On Birds, Phones, and Spaceflight

Jul 30 2011 by J Simmons.

I saw this tweet the other day:

http://twitter.com/#!/Bob_Richards/status/95670040791220224

It caught my attention because it’s a catchier version of a story I’ve been telling for several years now. My version goes like this:

No one could have predicted Facebook would be one of the most used features of the Internet 10 years ago, let alone when they were inventing the Internet.

Before Facebook it went like this:

Spreadsheets could not have been conceived of until the age of desktop computers. It took having a computer, a programming language, and an accounting background all coming together in the same place and person before the someone could even imagine the idea of a spreadsheet. And now, people buy Windows computers just so they can get Excel.

What does this have to do with the work of Mach 30? If you look around the space industry, patterns emerge. And one of those patterns is kind of the reverse of those stories. You see, every few years someone comes up with a new “reason” we have to invest in space access.

LG TO PRE-LOAD ANGRY BIRDS RIO ON OPTIMUS SERI...

Image by LGEPR via Flickr

The “we” is almost always the government, and the reason is some predicted “killer app” – the space industry equivalent to Excel, or Facebook, or Angry Birds— that thing we just cannot live without. When I was a kid it was microgravity pharmaceutical research that would lead to the cure for cancer. Later it was space tourism (Take your family on the vacation of a lifetime!), which has come back around again with the sub-orbital market. Lately I’ve been reading a lot about space based solar power, the idea that we can solve the world’s energy crisis by putting up dozens of giant solar collectors to beam electricity down to Earth.

What do all of these ideas have in common? The only way you could ever build them (many commercial orbiting research stations, dozens of orbiting hotels, or giant solar power stations) is to first build the holy grail of human spaceflight: a reusable space plane that provides aircraft-like access to space. The thought is if one can convince policy makers that we need the killer app, then they will obviously fund the development of a fully reusable space plane because that is a necessary first step. And then the space community gets what it really wanted in the first place: the space plane.

Vitosha, an early Bulgarian computer (1960s)

But it’s all backwards from the way history works. If you think about it, this is the equivalent of someone in the 1960s saying, “I know, let’s put a computer in everyone’s pocket [smart phones] and on their desks [personal computers], and then tie them all together into a planet wide super network so we can write a program for college students [and later everyone] to keep up with what their friends are doing at any moment” as a justification for building the entire personal computing revolution and the internet. And don’t forget, this is a time when computers were somewhere between the size of small closets to entire rooms. Seriously, there was no way to predict Facebook back then, and even if you could, it would sound so crazy that no one would fund the work. The scale is too large, the reason too strange, and the payoff is too far away, if it will ever come.

Instead, researchers openly shared and collaborated on the development of improved and ever smaller computers, and on the infrastructure for what would become the internet. Later hobbyists developed an operating system, a web server, a database, a web oriented programming language, and much more, all open source. Only then, after decades of open development, was the market ready for a college kid to start Facebook and become a billionaire. If you look at the other examples, you’ll find a similar story. Truly revolutionary technology is evolved over time, and not for the reasons we eventually use it for.

This is the reason Mach 30 is organized as a research organization instead of an advocacy organization. For decades advocacy groups have lobbied the government and industry to support the dream of a spacefaring society by tantalizing decision makers with these potential killer apps. But it just has not worked, because it puts the process in reverse order. Instead, we want to provide the opportunity to turn space development around, and lead with passionate research and development, knowing that when the time, technology, and players are right, amazing businesses and markets will open up in space.

ad astra per civitatem – to the stars through community

A New Path to Space (for everyone)

Jul 19 2011 by J Simmons.

2 Comments

J. Simmons introduces Mach 30, a grass roots space program, and invites the space community to join this revolutionary movement.

Show your support by making a donation here.

Can’t watch the video right now? You can read the transcript below.

If you don’t care about space exploration, this video is not for you. Feel free to stop watching now. But, before you do, I would appreciate it if you took a moment to send it to any of your friends who are into space. They might like it.

If, on the other hand, like me you grew up with Star Wars and the Space Shuttle, or going a little further back, with Star Trek and Apollo, then this message is for you.

Hello, my name is J. Simmons. I am the founder and President of Mach 30, a non-profit with a new approach to space exploration.

