SLS - On the Scent of Inevitable Capitulation

[e-FTW]

Lori Garver didn't exactly call SLS a jobs program. Instead she pointed to NASA's affinity for doing business in "more of a socialist way". Perhaps not a lot of people care, but that shot probably hit home a little harder in places like Huntsville.

Can you explain that further? A bit late here...

 

[Grendal]

Lori goes even further in an interview:

SpaceX Should Build NASA's Future Rockets Says Ex-Deputy Administrator

The Space Launch System is going to take humans to the moon once more as the most powerful rocket ever built, but there have been concerns about its cost.

www.newsweek.com

 

[bxr140]

Can you explain that further? A bit late here...

Its a reference to the fact that, in general, state funded technology and defense activities have always been about the secondary 'benefits' of that activity, sometimes to a small degree and sometimes--as is the case with SLS--to a large degree. The headlines typically focus on the "jobs program" aspect of those 'benefits', but there are other elements that are touted, like the providing a mechanism to maintain the collective technical knowledge base of Americans, maintaining sovereign manufacturing and production, etc. There's certainly plenty of legitimate debate over the need for and effectiveness of these strategies, but either way that's the way this country has been typically run.

Enter the word "socialism", the use of which has taken an unfortunate turn in popular culture, where politically charged conditioning has morphed the word "socialism" into an attempt at an insult. Equally unfortunate is retaliatory use of the word--as is the case here--where folks participating in public discourse and who are in possession of otherwise obvious facts and logic can't help but take the easy shot.

 

[e-FTW]

Its a reference to the fact that, in general, state funded technology and defense activities have always been about the secondary 'benefits' of that activity, sometimes to a small degree and sometimes--as is the case with SLS--to a large degree. The headlines typically focus on the "jobs program" aspect of those 'benefits', but there are other elements that are touted, like the providing a mechanism to maintain the collective technical knowledge base of Americans, maintaining sovereign manufacturing and production, etc. There's certainly plenty of legitimate debate over the need for and effectiveness of these strategies, but either way that's the way this country has been typically run.

Enter the word "socialism", the use of which has taken an unfortunate turn in popular culture, where politically charged conditioning has morphed the word "socialism" into an attempt at an insult. Equally unfortunate is retaliatory use of the word--as is the case here--where folks participating in public discourse and who are in possession of otherwise obvious facts and logic can't help but take the easy shot.

Thanks, the use of that word in this context did not make sense to me. Huntsville does not strike me as an hommage to socialism.

 

[HVM]

How long it has been? Like 16 years of Constellation and Space Launch System with $ 1/3 Trillion (with T /ˈtiː/) of US taxpayers money. With one botched test flight, one botched static fire, and one test flight with Orion using none-program-rocket. I don't think socialism would be correct word.

 

[e-FTW]

Hotfire take deux: NASA sets March 18 as the day for SLS hot fire test — SlashGear

 

[Cosmacelf]

NASA taking a hard look at SLS? Probably not, but we can all dream.

NASA has begun a study of the SLS rocket’s affordability [Updated]

One issue up for grabs: Should work on the Exploration Upper Stage continue?

arstechnica.com

Update: Cute, the tag for that article is $L$ (instead of SLS).

 

[e-FTW]

NASA taking a hard look at SLS? Probably not, but we can all dream.

NASA has begun a study of the SLS rocket’s affordability [Updated]

One issue up for grabs: Should work on the Exploration Upper Stage continue?

arstechnica.com

Update: Cute, the tag for that article is $L$ (instead of SLS).

There was a response from NASA. And no matter how often I read the last phrase, I keep at the use of construct. Man that phrase says nothing. They sure are attempting to walk a fine line until they assess where the SLS Senate balance of power sits with Shelby having lost his gavel.

