Author Topic: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1  (Read 167481 times)

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #60 on: 02/17/2017 02:28 am »
One is a NASA designed and owned system, the others are not... It's NASA's sandbox and they decide who and how they play in it...

So flying the SLS+Orion with crew on the first flight counts in political terms as a 'brave decision'.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #61 on: 02/17/2017 05:10 am »
One is a NASA designed and owned system, the others are not... It's NASA's sandbox and they decide who and how they play in it...

But that also means that whatever NASA issues about something being "manrated" isn't worth the paper it is printed on. Some people have a very idealized view of NASA.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12095
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18197
  • Likes Given: 12158
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #62 on: 02/17/2017 08:26 am »
One is a NASA designed and owned system, the others are not... It's NASA's sandbox and they decide who and how they play in it...

But that also means that whatever NASA issues about something being "manrated" isn't worth the paper it is printed on. Some people have a very idealized view of NASA.
Indeed. It would be very strange if man-rating standards would be different between NASA-developed-and-owned systems and hired-by-NASA systems.

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39215
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32735
  • Likes Given: 8178
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #63 on: 02/17/2017 08:32 am »
Not to mention risking a $100B facility and six crew by rendezvous with an untested spacecraft.

Its the same risk of the first flight of ATV, HTV, Dragon and Cygnus and the upcoming first flights of Dragon 2 and CST-100. In my opinion, this risk is small and far outweighs the reward of proving Orion safely in LEO before going into deep space. Flying crew on EM-1 is where high risk occurs and I think not worth the reward. If you want to speed up the first crewed flight and do it safely, I think the following is a better path

1) Increase the SLS and Orion budget from $4.3B to $6.3B without cutting other programs (a 10% increase in NASA's budget).
2) Crew rate ICPS.
3) Develop EUS.
4) Develop LM.
5) Fly EM-1 as is (2019).
6) Fly Orion to ISS on Delta IVH without crew. Transfer crew and do a two week checkout in LEO (2020).
7) Fly EM-2 with crew using crew rated SLS Block I (2021).
8) Refurbish High Bay 3 for Block IB.
9) Refurbish LUT to Block IB. All future flights are Block IB.
10) EM-3 with Boilerplate LM to LLO. (2hf 2023)
11) EM-4 with crewed Orion to LLO. Rendezvous with Boilerplate LM. (1hf 2024)
12) EM-5 with LM to LLO. Performs uncrewed landing on Moon. (2hf 2024)
13) EM-6 with LM to LLO. (1hf 2025)
14) EM-7 with Orion to LLO. Orion docks with LM with crew performing landing (2hf 2025).
« Last Edit: 02/17/2017 08:37 am by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #64 on: 02/17/2017 10:36 am »
One is a NASA designed and owned system, the others are not... It's NASA's sandbox and they decide who and how they play in it...

But that also means that whatever NASA issues about something being "manrated" isn't worth the paper it is printed on. Some people have a very idealized view of NASA.
I'm only stating what "appears" to be the case... Not my endorsement of it...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #65 on: 02/17/2017 10:41 am »
One is a NASA designed and owned system, the others are not... It's NASA's sandbox and they decide who and how they play in it...

So flying the SLS+Orion with crew on the first flight counts in political terms as a 'brave decision'.
Or a "foolishly expedient" one by politicians who aren't risking their own lives...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline jgoldader

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 760
  • Liked: 322
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #66 on: 02/17/2017 11:14 am »
I see the decision to fly a crew on the first flight of a new vehicle as a risk/benefit decision.  On Apollo, despite the Space Race, and the wish to honor Kennedy's pledge, NASA felt it was too risky to launch crews until after the Saturn V, CSM, and even the LM had all been proven in flight.  Even then, if you read Krantz's book, there was a near LOM/LOC/LOCV incident on most (all?) lunar flights. 

With STS, the risks were rather poorly understood and very underestimated, and NASA had designed a vehicle that required crew to fly, so STS-1, with (according to Feynman) estimates of LOCV of ~one-in-hundreds, and post hoc LOCV probability of, what was it, 1:12?, carried two crew members.  By the end of the STS program, the LOCV number was estimated at about 1:90 (https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20100005659.pdf), yet it was decided after STS-107 that finishing ISS was so important that the risk of another accident was accepted, though the STS program was destined to be closed down once that task was completed.

SLS-1 will be the first, all-up flight of an untested vehicle, with an untested capsule and untested service module.  From the way it looks to this outsider, the Orion that flew on the Delta IV was approximately a boilerplate, flown with at best a partial ECLSS and not, IIRC, the final GNC system (wasn't the GNC handled by the DIV upper stage?).  The Orion for SLS-1 will share the same OML, but not even the same heat shield design, and most of what goes inside will be new.  And NASA can say they're using known and proven systems, but a 5-live-segment SRM hasn't flown, and the ATV-derived service module hasn't flown, and the core stage hasn't flown, and the software won't have proven itself in flight, etc.

If there were some really important and pressing need, with absolutely no other way to respond to the need, accepting the risk of launching crew on SLS-1 could well be reasonable, or even prudent.  But no such need is readily apparent.
Recovering astronomer

Offline SimonFD

Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #67 on: 02/17/2017 11:26 am »
I just can't see this as anything other than a response to a request from the new administration.
I also can't see the response from NASA being anything other than "Nope" albeit reworded and supported by a thick stack of supporting evidence.

