NASA

And then there were two. After SpaceX launched Starlink 4-14 on April 21, 2022, there were “only” two rockets standing on top of their launch pads on the Space Coast.

Artemis-1 won’t launch this time around, instead, it will return to the VAB sometime around April 26, 2022 for repairs to a faulty valve as well as other processing. While it is gone, repairs and upgrades will be made to the ground support equipment on Launch Complex 39-B, and hopefully when the rocket is rolled back out, its Wet Dress Rehearsal will run more smoothly.

Artemis-1 in Monochrome
There’s something about a black and white photo that makes the details pop out nicely, so I used a #29 Wratten (red) filter to take this photograph of Artemis from Beach Road on the Cape Canaveral National Seashore on April 23, 2022.
(click to enlarge)
Photo ©2022 Charles Boyer

Crew-4 is scheduled to launch in the pre-dawn hours on April 27th, 2022. It will head to the International Space Station and deliver four NASA astronauts there to being a six-month stint onboard.

SpaceX Crew 4 (l) and Artemis-1 (r)
As seen from the boardwalk on Area 1 at Playalinda Beach, late in the afternoon on April 23, 2022.
(click to enlarge)
Photo ©2022 Charles Boyer
Read more

Artemis-1 Sitting on LC-39B, April 7, 2022
(Click to enlarge)
Photo ©2022 Charles Boyer / Creative Commons-Attribution license

Seen on April 7, Artemis-1 awaits further testing after The SpaceX Axiom-1 mission launches NET April 8th. The day was filled with intermittent rainstorms as a cold front approached and later passed through the Space Coast. As a result, the air was filled with a fine mist, something not atypical on the edge of the shoreline, and that’s where the launchpads are.

Artemis-1 Sitting on LC-39B, April 7, 2022
(Click to enlarge)
Photo ©2022 Charles Boyer / Creative Commons-Attribution license
Read more

The sun sets on Artemis1 and the first night of its Wet Dress Rehearsal begins.

All was quiet at that moment, and it was incredible to watch SLS start to glow brighter and brighter as the darkness fell behind her.

The sun sets on Artemis1 and the first night of its Wet Dress Rehearsal begins.
All was quiet at that moment, and it was incredible to watch SLS start to glow brighter and brighter as the darkness fell behind her.

(click to enlarge full size. Photo ©2022 Charles Boyer)

The day was a stormy one, starting with a tornado warning around 830-9am in Cocoa Beach, which is not far at all from Kennedy Space Center and Pad LC-39B. I was not terribly worried, however, because tornadoes almost always track northeast and that meant it would be offshore before it go to the launch pad. Fortunately, the warning was much ado about not very much and there was no damage to speak of at the beaches.

In between storms (it rained again that afternoon and that night as well) SpaceX launched a Falcon 9 carrying Transporter 4 at 12:24:17 local time, and later, after an afternoon of steely-grey skies and more rain, the clouds parted a little bit to put some color in the gloaming as the sun set.

Darkness falls on Artemis-1, April 1, 2022

(click to enlarge full size. Photo ©2022 Charles Boyer)

Artemis herself seemed to grow brighter and brighter as the sky turned to black. Much brighter and taller than the Cape Canaveral Lighthouse, the rocket shone like a beacon into the night. It’s clearly visible from all over the Titusville-Cocoa area, especially on bridges or on roads that give a view up the rivers.

Saturn V’s were the same, brightly lit and easy to see from nearly everywhere around town. It was not only a working spacecraft, but also a symbol that never failed to catch the eye. And given that a lot of NASA workers and their associated contractors contributing to the project live here, Artemis is now what the brightly lit Apollo vehicles were: a reminder of what the mission was.

A closeup of the top of Artemis on her first night of WDR.
(Best viewed enlarged…there are lots of cool little details to look at.)

(click to enlarge full size. Photo ©2022 Charles Boyer)
Read more

I get asked this question all this time: what’s the best place for a visitor to the Space Coast to go see a SpaceX crewed launch to the International Space Station?

All launches to ISS from LC-39A follow a 45-50 degree trajectory. This rendering is looking due east.


The Best of the Best Views

The best answer is to plan ahead and buy tickets from the Kennedy Space Center Visitors Center, because they will have the closest views on offer: The Apollo / Saturn V Center (see below). They do cost a good bit of money, however: the closest view of the April 4th, 2022 Axiom 1 private mission to ISS is $250 for a ~4.0 mile view.

That’s a lot of money, but if you’re only going to come here once, trust me, it is worth it. You will definitely hear the roar and see the best view of the launch, so think about whether it fits into your budget.

If $250 is beyond what you want to spend, the Visitors Center has cheaper tickets where you view from the Visitors Center grounds itself. It’s 7.5 miles to the launch pad, but you won’t see the rocket until it clears the trees. It’s still really close and you’ll hear the roar and see a lot, so it may be an alternative for you.

Star Fleet Tours

Website Link

Star Fleet is a commercial tour operator out of the Cape Canaveral Port, and they are without a doubt the best one in town for viewing launches, bar none. That’s not to say the other guys are not good folks or a good value, but Star Fleet is a cut above.

They will give you outstanding views of launches from out on the water, but aren’t as close as the KSC Visitors Center tours because of the exclusion zone that extend from the launch pad and out several miles into the Atlantic.

That doesn’t matter, because you’ll see as much as you’d see anywhere off the base, and you’ll also get to view the launch from angles that very few people ever do.

As it is with the KSCVC, there is a cost associated with them, but it’s well worth the money and the time. Click the link above to view their site and definitely consider them.

(Note: I am not compensated by or represent Star Fleet Tours. This is just my honest opinion of them.)

There are are other choices off of KSC property.

Crewed SpaceX launches are from LC-39A, which is on the north end of Kennedy Space Center. Let’s start with the two I consider to be mistakes. Your mileage may vary, but I think you can get a better look at other spots.

Great Views:

Max Brewer Bridge, Titusville:

Google Maps Link

his is considered a top-class viewpoint. Get there early and park across the street at the park. Walk to the top of the bridge on the south side. 11.5 miles away, with an elevated viewpoint, you will clearly see ignition and liftoff. You will also be able to see the rocket more clearly as it flies away.

Space View Park, Titusville:
Google Maps Link
12.08 miles away, this is another great viewing area. The park is smaller, with less parking but at 6am there should be little issue getting in and out. Ignition and liftoff is visible.

Rotary Riverfront Park, US1, Titusville:

Google Maps Link

12.05 miles away, and an excellent place to go see the launch. A bit south of Space View and the Max Brewer Bridge, this park is actually closer to the launch pad and you will be able to see the liftoff. Is on the Indian River and and is an excellent vantage point. There is a small parking lot and road-side parking.

Kennedy Point Park, US1, Titusville:

Google Maps Link

12.25 miles away. More or less the same as Rotary Park but with a little less parking. Ignition and liftoff is visible.

Plan B’s

KARS Park, Merritt Island

Facebook: KARS Park

KARS Park is an area normally reserved for NASA, on-site contractor and military guests and is a great complex for their enjoyment. While you probably don’t qualify to spend the night, you can still view launches from there. KARS is better for SLC-40 and SLC-41 launches, but it also serves as solid secondary choice for launch spectators.

It’s close to 528 (The Beachline), it’s safe and secure and easy to park. They do charge $10 for crewed launches, but that’s per car and that makes things very reasonable.

Check their Facebook page for more information, but I can say that I have seen over 100 launches from here (including Artemis I) and it was a great view every time.

Bennett Causeway – Rocket Launch Viewing Area

Google Maps Link

The causeway that extends over the Indian and then the Banana Rivers between Cocoa and Cape Canaveral are really good places to watch a launch, albeit at a long way away. You won’t hear the sound of the liftoff for over thirty seconds after ignition, but you will be able to see ignition and Falcon 9 for a good while as it heads to space.

Here’s a view of a launch from LC-39A seen from the Causeway on A1A/528


For this site for viewing launches from LC-39A (or B) I recommend binoculars and for photography, you’ll need a really long zoom lens. If you want to take closer-in photos, cell phones are not that great to take pictures with from this spot, and I recommend at least a 300mm telephoto on a good DSLR or mirrorless. Even then you’ll be cropping in when you look at the shots on your computer later.

Bennett Causeway, FL-528 / A1A

Here’s a closer view.

If you are coming in from I-95, go to the exit for the port (the cloverleaf above) and then head back west on A1A (it’s the same road as Florida-528.) Cross the first bridge (views are better there,) and pull off and park. Unless you are getting there super-early, you’ll see cars and tracks (and some campers) and fellow launch-watchers on the shore of the river.

