Is A Human Space Flight Compromise Emerging? (STS Extension/SD HLV etc)

[Ben the Space Brit]

Could we not just use the 5-segs as/is on a Shuttle launch or two?  Good way to test out the system, and wow, let's see the Shuttle really take off...

We'd run out of ETs before the 5-seg was flight-ready.  Might as well save them for the SDHLV tests.  That way, both the "shuttle derived" and "sparkly and new" schools of thought can be satisfied.

[Cog_in_the_machine]

I sure hope Scott Pace's prediction doesn't come true. It would be the worst possible compromise. I like how MP99 phrased it in the Direct thread:

Scott Pace, a former NASA official directing the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University, says he can foresee a compromise in which Congress maintains development of NASA's Ares I system to reach low Earth orbit and simultaneously underwrites efforts for rockets built by private firms.

Why build Ares I to compete with the commercial providers?? No no no no no !!

*headdesk*  *headdesk*  *headdesk*

cheers, Martin

[psloss]

Could we not just use the 5-segs as/is on a Shuttle launch or two?  Good way to test out the system, and wow, let's see the Shuttle really take off...

We'd run out of ETs before the 5-seg was flight-ready.  Might as well save them for the SDHLV tests.  That way, both the "shuttle derived" and "sparkly and new" schools of thought can be satisfied.

Don't think this was totally serious.  It's probably already been discussed here multiple times, but I don't know that the Ares 5-segment design has the Shuttle compatibility "features" that the proposed 5-segment design for Shuttle did.  (ET attach, thrust profile, etc.)

[Downix]

Could we not just use the 5-segs as/is on a Shuttle launch or two?  Good way to test out the system, and wow, let's see the Shuttle really take off...

We'd run out of ETs before the 5-seg was flight-ready.  Might as well save them for the SDHLV tests.  That way, both the "shuttle derived" and "sparkly and new" schools of thought can be satisfied.

Don't think this was totally serious.  It's probably already been discussed here multiple times, but I don't know that the Ares 5-segment design has the Shuttle compatibility "features" that the proposed 5-segment design for Shuttle did.  (ET attach, thrust profile, etc.)

No, not totally serious (note the smily face). 

Two more flights, with the existing manifect + STS 135 stretched out slightly, and it would fill a gap to a 36-month solution.

[upjin]

There is a way.  However it involves stretching the current manifest and a decision on HLV.

I think (hypothetically, because there is no funding for this in FY10 or proposed FY11) shuttle extension combined with shuttle-derived heavy-lift might close the gap with flights at nine month intervals:

STS-133 (Discovery):  November 28, 2010
STS-134 (Endeavour):  Currently February, instead August 2011
STS-135 (Atlantis):  Currently LON, plan for May 2012
SDLV X1:  (None):  Modified spare LWT ET, five-seg boosters, February 2013
STS-136 (Discovery):  ET from parts, four-seg SRBs using five-seg materials and processes, November 2013
STS-137 (Endeavour):  ET from parts, four-seg SRBs using five-seg materials and processes, August 2014
SDLV X2: (None):  Core from new production, five seg boosters, May 2015
SDLV IOC (Orion 1):  February 2016

(Note when the SDLV X vehicles are flown there are 18 month intervals between crewed missions; mini-gaps, if you will, where the capability to fly crews is retained but intentionally not utilized.)

Comments?

SpaceX starts ISS resupply mission sometime during 2011 with the Falcon 9.

Orbital Sciences Corp, tests their Taurus II in 2011, for ISS resupply.

The commercial sector can handle LEO resupply to ISS, so extending any shuttle mission past 2012 and arguably 2011 is unnecessary.  If there is anything NASA wants to put up in LEO, they have a number of companies and options to choose from, MINUS the need for the Space Shuttle.

The commercial/private sector can do HLV too, it isn't necessary to have a SDHLV.  The private/commercial sector could have a HLV in the 2015/2016 time frame. 

Even more, their HLV would come at less cost and risk to tax payers and have the benefit of commercializing LEO and BEO space for private and company use.  Their HLV should be able to serve dual (LEO and BEO) purposes by being scaled up or scaled down based on the number of rocket engines used.

