SLS - On the Scent of Inevitable Capitulation

[Bobfitz1]

Now, the vast majority of the general public has little to no interest in exploring space.

I was inclined to agree with you they don't, but I figured there must be some polling of public as to percentage that do support space exploration. I was pleasantly surprised by a very recent Pew survey on the question.

Majority of Americans Believe Space Exploration Remains Essential

"Roughly seven-in-ten Americans (72%) say it is essential for the U.S. to continue to be a world leader in space exploration, and eight-in-ten (80%) say the space station has been a good investment for the country, according to a new Pew Research Center survey conducted March 27-April 9, 2018."

The findings don't suggest seven-in-ten support it passionately. But likely would actively support new plans if they made sense and were presented (again) as a bold challenge to achieve what is now possible.

Farther into the article it reports that there is currently much less support for the most ambitious space exploration undertakings. Hopefully that will improve as SpaceX makes even more amazing progress with exciting hardware and missions.

"However, compared with other NASA programs, fewer Americans say such space exploration should be a top priority. Just 18% and 13%, respectively, say that sending astronauts to Mars or back to the moon should be a top priority; 37% and 44%, respectively, express the view that these missions are not too important or that NASA shouldn’t undertake these missions."

 

[Nikxice]

From that article, a statement by Alabama Rep. Alderholt, quote: “Can you talk about the importance of our national space programs, such as the capabilities, the supplier base, the innovation of SLS, the Orion benefit on a broad range of aerospace industry users?"

LOL! Nice pickup. Conveniently buried in all the noise inside Rep. Aderholt's long self-serving question.

I'm starting to feel some empathy for Jim Bridenstine. He's being pulled in all directions, all while being asked to expeditiously fulfill lofty goals on a shrinking budget. Pence meanwhile is living in a fantasy world. Apparently there's been no money designated or even an accepted design concept for SLS/lunar lander. Tuesday Pence made a fool of himself again by inferring Bridensteiner (yep, he actually called him that) had told him 5 minutes earlier that NASA had a plan to return to the surface of the moon and that it would be accomplished in 5 years. Who knows, maybe Pence's head just got stuck on the number 5.

 

[ecarfan]

"Roughly seven-in-ten Americans (72%) say it is essential for the U.S. to continue to be a world leader in space exploration, and eight-in-ten (80%) say the space station has been a good investment for the country, according to a new Pew Research Center survey conducted March 27-April 9, 2018."

Americans are happy to say that their country should be the best at...whatever. Then try rephrasing the question to say something like “Should X Federal dollars be spent to achieve objective Y?” and their opinion will change.

However, compared with other NASA programs, fewer Americans say such space exploration should be a top priority. Just 18% and 13%, respectively, say that sending astronauts to Mars or back to the moon should be a top priority; 37% and 44%, respectively, express the view that these missions are not too important or that NASA shouldn’t undertake these missions."

And that supports my point; only a small fraction of all Americans believe in and understand the importance of expanding our horizons and making human life multiplanetary.

I talk to people I know about SpaceX all the time. The majority of the time the reaction is either no interest or an outright rejection of the goal of SpaceX. Apparently I am not a very persuasive speaker...

 

[Mike1080i]

I talk to people I know about SpaceX all the time. The majority of the time the reaction is either no interest or an outright rejection of the goal of SpaceX. Apparently I am not a very persuasive speaker...

Sounds familiar, I get the same reactions from most people when space comes up.

 

[e-FTW]

But Bezos has his own money, and Elon is pretty good at figuring out where to find money since he doesn’t have Jeff’s deep pockets.

I think you just called Elon poor.

 

[Nikxice]

Here's a good read that reflects on the 2024 space news announcement from earlier this week. While the Orion capsule is apparently in good shape, the issues surrounding SLS development are glaring. The article contrasts Pence's push the envelope "Make no mistake about it, we are in a space race today," moon landing rhetoric to the reality of what NASA's plan was going out to 2028.
US boots on the Moon in 2024? It won't be easy

 

[ecarfan]

The article contrasts Pence's push the envelope "Make no mistake about it, we are in a space race today," moon landing rhetoric to the reality of what NASA's plan was going out to 2028.
US boots on the Moon in 2024? It won't be easy

From the article, quote:

“Just a few weeks ago, NASA chief Jim Bridenstine said the United States was not in any space race.
But he was forced to change his tune when Vice President Mike Pence said NASA needed to put astronauts back on the Moon in 2024 "by any means necessary."
"Make no mistake about it, we are in a space race today," Pence said.
————————————————————————————-
​

More meaningless talk from Pence, an empty suit if there ever was one. Exactly what “race” are we in, who are we racing against, and for what purpose?

