Author Topic: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions  (Read 132917 times)

Offline notsorandom

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1740
  • Ohio
  • Liked: 438
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #220 on: 12/08/2014 04:03 am »
If you are the SMD do you want to pay for the launch vehicle? The money saved by using a gifted launch vehicle can be used to on reducing schedule and technology risk or a better scientific payload.

Gifted launch vehicle?  Haven't you heard of TNSTAAFL?

The money for building a SLS has to come out of NASA's budget somewhere, unless you think the National Park Service is going to be "gifting" some of their budget over to cover the costs.  So if the Science directorate that would be building and operating the Europa mission doesn't pay for the launcher, that means the Exploration directorate has to, which means that much less money for them to use for future SLS development (i.e. the 130mt version mandated by Congress).

But there is more to the Europa decision than just cost (although that's pretty significant in itself), and that would be potential availability of the launcher when the Europa mission payload is ready.  They already know that they can launch on an EELV and do the mission, and there is pretty much zero risk in relying on an EELV because if one is not available the mission could be changed to another (yes, not easy, but doable).  But if the SLS is not available, for whatever reason, there are no alternatives.  That's a big risk for the Europa mission to take.
Gifted the launcher means that HSF picks up the tab or part of it for that particular SLS and SMD isn't stuck with paying for all of it. They are both part of NASA therefor its not a problem legally. They made deals like this with probes and the Shuttle a number of times. There was a while where the cost charged for a Shuttle launch was the marginal cost of the flight rather than picking up the proportional total systems cost.
Quote
SLS has a certain future, more so than any Europa mission.
Quote
The best that can be said is that the development of the SLS is going well.  But without real users that makes it's operational future very uncertain.
Lets just for the sake of argument and say that SLS is useless (its not of course). The F-35 needs two types of engines right? That is a billion dollar program which is happily cranking along with no real use. Lack of a need has never stood in the way of politics.

Quote
Quote
By 2017 when the new president and congress are sworn in it will be will be within a year of initial operating capability.

No, the first full-up SLS launch is not until 2021, which is when the Exploration Upper Stage (EUS) will have it's first flight.  So the earliest NASA could declare the SLS operational is then, assuming two test flights are enough to certify the SLS as being operational.
Yes, when SLS launches in 2018 it be a full up flight. There will be no battleship stages on it. It will fling Orion out beyond LEO.
Quote
Quote
It is doubtful it is going to run into any developmental problems...

Most of my career has been working for government contractors supporting military products, and Congress cancels programs all the time before they become operational, and sometimes after they have become operational.  Congress has no long term memory about their actions, and they have no compunction about undoing what a previous Congress has done.  No program is safe.
The same actors and dynamics between them who lead to SLS's creation years ago are still in place. They will be till 2017. No one new has been elected who has the power to kill SLS. It is also logical to assume that people will continue to act in the same way as they have been previously. I doubt Sen. Shely is going to wake up one morning and think "wow I have made a terrible mistake".

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8862
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11934
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #221 on: 12/08/2014 06:29 am »
Gifted the launcher means that HSF picks up the tab or part of it for that particular SLS and SMD isn't stuck with paying for all of it. They are both part of NASA therefor its not a problem legally.

Yes, I said as much previously.

Quote
They made deals like this with probes and the Shuttle a number of times. There was a while where the cost charged for a Shuttle launch was the marginal cost of the flight rather than picking up the proportional total systems cost.

I doubt they shifted the full amount over though, since at the time NASA really didn't keep track of Shuttle costs.  Regardless, it doesn't matter how much they shift around, it still comes out of NASA's overall budget - and so far the budget has not been increased to account for flying the SLS operationally.

Quote
Lets just for the sake of argument and say that SLS is useless (its not of course). The F-35 needs two types of engines right? That is a billion dollar program which is happily cranking along with no real use. Lack of a need has never stood in the way of politics.

The F-35 is a deterrence system, just like virtually every other weapon system our military has.  And so far Congress has indeed agreed with the need for the F-35 and they have provided the funding to make the F-35 operational.  Congress so far has not approved any funds for operational flights of the SLS.

How does this missions like Europa?

For the program manager it creates uncertainty.  Will the unique launch vehicle that I am committing to be there when I need it?

