Quote from: clongton on 02/12/2025 01:30 pm2020 – SpaceX Starship UpdatesWhile discussing Starship's heat shield, Musk compared it to Dragon's PICA-X, stating that Dragon's heat shield had already been tested in conditions beyond LEO reentry speeds....Do we know when and where such tests occurred?
2020 – SpaceX Starship UpdatesWhile discussing Starship's heat shield, Musk compared it to Dragon's PICA-X, stating that Dragon's heat shield had already been tested in conditions beyond LEO reentry speeds....
In a Reddit AMA in 2012, Elon Musk confirmed that the PICA-X heat shield was tested to withstand higher heat loads than necessary for LEO return, explicitly mentioning that it could handle lunar and Martian return speeds. Does anyone here have insight into when this testing was done and the results that were obtained that back up Mr. Musk's ascertains?
New Space Subcommittee Chair Backs Moon First, Then Mars:https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/new-space-subcommittee-chair-backs-moon-first-then-mars/Quote from: the article[Acting NASA Administrator Janet Petro said:] “I will say up front that Artemis is not just limited to SLS and Orion. It is a big tent … and our eventual goal is going to Mars. … We have a lot of support and industry partners helping us get back there” with the two HLS systems from SpaceX and Blue Origin and the CLPS robotic landers. “There’s a mutual benefit to both of us working together. We learn a lot from our commercial partners like the speed of business and the sense of urgency.” For its part NASA brings “60 years of experience of exploring space” and the result is “mutually beneficial.” NASA will continue to do the “really hard things that maybe have never been done before” where there’s no business case, and when there is a business case and industry is willing to step up, “that’s going to get us further, faster.”Speaking to reporters afterward, Petro said NASA right now is focused on implementing Trump’s Executive Orders and executing the agency’s Programs of Record, including Artemis II and Artemis III. Any changes will wait until the new NASA Administrator is confirmed.https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1889903293658439850
[Acting NASA Administrator Janet Petro said:] “I will say up front that Artemis is not just limited to SLS and Orion. It is a big tent … and our eventual goal is going to Mars. … We have a lot of support and industry partners helping us get back there” with the two HLS systems from SpaceX and Blue Origin and the CLPS robotic landers. “There’s a mutual benefit to both of us working together. We learn a lot from our commercial partners like the speed of business and the sense of urgency.” For its part NASA brings “60 years of experience of exploring space” and the result is “mutually beneficial.” NASA will continue to do the “really hard things that maybe have never been done before” where there’s no business case, and when there is a business case and industry is willing to step up, “that’s going to get us further, faster.”Speaking to reporters afterward, Petro said NASA right now is focused on implementing Trump’s Executive Orders and executing the agency’s Programs of Record, including Artemis II and Artemis III. Any changes will wait until the new NASA Administrator is confirmed.
Petro said that, contrary to some reports, she had not been lobbying the White House to at least maintain the Artemis 2 and 3 missions as currently planned. “I am an interim person,” she said. “We are executing on our programs of record, which does include Artemis 2 and 3 and beyond. So, we are executing on that program as it exists today.”“When the new administrator gets confirmed, I am sure that he will talk with the White House and get the new direction, if there is a change in direction,” she said. “That is not my role right now.”...Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, said after a speech at the conference earlier in the day that the committee has yet to schedule a confirmation hearing for Isaacman. “We’re still waiting for the paperwork to be completed,” he said. “The confirmation can’t move forward until the paperwork has been submitted and completed.”
Do we know that the paperwork delays are down to Isaacman? Could it be that he has filed the paperwork but the Trump administration has not yet processed it? Surely the administration must be involved, for example, to do background checks.
Quote from: Proponent on 02/13/2025 12:28 pmDo we know that the paperwork delays are down to Isaacman? Could it be that he has filed the paperwork but the Trump administration has not yet processed it? Surely the administration must be involved, for example, to do background checks.If Cruz really wants to get an authorization bill passed with SLS and Orion in it (as Berger speculated on the Main Engine Cutoff podcast), he could be dragging his feet on the paperwork. It doesn't take much for an aide to temporarily "misplace" it.
Quote from: TheRadicalModerate on 02/13/2025 07:59 pmQuote from: Proponent on 02/13/2025 12:28 pmDo we know that the paperwork delays are down to Isaacman? Could it be that he has filed the paperwork but the Trump administration has not yet processed it? Surely the administration must be involved, for example, to do background checks.If Cruz really wants to get an authorization bill passed with SLS and Orion in it (as Berger speculated on the Main Engine Cutoff podcast), he could be dragging his feet on the paperwork. It doesn't take much for an aide to temporarily "misplace" it.I doubt that's the reason. It will take many months to iron out the differences between the House's and the Senate's versions of the NASA Authorization bills. It will be interesting to see if Trump decides to veto the NASA Authorization bill. Although I suspect that any differences with the President would be ironed out before it gets to a final vote on the final version of the bill in both chambers.
Section 1 of Single Event Effect Criticality Analysis (https://nepp.nasa.gov/DocUploads/6D728AF0-2817-4530-97555B6DCB26D083/seecai.pdf) has a useful taxonomy of space radiation terms and definitions. It's from https://radhome.gsfc.nasa.gov/
Quote from: sdsds on 02/13/2025 03:49 amSection 1 of Single Event Effect Criticality Analysis (https://nepp.nasa.gov/DocUploads/6D728AF0-2817-4530-97555B6DCB26D083/seecai.pdf) has a useful taxonomy of space radiation terms and definitions. It's from https://radhome.gsfc.nasa.gov/I've made it to pg4. To answer my own question: A very firm, clear and unequivocal "it depends."
sevgonlernassauThe new budget request completely cancel SLS/Orion/Gateway and transfer exploration to a commercial to Mars program. Pretty clear what they want to do
sevgonlernassauNo action will be taken until the new admin gets swore in. Fwiw, the new budget request cancel the entirety of Artemis and focus on “commercial” to Mars, so there’s no moon.
sevgonlernassau[His source for the information:] People in DC. [$]1B cut to SMD [Science Mission Directorate], eliminating ESD [Earth Science Division]. New commercial program is a giveaway to musk.
Feb 16, 2025In this week's review of Artemis news, the main themes continue. NASA Exploration Ground Systems continues to stack the Artemis II SLS vehicle alongside rumors that the government-run rocket is in jeopardy of cancellation. Last week, Boeing, one of the SLS prime contractors, warned its workforce that significant percentage could lose their jobs, which seemed to prompt more questions about the possibility that President Trump and Elon Musk are getting ready to terminate the whole program.Members of Congressional oversight and appropriations publicly responded to those questions for seemingly the first-time, since most of them are in the same political party as Trump and Musk and want to keep any disagreements quiet. It remains to be seen whether any objections will be sustained and what happens when either side doesn't get its way.The politics continues to overshadow the work, but then updates about work progress remain limited mostly to pictures without much accompanying details. I reviewed pictures of the last of ten SLS solid rocket motor segments being stacked for Artemis II, fully emptying the storage facility in the process. With the exception of the SLS second stage and Orion connector, the other pieces of the Artemis II rocket are standing by in the VAB for their turn to be stacked in the coming weeks and months.Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.Links to social media posts:https://x.com/jackiewattles/status/18...https://bsky.app/profile/lorengrush.b...Links to stories referenced:https://spacenews.com/boeing-warns-sl...https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsle...https://www.reuters.com/technology/sp...00:00 Intro00:58 Artemis II stacking continues, with the SLS Boosters almost complete01:52 Right-hand forward segment is the last of ten to be stacked, RPSF now empty03:37 The forward assemblies will top out the left and right boosters04:47 NASA releases new mission animation for Artemis II05:33 Washington political drama continues06:22 Boeing reduces the number of possible SLS lay offs11:04 Trump/Musk planning "large-scale" reduction in force, which could include NASA11:36 Other news and notes: Gateway HALO module nearing shipment to the U.S. 12:58 Thanks for watching!
NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, which is supposed to send astronauts to lunar orbit next year and then to the surface in 2027 as part of the Artemis program, is agency-owned hardware. Its development over the past decade-plus has cost tens of billions of dollars. Critics have declared it a white elephant and a waste of taxpayer dollars in an era when commercial companies can provide launches at a much lower cost.But Artemis, NASA’s lunar program, still has strong bipartisan support. Speaking to reporters last week, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) seemed to offer support for Artemis while leaving open the possibility of a significant change in how the mission is carried out.“I think we’ll continue to see innovation. What is important is that we keep moving forward to the stated objectives, and we do so with cause,” Cruz said.Asked if he would support a directive to end the rocket program, he said, “Those conversations are ongoing.”
Feb 18, 2025In this video, I look at where things stand with preparations and planning for the next three Artemis lunar missions, even as they face the possibility that President Trump and Elon Musk are going to shut them down. With that hanging over NASA's Exploration directorate, work still continues on Artemis II, III, and IV.I'll look at how Exploration Ground Systems is stacking Artemis II in the Vehicle Assembly Building and the work that remains this year to get ready to launch that crewed, circumlunar mission. Musk's SpaceX is developing the critical piece for the Artemis III lunar landing mission, and I'll look at the big picture of where Starship is, along with work on the Axiom Space EVA suit, and downstream Orion and SLS production.There's also the assembly work for most of the Artemis IV elements that continues, too, from Exploration Upper Stage to the Gateway modules to Mobile Launcher-2.The fate of all of that work now rests on decisions and positions in Washington, D.C.; we're waiting to see where Trump and Musk's axe falls next, and whether anyone in power will object.Imagery is courtesy of NASA, except where noted.Links to stories referenced:https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/cutting-moon-rocket-would-test-musks-power-slash-jobs-republican-states-2025-02-12/00:00 Intro01:04 The big picture for Artemis II05:32 Artemis III big picture08:15 Artemis IV big picture11:51 Everything depends on the political situation15:16 Thanks for watching!
Jim Free, NASA's associate administrator who has been a central voice defending the agency's Artemis moon program, is planning to leave the agency by Saturday, two sources said.[...]Free, who is in mid 50s, announced his departure plans to agency officials in a meeting on Wednesday, saying it was a tough decision to make, one of the sources said.Some agency officials expected his eventual departure as many Trump advisors criticize elements of NASA's moon program, such as its Space Launch System, an over-budget but operational moon rocket.
[Free] reiterated those schedule concerns later in the meeting when asked about the schedule for Artemis 3. “With the difficulties that SpaceX has had, I think that’s really concerning,” he said. “You can think about that slipping probably into ’26.”
