NASA Developing Unique Robotic Satellite Refueling System

As reported by Network World: Refueling aging satellites that were never meant to be refueled is the goal with a emerging NASA system that could save millions.

NASA this week said since April 2011, engineers have been working to build robotic satellite servicing technologies necessary to bring in-orbit inspection, repair, refueling, component replacement and assembly capabilities to spacecraft needing aid. The project could also lead to life extension or re-purposing in Earth orbit or Earth-bound application like robotically fuel satellites before they launch, keeping humans at a safe distance during an extremely hazardous operation., NASA said.

Two of NASA's leading development groups -- Kennedy Space Center and the Goddard's Satellite Servicing Capabilities Office (SSCO) teamed on the most recent advancement.  Specifically SSCO demonstrated that a remotely operated robot - with supporting technologies - could transfer oxidizer into the tank of another orbiting spacecraft not originally designed to be refueled. Kennedy's propellant transfer system was an essential part of this Remote Robotic Oxidizer Transfer Test, or RROxiTT.

Satellite fuel, known as hypergolic propellants, includes fluids such as hydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide are the most frequently used fuel and oxidizers for maneuvering satellites in Earth orbit, NASA noted.

According to NASA, the team at Goddard shipped an industrial robotic arm to Kennedy for the test. From 800 miles away in Maryland, the team remotely controlled the robotic arm with its attached SSCO oxidizer nozzle tool to connect with a propellant fill and drain valve on the simulated satellite's servicing panel. 

Downstream, the Kennedy-provided propellant transfer system and hose delivery assembly flowed oxidizer through the tool into the client fill-drain valve, with all hardware located in the Kennedy facility in Florida.
Hypergolic propellant was controlled remotely at various flight, pressures and flow rates to prove the concept worked, NASA stated. 

"This is a unique test that's never been done, as far as we know, anywhere in the world," said Brian Nufer, a fluids engineer in the Fluids Engineering Branch of NASA Engineering and Technology.

The full contingent of operating spacecraft is right around 1,000 with more than 400 in the geosynchronous (GEO) Earth orbit belt some 22,000 miles above Earth. GEO is home to more than 400 satellites, many of which deliver such essential services as weather reports, cell phone communications, television broadcasts, government communications and air traffic management.


By developing robotic capabilities to repair and refuel GEO satellites, NASA said it hopes to add years of functional life to satellites and expand options for operators who face unexpected emergencies, tougher economic demands and aging fleets. NASA also hopes that remote refueling technologies will help boost the commercial satellite-servicing industry that is rapidly gaining momentum.

Toyota Combustion Engine That Generates Electricity Directly

As reported by Green Car Reports: Despite the recent advent of usable, talented electric vehicles, combustion engines are likely to persist for quite some time, often as a component in plug-in hybrid and range-extended electric vehicles.

The onus then is on refining combustion power to work harmoniously with increasingly electrified vehicles--and Toyota's new Free Piston Engine Linear Generator (FPEG) could be one solution.

The idea of a linear engine is nothing new--engineers and research departments have been developing them for years.

Linear engines eschew the rotating crankshaft of conventional engines in favor of a single chamber, in which a piston moves forward and backward.

Combustion is largely similar, operating in a chamber at the piston's top. At the bottom, a gas-filled chamber provides the return motion usually provided by the crankshaft-driven motion of connecting rods.
The benefit of a crankshaft is that your piston's linear motion can be transferred into more usable rotating motion--not possible in a linear generator.


Instead, kinetic energy of the piston's back-and-forth movement is used to generate power.
Previously, that's been the work of the air springs. In Toyota's FPEG, writes Green Car Congress (via Charged EVs) it's down to the movement of an unusual W-shaped piston within a special chamber.
The center of the 'W' sits in a combustion chamber, that works on a two-stroke cycle--burned gas is scavenged out through ports in the cylinder head during the exhaust phase, while fresh air is brought in through a port in the cylinder liner.

