Leonard David's INSIDE OUTER SPACE

Archive for the ‘Wait a Minute!’ Category

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

In classic wait-a-minute style, the European Space Agency (ESA)has released its Space Environment Report 2026

In brief, this chilling report points out that, indeed, Earth’s orbital environment is a finite resource.

Meanwhile, some of its orbits are getting crowded and increasingly churning with deadly, fast-moving pieces of defunct satellites and rockets that threaten our future in space.

Key takeaways

Some key takeaways — based on data collected until the end of 2025 — are:

• The number and scale of commercial satellite constellations continue to increase each year.
• Not enough satellites leave heavily congested orbits at the end of their lives, creating a growing collision risk.
• More than three intact satellites or rocket bodies are reentering the Earth’s atmosphere every day on average. At the same time, ten new payloads are launched daily.
• A new trend has constellations change altitude significantly year-on-year.

On-ground casualty risk

Image credit: ESA Space Environment Report 2026

For the first time, a new report metric has been added: on-ground casualty risk of reentries.

“Even though the numbers are low compared to everyday risks in life, the chance of a casualty increased in recent years due to increased traffic,” the report notes. That is, the casualty risk on the ground from fragments that survive atmospheric reentry is growing.

Image credit: ESA Space Environment Report 2026

This upward trend reflects the cumulative effect of more launches, more satellites and more reentries.

Runaway effect

The continued growth trends caused a worrying year-on-year development in the future projections. The expected number of objects and collisions in low-Earth orbit are skyrocketing in a runaway effect, despite the time horizon being shortened from 200 to 100 years.

The “ESA Space Environment Health Index” indicates that, in 2025, the long-term effect of our current activities in space over time got an order of magnitude worse in just one year.

Click on image to view yearly changes. Image credit: ESA Space Environment Report 2026

High price to pay

Active debris removal is required to stop the growth of the number of objects over time that is caused by space debris causing new debris on their own through collisions, known as the Kessler syndrome.

“Some indicators show that the interest in and adherence to space debris mitigation measures is on the rise,” the report points out, “but we need to be faster, more consistent and reliable. Without it, we are saddling future generations with a high price to pay for any activities in space.”

To access the full report – ESA Space Environment Report 2026 – go to:

https://www.sdo.esoc.esa.int/environment_report/Space_Environment_Report_I10R1_20260908.pdf

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

In wait-a-minute style, forget the competition between the U.S. and China to newly place human footprints on the Moon. Also, you can overlook any one-upmanship about dispatching astronauts to Mars, or firsts in piloted spaceflight.

The current space race is this: What country is winning the multi-nation contest to clutter space with discarded rocket bodies?

That’s the view of Darren McKnight, a senior technical fellow at LeoLabs, a group that keeps a persistent eye on what’s going on upstairs in orbital space.

Yes, satellite constellations provide uniquely robust capabilities in global connectivity, voice communications, Earth observation/imaging, navigation, and many other missions, McKnight notes. “The race to create constellations is a race that has some operators leaving space safety, space security, and space sustainability behind,” he adds.

The crowded space environment may look like this a decade from now, with proposed mega-constellations.
Credit: Center for Space Policy & Strategy

Rocket bodies

The new space race, especially at higher altitudes in low Earth orbit (LEO), involves the rocket bodies (R/B) that are abandoned once their payloads are deployed. But as McKnight asks, at what cost?

The current distribution of massive derelicts in high-LEO — above the average altitude of roughly 400 miles (650 kilometers) is highlighted by R/B mass and numbers with the 40 years of contribution by the Soviet Union/Russia amounting to roughly 787 metric tons (787,000 kilograms of mass in 438 rocket bodies.

China has roughly 365 metric tons (365,000 kilograms) in 110 R/Bs.

Image of spent rocket body.
Image credit: Astroscale-Japan

Large constellations

There are now several large constellations in LEO with Iridium, Starlink, and OneWeb, the most mature proliferated architectures.

Toss in AmazonLeo, China’s two very big LEO broadband constellations — Guowang, and Qianfan — all beginning in earnest over the last 18 to 24 months.

“In total, it is anticipated there will be over 100,000 operational payloads in LEO by 2040 due largely to this rapid expansion of constellations,” McKnight. “However, this story is not about the constellations per se – they are all creating value for their owners and already providing anywhere from global reliable services (for the more mature entrants) to initial regional capability (for the recent entrants), he adds.

