Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 199

Thread: Space Launch System (SLS)

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,939
    Quote Originally Posted by NEOWatcher View Post
    In short: Budgets, schedules and funding.

    Since theres still a chance that Orion may be on schedule, we could still see a launch in 2021.
    The current funding levels of SLS do not permit the EUS being completed by 2021 (let alone for EM-1). So; it's still up in the air if EUS can still be ready for EM-2 even if EM-2 is delayed.
    They have the budget and have now decided for Exploration Mission -2 (EM-2) they will use the more powerful Exploration Upper Stage,

    This report however says it is due to NASA being caught in a political tug-of-war.

    http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/...witch-eus-sls/

    NASA managers have placed a “stop work order” in relation to the human-rating of the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (lCPS) for the Space Launch System (SLS). The stage, which was set to ride with a crewed flight on Exploration Mission -2 (EM-2), will be replaced by the early addition of the more powerful Exploration Upper Stage, although NASA recently claimed the proposed FY 2017 funding cuts to SLS place its implementation schedule in doubt.
    Last edited by selvaarchi; 2016-Feb-20 at 12:33 AM.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,833
    SLS has both friends and foes in NASA--it really makes me mad. This is going to open up the path for landers and orbiters in the outer solar system where only fly-by missions were possible before.

    Here is a nice chart showing how it will look on the pad:
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...opic=31740.640

    First product of the massive vertical weld tool:
    http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/syst...ore-stage.html

    This shows how--even if we had true RLVs, the case for HLLVs remains strong: http://www.jbis.org.uk/paper.php?p=2003.56.369

    "Using a Heavy Lift Vehicle (HLV) with high specific launch costs but able to launch the system in one piece would lead to lower overall acquisition costs"

    From nasaspaceflight-

    The Augustine Committee considered propellant depots but for various reasons recommended the development of a super-heavy launch vehicle anyway. See section 5.2.1 of the report: http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/396093main_H...inalReport.pdf.

    From page 66 here:

    "The Committee finds that exploration would benefit from
    the development of a heavy-lift capability to enable voyages
    beyond low-Earth orbit"
    Last edited by publiusr; 2016-Feb-21 at 08:24 PM.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,833

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,939
    NASA is examining all options for SLS EM-2 mission. This includes if it should be after the Europa Clipper Mission.

    https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016...aths-sls-em-2/

    As NASA and its contracted partner agencies press forward toward the debut launch of the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket in 2018, the U.S. space agency is beginning to look toward preliminary planning and test objectives for the EM-2 mission of the SLS Program, which is expected to take place sometime in the opening half of the 2020 decade.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,939
    Engine Test Marks Major Milestone on NASA's Journey to Mars

    http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/En..._Mars_999.html

    NASA successfully tested the first deep space RS-25 rocket engine for 500 seconds March 10, clearing a major milestone toward the next great era of space exploration. The next time rocket engine No. 2059 fires for that length of time, it will be carrying humans on their first deep-space mission in more than 45 years.

    "What a great moment for NASA and Stennis," said Rick Gilbrech, director of NASA's Stennis Space Center in Bay St. Louis, Mississippi. "We have exciting days ahead with a return to deep space and a journey to Mars, and this test is a very big step in that direction."

    The hot fire marked the first test of an RS-25 flight engine for NASA's new Space Launch System (SLS), being built to carry humans on future deep-space missions, including an asteroid and Mars. Four RS-25 engines will help power the SLS core stage.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,387
    I should live that long.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,939
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    I should live that long.
    Do not despair yet. More optimistic news in the moon thread. SpaceX or China might beat SLS to carry humans on their first deep-space mission in more than 45 years.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,721
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    I should live that long.
    What, 500 seconds?

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,387
    LOL, No I was indicating 2023
    Hopefully the first manned mission, as I was in my early 20's when Apollo occurred.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,939
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    LOL, No I was indicating 2023
    Hopefully the first manned mission, as I was in my early 20's when Apollo occurred.
    Join the club We might be lucky as that is about the time we will have three parties that will have the technology to try a BEO flight. NASA, SpaceX and China. Four if Russia recovers from the financial mess it is in.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,833
    New art
    http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/rocket.html
    http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/fi...e_10202015.pdf

    Sad article on our space legacy:
    http://www.space.com/32251-abandoned...inspiring.html

    Abandon in Place.
    No Further Maintenance Authorized.
    Abandon. Turn away your face.
    No more the mad high wanderings of thought
    You once surmised. Let be!
    Wipe out the stars. Put out the skies."

