Showing posts with label film. Show all posts
Showing posts with label film. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Documentary Film To Shed Light on Child Sexual Assault: Connie Lee and FACSA Launches National Tour


SHATTERING THE SILENCE TOUR AND DOCUMENTARY  PROJECT

Issued by: 
Connie Lee - FACSA Foundation Founding Director
(Tele. 318.540.4464)
(Email: facsasavethechildren@hotmail.com)
(Website: www.facsafoundation.org)
                                                                   

The Shattering The Silence Tour and Documentary Project, at FACSAFoundation.org, is changing the social stigma of child sexual assault, public policies, conducting current research of community needs and assessment, educating communities on prevention and education of child sexual assault, by hosting free conferences with local advocates; filming a documentary on survivors stories across the nation, the latest healing modalities, and the most effective counseling techniques, with the hundred and fifteen cities Shattering The Silence Tour and Documentary Project, at FACSAFoundation.org.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice 1-3 girls, and 16 boys, will be sexually assaulted before their eighteenth birthday. Statistics are from the 10% of reported accounts, for 90% do not tell. They are silenced by the perpetrator with threats to their lives or the lives of their loved ones; who is usually a dad, mom, uncle, trusted neighbor, friend, or community leader. The children remain silent due to fear of retribution from the perpetrator, or losing their only circle of support and love they have ever known, their family. This becomes their way of life until someone steps in and protects them. According to ChildHelp USA, 5 children die a day due to abuse and neglect.

Today is the day we no longer turn away in indifference. Today is the day we tell our children, we have heard their silent cries in the night and we share their pain. People believe it is easy to turn away because you don’t see it. I say, “This is not true, for you see it every day from the angry and volatile society; which shoots up schools, murders and rapes children; where crimes of petty theft receive more sentencing than the rape of a child; where children are sold into indentured servitude, child porn, or into prostitution. What kind of society have we become, where we stand by and allow such atrocities take place, and not raise our voices to change this?

Where is the OUTRAGE?  "Enough Is Enough, We Will Not Be Silent Any Longer!" Join the FACSA Foundation Revolution at FACSAFoundation.org, or any local child advocacy groups!! I pass the baton to you, for you to advocate for our children. The children are counting on you!
 
 
Listen To Connie Lee Speak About the
SHATTERING THE SILENCE TOUR
 
 
Learn More About The
FACSA Foundation and Connie Lee's Incredible Work
 
 

Friday, May 17, 2013

Peter Senese: Preparing To Film At The United Nations

For anyone who has worked in film and television production knows, creating a production takes a great deal of time and patience. If there was a prerequisite to being a producer, it is that you need first attend juggling school and graduate with an advanced degree that acknowledges you have the ability of keeping a host of issues or 'balls' up in the air while walking forward on a trapeze line.

There are many moving parts - none taking the same shape or form - in film or television production. If you ask any juggler what one of the keys to keeping the 'balls' in the air, they will tell you there is a rhythm that is created because the 'balls' are generally the same shape and weight.

Well, you can toss that idea out the window when dealing with production.  From creating the 'right' script, to selecting the 'right' cast, to the ever-consuming budget issues, scouting and location issues, having a host of personalities to deal with in front of and behind the camera, and then the ever daunting challenges of distribution, not to mention the agenda or agendas of a studio or network, a producer is problem-solver, thoughtful storyteller, cheerleader, and thinker who must walk a trapeze line while juggling a large number of different sized 'balls' in the air at once, knowing that if any one ball drops the production they are carrying on their back will fall off the high-wire.

Fun stuff.

But in reality, producing is a great deal of fun when you get it right.

On this note, I am very pleased to share that the I CARE Foundation is co-producing (along with Mark Joseph Productions) a television special on international parental child abduction prevention in hope that as the summer months approach, we will be able to reach a large group of targeted parents at risk of having their child or children kidnapped. The show will initially air throughout the New York metropolitan area and then is expected to be distributed in large metropolitan areas.

Location for the show will include taping at the United Nations, which in my opinion, makes a great deal of sense.  In fact, yesterday was a fun day spent scouting key locations at the United Nations for the upcoming shooting schedule.

It is a great honor to have been granted permission to film at the United Nations, as it was a great honor previously to have the I CARE Foundation host a conference on international parental child abduction at the United Nations previously.

As the upcoming television production's host, it is my hope that the information shared in the segment will help protect children and their families. 

