrogen) to ISS. It brought food, spare and replacement parts, and personal effects to the Expedition crews on the station. The propellants Progress carried allowed the thrusters on Zvezda to be refuelled, and thus remain operational, maintaining the station in the correct attitude, when the CMGs in the American Z-l Truss became momentum-saturated.

Zvezda, Soyuz, and Progress, are the three Russian elements that made it possible to permanently occupy ISS at the earliest opportunity, but without the American Shuttle there would be very little ISS to occupy.

• Russian Docking Module-l, Pirs, was the final Russian module to receive funding from the Russian government, the planned science modules and power module were never built. Pirs docked automatically to Zvezda’s nadir to provide an airlock supporting EVA by crew members wearing Russian Orlan-M pressure suits while retaining a docking port for Soyuz and Progress spacecraft on the nadir. Two Strela cranes were later mounted on the exterior of Pirs.

The principal Russian Space Agency centres involved in the ISS programme were

• S. P. Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation (RSC) Energia, Korolev, Moscow, manages the Russian sector of the ISS programme and was responsible for the integration of Russia’s space station modules, the Soyuz and Progress spacecraft, and their respective launch vehicles.

• Yuri Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Centre, Zvezdny Gorodock, was where Russian cosmonauts, their international partners, and commercial Space Flight Participants are trained.

• Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Centre, Khrunichev, Moscow, was responsible for developing and constructing the Zarya (under contract to the American Boeing Company) and Zvezda modules and the Proton launch vehicle.

• Korolev Mission Control Centre (TsUP), Korolev, Moscow was the main Russian control centre for ISS operations.

• Baikonur Cosmodrome, Kazakhstan, was Russia’s launch facility. Its facilities oversaw the integration of all crewed and uncrewed spacecraft and their launch vehicles, before transporting them by rail to the launch pad, where they were erected and launched. (Baikonur Cosmodrome is named after the Baikonur region in which it lies, and not the town of Baikonur which is several hundred kilometres away. In the 1970s one NASA engineer explained facetiously that this

.. is like calling Kennedy Space Centre Tampa Spaceport.’’)

Following the departure of Endeavour, Korzun, Whitson, and Treschev settled down to the start of their 4.5-month stay aboard ISS. On June 18, they observed and photographed wildfires in Arizona and Colorado. Whitson activated the StelSys Liver Cell Research experiment in the Biotechnology Specimen Temperature Controller (BSTC) on June 21. The experiment compared liver cell function in microgravity with that of similar cells grown on Earth. Processed samples were stored in the Arctic-1 freezer for return to Earth on STS-112. When the experiments were complete the BSTC was powered off.

Having installed a new hard drive in the Zeolite Crystal Growth experiment during their second week on orbit, Huntsville powered on the EXPRESS Rack 2 containing the experiment. The first sample runs were commenced on June 27. All three astronauts completed their first Crew Interactions Questionnaire on June 25, while Korzun and Treschev also completed a running experiment on the station treadmill that required them to take close-up high-definition video of their facial features while running.

The crew also filled the docked Progress with rubbish, in preparation for its departure. The undocking of Progress M1-8, from Zvezda’s wake, took place at 04: 23, June 25, and the spacecraft re-entered the atmosphere and burned up as planned.

For several months in advance of its final report on the loss of STS-107 the chairman of the Investigation Board had been briefing NASA and the media on what had been found. Speaking about what the final report might contain NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe had warned, “It’s going to be ugly… This is not going to be anything that anybody’s going to be particularly happy with.’’

Likewise, Bill Gerstenmaier, Shuttle program manager said:

“We are well aware of what is coming out of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board and what is coming from the Shuttle Return to Flight discussions… We are looking at all of the systems on board the station and evaluating whether we need to do something directly or whether we made decisions in the past… we ought to go back and look at.”

NASA had been accused of excessive use of waivers during the preparation of the STS-107 flight. At the time of launch some 5,800 had been recorded during Columbia’s preparation. The Administration was accused of “bureaucratic fumbling and administrative missed signals’’.

The Final Report of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) was published in August 2003. It established that the left bipod ramp had fallen off of the External Tank during launch and had struck the leading edge of Columbia’s left wing in the region of Reinforced Carbon-Carbon Panels 6 through 9, on the internal bend where the wing root moves away from the fuselage. The suitcase-size block of foam caused a large hole in the RCC panels in a region that could not be seen through the flight deck windows. Columbia performed near-flawlessly throughout its mission until re-entry, when super-heated plasma entered the hole in the leading edge of the left wing and caused the destruction of the spacecraft. NASA management was severely criticised. Managers had refused requests from their engineers to have the orbiter photographed by a military reconnaissance satellite when the foam impact was identified on film of the launch. They had also adopted the attitude that if Columbia was fatally damaged then nothing could be done to save the crew.

The report made 15 recommendations for Return to Flight:

1. Initiate an aggressive programme to eliminate all External Tank Thermal Protection System debris shedding at the source with particular emphasis on the region where the bipod struts attach to the external tank.

2. Initiate a programme designed to increase the orbiter’s ability to sustain minor debris damage by measures such as improved impact-resistant Reinforced Carbon-Carbon and acreage titles.

3. Develop and implement a comprehensive inspection plan to determine the structural integrity of all Reinforced Carbon-Carbon system components.