    (Copyright 1981 by Ray Bradbury) -
    Last edited by publiusr; 2016-Mar-19 at 08:13 PM.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,833
    Some good news on the SLS front:
    http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/NA...stone_999.html

    SLS telescope file:///C:/Users/trall7/Downloads/SLS_Luvour_Study_WP.pdf
    file:///C:/Users/trall7/Downloads/SLS_Luvour_Study.pdf
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...641#msg1510641

    Europa Lander http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...668#msg1510668


    Be wary of nu Space
    http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/24/9...ce-enthusiasts

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,833
    A nice video of a simulated launch and an image of cables in the avionics ring
    http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/SL..._Mars_999.html
    http://www.space.com/32568-new-nasa-...nch-video.html

    The platform http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/...chan4large.jpg

    In terms of the use of SLS to launch telescopes--as in the link here: http://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/ATLAST/tech...2015_paper.pdf

    The single most massive item was the 22,000 kg solid meniscus Zerodur primary mirror.

    It provides a potentially more coronagraph-friendly point spread function (PSF) than a hexagonal segmented aperture The wavefront stability requirement is potentially more relaxed for an architecture with a central large segment surrounded by a single ring small petals, than for a hexagonal segmentation architecture with multiple rings of equal size segments. Unless there is an existing manufacturing facility to mass produce hexagonal
    segments (i.e. for TMT), it is potentially more cost effective to manufacture multiple copies of a single petal than 3 or more different hexagonal builds

    Having the large central core provides a simple descope path.


    A reason to support HLLVs (The author here is talking about LUVOIR):
    Our commitment to simplicity is based on the analysis of David Beardon. Beardon has shown that there is a direct correlation between mission payload complexity and total mission cost; and, between complexity and cost and schedule growth. Also, the greatest predictor of mission success is technology maturity. The reason for these relationships is because the only way to achieve increasingly demanding performance requirements in a mass and volume constrained launch vehicle is to design increasingly complex mission payload architectures. Consider for example how JWST’s cost was driven by the complexity needed to package a 6.5 meter telescope inside a 4.5 meter fairing with a 6500 kg mass capacity.

    The JWST Independent Comprehensive Review Panel found that JWST is “one of the most complex science missions carried out to date and therefore falls at the high end of the range, greater than 90%, on the complexity index. JWST is consistent with being “in family” for an LCC (life cycle cost) around $6 billion–$7 billion”. This cost versus complexity relationship is also evident in the NASA Advanced Mission Cost Model which is typically used to justify (possibly incorrectly) that mass is the dominant mission cost driver. A closer look at the model indicates that Difficulty Level may be a larger cost driver than mass.

    Given the available mass and volume capacity of the SLS, some subsystems may be able to use simpler more-mature (and more massive) technologies or higher design rule margins to eliminate complexity, lower risk and lower cost. By using mature technology, projects will save money on sub-system acquisition as well as engineering labor and management overhead. Because of program overhead, a savings of $500M in component cost might reduce total program cost by $1B to $2B. And, while potential cost savings from relaxing the mass constraint is difficult to quantify, anecdotal evidence suggests that early in a mass constrained mission, it may cost $100K of design effort to eliminate 1 kg of mass; while once the design is mature, it may cost as much as $1M to eliminate 1 kg of mass.

    http://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/ATLAST/tech...2015_paper.pdf

    Competition for BFR?

    Blue Origin/Bezos said they want to build LV's bigger than anything that has ever been built before. So a BE-5 could be a >F-1 thrust LOx/LCH4 engine possibly FFSC to keep the no. of 1st stage engines on their future BFR to a reasonable value. I don't think that Blue Origin wants to dev. an N-1 style vehicle and Bezos says that turbopumps and thrust chambers scale well to large sizes.
    http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...723#msg1518723

    Trajectory calcs
    http://www.sworld.com.au/steven/space/sls/

    SLS news:
    http://www.sworld.com.au/steven/space/sls/
    http://www.orbitalatk.com/news-room/...e.asp?prid=150
    https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016...ons-sls-orion/
    https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016...truction-letf/