I have wanted to go to space my whole life. My earliest memory is sitting on my mom’s lap at a drive-in movie theater watching Star Wars. I was too young to really get it, but the images of ships flying through space and of traveling to other worlds stuck with me. As I grew up and the Shuttle program started, I believed people when they said the Shuttle was going to make the dream of routine access to space a reality. And yet, 135 missions, and 30 years later, and we are still only dreaming. Sure the ISS is an impressive feat of engineering, but it is not somewhere any of us can expect to visit.

We have waited too many years for someone else to change the course of human space exploration. Instead of again asking our representatives to increase NASA’s budget, or cheering on another rocket launch, we must take the reigns ourselves.

There has never been a more perfect moment for a grass roots space program. The Internet has changed the way we work, share, and support one another. The success of open source software is ushering in a revolution in the design of hardware. And, the gap in US spaceflight has opened the door to new directions in space policy.

Enter Mach 30. Our goal is to design open source spaceflight hardware, and in doing so, create a world where the next “Facebook” is a space-based company whose business model is as inconceivable to us now as Facebook would have been in 1990. That’s the kind of world I want to live in. Where access to space is like the Internet: everywhere and a part of our daily lives.

We need your help to go from concept to reality. First, please share this video with all of your pro-space friends. We need to get the word out that there is a new path open to us, one that we have direct control over. Send it to your scifi buddies, post it on Facebook, tweet about it, share it with your Linux Users Groups…

Second, please make a donation to Mach 30. Hardware costs money, legal fees cost money. It turns out space is just really expensive. And remember, it all adds up. $5, $10, $25, and $50 at a time, from everyone who dreams of going into space could change the whole game.

Thank you for your help and support. Ad astra per civitas – to the stars through community

What do we mean by a “spacefaring civilization?”

Jul 18 2011 by J Simmons.

1 Comment

2001: A Space Odyssey Clavius Moon Colony

Image by Dallas1200am via Flickr

The mission of Mach 30 is “to hasten the advancement of humanity into a spacefaring civilization.” But what does that mean? When we talk about a “spacefaring civilization,” we are talking about the promises of the 1960s made real. Consider the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, released in April 1968 over a year before the first humans walked on the Moon. This movie predicted that by 2001 major airlines would be offering regular service to Low Earth Orbit using reusable space planes. It also predicted there would be multiple, extensive lunar bases. And, let’s not forget that the defining mission to another planet is not to Mars (been there, done that?) but to Jupiter and its moons! This is something that not even the most forward looking advocates of space exploration are discussing.

2001 is not the only example from the 1960s that makes these kind of predictions. There are a number of of books, videos, and other material that all promised a very similar future (routine access to space, lunar colonies, expeditions to Mars), all by the end of the twentieth century. Yet, none of this has come to pass. At present, all human access to Earth orbit is still provided by government space programs. And the Space Shuttle, while partly reusable, does not come close to being the kind of space plane that can make routine flights to space (commercial or otherwise) a reality.

Yes commercial companies are starting to work on access to space, but each of them has to start at square one when they are founded. Just look at the first project of almost every new space company: design and build a rocket engine. Seriously, if you want to start a spaceflight company, the first thing you need to do is design your own rocket engine. This is the equivalent of saying go design your own jet engine to anyone who wants to start an airline.

Still, we believe, some day the kind of future predicted in 2001 (or one very much like it) will come to pass. It is a vision born of the idea that commercial enterprise has developed the tools, technologies, and markets to establish a true space economy. And eventually all of those things will come to pass. It is just in our nature to push the boundaries of what can be done and where we can go. So, reaching this future is less a question of if, and more a question of when.

Given the costs associated with spaceflight (and the amount of effort spent reinventing the “wheel”), it seems reasonable to assume that without any intervention it will take quite a bit of time before we reach the future promised in the film 2001. Our goal at Mach 30 is to shorten the wait. We believe that by applying the principles of sustainability, open source development, and the use of mature technology we can get off the “not invented here” merry-go-round, and instead get on a path toward evolutionary improvements built on a shared foundation of technologies. And that like the explosion of commercial enterprise on the Internet, this shared foundation will lead to new and unimagined markets in space for commercial enterprise to serve.

End of the Space Age? Or a Time for Reinvention?

Jul 16 2011 by J Simmons.

Comment

Image via Wikipedia

The Economist has dedicated an issue to the “end of the space age” suggesting over three articles that the promise of the space race has faded, political will eroded, and public interest evaporated. Who can blame them? Aging isn’t easy! Like life, it always seems more exciting when you’re young and free and visionary.

