Author Topic: Predicting the SLS  (Read 258992 times)

Offline Spacely

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 300
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #60 on: 11/03/2010 08:06 pm »
When is NASA due to report their first SLS findings to Congress?

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10565
  • Liked: 815
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #61 on: 11/03/2010 08:56 pm »
I don't have a copy in front of me right now, but wasn't it 90 days after signing (Oct 11)?   Someone please correct me if I'm wrong :)

That would put it mid-January.

Ross.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2010 08:57 pm by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline Spacetime

  • Member
  • Posts: 62
    • Nasaengineer.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #62 on: 11/03/2010 09:35 pm »
Third that.  SLS, and specifically a SDHLV/DIRECT will never see the light of launch. 

It's unsustainable. Finishing Orion and seeding the rest to commercial and EELV upgrades would be a better use of money.

There is a lot of truth in that.  Bolden in a meeting yesterday at KSC said "everything is still on the table".  No SLS architecture has been chosen yet.  It'll depend on the NASA budget.  Both SDLV and RP-1 based vehicles are being looked at.  An EELV (Atlas Phase 2) is substantially cheaper than the SDLV HLLV.  He stated that a SLS architecture would be chosen and work will begin soon - "within months".

I predict an EELV based SLS architecture.


This is accurate. Look for an answer mid Feb.

Affordability is very high priority.

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10565
  • Liked: 815
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #63 on: 11/03/2010 09:49 pm »
The politics won't align correctly behind an EELV variant.

The EELV's were the original plan in the O'Keefe/Steidle days.   They ran the whole table.   They were the "Program of Record" immediately after VSE was announced.

But Congress threw that plan out just a few months later.   Why?   Because it failed to do the "spread the wealth" / jobs thing that they require from NASA.   Like it or loath it, that remains the pound of flesh Congress requires in order to provide NASA with its annual budget.   Mess with that at your peril.

I promise you that the same factors will decide this again.

An SD-HLV solution remains the only one that has a real chance of getting all the political forces that control NASA's budget, to align correctly behind it.   Despite the changes in the political landscape last night (and the three prior ones over the last ~5-6 years), that same fact remains just as true today, as it was when EELV's were kicked out last time.

Ross.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2010 10:00 pm by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7684
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2446
  • Likes Given: 2274
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #64 on: 11/03/2010 09:56 pm »
Third that.  SLS, and specifically a SDHLV/DIRECT will never see the light of launch. 

It's unsustainable. Finishing Orion and seeding the rest to commercial and EELV upgrades would be a better use of money.

There is a lot of truth in that.  Bolden in a meeting yesterday at KSC said "everything is still on the table".  No SLS architecture has been chosen yet.  It'll depend on the NASA budget.  Both SDLV and RP-1 based vehicles are being looked at.  An EELV (Atlas Phase 2) is substantially cheaper than the SDLV HLLV.  He stated that a SLS architecture would be chosen and work will begin soon - "within months".

I predict an EELV based SLS architecture.


What exactly are you all predicting?  That NASA will propose to Congress an EELV based architecture?  Or that Congress will appropriate funds for one?

And please be clear:  by "Atlas Phase 2" do you mean a vehicle that uses no motors from ATK and no engines from UT/PWR?  You feel NPO Energomash and Aerojet have an equally good shot at getting vehicles that use their products funded by Congress?  Are you thus predicting Congress will make its decisions solely based on the technical merits of the case?
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6362
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4235
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #65 on: 11/03/2010 10:52 pm »
IMO this new Congress, certainly the House, is very unlikely to go for anything that depends on a Russian license.  Period. 
DM

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38142
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 22612
  • Likes Given: 432
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #66 on: 11/03/2010 10:55 pm »

But Congress threw that plan out just a few months later.   

wrong.  griffin did it and Congress had nothing to do with it.  It never got to a point where Congress was involved to make such a point.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2010 10:58 pm by Jim »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38142
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 22612
  • Likes Given: 432
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #67 on: 11/03/2010 10:56 pm »
IMO this new Congress, certainly the House, is very unlikely to go for anything that depends on a Russian license.  Period. 

PWR already has the license. They can build the engines if needed.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6362
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4235
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #68 on: 11/03/2010 11:02 pm »
Can they revoke it in the case of an international incident?  If so, see above.

« Last Edit: 11/03/2010 11:11 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38142
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 22612
  • Likes Given: 432
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #69 on: 11/03/2010 11:05 pm »
Can they revoke it in the case of an international incident?  If so, see above.

I don't believe you just said that.

Who is going to stop them from building them if there is such an incident?
« Last Edit: 11/03/2010 11:07 pm by Jim »

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 678
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #70 on: 11/03/2010 11:08 pm »
Can they revoke it in the case of an international incident?  If so, see above.