If there is one thing more than anything else I have learned during my years of advocacy for children at risk of kidnapping, it is that stewarding the message of risk factors and warning signs of abduction does make a major difference in preventing abduction.

Now you might ask yourself, "Really, how impactful has stewarding the warning signs of abduction actually been?'

Consider this: prior to the I CARE Foundation's formal operations commenced, and using outbound cases of abduction originating from the United States, the international parental child abduction rate experienced substantial increases in abduction for each of the first 30 years since the United States became a member of the Hague Treaty on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. includng long periods when the abduction rate grew on average of 20% per year; however, over the past 2 years, the rate of outbound cases of abduction have dropped by over 15% per year during fiscal years 2011 and 2012 as reported by the Department of State to the U.S. Congress this past February, 2013.

Now what has not changed, but has increased, is the primary reason why international parental kidnappings take place: multi-national relationships fail, and one parent abducts a child to their country of origin.  In fact, more people than ever before from different countries are having relationships, which in theory means more children will be born from these relationships.

So what's the difference?

Clearly it is stewarding the message that the term 'international parental child abduction' exists, what the warning signs, risk factors, and immediate course of action should be if a parent finds themselves at-risk of having a child taken, or, what they should do if a child ws kidnapped abroad.  Weaved into the grass-roots awareness campaign is the fact that part of 'awareness' has been to raise awareness in courts and wherever possible, create case law and new precedent so that courts can protect defenseless children.

Getting the information out into the public's view has been key.

On that note, I am so pleased to share that the ongoing production of the documentary film  '150,000 Internationally Kidnapped Children' will also film several important scenes at the United Nations.

Step by step, the I CARE Foundation along with many other individuals and organizations continue to make a difference fighting against abduction.

A fight well worth joining as children are indeed our greatest resources . . . and worth fighting for.

- Peter Thomas Senese -

 Author of the critically acclaimed novel on abduction titled 'Chasing The Cyclone' available on Amazon (Peter Thomas Senese Donates 100% of all proceeds to the I CARE Foundation)


Click Here To Learn More About The Warning Signs Of International Parental Child Abduction

Monday, May 6, 2013

Peter Senese Film On International Child Abduction To Film At United Nations

Peter Senese's Child Abduction Film To Shoot On Location At United Nations

Film. Books. Advocacy. Rescuing Children. Heroes. International Child Abduction. United Nations. The Hague Convention. Kidnapping. Fighting Kidnappers. Chasing The Cyclone. Hope. Murder. Abuse. Targeted Parents. Hopelessness. The I CARE Foundation. Protecting Children.

In no particular order, these are some of the words that come to my mind when I think of international parental child abduction (IPCA). 

For those of you who are not aware of IPCA, it is the crime of child kidnapping.  It is a brutal crime against both child and targeted parent: one that is legally complicated to obtain true justice on, and one which in many ways, does not protect innocent children of kidnapping the way you might expect.

The reality is every child of abduction is severly abused. Some are murdered.

It is a worldwide epidemic. A plague that is finally being pushed back in the United States, but one that continues to spread in nations around the world.

The key to curing this plague is to educate society, particularly those parents who may be at risk of abduction ... and who may not know that such risk exists.

Creating various tools that educate others has played a very important role in having the abduction rate in the United States decline by over 15% per year the last two years.

My work in this area continues.



I am very pleased to share that a portion of the film on international parental child abduction titled 150,000 Internationally Kidnapped Children presently in production and being produced in conjunction with the I CARE Foundation will add the United Nations as a key location to the film.

Filming at the United Nations is no easy task. I am very thankful to the team at the United Nations for granting the necessary access required to film on location.

However, having previously sponsored a conference and spoken at the United Nations in my capacity as the founding director of the I CARE Foundation concerning the issue of international parental child abduction (IPCA) in conjunction with the United States Department of State's International Visitor Leadership Program, it is both an honor and only fitting to have an important portion of the film take place at the United Nations.

I am very excited about the potential positive impact that 150,000 Internationally Kidnapped Children may have on others, including parents who may be targeted to have a child internationally abducted by the child's other parent or by a stranger.

Previously, and in an ongoing effort, I produced the rather straight-forward educational documentary series on international parental child abduction titled Chasing Parents: Racing Into The Storms Of International Parental Child Abduction which discussed a wide-range of issues associated with international parental child abduction, including warning signs and risk factors, what to do if your child is targeted or taken, the Prevent Departure Program, and the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative amongst many critically important topics associated with child kidnapping.

