Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

  collectSPACE: Messages
  Exploration: Moon to Mars
  [Discuss] Space Launch System (SLS) (Page 2)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   [Discuss] Space Launch System (SLS)
Fra Mauro
Member

Posts: 1739
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 07-30-2018 12:42 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fra Mauro   Click Here to Email Fra Mauro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Will there be any test firings of the liquid stages of the SLS before the actual launch?

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 07-30-2018 01:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
A "green run" test slated for 2019 will fire the entire SLS EM-1 core stage with its four RS-25 engines on the B-2 test stand at Stennis Space Center.

The Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) is already at the Cape awaiting launch. It is directly based on the Delta Cryogenic Second Stage, which has a long flight history.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 10-10-2018 07:41 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The Office of Inspector General assessed NASA's management of the Boeing contract developing the Space Launch System's core stages and Exploration Upper Stage, key parts of the new heavy-lift rocket.

oly
Member

Posts: 1450
From: Perth, Western Australia
Registered: Apr 2015

posted 10-10-2018 09:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for oly   Click Here to Email oly     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Okay, this is only my opinion, for what it may be worth.

It seems lessons learnt during previous systems developments do not get picked up by follow up programs. The logistics of the SLS is by no means something new to NASA or many contractors, and Boeing have vast experience with large scale complexed programs.

The SLS basic design is nothing revolutionary or something never tried before, the tank designs, thrust structure, engines and thermal protection designs are all evolution or carry over items.

Based on this, it seems strange NASA, with ongoing budget constraints, allow contracts to overrun like this without A) knowing about it, B) having some control over it, C) wanting to get best value for money return.

This is the reason commercial programs were pushed by governments, to get better value for their dollar (your dollar), and yet overruns and delays have no perceivable penalty, other than some bad press for a while. If the previous generation successfully achieved the goal of putting a man on the moon by the end of the decade, putting a launch vehicle into service, using legacy items, within a budget and timeframe surely must be within some achievable realm.

There should be some kind of penalty for failure to meet milestones, and a failure to deliver. Perhaps if a failure to deliver resulted in a requirement for the next 3 launch vehicles to be delivered at no cost to government, tighter control of the programs would be undertaken at earlier stages.

There must be a point in time when somebody considers looking at the Orion spacecraft being mated to a Falcon Heavy or another launch vehicle so that the Orion program can continue forward and let SLS fortunes be self fulfilling. That way, if Boeing have confidence in the SLS, they will find a way to bring it online, and the Orion program becomes stand alone as well. This also does what the commercial space partnership idea originally intended, by giving players capable of achieving what is required a chance.

If Blue Origin or someone else can take on the launch requirements that SLS spruiked, this may be the nail in the coffin SLS detractors have been seeking.

I hope SLS becomes a reality, if only so that the past few years have not been in vain. I myself have failed to find an enthusiasm for SLS because it always seemed to be going backward from the direction a NASA driven program should, I believe, be done. NASA driven programs should be cutting edge, ingenious ideas to achieve goals. SLS seemed to be a means to an end or a way of keeping someone busy until a better idea comes along. Taking the left over items from a 30 year old program, reinventing the wheel to build a heavy lift rocket, trashing assets in the ocean while researching environmental and climate science, at the cost of billions in development dollars, without the expectation that some new and exciting innovation will come out of it seems like madness on a drug fueled rampage. I have sometimes wondered how the discussions of such ideas play out.

If it fails, I at least hope the SSME units assigned to SLS find a better purpose. There must be a long list of people who could use just some of the money SLS needs to be completed for an idea or program within the aerospace or space arena that have been previously rejected due to lack of funds, or a former space shuttle program employee that now feel slightly more annoyed.

Fra Mauro
Member

Posts: 1739
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 03-24-2019 09:59 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fra Mauro   Click Here to Email Fra Mauro     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If anyone has been following the testimony of the NASA Administrator, for a variety of reasons, the SLS program, seems to be a mess. It makes one wonder if it's a waste of money and time.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 03-24-2019 11:15 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Although he has acknowledged problems with the program, Jim Bridenstine has also stressed the importance of the Space Launch System. Just 10 days ago, he said:
SLS and Orion are a critical capability for this country, and it's in our national interest to continue those.
If you look back at comments made about the Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft circa 1966-1967, you'll find similar sentiments to your own about SLS. To quote Wayne Hale (via Twitter):
When asked if existing smaller rockets could be used for moon landing rather than the costly and delayed Saturns, Wernher von Braun replied: "It would be like flying the Berlin airlift with Piper Cubs. You can't say it couldn't be done but the logistics are overwhelming."

