FUTURE SPACE SHUTTLE- X-33:

The Lockheed Martin X-33 was an unmanned, sub-scale technology demonstrator for the VentureStar under the Space Launch Initiative. The VentureStar was planned to be a next-generation, commercially operated reusable launch vehicle. The X-33 would flight-test a range of technologies that NASA believed it needed for single-stage-to-orbit reusable launch vehicles (SSTO RLVs), such as metallic thermal protection systems, composite cryogenic fuel tanks for liquid hydrogen, the aerospike engine, autonomous (unmanned) flight control, rapid flight turn-around times through streamlined operations, and its lifting body aerodynamics.

DESIGN:

Through the use of the lifting body shape, composite liquid fuel tanks, and the aerospike engine, NASA and Lockheed Martin hoped to test fly a craft that would demonstrate the viability of a single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) design. An SSTO craft would not require external fuel tanks or boosters to reach low-earth orbit. Doing away with the need for "staging" with launch vehicles, such as with the Shuttle and the Apollo rockets, would lead to an inherently more reliable and safer space launch vehicle. While the X-33 would not approach airplane-like safety, the X-33 would attempt to demonstrate that 0.997 reliability, or 3 mishaps out of 1,000 launches, which would be an order of magnitude more reliable than the Space Shuttle system, was achievable. The 15 planned experimental X-33 flights could only begin this statistical evaluation.
 

The unmanned craft would have been launched vertically from a specially designed facility constructed on Edwards Air Force Base,and landed horizontally on a runway at the end of its mission. Initial sub-orbital test flights were planned from Edwards AFB to Dugway Proving Grounds southwest of Salt Lake City, Utah. Once those test flights were completed, further flight tests would be conducted from Edwards AFB to Malmstrom AFB in Great Falls, Montana, to gather more complete data on aircraft heating and engine performance at higher speeds and altitudes.

On July 2, 1996, NASA selected Lockheed Martin Skunk Works of Palmdale, California, to design, build, and test the X-33 experimental vehicle for the RLV program. Lockheed Martin's design concept for the X-33 was selected over competing designs from Boeing and McDonnell Douglas. Boeing featured a Space Shuttle-derived design, and McDonnell Douglas featured a design based on its vertical takeoff and landing DC-XA test vehicle.

COMMERCIAL SPACE SHUTTLE:

Based on the X-33 experience shared with NASA, Lockheed Martin hoped to make the business case for a full-scale SSTO RLV, called VentureStar, that would be developed and operated through commercial means. The intention was that rather than operate space transport systems as it has with the Space Shuttle, NASA would instead look to private industry to operate the reusable launch vehicle and NASA would purchase launch services from the commercial launch provider. Thus, the X-33 was not only about honing space flight technologies, but also about successfully demonstrating the technology required to make a commercial reusable launch vehicle possible.

The VentureStar was to be the first commercial aircraft to fly into space. The unmanned X-33 was slated to fly 15 suborbital hops to near 75.8 km altitude.It also was to be the first aircraft with a ballistic trajectory. It was to be launched upright like a rocket and rather than having a straight flight path it would fly diagonally up for half the flight, reaching extremely high altitudes, and then back down for the rest of the flight. The VentureStar was intended for long inter-continental flights and supposed to be in service by 2012, but this project was never funded or begun.

The decision to design and build the X-33 grew out of an internal NASA study titled "Access to Space". Unlike other space transport studies, "Access to Space" was to result in the design and construction of a vehicle.

CANCELLATION:

Construction of the prototype was some 85% assembled with 96% of the parts and the launch facility 100% complete when the program was canceled by NASA in 2001, after a long series of technical difficulties including flight instability and excess weight.

In particular, the composite liquid hydrogen fuel tank failed during testing in November 1999. The tank was constructed of honeycomb composite walls and internal structures to lower its weight. A lighter tank was needed for the craft to demonstrate necessary technologies for single-stage-to-orbit operations. A hydrogen fueled SSTO craft's mass fraction requires that the weight of the vehicle without fuel be 10% of the fully-fueled weight. This would allow for a vehicle to fly to low earth orbit without the need for the sort of external boosters and fuel tanks used by the Space Shuttle. But, after the composite tank failed on the test stand during fueling and pressure tests, NASA came to the conclusion that the technology of the time was simply not advanced enough for such a design. This conclusion is heavily disputed in the alt-space community, who blame the program's failure on NASA's preference for researching new materials and technologies rather than using older more reliable ones—for example, use of composite hydrogen tanks instead of aluminium-lithium. While the composite tank walls themselves were lighter, the odd hydrogen tank shape resulted in complex joints increasing the total mass of the composite tank to above that of an aluminum-based tank.

NASA had invested $912 million in the project before cancellation and Lockheed Martin a further $357 million. Due to changes in the space launch business—including the challenges faced by companies such as Globalstar, Teledesic, and Iridium and the resulting drop in the number of anticipated commercial satellite launches per year—Lockheed Martin deemed that continuing development of the X-33 privately without government support would not be profitable.

After the cancellation, engineers were able to make a working liquid oxygen tank out of carbon fiber composite.

Construction of the prototype was some 85% assembled with 96% of the parts and the launch facility 100% complete when the program was canceled by NASA in 2001, after a long series of technical difficulties including flight instability and excess weight.

In particular, the composite liquid hydrogen fuel tank failed during testing in November 1999. The tank was constructed of honeycomb composite walls and internal structures to lower its weight. A lighter tank was needed for the craft to demonstrate necessary technologies for single-stage-to-orbit operations. A hydrogen fueled SSTO craft's mass fraction requires that the weight of the vehicle without fuel be 10% of the fully-fueled weight. This would allow for a vehicle to fly to low earth orbit without the need for the sort of external boosters and fuel tanks used by the Space Shuttle. But, after the composite tank failed on the test stand during fueling and pressure tests, NASA came to the conclusion that the technology of the time was simply not advanced enough for such a design. This conclusion is heavily disputed in the alt-space community, who blame the program's failure on NASA's preference for researching new materials and technologies rather than using older more reliable ones—for example, use of composite hydrogen tanks instead of aluminium-lithium. While the composite tank walls themselves were lighter, the odd hydrogen tank shape resulted in complex joints increasing the total mass of the composite tank to above that of an aluminum-based tank.[5]

NASA had invested $912 million in the project before cancellation and Lockheed Martin a further $357 million. Due to changes in the space launch business—including the challenges faced by companies such as Globalstar, Teledesic, and Iridium and the resulting drop in the number of anticipated commercial satellite launches per year—Lockheed Martin deemed that continuing development of the X-33 privately without government support would not be profitable.

After the cancellation, engineers were able to make a working liquid oxygen tank out of carbon fiber composite.

SPACE SHUTTLE PARTS:

THE VARIOUS PARTS WHICH MAKE UP A WHOLE SPACE SHUTTLE CAN BE BREAKED UP IN SUB-CATEGORIES WHICH ARE AS LISTED BELOW:

1:) HISTORY:

The space shuttle is a spacecraft designed for transporting people and cargo to and from orbit around Earth. NASA built the shuttle in the 1970’s to serve as a reusable rocket that could fly many missions. Past spacecrafts could only be used one time.

After 10 years of preparing Columbia, the first space shuttle was launched on April 12, 1981. Now four space shuttles are in use—Columbia (1981), Discovery (1983), Atlantis (1985), and Endeavour (1991), which replaced Challenger.

2:) IMPORTANT MISSIONS:

Two of the most important missions for a space shuttle are to carry satellites and other equipment into space and repair them there if necessary and to allow astronauts to conduct space experiments for studying weightlessness called "microgravity."

3:)  MAIN PARTS:

The space shuttle has three main parts—the orbiter, rocket systems (two solid rocket boosters and three main engines), and an external fuel tank. The orbiter has the crew cabin (which can carry up to seven crew members) the cargo bay, and the three main engines. Located on each side of the shuttle, the solid booster rockets holds solid fuel. When the fuel is gone, the boosters fall back down to Earth. The external fuel tank holds the shuttle’s liquid fuel.

