QuoteNASA replied: “Now that the SLS design has matured and the program has more data as a result of progress with hardware manufacturing and testing, our current analysis shows the Block 1 configuration of SLS can deliver an estimated mass of 95 metric tons (209,439 pounds) to low-Earth orbit based on a 200 by 200-kilometer orbit with a 28.5 degree inclination, which is a commonly used orbit in the industry for estimating performance.”
NASA replied: “Now that the SLS design has matured and the program has more data as a result of progress with hardware manufacturing and testing, our current analysis shows the Block 1 configuration of SLS can deliver an estimated mass of 95 metric tons (209,439 pounds) to low-Earth orbit based on a 200 by 200-kilometer orbit with a 28.5 degree inclination, which is a commonly used orbit in the industry for estimating performance.”
The SLS, he argued, offered “a capability right now that no one else has, and so we want to deliver it.” However, he said he’d be open to revisiting that should commercial vehicles with similar capabilities enter service in the future. “If there comes a day when someone else can deliver that, then we need to think differently. It’s always evolving.”
http://spacenews.com/bridenstine-emphasizes-partnerships-with-industry-to-achieve-nasa-goals/QuoteThe SLS, he argued, offered “a capability right now that no one else has, and so we want to deliver it.” However, he said he’d be open to revisiting that should commercial vehicles with similar capabilities enter service in the future. “If there comes a day when someone else can deliver that, then we need to think differently. It’s always evolving.”
SLS will continue and likely fly within the next 24 months. Nothing currently out there matches its capability, so why do you think NASA would suddenly cancel it now?
SLS will continue and likely fly within the next 24 months.
Nothing currently out there matches its capability...
...so why do you think NASA would suddenly cancel it now?
I agree, soon as BFR becomes operational, everything currently flying or in-work become obsolete over night but its unreasonable to think NASA should cancel its POR before BFR is a proven entity.
IMO, we're likely at least a decade away from that.
It's been disappointing to see this Administration and this new Administrator give into and not challenge the politics surrounding SLS/Orion.
I do not see a challenge to SLS. It is wanted by senators from both parties in states where it is made.
According to his NASA bio, Todd May earned his bachelor's degree in 1990, which likely makes him quite young by retiree standards. So I'd guess he's leaving NASA but not truly retiring. Seems a little odd.
I would tend to agree, except that if that's the path Todd May is following then I would have expected an announcement of where he is going.
Since SpaceX is going to do refueling in LEO for BFR. IF, another big IF, they develop refueling the second stage in orbit, would say a 40 ton payload launched on FH, then refuel the second stage. Can this match TMI with SLS block II? If so, then FH alone with refueling would probably be cheaper than SLS. At that point would that kill SLS? Or if New Glen gets going and could do refueling of their hydrolox second stage? How about Vulcan w/ACES and refueling? Seems to me refueling in LEO is going to be the way to go. More vendors, more counties involved to, by using smaller launch vehicles to deliver fuel. More launches = lower costs for all. Why isn't NASA working on this instead?
At that point would that kill SLS?
Quote from: spacenut on 06/14/2018 01:00 pmAt that point would that kill SLS? SLS long ago stopped being about space. It's about jobs back in the home states. So no that will not kill SLS.Congress will continue to fund this jobs program until it no longer makes sense on the homefront to fund this instead of something else. At that point the funding will transition to the something else.