ML-2 Updates and Discussion

[DanClemmensen]

They need to test the ML-2 on the pad and also reconfigure the High Bay 3 in the VAB and perform tests in the VAB as well.
About 9 months.

Thanks. Based on the diagram, V&V of ML-2 on the pad is done in parallel with Artemis III stacking. ML-2 VAB V&V does in fact need to wait until Artemis III launch, after Artemis III has no further need for the VAB, with further wait until the VAB is reconfigured. Do we know how long these two steps will take?

Edit: DoH! the graphic has a timeline at the bottom. It starts at Artemis III launch and ends 22 to 24 months later at Artemis IV launch.

[pochimax]

So it seems like there are two options. Hurry to get ML-2 out to the pad for a test/debug campaign of unknown length, and then hurry to get it off the pad before Artemis II and ML-1 need it. Or do the unhurried thing, and grant Artemis II exclusive access to the pad until it's been launched. Which seems more like "the NASA way?"

It could be.

I also understand that you meant Artemis III.

[pochimax]

They need to test the ML-2 on the pad and also reconfigure the High Bay 3 in the VAB and perform tests in the VAB as well.
About 9 months.

Thanks. Based on the diagram, V&V of ML-2 on the pad is done in parallel with Artemis III stacking. ML-2 VAB V&V does in fact need to wait until Artemis III launch, after Artemis III has no further need for the VAB, with further wait until the VAB is reconfigured. Do we know how long these two steps will take?

Edit: DoH! the graphic has a timeline at the bottom. It starts at Artemis III launch and ends 22 to 24 months later at Artemis IV launch.

I think you are right.

(no idea of how time consuming will be VAB reconfiguration)

https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-25-107591.pdf

Bechtel is working to a delivery date of November 2026, and its
contract was modified in March 2024 to incentivize an earlier delivery. 
The schedule baseline does not include ML2 verification and validation
activities planned for after the delivery and prior to Artemis IV, which
NASA is tracking as the project’s top risk. To mitigate this risk, the
project plans to concurrently test the ML2 at the launch pad while
Artemis III hardware is processed in the Vehicle Assembly Building.

[Vultur]

If EUS is gone in the new plan, is ML-2 also gone?

[DanClemmensen]

If EUS is gone in the new plan, is ML-2 also gone?

Asked and answered during the press conference. ML-2 will be adapted to support the new "standard" SLS instead of block 1B.

[pochimax]

If EUS is gone in the new plan, is ML-2 also gone?

Asked and answered during the press conference. ML-2 will be adapted to support the new "standard" SLS instead of block 1B.

I don't understand how they can say they're going to launch Artemis 4 in 2028 using the ML-2.

Both the ML-2 and the VAB need time to adapt to the new version of the SLS, whether with the EUS or with this new upper stage they've proposed. I don't see how the new upper stage could accelerate those timelines in any way.

The idea that the ML-2 (or ML-1) and VAB will be available just a year after the launch of Artemis 3, and not in a year and a half to two years, is completely unbelievable.

[cplchanb]

If EUS is gone in the new plan, is ML-2 also gone?

Asked and answered during the press conference. ML-2 will be adapted to support the new "standard" SLS instead of block 1B.

I don't understand how they can say they're going to launch Artemis 4 in 2028 using the ML-2.

Both the ML-2 and the VAB need time to adapt to the new version of the SLS, whether with the EUS or with this new upper stage they've proposed. I don't see how the new upper stage could accelerate those timelines in any way.

The idea that the ML-2 (or ML-1) and VAB will be available just a year after the launch of Artemis 3, and not in a year and a half to two years, is completely unbelievable.

Well they did it in apollo so its not impossible but they need to get the entire industry  spun into high gear now to make it happen.
Essentially they need to start going at starship production  cadence to catch up

[DanClemmensen]

If EUS is gone in the new plan, is ML-2 also gone?

Asked and answered during the press conference. ML-2 will be adapted to support the new "standard" SLS instead of block 1B.

I don't understand how they can say they're going to launch Artemis 4 in 2028 using the ML-2.

Both the ML-2 and the VAB need time to adapt to the new version of the SLS, whether with the EUS or with this new upper stage they've proposed. I don't see how the new upper stage could accelerate those timelines in any way.

The idea that the ML-2 (or ML-1) and VAB will be available just a year after the launch of Artemis 3, and not in a year and a half to two years, is completely unbelievable.

At the press conference, Amit said that ML-2 is already more than 90% complete and the required adaptations to shift it from Block 1B to the new "standard" SLS are small. Feel free to disbelieve him, but we know that other companies can build an entire new launch infrastructure in that time.

[pochimax]

At the press conference, Amit said that ML-2 is already more than 90% complete and the required adaptations to shift it from Block 1B to the new "standard" SLS are small. Feel free to disbelieve him, but we know that other companies can build an entire new launch infrastructure in that time.

but

Edit: DoH! the graphic has a timeline at the bottom. It starts at Artemis III launch and ends 22 to 24 months later at Artemis IV launch.

I wasn't referring to delays due to possible modifications to the ML-2, but to the original plan for testing and trials prior to the commissioning of the launch tower and the reconfigured VAB. Look at what I quoted you.

If you recall, the plan stated 22-24 months to launch Artemis IV from the launch of Artemis III.

Yes. NASA was exploring reducing those timelines by doing work in parallel. However, if we now add the difficulty and delays that will occur due to the changes to the ML-2 itself, I think it will be a miracle to make everything coincide.

In my opinion, solely because of the ML-2, it seems impossible to launch Artemis IV in 2028. It will most likely be delayed until at least 2029. And that's without taking into account many other factors.

[DanClemmensen]

At the press conference, Amit said that ML-2 is already more than 90% complete and the required adaptations to shift it from Block 1B to the new "standard" SLS are small. Feel free to disbelieve him, but we know that other companies can build an entire new launch infrastructure in that time.

but

Edit: DoH! the graphic has a timeline at the bottom. It starts at Artemis III launch and ends 22 to 24 months later at Artemis IV launch.

I wasn't referring to delays due to possible modifications to the ML-2, but to the original plan for testing and trials prior to the commissioning of the launch tower and the reconfigured VAB. Look at what I quoted you.

If you recall, the plan stated 22-24 months to launch Artemis IV from the launch of Artemis III.

Yes. NASA was exploring reducing those timelines by doing work in parallel. However, if we now add the difficulty and delays that will occur due to the changes to the ML-2 itself, I think it will be a miracle to make everything coincide.

In my opinion, solely because of the ML-2, it seems impossible to launch Artemis IV in 2028. It will most likely be delayed until at least 2029. And that's without taking into account many other factors.

I believe that "Standardized" SLS/Orion can launch on ML-1. The only reasons to complete ML-2 instead of scrapping it is that it can be used as a backup, ML refurbishment can be overlapped, and there is at least the potential for a little bit of stacking overlap. Since ML-2 is mostly already paid for, these benefits may be worth  the incremental cost to complete it.

[pochimax]

I wasn't talking about costs or budgets, but about the timeline. Just about what seems to me an impossibility to launch Artemis IV in 2028.

Let's not forget either that, in order to use both towers at the same time for stacking, the only remaining free high bay in the VAB would have to be enabled, Congress would have to approve the funds for it, the contract would have to be launched, the work would have to be carried out... too many things in too little time.

[sdsds]

If you recall, the plan stated 22-24 months to launch Artemis IV from the launch of Artemis III.

Clearly this must change to meet the new schedule since NASA leadership just said Artemis III would fly in 2027 and Artemis IV in 2028. How can they hope to do this without major added costs?

- Launch Artemis II; move ML1 to the park area for refurbishment (2Q2026)
- Build out ML2 for the standardized vehicle configuration (2Q2026 -> 1Q2027)
- Move ML2 into HB3 and verify interfaces (1Q2027)
- Move ML2 to the park area; move the refurbished ML1 into HB3 (2Q2027)
- Stack Artemis III on ML1 (3Q2027)
- Launch Artemis III (4Q2027)
- Move ML2 into HB3 (4Q2027)
- Stack Artemis IV on ML2 (1Q2028)
- Launch Artemis IV (2Q2028)

EDIT: s/HB2/HB3/

[DaveS]

- Move ML2 into HB2 and verify interfaces (1Q2027)

Can't do this as HB2 space is taken up by the Core Stage processing structure.
Can't use the other HBs are they're otherwise occupied (HB1 is storage and still have the shuttle platforms, HB2 is SLS Core Stage processing, HB4 is general storage).

[sdsds]

- Move ML2 into HB2 and verify interfaces (1Q2027)

Can't do this as HB2 space is taken up by the Core Stage processing structure.
Can't use the other HBs are they're otherwise occupied (HB1 is storage and still have the shuttle platforms, HB2 is SLS Core Stage processing, HB4 is general storage).

Oops! HB3 is what I meant. Thanks for catching that!

[Thorny]

Can't use the other HBs are they're otherwise occupied (HB1 is storage and still have the shuttle platforms,

Can the Shuttle-era platforms in HB1 be used to stack the SRBs for SLS, then roll to the other HB for a core stage?

[DaveS]

No due to the fifth segment. They're setup to support the four segment version only.

[pochimax]

"Standardized" SLS/Orion can launch on ML-1.

Are you sure of this? 

[DanClemmensen]

"Standardized" SLS/Orion can launch on ML-1.

Are you sure of this?

Nope. Sorry. I made this assumption based on what I thought I heard in the press conference, and then I oversimplified. I now think that ML-1 can be relatively easily adapted to support the SUS, and that ML-2 and also be adapted reltatively easily.

[cplchanb]

- Move ML2 into HB2 and verify interfaces (1Q2027)

Can't do this as HB2 space is taken up by the Core Stage processing structure.
Can't use the other HBs are they're otherwise occupied (HB1 is storage and still have the shuttle platforms, HB2 is SLS Core Stage processing, HB4 is general storage).

Seems like HB4 would be the easiest to work with if they need to find space. How hard can it be to clear up "general storage"?

[DaveS]

No Crawlerway leading to it so they would have to restore it