While you wait, you’ll no doubt see pelicans, probably osprey hunting, and other waterbirds. More often than not folks will also enjoy seeing dolphins swimming just off shore. This is a wild area, so beware of wildlife. I’ve never seen an alligator at this site, but your mileage may vary. Just keep your eyes open and remember you’re in a natural area and you won’t have any problems.

Not That Great Views (IMO)

Most visitors ask me about these two places the most: Jetty Park in Cape Canaveral and the Cocoa Beach Pier. They’re great spots to visit, but are only okay for crewed launches.

You’ll definitely see the rocket in flight, but they are not what I would consider the best views for KSC-side launches. They’re a little better for launches from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, but even then, not the best of the best.

(Note: when Blue Origin starts launching New Glenn, Jetty Park will be a prime time spot. Stay tuned.)

Jetty Park Pier: 

Google Maps Link

Views of the launchpad are pretty good, but it is 13 miles to LC-39A from there. More than likely, there will be surf mist between you and the rocket. Since it is flying NE and away from you.

Cocoa Beach Pier: 

Google Maps Link

About 15.5 miles from LC-39A. Decent views, but again, you will not see ignition on the launch pad and the rocket will be flying away from you.

Read more

Ever wondered what the inside of NASA’s Transporter Crawler looks like?

In 2014, I was part of a NASA Social event, and as part of the “insider” tour we got to go inside and look around in the Crawler that was used for Apollo and the Space Shuttle, and is now used for Artemis.

Read more

I drove out to Playalinda Beach on the Cape Canaveral National Seashore yesterday (it’s about 30 minutes away) and got a great look at Artemis-1 as it sat on Launch Complex 39-B awaiting Wet Dress Rehearsal on April 1-3, 2022.

Artemis 1, March 27, 2022
Artemis 1 sits on LC-39B on March 27, 2022.
Seen from Pullout #5 on the Beach Road in the Cape Canaveral National Seashore.
Photo ©2022 Charles Boyer / Creative Commons-Attribution license

Artemis will be at LC-39B until sometime the week of April 4th, when it will be returned to the Vehicle Assembly Building to be prepared for its launch to the moon. When it flies, it will be the most powerful rocket ever launched — 39,000 kN (8,800,000 lb) of force — more than the venerable Saturn V.

Given a successful dress rehearsal, it should head to the moon from Kennedy Space Center in June. It will orbit Luna for five days after arrival, and then depart back for the Earth.

Artemis-1 sits on its launch pad as the daylight turns golden and heads towards the evening.
Seen from Pullout #5 on the Beach Road in the Cape Canaveral National Seashore. This photo is best appreciated at full size. Click to enlarge.
Photo ©2022 Charles Boyer / Creative Commons-Attribution license
Read more

“Rogozin is at it again,” harked a post on Twitter today. Rogozin is of course Dmitry Olegovich Rogozin, the Director General of Roscosmos, Russia’s state corporation for spaceflight activities and systems. “At it” meant that he had given a speech regarding the current state of the Russian space program, its future and its plans. I suppose “at it” was also meant that Rogozin had made sensational sort of statement, something he’s known for from time to time. He didn’t really do that this time, however, instead he gave a frank statement of how his program needs to improve and what his viewpoint of the American space program is.

Rogozin makes some good points, with a touch of the same sort of jingoism Americans were applauding as it came from the Cape and Houston just a couple of weeks ago as NASA and SpaceX sent two astronauts to orbit on the ISS. Write off the Russian space program at your own peril — they are the ones who have uninterrupted access to orbit for over forty years.

He called out NASA spokesperson Stephanie Schierholz, who told Forbes magazine last week that “cosmonauts will fly on Crew Dragon and Boeing Starliner and vice versa.” Aside from Schierholz’s statement, there’s no evidence that Russia is planning to fly on either craft — they have purchased no contracts, nor have they publicly submitted any RFP’s for one. Russia has no need to buy seats, as it has a reliable ride to space of its own.

Rogozin also offered a riposte to Elon Musk, when he said “on May 30 Elon Musk did not bring us down — he brought down his compatriots from Boeing passing them with the beginning of the flight tests. This war is theirs, but not ours. We have a long-standing and continuously working national transport system; we constantly refine it, at the same time building a new and more advanced spacecraft.”