So just to be clear, I think you need a big rocket to have a credible deep space program.

Headshot
Member

Posts: 1221
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 10-21-2019 10:25 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Headshot   Click Here to Email Headshot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
From this NASA release:
The full contract is expected to support up to 10 core stages and up to eight Exploration Upper Stages (EUS).
Ten SLS core stages will require 40 RS-25 engines? Sooner or later the supply of modified shuttle engines will be depleted. Would procuring the remainder be a separate contract?

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 10-21-2019 01:32 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
NASA signed a contract with Aerojet Rocketdyne in 2015 that runs through 2024 to restart production of the RS-25 and modernize it "to make it more affordable and expendable."

That contract included the initial production of six more engines, which when combined with the SSME-legacy engines and two engines built up from spare parts, is enough to fly the first six missions.

SpaceAholic
Member

Posts: 5246
From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 10-31-2020 09:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for SpaceAholic   Click Here to Email SpaceAholic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
As NASA moves toward the SLS's first flight, putting the Orion spacecraft in orbit around the moon, officials are concerned about the software that will control everything the rocket does, from setting its trajectory to opening individual valves to open and close.
At an ASAP meeting last month, Paul Hill, a member of the panel and a former flight and mission operations director at the agency, said the "panel has great concern about the end-to-end integrated test capability and plans, especially for flight software."

Instead of one comprehensive avionics and software test to mimic flight, he said, there is "instead multiple and separate labs; emulators and simulations are being used to test subsets of the software."

... NASA pushed back on the safety panel's findings, saying in a statement that "all software, hardware, and combination for every phase of the Artemis I mission is thoroughly tested and evaluated to ensure that it meets NASA's strict safety requirements and is fully qualified for human spaceflight."

The agency and its contractors are "conducting integrated end-to-end testing for the software, hardware, avionics and integrated systems needed to fly Artemis missions," it said.

oly
Member

Posts: 1450
From: Perth, Western Australia
Registered: Apr 2015

posted 11-01-2020 07:17 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for oly   Click Here to Email oly     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Perhaps it would be prudent for the SLS team to reflect upon the Boeing CST-100 OFT that is still so fresh in peoples memories.

DavidH
Member

Posts: 1271
From: Huntsville, AL, USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted 11-02-2020 06:29 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for DavidH   Click Here to Email DavidH     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Certainly the Boeing Starliner issues were the reason that comment got broader media attention; unfortunately, it's left to niche space media to report the facts. NASA Spaceflight, one of the better sites for in-depth SLS coverage, has a good article about integrated, end-to-end SLS software testing if you're interested.

oly
Member

Posts: 1450
From: Perth, Western Australia
Registered: Apr 2015

posted 11-02-2020 07:19 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for oly   Click Here to Email oly     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thanks for the link, an interesting read.

I understand that NASA plays an oversight role to its contractors and provides a lot of technical support and advice. Lessons discovered from Boeing's CST-100 OFT highlighted issues regarding not conducting end to end testing, and while systems integration testing using emulators is an accepted process, plugging the thing in and running all up tests are an important tool. NASA can't afford to oversee another contractor's launch of unreliable hardware.

My comment was intended to read that both NASA and the SLS program management cannot afford to let messages regarding any doubt about the integrity of the SLS engineering safety or reliability gain traction and that it would be wise to nip any doubt in the bud, the program has a lot of credibility bet on the success of the system, and the drawn-out and limited flight schedule can't slip behind without either failing to meet the boots on the moon planned date or the future Mars missions.

While I may not personally be a fan of the SLS design, having all the eggs in one basket with the SLS means that any potential reliability or flight safety doubts could see an end to the whole program before it gets off the ground given that a lot of economic shift has occurred between now and when the current administration directed a return to the moon by 2024, and it would be sad to see the only deep space transportation ride in town lose support and funding because doubt gained momentum or faith were lost. Allowing doubt to fester could be catastrophic for the program.


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

All times are CT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts

Copyright 2023 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement