Latest news with #SpaceLaunchSystem
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Science
- Yahoo
China Nails Pad Abort Test for Next-Gen Taikonaut Capsule
The China Manned Space Engineering Office (CMSEO) announced a successful test of its pad-abort system for the in-development Mengzhou spacecraft this week. This represents an important step in China's plans to send taikonauts to the Moon's surface sometime in the next few years, though there are still many steps between this and an eventual lunar mission. Like the USA and several other countries, China has expressed a growing interest in a manned mission to the Moon in the coming years, in what would be the first human feet to touch down on the celestial body in over five decades. This 21st-century space race could be important for setting the tone of the industrialization of space and future missions to Mars and beyond. That's a long way off for now, with China still developing the Long March 10 rocket and the Lanyue lunar lander, both of which would be integral parts of any future lunar missions. In the near term, though, the CMSEO is working on the safety features of its Mengzhou spacecraft, which would carry future taikonauts into low Earth orbit and beyond. On June 17, the Mengzhou successfully fired its solid rocket escape engines from the launch pad, firing the craft up and away from the launch facility, before triggering three descent parachutes. The craft then safely touched down a few minutes later using self-deployed air cushions. The CMSEO claimed the test was a "complete success," as per in the video above, you can see the craft tip over after landing, which probably wasn't intended. Still, this test shows the functionality of the safety system that would kick in should any future launches of manned missions encounter dangerous conditions on the launchpad, where the lives of the taikonauts are in danger. If such an event occurred, the safety system would kick in and tear the manned capsule from the rocket assembly, launching it far from the rocket and allowing the crew to return safely to Earth, regardless of what happens to the rest of the spacecraft. This puts CMSEO one step closer to its lunar missions goals, even if those are still a long way off. The next step will likely be a test in-flight, or at least at altitude, confirming that the abort system can still function at higher atmospheric pressures and speeds. NASA is also pushing for manned Moon missions in the next decade, but doubts have been raised over the plans since the Trump administration is recommending budgets that would push for the cancellation of the Space Launch System and the Orion spacecraft, which was designed to carry next-generation astronauts to the Moon. That puts into doubt the Artemis 3 mission, which is currently slated for 2027. Perhaps new spacecraft fees could help bolster budgets enough to compensate.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Science
- Yahoo
China's next-gen astronaut capsule for moon missions aces crucial pad-abort test (video)
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. China is advancing the development of the technology it needs to try to beat NASA back to the moon. The China Manned Space Engineering Office (CMSEO) completed a pad abort test of its Mengzhou spacecraft today (June 17), marking another step forward in its efforts to send Chinese astronauts, or taikonauts, to the lunar surface for the first time. The zero-altitude escape sequence was initiated at 12:30 p.m. Beijing time (12:30 a.m. EDT; 0430 GMT), from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center in northwest China. With just the Mengzhou spacecraft on the pad (no rocket), the solid rocket escape engines on the capsule's abort tower fired for approximately 20 seconds, according to CMSEO. At altitude, Mengzhou's escape tower was jettisoned, and a trio of parachutes guided the spacecraft safely back to the desert surface, touching down with an airbag cushion at 12:32 p.m. BJT (12:32 a.m. EDT; 0432 GMT). CMSEO called the test "a complete success." Tests like this allow spacecraft engineers to verify safety systems of new spacecraft without putting crews' lives on the line. In the event of an in-flight emergency during an actual launch, Mengzhou's capsule escape tower is designed to propel the spacecraft away from the rocket in order to put a safe distance between the crew and potential disaster. The capability has been built into nearly every spacecraft designed to transport crews since the beginning of spaceflight. NASA's Orion spacecraft, responsible for ferrying astronauts to the moon as a part of the U.S. space agency's Artemis program, underwent a similar test in 2019. While China is slightly behind in its progress, the nation's efforts to beat the U.S. back to the moon may be gaining momentum just as NASA's own plans for a lunar return run into a speed bump. The White House's proposed 2026 NASA budget leaves much of the Artemis program's future in question. For example, it calls for the cancellation of Orion and the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket responsible for launching the spacecraft after the Artemis 3 moon-landing mission, which is currently targeted for 2027. Related Stories: — 'We're in a space race.' NASA chief says US 'better watch out' for China's moon goals — How China plans to put astronauts on the moon by 2030 (video) — How China will land astronauts on the moon by 2030 The likely next step for Mengzhou will be an in-flight abort test, carried higher in altitude by one of China's Long March rockets. The country is developing the Long March 10 for Mengzhou's operational missions, which will be capable of flying crews to low Earth orbit and orbit around the moon in conjunction with its Lanyue lunar lander, which is also under development.