But the SLS has been approved (so far) for development, why wouldn't it be there for operational use?  If not enough users are identified and funded, then Congress could decide to mothball or cancel the program.  And potential users know this.  But that level of uncertainty doesn't happen if they go with an EELV.  Program managers have to weigh those odds when making their choices.

Quote
Yes, when SLS launches in 2018 it be a full up flight. There will be no battleship stages on it. It will fling Orion out beyond LEO.

The 2018 flight will be using the interim upper stage, so no it's not the first full-up flight.

Quote
The same actors and dynamics between them who lead to SLS's creation years ago are still in place. They will be till 2017. No one new has been elected who has the power to kill SLS. It is also logical to assume that people will continue to act in the same way as they have been previously. I doubt Sen. Shely is going to wake up one morning and think "wow I have made a terrible mistake".

You are right, for the next two years the political status quo will be the same.  But remember that not everyone on the Republican side likes the SLS, and so far the only funding has been for development, not operational use.  Shelby and other SLS supporters have to fight a whole new battle to fund both the once-per-year operational SLS flights, AND the funding for the missions and payloads those SLS will fly.  So far that has not been debated, and every year that goes by raises the cost of those programs (i.e. they are already late in funding missions that launch in 2021).  Plus there will be a new President in two years, and they may not support the SLS anymore than Obama has, and possibly even less.

For me though, as it usually is in politics, you have to watch the flow of money.  If it doesn't materialize to use the SLS, it will be cancelled.  If it does materialize, it won't.  Pretty simple.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline jgoldader

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 760
  • Liked: 322
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #222 on: 12/08/2014 09:59 am »
NASA has shown it is serious about exploring Mars.

SNIP

If NASA was serious about Europa, you'd see a similar cadence, and it's not there.  Mission times are very long, costs are very high, and power and radiation are much more significant obstacles than on Mars missions.

You're contradicting yourself. Even if NASA was "serious" about Europa, all those physical factors remain in place that would limit the cadence of Europa missions. Mars is an attractive target for exploration, but it is also an easier target for exploration. It is possible to send a mission there, gather the data, and then design a new mission based upon that data and send it only a few years later. In fact, with Mars it is possible to do this several times a decade.

In contrast, it takes so long to get out to Jupiter that you have to wait a long time before you can incorporate what you learn into a new mission.

There are unavoidable things, like long travel times.   However, it's been a long time since Galileo.  There has been no rush to do a follow-on mission.  Maybe there's just nothing useful that can be done for less than a billion dollars; or maybe there hasn't been the interest or will or need to find a way to do it more cheaply.  (That may be changing.) There have been cool animations of submersibles, but those are for the distant future.

But if you're not planning (expect to fund) a lander, you don't really need the radar data, then...
Recovering astronomer

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7828
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #223 on: 12/08/2014 12:30 pm »
A friend of mine used to run NASA's astronomy division. He has said that even if the launches were given to him for free he had a hard time paying for the payloads.

The same applies here--all this talk about using SLS for science mission makes the assumption that the science directorate is going to magically be able to pay for the mission. Might as well assume unicorns.

Offline Mark S

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2284
  • Dallas, TX
  • Liked: 396
  • Likes Given: 80
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #224 on: 12/08/2014 12:41 pm »
Well, unicorns or no, SLS is Congress's baby. And if SLS needs payloads, then Congress will mandate payloads. Heck, they might even be persuaded to pay for them.

There is a House hearing on the 10th to review progress on SLS and MPCV. I expect to hear questions from Congress on how NASA can pick up the pace on SLS, not how to kill it. Especially after the resounding success of EFT-1, both in actual technical terms, and in public relations terms.

Cheers!

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #225 on: 12/08/2014 12:43 pm »
Well, unicorns or no, SLS is Congress's baby. And if SLS needs payloads, then Congress will mandate payloads. Heck, they might even be persuaded to pay for them.

My worry? They will demand payloads and deploy much rhetoric and threats of detailed investigations into how NASA is being run to support those demands. The one thing they won't actually do is provide funding for them. Because I suspect that many of them secretly think that NASA already gets more than enough money and is just malingering for some reason.
"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!!!

Offline JasonAW3

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2443
  • Claremore, Ok.
  • Liked: 410
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #226 on: 12/08/2014 03:43 pm »
I can just see it...