The point of SDHLV appears highly political, like for "job transfers" and maintaining Space Shuttle facilitates use.  SDHLV is not needed from a technical point of view, it is instead a political solution.

Why should NASA/Bolden/Obama build a SDHLV for political reasons and not just solicit the private/commercial sector for a profitable and sustainable HLV?

What cost and technical advantages would a SDHLV have over a private/commercial HLV solution?  Sorry, my friends and I have tried our best, but didn't see any.
 

[simonth]

SpaceX starts ISS resupply mission sometime during 2011 with the Falcon 9.

Orbital Sciences Corp, tests their Taurus II in 2011, for ISS resupply.

Just on a sidecomment, Orbital is currently scheduled to do its COTS Demo mission that will do a complete ISS rendezvous and docking before SpaceX (COTS Demo 3), which also means that their CRS contract execution could start before SpaceX's first CRS flight.

[sdsds]

The commercial sector can handle LEO resupply to ISS, so extending any shuttle mission past 2012 and arguably 2011 is unnecessary.  If there is anything NASA wants to put up in LEO, they have a number of companies and options to choose from, MINUS the need for the Space Shuttle.

People.  What if the payload NASA wants the capability to launch and recover during 2012, 2013, and 2014 is people?  There will be a gap in US crew launch and landing capability.  Yes, Soyuz exists, and the US will pay Russia to fly US astronauts to ISS, and the US will pay Russia to fly ESA astronauts to the ISS, and the US will pay Russia to fly JAXA astronauts to the ISS.  And if Soyuz continues to function reliably, the only things the US will lose by this are money and prestige.

[Downix]

The commercial sector can handle LEO resupply to ISS, so extending any shuttle mission past 2012 and arguably 2011 is unnecessary.  If there is anything NASA wants to put up in LEO, they have a number of companies and options to choose from, MINUS the need for the Space Shuttle.

People.  What if the payload NASA wants the capability to launch and recover during 2012, 2013, and 2014 is people?  There will be a gap in US crew launch and landing capability.  Yes, Soyuz exists, and the US will pay Russia to fly US astronauts to ISS, and the US will pay Russia to fly ESA astronauts to the ISS, and the US will pay Russia to fly JAXA astronauts to the ISS.  And if Soyuz continues to function reliably, the only things the US will lose by this are money and prestige.

We lack the political will to solve this gap I fear.

[upjin]

The commercial sector can handle LEO resupply to ISS, so extending any shuttle mission past 2012 and arguably 2011 is unnecessary.  If there is anything NASA wants to put up in LEO, they have a number of companies and options to choose from, MINUS the need for the Space Shuttle.

People.  What if the payload NASA wants the capability to launch and recover during 2012, 2013, and 2014 is people?  There will be a gap in US crew launch and landing capability.  Yes, Soyuz exists, and the US will pay Russia to fly US astronauts to ISS, and the US will pay Russia to fly ESA astronauts to the ISS, and the US will pay Russia to fly JAXA astronauts to the ISS.  And if Soyuz continues to function reliably, the only things the US will lose by this are money and prestige.

We lack the political will to solve this gap I fear.

The "people gap" and how bad it is, is totally on NASA/Griffin.

SpaceX and Orbital both could fly U.S. astronauts to ISS.

With the Space Shuttle being retired, clearly, NASA should have been throwing development money and creating the contract for commercial crew capability.  Even now, where it is very clear how bad the people gap to LEO will be, NASA is still very slow and reluctant to move forward with private sector commercial crews.

Somehow NASA thinks its alright to pay RUSSIA to carry astronauts to the ISS, but not AMERICAN companies.  NASA was/is simply protecting its "territory", by "blocking" private sector American companies.

SpaceX has clearly and repeatedly told NASA they could carry crews in 3 years.  NASA/Bolden and now its on Obama too, should be helping fund the capability and pushing a commercial crew contract through.

