Category Manned Spaceflight Log II—2006-2012

In reviewing five decades of manned space flight operations, it is difficult to define any specific decade as a singular era, but in general the 1960s could be termed the pioneering decade; the 1970s the decade of ascending learning curve; the 1980s the reality decade; the 1990s the decade of application; and the 2000s perhaps a decade of expansion. What lies ahead is for the pages of history.

Connections

The physical quest for space flight can be traced back to the era of stratospheric balloon ascents during the early decades of the 20th century. This was followed by aviation pioneers in their quest for speed, height, duration, and eventually the international drive to break the sound barrier and pushing the limits of rocket aircraft propulsion. All of these linked steps led up to the dawn of human space flight operations. What is less often considered are the significant, but connected developments in other areas of science, technology, medicine, and human endeavor, including of course military advancements, which have all contributed to applications now used in space exploration. There is often discussion about the benefits of space flight and the spin-offs from the investment and technology devel­oped, but this works both ways. There are technologies and procedures which

have been incorporated into the space program which have filtered down to improve aspects of fife here on the ground.

Lessons learned from other endeavors are crucial to developing the next steps in space. For example, underwater exploration is currently being used to prepare astronauts for flights on the Space Station and in supporting simulations related to future explorations of the asteroids, the Moon, and Mars. Other extreme environment operations are to be found in the Arctic and Antarctic regions of Earth, in long-duration isolation chamber experiments (such as the recent Mars 500 experiment) and even experience from what are now termed extreme sports.

The history of polar exploration has analogues in long-duration space flight, and studies of the close confines of living and working in nuclear submarines, submerged for days or weeks in isolated environments under operational and stressful situations, have also been used to evaluate crew behavior and perform­ance on programs such as the Space Station. This work, including that being conducted by expedition crews on the ISS, will have direct application for our eventual return to the Moon and out to Mars, where long-term research bases will have to be staffed and operated remotely from our planet by self-reliant crews, with support from Earth coming in an advisory or backup role.

We are at a key point in human space flight history. After 50 years, we can no longer consider ourselves to be pioneering. It is now time to homestead space and to expand our horizons, creating a reliable, economical, and sustainable infrastruc­ture to move away from Earth, not only to explore new planets, moons, and asteroids but also to safely exploit their resources. We must still monitor our own world to ensure its survival and get the best use from its finite resources and we must discover how to balance our need for those resources with protection of the natural environment to ensure we can continue to live here. If we learn these lessons here on Earth, we can apply them to other worlds with confidence and perhaps a clear conscience.

Apollo 8 astronaut Bill Anders once said that the most valuable return from going to the Moon was to discover Earth. In expanding our knowledge and understanding of our own planet, we can put our best efforts into exploring new worlds. The last five decades have created the foundations for a concerted inter­national effort to move out into the cosmos. Never again can we look up at the night sky and wonder what it would actually be like to go there, because we have done that. We just need to keep going a little farther.

Hindsight is a wonderful way to interpret past events and experiences and to think how things could have been done better or differently. It is quite easy to look back and wonder what might have been if certain events had or had not happened or if fate had intervened a different way. In this context, you could ponder endlessly what would have happened if the Americans had launched the first satellite; if the Soviets had landed on the Moon before the Americans; if Apollo had not been canceled in 1972; if the Shuttle had been authorized with its liquid-fueled manned booster; if Buran had become operational; if a Moon base and 50-man space station had been authorized; and so on. That small word “if” could lead to countless such speculations but can never affect what actually happened.

In reality, as humans we can only do our best and hope we get it right. In space flight, “our best” has yielded some spectacular achievements over the past half a century. Whether the decisions made were the right decisions is irrelevant and unchangeable, but they can be learned from for such decisions in the future. Here, we can only briefly summarize the achievements and decisions of these first five decades, to provide an awareness of how we arrived at this point in space exploration and allow us to decide where to go next.

The 1980s were termed the reality years for good reason, for both the Soviets and Americans. The Soviets, despite great success with their Salyut and Mir programs,

were suffering from lack of funding to expand the program as planned. An improved station, Mir 2, was struggling for funding even to be built; Buran had flown successfully, proving the concept, but was also unable to attract funds to continue. On top of all this, the country itself was under extreme pressure both internally and externally to change and reform. The surprising and sudden demise of communism towards the end of the decade in Eastern Europe—and the even­tual breakup of the U. S.S. R.—was a major catalyst with global repercussions, and the pride of Soviet achievement—the Soviet space program—suffered. If it was to survive, the program would have to find other avenues of funding, much to the frustration of the older leadership in the design bureaus, the corridors of the Kremlin, and the top brass in the military. For a while, the program struggled on, but talks were in hand to help restore its pride and ensure its survival through the final decade of the century and beyond.

For NASA, the Shuttle was not delivering what was promised. The launch costs could not be lowered and the USAF had backed out of ordering their own orbiters and operating them from California. Commercial applications that took advantage of the unique characteristics of both the microgravity environment and the Shuttle transportation system were few and far between. It was becoming harder to keep the Shuttle flying and far from routine to launch them on time. The Challenger accident remained a painful memory.

On the positive side, as well as some remarkable flight operations once the vehicle attained orbit, significant lessons were learned and experience gained from

repeated ground turnaround, from planning to processing, launching, and recov­ery to postflight analysis of the fleet of vehicles. A similar learning curve came from flying the dozens of payloads and experiments that the fleet did carry, from the smallest school experiment to complex Spacelab payloads.

Hovering in the background of all this was the Freedom space station program, which was slowly gaining momentum following its 1984 authorization. Unfortunately, it was also gaining in size, mass, complexity, and cost. The new decade would once again signal changes, both on Earth and for operations in its orbit.

2009-015A March 26, 2009

Pad 1, Site 5, Baikonur Cosmodrome, Republic of

Kazakhstan

October 11, 2009

Near the town of Arkalyk, Republic of Kazakhstan Soyuz-FG (serial number Ю15000-027),

Soyuz TMA (serial number 224)

198 da 16 h 42 min 22 s (ISS-19/20)

12 da 19 h 25 min 52 s (Simonyi)

Altair

ISS resident crew transport (18S), ISS-19/20 research program, visiting crew 16 program

Flight Crew

PADALKA, Gennady Ivanovich, 50, Russian Federation Air Force, RSA Soyuz TMA and ISS commander, third mission

Previous missions: Soyuz TM-28/Mir 26 (1998/1999), TMA-4/ISS-9 (2004) BARRATT, Michael Reed, 49, Civilian, NASA Soyuz TMA and ISS flight engineer 1

SIMONYI, Charles, 60, civilian, U. S.A., space flight participant, second mission Previous mission: TMA10/TMA9 (2007)

ISS resident crew (Shuttle) exchanges

WAKATA, Koichi, 45, civilian (Japanese), JAXA ISS flight engineer KOPRA, Timothy Lennart, 46, U. S. Army, NASA ISS flight engineer (up STS-127, down STS-128)

STOTT, Nicole Maria Passano, 46, civilian, NASA ISS flight engineer (up STS-128, down STS-129)

Flight log

By the spring of 2009, the station was ready for an increase in the permanent crewing from three to six. It had been decided to overlap main crews between expeditions, to help ease the strain on the station’s limited resources while the final Shuttle assembly missions were flown. The plan was to launch a main crew to the station aboard Soyuz ferry craft in two teams of three. One knock-on effect of this would be the serious restriction of the availability of spare Soyuz seats for fare-paying individuals (the space flight participants) for some time. Any available

seats would now be filled by representatives of the ISS partners (NASA, RSA, CSA, ESA, and JAXA).

Overlapping these crews meant that when the first crew of three returned, there would be a period when only a three-person (skeleton) crew would be in residency on the station until the next trio arrived to restore the crew to six. For brief periods, the ISS could support three Soyuz craft with nine crew members, but not for prolonged periods. In practice, Crew “A” would be joined by Crew “B” to create Residency “X”. Once Crew “A” departed, crew “B” would continue alone as Residency “Y” until they were joined by Crew “C”. When Crew “B” returned, crew “C” would assume the role of Residency “Z”, and so on. The crew of TMA-14 would complete the first move in this new system, along with the next crew on TMA-15, creating the residencies ISS-19 and ISS-20 (or ISS-19/20). The lead crew on any station expedition would be known as ISS “X” Prime.

Pioneering this change and in command of the TMA-14, as well as ISS-19/20, was veteran Mir and ISS cosmonaut Gennady Padalka. Accompanying him was NASA rookie flight engineer Michael Barratt and space flight participant Charles Simonyi on his second visit to the ISS. This was a first for a space flight participant. Simonyi had previously visited the station two years before and this time would complete a 13-day flight (at a reportedly higher price than his first visit) before returning with the ISS-18 cosmonauts in TMA-13. During his second residency, Simonyi conducted a small program of experiments which included photography, a radiation safety experiment, ham radio, and various symbolic activities. Some of these activities were in connection with ESA, the Hungarian Space Office (Simonyi being a Hungarian-born, naturalized U. S. citizen), and the Russian Space Agency. On April 8, 2009 Simonyi and the outgoing ISS-18 crew undocked from ISS and landed safely.

Padalka and Barratt officially joined Japanese astronaut Wakata (already on board the station) as resident crew members on April 2. This trio became ISS-19 and would also assume the lead role for ISS-20 from May until their departure in October. There were still two further Shuttle partial crew exchanges to come after Wakata (who would be followed by Timothy Kopra and then Nicole Stott), so three-person Soyuz crewing would not actually begin until the end of 2009. ISS-19 was an expedition in a period of transition at the station after a decade of assembly. It was also a clear demonstration of the program’s increased capabilities in manpower research and the often overlooked level of ground support across the globe.

With all the main laboratory facihties up and running, the research programs could also now step up. The Russian program for ISS-19/20 would see 330 ses­sions for 42 experiments, including four new research studies. The program encompassed life sciences, geographical research, Earth resources, biotechnology, technical research, cosmic ray research, education and space technology studies, and contract activities. Most of this research would be conducted by Padalka (in preffight planning this amounted to 164 hours), while Barratt focused on U. S. segment experiments. During the ISS-20 phase of his mission, ISS-20/21 flight engineer Romanenko would complete a further planned 160 hours of Russian segment science. In addition, NASA reported 98 experiments in human research, technology development, observations of the Earth, educational activities, and biological and physical sciences. Of these, 39 were new investigations, with 28 others originating from Europe, 16 from Japan, and 5 from Canada. There were 10 ongoing investigations from earlier expeditions.

One of the investigations highlighted by the world’s media were the studies in recycling urine into drinking water, clearly not one of the more glamorous aspects of a space explorer’s role. After receiving the all clear from ground tests on reclaimed water samples on May 20, a milestone was reached on board the station when ISS-19 crew members drank reclaimed and purified water from the Water Recovery System.

On May 29, 2009, the much anticipated transition from a three to a six-person crew was finally realized with the docking of TMA-15. On board were Belgian Frank De Winne (ESA), Russian Roman Romanenko (son of Salyut 6/Mir cosmonaut Yuri Romanenko), and Canadian Robert Thirsk. For the first time, each of the primary participants (Russia, U. S.A., Europe, Canada, and Japan) were represented in the resident crewing. Long in planning, the symbolic nature of the first six-person crew being comprised of crew members from the major ISS partners was not lost on the international agencies or world’s media.

The docking and transfer into the ISS of the new crew of TMA-15 signaled the official end of the ISS-19 residency. The three ISS-19 crew members remained on board, but now ISS-19 officially became ISS-20. It would remain so until shortly before the return of Padalka and Barrett in October, together with the final space flight participant who was scheduled to arrive on Soyuz TMA-16 with the ISS-20/21 crew.

The makeup of the expanded international resident team on station soon changed, however, with the exchange of crew members on Shuttle. In July, Wakata was replaced by Kopra during STS-127, which also delivered the next element of the Kibo laboratory. Kopra remained on station for just over a month until August, when STS-128 delivered his replacement, Nicole Stott. Stott in turn remained on board until November when she returned on STS-129. She was the final Shuttle-transported station resident crew member.

During the ISS-19 phase, no EYAs were accomplished by the resident crew. However, during ISS-20 Padalka and Barratt completed two short excursions totaling 5 hours 6 minutes wearing the new improved Orlan-MK suits. The first of these (June 5, 4h 54 min) featured additional preparations for the arrival at the Zvezda Service Module of the Mini Research Module-2. During the EVA, Wakata remained inside Zvezda, allowing access to TMA-14 which was docked with the module’s rear port. In the event of an emergency, the EVA crew could have proceeded to the Soyuz if they had been unable to reenter Pirs. Romanenko, De Winne, and Thirsk remained in the American segment close to TMA-15 on Zarya. Fortunately, all went well and these well-planned and practiced contingency procedures were not required.

The second activity, on June 10, was a 12 min intravehicular activity (IVA, crew activity while wearing a spacesuit inside an unpressurized spacecraft)—the first on station since 2001. During this IVA, Padalka and Barratt depressurized the Zvezda Node to relocate a conical docking cover over the zenith port so that the MRM-2 could dock there. Later, both Kopra and Stott would assist with Shuttle-based assembly EVAs from the Quest airlock during STS-127 and STS-128. These were not classed as part of the residency EVA program.

TMA-14 was moved on July 2 from the rear port of Zvezda to the recently vacated (by the departing Progress M-02M) port of Pirs. This freed up the Zvezda port for Progress M-67, which would be used to reboost the altitude of the complex. The other three crew members remained in the ISS during the Soyuz relocation operation, which took about 26 minutes, after which the Soyuz crew reentered the station. With half the crew remaining inside, partial shutdown of the station was no longer required, saving both crew time and valuable experiment operating time.

This operation was followed by the arrival of the STS-127 mission (July 15­31) and later STS-128 (August 29-September 12). Another milestone was the arrival of the first Japanese HTV transfer vehicle on September 18, which was grappled by the station’s RMS. Its six tons of cargo would be transferred by means of the station’s robotic arms later.

In late September, the two ISS-20/21 crew members (Maxim Suraev and Jeff Williams) arrived with Canadian Space Tourist Guy Laliberte aboard Soyuz TMA 16. For a short time, the ISS included eight resident and one visiting crew member. On October 9, the formal change-of-command ceremony took place, with

Padalka handing over the reins to DeWinne. On October 11, Padalka, Barratt, and Laliberte transferred to TMA-14, undocked, and landed a few hours later. This expedition had seen a major milestone achieved in ISS operations and a highly successful period of activity, focused more on science than construction.

ISS-19/20 had logged almost 199 days in flight, of which 197 had been aboard the space station. The ISS-19 formal residency (April 2-May 29) lasted 57 days, while the ISS-20 residency (May 29-October 9) had logged 133 days, totaling 190 days of combined station command time for ISS-19/20.

Milestones

265th manned space flight 107th Russian manned space flight 100 th manned Soyuz flight 14th manned Soyuz TMA mission 18th ISS Soyuz mission (18S)

16th ISS Soyuz visiting mission 19/20th SS resident crew First ISS IVA in Zvezda node since 2001 First flight of Japanese HTV First ISS six-person residency (ISS-20)

Final planned three-person full resident crew (ISS-19)

First time representative from main ISS partners are represented on resident crew (NASA, RSA, ESA, CSA, JAXA)

Simonyi was the first space tourist to fly twice Final crew transfers via Shuttle (Wakata, Kopra, Stott)

Padalka celebrates his 51st birthday in space (June 21)

Flight crew

ALTMAN, Scott Douglas, 49, Captain USN (Retd.), NASA commander, fourth mission

Previous missions: STS-90 (1998), STS-106 (2000), STS-109 (2002) JOHNSON, Gregory Carl, 54, Captain USN (Retd.), NASA pilot GOOD, Michael Timothy, 45, Colonel USAF, NASA mission specialist 1 McARTHUR, Katherine Megan, 37, civilian, NASA mission specialist 2 GRUNSFELD, John Mace, 49, civilian, NASA mission specialist 3, fifth mission

Previous missions: STS-67 (1995), STS-81 (1997), STS-103 (1999), STS-109

(2002)

MASSIMINO, Michael James, 46, civilian, NASA mission specialist 4, second mission

Previous mission-. STS-109 (2002)

FEUSTEL, Andrew Jay, 43, civihan, NASA mission specialist 5

Flight log

STS-125 was the fifth and final servicing mission (SM) to the Hubble Space Telescope. It was also the sixth Shuttle mission devoted to the telescope’s orbital operations since 1990. The mission, as originally planned, was canceled in the wake of the 2003 Columbia tragedy, but was reinstated following a public and scientific lobby to fly one more Hubble-related mission. For space station Shuttle missions following the loss of Columbia, a rescue vehicle was prepared (normally as part of the next mission’s processing) and the station could be used as a safe haven until a rescue flight could be launched. As this was not a space station related mission and would be flying in a different orbit, the ISS was not an option. Instead, a second Shuttle was prepared on an adjoining pad as a potential rescue vehicle. When the Hubble flight was delayed and rescheduled, so too was

the rescue mission amended accordingly. The Shuttle Endeavour served as the backup rescue vehicle in a mission designated STS-400 (with a four-person crew). It remained on Pad 39B while STS-125 was in space, but once Atlantis was cleared for Earth return, Endeavour reverted to ISS mission preparations.

Atlantis preparations began in the OPF on February 20, 2008. The orbiter was subsequently moved across to the VAB on August 22 that year and the mated stack rolled out to Pad 39A on September 4, 2008. The mission was origin­ally scheduled for October 2008, but was changed to February 2009 when the system that transfers science data from the orbital observatory to Earth malfunc­tioned. The mission was postponed again when delivery of a second data-handling unit to the Cape was delayed. This resulted in the rescheduled launch date of May 2009.

Prior to the rendezvous with Hubble, a thorough inspection of the Shuttle’s heat shield was performed using the RMS. The close-up imagery of the orbiter’s surfaces was relayed to MCC for analysis by specialist teams on the ground. During this analysis, the Mission Management Team (MMT) noted an area of damage on the forward part of Atlantis where the wing blends into the fuselage. This was apparently minor damage but additional expert analysis was still con­ducted to make sure. It was subsequently decided by the MMT that the thermal covering of Atlantis was indeed safe for reentry at the end of the mission.

Atlantis was guided by Altman, assisted by Good and the rest of the crew, to within 50 ft (15.2m) of Hubble on May 13. The telescope was grappled by the

RMS (controlled by McArthur) without incident and then maneuvered into a Flight Support System (FSS) maintenance platform in the orbiter payload bay. In addition to supporting Hubble, this platform would provide power for thermal control during the service period while aboard the orbiter.

Five EVAs, totaling 36 hours 56 minutes, were conducted, achieving all of the mission’s objectives. Two of them went into the record books as the sixth and eighth longest EVAs in history. Two new instruments were installed on the telescope and a further two repaired, restoring them to operational life. The EVA crew also replaced gyroscopes and batteries as well as installing new thermal insu­lation panels for protection in orbit. Grunsfeld and Feustel logged three space walks each, totaling 20 hours 58 minutes, while Good and Massimino completed two EVAs each totaling 15 hours 58 minutes.

During the first EVA (May 14, 7h 20 min), Grunsfeld and Feustel replaced the Science Instrument Command and Data Handling Unit (SIC&DHU) and installed the Wide Field Camera 3. Grunsfeld installed the soft capture mechanism for future (though not yet planned) service missions, which would be post-Shuttle retirement. Meanwhile Feustel installed two latches over center kits in order to ease the opening and closing of the large access doors on the telescope. On the second EVA (May 15, 7h 56 min), Good and Massimino replaced three rate­sensing units which contained two gyroscopes each. Unfortunately, one of the replacement units would not fit, so a spare was used instead. The two astronauts also replaced a battery module from Bay 2 on the telescope.

The Corrective Optical Space Telescope Axial Replacement (COSTAR) was removed by Grunsfeld and Feustel on EVA 3 (May 16, 6 h 36 min). This had been installed during the first Hubble Service Mission in December 1993 to correct and refine the image generated from the telescope’s faulty main mirror. As it was no longer required, it was replaced with the Cosmic Origins Spectrograph. This new device would allow Hubble to peer farther into the depths of the universe than ever before, both in the near and far-ultraviolet ranges. Their next task was to repair the advanced camera for surveys, which involved the removal of 32 screws from an access panel, replacing the camera’s four circuit boards and installing a new power supply.

EVA-4 by Massimino and Good (May 17, 8h 20 min) included repairs to the telescope’s imaging spectrograph by replacing a power supply board. The astronauts experienced some difficulty with a handrail. This had to be removed before they could fit a fastener capture plate that was designed to retain over 100 screws during the removal of a cover plate. The astronauts found that a stripped bolt was preventing the handrail from coming free. They would receive guidance on how to overcome this problem from engineers at the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). Massimino eventually carefully bent and broke the handrail free to allow installation of the capture plate. This episode raised some concerns in Mission Control over the possibility of the effort involved causing damage to the astronaut’s pressure suit. All went well, though, and in fact was much easier than at first thought. However, the astronauts were unable to install a new outer blanket layer on the outside of Hubble Bay 8, so this task was delayed to the fifth and final EVA of the mission. This final EVA (May 18, 7 h 2min) saw Feustel and Grunsfeld exchange a battery module from Bay 3 for a fresh one, as well as removing and replacing the H2 fine guidance sensor. They were then able to install the new outer blanket layer on three bays outside the telescope.

The result of all this activity was a telescope with six working complementary science instruments. This gave Hubble a capability far beyond what was envi­sioned when the facility was launched in 1990 and an extended operational life to at least 2014. After Hubble was released on May 19, again using the RMS, a final separation maneuver was made and the berthing mechanism which had held Hubble in the payload bay during the mission was stowed for landing. The crew completed a further RMS-aided examination of the orbiter heat shield to search for any new damage from orbital debris but fortunately no significant damage was discovered.

The following day (May 20), the crew stowed gear and checked the RCS and flight control surfaces for entry and landing. The crew became the first to testify live from space on May 21, during a U. S. Senate Hearing in which they addressed the Senate Operations Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies, chaired by Senator Barbara Mikulski (Democrat) of Mary­land. She was the political driving force behind getting the STS-125 mission authorized. She and former U. S. Payload Specialist Senator Bill Nelson of Florida also talked to the crew.

Weather concerns and conditions at the Cape during May 22, 23, and 24 forced three consecutive landing waive-offs, requiring Atlantis to land at Edwards AFB, California on May 24, 2009. Just over a week later, the orbiter was ferried back to KSC on the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft, arriving back in Florida on June 2 after a two-day ferry flight. STS-125 had been a highly successful mission. Despite the apprehensions over flying an independent mission which could not visit the space station, the flight passed without major incident, ending a highly successful series of Hubble-related missions.

Milestones

266th manned space flight 156th U. S. manned space flight 126th Shuttle mission 30th flight of Atlantis 6th dedicated Shuttle HST mission 5th HST servicing mission Heaviest payload carried to Hubble on the Shuttle Final “solo” Shuttle mission of program Only post-Columbia-loss non-ISS Shuttle mission

In simple terms to attain true flight into space and achieve at least one orbit of Earth requires sufficient velocity and altitude to “fall” towards the planet in a closed orbit, which, as the surface curves away, is sufficient to loop around as long as the velocity and altitude is sustained. If not gravity will take over and the increasing density of the layers of the atmosphere drag the vehicle down towards the Earth once again. To escape low Earth orbit requires additional velocity “boosts” to increase speed to higher orbits or out towards the Moon or planets, using the gravitational forces of those celestial objects and the momentum of the vehicle to allow the spacecraft to journey towards them.

In an era of strained East/West relations following WWII, the growth in communism and the fear of a new, potentially nuclear, global conflict helped to create what has been termed the “Cold War”. Amid these fears of annihilation emerged a dramatic increase in the military arsenals of both the United States and the Soviet Union, creating the “Arms Race”. For military planners, gaining the high ground meant mastering a strategic advantage over the enemy. Attaining space flight capability in orbit around the Earth, or perhaps as far as the Moon, was about as high as you could hope to get in the 1950s. Of course, the only countries capable of achieving such a feat in the late 1950s were the communist Soviet Union and the capitalist United States. The “Space Race” which evolved between these two powerful nations and their ideologies was a competition to place the first object (satellite) in Earth orbit, send payloads to the Moon, and put the first man in space. The overriding goal during the first years of human space exploration was not scientific in purpose, but simply to beat the other superpower to the line. Doing so would be a clear demonstration, it was thought, of superior technology, implying strong military capability and making a great political and ideological statement.

It soon became obvious that enormous financial investment and infrastructure would be required to develop, mount, and sustain manned space flight operations. Military involvement was critical in the early years, if not in operational activities, then certainly to support launch, tracking, or recovery, or to provide the hardware and infrastructure to launch the payloads. As the program developed, so the balance between military and civilian participation shifted accordingly, with the support of the scientific community varying as required. For the Soviets, the complicated structure of the design bureaus and the supersecret nature of the civilian and military programs frequently served only to delay the development of advanced programs, such as the manned lunar landing, space shuttle, or space station efforts.

In contrast, the creation of the U. S. government space agency NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) in 1958 helped focus the “civilian” U. S. space program, but it did create the potential for competition and confrontation with the U. S. military—primarily the USAF. This friction was to

surface in congressional support for the development of the USAF Manned Orbit­ing Laboratory and NASA’s Apollo AppUcations (Skylab) space station programs and, much later, in convincing the Pentagon of the value of the NASA Space Shuttle for Department of Defense needs.

When President Kennedy committed America to reach the Moon by 1970, ideally before the Soviets, the Arms Race that had become the Space Race now evolved into a Moon Race. Even though it turned out to be purely one sided, at the time this was not clear, even to the Americans. When the U. S. committed to the Moon, only Yuri Gagarin had orbited the Earth, and then only once, during a 108-minute mission. America’s own space explorer, Alan Shepard, had experienced space but had not entered orbit, completing a 15-minute suborbital space “hop”. A second such flight was completed by Virgil Grissom in July 1961, but in August this was overshadowed by a mammoth 24-hour flight by Soviet cosmonaut Gherman Titov in Vostok 2. The bold commitment to place Americans on the Moon came as a surprise even to those involved in determining whether it could actually be done, so there was much work ahead. The clock was ticking and the Americans were clearly well behind in the race… for now.

As the new millennium approached, work on Mir continued, but only just. The demise of the Soviet Union, the creation of a new Russia, and the independent development of former communist states left much uncertainty. Russia now had little funding available, even for the bare essentials, so there was precious little available for space exploration. The program was rapidly losing its popularity in the new Russia, with former Soviet space museums becoming nightclubs and unused hardware left to rust in unused playgrounds. The severe reduction in funding meant Mir was in serious trouble.

In the short term, foreign investment helped, with a series of commercially supported visiting missions supplementing (and, on occasion, joining) long – duration expeditions. But, in the long term, something had to occur to keep the program going. That “something” would come from across the Atlantic.

2009-030A May 27, 2009

Pad 1, Site 5, Baikonur Cosmodrome, Republic of

Kazakhstan

December 1, 2009

57 km from the town of Arkalyk, Republic of Kazakhstan

Soyuz-FG (serial number Ю15000-030),

Soyuz TMA (serial number 225)

187 da 20 h 41 min 38 s Parus (“Sail”)

ISS resident crew (ISS-20/21), transport (19S) to establish six-person crew capability

Flight crew

ROMANENKO, Roman Yuriyevich, 37, Russian Federation Air Force, RSA Soyuz TMA commander, ISS flight engineer

DE WINNE, Frank, 48, Belgian Air Force, ESA (Belgian), Soyuz/ISS flight

engineer, second mission

Previous mission’. Soyuz TMA-1 (2002)

THIRSK, Robert Brent, 55, civilian (Canadian), CSA Soyuz/ISS flight engineer, second mission Previous mission: STS-78 (1996)

Flight log

It was with this mission that ISS crewing became a little more complicated to keep track of. On March 29, 2009, Soyuz TM-15 and its three crew members, representing Europe (Belgium), Russia, and Canada, docked to the station after a nominal 2-day flight from Baikonur. Already on board the station was the three ISS-19 crew members, representing Russia, Japan, and the U. S., marking a truly international complement. Unlike previous resident crew arrivals, the ISS-19 crew would not immediately return to Earth, but would remain on board as part of the first six-person resident crew, now designated ISS-20.

The TMA-15 flight was the first complete three-person ISS resident crew complement launched on a Russian launch vehicle and spacecraft since ISS-1 in 2000. The arrival of TMA-15 instigated the change in crew exchange protocol and represented a significant increase in resident crew time for science aboard the station. For the first time, a representative from each of the main ISS partners was part of the main crew.

At the time of docking with the station, Padalka, Barratt, and Wakata were in residence as ISS-19, and once the hatches were opened, the TMA-15 crew joined them as flight engineers and the six became ISS-20. On July 17, U. S. astronaut Kopra arrived on STS-127 (2J/A) to take over from JAXA astronaut Wakata, who returned at the end of that Shuttle mission. Barely six weeks later on August 31, Nicole Stott replaced Kopra during the STS-128 (17A) activities. Both Kopra and Stott served as flight engineers for the crew of ISS-20 and Stott remained as flight engineer for ISS-21/22 until she came home on STS-129 in November, shortly before the return of the core TMA-15 crew. These were the final Shuttle – delivered crew members. All station resident crew members for the foreseeable future would now be delivered by Russian Soyuz.

The ISS-20 experiment program continued the work conducted during ISS-19. With the Japanese and European laboratories recently installed, the opportunity for broadening the research had increased significantly. By the time this mission flew, most of the station hardware had been delivered by the Shuttle and reflected a change that was taking place. The ISS was evolving from an assembly site to a fully functioning scientific research facility. The Russians noted that during ISS-21/22, there would be 304 sessions on 47 experiments, while NASA reported that over 150 operating experiments would be completed under the station’s new role as a U. S. National Laboratory.

Two new crew members for ISS-21/22 arrived aboard TMA-16 on October 2, together with space flight participant Guy Laliberte. He would return with the TMA-14 pair (Padalka and Barratt) on October 11, leaving behind the ISS-21 expedition which would last just six weeks until the TMA-15 crew came home. Officially, ISS-21 began on October 9 and lasted until November 25. During ISS-21 there were no EYAs, but the crew did see the arrival of Progress M-03M and the release of the Japanese HTV-1 with about 725 kg of unwanted equipment and rubbish for burn-up in the atmosphere. On November 12, Mini Research Module-2 (which was delivered by a modified Progress M vehicle) docked with the zenith (upper) port of Zvezda. With all this activity, the crew was certainly not struggling to keep themselves occupied.

STS-129 departed on November 25 carrying Stott home and, just five days later, the TMA-15 trio departed the station for a landing in the early hours of December 1 after a historic and highly successful mission. Following these departures and for the first time since July 2006, the station was down to a skele­ton crew of just two until the next Soyuz launched just prior to Christmas 2010.

In a flight of 188 days, the TMA-15 crew had spent all but two of them on the space station. Of these, 133 were as members of the ISS-20 expedition and just 47 days as ISS-21. De Winne became the first European station commander (ISS-20) and Thirsk the first resident Canadian crew member. Future crewing would feature a rota of U. S.-Russian crew members and an allocation of Soyuz seats for Canadian, Japanese, and ESA crew members. NASA reported that the new expedition actually began with the undocking of the outgoing crew on the TMA (though the formal change of command actually took place a few days earlier). In fact, as the crew exchanged command, the outgoing crew became known as the “non-prime crew” for their final few days prior to coming home, while their replacements became the “prime crew”, which just seemed to add confusion to those following the formal trail of command and assignment.

Operating a rotating six-person crew and only flying on the Soyuz TMA spacecraft meant that there would be no free seats for fare-paying passengers. Unless separate funds for a complete Soyuz vehicle could be found by those who arranged SFP/tourist flights, it would be very hard for anyone other than a profes­sional astronaut or cosmonaut to fulfill their dream of flying in space for some considerable time.

Milestones

267th manned space flight 108th Russian manned space flight 101st manned Soyuz flight 15th manned Soyuz TMA mission 19th ISS Soyuz mission (19S)

20/21 st ISS resident crew

Romanenko is the son of cosmonaut Yuri Romanenko (selected 1970), who flew on STS-26 (1977), Soyuz 38 (1980), and Soyuz TM2 (1987)

Final Shuttle-launched ISS crew members (Kopra and Stott)

Flight crew

POLANSKY, Mark Lewis, 53, civilian, NASA commander, third mission Previous missions-. STS-98 (2000), STS-116 (2006)

HURLEY, Douglas Gerald, 42, USMC, NASA pilot WOLF, David Alan, 52, civilian, NASA mission specialist 1, fourth mission Previous missions-. STS-58 (1993), STS-86/89/Mir (1997), STS-112 (2002) CASSIDY, Christopher John, 39, USN, NASA mission specialist 2 PAYETTE, Julie, 45, CSA, (Canadian) mission specialist 3, second mission Previous mission-. STS-96 (1999)

MARSHBURN, Thomas Henry, 48, civilian, NASA mission specialist 4 ISS resident crew exchange

KOPRA, Timothy Lennart, 45, U. S. Army, NASA mission specialist 5,

ISS flight engineer (up only)

WAKATA, Koichi, 45, Japan, JAXA mission specialist 5, ISS flight engineer

(down only), third mission

Previous missions-. STS-72 (1996), STS-92 (2000)

Flight log

The 29th Shuttle mission to ISS featured a range of robotic operations, most of which focused around the delivery of elements of the Japanese Kibo laboratory module. In addition, U. S. NASA astronaut Tim Kopra was the latest resident crew member to arrive via the Shuttle. He replaced outgoing Japanese (JAXA) astronaut Koichi Wakata, who had been on the station since March.

Final mission preparations began with Endeavour being taken into the OPF on December 13, 2008. The orbiter was then moved across to the VAB on April 10, 2009, where it was mated with the twin SRB and ET before being rolled out to Pad 39B on April 17. This preparation was for its role as a “rescue” vehicle for the forthcoming STS-125 Hubble Service Mission. In the event, this requirement was not called upon after the STS-125 mission proceeded smoothly. On May 31, the STS-127 stack was relocated across to Pad 39A for a planned launch on June 13.

On June 12, a hydrogen leak at the Ground Umbilical Carrier Plate (GUCP) during tanking caused the June 13 attempt to be scrubbed. The seal on the 17 in. (43.18 cm) disconnect valve was replaced and the launch rescheduled to June 17. This attempt was also scrubbed in the early hours of the planned launch day when a similar type of hydrogen gas leak occurred at the GUCP. Troubleshooting of the vent valve took an hour and when it became clear that the problem could not be easily resolved in the current launch window, the launch was eventually rescheduled for July 11. This next attempt was also postponed 24 hours to allow technicians more time to evaluate lightning strikes at the launchpad, which had occurred during a thunderstorm on July 10. It was determined from sensors that 11 lightning strikes had occurred within 0.35 miles (0.56 km) of the pad, which was inside the pad threshold. Launch was rescheduled again for July 12, but once again was scrubbed, this time at T — 11 minutes before scheduled launch time due to weather concerns near the Shuttle Landing Facility (SLF) that violated rules for landing. A fifth launch attempt on July 13 resulted in another postponement due to lightning and thunderstorms within the 20 nautical mile circle around the pad. The sixth attempt, rescheduled for July 15, finally occurred without incident.

During the standard two-day flight to the space station, the crew completed the customary survey of Endeavour’s thermal protection system using the RMS boom assembly. The pressure suits to be used on the EYAs were also prepared and checked. The now regular backflip maneuver was completed just prior to docking. Shortly after entering the space station, Kopra joined the ISS resident crew and Wakata transferred to the Shuttle crew, ending his formal ISS crew residency after 122 days.

There were five EYAs conducted as part of the STS-127 mission, totaling 30 hours 30 minutes. Four astronauts (including Kopra) participated in the excur­sions, teaming up in pairs. Marshburn logged 18 hours 59 minutes on three EVAs, Wolf logged 18 hours 24 minutes on his three space walks, and Cassidy amassed 18 hours 5 minutes on his three excursions. Kopra logged 5 hours 32 minutes on his single EVA as part of the STS-127 program.

During the first EVA (July 18, 5h 32 min), Wolf and Kopra managed to complete all of their primary tasks. These included preparations for the berthing mechanism on Kibo and on the Japanese Exposed Facility, which was transferred to the station. They also deployed an unmanned cargo carrier attachment system on the P3 truss, which had failed to unfurl properly during STS-119 the previous March.

Robotic arm operations continued during and in between the space walks, supporting and supplementing EVA activities. Following the first EVA, the Shuttle RMS and the station robotic arm were used to latch the JEF to Kibo’s laboratory. The installation was viewed by the Kibo RMS. Further robotic activities included the installation of the Integrated Cargo Carrier-Vertical Light Deployable (ICC-VLD) cargo pallet. This was located on the port side of the station’s Mobile Base System (MBS).

During the second EVA (July 20, 6 h 53 min), Wolf and Marshburn removed a Ku-band space-to-ground antenna, a pump module, and a liner drive unit from the Integrated Cargo Carrier. The two astronauts then attached these items to a storage platform on the P3 truss. Next, Marshburn mounted a grapple bar onto an ammonia tank assembly, which the STS-128 crew would later move with the help of the RMS. He also attached two external power connector insulation sleeves to the Station-to-Shuttle Power Transfer System. The planned installation of a video camera was deferred from this EVA to a later excursion. This EVA had taken place on the 40th anniversary of the famous first lunar surface activity (moonwalk) conducted by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin during the Apollo 11 mission. Both the station and Shuttle crews honored the legacy of that historic mission and event.

Following the second EVA, Polansky and Payette used the Shuttle RMS to pass the Japanese Logistics Module’s Exposed Facility from Endeavour to Canadarm2 on the station. Canadarm 2 was operated by Hurley and Wakata, who then attached it to the Kibo laboratory. Astronauts Hurley and Payette then used the station’s robotic arm to move the ICC and to secure the batteries in preparation for the P6 truss battery swap.

The third EVA (July 22, 5h 59 min) saw Wolf and Cassidy remove insulation covers from the Kibo Laboratory, as well as preparing the JES payloads for trans­port to the Exposed Facility the following day. Two batteries were also installed but the EVA was curtailed early when CO levels in Cassidy’s suit were found to have increased more than expected. The next day, several astronauts took turns to use the Japanese RMS for the first time to move equipment from a Japanese Payload Carrier to the Exposed Facility on the exterior of Kibo. The initial move­ment of this new arm was faster than expected, so the arm was transitioned to a Slower Manual Mode. The three installed experiments on the facility were the Monitor of All-sky X-ray Image (MAXI), the Inter-orbit Communications System and, the Space Environment Data Acquisition Equipment-Attached Payload.

During the fourth EVA (July 24, 7h 12 min), Cassidy and Marshburn installed the remaining four batteries on the P6 truss. Four of the older batteries were stored on the ICC for the return to Earth. The completion of robotic work would include the transfer of the ICC back to Endeavour’s payload bay by means of the station and Shuttle robotic systems.

The fifth and final EVA (July 27, 4h 54 min) saw Marshburn and Cassidy install video cameras on the front and back of the Japanese Exposed Facility to assist with the forthcoming rendezvous and berthing of the H-II Transfer Vehicle scheduled to arrive that coming September. The EVA astronauts also secured multilayered insulation around the Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (Dextre), split out power channels for the station’s CMGs (Control Moment Gyros), tied down cables, and installed handrails and a portable foot restraint to aid future space walks.

Alongside the five EVAs and associated robotic activities, work continued inside the station. Crew members and flight controllers spent their time trouble­shooting the failure of the Waste and Hygiene Compartment (the toilet in the Destiny Laboratory Module). The Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly on the station also tripped a circuit breaker on July 28 and the ground team switched to manual operation of the backup heater.

Wakata had logged 133 days on the station by the time Endeavour undocked on July 28. After 10 days 23 hours 41 minutes of joint operations, the undocking was followed by the traditional fly-around of the complex, controlled by pilot Hurley, before moving away from the station.

After separation from the station, work was not over for the crew. In addition to a checkout of the Flight Control System and maneuvering engines and stowing of gear, the crew deployed two pairs of small satellites from the Endeavour payload bay prior to the landing at Kennedy Space Center. These were the Dual RF Astrodynamic GPS Orbital Navigation Satellite (DRAGONSat) and the dual Atmospheric Neutral Density Equipment 2 (ANDE-2) satellite. The subsatellites were designed and built by students at the University of Texas in Austin and the Texas A&M University in College stations. The ANDE-2 microsatellites would

measure the density and composition of the rarefied atmosphere 200 miles (321.8 km) above the surface of Earth. DRAGONSat de-orbited on March 17, 2010, while the pair of ANDE satellites reentered the atmosphere on March 29 and August 18, 2010, respectively.

Milestones

268th manned space flight 157th U. S. manned space flight 127th Shuttle mission 23 rd Endeavour mission 10th Endeavour ISS mission 29th Shuttle ISS mission 2nd Shuttle mission to feature five space walks

Flight crew

STURCKOW, Frederick Wilford, 48, USMC, NASA commander, fourth mission

Previous missions: STS-88 (1998), STS-105 (2001), STS-117 (2007)

FORD, Kevin Anthony, 49, USAF (Retd.), NASA pilot

FORRESTER, Patrick Graham, 52, USAF (Retd.), NASA mission specialist 1,

third mission

Previous missions: STS-105 (2001), STS-117 (2007)

HERNANDEZ, Jose Moreno, 47, civilian, mission specialist 2/ffight engineer OLIVAS, John Daniel, 44, civilian, NASA mission specialist 3, second mission Previous mission: STS-117 (2007)

FUGLESANG, Arne Christer, 52, civilian (Swedish), ESA mission specialist 4, second mission

Previous mission: STS-116 (2006) ISS resident crew exchange

STOTT, Nicole Maria Passano, 46, civilian, NASA mission specialist 5, ISS-20

flight engineer (up only)

KOPRA, Timothy Lennart, 45, U. S.A., NASA mission specialist 5, ISS-20 flight engineer (down only)

Flight log

According to reports from NASA, this was the mission which marked the beginning of the station’s transition from assembly to a continuous scientific research facility. The Leonardo MPLM was packed with supplies, stores, and new equipment to continue outfitting of the station. It was also the final Shuttle

mission to deliver a new resident station crew member. Nicolle Stott (NASA) would replace Tim Kopra after his 58 days aboard the orbital complex.

Preparations for the mission saw orbiter Discovery return to the OPF on March 28, 2009. It was rolled over to the VAB on July 26 for mating with the SRB and ET, with rollout to the pad occurring on August 4. The original August 25 launch attempt was scrubbed due to adverse weather conditions and the second attempt on August 26 was also postponed (during the refueling of the ET) follow­ing indications that a valve on the Main Propulsion System (MPS) had failed to perform as expected. A third attempt (August 27) was also postponed 24 hours to allow engineers more time to resolve an issue with a valve in the vehicle’s propul­sion system. The fourth launch attempt, on August 28, was accomplished successfully and completed without any major issues.

Prior to docking with the station, the obligatory inspection routines were completed to check the integrity of the heat shield. Following analysis of the imagery on the ground, the thermal protection system was deemed secure for entry and landing.

After the docking and opening of internal hatches, Kopra became part of the Shuttle crew while Stott transferred to the resident crew. Kopra had logged 45 days on board the station as an official resident crew member. The crew also pre­pared and moved the OBSS across to the station’s Canadarm2 to create additional room for maneuvering the Leonardo MPLM from the cargo bay to the Harmony

Node on station the following day. The rest of the day was spent preparing the pressurized cargo module for the transfer of supplies and logistics, an operation which would take the next six days to complete. Olivas, Hernandez, and Stott also prepared the tools for the planned EVAs, placing them in the station’s Quest airlock.

Three EVAs were completed on this mission, focused upon replacing experiments outside the ESA Columbus Laboratory and installing a new ammonia storage tank. Nicole Stott participated in the first EVA (September 1, 6h 35 min) with Olivas, during which they removed the depleted ammonia tank on the PI (Port 1) segment of the truss. The ammonia in these tanks is used to cool the station and expel the heat generated by the resident crew and onboard systems.

The next task was to retrieve two science experiments, EUTEF and MISSE-6, from the ESA Columbus Laboratory. The European Technology Exposure Facility (EuTEF) held a number of different experiments which collected data on the space environment. The sixth Materials International Space Station Experi­ment (MISSE-6) was housed in two suitcase-sized containers and was used to evaluate the effects of the environment on various materials and coating samples. Olivas reported seeing what he described as MMOD (micrometeoroid and orbital debris) “hits” on a station toolbox and the Quest airlock. He took photos of the area for later evaluation on the ground to determine whether the damage was a cause for concern, although hits for MMOD are not unexpected. For 30 minutes during the EVA, MCC Houston did not have communication with either the station or the Shuttle due to bad weather in Guam that effected the TDRSS reception.

On the second EVA (September 3, 6h 39 min), Olivas and Fuglesang installed a new ammonia tank on the PI truss segment and bolted the removed empty assembly into the orbiter’s payload bay. Protective lens covers were installed on the station RMS cameras, which would shield them from contamination when the arm was used to dock the Japanese H-ll Transfer Module later that month (September). The two astronauts also installed a portable foot restraint on the station’s truss system for use during upcoming missions. The astronauts discov­ered that the heater cables on the exterior of PMA-3 appeared to be in an incorrect configuration to extend sufficiently for planned relocation and as a result this task had to be deferred.

The final EVA of this mission (September 5, 7h lmin) saw Olivas and Fuglesang set up a payload attachment system on the station truss, which would be activated on the next mission. In addition, they replaced a rate gyro assembly and remote power control module, installed two GPS antennas, and removed a slide wire on the Unity Node. The connection of two avionics cables could not be completed on this EVA and had to be rescheduled for a future excursion. These would eventually be connected to Tranquility (Node 3), the final main module that would be delivered to the U. S. segment. The cables were wrapped in insulation, but it was found that one of the connectors on one of the cables would not mate. At the end of the EVA Fuglesang’s helmet-mounted video camera and headlight system became detached, so Olivas helped Fuglesang to connect a tether to the system and plans were devised to inspect its latches after they were back inside the spacecraft.

In total, the three space walks accumulated 20 hours 15 minutes. Olivas logged 20 hours 15 minutes in three EVAs, Fuglesang 13 hours 40 minutes on two space walks, and Stott 6 hours 35 minutes on her single venture outside.

On September 2, the Shuttle and station crews transferred the Fluids Integrated Rack, Materials Science Research Rack-1, and Minus Eighty-Degree Laboratory Freezer-2 from Leonardo and installed them in the U. S. Laboratory Destiny. In addition, ISS resident crew member Mike Barrett installed and out­fitted the third and fourth planned NASA crew quarters facihties. Inside the station, crew members replaced one of the 16 common berthing mechanism bolts used to secure the Leonardo cargo carrier to the station, as it had not operated correctly earlier in the mission. An old oxygen generation assembly water filter was also opened and inspected. It had been replaced prior to the arrival of the Shuttle. It was found that the filter was 70-80% blocked and the inspection increased confidence that the replacement filter had returned the system to full functionality.

During the docked phase, NASA reported that approximately 7.5 tons of equipment and supplies had been transferred out of Leonardo and 2,4001b (1,088.64 kg) of discards and experiment results placed back inside the module for return to Earth, all under the supervision of loadmaster Fuglesang. The Shuttle middeck held a further 8,8601b (4,018.89 kg) of returned items. One of these was the Disney astronaut character Buzz Lightyear from the Toy Story films. This was part of the NASA “Toys in Space” project designed to encourage students to pursue studies in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The Disney “Space Ranger” had logged 15 months on board the station. MPLM Leo­nardo was returned to the payload bay on September 7.

Discovery undocked on September 8 after 8 days 18 hours 32 minutes of joint operations. Following the normal fly-around of the station and pre-landing checks, the orbiter was prepared for landing. Weather concerns prevented a return to the Cape on September 10 and again the next day. The landing was completed on Runway 22 at Edwards AFB in California. On his mission, Kopra had logged a total of 58 days in flight, of which 8 were aboard the space station as a Shuttle crew member and 5 were spent aboard the Shuttle either flying to or coming home from the station. As well as the normal postflight activities for the “human” space crew, the “other” space hero of the mission—Buzz Lightyear—was celebrated with a tickertape parade alongside his space station crew mates and Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin at Walt Disney World in Florida on October 2, 2009.

Milestones

269th manned space flight 158th U. S. manned spaceflight 128th Shuttle mission 37th Discovery mission 11th Discovery ISS mission 30th ISS Shuttle assembly mission

Following the publication of the first edition of Praxis Manned Spaceflight Log 1961-2006 we were pleased with the response and feedback from readers. It was always our intention to produce subsequent works covering the years beyond 2006 and it was rewarding to know that the earlier volume provided such a handy quick reference guide to each manned space mission; a guide that could lead to further research, or just answer a query. The work was never intended to be a definitive account of every mission, and it remains doubtful if such an encyclopedic series of volumes will ever be written, and in the scope of the original project there was simply not enough pages to expand each entry further than a brief summary.

For the current work we decided to cover the missions flown to the end of the fifth decade and those in the opening two years of the sixth decade of human orbital space flight operations. We were therefore able to update the original entry for Soyuz TMA-9 which had just been launched when the book went to press. By including the flights in 2011 we could introduce the first year in a new decade which also marked a number of milestones in space exploration.

In April 2011 the 50th anniversary of Vostok, the first space flight by Yuri Gagarin was celebrated around the world. That month also saw the 40th anniversary of the launch of Salyut, the world’s first space station and the 30th anniversary of the first Space Shuttle mission by Columbia. In October the 20th anniversary of the launch of Soyuz TM-13, the final manned space flight under the Soviet Union was quietly achieved, whilst back in March the 10th anniversary of the first exchange of ISS expeditions took place with the ISS-1 crew handing over to ISS-2. So, in the history books at least, 2011 was a banner year for manned space flight anniversaries, and also added a new entry with the final flight of the Space Shuttle in July and the mission of STS-135.