4. For missions to the International Space Station, develop a practicable capability to inspect and effect emergency repairs to the widest possible range of damage to the Thermal Protection System, including both tile and Reinforced Carbon – Carbon, taking advantage of the additional capabilities available when near to or docked at the International Space Station… Accomplish an on-orbit Thermal Protection System inspection using appropriate assets and capabilities, early in all missions… The ultimate objective should be a fully autonomous capability for all missions to address the possibility that an International Space Station mission fails to achieve the correct orbit, fails to dock successfully, or is damaged during or after undocking.

5. Upgrade the imaging system capable of providing a minimum of three useful views of the Space Shuttle from lift-off to at least Solid Rocket Booster separa­tion… The operational criteria of these assets should be included in the Launch Commit Criteria for future launches.

6. Provide a capability to obtain and down-link high-resolution images of the External Tank after its separation.

7. Provide a capability to obtain and down-link high-resolution images of the underside of the Orbiter wing leading edge and forward section of both wings’ Thermal Protection System.

8. Modify the Memorandum of Agreement with the National Imagery and Mapping Agency to make the imaging of each Shuttle flight while on orbit a standard requirement.

9. Test and qualify the flight hardware bolt catchers.

10. Require that at least two employees attend all final closeouts and intertank area hand-spraying procedures.

11. Kennedy Space Centre Quality Assurance and United Space Alliance must return to the straightforward, industry-standard definition of “Foreign Object Debris’’ and eliminate any alternate or statistically deceptive definitions like “process debris’’.

12. Adopt and maintain a Shuttle flight schedule that is consistent with available resources. Although schedule deadlines are an important management tool, those deadlines must be regularly evaluated to ensure that any additional risk incurred to meet the schedule is recognised, understood, and acceptable.

13. Implement an expanded training programme in which the Mission Management Team faces potential crew and vehicle safety contingencies beyond launch and ascent. These contingencies should involve potential loss of Shuttle or crew, contain numerous uncertainties and unknowns, and require the Mission Management Team to assemble and interact support organisations across NASA/Contractor lines and in various locations.

14. Prepare a detailed plan for defining, establishing, transitioning, and implement­ing an independent Technical Engineering Authority, independent safety programme, and a reorganised Space Shuttle Integration Office.

15. Develop an interim programme of close-out photographs for all critical sub­systems that differ from engineering drawings. Digitise the close-out photograph system so that images are immediately available for on-orbit troubleshooting.

Chapter 9 of the Report addressed the future of American human access to space.

The report noted:

“The Board observes that none of the competing long-term visions for space have found support from the nation’s leadership, or indeed among the general public. The U. S. civilian space effort has moved forward for more than 30 years without a guiding vision, and none seems imminent. In the past, this absence of a strategic vision in itself has reflected a policy decision, since there have been many opportunities for the national leaders to agree on ambitious goals for space, and none have done so.’’

The CAIB did note that almost everyone seemed to agree that “The United States needs improved access for humans to low-Earth orbit as a foundation for whatever directions the nation’s space programme takes in the future.”

Board members called for a national debate to define America’s future in space. The report highlighted the short-sightedness of developing the Shuttle in isola­tion. Lack of funding and an often-hostile Congress meant that for the next 20 years after the decision to build the Shuttle, NASA made little or no attempt to develop parallel “access to space’’ technologies until the X-33 and X-34 programmes of 1994. As a result, those programmes were begun with a limited technology base, and X-33 proved beyond the technological capabilities of Lockheed-Martin at that time. The Report then recognised NASA’s attempts to broaden their technology base with the Space Launch Initiative (SLI) in 2000, and promptly narrowed that vision once more with the decision, in 2002, to redirect SLI to commence the Integrated Space Transportation Plan (ISTP) with its proposed Orbital Space Plane (OSP).

The Board made it clear that they did not study NASA’s plans for the ISTP, or the OSP in depth. Even so, they concluded:

“Because of the risks inherent in the original design of the Space Shuttle, because that design was based in many aspects on now-obsolete technologies, and because the Shuttle is now an ageing system but still developmental in character, it is in the nation’s interest to replace the Shuttle as soon as possible as the primary means for transporting humans to and from Earth orbit.’’

CAIB members recognised that in the mid-term that replacement would, more than likely, be the OSP and demanded:

“The design of the system should give overriding priority to crew safety, rather than trade safety against other performance criteria, such as low-cost, re-usability, or against advanced space operation capabilities other than crew transfer. This conclusion implies that whatever design NASA chooses should become the primary means for taking people to and from the International Space Station, not just a complement to the Space Shuttle.’’

This represented a major change in direction for the OSP, which NASA had originally intended to begin flying while the Shuttle continued to operate.

The CAIB members stated that there was considerable urgency in developing the OSP, which would require commitment and financial support from Congress and the American people. They stated that America must be prepared to support the OSP as a long-term commitment, and not shy away from the long-term cost, as ISS was likely to be the primary destination for Americans in space for the next decade, or longer.

The report called the failure to develop a Shuttle replacement vehicle “a failure of national leadership” caused by continuing to expect major technological advances in that vehicle’’. The CAIB recommended that everyone concerned should agree that the overriding design principal of the OSP should be “to move humans safely and reliably in to and out of Earth orbit. To demand more would be to fall into the same trap as previous unsuccessful efforts.” The paragraph concluded, “Continued US leadership in space is an important national objective. That leadership depends on a willingness to pay the costs of achieving it.”

On August 26, Sean O’Keefe made a speech that was broadcast to all NASA field centres. In that speech he told NASA’s employees:

“We must go forward and follow this blueprint in an effort to make this a much stronger organization. All of us at NASA are part of the solution… ultimately… to return to the exploration objectives that they dedicated their lives to.’’