May 30 1994
From The Space Library
Jean-Marie Luton, director general of the European Space Agency (ESA), announced at a news conference in Berlin that veteran German astronaut Ulf Merbold would join two Russian cosmonauts for the first joint European and Russian EUROMIR 94 space flight scheduled for October 3. During the 30-day flight, 30 experiments prepared by scientists from ESA states were to be performed on board Russian Space Station Mir. (Reuters, May 30/94)
European Space Agency (ESA) scientific director Roger Bonnet told a news conference that scientists and officials from the world's main space agencies were to meet in Switzerland on May 31 to discuss an ESA proposal for a joint international Moon program. The program, to cover a period up to 40 years, would begin with modest lunar orbit satellite missions and conclude by setting up human outposts on the Moon. Participants in the four-day conference were to include NASA, and the Russian and Japanese space agencies. (Reuters, May 30/94)
NASA scientist Michael Van Woert discussed plans for a satellite in NASA's Mission to Planet Earth, which was to be a follow-on to the U.S./French topex/Poseidon then in orbit. The successor, to be launched in 1998, would be smaller and cost $200 million. However, NASA cannot find the $120 million for its share, which was to include building the spacecraft bus and integrating the instruments. The French space agency, CNES, offered to build the bus if NASA would help with integration and launch it, which should save the United States some $50 million. (Av Wk, May 30/94)
Ken Szalai, Director of NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, said that construction of the hypersonic National Aerospace Plane (NASP), the X-30, and its first flight scheduled for 2000 were no longer goals. Funding for the plane runs out in 1994, but Szalai said research into supersonic flight would not end. John Bass, deputy program manager for the NASP consortium of government and industry, including five aerospace firms, the Department of Defense and NASA, considered the decision a great loss. The one area remaining a problem was that of propulsion, which engineers could not test because the scramjet engine required to power the X-30 needed an environment where wind speeds reach 25 times the speed of sound. (Bakersfield Californian, May 30/94)
Senator Barbara Mikulski, Democrat from Maryland and chair of the sub-committee that oversees NASA's appropriation, wrote a major article on space policy for a space trade journal. In it she discussed the Space Station and NASA's various redesigns of it, and the lack of a clear mission and a clear purpose. She said the redesigned station cost too much and its early scientific capabilities were too limited. Specifically, she pointed out that in the summer of 1993, NASA and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy promised the Senate Appropriations Committee with NASA oversight that there would be the same level of science capability on the new station as on Space Station Freedom. That meant twice the power and space available on the current Space Shuttle. However, by November 1993, the power for science had been cut to about half of that available on the current Shuttle. This meant that it was far more difficult to win congressional support for the Space Station, particularly as budgets became tighter. Mikulski questioned whether enough votes for the Station would be available if it meant "killing the increase for National Science Foundation grants, national service, and funding for environmental technology or climate change." Furthermore, to avoid defeat, the Station needed to be approved by the House by a reasonable mar-gin. She maintained that "Space policy should no longer he driven by the domination of the space station," adding that the United States needed to establish a consensus on space policy. (SP News, May 30-Jun 12/94)
Sandy Valenti, project team leader at NASA's Lewis Research Center, said the Center had compiled an inventory of space-related technology that has relevance to biotechnology and the work of medical researchers in northeastern Ohio. NASA's goal was to support existing organizations in the community, such as local hospitals and universities. Six specific research areas in which NASA could provide technological support were fluid mechanics, electronics, communication and instrumentation, materials development and structural design, surface modification, and energy storage systems. (Crain's Cleveland Business, May 30/94)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