Time of India
05-06-2025
- Business
- Time of India
How NASA fund cuts offer a chance for transformation
NASA is facing an unprecedented budget crisis that threatens to reshape the agency dramatically. The White House's fiscal year 2026 'skinny' budget proposal, released in May 2025, calls for a nearly $6 billion cut about 25% less than NASA's 2025 funding. Science programs face the harshest blow with a proposed 50% reduction. Traditional pillars like the Space Launch System (SLS), Orion spacecraft, and the Gateway lunar outpost are set to be phased out or cancelled after the Artemis 3 mission. While these cuts spark concern, many experts see this moment as a rare opportunity to transform NASA into a leaner, more agile agency that can thrive in a new era of space exploration. Historic scale of NASA fund cuts and their impact The scale of these cuts is historic. Adjusted for inflation, NASA's funding would revert to levels seen in the early 1960s, before the Apollo program. This level of reduction inevitably threatens thousands of jobs potentially up to 30,000 civil servants and contractors and imperils longstanding programs. The science division, responsible for some of NASA's most high-profile missions, faces the largest reductions, with key projects like Mars Sample Return cancelled and others like NEO Surveyor in uncertain limbo. Space technology efforts critical to future lunar and Mars exploration are also slated for sharp cuts. Uncertainty surrounding human spaceflight and the ISS Despite the severity, NASA's leadership has been cautious, awaiting full budget details to understand which missions might survive. The International Space Station (ISS), a symbol of international collaboration, faces cuts that could reduce crew size and accelerate retirement plans. More fundamentally, the budget signals that NASA will likely no longer operate human-rated spacecraft within five years, relying entirely on commercial providers for crew transport and exploration. Challenges of a fully commercialised human spaceflight future This potential 'commercialization' of human spaceflight raises questions about NASA's identity and public support. However, it also reflects a strategic shift that some argue NASA must embrace to remain competitive, particularly with China's expanding lunar ambitions. Experts like Alex MacDonald of CSIS and Dan Dumbacher of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics highlight the risk of workforce erosion and industrial base losses similar to those seen after Apollo and the Space Shuttle programs. Reinventing NASA through commercial partnerships Yet, amid this crisis lies opportunity. Many voices in the space community emphasize that NASA's traditional model is due for reform. The agency's bureaucratic inertia and risk aversion have hampered agility and innovation. Leveraging commercial partnerships more deeply, as NASA did during the successful COTS program that birthed SpaceX's cargo missions, could enable faster, cheaper, and more sustainable exploration. Envisioning a lunar COTS model and international collaboration Peter Garretson of the American Foreign Policy Council envisions a future where NASA acts as a central mission planner, outsourcing infrastructure development and operations to private firms through incentive-driven programs. This 'lunar COTS' model could stimulate new industry growth, keep international partners engaged by shifting focus to lunar surface contributions, and streamline NASA's core functions. Turning crisis into long-term success In sum, while the proposed 2026 budget presents severe challenges, it forces NASA to confront an urgent question: what should the agency look like for the next half-century? The difficult decisions ahead could break NASA free from outdated paradigms, enabling it to innovate, collaborate, and lead human space exploration in a more sustainable and impactful way. As MacDonald puts it, 'There is a new NASA that can emerge one that leverages commercial capabilities, operates leaner, and continues to do amazing things.' NASA's budget crisis, though painful, may be the catalyst for transformation the agency needs to remain a space exploration pioneer in the 21st century.