4:) LEVELS

The space shuttle has three levels—the flight deck, the mid-deck, and the utility floor. The flight deck is where the mission commander and the pilot control the shuttle. The astronauts sleep, eat, and go to the bathroom on mid-deck. The utility floor storage area is where they keep the water and air tanks. The cargo bay is large enough to fit a tour bus. The laboratory is located in the cargo bay on the utility floor. That is where the satellites are stored and experiments are conducted. The cargo bay is where they complete all the missions. For example if one of their missions was to repair a satellite, the astronaut would fix it in the cargo bay.

5:) HEAT SHEILD TILES

The space shuttle is covered with special tiles to protect it from the intense heat when it reenters the Earth’s atmosphere. The tiles are so safe that if exposed to temperatures of up to 2,300° F, a human could hold them in their bare hand without injury! The tiles can last for up to 100 missions. Without these tiles, the space shuttle would burn to a crisp, killing all the astronauts inside.

6:) ROBOTIC ARMS.

Located on the left side of the space shuttle is a Canadian built robotic arm. It is used to pick up satellites and astronauts. The arm has three moving joints similar to the human wrist, elbow, and shoulder. The arm stretches fifty feet in length. It has two video cameras used to record the activities of the crew. The robotic arm has been a very important tool because it was used to build and repair the Russian space station, Mir, and the International Space Station.

7:) SPACE SUIT.

Astronauts wear space suits and maneuvering units. These units strap on to an astronaut’s back over the space suit, allowing them to move around in space without being connected to the shuttle. This equipment allows astronauts to take space walks outside the shuttle to work on satellites and other equipment.

8:) LAUNCH

Space shuttles are designed to leave Earth vertically using rockets and to land horizontally a lot like an aircraft. The booster rockets take the shuttle 28 (45 km) miles high before they fall away. These engines are designed to be used for 55 space missions, the world’s first reusable rocket engines. The speed of the rockets reaches 3,049 mph (4,973 km/h) before they burn out and fall into the ocean. After the booster rockets fall away, the three main shuttle engines kick in.

9:) CREW

The mission commander and the pilot, who are responsible for flying the shuttle, lead the flight crew. The rest of the crew is responsible for making sure the mission completes all of its assignments. Payload specialists conduct experiments or launch and repair satellites or other equipment.

10:) LANDING

The space shuttle usually lands back at Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida. If there is bad weather or other problems, the shuttle can land at Edwards Air Force Base in California. Shuttles that land at Edwards have to be carried back to Cape Canaveral by a special Boeing 747 at a cost of nearly $1 million.

11:) ISS AND SPACE SHUTTLE WORKING TOGETHER.

The ISS and the Shuttle Working Together

The International Space Station (ISS) is a spacecraft where astronauts could live and work. Since the ISS is large, it is less expensive to take it piece by piece into space and assemble it there rather than build the entire station and launch it into space. In the year 2002, after 44 flights into space, the ISS will be finished.

The center of the ISS is the U.S. Destiny Laboratory. This is where new and extraordinary experiments will be done in near-zero gravity.

12:) SPACE SHUTTLE NAMES.

• Columbia was named after a sailing vessel the explored the Columbia River in 1792 and was the first American ship to sail around the world.
•  Discovery was named for two famous ships—Henry Hudson’s ship that searched for a route from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean in the 1610’s and Captain James Cook’s ship that sailed the Pacific Ocean where he found the Hawaiian Islands in the 1770’s.
•  Atlantis was named after the first U.S. ship used for ocean research.
•  Endeavour was named after the first ship commanded by Captain James Cook. In 1788 the ship sailed to the South Pacific and around Tahiti, discovered New Zealand, mapped Australia, and sailed around the Great Barrier Reef. His ship often took scientists on explorations.
•  Challenger was named after a British Naval research ship, The HMS Challenger, that sailed into the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean in the 1870’s.
  
  
  
  
  

SPACE DEFENCE:

The sucess of space defence system is mainly based on the ground based networks and equipments.The various equipments are as illustraed as below:

1. Extended Range Interceptor (ERINT)

The Extended Range Interceptor (ERINT) program was part of SDI's Theater Missile Defense Program and was an extension of the Flexible Lightweight Agile Guided Experiment (FLAGE), which included developing hit-to-kill technology and demonstrating the guidance accuracy of a small, agile, radar-homing vehicle.