NASA/Griffin and the Ares I is a complete ridiculous disaster and screw up.  Since the Space Shuttle will retire, and if you are pushing Ares I to carry crews, then you get it READY.  NASA has only itself and its incompetence, which Griffin so clearly was, to blame.  Even with full funding Ares I would not get crews to the ISS any faster than SpaceX or Orbital could at this point.  At least a 3 year gap, no matter how you slice it.

Ares I, the tax payer bleeding eye sore, so deserves to be canceled.  NASA needs to be moved out of LEO and there to just manage.  It is very obvious that the private/commercial sector can do LEO.  For NASA's sake and continual existence, they need to get with the philosophy of doing COTS-like programs and start to show better leadership in doing BEO and new technologies.

Speaking of which, SD HLV and mutations of Ares IV/V are not "it", are huge money waste pits, and should not be the future of the American BEO efforts. 

America needs a sustainable and profitable LEO and BEO effort, that only cooperation with the private/commercial sector, proper direction by a smarter NASA, and a private/commercial sector HLV can bring.  History will show that Griffin gets a big FAIL, for his role in the Constellation Project disaster. And for their part, the big Space Shuttle Industry and all the pork that goes with it is holding America back and not helping us go forward at this point.

[Longhorn John]

I get annoyed with politics when nothing seems to happen

[Chris Bergin]

I get annoyed with politics when nothing seems to happen

I'm not totally sure what is going on with all the imploding we're seeing of late, but remember it's all about compromises. Getting STS-135 in June is sort of a compromise position on a 2012 extension....via what is technically an extension to 2011 - as one, albeit small, example.....if approved.

[Bill White]

America needs a sustainable and profitable LEO and BEO effort, that only cooperation with the private/commercial sector, proper direction by a smarter NASA, and a private/commercial sector HLV can bring.  History will show that Griffin gets a big FAIL, for his role in the Constellation Project disaster. And for their part, the big Space Shuttle Industry and all the pork that goes with it is holding America back and not helping us go forward at this point.

Revenue streams not dependent on the taxpayers (Uncle Sugar) also is a mission critical aspect of attaining a profitable human spaceflight effort. I predict that within 10-15 years human spaceflight shall be funded by advertising dollars. Edit to add: If there is any significant human spaceflight going on at all.

Not my personal preference (darn tacky!) but a prediction nonetheless.

Speaking of which, SD HLV and mutations of Ares IV/V are not "it", are huge money waste pits, and should not be the future of the American BEO efforts.

Maybe and maybe not. Lori Garver is throwing the dice high, here.

The political calculus shall be whether NASA human spaceflight remains funded after the shuttle infrastructure is de-funded.

Note that the NewSpace / commercial (do it with depots) approach is now closely tied to Barack Obama and there are many within Obama's party who would be happy to see BEO efforts postponed indefinitely just as many Republicans shall be eager for political revenge.

And if there is no BEO exploration then depots and giant kerolox engines and other "game changers" become just another flavor of pork, to be edited from the budget in tight economic times.

Griffin obviously pushed the pendulum too far in one direction. The question now is whether Lori Garver shall push that same pendulum too far in the other direction.

[yg1968]

I get annoyed with politics when nothing seems to happen

I'm not totally sure what is going on with all the imploding we're seeing of late, but remember it's all about compromises. Getting STS-135 in June is sort of a compromise position on a 2012 extension....via what is technically an extension to 2011 - as one, albeit small, example.....if approved.

We seem to be getting the compromises in small doses. I would expect that adding STS-135 flight is a decision that can be taken by the NASA Administrator after discussing it with various people (including the President, OMB and some people in Congress). If everybody is on the same page, I imagine that the decision can be made this month without a formal Congressionnal approval for it. Obviously the funds for it will need to be apropriated for it in the coming months but I doubt that will be an issue as everybody seems to be in favour of adding the STS-135 flight.

An added advantage of adding this STS-135 flight in June 2011 is that it gives more time for Congress and the President to sort out a compromise on the HLV/Constellation issue. 

