For more information about NASA’s CRuSR program, visit:  http://suborbitalex.arc.nasa.gov

For more information about NASA’s Office of the Chief Technologist, visit: http://www.nasa.gov/oct

ORBITEC also just won, as part of the Wyle Laboratories team, another development support contract with NASA Johnson Space in Houston Texas called Crew, Robotics, Avionics, and Vehicle Equipment (CRAVE).  ORBITEC’s primary role is to provide solutions in the area of life support systems and crew related technologies including it interactive 3D information systems capabilities. Wyle is one of three companies receiving an award which, cumulatively, is expected to be awarded $70M of development over the next 5 years.

ORBITEC’s commercial viability and expansion is going strong with sales and projects with every division relating from government to commercial applications for a goal of diversifying the mix.

AirVenture, attended by 550,000 aerospace enthusiasts last year provided a perfect backdrop to the inaugural AeroInnovate 2009 attracting a highly select group of investors, industry leaders and entrepreneurs to network and learn. “AeroInnovate was created specifically for entrepreneurs and investors in the aviation and aerospace community,” AeroInnovate co-director Meridith Jaeger said. “We want it to be a platform for upcoming technologies and what’s going on in aviation and aerospace technology and we want to be the place where people come for that information.”

“The aviation community, like any community, loves their ‘sport’.  Investors in the industry are often motivated by their interest level in the technology or product and will put money into the opportunities that they feel connected to, the ones they like” said Kurt Waldhuetter, co-director of AeroInnovate.  “We want AeroInnovate to connect the dots between exciting new aviation related start-up ventures and potential investors, not just once a year at AirVenture, but throughout the year through our website’s blog and business profile sections”, commented Waldhuetter.  “We encourage companies to profile their businesses on AeroInnovate.org and periodically we will send newsletters to our private list of people we know who are interested in aviation related investment opportunities.”

This year, from 10-11:30 a.m. in the Leadership Classroom in EAA’s AirVenture Museum, Silicon Valley tech guru Bill Joos will give his presentation “Top Ten Mistakes Made in Business Plans and How to Avoid Them.” Joos was a co-founder of Garage Technology Ventures and held sales and marketing positions with a variety of companies, including IBM and as the Sales VP at the software division of Apple Computer. His message applies to all early to mid stage start-up ventures in any industry.

From 1-2:30 p.m. in the same location a panel session called “Funding Your Dream,” will feature three entrepreneurs with start-up experience in the aerospace industry who will share challenges faced, successes gained and lessons learned as they started up their own businesses and funded their efforts through equity financing, government grants and boot strapping.

From 6:30 to 10 p.m. AeroInnovate’s “Pitch & Mingle Venture Cocktail”, in the Founders Wing at EAA’s AirVenture Museum, will provide an opportunity for the most serious aerospace entrepreneurs, industry leaders and potential investors to “Mingle” and entrepreneurs chosen from a list of applicants will “Pitch” their business.

“The entire day climaxes with the ‘Pitch & Mingle’ event,” Jaeger said. “Seven start-up companies each do an eight-minute pitch, followed by a four-minute question and answer session.”

The panel for “Funding Your Dreams” features Carl Diedrich from Terrafugia, Bob Newman from TCW Technologies, and Tom Crabb of Orbital Technologies (Orbitech). Diedrich’s company just received FAA Light Sport Aircraft approval with variance because it was overweight due to compliance with auto safety standards for roll cage, crumple zones and airbags.  Terrafugia’s Transition is a “roadable aircraft” that also fits in standard garages—but he’s not the only one with a sparkling resume.

“Orbitec is perhaps the most successful Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) NASA awardee in the nation,” commented Waldhuetter. “Orbitec makes technology solutions for space exploration from plant research to human support and propulsion systems, some of which are now being commercialized on Earth in various applications” said Waldhuetter. Crabb has a wealth of knowledge to share on SBIR funding in addition to recent private funding success to commercialize their great technologies.