    Habitats https://science.house.gov/legislatio...space-habitats
    Last edited by publiusr; 2016-May-20 at 09:17 PM.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,939
    A string of good news for SLS. After publiusr news above, NASA has committed to the first SLS/Orion launch -- Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1) -- in November 2018. Then the second flight, EM-2, will be the first to carry a crew. NASA committed to launching that mission in 2023, but says it is working towards an internal date of 2021.

    http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/new...or-2018-launch

    Orion program manager Kirasich is confident Orion will be ready for EM-1 in the fall of 2018 and for EM-2 in 2021. The Orion spacecraft for EM-1 is already at KSC and will be outfitted with a variety of systems over the next 18 months. Orion EM-1's service module is being provided by the European Space Agency (ESA) and a structural test article is half way through tests at NASA Glenn Research Center's Plum Brook facility in Ohio.

    ESA agreed to provide at least one Service Module as part of a barter arrangement it has with NASA over common operating costs for the International Space Station (ISS).

    SLS is also making good progress according to Honeycutt: "This is becoming real." Manufacturing and testing of the core stage are well underway at Marshall Space Flight Center in Hunstville, AL and at the Michoud Assembly Facility near New Orleans, LA as well as qualification tests for the Solid Rocket Boosters. Progress is also being made on the Interim Cyrogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) needed to send Orion around the Moon.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,387
    I hope the program goes forward without further revisions/cancellations from here.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,939
    NASA managers are closing in on a mission trajectory plan for the new Space Launch System (SLS) rocket that is set to debut in 2018. Mike Sarafin, NASA’s mission manager for the first Orion/Space Launch System (SLS) mission, recently provided an early look at an outline of launch events and a high-level status of the process of designing the trajectory for the maiden flight.

    https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016...e-uphill-em-1/

    Designated Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), the first-ever SLS launch will send an uncrewed, second-generation Orion spacecraft on a three-week flight to orbit the Moon and return.

    Both the SLS and the Orion vehicles are still in development, while the trajectory design is in a preliminary phase – as the launch vehicle and spacecraft plans continue to mature.

    “We’re in the initial design phase,” Mr. Sarafin noted in a recent interview with NASASpaceflight.com.

    “We have three design phases of the mission trajectory; we’re doing the preliminary mission [trajectory design] phase, then we have a ‘final’ analysis [but] it’s not the ‘final’, and then we have what’s called a ‘best-estimate’ trajectory, so we’re in that initial phase.”

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,387
    It will be good to see it fly.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,833

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,939
    SLS is on track for 1st mission in 2018

    http://spacenews.com/first-sls-missi...l-2018-launch/

    Agency officials, speaking at a meeting of the NASA Advisory Council’s human exploration and operations committee July 25 in Cleveland, said they were making good progress overall in the development of the various launch vehicle, spacecraft and ground systems components needed to support the launch of Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1).

    “We believe we can still make the launch window of between September and November of 2018, and we’re still working towards that,” Bill Hill, deputy associate administrator for exploration systems development, said at the meeting.

    One challenge for that schedule is the delayed delivery of the service module for the Orion spacecraft, which is being provided by the European Space Agency. While the service module recently completed its critical design review, there are still some technical issues being studied, Bill Gerstenmaier, NASA associate administrator for human exploration and operations, said at the meeting.

    “We had planned on getting the service module from the Europeans in January,” he said. “We will now get that service module more likely in April. We’re preparing for it to even be a little bit later than that.”

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,387
    With two years lead time I suspect that the mission will go in that time period. Seems likely to be sufficient to fix all the issues.

  21. #81
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,939
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    With two years lead time I suspect that the mission will go in that time period. Seems likely to be sufficient to fix all the issues.
    Maybe not, though they do have a buffer. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) put up some red flags. They were also red flags on the audit of the Orion cost and schedules.

    http://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/07/...ms/#more-58980

    NASA is facing challenges with its Space Launch System and the related Exploration Grounds Systems that could cause schedule delay and cost overruns, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said in a report (GAO-16-612) released on Wednesday.

    The SLS program has not positioned itself well to provide accurate assessments of core stage progress—including forecasting impending schedule delays, cost overruns, and anticipated costs at completion—because at the time of our review it did not anticipate having the baseline to support full reporting on the core stage contract until summer 2016—some 4.5 years after NASA awarded the contract.

    Further, unforeseen technical challenges are likely to arise once the program reaches its next phase, final integration for SLS and integration of SLS with its related Orion and Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) human spaceflight programs.

