Trent Waddington passes along a note informing me that the Lockheed-Martin asteroid mission study writeup (mentioned here previously) is now available along with some additional materials:
/-- www.lockheedmartin.com/products/Orion/OrionToolKit/
/-- Plymouth Rock: An Early Human Mission to Near Earth Asteroids Using Orion Spacecraft, by J. Hopkins et al - Lockheed Martin - Version 2.0 - June 2010 (pdf)
/-- Orion Asteroid Mission Brief (2 pages, pdf)
/-- Orion Asteroid Mission Handout (pdf)
/-- Orion Asteroid Briefing Charts - Aug.2010 (pdf)

Trent Waddington comments on a soon to be released Lockheed-Martin study of crew missions to an asteroid with the Orion spacecraft: Early vs Late Human Missions To Deep Space - QuantumG's Blog.

Trent got an advanced copy but he says the study report will soon be posted at Orion Communications Toolkit | Lockheed Martin.

Update: See also Trents's visualization tool for determining when the trajectory of one of nearly 500 near earth asteroids will come in range for a 6 month duration human mission:
/-- Prospector's Skymap
/-- Prospector's Skymap - QuantumG's Blog - Aug.19.10

The presentation files for the Exploration of Near Earth Objects (NEO) Objectives Workshop [Explore NOW] held this week in DC are now available on line: Explore NOW - Presentation Briefings.

Here are some reports on the meeting:
/-- Report from the Exploration of Near-Earth Objects Objectives Workshop - The Planetary Society Blog - Aug.10.10
/-- Report from the Exploration of Near-Earth Objects Objectives Workshop - Day 2 - The Planetary Society Blog - Aug.11.10
/-- Space Prizes: More on Planetary Society NEO Competition - Aug.12.10

I've occasionally mentioned this 2004 study (pdf) sponsored by the Planetary Society and and co-led by Mike Griffin, which described the basic rocket designs - a "Stick" with a large capsule plus a heavy lifter, that became the Constellation architecture. Trent Waddington writes about the broader exploration roadmap laid out in the study and finds that surprisingly it is not so different from the Augustine panel's Flexible Path approach: Reselling Mike Griffin - QuantumG's Blog.

It appears that Lockheed-Martin's Orion activity is slowing drastically even while NASA officially keeps the program going: Orion becomes a liability as Lockheed Martin pull 600 engineers off the contract - NASASpaceFlight.com.

A reader points me to this interesting thread on the NASASpaceflight.com forum titled: Myth: CxP's only problem was that it was underfunded.

See also Dennis Wingo's essay, mentioned earlier, which discusses the many problems with Ares I/Orion.

Another report on how Constellation continues to eat up lots of time and money, which might have gone for productive work towards spacefaring capabilities, and will continuing doing so for many more months: Work continues on Constellation: Still unapproved budget proposal isn't a cease and desist order - Florida Today.

Supposedly to prepare for a heavy lifter design, a NASA team proposes a set of Ares rocket tests that could demonstrate everything - except, of course, low cost development and operation: Ambitious Ares test flight plan proposed for HLV demonstrations - NASASpaceFlight.com.

NASA's plans for its heavy lift vehicle architecture and propulsion systems are not decided but they are leaning in certain directions: US Heavy Lift Effort Inches Ahead - SpaceNews.com.

Indications are that they want a million pound thrust LOX/Hydrocarbon engine for the first stage and a a new LOX/hydrogen or LOX/methane upper-stage engine.

While NASA is not ruling out building a heavy-lift solution that incorporates solid-rocket motors, Guidi said affordability, reliability, and the flexibility to serve multiple users are paramount.

I mentioned earlier that NASA planned an industry day to gather input for its technology R&D projects. Here are the details of the meeting, which is being organized by the AIAA: NASA Exploration Enterprise Workshop (via Jeff Foust).
===
A.C. Charania has posted an overview of a meeting in Washington, D.C. yesterday in which NASA's Lori Garver, Ed Weiler, Bobby Braun, and Laurie Leshin described various aspects of the new plan for NASA: NASA Presentations on New Space Plans for FY2011 - planetarydefense.blogspot.com

A. C. also posted their presentation materials.

Apparently, the demo flight of the Launch Escape System for the Orion capsule went well today in White Sands Missile Range. Spaceflight Now reports:

NASA successfully accomplished a $220 million test of a new abort system Thursday that would whisk astronauts away from a failing rocket booster, but further work on the safety mechanism is on hold as managers divert funding for the project amid a shake-up of the space agency's exploration plans.

NASA also has this:

Pad Abort 1 Test Successful

NASA successfully tested the pad abort system for the Launch Abort System developed for the Orion crew exploration vehicle at 9 a.m. EDT. The 97-second flight test is called the Pad Abort 1 test, or PA1. It is the first fully integrated test of the Launch Abort System developed for Orion. The test took place at the U.S. Army’s White Sands Missile Range near Las Cruces, N.M.

The Launch Abort System is being designed to offer a safe, reliable and robust method of removing the astronaut crew from danger should an emergency occur on the launch pad or during the vehicle’s climb to orbit.