Bob Newman, a hands-on inventor and engineering, who has spent 30 years in aviation and 20 years making homebuilt aircraft, looked death in the eye surviving a run-a-way trim ordeal.  When he came home and told his wife, she said he has to do something about it and he did.  He created their first product, “Safety-Trim” and bootstrapped a company.  Now, eight products and four distributors later, Newman has a lot to share with other inventors who have a dream of taking their idea to market.

The first two events are open to the public. The “Pitch & Mingle” has limited seating and interested attendees must register beforehand.

Solar Impulse All Solar Aircraft

The Solar Impulse HB-SIA, with CEO André Borschberg at its controls, landed successfully at 09:00 am of July 8 at the Payerne airbase in Switzerland after a flight of 26 hours fueled solely by solar power.

After a disappointing weeklong delay, the plane took off at 6:51 am July 7. The plane then circled the Swiss Plateau and reached a maximum altitude of 28,500 (8700 m) at 16:40h. The prototype circled the base till sundown at 19:30, the 12,000 solar panels that cover the 210 foot (63.4 meter) expanse of its wing soaking up sunlight to fully charge its 880 pounds (400kg) of batteries.

With its four electric engines silently keeping it aloft, the aircraft then glided slowly through the night to a height of 4,900 feet (1,500 meters) by dawn. Following its predetermined flight plan of 26 hours, the plane then slowly descended to its 9:00 am landing.

As he climbed out of the cockpit, an emotional Borschberg said, “I’ve been a pilot for 40 years now, but this flight has been the most incredible one of my flying career. Just sitting there and watching the battery charge level rise and rise thanks to the sun. And then that suspense, not knowing whether we were going to manage to stay up in the air the whole night. And finally the joy of seeing the sun rise and feeling the energy beginning to circulate in the solar panels again! I have just flown more than 26 hours without using a drop of fuel and without causing any pollution!”

Bertrand Piccard, initiator and President of the project, went on to say that “This is a crucial step forward, it gives full credibility to the speeches we hold since years about renewable energies and CleanTechs and allows us now to get closer to the perpetual flight without using a drop of fuel!”

The international team of designers, engineers, craftsmen and pilots plan to fly the craft across the Atlantic next year, and then circumnavigate the globe in 2012, all without emission and fueled only by the sun.

For more information, including video, visit their website solarimpulse.com.

Dr. Carl Dietrich, CEO/CTO of Woburn, Mass.-based start-up Terrafugia, designed the craft to meet both the FAA’s criteria for light sport aircraft and the safety features required by the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. He found the FMVSS were more challenging to achieve and resulted in added weight for a roll cage, crumple zones and airbags — standard on cars but not on planes.

Anna Dietrich, co-founder and chief operating officer of Terrafugia, said, “Safety is one of the biggest selling points. Because the Transition is designed to operate on the road and in the air, we’ve incorporated all the safety features of a car into a plane.”

The configuration allows the aircraft to land in inclement weather, and drive the rest of the journey as a car. The transition from plane to car requires less than a minute. The wings fold upward, a steering wheel replaces the control stick, and the engine disengages from the rear-mounted propeller and connects to the rear driving wheels, all activated from inside the cockpit.

The Transition cuts time off the owner’s door-to-door trip by its ability to take off and land on shorter airstrips closer to residential neighborhoods and its ability to drive on any hard surface.

Its cruising speed in the air is 115mph (185kmh) and it has a range of 460 miles (740km). It requires a 1,650 foot-(0.5km) runway to take off and land, and can fit in a standard garage. The engine uses high octane auto gas, a saving over aviation fuel.

The Dietrichs, both MIT-trained engineers, created a buzz when they showed the prototype at the 2008 Experimental Aircraft Association AirVenture in Oshkosh. At AirVenture 2009, Carl told the success story of Terrafugia at AeroInnovate’s Fulfilling Your Dreams forum, and was one of 7 entrepreneurs to make an elevator pitch at AeroInnovate’s Pitch and Mingle.

Terrafugia says that 70 people have ordered the craft, each leaving a US$10,000 deposit toward the $194,000 retail price.

The plane is expected to begin delivery in about 18 months. Then, according to the company’s Web site, owners will be able to “simply land at the airport, fold your wings up and drive home.”

For more information and videos of the craft flying, driving and transitioning from plane to car, see www.terrafugia.com.