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Uncertainty at NASA; Nomination pulled, steep cuts proposed
Over the past several days, NASA's ambitious space exploration plans have experienced major setbacks. First, on Friday, newly released budget documents revealed the extent of the significant budget and personnel cuts proposed by the Trump administration. Then, just a day later, President Donald Trump withdrew the nomination of Jared Isaacman to be NASA administrator just days before an expected confirmation vote. From my perspective as a space policy expert, these events signal problems ahead for a space agency that now faces stiff competition in space exploration from the commercial sector. Without a leader and facing a fight over its budget, NASA faces an uncertain future, both in the months ahead and longer term. Budget problems When the Trump administration released a preview of its budget proposal in early May, it was clear that NASA was facing significant cuts. After the agency received $24.9 billion for 2025, the president's proposal would allot NASA $18.8 billion in 2026. After accounting for inflation, this amount would represent NASA's smallest budget since 1961. Space science programs are one of the largest targets of the proposed budget cuts, seeing an almost 50% reduction, to just $3.9 billion. Specific programs targeted for elimination include the Mars Sample Return mission, the currently operating Mars Odyssey and MAVEN missions around Mars, and several missions to Venus. Several ongoing and proposed astrophysics programs, including the Chandra X-Ray Observatory, would also end if the proposed budget passes. NASA's human spaceflight programs also face potential cuts. The budget proposes canceling the Space Launch System, the Orion crew vehicle and the Lunar Gateway after the Artemis III mission. Artemis III, planned for 2027, would be the first crewed flight back to the lunar surface since 1972. The mission would use the Space Launch System rocket and Orion crew vehicle to get there. The proposed Lunar Gateway, a mini-space station in lunar orbit, would be abandoned. Instead, the budget proposes to establish a Commercial Moon to Mars program. Under this initiative, NASA would utilize commercial systems such as Blue Origin's New Glenn and SpaceX's Starship to put Americans on the moon and Mars. A smaller budget also means a smaller NASA workforce. The budget proposal suggests that the number of NASA employees would be reduced by one-third, from more than 17,000 to 11,853. Advocates for space science and exploration have criticized the cuts. The Planetary Society has stated that these cuts to space science represent an "extinction level event" that would all but end NASA's ability to perform meaningful science. Democrats in Congress were also quick to push back on the proposed cuts, arguing that they would hamper the United States' ability to carry out its missions. The budget documents released so far are just proposals. Congress must make the final decisions on how much money NASA gets and which programs are funded. While this might be good news for NASA funding, my research has shown that Congress rarely appropriates more money for NASA than the president requests. Leadership challenges The release of the president's proposed budget was followed with the news that the president would withdraw his nomination of Jared Isaacman to be NASA's administrator. In a Truth Social post, Trump wrote, "After a thorough review of prior associations, I am hereby withdrawing the nomination of Jared Isaacman to head NASA. I will soon announce a new Nominee who will be Mission aligned, and put America First in Space." Like the budget proposal, news of Isaacman's withdrawal has also hit the space community hard. Following his nomination, Isaacman won the support of many in the space industry and in government. His confirmation hearing in April was largely uncontentious, with support from both Republicans and Democrats. NASA will now need to wait for the president to make a new choice for NASA administrator. That person will then need to go through the same process as Isaacman, with a hearing in the Senate and several votes. Given the amount of time it takes for nominations to make their way through the Senate, NASA is likely to face several more months without a confirmed administrator. This absence will come while many of its programs will be fighting for money and their existence. The months ahead Like many federal agencies right now, NASA faces a tumultuous future. Budgetary and leadership challenges might be the immediate problem, but NASA's long-term future is potentially rocky as well. Since its founding, NASA's mission has been largely centered on sending humans to space. If that role shifts to commercial companies, NASA will need to grapple with what its identity and mission is going forward. History provides some insight. One of NASA's forerunners, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, or NACA, largely focused on advanced research and development of aeronautical technologies. For instance, NACA researched things such as proper engine placement on airliners, as well as advances that helped air flow more efficiently over those engines. A new NASA that's more similar to NACA might continue research into nuclear engines or other advanced space technology that may contribute to the work commercial space companies are already doing. Choices made by the Trump administration and Congress in the coming months will likely shape what NASA will look like in the years to come. Until then, NASA, like many government organizations, faces a period of uncertainty about its future. Wendy Whitman Cobb is a professor of strategy and security studies at Air University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
UPI
03-06-2025
- Business
- UPI
Uncertainty at NASA; Nomination pulled, steep cuts proposed