Meanwhile, the sides of the 'W' feature a magnetic 'mover', and the walls of that chamber contain stator coils. As the permanent magnets on the piston pass the coils, electrical charge is generated--and you have your linear motor.

While this sounds complicated in concept, the unit itself is actually very compact, easy to cool and easy to lubricate. And as the gas spring chamber features a pressure regulating valve, the stiffness of the return 'spring' can be altered, for different operating parameters.

That's all well and good, but what could it be used for?

Essentially, its compact size makes it ideal as a generator for range-extended electric vehicles.
Toyota's test units are only 10 kW (13 horsepower), but a pair of them generates enough electricity for a Yaris or Corolla-sized vehicle to cruise on the highway at 75 mph.

If that sounds unimpressive, consider that one early BMW i3 reviewer struggled to maintain safe highway speeds in the range-extended version, when the two-cylinder engine was unable to sufficiently maintain battery charge.

A linear generator could cause vibration issues, but this is countered, as it is in any other combustion engine, by using more than one FPEG in a horizontally-opposed layout.

Toyota Central R&D Labs Inc. presented the concept at the recent SAE 2014 World Congress in Detroit.

It's still a way from production reality, but it shows that future range-extended vehicles may not be limited by the size, weight and power-generation constraints of conventional piston engines.

BMW Has The Most Efficient Electric Car in the US

As reported by Green Car Reports: Well, the numbers are in, courtesy of a quickly-photographed window sticker, and now we know the range and efficiency ratings for the 2014 BMW i3 electric car.

The EPA-rated range is 81 miles, and its efficiency is a record-breaking 124 MPGe combined (138 MPGe city, 111 MPGe highway).

That confirms the lightweight electric BMW i3 subcompact as the most efficient battery-electric car sold in the U.S. today.

The nearest competitor is the 2013 Scion iQ-EV, an electric minicar with 38 miles of range that's not available to the generic public; it's rated at 121 MPGe.

The competitor with the best rating that can actually be purchased by the public is the 2014 Chevrolet Spark EV, with a combined efficiency rating of 119 MPGe and a rated range of 82 miles.

The Spark EV, however, is a compliance car sold only in quantities sufficient to comply with California's zero-emission vehicle rules.

BMW would appear to have grander aspirations for the i3 electric car, although sales numbers will tell the story within a year or two.

(A "mile per gallon equivalent" is a measure created by the EPA that gives the distance a vehicle can cover electrically on the same amount of energy as contained in 1 gallon of gasoline.)

SpaceX Wins Injunction To Stop USAF From Buying Russian Rocket Engines - Russia's Deputy PM Suggests Getting To Space on a Trampoline

As reported by Reuters: A U.S. Court of Federal Claims judge issued an injunction late Wednesday prohibiting a joint venture between Lockheed Martin Corp and Boeing from proceeding with plans to buy Russian-made rocket engines used to send U.S. Air Force satellites into space.

Space Exploration Technologies, the privately held company known as SpaceX, won the temporary injunction against the U.S. government and contractors Boeing and Lockheed operating as United Launch Alliance.

The U.S. Air Force and United Launch Alliance are prohibited "from making any purchases from or payment of money to NPO Energomash", Federal Claims Court Judge Susan Braden wrote in the order.
The preliminary injunction does not extend to any purchase orders placed or money paid to Russian rocket engine maker NPO Energomash prior to the date of the order.

Lawmakers on Wednesday called for a program to develop a next-generation liquid-fuel rocket engine within five years, proposing legislation aimed at reducing U.S. dependence on Russian engines to launch military and spy satellites.



Moscow's annexation of neighbor Ukraine's Crimea region and the massing of Russian troops near the border have left East-West relations more tense than at any time since the Cold War.

SpaceX, which manufactures and launches rockets and spacecraft, last week filed a lawsuit to protest the Air Force's award of a multibillion-dollar, non-compete contract for 36 rocket launches to a partnership of the two biggest U.S. weapons makers.