FLAGE scored a direct hit against a MGM-52 Lance missile in flight, at White Sands Missile Range in 1987. ERINT was a prototype missile similar to the FLAGE, but it used a new solid-propellant rocket motor that allowed it to fly faster and higher than FLAGE.

Under BMDO, ERINT was later chosen as the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) missile.

2. Homing Overlay Experiment (HOE)
 

The Homing Overlay Experiment (HOE) was the first system tested by the Army that employed hit-to-kill. Given concerns about the previous programs using nuclear tipped interceptors, in the 1980s the U.S. Army began studies about the feasibility of hit-to-kill vehicles, where an interceptor missile would destroy an incoming ballistic missile just by colliding with it head-on.

The Homing Overlay Experiment (HOE) was the first successful hit-to-kill intercept of a mock ballistic missile warhead outside the Earth’s atmosphere. The Army's HOE (Homing Overlay Experiment) used a Kinetic Kill Vehicle (KKV) to destroy a ballistic missle.

The KKV was equipped with an infrared seeker, guidance electronics and a propulsion system. Once in space, the KKV could extend a folded structure similar to an umbrella skeleton of 4 m (13 ft) diameter to enhance its effective cross section. This device would destroy the ICBM reentry vehicle on collision.

Four test launches were conducted in 1983 and 1984 at Kwajalein Missile Range in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. For each test a Minuteman missile was launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California carrying a single mock re-entry vehicle targeted for Kwajalein lagoon more than 4000 miles away.
Although the fourth test succeeded, the New York Times charged in August 1993 that the test had been rigged. Investigations into this charge by the Department of Defense, headed John Deutch for Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, and the General Accounting Office concluded that the test was a valid, successful test.

This technology was later used by the SDI and expanded into the Exoatmospheric Reentry-vehicle Interception System (ERIS) program

Exoatmospheric Reentry-vehicle Interception System (ERIS)

Developed by Lockheed as part of the ground-based interceptor portion of SDI, the Exoatmospheric Reentry-vehicle Interception System (ERIS) began in 1985, with at least two tests occurring in the early 1990s. This system was never deployed, but the technology of the system was used in the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system and the Ground Based Interceptor currently deployed as part of the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system.

Directed-energy weapon (DEW) programs:

X-ray laser
 
An artist's concept of a Space Laser Satellite Defense System, 1984. (Not any one system specifically, just generalized concept artwork)

An early focus of the project was toward a curtain of X-ray lasers powered by nuclear explosions. The curtain was to be deployed using a series of missiles launched from submarines or, later on, satellites, during the critical seconds following a Soviet attack. The satellites would be powered by built-in nuclear warheads – in theory, the energy from the warhead detonation would be used to pump a series of laser emitters in the missiles or satellites, allowing each satellite to shoot down many incoming warheads simultaneously. The attraction of this approach was that it was thought to be faster than an optical laser, which could only shoot down warheads one at a time, limiting the number of warheads each laser could destroy in the short time 'window' of an attack. However, on March 26, 1983,[13] the first test, known as the Cabra event, was performed in an underground shaft and resulted in marginally positive readings that could be dismissed as being caused by a faulty detector. Since a nuclear explosion was used as the power source, the detector was destroyed during the experiment and the results therefore could not be confirmed. Technical criticism based upon unclassified calculations suggested that the X-ray laser would be of at best marginal use for missile defense.Such critics often cite the X-ray laser system as being the primary focus of SDI, with its apparent failure being a main reason to oppose the program. However, the laser was never more than one of the many systems being researched for ballistic missile defense.

Despite the apparent failure of the Cabra test, the long term legacy of the X-ray laser program is the knowledge gained while conducting the research. A parallel developmental program advanced laboratory X-ray lasers for biological imaging and the creation of 3D holograms of living organisms. Other spin-offs include research on advanced materials like SEAgel and Aerogel, the Electron-Beam Ion Trap facility for physics research, and enhanced techniques for early detection of breast cancer.

