It's 1968 and I feel young again...
Quote from: Rocket Science on 02/15/2017 03:50 pmIt's 1968 and I feel young again...I don't think this is anything like Apollo 8, if that's what you're thinking. With Apollo 8, NASA took a risk for a major historical and geopolitical accomplishment. Crewing EM-1 to, at best, fly a poor man's version of Apollo 8, would be largely about making the Trump administration look good. It's a terrible excuse for risking a crew. That this is even considered is a sad reflection on the Trump administration and NASA's leadership.It's reminiscent of is the tragic flight of Soyuz 1. Political pressure to pull off a space spectacular in time for the 50th anniversary of Russia's Communist revolution led to the death of a cosmonaut in a spacecraft that was not yet ready. NASA in recent years has acknowledged the large risk it took in flying a crew on STS-1. For it to now seriously to consider crewing EM-1 would be a sign of dysfunctionality.
Congress never asked for ICPS, that was all Charles Bolden. Same with the under-powered core stage with only four RS-25 engines, when all previous studies (ESAS, HEFT, RAC) indicated that five RS-25 was optimal for the very stretched SLS core.
I really think this is essentially a way to answer a demand from the transition team and nothing more.
If ASAP goes along with this, they will be exposed as fraudulent.
Quote from: Mark S on 02/15/2017 10:25 pmCongress never asked for ICPS, that was all Charles Bolden. Same with the under-powered core stage with only four RS-25 engines, when all previous studies (ESAS, HEFT, RAC) indicated that five RS-25 was optimal for the very stretched SLS core.So how come Congress has never complained?
Quote from: dglow on 02/15/2017 07:27 pmQuote from: Endeavour_01 on 02/15/2017 07:13 pmScrap ICPS and go straight to Block IB.Not likely to happen, but your sentiment is on point. ICPS, intended as a time-saver to appease congress, has morphed into an expensive liability.Congress never asked for ICPS, that was all Charles Bolden.
Quote from: Endeavour_01 on 02/15/2017 07:13 pmScrap ICPS and go straight to Block IB.Not likely to happen, but your sentiment is on point. ICPS, intended as a time-saver to appease congress, has morphed into an expensive liability.
Scrap ICPS and go straight to Block IB.
Quote from: SWGlassPit on 02/15/2017 08:53 pmI really think this is essentially a way to answer a demand from the transition team and nothing more.If that's what it were, I don't think Lightfoot would have announced it. He'd have simply quietly appointed a team to study it.
Quote from: Proponent on 02/15/2017 11:00 pmQuote from: SWGlassPit on 02/15/2017 08:53 pmI really think this is essentially a way to answer a demand from the transition team and nothing more.If that's what it were, I don't think Lightfoot would have announced it. He'd have simply quietly appointed a team to study it.By announcing it, NASA gets to control the story. Keep it quiet (not easy, given how much work this involves), and it would leak out eventually.
I have troubled believing that NASA would decide to send Orion to the ISS. That mission would likely happen after commercial crew has already started ferrying astronauts to the ISS. It wouldn't be a very exciting mission for SLS and Orion in my opinion. Not the kind of mission that would make NASA great again...
Quote from: Rocket Science on 02/16/2017 12:59 pmAs for the aforementioned WH occupant, he may be lucky to "finish" the current term in office ...Let's not make predictions here about how long a president will serve. Jim once did that and afterwards had to admit he had better not made that prediction.
As for the aforementioned WH occupant, he may be lucky to "finish" the current term in office ...
Quote from: jongoff on 02/16/2017 03:13 amMy take on this is that it's much like the original 2016 initial flight goal, and the Ares-I-X flight before that. A stunt to try and show enough "progress" before a new president gets in* that they hopefully can be made to think the program is farther along than it really is. This flight would be using refurbished shuttle engines and booster casings, an interim upper stage that may only fly once, and a European SM for Orion that may only fly once or twice. The whole SLS/Orion system would likely not be operational for another several years, and if anything pulling up the manned flight date is likely to push out the actual regular operation date. I have a hard time seeing this as anything other than a stunt.~Jon* And yes, I'm implying that the people pushing this may be betting on Trump being a one-term wonder.This is an example of the political "circus" stunt that I've been writing about as a distraction. Huge expense and risk for low return. As for the aforementioned WH occupant, he may be lucky to "finish" the current term in office ...
My take on this is that it's much like the original 2016 initial flight goal, and the Ares-I-X flight before that. A stunt to try and show enough "progress" before a new president gets in* that they hopefully can be made to think the program is farther along than it really is. This flight would be using refurbished shuttle engines and booster casings, an interim upper stage that may only fly once, and a European SM for Orion that may only fly once or twice. The whole SLS/Orion system would likely not be operational for another several years, and if anything pulling up the manned flight date is likely to push out the actual regular operation date. I have a hard time seeing this as anything other than a stunt.~Jon* And yes, I'm implying that the people pushing this may be betting on Trump being a one-term wonder.
Echoes of Soyuz-1 - Echoes of Soyuz-1.And no this would not resemble Apollo-8 in any way, shape or fashion. Both the Saturn-V rocket and the Apollo spacecraft had already flown and been tested. This is a really, really risky thing to do. Lightfoot made the announcement so we know he is on board with this. But speculation about whether or not the Trump administration was part of this and how long the President will stay in office is not only unfounded, it is exceptionally *far* off topic. This is a really good topic for discussion. Don't screw it up by going there or I promise I will light up the Moderator's complaint boxes every 30 seconds.