The company wants the Air Force to reverse the sole-source award of 36 boosters to United Launch Alliance and open the procurement to commercial competition.

United Launch Alliance, the U.S. Air Force and NPO Energomash were not available for immediate comment.

SpaceX, co-founded by investor Elon Musk who also heads electric car company Tesla, says its rockets are U.S. made.

In related news: Russia's Deputy PM Suggests Using A Trampoline To Get To Space

Russia's Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin has become one of the most vocal critics of the United States in the past few months, often using his English-language Twitter account to fire off insults against the economic policies which he himself is personally targeted by.

On Tuesday, Rogozin lashed out again, this time at newly announced U.S. ban on high-tech exports to Russia.

"The U.S. introduced sanctions against our space industry. God knows, we warned them: we respond to declarations w/ declarations, to actions w/ actions," Rogozin tweeted, later adding: "After analyzing the sanctions against our space industry, I suggest the U.S. delivers its astronauts to the ISS [international space station] with a trampoline."

Rogozin does actually have a point, although his threats carry much less weight than he may hope.

It's true that Russian shuttles are currently the only option for getting U.S. citizens to get to the space station, and the United States pays Russia some $71 million per person they get up there. In fact, Russia is due to get a $457.9 million payment for its services soon. If it really wanted to, Russia could stop U.S. astronauts from reaching the station, despite the fact that the United States funded as much as $100 billion of the space station's $160 billion price tag. Worse still, it could refuse to let the two U.S. citizens currently on the space station return home.

Thankfully, that seems a remote possibility – $457.9 million a lot of money for Russia's aerospace industry, and few believe that Russia would actually give it up. Plus, as Jeffrey Kluger noted at Time Magazine last month, Russia may not want to push the United States into the hands of SpaceX and Orbital Sciences, two private American companies that hope to be able to send passengers to the station soon. So, while things may be a little awkward for a while, don't expect a change to the status quo.

Rogozin's comments on Tuesday are just his latest criticism of U.S. sanctions. At the beginning of April, he mocked Western attempts to targeted his foreign assets, tweeting, "Have you found my accounts, money transfers, real estate, luxury cars, yachts, etc?"

His criticism is legitimate – asset seizures only work if there are foreign assets to seize (or if those can be found), and, as The Post's Michael Birnbaum recently reported, there are few signs of sanctions on the street in Russia. However, when Rogozin asked those who sanctioned him to "send me your teeth ground in impotent rage," he may have gone a bit far.

Drone Camera Tornado Coverage Raises Press Freedom Questions

As reported by Forbes: Storm chaser and videographer Brian Emfinger used a drone to document the aftermath of a tornado that ripped through Arkansas.  That video prompted speculation as to whether the FAA was going to investigate or even fine Emfinger for using the drone.  Today, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette is reporting ($0.99 paywalled) that the FAA is investigating the use of drones to gather aerial footage in Arkansas.   FAA investigations and enforcement actions against drone journalists raise serious First Amendment questions about the agency’s ability to infringe upon press freedom in the absence of formal rules.

According to the article:

"The Federal Aviation Administration currently prohibits the commercial use of the devices, including for reporting, according to the agency’s website. But some photographers who fly small drones say a recent court case voids the federal regulators’ authority over unmanned aircraft.

Asked Monday about KATV’s use of a drone for its coverage of the tornado, FAA spokesman Lynn Lunsford said, "We are looking into it."

The article goes on to note that Emfinger is not the only journalist covering the tornado’s damage using a drone, and this isn't the first time Arkansas news stations have used the devices.

Emfinger’s white drone, which can carry a small video camera, is about a foot and a half wide with propellers that are about 8 inches long, he said.  It has been used by KATV before to cover a fire at the Majestic Hotel in Hot Springs earlier this year, said Nick Gentry, news director for the television station.

“Brian went out to use it last night because we knew we needed some pictures to show the damage,” Gentry said. “It gave great perspective of how bad the damage was in Mayflower.”  Other Arkansas television stations are also using unmanned aircraft to cover the aftermath of the tornado.  Tim Trieschmann, owner of The Shot Above, a company that specializes in aerial photography in Little Rock, also used a drone to provide aerial footage for KLRT, Channel 16, on Monday.