Earlier articles:
/-- Orion's launch escape craft tests at 7 a.m. today - Las Cruces Sun-News
/-- Orion test launch may be hard to watch - Las Cruces Sun-News

Update: Can't find a video yet but Robert Pearlman has posted these images: Orion Pad Abort-1 (PA-1) test flight - collectSPACE.
[Update 2: Robert has now added a video.]

Leonard David reports on the $220 million test: NASA Test Launches Rocket Escape System for Astronauts - SPACE.com

Update 3: NASA video:


Update 4: Another article: NASA tests launch abort system for space capsules - Spaceflight Now

A report on a test flight planned tomorrow at White Sands of the Launch Escape System for the Orion capsule: Capsule safety system ready for testing in New Mexico - Spaceflight Now.

Jeff Greason posted an interesting comment to this item here about the Orion capsule. I'll re-post it here. (Note this previous item that discussed how the large size for Orion came from Griffin's insistence on a 6 person capacity and the requirement that it provide both in-space habitation and re-entry capability rather than separating these tasks as the Soyuz system does.):

Future exploration missions are very likely to use *some* kind of Earth-return capsule. There are other ways to do it but they are probably a bridge too far for NASA to consider.

The fundamental challenge with using Orion as the baseline capsule for any strategy which includes destinations other than the Moon is that the capsule is physically far too big; it includes habitat volume and amenities for a Lunar trip *inside the aeroshell*. That's why small mass budget reductions require large capability reductions -- because too much of the mass is in the aeroshell, heat shield, landing subsystems, etc.

Yet the resulting habitat volume and amenities are too small and austere for longer missions to near earth objects or the Martian neighborhood.

An exploration capsule system will involve a separate habitat volume, so that longer missions can use larger habitats and shorter missions smaller. That gives the opportunity for a much smaller capsule. With proper design targets, such a capsule could have a much lower fly-away cost. Orion was shaping up to around $0.5B/mission fly away cost for the capsule & SM alone.

It is an open question whether a "shrunk" version of Orion would be faster and/or cheaper than a clean-sheet start based on the lessons learned during the Orion development process. I suspect that there is some discussion happening between NASA and the Orion contractors on that point right now. The Augustine Committee estimated an added $1B to the cost of Orion to shrink it back to ~4m diameter, but that would still leave the high fly-away cost for future NASA budgets to swallow.

Given a NASA budget that ramps up to $3B/year over the 2010 budget baseline for manned spaceflight, there was room to keep the Orion capsule going with only small changes, and while the capsule was very much not *optimal* for other exploration missions, it was *workable*. With the currently proposed $1B/year increase, the best capsule strategy isn't clear. I'm not surprised that it is taking time to work that out.

To me, the Orion capsule did look like it was substantially further along than the planned booster for it, and it was quite suitable for launch on a Delta-IV Heavy, so I suspect the issues being grappled with by NASA and its contractors are what the overall exploration mission sequence will be and when the other subsystems can be ready, which will drive the capsule requirements.

More on efforts to save the Orion capsule project in one form or another: Lies, damned lies and timetables: NASA’s Orion fights for its life - Orlando Sentinel/The Write Stuff.

As I indicated last night, it was somewhat of a surprise that the Orion project was canceled outright rather than modified. Rob Coppinger wonders how they plan to do deep space exploration without it: Obama's capsule conundrum, what you hadn't noticed? - Hyperbola.

Fuel depots and other in-space infrastructure technologies are given a high priority in the new plan. So it's possible that, as indicated in the comments to Rob's item, they might be investigating an in-space reusable system of some sort. Bolden has said that many aspects of their long range plans are still being worked out so I think we'll have to wait to see what might replace Orion for deep space human missions.

A survey of the rumors on the possible changes to Constellation : Ares I: Is it on or off? - al.com.
===
A brief video clip from Spacevidcast about the possibility that the Ares V design will move towards a DIRECT Jupiter approach: A possible new launch vehicle for NASA? - Spacevidcast.


Update: Rob Coppinger weighs in on the Ares I fate via rumors on NASA's 2011 budget: Ares I is not dead: It's NASA's FY2010 budget request again... - Hyperbola

Bolden will get the results of an internal NASA study of heavy lifter design alternatives: Bolden to review HLV study on Friday – Sidemount in doubt, In-line/SSME boost - NASASpaceFlight.com - Jan.15.10

If we're lucky it's too late to matter but the Safe, Simple, Soon rocket finally gets a fix for its shaking fits:
/-- NASA announces final fixes for Ares shaking danger - The Write Stuff/Orlando Sentinel
/-- Constellation Finalizes Thrust Oscillation Fix.
===
Orbital Sciences and ATK are developing the launch abort system (LAS) for the Orion capsule, which will no doubt continue regardless of Ares I. They recently tested the ATK motor for the LAS: VIDEO: Orion Abort Control Motor Test - Aviation Week

Even Griffin's ESAS report said Ares I/Orion would need at least seven flights before its calculated safety level exceeds that of the Shuttles: First flights of NASA's Ares rocket: less safe than space shuttle? - The Write Stuff/Orlando Sentinel.

Of course, the Shuttle program needed 113 flights to illuminate two major flaws in that system.

Vision Restoration blog continues with the set of questions raised by the Augustine panel's report:
... Question 3: Should Earth orbit be included in the Flexible Path?
... Question 4: Should Venus orbit be included in the Flexible Path?
... Question 5: What is the real goal of human space exploration?