Author Topic: NASA finally sets goals, missions for SLS - eyes multi-step plan to Mars  (Read 71273 times)

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
...
Core stage test fire is planned for early 2018 as far as I can tell.
...

We'll see when the Mission Integration Review (in June) updates the schedule.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline GWH

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1742
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1929
  • Likes Given: 1277
I wonder would it be possible to start the tower extension work now and build a spacer under the ICPS so they don't have to incur that delay later.  Forget about performance on EM1, just fly a demo to whatever orbit they can.

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5305
  • Florida
  • Liked: 5005
  • Likes Given: 1444
I wonder would it be possible to start the tower extension work now and build a spacer under the ICPS so they don't have to incur that delay later.  Forget about performance on EM1, just fly a demo to whatever orbit they can.
The pad mods for 1B after EM-1 is a durration of 33+ months more like about 40 months. If they started now that would be a NET date for EM-1 with a EUS sized spacer of Sept 2020.

Offline GWH

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1742
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1929
  • Likes Given: 1277
Right. I had a 20 month duration in my head, should have read up-thread further. 

Offline Mark S

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2284
  • Dallas, TX
  • Liked: 396
  • Likes Given: 80
I wonder would it be possible to start the tower extension work now and build a spacer under the ICPS so they don't have to incur that delay later.  Forget about performance on EM1, just fly a demo to whatever orbit they can.
The pad mods for 1B after EM-1 is a durration of 33+ months more like about 40 months. If they started now that would be a NET date for EM-1 with a EUS sized spacer of Sept 2020.

All the more reason to just build another ML with a tower tailored to Block-1B from the get-go. That way NASA can continue to launch SLS missions with Block-1, while EUS is being developed and the ML-1B is being built. An additional 3-4 year stand-down waiting for all Block-1B items to be finalized and built is ridiculous.

NASA might as well fit out another VAB high bay for SLS-1B while they're at it. Go big or go home!

:)

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5305
  • Florida
  • Liked: 5005
  • Likes Given: 1444
I wonder would it be possible to start the tower extension work now and build a spacer under the ICPS so they don't have to incur that delay later.  Forget about performance on EM1, just fly a demo to whatever orbit they can.
The pad mods for 1B after EM-1 is a durration of 33+ months more like about 40 months. If they started now that would be a NET date for EM-1 with a EUS sized spacer of Sept 2020.

All the more reason to just build another ML with a tower tailored to Block-1B from the get-go. That way NASA can continue to launch SLS missions with Block-1, while EUS is being developed and the ML-1B is being built. An additional 3-4 year stand-down waiting for all Block-1B items to be finalized and built is ridiculous.

NASA might as well fit out another VAB high bay for SLS-1B while they're at it. Go big or go home!

:)
Its called insufficient budget. If you double the nearly $800M/yr pad build budget you could do it. Or better yet have skipped doing the SLS 1A altogether and just built the 1B you would have saved years and $Bs. The problem was that the EUS would have had to have been funded at the beginning in 2012 instead of just starting in 2015.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
He didn't.

Although, the 3-stage NG should put about 20 tonnes to TLI with a 7 meter fairing. That's a lot closer to SLS class than anything else that will fly in the next 5 years or so.
Doubtful

ULA have stated they have investigated (and could meet) customer needs for a 7.2m PLF on Atlas V. On that basis an SLS 8.4m PLF would be well within their range for Vulcan and in fact applying the Centaur to PLF ratio of Atlas V suggests 10.2m is possible.

Vulcan should be flying by the early 2020's.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
I wonder would it be possible to start the tower extension work now and build a spacer under the ICPS so they don't have to incur that delay later.  Forget about performance on EM1, just fly a demo to whatever orbit they can.
The pad mods for 1B after EM-1 is a durration of 33+ months more like about 40 months. If they started now that would be a NET date for EM-1 with a EUS sized spacer of Sept 2020.

Start the design now, you mean?
I believe the 33-40 month duration is predicated on having a finished design and preparation effort time -- start designing now and you'll probably be hard pressed to cut metal before EM-1 anyway.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
He didn't.

Although, the 3-stage NG should put about 20 tonnes to TLI with a 7 meter fairing. That's a lot closer to SLS class than anything else that will fly in the next 5 years or so.
Doubtful

ULA have stated they have investigated (and could meet) customer needs for a 7.2m PLF on Atlas V. On that basis an SLS 8.4m PLF would be well within their range for Vulcan and in fact applying the Centaur to PLF ratio of Atlas V suggests 10.2m is possible.

Vulcan should be flying by the early 2020's.