Matt Waite, the director of the Drone Journalism Lab for the College of Journalism and Mass Communications at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln is quoted in the article.  A few months ago the Drone Journalism Lab received a cease and desist letter from the FAA, forcing them to teach their drone journalism class indoors.

Waite helpfully explains “We don’t have really clear rules of the road right now for the use of drones for journalists or anyone, really,” Waite said. “There are a tremendous number of questions that are floating around out there that have significant ramifications of how journalists will use these, that we do not have solid answers for.”

Matt Waite, director of the Drone Journalism Lab at University of Nebraska-Lincoln has noted how the lack of FAA rules has created uncertainty for journalists.

If the FAA chooses to pursue an enforcement action against Emfinger or other journalists, those journalists may face up to a $10,000 fine.  Pursuing journalists will likely raise immediate First Amendment challenges, and may be a losing strategy for the agency as many news organizations, lawyers, and other drone enthusiasts would be united in opposition to the agency’s efforts to enforce non-existent rules.

In February of this year, Pedro Rivera, a photographer and drone journalist in Connecticut, filed a Federal lawsuit directed against a police department, rather than the FAA.  In that suit he alleged that his First Amendment right to monitor police was infringed when police ordered him to cease videotaping their activity.

As drone technology continues to spread into the hands of more journalists we can expect to see more questions raised about how far the FAA’s authority extends, and what happens when that claimed authority intersects with First Amendment rights.

The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette’s full coverage is available here or can be found in print on page 23 of the 04/29/2014 edition with the headline: Rules hazy for drone coverage of tornado.  

Can Dedicated Vehicle Navigation Device Manufacturers Find a Way Back From Irrelevance?

As reported by Daily Finance: Quick, when was the last time you bought a dedicated GPS/Navigation device? We're betting it's been awhile.

Sales of pure GPS/Navigation hardware units -- as opposed to devices that run navigation apps in addition to other software and functionality -- have plummeted in the U.S., from a high of 18 million in 2009 to 7.5 million just three years later.

The main culprit is advances in technology. These days, a user of Apple (AAPL) iDevices, Nokia's (NOK) phones and tablets or basically anything that runs on Google's (GOOG) Android operating system has a built-in app or a wealth of navigation software to choose from. Navigation apps are also usually far cheaper than a dedicated piece of hardware.

Not only that, but during the same time, navigation functionality made its way into the systems of automobiles, and once that segment was penetrated, there was no chance of a U-turn. These days, dashboard navigation -- typically bundled with apps to control other activities -- is a popular option in many car models.

In Need of a Compass
That's been a damaging trend for the companies in the GPS/Navigation device business. One that leaps immediately to mind was once nearly synonymous with the technology: Garmin (GRMN).

Smartphone navigation apps are taking over the market, and
with near real-time communication systems like those built
into Waze, they offer more functionality than stand alone units.

Once upon a time, Garmin was an investor favorite, with its shares touching $123 apiece in September 2007. The good times didn't last. As the GPS market broadened and offerings became more plentiful and cheaper, Garmin got lost in the woods. In 2008, its stock bottomed out at less than $15 per share.

Since then, Garmin has made a bit of a comeback thanks to its continued involvement in specialty GPS segments. 

The company trades in the $50 range now. Most notably it's doing well in aviation, where it saw a 25 percent year-over-year gain in revenue this past Q4. It's also managed to capitalize on the trend for wearable fitness monitoring products, posting nice gains in that segment as well.

But neither is going to make Garmin a growth stock. In that quarter, aviation took in around $70 million and fitness a bit under $120 million, neither of which was a massive contributor to the firm's $760 million in total revenue.

Despite some share-price-boosting optimism lately -- not least because Citigroup (C) released a glowing analyst note on the company in March -- both top and bottom lines for the company in fiscal 2013 were down notably from 2009, Garmin's heyday.