What do you expect him to say? Should he fawn like a SpaceX fanboi on Twitter and suggest that the Russians shut down a program that has ~1900 successful launches, 173 crewed? That is absurd. Rogozin is correct, besides. The competition was not with them, it was Boeing vs. SpaceX. Yes, Russia charged NASA far more than SpaceX will, but the Russians were also charging what the market would bear, something that should be near and dear to a country to claims to love the free market and capitalism. The only possible competition would have come from China, a country that NASA is forbidden to work with in any international space effort. It was Russia or America would have had to abandon ISS entirely. Given that stark choice, Russia’s price was a bargain.

Much was also made in the about the vast superiority of Crew Dragon and Falcon 9 versus Soyuz. Certainly Crew Dragon is more modern, after all, its base design is a little more than a decade old. Its crewed flight capabilities are still being tested for the first time — while it is successfully in orbit, that was only one-third of its mission: go to orbit, stay there and test the long-term capabilities of the craft to stay functional and then return the crew safely home. Until it meets the latter two milestones, one underway, the other yet to come later in the summer, the mission cannot be called a success. On the other hand, Soyuz was and still is the most venerable human launch system in existence. It’s record speaks for itself.

“We have a unique record of 173 successful flights. Even the three emergencies caused by the carrier rocket failures in 1975, 1983 and 2018 occurring during various injection stages showed its unique survivability due to the launch escape system reliability. By the way, the Soyuz rocket of various configurations has performed over 1,900 launches,” said Rogozin.

True. Soyuz is, by far, the most experienced and iterated design of any spacecraft, ever. Is it dated? Yes. But it has continued from its maiden launch in the days of Gemini until now. The Soviets/Russians have not had the capability gaps that existed here between Apollo and STS, the delays after STS tragedies, and the last gap between STS and Commercial Crew.

And it will stay that way, because not all nations want to depend on America for access to space. That is why Rogozin mentioned “the time-honored spacecraft created and designed by Sergey Korolev to conquer the Moon, will serve for a while even after the new Oryol spacecraft becomes operational.” In other words, the Russians will continue to have access to space now and for as far as one can peer into the future.

Read more

Here’s a fun little thought experiment for the space enthusiast: suppose for a moment that NASA and the US had followed what the Soviets and later Roscosmos did with Soyuz: kept improving the existing system incrementally and kept the system flying while they did.

Instead of building a new booster stack for every new program – STS, now ISS, and later whatever we do with SLS when it finishes, we had kept the Saturn IB / Apollo CSM system in service and had iteratively improved it as technology improved? At least on the surface, the answer seems be a “yes.”

Soyuz launching the Soviet part of the ASTP mission from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in 1975. Alexei Leonov and Valeri Kubasov would later meet in space with Thomas Stafford, Vance Brand and Deke Slayton in orbit on the last spaceflight of the Saturn family.

photo: TASS, via NASA.

While it was hardly sexy, “Cluster’s Last Stand” had a great track record. Save for Apollo 13 (caused by human error) the same can be said for the CSM. I think the H-1 (later RS-27) engine would have evolved to something similar to the Merlin in performance terms (both are gas-generator engines) and the J2 engine on the S-IVB Saturn IB second stage had plenty of go (1,033.1 kN).

 A Saturn IB lifts off from Kennedy Space Center in the 1970’s. Seen below the rocket’s plume is the distinctive pedestal used to match the relatively diminutive IB to the launch tower.

photo: NASA

On the top, literally, an Apollo capsule with even the second generation Shuttle avionics much less CST-100 or Orion avionics would have been something to behold, plus whatever improvements to another 40 years of development and manufacturing would have brought. Would the Apollo CSM have evolved to something reusable? Maybe.

Did we quit flying every time we built a new kind of airplane? No. But that’s what the US has effectively done with its space program: nothing launched from US soil during the development of the next program. This happened in the 1970’s between Apollo and the Space Shuttle and it has been since 2011 and the end of the Shuttle program that US astronauts have gone to space on an American rocket. It seems illogical, but that’s what has happened.

Ironically, the US and NASA depend on the venerable Soyuz workhorse to ferry astronauts to ISS. Soyuz has been in service since 1967, and its replacement is only now in advanced development in Russia.

