SLS - On the Scent of Inevitable Capitulation

[Nikxice]

Yup!

Eric Berger spells it all out here: New White House budget spells trouble for NASA’s SLS rocket
$700 million is a big chunk of change to save. On one single mission.

Boeing is currently taking plenty of heat for the 737 Max 8 turmoil, this proposed budget reduction for SLS must feel like a double whammy.

Yep, fascinating new clues from Bridenstine on the future of SLS.

But Senator Shelby literally has the final say on this and he is certain to “plus it up”! He’s openly shameless about it.

The almighty Shelby is certainly powerful, but not immortal. If he even makes it to 2022 he'll be 88 and up for reelection.

 

[ecarfan]

So $3.4B is a 17% reduction... Wow.

A billion here, a billion there, it does add up...to a single SLS first stage which ends up in the ocean. Brilliant.

 

[Lozza12]

A billion here, a billion there, it does add up...to a single SLS first stage which ends up in the ocean. Brilliant.

Or you could lay them end to end and help build the Wall? That’s where the funding is going isn’t it?

 

[Cosmacelf]

Boeing is currently taking plenty of heat for the 737 Max 8 turmoil, this proposed budget reduction for SLS must feel like a double whammy.

As they should be feeling the heat. At this point, it looks like a simple, single sensor failure makes an automated safety system put the plane into a nosedive.

 

[Uncle Paul]

Boeing is a fantastic company. They have elaborate systems to evaluate failures and proceedures to correct them.

Once they determine the fault they will do what ever is necessary to resolve the issue.

Most every company has failures. The fact that for airplanes the failures can result in the tremendous loss of human life.

Trump has a good idea that modern planes are way too complex, and lives are at risk. Perhaps simpler designs might be the way of the future.

 

[ecarfan]

Trump has a good idea that modern planes are way too complex, and lives are at risk.

The concept that he has anything useful to contribute on the topic of aerospace engineering is beyond absurd. The depths of that man’s ignorance, in virtually every subject, are unfathomable.

Let’s get back on topic: the impending demise of SLS. I think Bridenstine is doing everything he can to deprive SLS of a reason for construction to continue, but he knows he can’t single-handedly defund it. So he is chipping away, bit by bit...shifting the Europa Clipper to a Falcon Heavy would be smart, and given the enormous savings, likely unstoppable once the plan is set in motion.

 

[bxr140]

Trump has a good idea that modern planes are way too complex, and lives are at risk. Perhaps simpler designs might be the way of the future.

Simpler aircraft designs will kill more people. Period.

Modern politics has conditioned us to conflate fact and feeling; modern pundits have conditioned us to believe what we want and not what is.

Sure, it feels like planes are dangerous, because any non-nominal event makes its way to the top of our news feeds, and folks who care more about ratings and controversy than facts and discourse (like POTUS) are happy to stir the pot.

Reality is that, even with recent tragedies, flying has become significantly safer over the past decades of air travel. And that's not just from 50 years ago, when we were statistically ~50 times more likely to die in an aircraft accident. Compared to 2017 we were 4-5 times more likely to die just ten years prior in an aircraft accident. That's not the ancient past when we used pagers and corded phones--that's like when we got the first iPhone.

Of course mistakes were made, of course shortcuts were taken, of course 'better' is always an option. These are not a blameless events to be forgotten with a cavalier hand wave of 'that's progress'. But they should not be used to justify putting more people in harms way because we can't separate fact from feeling.

 

[Grendal]

Let’s get back on topic: the impending demise of SLS. I think Bridenstine is doing everything he can to deprive SLS of a reason for construction to continue, but he knows he can’t single-handedly defund it. So he is chipping away, bit by bit...shifting the Europa Clipper to a Falcon Heavy would be smart, and given the enormous savings, likely unstoppable once the plan is set in motion.

I agree about Bridenstine. I'm liking him more and more. While he is chipping away at the old school projects, it does come down to Congress funding these things. I'm pretty sure that even last year there was something similar happening in the budget and Congress rearranged the money and refunded SLS with extra money. So let's hope this goes through.