     "Mr. Chairman, I propose that we send a 1 meter by 4 meter by 9 meter block of black obsidian stone, to the Moon, and more precisely Tycho Crater..."

     "Mr. Senator from California, why should we sent this block of stone to the moon and what purpose would it serve."

     "Mr. Chairman, it would be a dedication to Stanley Kubrick and Sir Arthur C. Clarke and the movie they both worked on, "2001: A Space Odyssey"".

     "Mr Senator, would it not actually be a better monument to these brilliantly foresighted people to actually establish a working Moon Base, say around Copernicus Crater?"

     "Perhaps it would, Mr. Chairman, but this project has the advantage of providing thousands of jobs, being vastly cheaper than a Moon Base, and it would be really cool."

     "Mr. Senator, I think perhaps the "Coolness Factor" is perhaps the deciding factor here.  All infavor of the project as proposed?..."
My God!  It's full of universes!

Offline Will

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 902
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #227 on: 12/08/2014 04:55 pm »
I can just see it...

     "Mr. Chairman, I propose that we send a 1 meter by 4 meter by 9 meter block of black obsidian stone, to the Moon, and more precisely Tycho Crater..."

     "Mr. Senator from California, why should we sent this block of stone to the moon and what purpose would it serve."

     "Mr. Chairman, it would be a dedication to Stanley Kubrick and Sir Arthur C. Clarke and the movie they both worked on, "2001: A Space Odyssey"".

     "Mr Senator, would it not actually be a better monument to these brilliantly foresighted people to actually establish a working Moon Base, say around Copernicus Crater?"

     "Perhaps it would, Mr. Chairman, but this project has the advantage of providing thousands of jobs, being vastly cheaper than a Moon Base, and it would be really cool."

     "Mr. Senator, I think perhaps the "Coolness Factor" is perhaps the deciding factor here.  All infavor of the project as proposed?..."

You know what would be great? A private mission to Tycho Crater to secretly deploy an inflatable monolith. And then photograph it.

Offline ncb1397

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3497
  • Liked: 2310
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #228 on: 12/08/2014 05:34 pm »
They made deals like this with probes and the Shuttle a number of times. There was a while where the cost charged for a Shuttle launch was the marginal cost of the flight rather than picking up the proportional total systems cost.

I doubt they shifted the full amount over though, since at the time NASA really didn't keep track of Shuttle costs.  Regardless, it doesn't matter how much they shift around, it still comes out of NASA's overall budget - and so far the budget has not been increased to account for flying the SLS operationally.

Why would the construction of additional cores be funded before a test flight occurs? You could simply be building a lot of flawed rockets. All you have to do is extrapolate the SLS budget out forever and there will be some cadence to the launches just as the current budget profile allows for a flight in 2018. NASA is funded on an annual basis, and so looking for money that would be spent 4 years+ out in the current budget is the reason you aren't seeing the money.
« Last Edit: 12/08/2014 05:36 pm by ncb1397 »

Offline newpylong

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1499
  • Liked: 200
  • Likes Given: 343
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #229 on: 12/08/2014 05:48 pm »

I doubt they shifted the full amount over though, since at the time NASA really didn't keep track of Shuttle costs.  Regardless, it doesn't matter how much they shift around, it still comes out of NASA's overall budget - and so far the budget has not been increased to account for flying the SLS operationally.



This is a straw man argument.

Once core development (by far the most expensive) winds down the money will be there within the appropriated budget. No one is planning on any substantial increase. The Upper Stage and Advanced Boosters if ever RFP'd will not come close to the overall expensive of initial vehicle development.

Once STS was built they found ways to build and fly things. Anyone who thinks it is not possible again has their head in the sand.


Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #230 on: 12/08/2014 06:04 pm »

Once STS was built they found ways to build and fly things. Anyone who thinks it is not possible again has their head in the sand.

It still was sucking the life out of other NASA programs.  The "continuing" development cycle is just a way of keeping MSFC busy.
« Last Edit: 12/08/2014 06:05 pm by Jim »

Offline llanitedave

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2286
  • Nevada Desert
  • Liked: 1545
  • Likes Given: 2052
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #231 on: 12/08/2014 06:15 pm »
Launching would be a good way of keeping them busy too.
"I've just abducted an alien -- now what?"