This will probably be the last test before the full night flight.

Solar Impulse is being designed, built and tested by a consortium of European engineers, scientists and designers with the intent of completing a global circumnavigation using only solar power in 2011.

Visit their blog on www.solarimpulse.com to get all information on the course of this test flight and videos of previous flights.

True, some wealthy entrepreneurs such as Amazon.com (AMZN) founder Jeff Bezos, Virgin brand founder Richard Branson and Pay-Pal co-founder Elon Musk have poured millions into the emerging field. But venture capitalists who have fueled so many industries have stayed off the launch pad.

The problem is that VC funds aim to show profitable returns in a relatively short time.

While Musk’s SpaceX, Branson’s Virgin Galactic and Bezos’ Blue Origin plan to offer trips into space, the territory remains unknown.

It’s not clear enough people will get aboard to make the business profitable, says Paul Guthrie, an analyst at research firm Tauri Group.

“Consumer demand hasn’t been established in any public documents, from an investor’s point of view,” Guthrie said. “The venture capital firms won’t invest money without the perception of getting that money back. There’s some demand (for space travel), but some question if it can sustain the cost of the hardware.”

And usually left unsaid is another issue. One bad accident could put the brakes on the new industry.

“The industry will have to be prepared for how to deal with that,” Guthrie said.

The VC industry is unlikely to step in, agrees commercial space advocate Peter Diamandis — until the field’s first successful initial public stock offering.

“We’re looking for the Netscape effect,” he said, referring to the pioneering Web browser company’s 1995 IPO, which opened the Internet floodgates.

“Whether it will be SpaceX, Blue Origin or whoever, after one of these companies goes public and provides a significant return, we’ll see venture capital funds join in,” said Diamandis, chairman of the X Prize Foundation, which awards money for commercial space achievements. “It will be the birth of the Apples and the Googles of the space industry.”

There have been two VC exceptions. SpaceX, officially called Space Exploration Technologies, has received $20 million from venture capital firm Founders Fund, whose partners include another PayPal co-founder, Peter Thiel. And VC firm Draper Fisher Jurvetson also invested what a managing director says was $20 million.

“We look to invest in passionate entrepreneurs with unique ideas to change the world,” Steve Jurvetson, managing director of Draper Fisher Jurvetson, said via e-mail. “Apple (AAPL) set out to change the world. Elon Musk looks beyond even this world.”

Jurvetson says DFJ is mulling other space investments.

“We have met with several very interesting projects and have come close to investing in one more beyond SpaceX,” he said. “We have a very high bar, so it should not be surprising to see just a few investments given the available pool of opportunities.”

SpaceX is profitable and has more than $2.5 billion in contracts for launches, Musk has said. Most of that money is from NASA for delivery of cargo to the International Space Station, but SpaceX also plans to get into space tourism. And just last week it inked the largest single commercial space pact — a $492 million deal to launch satellites for satellite phone service provider Iridium Communications (IRDM).

The industry also got a boost in April when President Obama proposed a change in direction for NASA that puts more emphasis on commercial enterprise. He proposed a $6 billion increase in NASA’s budget over five years to dole out to commercial contractors for space missions.

There’s no question that big bucks are at stake.

More than $261 billion was spent on “space-related activity” in 2009 worldwide, private and public, according to the nonprofit Space Foundation. That’s up 40% in the five years the foundation has tracked this figure.

For now, the commercial space industry relies on the rich. Besides Bezos, Branson and Musk, spaceship developer Armadillo Aerospace is backed by veteran video game developer John Carmack, creator of “Doom” and “Quake.” And X Prize winner Scaled Composites has received funding from Microsoft (MSFT) co-founder Paul Allen. Three years ago, Northrop Grumman (NOC) bought Scaled Composites.

That people from the tech world “who grew up during Apollo and the shuttle missions” are leading the charge is no surprise, Diamandis says.

“They’re technology geeks who love this stuff,” he said. “They’ve seen (the computer) industry go through exponential growth while the space industry remained flat, and they’ve asked why.”

 According to Rob Coppinger of flightglobal.com, the future of general aviation is electric.