Can anyone take away plans for an items that you rightfully procured?  No.

Well to be fair F-1 schematics/plans exist as well - but it still doesn't make it easy to build a new one should one want to.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38142
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 22612
  • Likes Given: 432
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #71 on: 11/03/2010 11:12 pm »

Well to be fair F-1 schematics/plans exist as well - but it still doesn't make it easy to build a new one should one want to.

PWR has built some components

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6362
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4235
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #72 on: 11/03/2010 11:13 pm »
Jim,

It's a matter of international patent law, and if Russia holds the rights to X-engine or tech they can revoke the license quoting national security issues. 

My concern is the widening policy gap between Putin and his followers who retain nationalist tendencies, and the followers of Medvedev who are more internationalist and want a strong relationship with the US. 

This will come to a head soon, and if Putin returns so might some of his more xenophobic tendencies.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2010 11:15 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38142
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 22612
  • Likes Given: 432
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #73 on: 11/03/2010 11:18 pm »
Jim,

It's a matter of international patent law, and if Russia holds the rights they can revoke the license quoting national security issues.


1.  No they can't, they are property of PWR
2.  If they got uppity, we would thumb our noses at them
3.  The DOD wouldn't approved the use of the engine if it were so
« Last Edit: 11/03/2010 11:20 pm by Jim »

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6362
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4235
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #74 on: 11/03/2010 11:37 pm »
DoD does what they're told by the Administration, and violating a license would put us afoul of the WTO treaty. In licensing posession is not 9/10 of the law.
DM

Offline madscientist197

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1014
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #75 on: 11/04/2010 12:11 am »
Patent law doesn't necessarily always apply in national security situations.
John

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6362
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4235
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #76 on: 11/04/2010 01:11 am »
My point is to avoid a potential area of conflict with a petulant Russian govt. if nationalists decide to cause one.  Better to use local, even if that is inconvenient at the front end.
DM

Offline Mark S

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2284
  • Dallas, TX
  • Liked: 396
  • Likes Given: 80
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #77 on: 11/04/2010 01:17 am »
I predict that NASA will come back to Congress with a report that endorses the HEFT 5/5 - J252SH - Ares-V Classic launcher, using the logic that it will save money "in the long run". Which of course will actually cost more and require a substantial budget increase to meet the deadlines enacted by the NASA Auth. Act of 2010.

Congress will come back with a firm "no" answer and a scathing rebuke. NASA will pout and mutter under their breath that "we're the rocket scientists, not Congress". Congress will simply state that NASA can find a way to do what they were asked to do with the budget they were given, or they can do without.

Then NASA will go back to the drawing board and amazingly enough come up with the HEFT 4/3 - J-130 configuration that they should have had the sense to propose in the first place.

Time will tell. Eventually. Some time after the heat death of the universe, at this rate.

Mark S.

Offline kkattula

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3008
  • Melbourne, Australia
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 117
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #78 on: 11/04/2010 02:03 am »

Did I forget anyone? Oh, and can you guess to which group I belong?

- Those who don't wish for SLS to fail and don't expect it to fail because NASA can achieve great things if given a clear, practical plan and resources to execute it.

Can it?

$18bn per year, every year, is *a lot* of resources. Ask SpaceX, Orbital, or ULA what they'd do if they magically had those monies.

True, but look at what NASA has to do with all that money.  Maintain all those centers, support all the pork that's been tacked on over the years, fly Shuttle, support ISS, PLUS develop a new rocket.

Still, I think there's plenty of money in the current budget to do what needs to be done. Just not enough to do what doesn't need to be done.

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10565
  • Liked: 815
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: Predicting the SLS
« Reply #79 on: 11/04/2010 02:59 am »

But Congress threw that plan out just a few months later.   

wrong.  griffin did it and Congress had nothing to do with it.

Sorry Jim, this time you are definitely the one who is in error.

Why do you think Congress wanted Griffin in the first place?

Go back and watch his Senate testimony (the video is probably somewhere here on NSF?).   In it, Griffin said *everything* they wanted to hear regarding Shuttle-derived and job preservation.

Of course, in hindsight we now all know his promises were all a complete bait'n'switch, but at the time Griffin was the one who got through the behind-closed-doors Presidential nomination process and who was ultimately approved, specifically because he had clear plans to replace O'Keefe/Steidle's EELV-based plan.

Congress approved Griffin primarily *because* he planned to replace the EELV option and that was what they were demanding.   He would never have gotten nominated otherwise.

Ross.
« Last Edit: 11/04/2010 03:05 am by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1