Mar 12, 2021 08:35 PM
(This post was last modified: Mar 13, 2021 05:40 AM by C C.)
Trump’s Moon program survived a transfer of power, so what’s next?
https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/12/22323...a-timeline
INTRO: The Trump administration’s Moon-to-Mars program has already dodged the fate of many past presidential space programs: cancellation under new leadership. Last month, White House press secretary Jen Psaki announced the Biden administration’s support for Artemis, NASA’s flagship lunar agenda.
It was a rare passing of the baton between two administrations at odds with one another in virtually every other area. And it quelled some industry fears that Biden would shelve the moonshot plan entirely. While still in its infancy, the Artemis program unleashed a wave of industry momentum, partially thanks to an energizing, yet wildly unrealistic target date of 2024 for planting boots on the Moon.
To get a sense of what’s next for Artemis and NASA, The Verge spoke with Bhavya Lal, NASA’s acting chief of staff and currently the agency’s most senior Biden appointee...
[...] the NASA-Russia relationship is changing. Roscosmos, Russia’s space agency, has been reluctant to extend its alliance with NASA to the Moon, and last year the US sought to exclude Russia from early talks on the Artemis Accords. This week, Russia made good on its claims to ditch Artemis by announcing a new agreement with China to build a rival Moon base and space station in lunar orbit, cementing a new front in an increasingly polarized race into deep space.
NASA is courting its own allies for Artemis, but it’s barred from collaborating with China, thanks to a 2011 law called the Wolf Amendment, named after the now-retired Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA). But as Beijing ups its game on the Moon, some of Biden’s space advisors have argued against the Chinese exclusion policy. “Trying to exclude them I think is a failing strategy,” former astronaut Pam Melroy told Politico last year, before joining Biden’s NASA transition team.
Lal tamps down prospects of NASA-China cooperation under Biden’s NASA: “I don’t expect China collaborations, at least on the Artemis program, in any way shape or form.”
She says the NASA-Russia relationship, on the other hand, should continue for the foreseeable future. “There’s no reason we shouldn’t be collaborating with them in deep space activities.” Despite Russia bowing out of NASA’s Lunar Gateway program, NASA said in a statement to The Verge on Wednesday that “they did offer to continue exploring interoperability and we welcome such a discussion.” (MORE - details)
US Air Force says it will test bizarre 'hypersonic' weapon this month
https://www.livescience.com/us-hypersoni...-test.html
EXCERPTS: The missile, known as AGM-183A, is supposed to be the first hypersonic weapon — or Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW) — in the U.S. arsenal. It should move so quickly through the atmosphere — about 20 times the speed of sound — at such low altitudes that it's impossible for enemy missile defense systems to shoot out of the air.
[...] The U.S. isn't the only country working on hypersonic weapons technology. As Live Science previously reported, Russian President Vladimir Putin first announced his country's own hypersonic weapons program in 2018, promising the nation's hypersonic weapon would reach Mach 20.
Pavel Podvig, a military analyst, told Live Science at the time that such weapons likely won't be useful. "It has been described as a weapon in search of a mission," he said. "My take is, you don't really need this kind of capability. It doesn't really change much in terms of ability to hit targets."
That's because ICBMs are already perfectly capable of evading missile defense systems. The U.S. has the most advanced missile defense technology in the world; and according to Union of Concerned Scientists physicist Laura Grego and many other analysts it simply does not work. So it's not clear why a hypersonic missile would be necessary for striking any other country. The Air Force does emphasize the idea that an ARRW might be useful against "time sensitive" targets, because of its high speed (at least compared to non-ICBM missiles typically used to deliver non-nuclear weapons).
The danger of hypersonic weapons, Podvig said, is that they aren't covered by existing treaties designed to prevent arms races. And there's still a great deal of uncertainty around the technology. "These systems create greater risks of [strategic] miscalculation," Podvig said, "and it's not clear if we can effectively deal with those risks."