Offline ncb1397

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3497
  • Liked: 2310
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #232 on: 12/08/2014 06:22 pm »

Once STS was built they found ways to build and fly things. Anyone who thinks it is not possible again has their head in the sand.

It still was sucking the life out of other NASA programs.  The "continuing" development cycle is just a way of keeping MSFC busy.

If HSF wasn't being carried out, legislators would probably see NASA as simply a smaller agency like ESA. Shuttle was funded under its own line item. Taking shuttle away doesn't magically enduce legislators to think other areas of NASA need more money to accomplish the tasks they want them to. Cancelling SLS/Orion doesn't lead a legislator to all of a sudden think we need to pour 3 billiion a year into heliophysics instead. Ok, we aren't sending humans to space, therefore we need to understand the sun better. It just doesn't compute. It is just as likely to go to some other agency or leave the budget altogether to accomplish deficit reduction.

Somehow a big portion of current legislators got it into their heads that HSF = national prestige. A lot of them were probably kids during the Apollo era which might have something to do with it. You simply can't claim to be a Super Power without some sort of manned space flight capability and hopefully better than anyone else...the internal logic must go. So, they spend .5% of the federal budget on NasaSpaceFlight.com's userbase's collective hobby. I don't see what the fuss is about. Ok, a big rocket lights some senator's shorts on fire. How does the saying go: don't look a gift horse in the mouth?
« Last Edit: 12/08/2014 06:36 pm by ncb1397 »

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7828
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #233 on: 12/08/2014 11:19 pm »
Well, unicorns or no, SLS is Congress's baby. And if SLS needs payloads, then Congress will mandate payloads. Heck, they might even be persuaded to pay for them.


Except that if they are not already paying for human spacecraft payloads for SLS, why does anybody think they will pay for science payloads for SLS?

And just to repeat something that I've said here before, Europa Clipper and Mars Sample Return are not actually equal in terms of affordability or programmatics. Europa Clipper could happen and could fly on SLS. But the Mars 2020 rover is ALREADY starting NASA's sample return campaign (and won't be using SLS), and the reason that NASA has adopted a multi-mission sample return campaign is because it is unaffordable (and unwise) to do sample collection, ascent from Mars, and return to Earth all in one single mission. That's a many billion dollar mission that cannot fit into the planetary science budget if it all happens at once. That's why they want to spread it out. So when the SLS office fits a single big sample return mission onto their notional schedule, they're completely ignoring what it is possible for the planetary side of NASA to do.

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8862
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11934
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #234 on: 12/09/2014 08:04 pm »
I doubt they shifted the full amount over though, since at the time NASA really didn't keep track of Shuttle costs.  Regardless, it doesn't matter how much they shift around, it still comes out of NASA's overall budget - and so far the budget has not been increased to account for flying the SLS operationally.
This is a straw man argument.

Once core development (by far the most expensive) winds down the money will be there within the appropriated budget. No one is planning on any substantial increase.

This is speculation of course, since no one in the political world that is responsible for providing NASA with funding has stated that NASA's budget will not be decreased as development winds down on the SLS.  And the only way to they would increase funding would be by approving a mission or payload for the SLS, and so far they have not seriously considered any.

Quote
Once STS was built they found ways to build and fly things. Anyone who thinks it is not possible again has their head in the sand.

I'm not sure you realize the difference between the Shuttle and the SLS, and how that affects the future of the SLS.

The Shuttle was a transportation system that was planned to provide frequent, low-cost access to space for payloads up to about 20mt, which satisfied the needs of just about every commercial, military and NASA product and program.  Customers were building payloads for the Shuttle well in advance of the Shuttle becoming operational.  Just a few examples:

- The first commercial payload launch on the Shuttle (SBS 3) was ordered in 1977 and launched on STS-5 (11/11/82).

- NASA's first TDRS satellite was launched on STS-6 (4/4/83).  Don't know when construction started, but it was 3 more years until the second of seven ordered was ready for launch.

- The Hubble was funded in 1978 and initially planned to fly on the Shuttle in 1983.  It was delayed until 1990, which is another cautionary tale for the SLS.

Just look at the list of Shuttle missions on this Wikipedia page and you'll see that customers were not waiting for the Shuttle system to proven before they committed to flying on it.  Which was pretty ballsy considering no one had ever created a manned, reusable spaceplane before.  By comparison there is virtually no technical risk concerning the SLS - the U.S. aerospace industry has been building rockets for decades, and is pretty good at it.

But the SLS is not being built to provide frequent, low-cost access to space, nor is it supposed to be the primary transportation system that commercial, military and NASA will use.  NASA will not even use it for every need they have, since it's too expensive.

So while the answer for the question "who will use the Shuttle" was "EVERYONE", the answer to the question of "who will use the SLS" is "only users that have HLV-sized payloads or need high-energy transport beyond Earth".  See the difference?

The pool of potential payloads for the SLS is rather limited without substantially increased funding by Congress for new NASA missions such as going to the Moon/Mars, and the Europa and Mars sample return missions are not enough need to justify the SLS by themselves (and who knows when they will eventually launch anyways).

At this point the SLS is a niche solution for a need that has not been proven.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8862
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11934
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #235 on: 12/09/2014 08:30 pm »
If HSF wasn't being carried out, legislators would probably see NASA as simply a smaller agency like ESA.

It's a possibility.  Although part of the reason we are doing what we're doing today, and the way we're doing it, is that NASA has a very large facility and industrial base (what I'll call the "NASA Industry Complex") that relies on continued funding - doing whatever.  That was definitely part of the thinking for why the SLS and Orion/MPCV were created out of the ashes of the Constellation program, since NASA did not ask for them.

Quote
Cancelling SLS/Orion doesn't lead a legislator to all of a sudden think we need to pour 3 billiion a year into heliophysics instead. Ok, we aren't sending humans to space, therefore we need to understand the sun better. It just doesn't compute.

You are right.  If that were all that was to considered, it would not compute or equate.  But we have the "NASA Industry Complex" to take into consideration.  Can you see a politician like Shelby voting to significantly reduce the size of the Marshall Space Flight Center - for any reason?  How do you think Boeing and Lockheed Martin would react to a significant reduction in contracts coming from NASA?  Lots of people care about these topics, and not for the reasons you or I would.

Quote
It is just as likely to go to some other agency or leave the budget altogether to accomplish deficit reduction.

If politics was not involved that may be true.  But for the good or bad, politics is heavily involved, so it's hard to predict what would happen.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline mike robel

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2304
  • Merritt Island, FL
  • Liked: 369
  • Likes Given: 260
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #236 on: 12/09/2014 09:21 pm »

You are right.  If that were all that was to considered, it would not compute or equate.  But we have the "NASA Industry Complex" to take into consideration.  Can you see a politician like Shelby voting to significantly reduce the size of the Marshall Space Flight Center - for any reason?  How do you think Boeing and Lockheed Martin would react to a significant reduction in contracts coming from NASA?  Lots of people care about these topics, and not for the reasons you or I would.


I suspect Companies would react the same way they do when military projects are cut.  Take the cancellation fee, fire a bunch of people, bitch through their lobbyists, and look for new work and/or try to self off non-productive portuons of the company, or pursue mergers.

Politicians of all sorts vote to shut down military facilities.  Such a program could benefit NASA through consolidation of similar functions at different locations.  For example (although this would probably not be done now cause it would be way expensive, even if someone provided an excellent reason) move all functions of JSC to KSC.  Control facilities would be centralized, all training would take place at KSC, travel between JSC and KSC would be saved, and I am sure there would be other benefits.  Perhaps even movement of MSFC to KSC would result in further savings and consolidation.

Balenced against this, from NASA's view would be the further erosion of their political support base.

But there is undoubtedly a little pork fat that could be trimmed from other centers and merged.

Offline newpylong

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1499
  • Liked: 200
  • Likes Given: 343
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #237 on: 12/09/2014 10:34 pm »
I doubt they shifted the full amount over though, since at the time NASA really didn't keep track of Shuttle costs.  Regardless, it doesn't matter how much they shift around, it still comes out of NASA's overall budget - and so far the budget has not been increased to account for flying the SLS operationally.
This is a straw man argument.

Once core development (by far the most expensive) winds down the money will be there within the appropriated budget. No one is planning on any substantial increase.

This is speculation of course, since no one in the political world that is responsible for providing NASA with funding has stated that NASA's budget will not be decreased as development winds down on the SLS.  And the only way to they would increase funding would be by approving a mission or payload for the SLS, and so far they have not seriously considered any.

Quote
Once STS was built they found ways to build and fly things. Anyone who thinks it is not possible again has their head in the sand.

