Author Topic: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding  (Read 35333 times)

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #20 on: 05/15/2018 11:43 am »
This is bordering on tragic. What can be done about this?! :(

Build an additional mobile launcher!  :o
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #21 on: 05/15/2018 11:49 am »
I thought there was going to be two operational Crawlers? I know one was extensively upgraded and repaired over the last couple of years. I also know that the old Ares 1 tower is being modified and there's been talk of building another that will be full 'SLS Block 1B' compatible.
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #22 on: 05/15/2018 01:00 pm »
I thought there was going to be two operational Crawlers? I know one was extensively upgraded and repaired over the last couple of years. I also know that the old Ares 1 tower is being modified and there's been talk of building another that will be full 'SLS Block 1B' compatible.

Sorry, didn't intend to sidetrack this discussion -- just thought it bazaar that SLS/Orion would be looking to double its launch capability when they are having such a difficult time establishing initial operational capability.  It seems obvious to anyone who has managed a project that adding ML-2, the EUS design/build, additional iCPS stages, human rating iCPS, human rating Block 1 SLS, and building multiple copies of Block 1 to the already struggling workforce will slow the already-anemic progress considerably. 
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline UltraViolet9

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 148
  • Undisclosed
  • Liked: 243
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #23 on: 05/15/2018 03:12 pm »
I suspect that the only saving grace for the SLS is that the human transport version of the BFR will probably take a lot  longer than a few years...

Even if a cargo version is never really used I suspect using the SLS to launch humans into space will be its main justification, even if that doesn't happen until 2023.

I don't think so.  For similar missions, SLS/Orion has worse loss-of-crew projections than the projections STS had at the end of that program.  Someone in power will eventually wake up to this and start asking why we're spending so much on a system that is projected to kill astronauts at a faster rate than STS, a system which we terminated after ISS deployment was complete precisely because of flight safety concerns.  Maybe SLS continues as a hyper-expensive cargo transport for reasons of jobs and misbegotten national pride.  But if anyone responsible is paying attention, I don't think SLS, and maybe not Orion, ever launches astronauts.  Manifest rumblings a few weeks ago that pushed out the first crewed flight may have been the first toes in this water.

Also, in the scenario that BFR never comes to fruition, there are still other vehicles for delivering crew to exploration expeditions, either via modifications to those vehicles or via architectures staged in LEO.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #24 on: 05/15/2018 04:10 pm »
When I click on "EM-1 INTEGRATED MISSION MILESTONE SUMMARY" in this article,
it does not expand.
I don't know if the original image was too low a resolution or if something is missing from the
incorporation of the image.

If its easy to fix, that would be appreciated or supplying the URL for a readable version
of the image would be appreciated [in which case adding that URL to the article might be a good idea].

Here's a copy of the original (but without the magnified insert).

Thanks, I can read that.

Carl


Perfectly readable in the article. Either you are using a small phone or you need new glasses ;)

Interesting article. We all knew 2020 was the new date, but mid-2020 and may slip further isn't great. Still, Falcon Heavy slipped a few years and no one said a word.

FH was five years late and lotsa people here repeatedly asked the question when FH would finally launch.

But, to get back to SLS: first launch was mandated, by law, to be no later than December 2016. With the recent sliding of the CS schedule there is a very real chance that the new NET launch date for EM-1 will be in December 2020. That is four years behind schedule. Which is real bad for a government program gobbling up over a billion dollars PER YEAR. For comparison: FH was done on a mere $500 million IN TOTAL.

Actually, operational capability was mandated NLT Dec 2016. That would imply an earlier test launch.

Quote
Priority should be placed on the core elements with
the goal for operational capability for the core elements not
later than December 31, 2016.

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Fife
  • Liked: 2762
  • Likes Given: 3369
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #25 on: 05/15/2018 04:14 pm »
This is bordering on tragic. What can be done about this?! :(

Build an additional mobile launcher!  :o
Just  respecify the mobile launcher to get the whole stack to LEO.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #26 on: 05/15/2018 04:22 pm »

adding ML-2,
the EUS design/build,
additional iCPS stages,
human rating iCPS,
human rating Block 1 SLS, and building multiple copies of Block 1
 to the already struggling workforce will slow the already-anemic progress considerably. 

All separate and unrelated workforces.
There is no need to "human rate" Block 1 SLS, it was designed that way.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #27 on: 05/15/2018 04:32 pm »
I thought there was going to be two operational Crawlers? I know one was extensively upgraded and repaired over the last couple of years. I also know that the old Ares 1 tower is being modified and there's been talk of building another that will be full 'SLS Block 1B' compatible.

Sorry, didn't intend to sidetrack this discussion -- just thought it bazaar that SLS/Orion would be looking to double its launch capability when they are having such a difficult time establishing initial operational capability.  It seems obvious to anyone who has managed a project that adding ML-2, the EUS design/build, additional iCPS stages, human rating iCPS, human rating Block 1 SLS, and building multiple copies of Block 1 to the already struggling workforce will slow the already-anemic progress considerably.

The critical path seems to be through Michoud and Stennis, which are unrelated to any of those things.

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2457
  • Liked: 2412
  • Likes Given: 10225
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #28 on: 05/15/2018 04:40 pm »
Interesting article. We all knew 2020 was the new date, but mid-2020 and may slip further isn't great. Still, Falcon Heavy slipped a few years and no one said a word.

NB:  Over those few years, both Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy (first from its Falcon 9 Heavy incarnation) increased their capability by >100%.  Have SLS capabilities been similarly increased?
« Last Edit: 05/15/2018 05:07 pm by RedLineTrain »

Offline rst

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 347
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #29 on: 05/15/2018 04:57 pm »
The critical path seems to be through Michoud and Stennis, which are unrelated to any of those things.

Also software development, about which we keep hearing worrisome noises. But again, transferring workers from ML-2 wouldn't make that happen any faster...

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #30 on: 05/15/2018 05:56 pm »

adding ML-2,
the EUS design/build,
additional iCPS stages,
human rating iCPS,
human rating Block 1 SLS, and building multiple copies of Block 1
 to the already struggling workforce will slow the already-anemic progress considerably. 

All separate and unrelated workforces.
There is no need to "human rate" Block 1 SLS, it was designed that way.

Not according to the people writing SLS software -- the software was NOT written such that it could be used for crewed flight.  The iCPS was also NOT supposed to get crew qualified... NASA specifically decided the $150M needed to qualify it wasn't worth it when they decided that SLS Block 1 would only fly once, and that it would NOT fly crew.  (But like everything in this program, that decision subsequently was changed.)  These are just a couple of the requirements shoved downstream 'to save money' in this never ending saga of mis-management.

But you are free to be of the opinion that all of this is business as usual for NASA, and thus fine. 
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #31 on: 05/15/2018 06:48 pm »

1.  Not according to the people writing SLS software -- the software was NOT written such that it could be used for crewed flight. 

2. The iCPS was also NOT supposed to get crew qualified...

But you are free to be of the opinion that all of this is business as usual for NASA, and thus fine. 

No opinions, just facts.  You just poked at two minor points when the bulk of your post was wrong.

1.  That is just a software revision and not man rating.   Having different increments of software during project development is common across many industries.   MSL was launched without the software to land or to rove.   Fighter aircraft have just the software to fly and not operate weapons during early test flights.

2.  It is just one item, it doesn't change that

adding ML-2 is KSC
the EUS design/build is MSFC, who can use the resources from the core stage group since it is production
additional iCPS stages is ULA
human rating Block 1 SLS is just a software upgrade by MSFC SW group
building multiple copies of Block 1 is Boeing


Offline Torbjorn Larsson, OM

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 302
  • Liked: 107
  • Likes Given: 79
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #32 on: 05/15/2018 07:18 pm »
But, to get back to SLS: first launch was mandated, by law, to be no later than December 2016. With the recent sliding of the CS schedule there is a very real chance that the new NET launch date for EM-1 will be in December 2020. That is four years behind schedule.

That fact and the relative lack of noise in Washington about the slips, indeed consistently increased funding over what's requested year-on-year, makes clear that politically the dates don't matter, yet. I'm pretty sure EM-1 will fly, but the delays mean the launch landscape with SpaceX and Blue Origin is likely to be very different before EM-2 and that's when I guess the politics will change.

Yikes. If this trend continues, people will be more interested in when the SLS program is discontinued than when it launch. Is there a poll for this?


adding ML-2,
the EUS design/build,
additional iCPS stages,
human rating iCPS,
human rating Block 1 SLS, and building multiple copies of Block 1
 to the already struggling workforce will slow the already-anemic progress considerably. 

All separate and unrelated workforces.
There is no need to "human rate" Block 1 SLS, it was designed that way.

