#1
|
||||
|
||||
Bad (good) SLS news
Hello All,
Many years ago, I never thought I'd find myself rooting for the demise of a U.S. launch vehicle, but as my understanding of what the Space Shuttle did to the planetary exploration program--unmanned and manned--grew, so did my opposition to that winged monstrosity. Today there is another such NASA budget glutton, called the SLS (which officially stands for "Space Launch System," but whose abbreviation is often used derisively to mean "Senate Launch System," because its contractors have powerful allies in that body). But today I came across some bad news (bad for SLS's supporters, but good for just about everyone else in astronautics) on Scott Manley's vlog (under which I just posted a comment): www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb3pGNTIC4c . Also: While--as tbzep pointed out elsewhere--we are paying (via government grants and anchor tenancy agreements) for the hardware that SpaceX developed and is producing for NASA and DoD use, we are [1] actually getting hardware, and [2] it is very competitively priced. Despite claims to the contrary in their publicity literature, the Space Shuttle was really developed in order to keep employed--and maintain the size of--the standing army that NASA created to build, support, and launch the Apollo-Saturn vehicles, and the SLS's purpose for existing is the same (it isn't only the legacy Shuttle contractors who want to keep that particular gravy train running). If an earthquake destroyed the RS-25 (ex-SSME) factory (with no casualties), and/or a leaky roof resulted in the SRB motor case tooling rusting away beyond repair, I would not celebrate (those people would lose their current jobs, after all), but I wouldn't mourn the loss of that outdated space hardware (and the ability to make more of it), either.
__________________
Black Shire--Draft horse in human form, model rocketeer, occasional mystic, and writer, see: http://www.lulu.com/content/paperba...an-form/8075185 http://www.lulu.com/product/cd/what...of-2%29/6122050 http://www.lulu.com/product/cd/what...of-2%29/6126511 All of my book proceeds go to the Northcote Heavy Horse Centre www.northcotehorses.com. NAR #54895 SR |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
When Apollo and the Saturn family were shut down, I hated the shuttle.
When I saw the first launch without the slow majestic liftoff and the smoke obscuring exhaust instead of 1000 ft of kero-lox flaming awesomeness, I hated the shuttle. When I realized we would never go back to the moon because it was LEO only, I hated the shuttle. When we were earthbound between the Apollo and shuttle eras, I hated the shuttle. When we were (are) earthbound or hitching rides with Russians, I hated the shuttle. When we fixed the Hubble, I loved the shuttle. When we returned satellites and payloads from space, I loved the shuttle. When it glided into Edwards and Canaveral and absolutely dwarfed the T-38 chase planes, I loved the shuttle. My love hate relationship with the shuttle is considerably one sided, but I grew more fond of it in the later years and hated to see it end knowing we had absolutely nothing to replace it. I loathe the SLS, Constellation and all the other stupid SRB based ideas developed solely to keep Thiakol/Orbital ATK running at full capacity.
__________________
I love sanding. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
The Saturn could have done everything Shuttle did, 10 years sooner, 2-4x as frequently, for 1.5x as long in history, and with vastly more mass to LEO. You know, that's all.
These days BFR should replace SLS ASAP. BFR is doing a test flight in late 2019. SLS despite having the motor cases, crew capsule, hydrogen tanks, etc IN STOCK will not see a flight for at least 4 years and in the mean time will eat close to $1B (correction. >$2B) a year. BFR will be done by a private company in 2-3 years to actual mission launch, at under 1/3 the cost and vastly more capacity to LEO. Is there an echo in this room? How can I "redress my grievances?" Last edited by Jerry Irvine : 03-14-2019 at 04:22 PM. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I'm with you with one exception. The shuttle could retrieve and land with cargo such as a satellite or the ESA lab (pre ISS). Retrieval was only done a few times and the lab became redundant with the launches of the first couple pieces of ISS. An SIVB based ISS would have been quick, easy, and very roomy! Edit: The ISS has a little less than 33,000 cubic ft of pressurized space, including all those docking modules, etc. Three Skylab modules would be around 36,000 cubic ft, plus whatever common docking core that would have connected them. Four modules would have been awesome! The big Saturn is a platform that should still be operating today. The 1B has fairly recently been matched or eclipsed in lifting capacity and efficiency by several boosters, but it would have been interesting to see how long it would have hung around as the only LEO man rated booster. There is no telling what the big V would be capable of today with well thought out incremental updates over the last 50 years as our technology has grown.
__________________
I love sanding. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Black Shire--Draft horse in human form, model rocketeer, occasional mystic, and writer, see: http://www.lulu.com/content/paperba...an-form/8075185 http://www.lulu.com/product/cd/what...of-2%29/6122050 http://www.lulu.com/product/cd/what...of-2%29/6126511 All of my book proceeds go to the Northcote Heavy Horse Centre www.northcotehorses.com. NAR #54895 SR |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
The V can launch a huge BG. Retrieval no prob. Imagine a scaled up Apollo capsule for cargo and stolen black satellites the diameter of the 2nd stage (33 feet)? Hmmm? The V being deprecated was a national tragedy.
Last edited by Jerry Irvine : 03-14-2019 at 06:40 AM. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Black Shire--Draft horse in human form, model rocketeer, occasional mystic, and writer, see: http://www.lulu.com/content/paperba...an-form/8075185 http://www.lulu.com/product/cd/what...of-2%29/6122050 http://www.lulu.com/product/cd/what...of-2%29/6126511 All of my book proceeds go to the Northcote Heavy Horse Centre www.northcotehorses.com. NAR #54895 SR |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Grid fins. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
In his statement on the 2020 FY NASA Budget, NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine (as posted on the Sagitta Cantina here, No real mention is made of the SLS.
It almost sounds like they want to go to the Moon, then on to Mars using commercial supplied equipment. Quote:
One additional thing, while Mr. Musk is garnering a lot of the headlines with his bold usae of our tax dollars, there is that other company owned by another well to do person using the snail's slow and steady method to compete. And while SpaceX's BFR may overwhelm Blue Origin's New Glenn for now, at least in design parameters, BO's New Glenn is likely to launch in 2020 whereas BFR will be in the late 2020's. Also, I just shudder to think what Blue Origin's New Armstrong will be capable of doing. The future is looking a lot brighter than it has in many a year for Rocketry.
__________________
Bernard J. Herman Ohio RLS Starport Sagitta Rockets email bherman@sagittarockets.com NAR # 97971 SR What's your idea on the best way to change Washington D.C.? Let us know at the Cantina Sagitta Cantina We're looking for a few good Catos, please tell us about any you may have had. Survey of Anecdotal Malfunctioning Engines or S.A.M.E. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
BTW GH, I think Blue Origin is more in line with your philosophy on recovery ships.
Stena Freighter It will be interesting to see it after it's been modified. There will be one additional difference, Blue Origin's recovery ship is supposed to be underway during recovery
__________________
Bernard J. Herman Ohio RLS Starport Sagitta Rockets email bherman@sagittarockets.com NAR # 97971 SR What's your idea on the best way to change Washington D.C.? Let us know at the Cantina Sagitta Cantina We're looking for a few good Catos, please tell us about any you may have had. Survey of Anecdotal Malfunctioning Engines or S.A.M.E. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|