Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

  collectSPACE: Messages
  Exploration: Asteroids, Moon and Mars
  [Discuss] NASA's Artemis-1 mission (Orion) (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] NASA's Artemis-1 mission (Orion)
Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 45285
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 05-13-2020 12:40 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The Artemis 1 mission plan, as it exists today, from the NASA Advisory Committee Human Exploration and Operations (HEO) meeting on Wednesday (May 13).

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 45285
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 06-11-2020 01:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
NASA photo release
The two solid rocket boosters that will power NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) for Artemis missions to the Moon are on their way to the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida after departing from a Northrop Grumman manufacturing facility in Promontory, Utah, on June 5, 2020.

The boosters – each comprised of five motor segments – are scheduled to arrive at Kennedy’s Rotation, Processing and Surge Facility, where teams with NASA’s Exploration Ground Systems will process the segments before moving them to the Vehicle Assembly Building for stacking on the mobile launcher.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 45285
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-27-2020 12:56 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
An update on the Artemis-1 readiness from Kathy Lueders, NASA's head of human exploration and operations:
Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, NASA also completed a detailed cost and schedule assessment for Artemis I and established a new agency commitment for launch readiness by November 2021. While it is too early to predict the full impact of COVID-19, we are confident a November 2021 date is achievable with the recent pace of progress, and a successful Green Run hot fire test will enable us to better predict a target launch date for the mission.

Taking this new launch readiness date into account, NASA also aligned the development costs for the SLS and Exploration Ground Systems programs through Artemis I and established new cost commitments. The new development baseline cost for SLS is $9.1 billion, and the commitment for the initial ground systems capability to support the mission is now $2.4 billion. NASA’s cost and schedule commitment for Orion currently remains within original targets and is tied to demonstrating the capability to fly crew on the Artemis II mission by 2023.

NASA has notified Congress of these new commitments, and we are working at the best possible pace toward launch, including streamlining operational flow at Kennedy and assessing opportunities to further improve the efficiency of our integration activities. Now that the majority of the design development is done, as well as the first time build and an extensive test program, a lot of effort is behind us.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 45285
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 11-30-2020 11:04 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The discovery of a failed redundant channel in one of the eight power and data units (PDU) on the Artemis 1 Orion's crew module adapter may result in a time-consuming removal and replacement, according to Loren Grush reporting for The Verge.
To get to the PDU, Lockheed Martin could remove the Orion crew capsule from its service module, but it’s a lengthy process that could take up to a year. As many as nine months would be needed to take the vehicle apart and put it back together again, in addition to three months for subsequent testing, according to the presentation.

Lockheed has another option, but it’s never been done before and may carry extra risks, Lockheed Martin engineers acknowledge in their presentation. To do it, engineers would have to tunnel through the adapter’s exterior by removing some of the outer panels of the adapter to get to the PDU. The panels weren’t designed to be removed this way, but this scenario may only take up to four months to complete if engineers figure out a way to do it.

A third option is that Lockheed Martin and NASA could fly the Orion capsule as is. The PDU failed in such a way that it lost redundancy within the unit, so it can still function. But at a risk-averse agency like NASA, flying a vehicle without a backup plan is not exactly an attractive option.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 45285
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 12-17-2020 08:25 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
NASA has decided to fly with the PDU as is:
During their troubleshooting, engineers evaluated the option to "use as is" with the high-degree of available redundancy or remove and replace the box.

They determined that due to the limited accessibility to this particular box, the degree of intrusiveness to the overall spacecraft systems, and other factors, the risk of collateral damage outweighed the risk associated with the loss of one leg of redundancy in a highly redundant system. Therefore, NASA has made the decision to proceed with vehicle processing.

Headshot
Member

Posts: 962
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 12-17-2020 10:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Headshot   Click Here to Email Headshot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I guess I have to ask the question, "Would NASA fly Orion in this condition if it were a manned mission?"

Any thoughts?

Blackarrow
Member

Posts: 3241
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 12-19-2020 11:47 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Blackarrow     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
There's a rather fundamental difference between "loss of vehicle" and "loss of vehicle and crew." The vehicle is replaceable, the crew is not.

It also occurs to me that in what seems to be the unlikely event of a fault developing, there would be useful engineering lessons to be learned from observing how well the built-in redundancies operate (and if they do not operate properly, other lessons will be learned!).


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 2020 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement