I fear that the chance curiosity has of a successful landing will be inversely proportional to the level of hype. NASA's luck is everyone will tune in to watch it crater. I'm soooooooo nervous!

[0.o]

Are those priorities?? Think of it this way: this Cosmic Log article deals with the topic of the Curiosity landing and a couple videos associated with drumming up some publicity for said landing. So, with the aforementioned landing just days away now, what holds more priority? I would argue that any small news item about the MSL mission is higher priority than any of the items on you PIR list.

As a fellow space enthusiast I would like to hear about all of those things on your list. Although, I would have to say that weekly updates on the SLS would be ...a bit much (to put it mildly). How much really happens in a given week at this stage of things? I would be all for reading about it more often as long as we are getting new information each time.

Reader contribution: (Ahem)

1. Jeff Bezos' project for manned space flight updates

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Origin

Blue Origin is a privately funded aerospace company set up by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos. The company was awarded $3.7 million in funding in 2009 by NASA via a Space Act Agreement under the Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program for development of concepts and technologies to support future human spaceflight operations. They received another $22 million during the second phase of the Commercial Crew Development program. The company's "pusher" Launch Abort System (LAS) was one of the technologies that was of particular interest to NASA. To date abort systems have been of the tractor variety, which pulls a crew vehicle to safety in case of an emergency.

2. Orbital Sciences has been quiet; I find it hard that they are developing in a vacuum...When is their first launch again?

http://www.orbital.com/

Orbital Successfully Launches Medium Range Target for Missile Defense Test

(Dulles, VA 27 June 2012) – Orbital Sciences Corporation (NYSE: ORB) announced today that it successfully launched a medium-range target (MRT) vehicle under a direct contract with the U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA). The MRT vehicle served as an intercept target for the U.S. Navy's Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) System and was launched yesterday from the Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF) on Kauai, Hawaii. MRT flew a trajectory northwest of Kauai and was intercepted by the Navy's Standard Missile (SM-3, Block 1B) interceptor system before reentering the Earth's atmosphere. The MRT was the eighth medium-range target Orbital has launched in support of the Aegis BMD test program and the eleventh MRT launch overall.

3. Any further developments on getting an experimental VASIMR propulsion unit up to the ISS for helping it maintain its orbit or is that a dead issue?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_Specific_Impulse_Magnetoplasma_Rocket

Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma

A potential maintenance vehicle application for the future and in about a hundred years at that, while this should be very important for developers it has few immediate applications that cannot be performed by alternate means. The fact that the space station needs boost not and then is something of a design flaw, since it was known about a head of time, and not provided in its design. Design it, build it, make bigger, and less costly, but just because it is beautiful feat of complex engineering you will want a working version in a museum until the objectives of your mission dictate its practicality.

4. Now that the Russians are about to have some competition for sending cargo and ultimately personnel as well, what are they doing about it to remain competitive?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Federal_Space_Agency

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Federal_Space_Agency#Current_status_of_the_space_program

Read on Russian…

5. What is the status of the JWST?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Webb_Space_Telescope

The mission was under review for cancellation by the United States Congress in 2011 after about $3 billion had been spent, and more than 75 percent of its hardware was either in production or undergoing testing. In November 2011, Congress reversed plans to cancel the JWST and instead capped additional funding to complete the project at $8 billion.

6. Okay, I'll say it: There is an 800lb gorilla in the room and that is the SLS...Any chance we can have a weekly status update along with your perspective as to the likelihood of it getting off the ground let alone beyond earth orbit?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System

Space Launch System, go ahead do it, but notice the general usefulness of congressional interference. The one problem is the fixation the with hydrogen engines, that could have been done with good old fashioned rocket propellant (RP) (Saturn V), these (shuttle) engines were retrieved at the expense of the huge dead weight of the shuttle. (It could not be more illogical to launch the space truck when just the cargo as needed). The main problem with Earth launch was always peak aero dynamic drag (PADD). The shuttle configuration suggested the possibility of an awkward, ungainly design that could possibly be useful for launching large objects, lenticular cargo space, for the space telescope where a saucer (double Frisbee), flying wind etc. Launching an even more asymmetrical configuration using solid rocket boosters, to get it past the PADD point, requires finer/stronger control of the wild SRB's, further noting the SLS RS-25E's of the space shuttle are provided much of the control against the force of the SRB's. The saucer space telescope configuration of 4 SRB's needs some form of power control, power control possible by the old fashion RP. The Saturn V was successful, because it was the only rocket engine that as amenable to throttling back against PADD. The SLS would have been better off if the detailed requirements were laid out next to the corresponding reasons for those detained requirements, allowing the engineers to meet those requirements, without using a fifty state build program.

7. Can you provide a summary of the various high altitude airship programs that are out there or are they all dead due to budget cuts?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_airship

Good luck with meeting a heavy pay load with this design.

The United States Department of Defense Missile Defense Agency contracted Lockheed Martin to construct a high-altitude airship (HAA) to enhance its Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS).