Judging from the tens of thousands of views of the Chasing Parents: Racing Into The Storms of International Parental Child Abduction along with the rather large number of parents who personally contacted me and shared that the information contained in the educational documentary series made the difference between having their child remain at home as opposed to being internationally abducted, there is a clear international need for a film such as 150,000 Internationally Kidnapped Children: one that not only shares critically important new research conducted by the I CARE Foundation concerning IPCA, but a film that clearly shows both the incredible dangers of stranger and non-stranger abduction in a way that gives light to ways which these kidnappings may be prevented.

Of course, at the core of all the information that I create concerning IPCA is the unbending desire and commitment to help educate society and targeted parents so that children will not face the dangerous, and at times deadly ordeal of IPCA.

There unquestionably is a great crisis on our hands as too many children around the world are being abducted. However, if the statistics of reported cases of abduction originating from the United States demonstrate anything - there has been a two-year consecutive decline of over 15% per year the last two years - it is that stewarding the message that IPCA is a real threat, and enlightening society of the reality of IPCA does in fact mean something: after nearly 30 years of near-consistent growth in the number of IPCA cases, we've pushed back the proverbial mountain in the United States . . . and though there is a great deal to still be done, there is measurable indicators that raising awareness has made a sizeable difference in protecting children from abduction.

On a very personal note, and as a storyteller and writer, when I first began my journey as an international parental child abduction prevention advocate by writing the critically accalimed novel Chasing The Cyclone that was deeply inspired by my own experiences, I never thought that so many miracles would happen as a by-product of these efforts. But that is what happened because through it, dozens of internationally kidnapped children have been reunited while an even larger number of targeted children of abduction have remained safe.

And that is very cool.

-Peter Thomas Senese-





Saturday, April 27, 2013

ORION


With great intention to travel into space one day in the future via one of the LEO (Low Earth Orbit) flights that are being offered by a host of commercial cosmonaut companies, combined with an infinite love and curiousity for space exploration, I have been following diligently the developments of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle for some time.
Realizing just how important Orion is to mankind's future, I have decided to share Orion's updated activities as a series of spacecraft under the Orion label make its way into production, and eventually into the cosmos.

Below is a historical summary of Orion.  I will follow this up with a host of interviews, news reports, etc. But for now - take it all in!

Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) is a planned beyond-low-earth-orbit manned spacecraft that is being built by Lockheed Martin for NASA and Astrium for European Space Agency[6] for crewed missions to the Moon, asteroids and Mars. It is planned to be launched by the Space Launch System.[7] Each Orion spacecraft is projected to carry a crew of four or more astronauts.[2] It is also planned as a backup for ISS cargo and/or crew delivery,[8]
The MPCV was announced by NASA on 24 May 2011,[9] aided by designs and tests already completed for a spacecraft of the cancelled Constellation program, development for which began in 2005 as the Crew Exploration Vehicle. It was formerly going to be launched by the tested-but-cancelled Ares I launch vehicle.[10]
The MPCV's debut unmanned multi-hour test flight, known as Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1), is scheduled for a launch aboard aDelta IV Heavy rocket in 2014.[4][11][12] The first manned mission is expected to take place after 2020.[13] In January 2013, ESA and NASA announced that the Orion Service Module will be built by European space company Astrium for European Space Agency.[14]
Orion
Orion with Orion Service Module
Description
Role:Beyond LEO, back-up for commercial cargo and crew to the ISS[1]
Crew:2–6[2]
Carrier rocket:Space Launch System[3](planned-deep space),
Delta IV (test flight),
Ares I (cancelled)
Launch date:December 2013 or later (uncrewed test launch)[4]
Dimensions
Height:
Diameter:5 m (16.5 ft)
Pressurized volume:19.56 m3 (691 cu ft) [5]
Habitable volume:8.95 m3 (316 cu ft) [5]
Capsule mass:8,913 kg (19,650 lb)
Service Module mass:12,337 kg (27,198 lb)
Total mass:21,250 kg (46,848 lb)
Service Module propellant mass:7,907 kg (17,433 lb)
Performance
Total delta-v:1,595 m/s
Endurance:21.1 days[2][5]


The MPCV is being developed for crewed missions to the Moon, to an asteroid, and Mars. In addition, it is a backup vehicle for cargo and crewed missions to the International Space Station. It is intended to be launched by the Space Launch System.[7][15] A modified Advanced Crew Escape Suit is planned to be worn by the crew during the launch and re-entry of the mission.[16]

[edit]Mission

The spacecraft is named for for the famous Orion constellation.[17]

