Author Topic: Orionís crewed asteroid mission unlikely to occur prior to 2024  (Read 56882 times)


Online MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3890
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 802
  • Likes Given: 1510
No money... No real leadership... No real destinations... Stretching further away into an unknown future... If CXP had been pragmatically and drastically altered - and not butchered by 'not invented here' syndrome... We *may* have been looking at manned lunar missions by 2020 or so....  :'(

But instead; we have what we have.
« Last Edit: 11/29/2014 02:57 AM by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Online mike robel

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2084
  • Merritt Island, FL
  • Liked: 169
  • Likes Given: 35
As I watch the program advance at the speed of maple syrup in January, I remember these words.

"Let it be clear--and this is a judgment which the Members of the Congress must finally make--let it be clear that I am asking the Congress and the country to accept a firm commitment to a new course of action, a course which will last for many years and carry very heavy costs: 531 million dollars in fiscal '62--an estimated 7 to 9 billion dollars additional over the next five years. If we are to go only half way, or reduce our sights in the face of difficulty, in my judgment it would be better not to go at all."

And

"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too."["

The climate is, if anything, less supportive now than then.

Edit:  I'll be 71 in 2024, I was 16 in 1969.  I feel robbed and cheated.
« Last Edit: 11/29/2014 03:10 AM by mike robel »

Online butters

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1678
  • Liked: 319
  • Likes Given: 76
Cue the cancellation of the asteroid redirect mission in 3.. 2.. 1..

NASA has two viable options for post-ISS: L2 gateway or lunar lander. We need one of those elements in order to do anything compelling with SLS and Orion. SLS and Orion are not enough. SLS and Orion are not enough. SLS and Orion are not enough.

Offline Endeavour_01

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
  • Physics Professor in SC, USA
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 412
Cue the cancellation of the asteroid redirect mission in 3.. 2.. 1..

NASA has two viable options for post-ISS: L2 gateway or lunar lander. We need one of those elements in order to do anything compelling with SLS and Orion. SLS and Orion are not enough. SLS and Orion are not enough. SLS and Orion are not enough.

Or both. An L-2 gateway with a lunar lander.
I cheer for both NASA and commercial space. For SLS, Orion, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, Dragon, Starliner, Cygnus and all the rest!
I was blessed to see the launch of Space Shuttle Endeavour on STS-99. The launch was beyond amazing. My 8-year old mind was blown. I remember the noise and seeing the exhaust pour out of the shuttle as it lifted off. I remember staring and watching it soar while it was visible in the clear blue sky. It was one of the greatest moments of my life and I will never forget it.

Online MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3890
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 802
  • Likes Given: 1510
L-2 Gateway with a re-usable Lunar lander. Compete the lander contract out to private industry - perhaps including opening up to an international consortium (Japan & Europe joining forces). Splinter thread for ARM alternates and Gateway designs?
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9101
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5781
  • Likes Given: 3871
Sad. But not surprising. With that budget imagine what could be accomplished if it wasn't OldSpace doing it. Sorry for that tone but it's how I feel.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Endeavour_01

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
  • Physics Professor in SC, USA
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 412
Sad. But not surprising. With that budget imagine what could be accomplished if it wasn't OldSpace doing it. Sorry for that tone but it's how I feel.

You mean the 0.5% of the federal budget that NASA gets and the around 0.2% that human spaceflight gets? New Space wouldn't be able to do much of anything with it either.
I cheer for both NASA and commercial space. For SLS, Orion, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, Dragon, Starliner, Cygnus and all the rest!
I was blessed to see the launch of Space Shuttle Endeavour on STS-99. The launch was beyond amazing. My 8-year old mind was blown. I remember the noise and seeing the exhaust pour out of the shuttle as it lifted off. I remember staring and watching it soar while it was visible in the clear blue sky. It was one of the greatest moments of my life and I will never forget it.

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5478
  • "With peace and hope for all mankind."
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 577
  • Likes Given: 677
Thanks Chris, I think it's really useful to have the content of this article available to people! Whether people support or oppose SLS and Orion, a shared understanding of a realistic timeline for NASA's BEO aspirations should at least help people agree on what they're disagreeing about! ;)
« Last Edit: 11/29/2014 04:17 AM by sdsds »
-- sdsds --

Offline su27k

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 707
  • Liked: 435
  • Likes Given: 47
Sad. But not surprising. With that budget imagine what could be accomplished if it wasn't OldSpace doing it. Sorry for that tone but it's how I feel.

You mean the 0.5% of the federal budget that NASA gets and the around 0.2% that human spaceflight gets? New Space wouldn't be able to do much of anything with it either.

0.2% of the federal budget is $7 billion, if you add up all the SpaceX contracts with NASA it's about $5 billion, for that amount of money NASA got or will get a new launch vehicle that can compete in the international market, a cargo ship with down mass capability, a manned spaceship that can do vertical landing, 12 resupply flights to ISS, 6 crewed flights to ISS. Yeah, not much of anything indeed.

Offline zodiacchris

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 136
  • Melbourne, Australia
  • Liked: 148
  • Likes Given: 280
What is the opposite of a party thread? Bespoke handcrafting of Orion heat shield, maintaining the workforce to fly SLS once in a blue moon, and all culminating in a 30 day trip in 10 years time to a piece of wrapped asteroid. Don't get me wrong, as a geologist I like asteroids, but we already have a fair bit of that stuff down here, it falls down the gravity well by itself. Is this important enough to blow the budget of the next 10 years on?

Cue in Talking Heads 'Stop making Sense' album: We're on a way to nowhere... :'(

Online MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3890
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 802
  • Likes Given: 1510
It`s almost like someone planned it that way...
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5179
  • Liked: 799
  • Likes Given: 553
It`s almost like someone planned it that way...

And, indeed, that makes perfect sense in Blackjax's analysis of Orion/SLS.  Perpetual development without emphasis on actually flying does benefit some parties.  The protracted uncertainty of what engines SLS will use when the RS-25Ds run out, developing ICPS to fly only once or twice then developing another upper stage, the uncertainty over what that second upper stage will be, etc., suggest that perpetual development is the whole point.
« Last Edit: 11/29/2014 08:07 AM by Proponent »

Offline Eerie

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 756
  • Liked: 114
  • Likes Given: 7
Cue the cancellation of the asteroid redirect mission in 3.. 2.. 1..

NASA has two viable options for post-ISS: L2 gateway or lunar lander. We need one of those elements in order to do anything compelling with SLS and Orion. SLS and Orion are not enough. SLS and Orion are not enough. SLS and Orion are not enough.

Orion already has ESA module. Now NASA just needs to let China build the lunar lander, and we can have ISS ON THE MOON!

Offline redliox

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1755
  • Arizona USA
  • Liked: 325
  • Likes Given: 56
With luck Orion and SLS will survive the next round of political elections, including a new president, but I honestly never liked the whole ARM scheme.  Keep the rocket, lose the crazy idea.  Once the current administration leaves, I guarantee ARM goes on the chopping block...if not the shredder.

If they are insistent on asteroids before Mars, then they should change the mission to sending humans, not a bag-probe.  The whole point was to reach interplanetary space on a trip lasting from half a year to a full one as a test run for Martian expeditions that would last three times as long.  A near-Earth asteroid orbiting the sun suits the job.  How the heck NASA misinterpreted that is crazy, and why few people like ARM much.

If they can't do an asteroid, some lunar science wouldn't be a bad alternative.  Testing out new deep space vehicles would be great too, such as the habitat module Orion would need to haul with for anything beyond the Moon.  Whatever happens, a new plan will be needed to fill the void.
"Let the trails lead where they may, I will follow."
-Tigatron

Offline NovaSilisko

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1828
  • Liked: 1435
  • Likes Given: 1305
How the heck NASA misinterpreted that is crazy, and why few people like ARM much.

It's not misinterpretation, it's re-interpretation. There's a "friendly mandate" to go to an asteroid, but seemingly nobody willing to pay for actually sending a crew to meet one in interplanetary space, so with a bit of word-wrangling, ARM was born - they're sending human beings to "an asteroid" after all...  :P

Online MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3890
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 802
  • Likes Given: 1510
There's a couple of perfectly good asteroids/primordial rubble piles that can be reached with less delta-vee than the lunar surface - Deimos and Phobos. I really think the idea should be seriously revisited. I'm not joking. They are neither the 'been there done that' Moon (God, I hate that putdown) nor anywhere else mankind has been. They don't require tens of billions to get the 'Entry, Descent & Landing' of a 40 ton manned ship on the Martian surface.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2010/01/taking-aim-phobos-nasa-flexible-path-precursor-mars/

But they would be better than the Inspiration Mars flyby for probably not a hell of a lot more money, they would demonstrate true deep space propulsion, life support, communications, navigation, technology and human operations and inspiration. They could collect formidable science with a human and robotic partnership. High-definition TV views of astronauts floating at zero feet above little worlds that are actually bigger than mountains or cities, with Mars looming huge on the sky. The crew could collect sample return probes sent into orbit before and during their mission. I'll not discuss equipment and architectures here and now. But this would be the sort of mission SLS and Orion - augmented with mission modules and propulsion stages - were born to do. Or alternative vehicles yada, yada.

If sending humans to the Martian surface costed, oh; about $200 billion, then I think the above mission could cost far less than half that spread over a 12-to-14 year period with only a modest increase to NASA's budget and working with International partners. I'm trying to be an optimist, but today; it's very hard.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35872.msg1273331#msg1273331

« Last Edit: 11/29/2014 08:57 PM by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline IRobot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1181
  • Portugal & Germany
  • Liked: 214
  • Likes Given: 203
Personally I see a much bigger business case in asteroids than on Mars.  But NASA is not about business, it's about science, so this one-off mission is not very important if it is not thought as a business opportunity.

Offline Wigles

  • Member
  • Posts: 52
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 5
Personally I see a much bigger business case in asteroids than on Mars.  But NASA is not about business, it's about science, so this one-off mission is not very important if it is not thought as a business opportunity.

I think you'll find NASA intends to be about science but ends up being an element of politics.

Offline K-P

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 151
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 0
Or how about exploring an asteroid or two already on a stable orbit and doing some Mars -related science at the same time?

And gathering valueable knowledge of performing crewed deep-space missions at the same time?

How about that...?

No need for landers, no need to choose asteroid OR Mars.
No need for giant doggybags for capturing asteroid and sending it to another trajectory/orbit.

How about that...?

What is the problem with Phobos/Deimos missions? Really, what...?  :o
Yes yes, delta-v & delta-t obviously, but if we'd really focus on Mars orbital missions, we would get 2 or 3 slam dunks at the same time.

Tags: