... we know what other entities have in the works and it sounds like it's going to be a job creation program for lawyers...
SLS costs over $2 billion per year. Over $10 billion more will have been spent on it by the time EM-1 flies. It's only sensible to ask whether NASA might accomplish more by spending a similar quantity of money on an exploration program based on rockets the cost of which is shared with other users.In other words, I don't think the argument has sailed.
Congress mandated that NASA would build SLS and was even told the basics on how to build it to make sure the right companies got the contracts. That supersedes the previous law in this case. Now NASA has to use SLS for BLEO exploration, at least for large payloads. Unless Congress changes its mind, something I seriously doubt because SLS and Orion are the continuation of Constellation, it's pointless to discuss about what could have been. It's time to figure out what to do with SLS and commercial space to create a BELO program.
Endorsement is a form of lobbying IMHO...
Quote from: Rocket Science on 02/08/2017 02:04 pmEndorsement is a form of lobbying IMHO...In this case more like: not stepping on the toes of certain folks in the White House and US Congress.Or better: When a situation is unclear, keep all your options open.
Quote from: RonM on 02/08/2017 01:56 pmCongress mandated that NASA would build SLS and was even told the basics on how to build it to make sure the right companies got the contracts. That supersedes the previous law in this case. Now NASA has to use SLS for BLEO exploration, at least for large payloads. Unless Congress changes its mind, something I seriously doubt because SLS and Orion are the continuation of Constellation, it's pointless to discuss about what could have been. It's time to figure out what to do with SLS and commercial space to create a BELO program.There is no $$ for missions..Congress will not give them enough money, haven't we been though this?
Quote from: muomega0 on 02/08/2017 02:12 pmQuote from: RonM on 02/08/2017 01:56 pmCongress mandated that NASA would build SLS and was even told the basics on how to build it to make sure the right companies got the contracts. That supersedes the previous law in this case. Now NASA has to use SLS for BLEO exploration, at least for large payloads. Unless Congress changes its mind, something I seriously doubt because SLS and Orion are the continuation of Constellation, it's pointless to discuss about what could have been. It's time to figure out what to do with SLS and commercial space to create a BELO program.There is no $$ for missions..Congress will not give them enough money, haven't we been though this?That's why I wrote we need to figure out what to do with SLS. Congress will have to fund payloads soon or their jobs program crashes after EM-2. Working with commercial space on BLEO, like NASA is already discussing, is a way forward.It doesn't matter what any of us think about SLS. It's what Congress wants to do. The trick is working within that limitation.
Guess you're forgetting about the Europa mission(s) it's not just about manned space flight.
Are you referring specifically to SLS? In that case, the argument is probably just that there is not commercial launch vehicle of its capability.
(a)In General.—Except as otherwise provided in this section or in section 70102, the Federal Government shall acquire space transportation services from United States commercial providers whenever such services are required in the course of its activities. To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers.
Quote from: RonM on 02/08/2017 02:41 pmQuote from: muomega0 on 02/08/2017 02:12 pmQuote from: RonM on 02/08/2017 01:56 pmCongress mandated that NASA would build SLS and was even told the basics on how to build it to make sure the right companies got the contracts. That supersedes the previous law in this case. Now NASA has to use SLS for BLEO exploration, at least for large payloads. Unless Congress changes its mind, something I seriously doubt because SLS and Orion are the continuation of Constellation, it's pointless to discuss about what could have been. It's time to figure out what to do with SLS and commercial space to create a BELO program.There is no $$ for missions..Congress will not give them enough money, haven't we been though this?That's why I wrote we need to figure out what to do with SLS. Congress will have to fund payloads soon or their jobs program crashes after EM-2. Working with commercial space on BLEO, like NASA is already discussing, is a way forward.It doesn't matter what any of us think about SLS. It's what Congress wants to do. The trick is working within that limitation.Maybe we need to resurrect the Federal Line Item Veto... swamp draining will not make any progress against entrenched interests without it. (Falls into the swamp draining toolkit... like 'term limits') 44 Governors have authority to use it; impossible to balance the budget without.Obama would have slain SLS in the crib if he had that tool.