Not according to the people writing SLS software -- the software was NOT written such that it could be used for crewed flight.  The iCPS was also NOT supposed to get crew qualified... NASA specifically decided the $150M needed to qualify it wasn't worth it when they decided that SLS Block 1 would only fly once, and that it would NOT fly crew.  (But like everything in this program, that decision subsequently was changed.)  These are just a couple of the requirements shoved downstream 'to save money' in this never ending saga of mis-management.

But you are free to be of the opinion that all of this is business as usual for NASA, and thus fine. 

Oh, come on. These are programs with enormous number of options and changes. NASA is maybe too good at managing programs instead of having them ditched, no company is beset by changing politics externally and internally (say, budget). There is no easy comparison, and Constellation was grounded by others. And that is when they manage program tactics that they do not agree with (say, contract forms).

Strategic decisions have been mistaken for sure (Constellation, DIRECT), and they are of course part of management. I don't know if anyone expects to avoid them. ('If you don't crash rockets/programs, you are not trying hard enough.')

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #33 on: 05/15/2018 08:49 pm »
Please do not bring SpaceX into this discussion. That includes FH, F9, BFR, BFS, ITS, Dragon 1, Dragon 2, etc.
While you're at it, you might also leave out Blue.

Thanks. We don't need every thread pointing out the same obvious[1] facts[2]

1 - or debating about which facts are obvious and which aren't.
2 - or debating about which facts are actually not facts.
"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 johnfwhitesell

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Liked: 108
  • Likes Given: 198
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #34 on: 05/15/2018 08:57 pm »
Please do not bring SpaceX into this discussion. That includes FH, F9, BFR, BFS, ITS, Dragon 1, Dragon 2, etc.
While you're at it, you might also leave out Blue.

Thanks. We don't need every thread pointing out the same obvious[1] facts[2]

1 - or debating about which facts are obvious and which aren't.
2 - or debating about which facts are actually not facts.

Well if we compare SLS to Vulcan...

(I joke, I joke)

Online rcoppola

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • USA
  • Liked: 1967
  • Likes Given: 970
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #35 on: 05/15/2018 09:03 pm »
So who's actually responsible for SLS? I mean someone who can actually be held accountable for this? I guess the biggest issue is that year after year, schedule slip after schedule slip, billion after billion, nobody has been held accountable? Does everyone get a prize for just showing up? If there's no repercussions, then there's no skin in the game and....well, we all know how that works out.

So, seriously, who the hell is running this show?
Sail the oceans of space and set foot upon new lands!
http://www.stormsurgemedia.com

Offline johnfwhitesell

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Liked: 108
  • Likes Given: 198
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #36 on: 05/15/2018 09:15 pm »
So who's actually responsible for SLS?

Brief history:
Shuttle blew up a second time, we decided to retire the shuttle
Wanted to keep going to space so Ares program emerged
Ares program was a dog so Obama cancelled it
The Senate was up in arms at Ares being cancelled (jobs in the right states and we didn't have alternative heavy rockets)
They compromised and made the SLS, like the Ares but a little cheaper
« Last Edit: 05/15/2018 09:16 pm by johnfwhitesell »

Online rcoppola

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • USA
  • Liked: 1967
  • Likes Given: 970
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #37 on: 05/15/2018 09:20 pm »
So who's actually responsible for SLS?

Brief history:
Shuttle blew up a second time, we decided to retire the shuttle
Wanted to keep going to space so Ares program emerged
Ares program was a dog so Obama cancelled it
The Senate was up in arms at Ares being cancelled (jobs in the right states and we didn't have alternative heavy rockets)
They compromised and made the SLS, like the Ares but a little cheaper
Ha....Yeh, got a few hundred threads about all that on here. I wasn't asking the "big" who but the actual, who. As in, "Go ask Mike what the heck is going on. He's the one in charge of this mess..." So, who is Mike?
Sail the oceans of space and set foot upon new lands!
http://www.stormsurgemedia.com

Offline ulm_atms

  • Rocket Junky
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 926
  • To boldly go where no government has gone before.
  • Liked: 1565
  • Likes Given: 770
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #38 on: 05/15/2018 09:50 pm »
^^ Congress is the answer

That's why there is no responsibility and it is just chugging along.  It is doing EXACTLY what it's supposed to be doing.
« Last Edit: 05/15/2018 09:52 pm by ulm_atms »

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2587
  • Likes Given: 2895
Re: Schedule for First SLS Core Stage Still Sliding
« Reply #39 on: 05/15/2018 10:03 pm »
My former supervisor once said, "if we have to fight WWII again, we would loose".  He did not like some of our suppliers, with parts missing bolts and nuts. 

Tags:
 

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