One thing is certain: the US would have never had the launch gap in the 1970’s between ASTP and STS, nor would we have one now. The Russians have never had a flight gap since Soyuz entered service in the late 1960’s, save for the short periods following incident investigations. And even today, they can continue to use the venerable Soyuz while RKK Energia works through the issues with their new Federation spacecraft (its maiden launch is expected to slip from 2022 to 2024.)

A breakdown of the Saturn IB flight stack. 

Source: NASA msfc-71-pm 1100-29

Meanwhile, our *three* human spaceflight programs all have their own issues. At the time of this writing in May, 2019, SpaceX is piecing together the data and the remains of its first Crew Dragon capsule after it exploded during a test, Boeing is working through its own issues with its onboard launch escape system engines on the CST-100 and SLS continues to plod through development and testing (and is years behind schedule.)

Perhaps we should have kept the old uprated Saturn I system. It would be interesting to have seen what we could have done in space had we kept the old bird flying.

Read more

My father Armand worked at Cape Kennedy (now Kennedy Space Center) during the Apollo program.  He was the Pad Fire Chief whose fire and safety responsibility was launch pad operations — and that included astronaut safety except for when they were in the rocket itself.  Once they were strapped in, the Launch Escape System (a rocket on top of the rocket) was the primary safety system, but anywhere else, that was Dad’s team.

2377a

Apollo 7 lifts off from Cape Kennedy on October 11, 1968.

When it came time to launch Apollo 7, everyone at Kennedy Space Center was tense — it was the first human-crewed flight of Apollo, and it was the first time men humans would be going to space after the AS-204 (Apollo 1) tragedy that had claimed three astronauts in the first design of the Apollo capsule.  America had started falling behind schedule in its schedule to get to the moon before 1970, and on this flight, everything had to go right…or perhaps the program would be canceled.

If there’s one thing about NASA, is that’s they pay attention to the smallest details.  That’s because major incidents always start small…and mushroom from there.  On this particular mission, due to the previous tragedy in the capsule, extra attention was given to FOD — foreign object debris — that might be loose in the capsule.  The fear was another fire, and no one was taking any chances.  None.

nasa-apollo-7-flight-crew-to-launch-pad-photo-print-2With that, word came down from on high in the NASA hierarchy: once they were in their flight suits, no one was to touch the astronauts, under penalty of instant dismissal from their position.  The mission managers made it clear that they meant business and that meant anyone.

Part of Dad’s job was to ride up in the elevator on the rocket gantry to the White Room — the place where crew would help each astronaut into the capsule.  This elevator was essentially a hardened industrial elevator, big enough to move a lot of people and gear, but not so big one could stand on the other side of a room.  There wasn’t room enough for that.

68-HC-428HR

Wally Schirra waiting to go to the launch pad to start the Apollo 7 mission on October 11, 1968.

The mission command was Walter “Wally” Schirra, a crack former Navy test pilot and an inveterate smart-ass.  He and my father knew each other well from launches and rehearsals for the Apollo 7 launch.  They’d spent a lot of time testing emergency evacuation systems, refining them afterwards in meetings, and probably hoisting a couple of drinks after work back in Cocoa Beach.  That meant Wally had also experienced by Dad’s wicked sense of humor, and anyone that ever knew him said the same thing: he was a masterful raconteur who loved to laugh and loved to tell a joke even more.  He and Schirra were two peas in a pod.

So the astronauts get out of their van, walk up to the elevator on the launch pad and they start riding up towards their seats, and Dad was with them in their procession.

Dad told me that they ended up in the back, side by side, riding up to the top when Schirra starts laughing, gives my Dad “a shit-eating grin” and then “started rubbing shoulder all over me, laughing.”

What did you think about that?

“I was scared shitless that one of the Germans would turn around and I’d have to come home and explain to your mother why I’d gotten fired.”

But you didn’t, right?

“Nope, the Germans turned around, looked at Schirra and said in their perfect* English ‘stop it Schirra.  Armand has kids at home.'”

Did you worry about getting any FOD on Wally?

“No, we were in jumpers and they were the cleanest clothes I ever wore.  Wally knew it too.”

Dad told me that the rest of the way was silent, and when they got to the top, and then he looked at my Schirra and said, “give me a hug goodbye, Wally!”

Yup, the world watching and two smart-asses are cutting up behind the scenes.  That was my Dad.

  • most of zee Germans had accents.
Read more