Quote from: Prober on 05/03/2014 02:46 am2) The ULA can pump out more cores, that's a non issue. The issue then comes down to the engines. Again this isn't a DOD problem its a NASA problem. So the fix is easy pull all Atlas V NASA missions and use those engines for Crew testing until they sort the engine mess out. Not NASA's call. NASA doesn't own any engines nor does NASA contract ULA for crew flights.
2) The ULA can pump out more cores, that's a non issue. The issue then comes down to the engines. Again this isn't a DOD problem its a NASA problem. So the fix is easy pull all Atlas V NASA missions and use those engines for Crew testing until they sort the engine mess out.
The law says SLS with Orion as backup. Ridiculous and not human rated until the next upper stage, so you can't do it before 2020, with unlimited funds.Well SLS could, and should have been in launch test mode this year....lets not go there.Orion has been under development one way or another for how many years? Frankly, the 2010 Obama plan confirmed Orion as a backup and should be ready....but this is all the Administration and politics, so lets not go there.
If you wanted to go with Delta IV Heavy, you'd still have to human rate it. If you look at our status I don't see any other choice.
Those schedules and cost would make it easier to actually produce the RD-180 in the US. Again, no funding limits.That's a given....its time for Rocketdyne to pull all the materials out of storage and get the manufacturing project started.
If funding is an issue, I don't believe there's any human rated alternative to Atlas V save for Falcon 9, and Dragon has the integration advantage there.Where is this coming from? The Falcon 9 is under continuous experimental status with re usability. Unless I missed something, don't see this combo operational as HSR for years. Throwing more cash is not going to fix this problem.
Regarding NASA rockets, yes, the problem is propulsion. Not only human rated but nuclear rated. ULA could deploy a Delta IV (4,4) in 36 months and a (5,6) or (5,8) in 48 months. That could cover Atlas V 431, 541 and 551, resp. But again, look at lead times. And is not only certifying for launch, but human rating and nuclear rating. Of course ULA can pump the cores, and the cost would go down for Delta (though higher than Atlas V). But the engines stock in simply not enough to deploy the alternatives without some painful decisions.We are at the pre to painful decisions point. Start thinking of it as a management lead Apollo 13 issue. So a decision is needed, the Sooner the better.Believe the real call NASA needs to make is going from the RS-68 A to make the RS-68B. The electronics upgrade is done? The regenerative nozzle would finish the project?
But, to be frank, I don't expect this situation to keep going for more than two days.What can be solved in two days?
Quote from: Prober on 05/03/2014 03:54 pmThe law says SLS with Orion as backup. Ridiculous and not human rated until the next upper stage, so you can't do it before 2020, with unlimited funds.Well SLS could, and should have been in launch test mode this year....lets not go there.Orion has been under development one way or another for how many years? Frankly, the 2010 Obama plan confirmed Orion as a backup and should be ready....but this is all the Administration and politics, so lets not go there.If DoD had invested on a bigger cache of RD-180, or us production this would not an issue. If they had worked on human rating the Delta IV before, it wouldn't either. But even the ICPS has dropped the human rating requirement. So as of right now it simply isn't an option.
That might be your opinion. But on L2 and even on the public side every informed opinion is that SpaceX is ahead of the rest in CCtCap. You'll understand if you go by the opinion of the actual NASA engineers.
These the same NASA engineers making the call on SLS or Orion, or how about Aries 1?
Interesting article about the CST-100 on Gizmodo, including additional interior pictures that I hadn't seen before:Inside the Boeing Capsule That May Someday Take You to Space
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 05/07/2014 08:10 pmInteresting article about the CST-100 on Gizmodo, including additional interior pictures that I hadn't seen before:Inside the Boeing Capsule That May Someday Take You to SpaceYep, and those pictures do seem to suggest that this is an interior of some fantasy spacecraft (look at all the windows!), and *NOT* CST-100. Some future derivative perhaps, but not CST-100.There is no way that interior matches the exterior.
I see 2 dates throughout 2017 for orbital tests but I have not seen any dates mentioned for a Pad abort and/or In-flight abort? Which I'm assuming would need to be towards the end of 2016? Will there be an additional Atlas V available for an in-flight abort test in 2016?
" A familiar daytime blue sky scene helps passengers maintain their connection with Earth."
Quote from: jacqmans on 04/30/2014 09:14 pm" A familiar daytime blue sky scene helps passengers maintain their connection with Earth."Seems everyone agrees with this. Which ever spacecraft flies on on which ever launcher, it will most likely have a blue interior.
Doesn't need to be an Atlas for an abort test. In fact that would be a waste of an expensive booster.