Update: After this story was published, NASA released the following statement at 11 pm ET on Monday regarding the internal study:

NASA is conducting an internal study of the timing and sequence of lunar missions with available resources, and with the guidance that SLS and Orion will be providing crew transportation to the Gateway. The backbone for NASA’s Moon to Mars plans are the Space Launch System rocket, Orion spacecraft, ground systems at Kennedy Space Center, Gateway in lunar orbit and human landing system. We currently are also assessing various elements of our programs to find efficiencies and opportunities to reduce costs, and this exercise is ongoing. This will include conversations with our industry partners. Budget forecasts and internal agency reviews are common practice as they help us with long-term planning. The agency anticipates taking full advantage of the powerful SLS capabilities, and this effort will improve the current construct associated with executing the development, production and operations of the NASA’s Artemis missions.

 

[Grendal]

Green Run 2.0 happening today.

 

[HVM]

...$1/3 Trillion (with T /ˈtiː/) of US taxpayers money...

I forget that ESA is building the Orion's service module, so small-% of my taxes is too going proudly for this good cause.

 

[Grendal]

The test seemed to be successful. It ran for the full duration.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Green Run 2.0 happening today.

Looks like a successful 8+ minute test fire.

 

[Grendal]

Article on the test:

NASA performs full-duration SLS Green Run static-fire test

NASA completed a successful static-fire test of the core stage of the SLS March 18, two months after a similar test was cut short.

spacenews.com

 

[e-FTW]

In other potential good news for SLS: Biden to tap Bill Nelson to lead NASA

We shall see how much independence or (influence on the White House) he will have with regards to SLS.

 

[Cosmacelf]

In other potential good news for SLS: Biden to tap Bill Nelson to lead NASA

We shall see how much independence or (influence on the White House) he will have with regards to SLS.

Eric Berger is not a fan: A politician who said politicians shouldn’t run NASA wants to run NASA

 

[frontrangeM3]

Eric Berger is not a fan: A politician who said politicians shouldn’t run NASA wants to run NASA

Neither am I. Nelson is one of the principal architects of this gillion dollar boondoggle. Enough already.

SLS needs to die a natural death. Failing that, an unnatural one. Not going to happen in this cycle though. We'll pump a few more $B in before we finally give up on the damn thing. It's obscene.

I think I understand the political necessity here. The administration doesn't have political capital to burn, and from that perspective, it might even make some sense.

The contracts should be ended and changed over from cost-plus to fixed price. That would end it right there. Done. Aus. Basta.

 

[HVM]

Good luck for ending SLS-money-hole saga with Bill "cost plus ballast" Nelson in lead... Ha ha.

 

[e-FTW]

Scott is not as pessimistic as us:

 

[HVM]

How long it has been? Like 16 years of Constellation and Space Launch System with $ 1/3 Trillion (with T /ˈtiː/) of US taxpayers money. With one botched test flight, one botched static fire, and one test flight with Orion using none-program-rocket. I don't think socialism would be correct word.

Other way to compare this, natural disaster with nuclear meltdown:

"In the decade since the strongest earthquake in Japan's history triggered a 32-foot tsunami that slammed into the eastern coastline, the cleanup effort has become one of the world's most expensive, costing some $300 billion so far."

Anddddd twice of the Apollo program cost!? ($152 billion -inflation corrected) Can that be real?

 

[e-FTW]

NASA’s bold bet on Starship for the Moon may change spaceflight forever

"It is transformational to degrees no one today can understand."

arstechnica.com

One aspect of this I had not read about yet: other countries’ interests:

And what of international partners and the geopolitical implications of this? During a confirmation hearing this week before the US Senate Commerce committee, incoming NASA Administrator Bill Nelson said expanding the coalition of nations participating in the Artemis Program was one of his big goals. Increasing the space agency's reliance on SpaceX likely would work against this.

With the low-cost, reusable Falcon 9 rocket, SpaceX has already badly damaged the commercial launch industries in Europe, Russia, and Japan. For the Artemis Program, Europe is contributing the Service Module for the Orion spacecraft. How would these officials react if NASA now says, "non merci" to that contribution because of SpaceX?

"The nation's activities in deep space remain very tied up in international policy, alliances, adversaries, and security, as well as space exploration and science," an industry source told Ars. "There are a number of foreign policy interdependencies and offsets that are managed through or impact space, generally below the surface. What does this choice signal to all of those players?"