He argues that advances in power cells and lithium batteries, coupled with increased efficiencies and new control systems for small electric motors, have made it possible for light sport aircraft to be powered entirely without fuel, noise or emissions.

The idea of electric aircraft is not new. John Monnett and Peter Buck of Sonex Aircraft sketched out the necessary hardware and electronic controls in 1994, even before he started Sonex, the granddaddy of kit-built planes. Sonex has progressed along a path charted as their e-Initiative since their inception.  Sonex chief designer Peter Buck helped develop the Monerai sailplane and the Moni motorglider. He created the plans for the Sonex, Waiex, and Xenos — Sonex’s product line of kit aircraft.

Monnett is now offering two ways to go electric. One is a kit plane with battery power-pack and rotary electric engine. The other is a retro-fit kit he displayed at EAA in 2007 consisting of a Sonex Waiex motor glider with a proof-of-concept prototype electric powerplant (AeroConversion engine, controls and lightweight batteries) installed in it.

Over the course of the last few five years, several aircraft have had their debuts as experimental, uncertified LSAs. Yuneec Aircraft of China displayed the Yuneec International E430 in 2009. It is a two seat, V tailed, composite aircraft. The plane is being marketed in the US as a kit built aircraft, complete with powerplant.

Also in 2009 Flightstar Sportplanes debuted the Flightstar Spyder ultralight, designed by Tom Peghiny of South Woodstock, Connecticut, USA also using a powerplant by Yuneec.

Another line of attack on the piston engine has been followed by glider pilots, seeking to have a totally noiseless experience, including take-off and landing.  On 2006, Randal Fishman converted a powered hang-glider, replacing its small gas engine (used only for take-off) with a battery and an electric motor.

The all electric glider has come a long way quickly, because the engine is only needed for launch and landing, and the propeller operates as a windmill to crank energy to its batteries during controlled dives. This extends the total flight duration considerably.

Self-launched gliders have existed for decades, using small combustion engines for take off. The Lange Aviation Antares 20E debuted in 2005. In 2010, the Lange Antares 20E became available with a 42-kW electric motor and SAFT VL 41M lithium-ion batteries. On a single charge it is capable of taking off and soaring to 3,000 meters, though the same amount of energy could also be used for multiple launches to a lower altitude, or for range-extension during a mostly unpowered flight. The variety of purposes served by the Antares 20 point out that electric planes are more versatile than most combustion models. The Antares 20E is thought to be the first fully certified and commercially produced electric plane. Over 50 had been built and more will be available during 2011 as production ramps up.

Other aircraft have come from Pipistrel, led by Slovenian master designer Ivo Boscarol. They have a line of light sport aviation craft (electric and combustion) and a new line of gliders.

Electric Aircraft Corporation is an all American outfit that does ONLY electric aircraft – paragliders, Light Sport Aircraft and a new even lighter and more versatile LSA (Electraflyer). Their website declares, “The technology of electric motors and high capacity batteries has finally reached the level of development where pure electric flight is now possible. Electric Aircraft Corporation now makes this dream a reality!”

RANS’ website describes the veteran firm this way, “Established in 1974 on the plains of western Kansas to build Sailtrikes, RANS has evolved into a world leader in the ever growing recumbent bike and kit plane industries. Setting the standard of innovation in these exciting fields, RANS uses cutting edge technology to produce safe, high quality aircraft & bicycles.” Along the way, the firm designed the Coyote as a certified light aircraft, long before the category or concept of Light Sport Aircraft became official jargon.

Where to Next?

Coppinger predicts that many current producers of LSAs will market conversion kits to adapt the current fleet of combustion models to electric versions.

The planes described here vary tremendously in the size, efficiency and operating times of their powerplants. Some are built for speed, others for duration of flight, and others for attainable altitude. With the power-to-weight ratio of batteries constantly growing and the design of more efficient rotary engines, both new planes and retrofit packages will improve the capabilities of electric engines. This increases the versatility of these craft with each advance.

There is tremendous upside for electric aircraft, for several reasons. As the earth-friendly lifestyle movement takes aim at the emissions of the general aviation fleet, both all-electric and hybrid models will evolve. We’ve already mentioned it adds to the aesthetics of LSA and glider flights by eliminating noise pollution and combustion emissions. Some commentators have suggested that small jets, and eventually large ones, will have electric motors for take off and landing to reduce noise and pollution at commercial airports, while retaining the large jet turbines for long range high altitude and high speed travel between airfields. 

Radical new designs for aircraft flight control systems will improve efficiency (See the May 17 entry of this blog at www.AeroInnovate.org on the European SmartFIsh design).

The Fuel-less Aircraft

The European Solar Impulse consortium is flight testing an enormous plane with the wings of a 747 covered with solar power cells. (See the May 3 entry of this blog at www.AeroInnovate.org on the European Solar Impulse consortium). They are in the middle of flight testing, and will attempt the first fuel-less global circumnavigation next year. The solar cells recharge the batteries during daylight and the plane flies through the night on this stored energy. Four power plants provide the thrust while the long wings make the plane an efficient glider. Hydrogen fuel cells have been suggested as an add-on to a battery-powered system or a solar-powered system.

OSHKOSH, WISCONSIN (AeroInnovate Pitch & Mingle 2010) – June 7, 2010 – It was announced today that the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh Business Success Center AeroInnovate team has issued a call for Applicant Companies for the annual AeroInnovate Pitch & Mingle event to be held on Tuesday, July 27th at EAA’s AirVenture.  Interested applicants should send a copy of their executive summary from their business plan to jaegerm@uwosh.edu prior to July 1, 2010.  Applications will be reviewed on an ongoing basis and selected companies will be notified no later than July 9, 2010.  Selected companies will give an 8-minute pitch followed by a 4 minute Q&A  to a group of investors, advisors and fellow aviation/aerospace entrepreneurs.

In addition to the six (6) elevator pitches, AeroInnovate’s Pitch & Mingle event provides an opportunity for entrepreneurs, investors and advisors to mingle, network and enjoy learing about up & coming technology and businesses in the industry.  If you’re an entrepreneur, investor or an advisor in the industry and would like to attend the Pitch & Mingle Event, please register by sending an email to Meridith Jaeger at jaegerm@uwosh.edu.

This blog entry won’t review budgets and plans for
• robotic missions to Mars or the moon,
• new satellites for earth science, or
• NASA’s continuing role in the development of next-generation concepts in aviation & its inftrastructure.
These parts of NASA’s mission have not caused disagreement about their priority or cost.
We at AeroInnovate are especially encouraged by NASA’s investment in Next-Generation innovation for GA.

The debate is about human spaceflight, its long range goals, its short range targets and the proper allocation of funds for sending astronauts to the ISS, a return to the moon and trips to Mars and its moons.

Human space flight is what captures the imaginations of citizens across the globe. Progress here is the metric of successful accomplishment of lofty space goals—or failure of leadership. It is THE measure of success or failure in the new multinational spaceflight contest.

Who is speaking in the public debate? Politicians, especially those in Washington have been most vocal in their critiques or support of the President’s plan. Also in the dialogue are NASA employees, including past and current astronauts as well as engineers and scientists. Similarly the scientific community has been split on these issues. Finally, newspapers in their editorials have taken sides and shaped the debate.

The key decisions that form the basis for Obama’s NASA plan and budget include
• retiring the space shuttle after the final two missions this year,
• not replacing the shuttle with any NASA rocket or vehicle to take astronauts and supplies to the ISS,
• spending five years deciding on the design and manufacture of a heavy-lift rocket to take astronauts and exploration vehicles out of earth orbit
• spending the following five years building and testing the heavy-lift vehicle, and
• following a “flexible path” to get astronauts to Mars by 2030.

Obama did a poor job of stating that THE GOAL for NASA is getting astronauts to Mars by 2030. To the average person in the street, a goal that is 20 years from completion is not inspiring. People do not have the patience to wait that long. More importantly, a whole generation of young astronauts, engineers, scientists and other aerospace workers will have no immediate reward to excite and motivate them to do the hard work of getting higher education when the payoff is so remote. In truth, the younger generation of NASA employees and the space community is split on this issue. Obama’s announcement of “Mars by 2030” was so understated that many listeners came away with the conclusion that Obama had not presented ANY goal. Some in the new generation of the space community have the vision and the patience to push ahead with getting ready for a goal that grand, while others believe the nation needs clear, near term objectives that will lead us stepwise to that grand goal.