[edit]History

On 14 January 2004, U.S. President George W. Bush announced the Orion spacecraft, known then as the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), as part of the Vision for Space Exploration:
Our second goal is to develop and test a new spacecraft, the Crew Exploration Vehicle, by 2008, and to conduct the first manned mission no later than 2014. The Crew Exploration Vehicle will be capable of ferrying astronauts and scientists to the Space Station after the shuttle is retired. But the main purpose of this spacecraft will be to carry astronauts beyond our orbit to other worlds. This will be the first spacecraft of its kind since the Apollo Command Module.[18]
The proposal to create the Orion spacecraft was partly a reaction to the Space Shuttle Columbia accident, the subsequent findings and report by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB), and the White House's review of the American space program. The Orion spacecraft effectively replaced the conceptual Orbital Space Plane (OSP), which itself was proposed after the failure of the Lockheed Martin X-33 program to produce a replacement for the space shuttle.
The name is derived from the constellation of Orion, and was also used on the Apollo 16 Lunar Module that carried astronauts John W. Young and Charlie Duke to the lunar surface in April 1972.

After the replacement of Sean O'Keefe, NASA's procurement schedule and strategy completely changed, as described above. In July 2004, before he was named NASA administrator, Michael Griffin participated in a study called "Extending Human Presence Into the Solar System"[19] for The Planetary Society, as a co-team leader. The study offers a strategy for carrying out Project Constellation in an affordable and achievable manner. Since Griffin was one of the leaders of the study, it can be assumed that he agrees with its conclusions, and the study may show insight into possible future developments of the CEV. Griffin's actions as administrator supported the goals of the plan.
According to the executive summary, the study was built around "a staged approach to human exploration beyond low Earth orbit (LEO)."[19] It recommends that Project Constellation be carried out in three distinct stages. These are:
  • Stage 1 – "Features the development of a new crew exploration vehicle (CEV), the completion of the International Space Station (ISS), and an early retirement of the shuttle orbiter. Orbiter retirement would be made as soon as the ISS U.S. Core is completed (perhaps only 6 or 7 flights) and the smallest number of additional flights necessary to satisfy our international partners’ ISS requirements. Money saved by early orbiter retirement would be used to accelerate the CEV development schedule shorten the hiatus in U.S. capability to reach and return from LEO."[19]
  • Stage 2 – "Requires the development of additional assets, including an updated CEV capable of extended missions of many months in interplanetary space. Habitation, laboratory, consumables, and propulsion modules, to enable human flight to the vicinities of the Moon and Mars, the Lagrange points, and certain near-Earth asteroids."[19]
  • Stage 3 – "Development of human-rated planetary landers is completed in Stage 3, allowing human missions to the surface of the Moon and Mars beginning around 2020."[19]
A number of changes to the original CEV acquisition strategy were explained in a NASA study called the Exploration Systems Architecture Study. The results were presented at a news conference held on 19 September 2005.[20] The ESAS recommends strategies for flying the manned Orion by 2014, and endorses a Lunar Orbit Rendezvous approach to the Moon. The LEO versions of Orion were intended carry crews of four to six to the ISS. The lunar version of the Orion would carry a crew of four and the Mars Orion would carry six.[citation needed] Cargo would also be carried aboard an unmanned version of Orion, similar to the Russian Progress cargo ships. The contractor for the Orion is Lockheed Martin, which was selected by NASA in September, 2006 and is the current contractor for the Space Shuttle's External Tank and the Atlas V EELV.
Orion is Apollo-like, not a lifting body or winged vehicle like the now retired Shuttle. Like the Apollo Command Module, Orion would be attached to a service module for life support and propulsion. It is intended to land in water but past versions had included plans for it to land on land. Landing on the west coast would allow the majority of the reentry path to be flown over the Pacific Ocean rather than populated areas. Orion will have an AVCOAT ablative[21] heat shield that would be discarded after each use.
The Orion spacecraft (CEV) will weigh about 25 tons (23 tonnes), slightly less than the mass of the Apollo Command/Service Module at 33 tons (30 tonnes). The Orion Crew Module will weigh about 9.8 tons (8.9 tonnes), greater than the equivalent Apollo Command Module at 6.4 tons (5.8 tonnes). With a diameter of 16.5 feet (5 metres) as opposed to 12.8 feet (3.9 metres), it will provide 2.5 times greater volume.[22]
Accelerated lunar mission development was slated to start by 2010, once the Shuttle was retired. The Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM) and heavy-lift boosters were to be developed in parallel and would both be ready for flight by 2018. The eventual goal is to achieve a lunar landing by 2020. The LSAM would be much larger than the Apollo Lunar Module and is anticipated to be capable of carrying up to around 23 tons (21 tonnes) of cargo to the lunar surface to support a future lunar outpost. This weight in cargo is greater than the mass of the entire Apollo Lunar Module.
Like the Apollo Lunar Module, the LSAM would include a descent stage for landing and an ascent stage for returning to orbit. The crew of four would ride in the ascent stage. The ascent stage would be powered by a methane/oxygen fuel for return to lunar orbit (later changed to liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, due to the infancy of oxygen/methane rocket propulsion). This would allow a derivative of the same lander to be used on later Mars missions, where methane propellant can be manufactured from the Martian soil in a process known as in-situ resource utilization (ISRU). The LSAM would support the crew of four on the lunar surface for about a week and use advanced roving vehicles to explore the lunar surface. The huge amount of cargo carried by the LSAM would be extremely beneficial for supporting a lunar base and for bringing large amounts of scientific equipment to the lunar surface.