Meanwhile, there are questions about whether hypersonic tech will work at all... (MORE - details)
https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/12/22323...a-timeline
INTRO: The Trump administration’s Moon-to-Mars program has already dodged the fate of many past presidential space programs: cancellation under new leadership. Last month, White House press secretary Jen Psaki announced the Biden administration’s support for Artemis, NASA’s flagship lunar agenda.
It was a rare passing of the baton between two administrations at odds with one another in virtually every other area. And it quelled some industry fears that Biden would shelve the moonshot plan entirely. While still in its infancy, the Artemis program unleashed a wave of industry momentum, partially thanks to an energizing, yet wildly unrealistic target date of 2024 for planting boots on the Moon.
To get a sense of what’s next for Artemis and NASA, The Verge spoke with Bhavya Lal, NASA’s acting chief of staff and currently the agency’s most senior Biden appointee...
[...] the NASA-Russia relationship is changing. Roscosmos, Russia’s space agency, has been reluctant to extend its alliance with NASA to the Moon, and last year the US sought to exclude Russia from early talks on the Artemis Accords. This week, Russia made good on its claims to ditch Artemis by announcing a new agreement with China to build a rival Moon base and space station in lunar orbit, cementing a new front in an increasingly polarized race into deep space.
NASA is courting its own allies for Artemis, but it’s barred from collaborating with China, thanks to a 2011 law called the Wolf Amendment, named after the now-retired Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA). But as Beijing ups its game on the Moon, some of Biden’s space advisors have argued against the Chinese exclusion policy. “Trying to exclude them I think is a failing strategy,” former astronaut Pam Melroy told Politico last year, before joining Biden’s NASA transition team.
Lal tamps down prospects of NASA-China cooperation under Biden’s NASA: “I don’t expect China collaborations, at least on the Artemis program, in any way shape or form.”
She says the NASA-Russia relationship, on the other hand, should continue for the foreseeable future. “There’s no reason we shouldn’t be collaborating with them in deep space activities.” Despite Russia bowing out of NASA’s Lunar Gateway program, NASA said in a statement to The Verge on Wednesday that “they did offer to continue exploring interoperability and we welcome such a discussion.” (MORE - details)
US Air Force says it will test bizarre 'hypersonic' weapon this month
https://www.livescience.com/us-hypersoni...-test.html
EXCERPTS: The missile, known as AGM-183A, is supposed to be the first hypersonic weapon — or Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW) — in the U.S. arsenal. It should move so quickly through the atmosphere — about 20 times the speed of sound — at such low altitudes that it's impossible for enemy missile defense systems to shoot out of the air.
[...] The U.S. isn't the only country working on hypersonic weapons technology. As Live Science previously reported, Russian President Vladimir Putin first announced his country's own hypersonic weapons program in 2018, promising the nation's hypersonic weapon would reach Mach 20.
Pavel Podvig, a military analyst, told Live Science at the time that such weapons likely won't be useful. "It has been described as a weapon in search of a mission," he said. "My take is, you don't really need this kind of capability. It doesn't really change much in terms of ability to hit targets."
That's because ICBMs are already perfectly capable of evading missile defense systems. The U.S. has the most advanced missile defense technology in the world; and according to Union of Concerned Scientists physicist Laura Grego and many other analysts it simply does not work. So it's not clear why a hypersonic missile would be necessary for striking any other country. The Air Force does emphasize the idea that an ARRW might be useful against "time sensitive" targets, because of its high speed (at least compared to non-ICBM missiles typically used to deliver non-nuclear weapons).
The danger of hypersonic weapons, Podvig said, is that they aren't covered by existing treaties designed to prevent arms races. And there's still a great deal of uncertainty around the technology. "These systems create greater risks of [strategic] miscalculation," Podvig said, "and it's not clear if we can effectively deal with those risks."
Meanwhile, there are questions about whether hypersonic tech will work at all... (MORE - details)