Requiring the all up configuration on first launch which will never be needed again is just adding a configuration which potentially could cause mass growth.
Is there a scenario that HLS-1 launches indeed launches on Block 1B but the lander contractor is not Boeing ?
Quote from: Markstark on 03/22/2020 01:34 pmIs there a scenario that HLS-1 launches indeed launches on Block 1B but the lander contractor is not Boeing ?Yes. Boeing will not be sole-sourced the lander contract even if it's decided to go with an integrated lander.
I agree. I don’t anticipate that the HLS contract will be sole sourced to Boeing. I anticipate two or three HLS contracts. My question is, is there a scenario where the first HLS for 2024 landing is launched on a B1B but the HLS vendor is someone other than Boeing. They still get a contract, but it would be for a later date.
I believe NASA has the ability to force Boeing to make an SLS rocket available to another contractor since SLS is a government-owned system, so I think that scenario is possible.
The lander contractor who uses SLS is supposed to be the prime for the extra SLS since NASA is not going to do the integration for them, I don't see anyone else can do this besides Boeing.
1. To maximize payload, a 3-stage lander design will need to use slow, low-energy transfers2. Slow, low-energy transfers are not compatible with cryogenic fuels3. Non-cryogenic fuels are not compatible with Artemis objectives of Lunar ISRU and the "soft" objective of maximal reuse of landing architecture4. The aggressive 2024 deadline makes in-space cryogenic refueling non-viable, and to change the fuel type at a later date would require a total redesign of most of the lander.5. The extreme mass constraints imposed by launching each of the three fueled components on existing CLVs leaves them with very little growth potential
Quote from: su27k on 03/24/2020 03:18 amThe lander contractor who uses SLS is supposed to be the prime for the extra SLS since NASA is not going to do the integration for them, I don't see anyone else can do this besides Boeing.Couldn't a non-Boeing lander contractor simply sub-contract integration to Boeing?
Quote from: jadebenn on 03/24/2020 02:36 amQuote from: Markstark on 03/22/2020 01:34 pmIs there a scenario that HLS-1 launches indeed launches on Block 1B but the lander contractor is not Boeing ?Yes. Boeing will not be sole-sourced the lander contract even if it's decided to go with an integrated lander.I agree. I don’t anticipate that the HLS contract will be sole sourced to Boeing. I anticipate two or three HLS contracts. My question is, is there a scenario where the first HLS for 2024 landing is launched on a B1B but the HLS vendor is someone other than Boeing. They still get a contract, but it would be for a later date.
Why must you dig up my old shame.
Quote from: jadebenn on 05/22/2023 05:28 amWhy must you dig up my old shame. Because he is a tusker (wild boar) who like digging up old and buried threads.