[Chris Bergin]

I get annoyed with politics when nothing seems to happen

I'm not totally sure what is going on with all the imploding we're seeing of late, but remember it's all about compromises. Getting STS-135 in June is sort of a compromise position on a 2012 extension....via what is technically an extension to 2011 - as one, albeit small, example.....if approved.

We seem to be getting the compromises in small doses. I would expect that adding STS-135 flight is a decision that can be taken by the NASA Administrator after discussing it with various people (including the President, OMB and some people in Congress). If everybody is on the same page, I imagine that the decision can be made this month without a formal Congressionnal approval for it. Obviously the funds for it will need to be apropriated for it in the coming months but I doubt that will be an issue as everybody seems to be in favour of adding the STS-135 flight.

An added advantage of adding this STS-135 flight in June 2011 is that it gives more time for Congress and the President to sort out a compromise on the HLV/Constellation issue. 

Yep, I totally concur with all of that, FWIW. The first thing that was required was a manifest stretch, and we've gained some of that via the payload issues.

[phantomdj]

I get annoyed with politics when nothing seems to happen

I'm not totally sure what is going on with all the imploding we're seeing of late, but remember it's all about compromises. Getting STS-135 in June is sort of a compromise position on a 2012 extension....via what is technically an extension to 2011 - as one, albeit small, example.....if approved.

We seem to be getting the compromises in small doses. I would expect that adding STS-135 flight is a decision that can be taken by the NASA Administrator after discussing it with various people (including the President, OMB and some people in Congress). If everybody is on the same page, I imagine that the decision can be made this month without a formal Congressionnal approval for it. Obviously the funds for it will need to be apropriated for it in the coming months but I doubt that will be an issue as everybody seems to be in favour of adding the STS-135 flight.

An added advantage of adding this STS-135 flight in June 2011 is that it gives more time for Congress and the President to sort out a compromise on the HLV/Constellation issue. 

Yep, I totally concur with all of that, FWIW. The first thing that was required was a manifest stretch, and we've gained some of that via the payload issues.

This is all true enough but will there be enough workers around to implement any beyond June 2011 strategy for a compromise on the HLV/Constellation issue?  Consider the following…

Most, if not all, of the black boxes have been tested including those for the LON. 

The final testing of the SRB FWD and AFT skirts for the LON will be tested by the end of Sept. 2010.

Three vehicles worth of workers do not need to be maintained.

United Space Allance is still looking at a major RIF by Oct 2010 unless directed by NASA to maintain them for any possible HLV.

[Ben the Space Brit]

I know that Chris doesn't like us linking to space blogs, but I think it is relevant here.  JSC has released a fairly 'executive summary' assessment of shuttle-derived launch vehicles, a PDF version of which you can download here.

Apart from having a DIRECT squee-gasm at the J-231 illustrated on the front page, I think that this can be said to show several things going on under the surface.  Firstly, SSP knew about and was possibly co-operating with developing CxP's 'Ares Alternative' concepts.  Secondly, this lends weight to the suggestion that there is a significant undercurrent of resistance to the FY2011 proposals inside the agency but hidden from sight.  I mean, the options matrix in the PDF pretty much calls the FY2011 path a disaster.

I wonder if John Shannon will shortly be promoted sideways like Jeff Hanley was?

[mr_magoo]

Nelson sends letter to Mikulski informing her of his committe's intentions.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/

HLV now,  commercial crew slowdown.

[gladiator1332]

Thanks for sharing....very interesting, and at first glance, a very sensible approach to all of this.

[neilh]

Nelson sends letter to Mikulski informing her of his committe's intentions.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/

HLV now,  commercial crew slowdown.

Interesting. Some of the compromises are highly suboptimal, but potentially could result in a reasonable program. I would certainly hope that commercial crew is significantly more than $50M/year, though.

I'm also glad to see that Nelson's apparently dropped the "continued Ares I test launch program" silliness.

[FinalFrontier]

Nelson sends letter to Mikulski informing her of his committe's intentions.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/

HLV now,  commercial crew slowdown.

Very interesting. This and what  Ben has posted suggests there may be movement on SDHLV inline again. And if ATK has changed their position on 4 seg srm costs..................

But the clock is ticking and time is running out.