Kennedy mesmerized the world with sheer audacity of launching the space race. Without a doubt the excitement led to incredible achievements built on competition and daring goals. It helped, of course, that this competition had political objectives and seemingly unlimited resources to back it up.

When the shuttle program took off, it galvanized the world, again, around the possibilities of new technologies and intrepid journeys. The shuttles made it possible to create and support the International Space Station with which the shuttle has docked for that last time. I know I was captivated by the possibilities the ISS provided that unfortunately never materialized for most of the American (and global) public. Indeed, The Economist got it right that, over thirty years, the space program has become commonplace, mundane—just another trip to the International Space Station. But, where the The Economist sees the mundane Mach 30 appreciates the mature.

There’s less fanfare in building the foundations, but Mach 30 is focused on a new audacious goal—Open Source Spaceflight Hardware; cooperation that moves beyond government agendas or private industry to a community-led effort. Shuttle technology never focused sufficiently on building the mature technologies that could be leveraged for missions further afield. Imagine what small steps over 30 years might have meant to a spacefaring future.

Mature technologies (perhaps with small changes or new uses) are the foundation of successful systems. It’s critical that those systems be sustainable also in order to make long-term space travel a reality. Mach 30 goes one step further by placing open source as a central springboard for innovation to keep barriers low and advancement rapid among communities of practice—reaching for the stars through community.

Mach 30 accepts that moving a little slower but very deliberately may actually be the quickest route—even admitting we do miss some of the excitement of the race! That is maturity indeed.

And, yet there are dreams to be achieved. There are bold goals yet to be named. Find them with us—whether you’re a space enthusiast or simply recall shuttle memories—by joining Mach 30’s community. Donate. Friend us. Contribute to Open Design Engineering. With an open community leveraging mature technologies for sustainable travel spacefaring will be a reality.

The Role of Open Methods in the Development of the First Airplane

Jul 15 2011 by J Simmons.

2 Comments

Image via Wikipedia

The open source spaceflight hardware movement has its roots in both the growing open source hardware movement, which is itself based on the open source software movement, and the application of open methods in aerospace engineering which dates back to the earliest days of the field. In fact, this openness led to the success of the Wright brothers.

The Wrights built upon a large body of published works including books, articles, and expired patents, dating back to the beginning of the nineteenth century. George Cayley identified the use of curved airfoils for lift, the need for controls, and the use of propellers as a means of propulsion as the fundamentals of flight in 1799. He also proposed the use of the bi-plane wing, which would later be used in a number of gliders, including those built by the Wrights, and the first airplane. These ideas were not widely known until Alphonse Penaud rediscovered and published Cayleys work. Penaud went on to expand Cayleys work by publishing what he saw as the core challenges to achieving heavy than air flights: resistance of the air, resistance of the machine, and a light weight motor. Even more important to the story of the Wrights was Penauds work in models and his use of rubber bands as a power source for model airplanes and helicopters, some of which were sold as toys. The Wright’s father gave young Wright brothers one of Penauds toy helicopters, which is said to be the catalyst for their interest in aviation as adults.

These principles and challenges identified by Cayley and Penaud were the core of the problems tackled by the Wrights, due in large part to the Wrights beginning their journey into aviation by researching all of the work done to date. But the aviation community’s influence on the Wrights’ work did not end with an understanding of the principles of aviation, it also influenced their approach to tackling the problem. Louis Pierre Mouillard, author of the 1881 book The Empire of the Air, was a proponent of using ailerons for roll control, a challenge that the Wrights solved with the related idea of wing warping. And it was Otto Lilienthal who in the late 1800s publicly promoted the idea that the best approach to developing the first airplane was to start by developing a reliable glider and then adding a motor. This is exactly the approach used by the Wright brothers in the development of the Wright Flyer. Finally, the Wrights knew and were in contact with Octave Chanute who published the most complete summary of nineteenth century aeronautics to date, Progress of Flying Machines, leaving little doubt that the Wrights were influenced by the developments of earlier aviation pioneers.

As can be seen above, the Wrights first airplane is the product of not only their hard work and ingenuity, but also of the culture of openness surrounding the field of aviation during the nineteenth century. In the words of author Courtlandt Canby in his book A History of Flight, “The Wrights were not pioneers. Their work, rather, culminated a century of experience.”