An unmanned lighter-than-air vehicle, the HAA, is intended to operate above the jet stream in a quasi-geostationary position to deliver persistent station keeping as a surveillance platform, telecommunications relay, or a weather observer. They proposed to launch their HAA in 2008.

The airship would be in the air for up to one month at a time and was intended to survey a 600-mile (970 km) diameter of land. It will use solar cells to provide its power and would be unmanned during its flight.

Once we figure out that the whole space endeavor depends on the use of a heavy lift vehicle, then we can properly focus on the missions themselves, instead of having to look again and again back to 1955 to get a good design. But if we spent too much just getting this basic notion off the ground, our space missions may as well be paper airplanes.

Thanks, guys and thanks, Alan...I take NOTHING away from the upcoming Mars landing. THAT IS THE PRIORITY RIGHT NOW...But we saw these videos already and the article aside from the technicals about the landing itself is about who is the better narrator. They both have their unique ways of delivering the punch for the story, but it's about the mission, not about the narrator. You are right; perhaps the frequency of weekly updates would be too much but there has to be some news on this topic (besides the Orion capsule)...I wanted to provide topics for Alan to focus on (like he doesn't have enough to do) as to what other efforts are going on...I have been to those websites but I wanted to read it from a reporter's perspective and his insights.

But again, I appreciate the vectors gentlemen; praying for the best on the Curiosity mission...Hope all is well, Alan...Cheers!

Odd, as I was going to discuss the mission, hoping for the best, as it will be miracle.

I have been waiting for this event for almost 2 years, and in about 6 days I will be sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for conformation that curiosity has landed safely. This rover is a major step forward for understanding Mars and if there ever was or is life. Mars is the next frontier for the human species to colonize and make it our home.

On December 29 I finished a new video called "Mars The Red Planet' it tells a story about some of our missions there and at the end of the video I have some footage of this mission to Mars, take a look and enjoy.

A comment on the video.

Mars "The Red Planet" http://youtu.be/z6glstqMc50

Ever Since Humans have looked into the sky, we have dreamed, and wondered, what is that little glowing red dot in the sky, and what is it all about. Today we have some answers to that question. The first successful flyby of Mars occurred in 1965, by Mariner 4, since then we have sent many landers, and rovers, to its surface, looking to see if there is life, and wondering if someday we may call Mars "The Red Planet" our home. Mars is waiting, for humanity to set foot on its surface, so what are we waiting for ? Lets put a plan, and a mission, together, and let's get it done, for all humanity !

Best played at 1080p Full-Screen.

Enjoy the video and have a good day, Tom And Lyn, Thomasp671

If Patrick Stewart were not speaking out against space exploration I would agree with you.

Patrick Stewart is speaking out against space exploration?? Really?

Here's the web site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3455463.stm. I did the "REALLY" thing myself when I first heard about it. I originally read about it on the Star Trek web site which did not have as much info as this BBC site does.

It's interesting that you mention that. If you were to watch and listen to the videos, you'd see a subtle (maybe not-so-subtle) difference between the audio in the two videos.

Both videos have the two actors reading the same cue cards. Both have parts where the actors are standing in front of blue (or green) screen. But, Wheaton's audio sounds like it was recorded in my basement. (as a musician I record my music all the time and I pay close attention to sound quality)... Shatner's audio sounds a little better.

But what really surprises me is the lousy quality over-all of the videos. There is the incredible mission animation film that is haphazardly spliced together and then the lame "actor-in-front-of-the-cool-footage" aspect that seems very.. sophomoric. At least Bill Shatner wore a suit (doesn't he always?), Wheaton looked like the whole thing was a test or a rehearsal. Very poor quality.

Both videos reminded me of something made by middle school students in their Audio Visual class. The 7 minutes of terror video had far and away a much better production value and that on it's own won me over. It also got into the specifics of why each stage was chosen. The Shatner/Wheaton videos completely gloss over the skycrane aspect and simply mention the there is a skycrane and that it drops of the rover. For me you could spend the whole length of the video just talking about the skycrane mechanism and that'd be gravy.

Anyways, Shatner is the man, Will Wheaton needs a shave and a suit. 7 minutes of Terror is the better video. And there you have it.

Much agreed.

Will did a very good job on the narration, but the folks behind the production really screwed the pooch. Wheaton's audio sounded horrible.

LMAO! Okay, so I wasn't the only one thinking that during the series...LOL!!!

Poor Wesley, never gets a break. Hey believe me, I'm the first to admit that I wished they would have chosen a female to play that part, as they originally intended. The first couple of seasons Wesley was barely tolerable, but I have to honestly say that he grew, his character grew, and I think the "specialness" that was written into his character (with The Traveler) was a really nice touch. THAT was why he was allowed on the bridge, not because Picard had the hots for Beverly. (well maybe just a little). Oh geez, listen to me, I'm sounding just like one of those Trekkers that doesn't have a life and takes the show way too seriously. Oh well, but that's my 2 cents about Wesley's character. Give him (and Wil Wheaton) a break, they both grew up and shed their geeky image. (mostly)

With Uhura and Rand in a tag-team match? Energize!

Well, alright I guess so. But ONLY if they're topless! 8-)