Obama spelled out no such objectives. In fact, he terminated the one obvious mid-way project – returning to the moon. His abdication of the moon shot has split every segment of the space community into supporters and critics. He argued that “we’ve been there already, there’s no need to go back.” He underlined his decision to sit out Moon Race II by reaffirming the retirement of the shuttles and the discontinuation of the Constellation program, including the Ares rocket –a rocket similar to the Saturn V, capable of putting astronauts and cargo in low earth orbit and then moon orbit and landing.

With the US out of the moon race, the Chinese, Russians, Europeans, Japanese and Indians will have center stage in a very visible race to map the moon, and then build permanent settlements there. These nations will gain the military and economic technological advantages at each stage — earth orbit, moon orbit and moon settlement. Although the US currently has the most sophisticated set of satellites for earth mapping, earth science and military staging, the US lead will appear to dwindle each time one of the moon racers passes one of the hurdles along the way.

Politicians were quick to decry a moon race without US participation as an affront to American national pride, national security and loss of economic opportunities. Most agreed with Sen. Shelby (R-Ala) who said, ”Future generations will learn how the Chinese, the Russians, and even the Indians took the reins of space exploration away from the United States,” and “ (discontinuation) ensures that for decades to come the United States will be subservient to and reliant on other countries for access to space. This request I believe abandons our nation’s only chance to remain the leader in space.”

The first race to the moon was a clear cold war competition between the US and the USSR, as vividly defined by President John Kennedy. While Obama gave no hint of using the moon race as a test of national supremacy, Shelby and others have pointed out that, in the eyes of the world, the second moon shot is another international competition which the US must win again in order to retain the title of space leader. The PR value of successes in human space flight is so high that the US cannot afford to sit out this round, according to this logic.

While each country gains global media coverage for every step it each takes along the way, the US will be busy with tasks that have no pizzazz for media attention, such as designing a heavy-lift rocket to take us beyond the earth and moon. The US will also be paying the Russians to take US astronauts and supplies to the ISS on Russian Soyuz capsules. Russia has set the cost as $50 million for each astronaut.

The US will not be totally inactive in the next decade, but it will not have a clear objective for the twenty-teens in the form of a return to the moon. Instead the US will be
• doing experiments on long duration spaceflight at the ISS,
• robotically mapping Mars, and
• designing, building and testing the heavy lift rocket needed to get to Mars.
The military has already enacted its strategy to weaponize space with the USAF program independent of NASA. (See the May 3 entry on this AeroInnovate blog about the USAF’s space vehicle, the X-37B).

Obama emphasized the importance of research done on the ISS by extending its mission for five years beyond the already-announced five year period, to cover the full decade till 2020. And he backed it up with an ADDITION of $6b to NASA’s budget for the next five years.

Obama is content to buy passage from the Russians for a few years until the fledgling US private rocket companies are ready to safely and reliably give the US control over its own passage (his estimate is 2013).
The cancellation of the Constellation program means that NASA will not build the next earth & moon orbit rocket. It will only act as a partial funder and conceptual partner to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance in their construction of a new low-earth orbit rocket.

Obama’s plan calls for NASA to contract with these two new private space delivery companies to rebuild a US rocket option to be ready by 2013. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) expressed skepticism with NASA’s plan to rely on commercial crew taxis to ferry astronauts to and from the space station.

Hutchison stated, “The emphasis to the tune of $6 billion into a very fledgling commercial capability I just think is not sound and it’s certainly not going to be reliable,” she said, adding that it would be premature to rely on Hawthorne, Calif.-based Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and Dulles, Va.-based Orbital Sciences Corp. to deliver crews to low Earth orbit. Hutchison said NASA’s two Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) providers are, in her opinion, “not ready for this kind of reliance and I don’t think we can take that kind of chance.”

The issue of control of our own capability to get to and from the ISS has split the space community and the politicians. The split among Washington politicians is not partisan.