[edit]Design revisions and updates

Comparison of 604, 605 and 606 versions
July 2006 design revisions
In late July 2006 NASA's second design review resulted in major changes to the spacecraft design.[23] Originally, NASA wanted to use liquid methane (LCH4) as the SM fuel, but due to the infancy of oxygen/methane-powered rocket technologies and the need to launch the Orion by 2012, the switch to hypergolic propellants was mandated in late July 2006. This switch will allow NASA to man-rate the Orion and Ares I stack by no later than 2011,[citation needed] and eliminate one potential cause of the gap between the shuttle's retirement in 2010 and the first manned Orion flight.[24]
April 2007 contract revision
On 20 April 2007 NASA and Lockheed-Martin signed a modification to the Orion contract. The updated contract adds two years to the Orion project design phase, adds two test flights of Orion's launch abort system, and deletes from the initial design phase production of a pressurized cargo carrier for the International Space Station.[25]
May 2007 design update
An article in "Aerospace Daily & Defense Report" indicates that in the latest Orion design revision, called configuration "606" byLockheed Martin, the service module will have exterior panels that are jettisoned shortly after the second stage engine of the Ares I ignites. This configuration will save 1,000 pounds of the mass compared with the prior "605" configuration.[26]
August 2007 design update
On 5 August, a report surfaced stating that the airbag landing system was removed from the next Orion design cycle ("607") in a weight saving measure, opting to return to an Apollo-style splashdown for the vehicle's end of mission.[27]

[edit]2009 Human Space Flight Plans Committee

Rollout of Ares I-X at Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39 secured by four bolts on a mobile launcher platform.
On 8 September 2009, the Human Space Flight Plans Committee was scheduled to release a report proposing a short list of different long term plans for the US Government's human space flight program. The review was commissioned by the Obama Administration to take into account several objectives. These include support for the International Space Station, development of missions beyond low Earth orbit (including the Moon) and use of commercial space industry. These objectives must fit within a defined budget profile.[28]
Among the parameters to be considered in the course of the review are "crew and mission safety, life-cycle costs, development time, national space industrial base impacts, potential to spur innovation and encourage competition, and the implications and impacts of transitioning from current human space flight systems". The review considered the appropriate amounts of research and development and "complementary robotic activity necessary to support various human space flight activities". It also "explores options for extending International Space Station operations beyond 2016".[29]

[edit]2010

On 11 October 2010, with the cancellation of the Constellation Program, the Ares program ended and development of the original Orion vehicle was renamed as the MPCV, planned to be launched on top of an alternative Space Launch System. Following cost overruns and schedule delays caused by insufficient funding, the Obama Administration proposed cancellation of the Constellation program in February 2010 which was signed into law 11 October.[30] However, the Orion spacecraft continued to be developed because it supported new presidential goals.