Jared Isaacman gives a thumbs-up after Inspiration4, the world's first all-civilian mission to space, safely returned to Earth in September 2021 following a groundbreaking three-day mission. President Donald Trump has withdrawn Isaacman's nomination to become NASA administrator. File Photo by SpaceX/UPI | License Photo Over the past several days, NASA's ambitious space exploration plans have experienced major setbacks. First, on Friday, newly released budget documents revealed the extent of the significant budget and personnel cuts proposed by the Trump administration. Then, just a day later, President Donald Trump withdrew the nomination of Jared Isaacman to be NASA administrator just days before an expected confirmation vote. From my perspective as a space policy expert, these events signal problems ahead for a space agency that now faces stiff competition in space exploration from the commercial sector. Without a leader and facing a fight over its budget, NASA faces an uncertain future, both in the months ahead and longer term. Budget problems When the Trump administration released a preview of its budget proposal in early May, it was clear that NASA was facing significant cuts. After the agency received $24.9 billion for 2025, the president's proposal would allot NASA $18.8 billion in 2026. After accounting for inflation, this amount would represent NASA's smallest budget since 1961. Space science programs are one of the largest targets of the proposed budget cuts, seeing an almost 50% reduction, to just $3.9 billion. Specific programs targeted for elimination include the Mars Sample Return mission, the currently operating Mars Odyssey and MAVEN missions around Mars, and several missions to Venus. Several ongoing and proposed astrophysics programs, including the Chandra X-Ray Observatory, would also end if the proposed budget passes. NASA's human spaceflight programs also face potential cuts. The budget proposes canceling the Space Launch System, the Orion crew vehicle and the Lunar Gateway after the Artemis III mission. Artemis III, planned for 2027, would be the first crewed flight back to the lunar surface since 1972. The mission would use the Space Launch System rocket and Orion crew vehicle to get there. The proposed Lunar Gateway, a mini-space station in lunar orbit, would be abandoned. Instead, the budget proposes to establish a Commercial Moon to Mars program. Under this initiative, NASA would utilize commercial systems such as Blue Origin's New Glenn and SpaceX's Starship to put Americans on the moon and Mars. A smaller budget also means a smaller NASA workforce. The budget proposal suggests that the number of NASA employees would be reduced by one-third, from more than 17,000 to 11,853. Advocates for space science and exploration have criticized the cuts. The Planetary Society has stated that these cuts to space science represent an "extinction level event" that would all but end NASA's ability to perform meaningful science. Democrats in Congress were also quick to push back on the proposed cuts, arguing that they would hamper the United States' ability to carry out its missions. The budget documents released so far are just proposals. Congress must make the final decisions on how much money NASA gets and which programs are funded. While this might be good news for NASA funding, my research has shown that Congress rarely appropriates more money for NASA than the president requests. Leadership challenges The release of the president's proposed budget was followed with the news that the president would withdraw his nomination of Jared Isaacman to be NASA's administrator. In a Truth Social post, Trump wrote, "After a thorough review of prior associations, I am hereby withdrawing the nomination of Jared Isaacman to head NASA. I will soon announce a new Nominee who will be Mission aligned, and put America First in Space." Like the budget proposal, news of Isaacman's withdrawal has also hit the space community hard. Following his nomination, Isaacman won the support of many in the space industry and in government. His confirmation hearing in April was largely uncontentious, with support from both Republicans and Democrats. NASA will now need to wait for the president to make a new choice for NASA administrator. That person will then need to go through the same process as Isaacman, with a hearing in the Senate and several votes. Given the amount of time it takes for nominations to make their way through the Senate, NASA is likely to face several more months without a confirmed administrator. This absence will come while many of its programs will be fighting for money and their existence. The months ahead Like many federal agencies right now, NASA faces a tumultuous future. Budgetary and leadership challenges might be the immediate problem, but NASA's long-term future is potentially rocky as well. Since its founding, NASA's mission has been largely centered on sending humans to space. If that role shifts to commercial companies, NASA will need to grapple with what its identity and mission is going forward. History provides some insight. One of NASA's forerunners, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, or NACA, largely focused on advanced research and development of aeronautical technologies. For instance, NACA researched things such as proper engine placement on airliners, as well as advances that helped air flow more efficiently over those engines. A new NASA that's more similar to NACA might continue research into nuclear engines or other advanced space technology that may contribute to the work commercial space companies are already doing. Choices made by the Trump administration and Congress in the coming months will likely shape what NASA will look like in the years to come. Until then, NASA, like many government organizations, faces a period of uncertainty about its future. Wendy Whitman Cobb is a professor of strategy and security studies at Air University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