    The space agency is also facing challenges with the ground systems to support the SLS and its Orion capsule. NASA is aiming to launch the first test flight of the entire system by November 2018.

    Like SLS, the program has reduced cost and schedule reserves, which threatens its committed November 2018 launch readiness goal,” the report stated. “Modifications to two main components—the Vehicle Assembly Building, where the SLS is assembled, and the Mobile Launcher, the vehicle used to bring SLS to the launch pad—have already cost more and taken longer than expected as has development of EGS software.”

    http://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/07/...ates-reliable/

    A new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report (GAO-16-620) says that NASA has used bad on estimating the cost and schedule for its Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, leaving the program open to budget overruns and cost delays.

    “GAO found that the Orion program’s cost and schedule estimates are not reliable based on best practices for producing high-quality estimates,” the report stated. “Cost and schedule estimates play an important role in addressing technical risks.”
    Last edited by selvaarchi; 2016-Jul-28 at 11:17 AM.

  22. #82
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,387
    Cost overruns, of course, the governmental agencies have never been able to function within budgets. History has painted that sore subject. I hope that we don't have project delays, but we shall see what we'll see.

  23. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Klang, Malaysia
    Posts
    7,939
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    Cost overruns, of course, the governmental agencies have never been able to function within budgets. History has painted that sore subject. I hope that we don't have project delays, but we shall see what we'll see.
    I hope that is all, but they do warn on both reports on schedule.

  24. #84
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,833
    You can get problems with any project. I'm sure folks who hate on SLS will wave this around like a bloody flag. If Falcon Heavy were to pitch over: "Well, it's a set back--but we'll keep trying."
    That's newspace religion. Forgive us if we fall--but if you stumble even a step--we'll fall on you tooth and fang.

  25. #85
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    6,269
    I've definitely heard some criticisms about the SLS. Still wondering why solid rocket boosters were chosen.
    My travel blog Mostly about riding a motorcycle across the US and Europe. Also has cool things that happen in between.

  26. #86
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,387
    Quote Originally Posted by crosscountry View Post
    I've definitely heard some criticisms about the SLS. Still wondering why solid rocket boosters were chosen.
    More thrust to weight, I suspect, but then I'm not on the development team.

  27. #87
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    More thrust to weight, I suspect, but then I'm not on the development team.
    And a great deal of political support...those contracts go to big defense contractors who make rocket motors for ICBMs. SLS is designed to keep pork flowing to the same industrial complex that the Shuttle fed.

  28. #88
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    470
    Quote Originally Posted by crosscountry View Post
    I've definitely heard some criticisms about the SLS. Still wondering why solid rocket boosters were chosen.
    Politics. Plain and simple. Gotta keep those jobs and money flowing.
    What does God need with a starship?

  29. #89
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,833
    That's better than putting good folks out of work. Besides Congress listened to folks like Griffin who pushed for Shuttle-derived HLVs for years. Now it finally looks to fly

    Interesting look at the solids
    http://www.space.com/33666-deep-look...est-video.html

    SLS even made it to Comic-Con
    http://beyondearth.com/fact-meets-fi...-at-comic-con/

    At Space Camp http://beyondearth.com/mission-to-ma...at-space-camp/

    Look at the scale:
    http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/syst...t-article.html
    https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/n...case-on-aug-18

    I'm stocked about getting a little of that Saturn mojo back myself.
    Last edited by publiusr; 2016-Aug-06 at 04:44 PM.

  30. #90
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    49,783
    From spaceflightnow.com

    A major booster test for NASA’s Space Launch System in June doubled as a demonstration of a new high dynamic range video recorder that captured unprecedented imagery of the rocket firing, revealing hidden details normally masked by the motor’s bright-hot exhaust.

    Developed by engineers at NASA’s Stennis Space Center in Mississippi, the high-tech camera is able to record multiple slow motion exposures at once. Conventional cameras can only record in one exposure, and that is a problem when trying to document very bright events like a rocket test.

    The High Dynamic Range Stereo X, or HiDyRS-X, camera attempts to fix the problem. Imagery from the new recording system perfectly exposes everything within its field-of-view, showing the rocket motor’s supersonic exhaust plume while still keeping other parts of the image visible.
    The video is pretty amazing, you really have to see it (at link). It doesn't look real.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •