It is now law that the Europa mission will use SLS.
Quote from: ncb1397 on 05/02/2016 07:14 pmIt is now law that the Europa mission will use SLS.Can you cite the bill that requires that, please? I know there were a lot of people hyping it, but I just don't remember any legislation to that effect. If I missed that, I would like to read what it says. Thanks.
For Orion missions will ESA be providing service module for free?. I assume that buys them one or two seats.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 05/03/2016 02:59 amFor Orion missions will ESA be providing service module for free?. I assume that buys them one or two seats.ESA was contributing the Service Module as part of their contribution to the ISS. I'm not sure if that includes guaranteed crew participation on a future mission, but my guess would be it does not.Also ESA is only designing the Service Module, building a complete unit for flight, and providing NASA the parts for a second unit. It will be up to NASA to finish the assembly of the second unit, and to build future units.
The 6 month margin in the schedule got eaten up by the problems they discovered in the new Vertical Weld Center at MAF. It took a number of months to rectify the VWC problems. So, it isn't a generic SLS flaw or anything that made a number of months disappear, it was a manufacturing hardware fault.
If I am correct, NASA was not to long ago (less than a year) saying that they had a 6 month schedule margin. But now they are saying they have a 2 month schedule margin. That would imply that historically critical path schedule has changed dramatically in the last year.
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/05/senator-cuts-nasas-tech-budge/
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 05/03/2016 07:39 pmQuote from: TrevorMonty on 05/03/2016 02:59 amFor Orion missions will ESA be providing service module for free?. I assume that buys them one or two seats.ESA was contributing the Service Module as part of their contribution to the ISS. I'm not sure if that includes guaranteed crew participation on a future mission, but my guess would be it does not.Also ESA is only designing the Service Module, building a complete unit for flight, and providing NASA the parts for a second unit. It will be up to NASA to finish the assembly of the second unit, and to build future units.So, essentially what seems to be happening is that part of the ISS budget is being diverted to Orion, right?
Sounds like a huge waste of money. NASA should've just built it themselves in the first place. Of course, we knew that from the beginning.It's just a move designed to maintain political support for Orion.
If they were doing manned Lunar Sortie missions in preparation for a small manned Outpost - it would have purpose! Two manned plus two cargo missions per year would give it a decent enough flight rate to justify the expense of the standing armies of production and infrastructure. Also; 'trickle' funding has resulted in a virtual three-step development: Block 1, Block 1B and Block II. I feel that if they were going to be throwing away all this massive hardware each time (we call that expendable, eh?) then they should be shooting for the best and most powerful version from the word GO. Lifting 130, 140 or even 150 tons to LEO per launch would go a long way to justifying such a large expendable. I also believe Mars is, sadly, an unfunded Powerpoint fantasy at this point