Chemical laser

Beginning in 1985, the Air Force tested an SDIO-funded deuterium fluoride laser known as Mid-Infrared Advanced Chemical Laser (MIRACL) at White Sands Missile Range. During a simulation, the laser successfully destroyed a Titan missile booster in 1985, however the test setup had the booster shell pressurized and under considerable compression loads. These test conditions were used to simulate the loads a booster would be under during launch. The system was later tested on target drones simulating cruise missiles for the US Navy, with some success. After the SDIO closed, the MIRACL was tested on an old Air Force satellite for potential use as an Anti-satellite weapon, with mixed results. The technology was also used to develop the Tactical High Energy Laser, (THEL) which is being tested to shoot down artillery shells.

During the mid to late 1980s a number of panel discussions on lasers and SDI took place at various laser conferences. Proceedings of these conferences include papers on the status of chemical and other high power lasers at the time.

The Missile Defense Agency's Airborne Laser program uses a chemical laser which has successfully intercepted a missile taking off, so an offshoot of SDI could be said to have successfully implemented one of the key goals of the program.

Neutral Particle Beam

In July 1989, the Beam Experiments Aboard a Rocket (BEAR) program launched a sounding rocket containing a neutral particle beam (NPB) accelerator. The experiment successfully demonstrated that a particle beam would operate and propagate as predicted outside the atmosphere and that there are no unexpected side-effects when firing the beam in space. After the rocket was recovered, the particle beam was still operational.According to the BMDO, the research on neutral particle beam accelerators, which was originally funded by the SDIO, could eventually be used to reduce the half-life of nuclear waste products using accelerator-driven transmutation technology

Laser and mirror experiments
 
Technicians at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), work on the Low-powered Atmosphere Compensation Experiment (LACE) satellite.

The High Precision Tracking Experiment (HPTE), launched with the Space Shuttle Discovery on STS-51-G, was tested June 21, 1985 when a Hawaii-based low-power laser successfully tracked the experiment and bounced the laser off of the HPTE mirror.

The Relay mirror experiment (RME), launched in February 1990, demonstrated critical technologies for space-based relay mirrors that would be used with an SDI directed-energy weapon system. The experiment validated stabilization, tracking, and pointing concepts and proved that a laser could be relayed from the ground to a 60 cm mirror on an orbiting satellite and back to another ground station with a high degree of accuracy and for extended durations.

Launched on the same rocket as the RME, the Low-power Atmospheric Compensation Experiment (LACE) satellite was built by the United States Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) to explore atmospheric distortion of lasers and real-time adaptive compensation for that distortion. The LACE satellite also included several other experiments to help develop and improve SDI sensors, including target discrimination using background radiation and tracking ballistic missiles using Ultra-Violet Plume Imaging (UVPI). LACE was also used to evaluate ground-based adaptive optics, a technique now used in civilian telescopes to remove atmospheric distortions.

Research into hypervelocity rail gun technology was done to build an information base about rail guns so that SDI planners would know how to apply the technology to the proposed defense system. The SDI rail gun investigation, called the Compact High Energy Capacitor Module Advanced Technology Experiment (CHECMATE), had been able to fire two projectiles per day during the initiative. This represented a significant improvement over previous efforts, which were only able to achieve about one shot per month. Hypervelocity rail guns are, at least conceptually, an attractive alternative to a space-based defense system because of their envisioned ability to quickly shoot at many targets. Also, since only the projectile leaves the gun, a railgun system can potentially fire many times before needing to be resupplied.

A hypervelocity rail gun works very much like a particle accelerator insofar as it converts electrical potential energy into kinetic energy imparted to the projectile. A conductive pellet (the projectile) is attracted down the rails by electric current flowing through a rail. Through the magnetic forces that this system achieves, a force is exerted on the projectile moving it down the rail. Railguns can generate muzzle-velocities in excess of 24 miles per second. At this velocity, even a rifle-bullet sized projectile will penetrate the front armor of a main battle tank, let alone a thinly protected missile guidance system.

Rail guns face a host of technical challenges before they will be ready for battlefield deployment. First, the rails guiding the projectile must carry very high amperage and voltage. Each firing of the railgun produces tremendous current flow (almost half a million amperes) through the rails, causing rapid erosion of the rail's surfaces (through ohmic heating, and even vaporization of the rail-surface.) Early prototypes were essentially single-use weapons, requiring complete replacement of the rails after each firing. Another challenge with the rail gun system is projectile survivability. The projectiles experience acceleration force in excess of 100,000 g. In order to be effective, the fired projectile must first survive the mechanical stress of firing, then the subsequent impact with the target. In-flight guidance, if implemented, would require the onboard guidance system to be built to the same standard of sturdiness as the main mass of the projectile.