Quote from: AncientU on 02/08/2017 03:06 pmQuote from: RonM on 02/08/2017 02:41 pmQuote from: muomega0 on 02/08/2017 02:12 pmQuote from: RonM on 02/08/2017 01:56 pmCongress mandated that NASA would build SLS and was even told the basics on how to build it to make sure the right companies got the contracts. That supersedes the previous law in this case. Now NASA has to use SLS for BLEO exploration, at least for large payloads. Unless Congress changes its mind, something I seriously doubt because SLS and Orion are the continuation of Constellation, it's pointless to discuss about what could have been. It's time to figure out what to do with SLS and commercial space to create a BELO program.There is no $$ for missions..Congress will not give them enough money, haven't we been though this?That's why I wrote we need to figure out what to do with SLS. Congress will have to fund payloads soon or their jobs program crashes after EM-2. Working with commercial space on BLEO, like NASA is already discussing, is a way forward.It doesn't matter what any of us think about SLS. It's what Congress wants to do. The trick is working within that limitation.Maybe we need to resurrect the Federal Line Item Veto... swamp draining will not make any progress against entrenched interests without it. (Falls into the swamp draining toolkit... like 'term limits') 44 Governors have authority to use it; impossible to balance the budget without.Obama would have slain SLS in the crib if he had that tool.Doubt we'll see a federal line item veto since the first one was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_v._City_of_New_YorkNASA has to play with the cards Congress dealt. So does commercial space.Only chance any of this will change, and it's a slim chance, is if President Trump is incensed by the billions spent in the SLS/Orion programs and not being able to conduct a manned mission in his first term. If Trump is reelected and SLS/Orion continues to have schedule slips, there might not be a manned mission in his second term.SpaceX, Blue, and even Boeing could have manned BLEO missions before 2025.
Also, you don't even have to human-rate Delta IV Heavy if you really don't want to. You COULD just use it to launch the spacecraft empty and transfer using a crew vehicle from ISS.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 02/08/2017 01:15 amAlso, you don't even have to human-rate Delta IV Heavy if you really don't want to. You COULD just use it to launch the spacecraft empty and transfer using a crew vehicle from ISS.And then perform a plane change to get anywhere useful...ISS isn't in the best plane to go to the moon or interplanetary.
ISS isn't in the best plane to go to the moon or interplanetary.
Quote from: Star One on 02/08/2017 02:54 pmGuess you're forgetting about the Europa mission(s) it's not just about manned space flight.Atlas V, Delta IV and Falcon Heavy could do the job too. The use of SLS appears to be politically driven, in that Congress has weighed in, but I've never seen an analysis arguing that the extra cost of using SLS is actually worth the shorter flight time.
Star One, you should be making the argument that SLS is politically unkillable and therefore some use should be made of it... That's actually a valid argument. Not that SLS has any technical or economic merit whatever, which is a hill of malarky. (not a mod post)
It [SLS[ at the very least saves money on having to thermally proof the craft from travelling inwards towards the sun for a gravity assist around Venus. Also the very fact that flight time is reduced means the equipment has less chance to go wrong, suffer an incident and general wear and tear is reduced. There are more complete discussions of this in the Europa thread.
Quote from: Star One on 02/08/2017 04:49 pmIt [SLS[ at the very least saves money on having to thermally proof the craft from travelling inwards towards the sun for a gravity assist around Venus. Also the very fact that flight time is reduced means the equipment has less chance to go wrong, suffer an incident and general wear and tear is reduced. There are more complete discussions of this in the Europa thread.Yes, there are advantages (and disadvantages) of using SLS rather than Atlas V. But the decision appears to have been made not by engineers and scientists, but by politicians, who are not qualified to way up those factors.