Accumulation of derelicts

McKnight says that this story is about accumulation of massive derelicts, the leftover rocket bodies in long-lived orbits. The defunct R/Bs left above 400 miles (650 kilometers) will linger for decades to centuries in LEO posing an ever-growing collision hazard at these altitudes, he adds.

That likely erodes the reliability of future space systems and possibly fueling a self-sustaining cascading of collision events, states McKnight. More specifically, this story, he says, is about China adding massive derelict objects in LEO at that altitude at unprecedented rates.

“The bottom line is noteworthy,” McKnight points out. “The R/B mass abandonment rate is accelerating quickly and possibly so quickly that in four to 16 years China will surpass the Soviet Union/Russia abandoned R/B mass that took them 40 years to amass. This is producing a significant effect on space safety, space sustainability, and space security domains.”

The space hardware population in low Earth orbit as of July 1, 2026 is represented in these charts.
Image credit: Darren McKnight/LeoLabs

Extra level of risk

Among items singled out by McKnight, the current data suggests China is not dealing short-term space safety or long-term space sustainability.

“This accumulation of derelict hardware will affect all global space operators for decades and add an extra level of tension as the space domain becomes more contested with the recent deployment of counterspace and military support space systems globally,” McKnight states.

The possibility of explosions and collisions involving the growing R/B population in high-LEO “is adding a measurable extra level of risk, ambiguity, and confusion when transparency of operations is needed the most,” says McKnight.

So a key conclusion: “China is winning the ‘space race’ in high-LEO, but again two of these three ‘wins’ (i.e., accumulation of derelict mass and fragments) hurt all future space operators – commercial, civil, and military,” McKnight concludes.

NOAA-3 (also designated ITOS-F) lifts off on Delta 1 launch vehicle in November 1973. The rocket’s upper stage exploded in space a few months later due to residual fuel left onboard.
Image credit: U.S. Air Force

But wait!

McKnight has also issued on August 15 an interesting “Conjunction of the Fortnight.”

“While we may often lament Russian and Chinese space hardware being left on-orbit, the US has areas where we can improve behavior and show leadership in debris remediation (hopefully),” McKnight observes.

This conjunction occurred on March 29^th. It involved a non-operational payload (PL) Globalstar that passed in close proximity with a fragment from a Delta 1 rocket body that “was liberated” in 1973 when that second stage exploded creating nearly 220 fragments.

The event took place at over 1,000 miles (roughly 1,700 kilometers) above Earth.

“This is remarkable,” reports McKnight, since the Delta rocket body explosion occurred well over 50 years ago. “This just highlights the persistence of debris-generating events or longevity of abandoned derelicts at these high-LEO altitudes” – above 400 miles (650 kilometers), he notes.

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

Here’s a wait-a-minute question: What’s the frequency, Kenneth Arnold?

Admittedly, I borrowed and bent that R.E.M. song line. But it came to me in reading the latest outpouring of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) documents, videos and illustrations by the Department of War on August 7.

Those files are part of the Presidential Unsealing and Reporting System for UAP Encounters (PURSUE).

It’ll take a while before Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) and UAP specialists deep dive through all the newly released data.

But one thing caught my wandering and wondering eye.

Project Sign

I sifted through 245 pages of the report DOW-UAP-D100, Air Materiel Command Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, 1947-1948.

This file is a collection of U.S. Government memoranda and correspondence relating to “Project Sign,” a 1948 U.S. Air Force program to investigate reports of high-performance airborne objects.

The Air Materiel Command’s (AMC) investigation found that observers were “generally not mistaken when reporting that they had seen an airborne object, but that their characterizations of those objects as unusual was likely a reflection of the ‘limits of their personal experience.’”

Flying saucer

I thought 1947. Wasn’t that the year Kenneth Arnold caught glimpse of nine unidentified flying objects near Mount Rainier, moving at incredible speeds. What’s more is that Arnold’s report locked into place, due to a reporter’s catchy expression, the term “flying saucer.”

Indeed, on June 24, 1947, Kenneth Arnold was flying near Mount Rainier, Washington. He estimated the objects were flying at speeds of at least 1,200 miles per hour. His sighting is often cited as kick-starting the modern UFO phenomenon. That was over 79 years ago.

What I didn’t realize was that Arnold was not alone in sighting strange things in the air in 1947.

Image credit: Kenneth Arnold’s report drawing from the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP)

Typical reports

“The following are typical reports of observations of discs,” explains the AMC report, indicating the types of objects gleaned from a variety of sources.

On July 7, 1947, five Portland, Oregon police officers saw varying numbers of discs flying over different parts of Portland.

On July 7, 1947, a Phoenix, Arizona resident saw a disc in the glow of sunset and took two photographs. “The resultant picture showed a round front and square tail in plan form,” the AMC document adds.

On July 10, 1947, a mechanic near Harmon Field, Newfoundland, observed a circular object flying at high velocity and leaving a trail. Two other persons also saw the trail.

On July 11, 1947, three people at Codroy, Newfoundland saw a disc flying at high velocity and leaving a smoke trail.

Also pointed out in the AMC report, Kenneth Arnold’s sketch of one of the flying objects he spotted “corresponds closely to that shown in the photographs made by the individual in Phoenix, Arizona.

Furthermore, the AMC report states that on the same day as Arnold’s sighting, two U.S. Air Force pilots at Hamilton Field, California saw two flying discs trailing a P-80 aircraft, following it toward Oakland, California. The Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star was an early jet fighter.

Image credit: Air Materiel Command

Flying wing – German style?

This AMC report is chock full of other 1947 accounts of objects, from military personnel, including radar technicians in Japan.

In the “investigations made” part of the document, one item is looking into the possible existence of foreign aircraft projects which might be related to these observations. “Of interest in this regard are two German designs that could be under current exploitation by the U.S.S.R” – now the Soviet Union.

The Horten Brothers are identified as looking into a flying wing, crescent shaped in design.

Cannot be dismissed

In the AMC “conclusions” section, they state that “while a portion of the observations may be the results of natural phenomena, such as meteors, or may have other conventional explanation, the likelihood that some observers actually saw disc-shaped objects sufficiently large to be compared in size with known aircraft cannot be dismissed.”

“Considering the described conduct of these disc-like objects when sighted, it must be considered a possibility that they may have been humanly controlled, either manually or remotely, or by pre-set automatic controls,” the AMC report states.

Puzzling problem

Lastly, the AMC document explains that “if these discs actually exist they are foreign in origin, so investigation of the possible country of development and the place of origin should continue.”

All in all, the Directorate of Intelligence, U.S. Air Force, “will continue to collect and analyze all reports of sightings of flying objects, lights, trails, etc., in an effort to develop an answer to the puzzling problem which they present.”

For your waaay back reading, go to:

https://www.war.gov/UFO/?releaseDate=Release+05&release=05#DOW-UAP-D100-Air-Materiel-Command-Report-on-Unidentified-Flying-Objects-1947-1948

The entire UAP documents just released are available at:

https://www.war.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/4565994/department-of-war-publishes-fifth-release-of-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena-f/

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

Wait a Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

The American Foreign Policy Council has released a report, Strategic Implications of Lunar Mass Drivers as a Dual-use Technology.

“The economic advantages of mass drivers are inseparable from their security implications, the report notes. “As high throughput launch systems, they are inherently dual use. Mass drivers are in fact, just large electrically driven cannons.”

Cover art: Matthew Cook

Strategic environment

Authored by Andre Sonntag, an independent space power and policy analyst focused on cislunar security, strategy, and near-term space conflict, among its recommendations the special report states:

“The United States faces a narrowing window to shape the strategic environment of the Lunar frontier. Mass driver infrastructure will be an unparalleled source of space power due to its ability to move strategic mass at a rate traditional systems cannot hope to compete against.”

Image credit: Matthew Cook

For these reasons, “the United States must take measurable steps towards practical development of Lunar mass drivers as soon as possible. If the United States fails to invest in the practical development and ample fielding of Lunar mass drivers, competitors will be granted the ability to dictate their use and control space power.”

To access this special report, go to:

https://www.afpc.org/uploads/documents/Special_Report_-_Strategic_Implications_of_Lunar_Mass_Drivers-5.27.26.pdf

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

Wait a Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

If the winds and whims of politics play out, U.S. President Donald Trump is to trek to Beijing for a summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping on May 14 and 15.

No telling the outcome(s) from such a two-nation mind meld given the entourage that will accompany Trump, folks that typically engage in off-stage banter to propose, detail, iron-out, trash, and agree on new ideas.

It might be a wait-a-minute moment for space collaboration.

Could one of those pitches retro-fire back to a U.S. John Kennedy and then Soviet Union Premier’s Nikita Khrushchev discussion of a joint Moon mission?

Space race rivals: Soviet Union’s Premier
Nikita Khrushchev with U.S. President, John F. Kennedy.
Image credit: Kennedy Library

Yes, a blunt, but bold initiative – and at a time when rocket rhetoric has it that both the U.S. and China are in a heated “Space Race.”

Joint-mission messages

Let’s revisit a page in space history.

When U.S. President Kennedy and former Soviet Union leader Nikita Khrushchev met in June 1961, the Soviet leader said “nyet” to the idea of a joint Moon adventure. Kennedy further pushed for a bi-national lunar landing idea during a United Nations address on September 20, 1963.

After JFK met his doom in Dallas, the joint-mission idea fell to the wayside…and the rest was history as Apollo 11’s Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin came to full-stop on the barren Moon’s surface in July 1969.

Image credit: NASA

Measured in months, not years

Fast forward to today, China has road mapped a plan to plant the country’s own boots on the dusty, cratered Moon by 2030, maybe even earlier.

It also seems clear that, if they are successful, Chinese moonwalkers may likely strut their right stuff across lunar real estate ahead of NASA’s current Artemis lunar landing plans.  

That possibility is much to the consternation of NASA and the U.S. Congress.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman has repeatedly stated that America finds itself with a real geopolitical rival, one that is challenging American leadership in the high ground of space. Success or failure in countering that confrontation will be measured in months, not years, he has explained.

“This time, the goal is not flags and footprints. This time, the goal is to stay. America will never again give up the Moon,” Isaacman has said.

Image credit: White House

Artemis program agenda

Rhetoric aside, there isn’t as yet a “Department of Wiggle Room” that can stave off the uncertainty of NASA funding, government shutdown ramifications, space agency layoffs, restructuring of space agency field centers – as well as hiccups in pushing forward on the Artemis program agenda.

In the meantime, China’s intention to place their astronauts on the Moon is progressing smoothly and appears on track. They have enough financial resources. They have already demonstrated a technical ability that equals or exceeds America in some instances. But they too could encounter setbacks.

China’s robotic sample return of lunar collectibles from the Moon’s near side and far side have been done, with more missions plotted out. They are building international partnerships that include sharing precious lunar material with other nations.

The long haul

Like the United States, China is detailing their own Moon-situated research base, in partnership with Russia’s space agency, Roscosmos.

Image credit: CCTV/Inside Outer Space screengrab

China’s encampment will benefit by a sequence of two upcoming robotic lunar landers. The Chang’e-7 mission later this year is tasked to accomplish environment and resource surveys in the lunar south pole region. Chang’e-8 in 2028 is to tackle on-the-spot utilization of lunar resources.

All this suggests that — like the U.S. — China is into Moon exploration and utilization – and for the long haul.

Both nations are putting in place an aggressive agenda of technological development for “rebooting” the Moon, this time in the 21^st century.

Is the window of opportunity open once again regarding the idea of superpower space cooperation in space?

Bring your own Windex!

What are your views?

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

As the four-person Artemis II crew heads back to Earth, there’s a heavy breathing, nail-bitter ahead.

It is a wait-a-minute moment regarding the Orion spacecraft heat shield.

The high-speed, safe return to Earth from lunar distance of the Artemis II crew depends on the thermal protection system of Orion’s crew module. It must endure blistering temperatures to keep crew members safe.

Artwork depicts Orion spacecraft plowing through Earth’s atmosphere at high speed.
Image credit: NASA

However, following the flight of the uncrewed Artemis I lunar flight test in late 2022, it was found that ablative thermal protective material had unexpectedly chipped away from the Orion heat shield during its plunge through Earth’s atmosphere.

Image credit: NASA OIG

In 2024, NASA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a report – “NASA’s Readiness for the Artemis II Crewed Mission to Lunar Orbit” – calling attention to the heat shield issue.

To read the full report, go to:

https://oig.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/ig-24-011.pdf

Post-flight analysis

In a post-flight analysis of the Artemis 1 heat shield, NASA identified more than 100 locations where ablative thermal protective material was liberated during its speedy reentry.

NASA, along with contractors and an independent review team, an investigation was launched to establish the technical cause of the issue. An analysis was done, including over a 100 tests at unique facilities across the country.

Arc Jet Complex at NASA’s Ames Research Center in California’s Silicon Valley has been used to study unexpected heat shield issues found after Orion capsule’s Artemis I flight in 2022.
Image credit: NASA Ames Research Center

Image credit: NASA OIG

That extensive analysis, determined the heat shield on Artemis I did not allow for enough of the gases generated inside a material called Avcoat to escape, which caused some of the material to crack and break off.

For more details how the situation was resolved, go to my past Space.com story — “The Artemis 1 moon mission had a heat shield issue. Here’s why NASA doesn’t think it will happen again on Artemis 2” – at:

https://www.space.com/space-exploration/artemis/the-artemis-1-moon-mission-had-a-heat-shield-issue-heres-why-nasa-doesnt-think-it-will-happen-again-on-artemis-2

Also, go to — “NASA Shares Orion Heat Shield Findings, Slips of Artemis Moon Missions” — at

https://www.leonarddavid.com/nasa-shares-orion-heat-shield-findings-slips-of-artemis-moon-missions/

Fingers crossed!

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

Yet another wait-a-minute moment.

While it remains unclear whether or not new NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman favors putting in place a lunar Gateway, the European Space Agency has just released a schematic overview of the multi-component station.

The lunar Gateway is envisioned by advocates as the first international space station around the Moon, dedicated to supporting the most distant human space missions ever attempted.

Image credit: ESA

This outpost is to be assembled for operation around the Moon, providing a place for crew members to live and work in lunar orbit.

Gateway is to serve as a base for scientific research of the deep space environment, a host for technology development and demonstration experiments, as well as a staging post supporting exploration missions to the lunar surface and beyond.

The Gateway space station will operate in a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit supporting crewed Artemis missions to the moon.
Image credit: NASA/Alberto Bertolin, Bradley Reynolds

Key elements

In addition to payloads that will fly to this new space station, the European Space Agency (ESA) is contributing three key elements to the Gateway: Lunar I-Hab, Lunar View and Lunar Link. Together, these provide a habitable space for astronauts, refueling, storage and telecommunication capabilities, and windows to view space and the Moon.

The Gateway is to be assembled this decade, built as part of the Artemis program in an international collaboration between ESA, NASA and the space agencies of Canada (CSA), Japan (JAXA) and the United Arab Emirates (MBRSC).

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

It is a wait-a-minute, hard-hitting NASA report issued on the crewed Boeing Starliner mission to the International Space Station in 2024, in redacted form.

NASA defines the incident in the same category as the Space Shuttle Columbia and Challenger disasters.

An Anomalies Review Investigation Team identifies lessons learned in the flawed Starliner mission, focused on propulsion system anomalies experienced during the Crew Flight Test.

Troubled flight

New NASA chief, Jared Isaacman, underscored the seriousness of Starliner’s troubled crewed flight, labeling it as a “Type A mishap,” a mission that could put astronauts in danger.

NASA astronauts Suni Williams (left) and Butch Wilmore during pre-launch Boeing Starliner spacecraft simulator workout at NASA’s Johnson Space Center.
Image credit: NASA/Robert Markowitz

Starliner was not designated a serious mishap right from the start, Isaacman said, citing internal pressure to keep Boeing on board and flights on track.

Go to the full (redacted) report — Commercial Crew Program Starliner Tests & Anomalies Review (STAR) Investigation Team and Starliner Data Review Team (SDRT) Report – at:

https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/nasa-report-with-redactions-021926.pdf?emrc=76e561

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David

It is not an inside secret that the private space company, Axiom Space, has been troubled by its development of a new spacesuit for Artemis moonwalkers.

As the new spacesuit is needed for any Artemis III astronauts working on the Moon, the sluggish development of appropriate apparel is a wait-a-minute moment in space expooration.

Meet the timelines

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman recently met with leadership at Axiom Space to discuss the development of their spacesuit.

Image credit: Via Jared Isaacman

“It was great to see their facilities and all the progress,” Isaacman posted January 24 on X (formerly Twitter).

“I shared with them exactly what I told our HLS [Human Landing System] providers: NASA will do all we can to help them accelerate and meet the timelines, with plenty of schedule margin to spare,” the NASA leader explained.

“As an agency, we must be willing to challenge the requirements and not let an hour go by on a problem we can solve today. This is imperative to achieving the President’s national space policy,” said Isaacman.

Image credit: Axiom Space

Hale-ing frequency

A day later, Wayne Hale, a former Space Shuttle Program Manager & Flight Director for 40 missions, now retired from NASA after 32 years, responded:

“Exactly the same message from NASA leadership that was made right before Challenger was lost.”

Hale’s posting stirred up this counter-response from Isaacman:

Image credit: Via Jared Isaacman

“It is disappointing and disrespectful that you would so casually invoke the loss of Challenger on a topic related to EVA suit development. Let me rework my above post to be the opposite of what I wrote, and please tell me if it sounds safer:

“I shared with them exactly what I told our HLS providers: NASA should do absolutely nothing to help them accelerate and meet their timelines so there is no schedule margin to spare. As an agency, we must never be willing to challenge the requirements and let as much time go by as possible on problems.”

“Is this better? Respectfully, do better Sir,” Isaacman posted.

Wait-a-Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David