In addition to being considered for destroying ballistic missile threats, rail guns were also being planned for service in space platform (sensor and battle station) defense. This potential role reflected defense planner expectations that the rail guns of the future would be capable of not only rapid fire, but also of multiple firings (on the order of tens to hundreds of shots).

Hypervelocity Rail Gun (CHECMATE)

SPACE DEFENCE:

The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) was a proposal by U.S. President Ronald Reagan on March 23, 1983 to use ground and space-based systems to protect the United States from attack by strategic nuclear ballistic missiles. The initiative focused on strategic defense rather than the prior strategic offense doctrine of mutual assured destruction (MAD).

Though it was never completely developed or deployed, the research and technologies of SDI paved the way for some anti-ballistic missile systems of today. The Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) was set up in 1984 within the United States Department of Defense to oversee the Strategic Defense Initiative. It gained the popular name Star Wars after the 1977 film by George Lucas. Under the administration of President Bill Clinton in 1993, its name was changed to the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) and its emphasis was shifted from national missile defense to theater missile defense; from global to regional coverage. BMDO was renamed to the Missile Defense Agency in 2002. This article covers defense efforts under the SDIO.

INTIAL STAGES:

In the fall of 1979, at Reagan's request, Lieutenant General Daniel O. Graham conceived a concept he called the High Frontier, an idea of strategic defense using ground- and space-based weapons theoretically possible because of emerging technologies. It was designed to replace the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction, a doctrine that Reagan and his aides described as a suicide pact.

The initial focus of the strategic defense initiative was a nuclear explosion-powered X-ray laser designed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory by a scientist named Peter L. Hagelstein who worked with a team called 'O Group', doing much of the work in the late 1970s and early 1980s. O Group was headed by physicist Lowell Wood, a protégé and friend of Edward Teller, the "father of the hydrogen bomb".

Ronald Reagan was told of Hagelstein's breakthrough by Teller in 1983, which prompted Reagan's March 23, 1983, "Star Wars" speech. Reagan announced, "I call upon the scientific community who gave us nuclear weapons to turn their great talents to the cause of mankind and world peace: to give us the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete." This speech, along with Reagan's Evil Empire speech on March 8, 1983, in Florida, ushered in the last phase of the Cold War, bringing the nuclear standoff with the Soviet Union to its most critical point before the collapse of the Soviet Union later in 1991.

PROJECT AND PROPOSAL:

In 1984, the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) was established to oversee the program, which was headed by Lt. General James Alan Abrahamson, USAF, a past Director of the NASA Space Shuttle program.Research and development initiated by the SDIO created significant technological advances in computer systems, component miniaturization, sensors and missile systems that form the basis for current systems.

Initially, the program focused on large scale systems designed to defeat a Soviet offensive strike. However, as the threat diminished, the program shifted towards smaller systems designed to defeat limited or accidental launches.

By 1987, the SDIO had developed a national missile defense concept called the Strategic Defense System Phase I Architecture. This concept consisted of ground and space based sensors and weapons, as well as a central battle management system.The ground-based systems operational today trace their roots back to this concept.

Supporters of SDI hail it for contributing to or at least accelerating the fall of the Soviet Union by the strategy of technology, which was a prevalent doctrine at the time. At Reagan and Gorbachev's October 1986 meeting in Iceland, Gorbachev opposed this defensive shield, while Reagan wanted to keep it, and offered to give the technology to the Soviets. Gorbachev said he didn't believe the offer, saying "Excuse me, Mr. President, but I do not take your idea of sharing SDI seriously. You don't want to share even petroleum equipment, automatic machine tools or equipment for dairies, while sharing SDI would be a second American Revolution." Both Reagan and Gorbachev proposed total elimination of all nuclear-armed missiles, but SDI and intermediate-range missiles were sticking points. While SDI was a disagreement, the summit led to the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which some have claimed was an outgrowth of Gorbachev's fear of SDI. Opponents of the program say that Mikhail Gorbachev's reforms were the cause of the USSR's collapse and that SDI was an unrealistic and expensive program. Furthermore, some believed that Gorbachev's opposition to SDI was intended to encourage the United States to pursue ABM defense at great economic expense. To quote Gorbachev, "But I think that I am even helping the president [Reagan] with SDI. After all, your people say that if Gorbachev attacks SDI and space weapons so much, it means the idea deserves more respect. They even say that if it were not for me, no one would listen to the idea at all. And some even claim that I want to drag the United States into unnecessary expenditures with this." This supposed calculation on Gorbachev's part, though, is highly unlikely, for because of his demands on the US giving up SDI, and Reagan's resulting stance in maintaining it, no arms reduction agreement in Iceland was concluded at all, which consequently meant that the USSR would have to keep spending money on the arms race as well, money that the Soviet economy no longer could afford, but the American economy could