There is clear bipartisan support for continuation of Constellation. Congress members from both parties have vowed to keep Constellation and the Ares alive by their control of the budget process. Florida stands to lose 7000 NASA jobs when the shuttle retires, Texas about another 5000, and Alabama (home of NASA’s Marshall Rocket Center) a few thousand more.

At a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing a week after Obama’s speech, Senator Bill Nelson, (D-FL).urged Obama to continue development of a US low-orbit rocket for national security reasons, and proposed budget language requiring that 2011 funds continue the development of the Ares rocket. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) agreed that “this (continued development) is absolutely essential for the national security.”

Nearly all the Congress members whose home states will lose jobs when shuttle is retired are fighting to keep those jobs, both in NASA and in contractors such as United Space Alliance.

The two decisions – to discontinue Constellation and to retire the shuttles—have politicians at all levels from local to state to federal fighting to rescind the discontinuation of both programs. A guest editorial on an online space blog site (nasawatch.com) by a non-NASA engineer argued for the need to keep the shuttles flying. It received over 60 supportive comments within two days of publication – most from fellow engineers, but many from politicians and concerned scientists and citizens, arguing that the US cannot afford to abandon the shuttles, cannot be without a US-owned vehicle to get astronauts and cargo to the ISS and to low earth orbit on the way to the moon.

The blog’s comments showed that they doubted the validity of the analysis and decision by NASA engineers done five years ago that the shuttle was too old and too costly to be a reliable vehicle. It did not seem to matter that the decision to end the shuttle flights was made by President Bush in 2004, based on the recommendation of a national commission of leaders of the US space community. These writers blame Obama for leaving the US without a way to get to the ISS and earth orbit. (nasawatch.com). They called for the continuation of shuttles and a rapid deployment of resources to build the Ares rocket to maintain US control over access to the ISS and the moon.

Apollo moon astronauts Neil Armstrong, Jim Lovell, and Gene Cernan wrote a scathing letter to Obama, warning that without the Constellation and shuttle programs, the US space program will become a “journey to nowhere.”

If all these representatives of the astronauts, the scientific space community, the space hardware engineers and the politicians are aligned against Obama’s plan, then who supports it?

The Planetary Society, one of the few organizations with broad membership across all levels of the space community, published supporting comments by
• Astronauts Buzz Aldrin, Sally Ride and four other astronauts,
• four space scientists involved in both robotic and human space flight,
• 2 governors in states with a strong presence of “New Space” companies in the Southwest,
• Newt Gingrich and Robert S. Walker, former Chairman of the House Science and Technology Committee
• editorials by the NY Times, Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, Christian Science Monitor and the Economist
Each of them emphasized that the challenge of reaching Mars by 2030 is the only space objective worthy of pursuit by the leader of the space club. They endorsed Obama’s “flexible path” to the moon, a responsive journey guided by discoveries made along the way. They supported the notion that the time has come for the commercial pursuit of space travel by private entrepreneurial firms. They spotlighted the synergies between discoveries from remote robotic exploration and human space exploration.
• Separately, the New Jersey Institute of Technology’s campus editorial by a space engineering student said he and his cohort would be pleased to help at any stage along the way to Mars.
• The Orange County Register said it’s time for the entrepreneurs to take over and take the risks –this from the heart of the new Space Center of the Southwest.
• The Chicago Tribune stated, “The stars are already in space entrepreneurs’ eyes. They see money to be made in space tourism and industry. We hope they’re right. It’s time to let them take more of the risk — and reward — in finding out.”

The debate will no doubt be continued in Congressional budget hearings for the 2011 budget. The White House has already modified its 2011 budget request to accommodate support for continuation of the Ares, mostly to placate Congress members who will not give up thousands of NASA and contractors’ jobs without a fight.
Now Obama needs to make the case that now is the time to turn over the development and manufacture of the next low earth orbit rocket to new space entrepreneurs and make it clear that they must succeed by 2013.
And Obama needs to spell out the short term objectives needed to succeed in the development of heavy lift rockets capable of visiting Mars in 2030—he said, “I intend to be here to see this happen.”