I'm not sure you realize the difference between the Shuttle and the SLS, and how that affects the future of the SLS.

The Shuttle was a transportation system that was planned to provide frequent, low-cost access to space for payloads up to about 20mt, which satisfied the needs of just about every commercial, military and NASA product and program.  Customers were building payloads for the Shuttle well in advance of the Shuttle becoming operational.  Just a few examples:

- The first commercial payload launch on the Shuttle (SBS 3) was ordered in 1977 and launched on STS-5 (11/11/82).

- NASA's first TDRS satellite was launched on STS-6 (4/4/83).  Don't know when construction started, but it was 3 more years until the second of seven ordered was ready for launch.

- The Hubble was funded in 1978 and initially planned to fly on the Shuttle in 1983.  It was delayed until 1990, which is another cautionary tale for the SLS.

Just look at the list of Shuttle missions on this Wikipedia page and you'll see that customers were not waiting for the Shuttle system to proven before they committed to flying on it.  Which was pretty ballsy considering no one had ever created a manned, reusable spaceplane before.  By comparison there is virtually no technical risk concerning the SLS - the U.S. aerospace industry has been building rockets for decades, and is pretty good at it.

But the SLS is not being built to provide frequent, low-cost access to space, nor is it supposed to be the primary transportation system that commercial, military and NASA will use.  NASA will not even use it for every need they have, since it's too expensive.

So while the answer for the question "who will use the Shuttle" was "EVERYONE", the answer to the question of "who will use the SLS" is "only users that have HLV-sized payloads or need high-energy transport beyond Earth".  See the difference?

The pool of potential payloads for the SLS is rather limited without substantially increased funding by Congress for new NASA missions such as going to the Moon/Mars, and the Europa and Mars sample return missions are not enough need to justify the SLS by themselves (and who knows when they will eventually launch anyways).

At this point the SLS is a niche solution for a need that has not been proven.

Thanks for the history lesson. Considering I was involved in shuttle this was a good laugh.

The point, which you once again sidestepped, is that it is speculation that a budget increase is required to fly anything.

Didn't you say you were in operations? You should know it's common place to see reduced operational cost as a product's life cycle moves from development to operational use.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #238 on: 12/10/2014 01:13 am »
Launching would be a good way of keeping them busy too.

no, launching  doesn't use development people

Offline muomega0

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 862
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: SLS manifest targets Europa and Mars Sample Return missions
« Reply #239 on: 12/10/2014 02:21 am »
Considering I was involved in shuttle this was a good laugh.
The point, which you once again sidestepped, is that it is speculation that a budget increase is required to fly anything.
Didn't you say you were in operations? You should know it's common place to see reduced operational cost as a product's life cycle moves from development to operational use.
One would intuitively think that, but not with NASA LV and vehicle programs:  the budget request shows no reductions in total costs. 

The development of shuttle ended decades ago, operations were fairly constant 2007 to 2010, and not being reduced at all.
Also in the attached     FY2007       FY2008   FY2009     FY2010      FY2011
Total Space Shuttle     3,215.3      3,266.7    2.981.7    2.983.7          95.7

In the transition to *developing* a super HLV, using off the shelf hardware, the development costs are about the same as the Shuttle operational costs in 2011 and forward (~3B)

Per the 2015 Bill, SLS must be operational by Dec 2017 and loft 130 mT, and is funded at 2.1B and Orion 1.1B.

Per last years request (so values are ~), the budget is still  ~3.1B  level after 2017. 
                                  FY  13      FY14    FY2015     FY2016     FY2017   FY2018   FY 2019
ISS                                    3.7      3.8           3.9           3.9            4.0          4.1           4.6
Onion                                1.1      1.2            1.1           1.1            1.1          1.1           1.1
SLS                                   2.0      2.0            2.1          2.1            2.1          2.1          2.1     
Ground                             0.35    0.32          0.35         0.4            0.43       0.44         0.45   
Missions                                0         0               0             0               0             0               0    0  0           

2011 to 2021:  30B will be spent and still no missions, perhaps only a one test flight with crew, and funding for non-HSF Europa and Mars is TBD.
Due to economic reasons driven by politics and policy, SLS/Orion/existing EELV is not taking Astronauts anywhere important                                 

Tags:
 

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