Another ESD Con Ops (L2) based article. This time it's Marshall Murphy which his second article for the site. What you see is what he wrote. Hardly any subediting required - very talented young man, as it normally take a lot of articles to get to the point you don't need a lot of subediting - myself included:http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/09/nasa-evaluate-yearlong-asteroid-mission/
Also, President Obama's pro asteroid leadership of NASA only lasts until early 2017 and then international Lunar ISRU missions will most likely become NASA's main focus for beyond low Earth orbit human spaceflight.
Interesting that they are naming an asteroid as a target. That would potentially mean they have a launch year picked out for the mission right? Will the full up SLS with advanced boosters and 5 SSME's be needed for this mission or will the Block 1 A/B be able to do both launches?
Quote from: Chris Bergin on 09/10/2013 12:29 amAnother ESD Con Ops (L2) based article. This time it's Marshall Murphy which his second article for the site. What you see is what he wrote. Hardly any subediting required - very talented young man, as it normally take a lot of articles to get to the point you don't need a lot of subediting - myself included:http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/09/nasa-evaluate-yearlong-asteroid-mission/Interesting that they are naming an asteroid as a target. That would potentially mean they have a launch year picked out for the mission right? Will the full up SLS with advanced boosters and 5 SSME's be needed for this mission or will the Block 1 A/B be able to do both launches?
If SLS Block-1B is developed, would this mission still require a dedicated in-space CPS? Or would the DUUS be sufficient for both launch and TAI (trans-asteroid injection)?
Quote from: Mark S on 09/10/2013 05:10 pmIf SLS Block-1B is developed, would this mission still require a dedicated in-space CPS? Or would the DUUS be sufficient for both launch and TAI (trans-asteroid injection)?DUUS, which has recently been renamed to Exploration Upper Stage, should be sufficient and is probably even better.
Quote from: M129K on 09/10/2013 05:46 pmQuote from: Mark S on 09/10/2013 05:10 pmIf SLS Block-1B is developed, would this mission still require a dedicated in-space CPS? Or would the DUUS be sufficient for both launch and TAI (trans-asteroid injection)?DUUS, which has recently been renamed to Exploration Upper Stage, should be sufficient and is probably even better.DUUS dosen't carry enough prop. It would need a lot larger tank about 30mt of prop larger tank or twice its current load. So by the time you do this to DUUD you have almost a new vehicle anyway even if it shares a lot of hardware with DUUS such as engines.
Quote from: HappyMartian on 09/10/2013 01:48 pmAlso, President Obama's pro asteroid leadership of NASA only lasts until early 2017 and then international Lunar ISRU missions will most likely become NASA's main focus for beyond low Earth orbit human spaceflight.I have no idea why you care so much about lunar ISRU missions.....
I am pretty sure from what little we know about the DUUS/EUS it would be able to satisfy the mission requirements. By not using the J-2X you are cutting down on a lot of mass which can be made into larger tankage.
Quote from: newpylong on 09/11/2013 02:26 pmI am pretty sure from what little we know about the DUUS/EUS it would be able to satisfy the mission requirements. By not using the J-2X you are cutting down on a lot of mass which can be made into larger tankage.The primary problem is lack of funds, not lack of mass. Why do people always get this reversed?
Quote from: Robotbeat on 09/11/2013 04:08 pmQuote from: newpylong on 09/11/2013 02:26 pmI am pretty sure from what little we know about the DUUS/EUS it would be able to satisfy the mission requirements. By not using the J-2X you are cutting down on a lot of mass which can be made into larger tankage.The primary problem is lack of funds, not lack of mass. Why do people always get this reversed?Did you mean to respond to me?I don't care if it costs $1 or 100 Billion - my reply was in regards to the technical merits of the CPS vs DUUS/EUS.
Phobos/Deimos is what I wish they were considering!!