[edit]2012

An inflatable seal between the clean room and the Orion space capsule which is superior to the ones used on Apollo and the shuttle was tested on December 3, 2012.[31]

[edit]Design


An expanded view of Orion and its spacecraft adapter and launch escape system (2009).
The Orion Crew and Service Module (CSM) stack consists of two main parts: a conical Crew Module (CM), and a cylindrical Service Module (SM) holding the spacecraft's propulsion system and expendable supplies. Both are based substantially on the Apollo Command and Service Modules (Apollo CSM) flown between 1967 and 1975, but include advances derived from the space shuttle program. "Going with known technology and known solutions lowers the risk," according to Neil Woodward, director of the integration office in the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate.[32]
The MPCV resembles its Apollo-era predecessors, but its technology and capability are more advanced. It is designed to support long-duration deep space missions of up to six months. The spacecraft's life support, propulsion, thermal protection and avionics systems are designed to be upgradeable as new technologies become available.
The MPCV spacecraft includes both crew and service modules, and a spacecraft adaptor.
The MPCV's crew module is larger than Apollo's and can support more crew members for short or long-duration spaceflight missions. The service module fuels and propels the spacecraft as well as storing oxygen and water for astronauts. The service module's structure is also being designed to provide locations to mount scientific experiments and cargo.

[edit]Crew Module

Test of Orion's parachute system in July 2012.
The Orion CM will hold four crew members, compared to a maximum of three in the smaller Apollo CM or seven in the larger space shuttle. Despite its conceptual resemblance to the 1960s-era Apollo, Orion's CM will use several improved technologies, including:
  • "Glass cockpit" digital control systems derived from that of the Boeing 787.[33]
  • An "autodock" feature, like those of Russian Progress spacecraft and the European Automated Transfer Vehicle, with provision for the flight crew to take over in an emergency. Previous American spacecraft (Gemini, Apollo, and Space Shuttle) have all required manual piloting for docking.
  • Improved waste-management facilities, with a miniature camping-style toilet and the unisex "relief tube" used on the space shuttle (whose system was based on that used on Skylab) and the International Space Station (based on the Soyuz, Salyut, and Mir systems). This eliminates the use of the much-hated plastic "Apollo bags" used by the Apollo crews.
  • A nitrogen/oxygen (N2/O2) mixed atmosphere at either sea level (101.3 kPa or 14.69 psi) or slightly reduced (55.2 to 70.3 kPa or 8.01 to 10.20 psi) pressure.
  • Much more advanced computers than on previous manned spacecraft.
Another feature will be the partial reusability of the Orion CM.[dated info] Both the CM and SM will be constructed of the aluminium lithium(Al/Li) alloy like that was used on the shuttle's external tank, and is in use on the Delta IV and Atlas V rockets. The CM itself will be covered in the same Nomex felt-like thermal protection blankets used on parts on the shuttle not subject to critical heating, such as the payload bay doors. The reusable recovery parachutes will be based on the parachutes used on both the Apollo spacecraft and the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, and will also use the same Nomex cloth for construction. Water landings will be the exclusive means of recovery for the Orion CM.[27][34]
To allow Orion to mate with other vehicles it will be equipped with the NASA Docking System, which is somewhat similar to the APAS-95 docking mechanism used on the Shuttle fleet. Both the spacecraft and docking adapter will employ a Launch Escape System (LES) like that used in Mercury and Apollo, along with an Apollo-derived "Boost Protective Cover" (made of fiberglass), to protect the Orion CM from aerodynamic and impact stresses during the first 12 minutes of ascent.
The Orion Crew Module (CM) is a 57.5° frustum shape, similar to that of the Apollo Command Module. As projected, the CM will be 5.02 meters (16 ft 6 in) in diameter and 3.3 meters (10 ft 10 in) in length,[35] with a mass of about 8.5 metric tons (19,000 lb). It is to be built by the Lockheed Martin Corporation.[36] It will have more than 2.5 times the volume of an Apollo capsule, which had an interior volume of 5.9 m3 (210 cu ft), and will carry four to six astronauts.[37] After extensive study, NASA has selected the Avcoatablator system for the Orion crew module. Avcoat, which is composed of silica fibers with a resin in a honeycomb made of fiberglass and phenolic resin, was previously used on the Apollo missions and on select areas of the space shuttle for early flights.[38]
The crew module is the transportation capsule that provides a habitat for the crew, provides storage for consumables and research instruments, and serves as the docking port for crew transfers. The crew module is the only part of the MPCV that returns to Earth after each mission.
The crew module will have 316 cubic feet (8.9 m3) and capabilities of carrying four astronauts for 21 day flights itself which could be expanded through additional service modules.[39] Its designers claim that the MPCV is designed to be 10 times safer during ascent and reentry than the Space Shuttle.[15]

[edit]Service Module

Edoardo Amaldi ATV approaches the International Space Station
Orion Service Module serves as the primary power and propulsion component of the spacecraft system, but is discarded at the end of each mission. In January 2013, the European ATV based service module was announced.[14]