 

[Grendal]

Eric Berger of Ars Technica has a lot going on about SLS in his twitter feed. It's interesting stuff. Here is a taste:

Here is what is absolutely stunning. In two days NASA and White House officials have acknowledged the agency does not need SLS for: Lunar Gateway Assembly
Science missions
Crew missions to lunar orbit

Folks, that's everything SLS was going to do for the next 15 years, at least.

Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) | Twitter

 

[Grendal]

Scott Manley pipes in and lays it all out:

 

[ecarfan]

Yep, Bridenstine continues to pound nails into SLS’s coffin, see NASA to consider use of private rockets for first Orion lunar mission

Quote from him: "SLS is struggling to meet its schedule," he said. "We are now understanding better how difficult this project is, and it’s going to take some additional time. I want to be really clear. I think we as an agency need to stick to our commitment. If we tell you, and others, that we’re going to launch in June of 2020 around the Moon, I think we should launch around the Moon in June of 2020. And I think it can be done. We should consider, as an agency, all options to accomplish that objective.”

And the options are Falcon Heavy or the ULA Delta IV Heavy. Guess which one is half the cost of the other..

 

[bxr140]

Folks, that's everything SLS was going to do for the next 15 years, at least.

Perhaps NASA is actually getting close to turning the corner on reality. I know it's easy to get distracted by the big shiny thing that gets all the attention (the launch), but IMHO NASA is much better off focusing on science and unique missions and leaving the 'boring' part (the launch) to the low cost commercial companies.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Perhaps NASA is actually getting close to turning the corner on reality. I know it's easy to get distracted by the big shiny thing that gets all the attention (the launch), but IMHO NASA is much better off focusing on science and unique missions and leaving the 'boring' part (the launch) to the low cost commercial companies.

What’s changed is SpaceX. Cheaper, better and reliable. 2018 was indeed a pivotal year. Let’s keep our fingers crossed that Congress doesn’t muck it up.

 

[e-FTW]

Yep, Bridenstine continues to pound nails into SLS’s coffin, see NASA to consider use of private rockets for first Orion lunar mission

Quote from him: "SLS is struggling to meet its schedule," he said. "We are now understanding better how difficult this project is, and it’s going to take some additional time. I want to be really clear. I think we as an agency need to stick to our commitment. If we tell you, and others, that we’re going to launch in June of 2020 around the Moon, I think we should launch around the Moon in June of 2020. And I think it can be done. We should consider, as an agency, all options to accomplish that objective.”

And the options are Falcon Heavy or the ULA Delta IV Heavy. Guess which one is half the cost of the other..

Yes, definitely “shots fired”.

 

[ecarfan]

 

[e-FTW]

View attachment 386119

That was funny. Cloak and dagger, with a non-existent cloak! Ha!

Looking at payload numbers to LEO, Falcon Heavy is about twice as capable as Delta IV Heavy. And it has about 2/3rd of the SLS Block 1’s capability.

I say this because moving off of SLS seems to require a convoluted approach:

The mission would work something like this. A heavy-lift rocket would launch Orion and its service module into low-Earth orbit. Another rocket would launch a fully fueled upper stage into orbit, which would then dock with Orion. This upper stage would provide the propulsion needed to push Orion out of low Earth orbit and inject it into lunar orbit.

I don’t understand why that would be required, since they were thinking of doing Orion in one shot on SLS, while at the same time co-manifesting Lunar Gateway modules.

 

[e-FTW]

I don’t understand why that would be required, since they were thinking of doing Orion in one shot on SLS, while at the same time co-manifesting Lunar Gateway modules.

Fairing size maybe? Or is an Orion+Fueled upperstage really beyond Heavy’s payload capability?

 

[RDoc]

Doesn't the FH have too small a fairing for a lot of NASA missions such as Europa Clipper?

 

[e-FTW]

Doesn't the FH have too small a fairing for a lot of NASA missions such as Europa Clipper?

Yeah, might be the case.

Thankfully, Orion does not need an enclosed fairing.

 

[Yggdrasill]

If Orion were to be sent up with crew, that would mean crew-rating the Falcon Heavy. Not sure if this is where SpaceX would like to direct their energy.

Though they could just launch Orion without crew on Falcon Heavy, then launch a Dragon 2 with crew and supplies. Seems a bit silly to launch two crew return vehicles for one crew, though... Maybe Dragon 2 could proceed to ISS after unloading crew, and act as a life boat.