Poor Tom
Netherlands-based TomTom (TMOAF) -- loosely speaking, the Garmin of Europe -- has struggled for the same reasons. In the salad days of the last decade, its Nasdaq-traded stock nearly touched $30 per share; these days, it can be had for less than $7. Like Garmin, TomTom has struggled to broaden its product range with popular offerings -- a line of GPS-packed sports watches the company launched last year, for example, brings in only a fraction of the company's total revenue.

In-dash navigation systems are becoming standard for many vehicles - especially since the requirement for backup cameras in vehicles will soon be mandatory.  While driving the display screens for the backup camera can be used for operator and entertainment menus, as well as navigation.

Speaking of revenue, the top lines from three of the company's four business units were down notably in fiscal 2013. Only its telematics division saw a significant year-over-year increase during the year, growing by 16 percent to 85 million euros ($118 million).

That's encouraging, but the division (essentially, TomTom's products for businesses) is the smallest out of the four, taking in less than 7 percent of total revenue in 2013.

Driven Away
In a sense, both Garmin and TomTom have fallen victim to a classic cycle in business. They stood atop a specialty market, and profited handsomely from their niche, but are now fighting to stay relevant now that their core offerings are essentially commodity goods.

These days, you can find GPS functionality built into your cellphone, tablet, and the dashboard of your car. Who needs a dedicated device anymore?

Colorado Likely First To Legislatively Authorize Ride-Share Services

As reported by the Denver Post: Colorado is set to become the first state in the country to legislatively authorize ride-sharing services offered by UberX and Lyft.

The Senate on Tuesday approved a House-amended version of Senate Bill 125 that closes the controversial insurance gap, sending the bill to Gov. John Hickenlooper's desk.

Hickenlooper's office has urged lawmakers to pass the much-debated measure because without it, Lyft and UberX would be forced to cease operations in the state, dealing a blow to Colorado's reputation as an innovation hub.

SB 125 officially would authorize the services and place Lyft, UberX and other so-called transportation network companies, or TNCs, under limited state regulation.

Lawmakers in Arizona, California and Illinois also have taken up the issue of regulating ride-share companies. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed her state's bill last week because of concerns about insurance coverage and lack of drug testing for drivers.

Ride-sharing drivers use their personal cars for fares and connect with passengers via smartphone apps. Fares generally are lower than taxi service. Taxi officials have argued the TNCs have an unfair advantage because they don't face the same regulations.

The final version of SB 125 requires car-sharing companies, or their drivers, to carry primary commercial insurance coverage for the period when a driver has logged into their Lyft or UberX app but hasn't been hailed. Insurers had threatened to raise rates if they were forced to cover that period with a driver's personal auto policy, arguing that the driver is engaged in commercial activity at that point.

"We were able to address that critical issue in making sure there were no gaps in coverage during the commercial activity, at least for liability coverage," said Kelly Campbell, a lobbyist with Property Casualty Insurers Association of America.

The bill allows TNCs to carry contingent coverage — which kicks in if a driver's personal policy doesn't cover damages — for the gap period until Jan. 15. At that time, the gap coverage has to be primary, either through the driver or the TNC.

SB 125 also requires TNCs to provide primary liability coverage between the time a fare has been hailed and the passenger has been dropped off.

"We look forward to Gov. Hickenlooper signing the bill to secure a future that will allow ride-sharing to grow and thrive in the state of Colorado for years to come," Lyft said in a statement.

Uber, the parent company of UberX, still has some concerns about certain regulatory controls the state will have over the ride-sharing service.

"All in all, it's a very good thing that this legislature cleared the way for TNCs to operate in Colorado," Uber attorney Greg Sopkin said.

Lyft launched service in Denver in September, with UberX following a few weeks later. Lyft has since expanded to Colorado Springs.

"We're the first in the nation to legislatively authorize this," Uber attorney Ray Gifford said. "That should be a point of pride for Colorado."