This IMHO is the interim boss doing due diligence
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #68 on: 02/17/2017 12:58 pm »
Commercial crew is supposed to achieve 1/270 LOC. This crewed EM-1 may be lucky to achieve 1/27, though there's no way to prove that due to the tiny sample size.

I actually like it. It's okay to take big risks, and we haven't left LEO for 45 years. But one thing: what's the point of this? Does it actually build a stepping stone to later flights and accomplishments that advance the footprint and improve the future of our species, or is this purely a stunt? If the latter, then the cost is too high as well as the risk.
« Last Edit: 02/17/2017 01:00 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #69 on: 02/17/2017 12:59 pm »
I just can't see this as anything other than a response to a request from the new administration.
I also can't see the response from NASA being anything other than "Nope" albeit reworded and supported by a thick stack of supporting evidence.

This IMHO is the interim boss doing due diligence
There are some in NASA who see this as SLS/Orion's chance to put up or shut up.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12095
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18197
  • Likes Given: 12158
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #70 on: 02/17/2017 01:16 pm »
I just can't see this as anything other than a response to a request from the new administration.
I also can't see the response from NASA being anything other than "Nope" albeit reworded and supported by a thick stack of supporting evidence.

This IMHO is the interim boss doing due diligence
There are some in NASA who see this as SLS/Orion's chance to put up or shut up.
I can understand that sentiment. But that does not change the fact that this proposal, when turned into reality, is nothing more than a political stunt.
It serves no purpose other than making the Trump administration look good.

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #71 on: 02/17/2017 01:50 pm »
That requires for someone outside the specialist publications to report the price tag and, quite frankly, I can't see that happening. Most news agencies would see that as too technical a detail to interest their customers! ::)
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Online butters

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2399
  • Liked: 1692
  • Likes Given: 597
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #72 on: 02/17/2017 01:59 pm »
Launching a crewed Orion before the ECLSS is ready seems like a bigger problem than launching crew on the first SLS. Everything I've read suggests that ECLSS won't be ready until 2021 and that's the long pole in the Orion development schedule. Has this changed?

Online Chris Bergin

Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #73 on: 02/17/2017 03:57 pm »
I would remind people that ranting is frowned upon around these parts. Mods can trim, but I think we need a warning.

I don't want to have to come back here!!

(OK, I will be coming back here, but I hope it's not because of report to mods! ;)
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline SimonFD

Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #74 on: 02/17/2017 04:53 pm »
I would remind people that ranting is frowned upon around these parts. Mods can trim, but I think we need a warning.

I don't want to have to come back here!!

(OK, I will be coming back here, but I hope it's not because of report to mods! ;)

Rant removed - apologies to all
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #75 on: 02/17/2017 06:00 pm »
From yesterday's committee hearing, retired astronaut Tom Stafford didn't feel that putting a crew on this flight was any riskier than STS-1... Don't shoot the messenger...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7277
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #76 on: 02/17/2017 07:15 pm »
From yesterday's committee hearing, retired astronaut Tom Stafford didn't feel that putting a crew on this flight was any riskier than STS-1...

Stafford's statement does not seem unreasonable to me.  I would, however, argue that

1. STS-1 was very risky; and
2. The major purpose served by putting a crew on EM-1 would be boosting the political fortunes of the Trump (or Pence) administration; that is not worth the risk, not nearly.

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7347
  • Likes Given: 3749
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #77 on: 02/17/2017 07:35 pm »
Stafford's statement *IS* unreasonable. There is a *HUGE* difference between STS-1 and EM-1.

STS-1 required a crew in the same way that the first flight of any new aircraft requires a crew - there was no way to fly it without a pilot. A flight crew was required to start the APUs, deploy the landing gear, drag chute, and air data probe among many other things. None of these could have been done automatically on STS-1, or any of the other Shuttles for that matter, until much later in the program. For most of its service life the Shuttle fleet *required* a pilot.

EM-1 on the other hand does *NOT* require a crew to do anything. They would simply be along for the ride. Neither the SLS nor the Orion would need any human intervention at any point in its flight. This is a pure political stunt, needlessly endangering the lives of anyone NASA asks to fly it.
« Last Edit: 02/17/2017 07:40 pm by clongton »
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1750
  • Orange County, California
  • Liked: 1132
  • Likes Given: 3156
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #78 on: 02/17/2017 07:40 pm »
There is a *HUGE* difference between STS-1 and EM-1.

STS-1 required a crew in the same way that the first flight of any new aircraft requires a crew - there was no way to fly it without a pilot. A flight crew was required to start the APUs, deploy the landing gear, drag chute, and air data probe. None of these could have been done automatically. The Shuttles did not have this capability until much later in the program.

EM-1 on the other hand does *NOT* require a crew to do anything. This is a pure political stunt, needlessly endangering the lives of anyone NASA asks to fly it.

A bit premature to be saying this until they've completed their study.  All we know is that they are looking at options, which isn't a bad thing.  What it ultimately ends up being is anyone(s) guess at the moment.
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing - Thomas Jefferson

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: SLS/Orion Crewed Flight Proposal for EM-1
« Reply #79 on: 02/17/2017 07:45 pm »
STS-1 was far more risky. No flight heritage, no test flights, no launch abort.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0