[edit]ATV-based Service module

Orion spacecraft including the ATV derived Service Module with a propulsion stage attached at the back
In May 2011 the ESA director general announced a possible collaboration with NASA to work on a successor to the ATV.[40] On 21 June 2012, Astrium announced that they had been awarded two separate studies, each worth €6.5 million, to evaluate the possibilities of using technology and experience gained from ATV and Columbus related work for future missions. The first looked into the possible construction of a service module which would be used in tandem with the Orion capsule.[41] The second examined the possible production of a versatile multi purpose orbital vehicle.[42]
On November 21, 2012, the ESA decided they will construct an ATV derived Service Module ready to support the Orion capsule on the maiden flight of the Space Launch System in 2017.[43] service module will likely be manufactured by EADS Astrium in Bremen, Germany.[44]
"ESA’s contribution is going to be critical to the success of Orion’s 2017 mission"
—NASA Orion Program manager[14]
NASA announced on January 16, 2013, that ESA will construct the service module for Exploration Mission-1 in 2017.[14]The European Space Agency will use hardware from their current Automated Transfer Vehicle to construct a compatible service module to the spacecraft.

[edit]Launch Abort System

In the event of an emergency on the launch pad or during ascent, a launch escape system called the Launch Abort System (LAS) will separate the Crew Module from the launch vehicle using a solid rocket-powered launch abort motor (AM), which is more powerful than the Atlas 109-D booster that launched astronautJohn Glenn into orbit in 1962.[45] There are two other propulsion systems in the LAS stack: the attitude control motor (ACM) and the jettison motor (JM). On 10 July 2007, Orbital Sciences, the prime contractor for the LAS, awarded Alliant Techsystems (ATK) a $62.5 million sub-contract to, "design, develop, produce, test and deliver the launch abort motor." ATK, which had the prime contract for the first stage of the Ares I rocket, intended to use an innovative "reverse flow" design for the motor.[46] On 9 July 2008 NASA announced that ATK had completed a vertical test stand at a facility inPromontory, Utah to test launch abort motors for the Orion spacecraft.[47] Another long-time space motor contractor,Aerojet, was awarded the jettison motor design and development contract for the LAS. As of September 2008 Aerojet has, along with team members Orbital Sciences, Lockheed Martin and NASA, successfully demonstrated two full-scale test firings of the jettison motor. This motor is important to every flight in that it functions to pull the LAS tower away from the vehicle after a successful launch. The motor also functions in the same manner for an abort scenario.

[edit]Testing

[edit]Environmental testing

NASA performed environmental testing of Orion from 2007 to 2011 at the Glenn Research Center Plum Brook Station in Sandusky, Ohio. The Center's Space Power Facility is the world's largest thermal vacuum chamber.[48]

[edit]Pathfinder

On March 2nd 2009, the LAS Pathfinder began its transfer from the Langley Research Center to the White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, for launch tests. The Pathfinder is a combination of the Orion Boilerplate and LAS module. The 45 ft (14 m)-long rocket assembly will begin its first Pad Abort 1 Test on the Missile Range.[49]

[edit]Abort Flight Test (AFT)

Test-firing of Orion LAS jettison motor (shock diamonds are clearly visible in the exhaust plumes)
NASA planned to perform a series of six Abort Flight Tests between the fall of 2008 and the end of 2011 at the United States Army'sWhite Sands Missile Range (WSMR), New Mexico.[dated info] The Orion AFT subproject includes two pad abort tests and four ascent abort tests. Three of the four ascent aborts are planned to be flown from a special test launch vehicle, the Orion Abort Test Booster, the fourth one being performed with Ares I-Y. The Orion Abort Flight Tests are similar in nature to the Little Joe II tests performed at WSMR between September 1963 and January 1966 in support of the development of the Apollo program's Launch Escape System.[50][51][52]The LAS Pathfinder boilerplate is being used.
ATK successfully completed the first Orion launch-abort test on 20 November 2008. The abort motor will provide 500,000 lbf (2,200 kN) of thrust for an emergency on the launch pad or during the first 300,000 feet (91 km) of the rocket's climb to orbit. The test firing was the first time a motor with reverse flow propulsion technology at this scale has been tested.
This abort test firing brought together a series of motor and component tests conducted in 2008 as a preparation for the next major milestone, a full-size mock-up or boilerplate test scheduled for the spring of 2009.[53]
On May 10th, 2010, NASA successfully executed the PAD-Abort-1 test at White Sands New Mexico, launching a boilerplate Orion capsule to an altitude of approximately 6000 feet. The test used three solid-fuel rocket motors - a main thrust motor, an attitude control motor and the jettison motor. [54]

[edit]Post-landing Orion Recovery Test (PORT)

The PORT Test is to determine and evaluate what kind of motions the astronaut crew can expect after landing. This will include conditions outside the capsule for the recovery team. The evaluation process will support NASA's design of landing recovery operations including equipment, ship and crew necessities.
The Port Test will use a full-scale boilerplate of NASA's Orion crew module and will be tested in water under simulated and real weather conditions. Tests began 23 March 2009 with a Navy-built, 18,000-pound boilerplate. It will be placed in a test pool at the Naval Surface Warfare Center's Carderock Division in West Bethesda, Md. Full sea testing will begin 6 April 2009, in a special location off the coast of NASA's Kennedy Space Center with media coverage.[55]

[edit]Missions

List only includes relatively near missions, more missions are planned than are listed below.
AcronymMission nameLaunch DateRocketDurationRemarks
EFT-1Exploration Flight Test-1Early 2014Delta IV HeavyUncrewed high apogee trajectory test flight of the Orion Crew Module in Earth Orbit.
EM-1Exploration Mission-1[56]2017[56]SLS Block I[56]7–10 days[57]Send an uncrewed Orion on a circumlunar trajectory.[57]
EM-2Exploration Mission-2[56]2019-2021[56]SLS Block I[56]10–14 days[57]Send Orion with a crew of four into Lunar elliptical orbit (typically 100 x 5000 km).[57]
EM-3Exploration Mission-3[56]2022[58]SLS Block IA[56]Destination TBA[58]

[edit]Existing craft and mockups

  • The Boilerplate Test Article (BTA) underwent splashdown testing at the Hydro Impact Basin of NASA's Langley Research Center.[59] The BTA contains over 150 sensors to gather data on its test drops.[60] Testing of the 18,000 pound mockup ran from July 2011 to 6 January 2012.[61]
  • The Ground Test Article (GTA) stack, located at Lockheed Martin in Denver, is undergoing vibration testing.[62] It is made up by the Orion Ground Test Vehicle (GTV) combined with its Launch Abort System (LAS). Further testing will see the addition of Service Module simulator panels and Thermal Protection System (TPS) to the GTA stack.[63]
The Orion Drop Test Article during a test on 29 February 2012
  • The Drop Test Article (DTA), also known as the Drop Test Vehicle (DTV) is undergoing test drops at the US Army’s Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona. The mock Orion parachute compartment is dropped from an altitude of 25,000 feet from a C-130.[63] Testing began in 2007. Drogue chutes deploy around 15,000 and 20,000 feet. Testing of the reefing staged parachutes includes partial failure instances including partial opening and complete failure of one of the three main parachutes. With only two chutes deployed the DTA lands at 33 feet per second, the maximum touchdown speed for Orion's design.[64] Other related test vehicles include the now-defunct Orion Parachute Test Vehicle (PTV) and its replacement the Generation II Parachute Test Vehicle (PTV2). The drop test program has had several failures in 2007, 2008, and 2010.[65] The new PTV was successfully tested 29 February 2012 deploying from a C-17. Ten drag chutes will drag the mock up's pallet from the aircraft for the drop at 25,000 feet. The landing parachute set of eight is known as the Capsule Parachute Assembly System (CPAS).[66] The test examined air flow disturbance behind the mimicked full size vehicle and its effects on the parachute system. The PTV landed at 17 mph to the desert floor.[67] A third test vehicle, the PCDTV3, is scheduled for a drop on 17 April 2012. In this testing “The CPAS team continued preparation activities for the Parachute Compartment Drop Test Vehicle (PCDTV3) airdrop test, scheduled for April 17, which will deploy the two drogue parachutes in the highest dynamic pressure environment to date, and will demonstrate a main parachute skipped second stage.”[68]
  • Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1) Orion (re-designation of OFT-1) constructed at Michoud Assembly Facility,[12] was delivered by Lockheed Martin to the Kennedy Space Center on July 2, 2012.[69]

[edit]Orion Lite

Orion Lite was an unofficial name used in the media for a lightweight crew capsule proposed by Bigelow Aerospace in collaboration with Lockheed Martin. It was to be based on the Orion spacecraft that Lockheed Martin was developing for NASA. It would be a lighter, less capable and cheaper version of the full Orion.