I think that we are racing against an arbitrary 2024 timeline picked because, quote:

“The reality of Pence's announcement is that 2024 is politically significant: it would be the final year in Trump's eventual second term at the White House.”
——————————————————————————————-​

And then more silliness from someone named Greg Autry, the “vice president for space development at the independent National Space Society”...who was a member of Trump's presidential transition team. Quote:

“So why has a return to the Moon taken so long -- after all, Neil Armstrong made his legendary "giant leap for mankind" 50 years ago.
Autry says NASA wants to be "100,000 percent sure this will be safe."
———————————————————————————-​

This person has a glaringly inadequate concept of statistical probability, and apparently doesn’t understand that nothing is 100% safe, especially space travel. Nor does it have to be; every day people risk their lives traveling by plane, train, and automobile. Some people die, more are injured. But we take the risk because it’s worth the risk.

 

[Cosmacelf]

What I see is NASA being pressured by the White House to not let SLS delays get in the way of space programs. Of course Congress runs NASA’s purse strings, but they don’t give a hoot about any accomplishments (since when did anyone thank Congress for anything). The executive DOES care about accomplishments since they would get the credit, so while Pence doesn’t directly control funding, he can persuade NASA to actually accomplish something, SLS be damned.

 

[Grendal]

What I see is NASA being pressured by the White House to not let SLS delays get in the way of space programs. Of course Congress runs NASA’s purse strings, but they don’t give a hoot about any accomplishments (since when did anyone thank Congress for anything). The executive DOES care about accomplishments since they would get the credit, so while Pence doesn’t directly control funding, he can persuade NASA to actually accomplish something, SLS be damned.

Which I agree is good for what it is worth. At the very least, it got Bridenstine to say on record that NASA would go to commercial launch providers if the government contractors didn't get their act together. This statement could be used in the future to force Congress to submit to political pressure when it becomes glaringly obvious that SLS and other government jobs programs are a vast waste of taxpayer money when Starship and Super Heavy can achieve everything SLS can do and more for pennies on the NASA dollar.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Which I agree is good for what it is worth. At the very least, it got Bridenstine to say on record that NASA would go to commercial launch providers if the government contractors didn't get their act together. This statement could be used in the future to force Congress to submit to political pressure when it becomes glaringly obvious that SLS and other government jobs programs are a vast waste of taxpayer money when Starship and Super Heavy can achieve everything SLS can do and more for pennies on the NASA dollar.

Exactly. I'm seeing the White House set up a situation where it can bully Congress away from SLS. Whether or not that will happen, of course, depends on a lot of things. At the very least, SLS contractors and SpaceX are very much in a space race with each other now. This is a good thing.

 

[ecarfan]

I'm seeing the White House set up a situation where it can bully Congress away from SLS.

I see the White House may be attempting to do that. I put the odds of the success of that approach at close to zero.

 

[Cosmacelf]

I see the White House may be attempting to do that. I put the odds of the success of that approach at close to zero.

It depends in large part on what SpaceX and the SLS contractors do in the next 4 years

 

[e-FTW]

Loren Grush on Twitter
Looks like SLS keeps EM-1, too complicated to do with other rockets.

 

[e-FTW]

But Bridenstine did openly discuss the possibility of flying crew on private rockets (ULA or SpaceX): NASA chief says a Falcon Heavy rocket could fly humans to the Moon

Very few details, like say any plan for human-rating Falcon Heavy? Tiny detail right?

 

[ecarfan]

Very few details, like say any plan for human-rating Falcon Heavy? Tiny detail right?

Well, Bridenstine is sort of publicly speculating, to a rather remarkable degree, on using an FH to get humans on the Moon. There would be a lot of issues, large and small, to work out. However, I suspect it is feasible. It would require multiple test flights, but since the FH doesn’t throw boosters away, that’s the easy part. And NASA used to fly humans to space on a “flight proven” vehicle called the Space Shuttle.