Wasn't that on Atlas V Phase 2? Agreed that Vulcan could support a 7+ m fairing, but still think NG is the only one that is likely to actually fly a 7+ meter fairing in the next 5 years. And that includes SLS.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
Wasn't that on Atlas V Phase 2? Agreed that Vulcan could support a 7+ m fairing, but still think NG is the only one that is likely to actually fly a 7+ meter fairing in the next 5 years. And that includes SLS.
The comment came from the Atlas V users manual. It gives a PLF to upper stage diameter ratio of about 1.889:1 so a 5.4m US like ACES would be good for 10.2m. Until ACES is live I'd guess 7.2 would be the limit Centaur could carry.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline alexterrell

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1747
  • Germany
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 107
So far the only useful thing that SLS can do that Falcon Heavy can't, is launch a 10m diameter, single piece heat shield for Mars reentry. I suppose a Bigelow BA-2100 would also count.
There's that.

The other things I got were a really big telescope or a nuclear reactor.

The other things that Boeing have suggested for SLS are basically cutting the travel times to distant locations. Examples they cite are the trip to Saturn and the 200AU interstellar precursor (cuts 15 years off that).

Essentially anything is better with a really big propellant tankset strapped to it.

Still not quite clear why Boeing got the contract for this given that ULA has all the rocket building skills.

But which of those can be done by Falcon Heavies? Cutting trip times is just a matter of propellent, which can be launched in 60 tons lots or 120 ton lots. SLS will be too expensive for propellant.

A space telescope with a single 10m diameter mirror - yes, that would justify using SLS.

Nuclear reactor - it can probably be launched in modular form in 60 ton segments. Most designs for Earth SMRs are road transportable and designed for easy assembly.

The ISS has demonstrated that bigger modules would be better, but that could be countered by developing a Bigelow BA-1200 (or there abouts) for a Falcon Heavy.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
None of those elements are part of NASA's plan.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
None of those elements are part of NASA's plan.

All the elements in NASA's cislunar/Mars plan could be launched to LEO by smaller vehicles than SLS.

Online Phil Stooke

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1354
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1424
  • Likes Given: 1
"None of those elements are part of NASA's plan. "

Current plan.

Offline TrevorMonty

"None of those elements are part of NASA's plan. "

Current plan.
WFIRST maybe last large telescope launched as complete telescope. NASA via funding of SBIRS is developing the technology to manufacture and assemble large telescopes in space. The DSG would be an ideal location to do this as space debris is minimal compared to LEO.

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7277
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1462
On the Space Show, Marcia Smith recently mentioned, IIRC, that something bad happens if a program exceeds by a certain margin the cost set out at Key Decision Point C.  In SLS's case, that cost is $7.021 billion from February 2014 through first launch.  That excludes Orion and Exploration Ground Systems.  The amount of the cost overrun can't be established until a new launch date is set.  Per Smith's 5 May appearance on the Planetary Radio's Space Policy podcast, NASA has said it will announce a new launch date by the end of September (the end of FY 2017).  Like the launch itself, however, the date of that announcement could slip.

Offline Negan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 739
  • Southwest
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 533
So if ITS is doing orbital testing in 2021, what happens to this plan?

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5305
  • Florida
  • Liked: 5005
  • Likes Given: 1444
So if ITS is doing orbital testing in 2021, what happens to this plan?
I think SpaceX may be a little starved for funds unless they get more investments or a gov contract to do Mars to meet a 2021 date. Think more like 2025 for first flight of just the ITS no BFR and no payload.

Offline Negan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 739
  • Southwest
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 533
So if ITS is doing orbital testing in 2021, what happens to this plan?
I think SpaceX may be a little starved for funds unless they get more investments or a gov contract to do Mars to meet a 2021 date. Think more like 2025 for first flight of just the ITS no BFR and no payload.

You should probably inform Paul Wooster.
« Last Edit: 05/12/2017 10:52 pm by Negan »

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5305
  • Florida
  • Liked: 5005
  • Likes Given: 1444
Now for the implications of a EM-1 date in 4Q 2019 for this plan.

EM-2 no earlier than 1Q 2023.
Europa Clipper possible the first SLS-1B in 2Q-3Q 2023 with EM-2 in 2Q-3Q 2024 because of not flying crew on first flight of EUS.

This pushes all the dates  NETs referenced in the plan slipped to the right 1-2 years.

So first manned Orion and the first ITS unmanned flight could be an either or situation as to who is first.
A BTW ISS has 500m^3 of volume. An ITS has somewhere in the range of 1,000 to 2,000m^3 of volume. As a SSTO just the spacecraft lifting with a dozen persons to LEO would make an interesting instant space station. That also presumes that the dry weight of the spacecraft is as low as SpaceX would like for it to be making it able to reach orbit as an SSTO without much payload (estimate about 10mt out of its planned capability of 200-300mt when launched on top of the BFR.

But alas ITS is highly speculative at this point but so is the funding for SLS/Orion through to 2025.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1