With the Americans flying the final Shuttle missions in 2011 so the Russians completed the final evaluations of the upgraded Soyuz TMA-M spacecraft. With the retirement of the Shuttle the TMA-M became the primary crew transport and rescue

vehicle for ISS operations for the next few years. In September the Chinese began their next phase of manned space operation with the launch of their first Salyut-class space station called Tiangong (“Heavenly Palace”).

The following year saw the first operational launches of the latest version of the venerable Soyuz and the initial crew to visit the Chinese space station. The Shenzhou 9 crew featured a three-person team including Jing Haipeng, the first Chinese taikonaut to make a second flight, having flown on Shenzhou 7 in 2008 and Liu Yang the first Chinese woman to fly in space. The year also saw the first (unmanned) commercial mission dock with the ISS, the SpaceX Dragon spacecraft, which gave a successful demonstration of the capacity of the vehicle to support future manned space flights as one of several American aerospace company designs hoping to replace the Space Shuttle.

This book, therefore, focuses upon the latest developments covering September 2006 through December 2012, a period of six years in which the main space station assembly was completed, yet another lease of life was given to Soyuz after over 40 years of operational service, and a significant new step in the development of Chinese permanent presence in space. In this time period there were over 40 new space flights to insert into the log, an impressive total.

We have not, however, neglected the rich ancestry of these recent missions. In the earlier volume we explained the methods and systems available to reach space across the 1961 to 2006 period and, as we focused upon orbital space flight, we included a section that explained the quest for space in which efforts were made in ballistic suborbital flight by space capsules or astro-flights by winged vehicles, all within the confines of the Earth’s atmosphere. This included the 13 X-15 rocket plane astro-flights between 1962 and 1968 which surpassed the 80 km (50 mile) altitude, the two 1961 Mercury-Redstone suborbital missions that both surpassed the 185 km (115 miles) altitude, and all three 2004 SpaceShipOne X-Prize flights in excess of 100 km altitude (62 miles).

For this current edition we have amended the opening two chapters to overview those earlier efforts and incorporated the latest development and achievements to bring the story up to date and cover 50 years of operations. For the missions flown between 1961 and 2012 we have presented a short overview which describes the main milestones and advances within the first five decades of human space flight activities and what lessons were learned or experiences gained within each decade.

From Chapter 3 we cover the new space flights completed between September 2006 and December 2010 completing the fifth decade of operations including an update to conclude the Soyuz TMA-9 entry begun in the earlier edition. Chapter 4 commences the story of the sixth decade for missions flown in 2011 and to the end of September 2012. We have also included a brief entry for Soyuz TMA-06M launched and docked with the station in October 2012. These entries follow the format adopted in the earlier volume to provide continuity. A summary is then added for Chapter 5 which includes a resume of Soyuz TMA-07M, the final mission planned for 2012, looks forward to the remaining years of the sixth decade of operations, and discusses what may be the future of human space activities beyond that.

A series of appendixes and a bibliography complete the work offering further reference to the main text. The updated tables cover the period 1961-2012 and we have included a full EVA log which originally appeared in the companion title Walking in Space.

Having realized that the most efficient method to punch through the atmosphere, gain the velocity to counter the pull of Earth’s gravity, and “fly in space” was the rocket, the next challenge was to devise the best way to harness that power for both unmanned and manned operations. The main difference between those operations was, of course, the safety of the human crew being carried. As missile rocketry was still in its infancy, the chances of a vehicle blowing up on the launch – pad or in the early stages of flight were very high. The development of rescue systems and striving to ensure the safety of the launch vehicle was paramount. This effort became known as man-rating.

By the 1950s, only two nations had the capability and infrastructure to support a concerted effort to explore space; the U. S.S. R. and the United States. It was here that the military consideration of “securing the high ground” developed the Cold War “arms race” into a “space race” and, eventually, a “moon race”.

What followed was a series of one-person flights that pushed the boundaries of human space flight endeavor from a few minutes to up to a few days in the next two years. It was a rapid advancement. The four U. S. Mercury orbital missions during 1962 and 1963 increased U. S. durations from 4 hours to 8, then 22 hours. A planned three-day Mercury mission was canceled, as the agency wanted to move to the more advanced two-man Gemini missions in preparation for the Apollo series.

In 1962, and again in 1963, the Soviets flew two dual flights, increasing their mission durations to between 3 and 5 days and once again stealing the headlines by flying the first female space explorer, Valentina Tereshkova, in June 1963 (Vostok 6) and the longest solo space flight (5 days), by Valeri Bykovsky. The one-person Vostok was then modified to carry additional crew members (all without spacesuits). It reappeared as Voskhod 1 in October 1964, flying a three – person crew (a pilot, doctor, and scientist), before the two-person Voskhod 2 in

MtriCUN*

poiio

Comparing the pioneering American manned spacecraft.

March 1965 during which Alexei Leonov performed the world’s first space walk. These missions were politically motivated, inserted as “space spectaculars” designed to upstage the American Gemini flights, as well as filling time until the more advanced three-person Soyuz was ready. The Voskhod flights were very risky and achieved very little apart from Leonov’s space walk. They diverted resources away from the Soyuz program, the real Soviet competition to Gemini and Apollo.

The multi-purpose Soyuz was designed to perform a variety of tasks for the Soviets. These included rendezvous and docking missions, as a space station crew ferry, as a solo scientific research platform, some with clearly military objectives and, in its guise as Zond, as a two-person lunar transport craft with separate one – person lunar lander. Developed by the OKB-1 design bureau under the powerful leadership of Chief Designer Sergei Korolev, the driving force of the Soviet space program since its inception, Soyuz was hoped to be the salvation of the Soviet effort in space, trying to capture the headlines from the Americans. Unfortunately, the program was plagued with problems from the start. In January 1966 Korolev died on the operating table during surgery and with his loss came a power struggle

not only at OKB but with other design bureaus for government-supported space programs. Then in April 1967 Cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov was lost in a landing accident on Soyuz 1, and over the next few years difficulties in man-rating the lunar launch vehicle the N1 saw the Soviets abandon reaching the Moon in favor of the creation of large space stations. They issued statements to the effect that the Moon was never actually a target for their cosmonauts at all, which is now known not to be the case. It was a difficult time for the Soviet program.

The Americans, on the other hand, were very successful with their second – generation spacecraft, Gemini. Between March 1965 and November 1966, 10 two-man missions were flown with remarkable consistency. Gemini was planned as a stepping stone between the one-man Mercury and three-man Apollo and was designed to extend the experience of American missions from 1 to 14 days, which was the expected average duration of the Apollo lunar missions. Another objective of Gemini was to perfect the skills of rendezvous and docking and close quarters formation flying, known as Proximity Operations, or “Prox-Ops”. The program also provided the opportunity to conduct far more extensive space walks than had been possible on Voskhod. Incorporating a crew compartment hatch that could be opened in space allowed one astronaut on each of Gemini flights 4, 9, 10, 11, and 12 to conduct pioneering American EVAs. Gemini also afforded the opportunity to fly a number of small experiments and conduct scientific observations on its longer missions and also to perfect the techniques of precision splashdown. On the whole, NASA gained a significant amount of experience with Gemini, taking the long-duration record from the Soviets, increasing their EVA experience, and perfecting docking with unmanned targets. These were important skills to be mastered in advance of the Apollo series of missions and beyond. Indeed, the experience gained during Gemini makes it one of the most important, if still most overlooked, programs in human space flight history.