SPACE SCIENCE:

Space science is an all-encompassing term that describes all of the various science fields that are concerned with the study of the Universe, generally also meaning "excluding the Earth" and "outside of the Earth's atmosphere". Originally, all of these fields were considered part of astronomy. However, in recent years the major sub-fields within astronomy, such as astrophysics, have grown so large that they are now considered separate fields on their own. There are eight overall categories that can generally be described on their own; Astrophysics, Galactic Science, Stellar Science, non-Earth Planetary Science, Biology of Other Planets, Astronautics/Space Travel, Space Colonization and Space Defense. The Library of Congress and Dewey Decimal System have a major classification "Descriptive Astronomy" which they use instead of placing descriptive works into their huge "Geography" collections.

ASTRONOMY:

astronomy can be divided in 2 major categories:

1. ASTRONOMICAL METHODS:

Astronomical methods are the equipment and techniques used to collect data about the objects in Space. Galileo's first astronomical method was to find and buy the best telescope of the time and then point that telescope to the heavens. Methods can be categorized according to the wavelength they are attempting to record.

Radio astronomy includes radio telescopes; devices that receive and record radio waves from outside the Earth. They record cosmic microwave background radiation resulting from the Big Bang, Pulsars and other sources. Optical astronomy is the oldest kind of astronomy. X-ray observatories include the Chandra X-ray Observatory and others. gamma ray includes the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory and others. Neutrino astronomy observatories have also been built, primarily to study our Sun. Gravitational wave observatories have been theorized.

A space telescope is a telescope orbiting or travelling from the Earth, such as the Hubble space telescope. RXTE is Long Exposure Time Astronomy used to study millisecond pulsars and pulsar deceleration.

2. DECRIPTIVE ASTRONOMY:

Galileo's second astronomical method was to describe what he saw in the telescope. Descriptive Astronomy is the highest sub-category of Astronomy used by the Library of Congress and Dewey Decimal systems to classify any knowledge related to describing celestial objects. Because we are seeing today portions of the Universe as they actually looked millions or billions of years ago we should have a historical section within Descriptive astronomy: History of The Universe includes the size, shape and structure of the historical universe), Cartography of The Historical Universe, Early Universe and others. The Current Universe includes size shape and structure of the current Universe, cartography of the current Universe and others.

Cartography of Space Bodies. Recording photographic or similar images of the Earths surface from space is a well developed science, yet still expanding because of advances in the actual resolution of images taken from space or atmosphere and because of advances in digitizing and manipulating the images. Most of these advances are being applied to the cartography of space-located bodies, even though acquiring the original images of those bodies is extremely complicated and expensive, usually requiring long distance probes to carry the cameras.

Local Group:

Our Milky Way Galaxy is one of about 30 galaxies called the Local Group. The Local Group is about 4 million light-years across. In the Local Group our Milky Way Galaxy plays a large gravitational part because our galaxy is the second largest galaxy in our Local Group, second only to the Andromeda Galaxy. All of the other galaxies in our Local Group are gravitationally bound either to the Andromeda Galaxy or to our Milky Way Galaxy. Inside of our local group but outside of our Galaxy are objects 4,000,000 LY to 1,000,000 LY from the Sun:

Milky Way Galaxy:

Our Milky Way Galaxy is a massive mass-containing structure 100,000 light-years across and 30,000 light-years tall. Most of its billions of suns are organized into approximately 12 structures called "arms". Our Sun is located in what is called the "Orion Arm". The next arm outside of us is called the "Perseus Arm". The Crab Nebula M1 is located in the Perseus Arm. The arm outside of the Perseus Arm is called the Outer Arm. Palomar 1 is located in the Outer Arm. The next arm inside of us is called the Sagittarius Arm. The Ring Nebula M57 and the Carina Nebula (NGC 3372) are located in the Sagittarius Arm. The next arm inside of the Sagittarius Arm is called the Crux Arm. The inner arms are much shorter, obviously from being shifted by gravitational forces. Arms beside each other today may have at an earlier time been one.

INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION-3

MICROGRAVITY:

At the station's orbital altitude, the gravity from the Earth is 88% of that at sea level. The state of weightlessness is caused by the constant free fall of the ISS. Due to the equivalence principle, free fall is indiscernible from a state of zero gravity, however the environment on the station is instead often described as microgravity, as it is imperfect due to four effects:
1. The drag resulting from the residual atmosphere.
2. Vibratory acceleration caused by mechanical systems and the crew on board the ISS.
3. Orbital corrections by the on-board gyroscopes (or thrusters).
4. The spatial separation from the real centre of mass of the ISS—any part of the ISS not at the exact centre of mass will tend to follow its own orbit.

However, as each point is physically part of the station, this is impossible, and so each component is subject to small accelerations from the forces which keep them attached to the station as it orbits.This is also called the tidal force.

LIFE SUPPORT:

The ISS Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) provides or controls elements such as atmospheric pressure, fire detection and suppression, oxygen levels, and water supply. The highest priority for the ECLSS is the ISS atmosphere, but the system also collects, processes, and stores waste and water produced and used by the crew. This process includes recycling fluid from the sink, shower, toilet, and condensation from the air. The Elektron system aboard Zvezda and a similar oxygen generation system in Destiny generate oxygen aboard the station.If required, the crew has a backup option in the form of bottled oxygen and Solid Fuel Oxygen Generation (SFOG) canisters. Carbon dioxide is removed from the air by the Vozdukh system in Zvezda. Other by-products of human metabolism, such as methane from the intestines and ammonia from sweat, are removed by activated charcoal filters.

The atmosphere on board the ISS is maintained to have a composition similar to that of the Earth's atmosphere. Normal air pressure on the ISS is 101.3 kPa (14.7 psi), the same as at sea level on Earth. Whilst this type of atmosphere offers various benefits for crew comfort, an Earthlike atmosphere is also much safer than the alternative, a pure oxygen atmosphere, due to the increased risk of fire, responsible for the deaths of the Apollo 1 crew.

SIGHTINGS:

Because of the size of the International Space Station (about that of an American football field) and the large reflective area offered by its solar panels, ground based observation of the station is possible with the naked eye if the observer is in the right location at the right time—in many cases, the station is one of the brightest naked-eye objects in the sky, although it is visible only for brief periods of time, ranging from two to five minutes.

In order to view the station, the following conditions need to be fulfilled, assuming the weather is clear: The station must be above the observer's horizon, and it must pass within about 2000 km of the observing site (the closer the better); it must be dark enough at the observer's location for stars to be visible; and the station must be in sunlight rather than in the Earth's shadow. It is common for the third condition to begin or end during what would otherwise be a good viewing opportunity. In the evening, this will cause the station to suddenly fade and disappear as it moves further from the dusk, going from west to east. In the reverse situation, it may suddenly appear in the sky as it approaches the dawn

POLITICS AND FINANCING:

As a multinational project, the legal and financial aspects of the ISS are complex. Issues of concern include the ownership of modules, station utilisation by participating nations, and responsibilities for station resupply. The main legal document establishing obligations and rights between the ISS partners is the Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA). This international treaty was signed on January 28, 1998 by the primary nations involved in the Space Station project: the United States, Russia, Japan, Canada and ten Member States of the European Space Agency (Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland). This set the stage for a second layer of agreements, called Memoranda of Understanding (MOU), between NASA and ESA, CSA, RKA and JAXA. These agreements are then further split, such as for the contractual obligations between nations, and trading of partners rights and obligations.Use of the Russian Orbital Segment is also negotiated at this level