 

[Nikxice]

Bridenstine shows he has a good grasp of several options in this 7 minute video clip from NASA's town hall on Monday. He is clearly taking the 2024 moon landing directive very seriously, be damned all the delays and excuses for SLS. He optimistically notes there is time to work out the issues for a stack consisting of Falcon Heavy / UAL built Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage / European Service Module / Orion capsule. No mention of how a potential lunar lander would fit into the equation.

 

[ecarfan]

He optimistically notes there is time to work out the issues for a stack consisting of Falcon Heavy / UAL built Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage / European Service Module / Orion capsule. No mention of how a potential lunar lander would fit into the equation.

As far as I know the lunar lander does not exist even in prototype form

Bridenstine’s “optimism” is unfounded, in my opinion. Can you imagine how long it would take ULA to construct that “interim” stage and test it? It would likely be faster and cheaper to give SpaceX the money to design a new FH second stage with the necessary capability.

But of course that won’t happen because to get the necessary political support you need to include ULA in the stack.

I doubt what Bridenstine is talking about will ever happen.

 

[e-FTW]

As far as I know the lunar lander does not exist even in prototype form

Bridenstine’s “optimism” is unfounded, in my opinion. Can you imagine how long it would take ULA to construct that “interim” stage and test it? It would likely be faster and cheaper to give SpaceX the money to design a new FH second stage with the necessary capability.

But of course that won’t happen because to get the necessary political support you need to include ULA in the stack.

I doubt what Bridenstine is talking about will ever happen.

I will give him this: he knows his stuff much more than I expected of a nominated administrator. And they clearly had folks work on these scenarios for those two weeks, it was not just talk.

 

[ecarfan]

Eric Berger provides a helpful analysis of what might possibly just maybe but probably not happen after Bridenstine latest statements and Pence’s purely politically determined 2024 objective to put humans on the Moon. See Here’s why NASA’s audacious return to the Moon just might work

Reading that article, all I can do is laugh. SLS has cost $14 billion (so far), was supposed to launch 3 years ago, won’t launch for at least two years, and costs $2 billion per launch. None of the components of the Lunar Gateway exist yet, nor does the lunar ascent, transfer, or descent vehicles and all the other parts needed. The idea of grafting a different second stage onto an FH first stage seems wildly implausible in the timeframe required. NASA’s budget will need to be increased by billions of dollars a year to pay for all that lunar-related hardware and even then the 2024 date is just a fantasy.

This sentence from the article sums it up:

Asked when his large aerospace company would need contracts to start work on a lunar lander capable of setting down on the Moon in 2024, one engineer said, "What day is it today? Whatever today is."​

I hope that SpaceX steers clear of this debacle and remains focused on building the first Starship for the Dear Moon project (a reasonable way to test it out on a relatively short duration manned flight) and then start sending Starships to Mars.

 

[Bobfitz1]

This sentence from the article sums it up:

Asked when his large aerospace company would need contracts to start work on a lunar lander capable of setting down on the Moon in 2024, one engineer said, "What day is it today? Whatever today is."​

I hope that SpaceX steers clear of this debacle and remains focused on building the first Starship for the Dear Moon project (a reasonable way to test it out on a relatively short duration manned flight) and then start sending Starships to Mars.

Question: Has Elon said anything about the size and payload capacity of the new SS design Starship? If he's said nothing on that is there anything to suggest it will not be the same as what he's said the 2nd iteration would have?

Putting aside all the politics and differing development timelines, once Starship is built and tested, am I right to imagine it could get to LEO and from there boost into a lunar trajectory, orbit and then land on the moon and return? My guess is that should be possible if it was refueled (as much as needed for the mission) once in LEO by another Starship. In this scenario it would not be necessary to engineer and build a one use landing vehicle.

If Starship is not carrying a large heavy object to LEO, wouldn't SuperHeavy be able to provide more of the energy needed to reach LEO and therefore leave a substantial amount of fuel in it's tanks to be used for subsequent orbital changes?

I'm curious if anyone knows how much fuel a Starship mass vehicle would need to travel to the moon, land and return? Getting back into lunar orbit would seem to me to require the largest portion of that total fuel budget.

Finally, if there is nothing new/extra that needs to be built for a Starship to travel to the moon, land and return, why not do such a shake out trip before sending people to Mars?