Author Topic: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid  (Read 57308 times)

Offline jadebenn

  • Professional Lurker
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
  • Orbiting the Mun
  • Liked: 1221
  • Likes Given: 3546
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #100 on: 11/16/2019 11:07 pm »
The moment you launch a separate Block 1B SLS to handle the lander, you limit yourself to storables, because the second SLS will still be under construction when you launch the first one.
This is a bad assumption. There are two mobile launchers. If NASA wants, they are fully capable of outfitting high bay 1 and stacking a second SLS at the same time as the first.

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9264
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10730
  • Likes Given: 12341
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #101 on: 11/16/2019 11:22 pm »
The moment you launch a separate Block 1B SLS to handle the lander, you limit yourself to storables, because the second SLS will still be under construction when you launch the first one.
This is a bad assumption. There are two mobile launchers. If NASA wants, they are fully capable of outfitting high bay 1 and stacking a second SLS at the same time as the first.

The current Mobile Launch Platform (MLP) can only handle the Block 1 configuration, and the new MLP is being built to handle Block 1B and Block 2, so if there was a need to launch more than one SLS per year then it's likely they would only use the new MLP (it can handle multiple launches per year). The only opportunity to use both MLP would be at the transition from Block 1 to Block 1B/2, and I think that is too soon to allow a plan to do that.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline jadebenn

  • Professional Lurker
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
  • Orbiting the Mun
  • Liked: 1221
  • Likes Given: 3546
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #102 on: 11/17/2019 12:01 am »
The current Mobile Launch Platform (MLP) can only handle the Block 1 configuration, and the new MLP is being built to handle Block 1B and Block 2, so if there was a need to launch more than one SLS per year then it's likely they would only use the new MLP (it can handle multiple launches per year). The only opportunity to use both MLP would be at the transition from Block 1 to Block 1B/2, and I think that is too soon to allow a plan to do that.
Even with the current ML configuration it would be entirely possible to launch a Block 1 crewed SLS in conjunction with a Block 1B cargo SLS with very little turnaround if high bay 1 is set up for it.
« Last Edit: 11/17/2019 12:01 am by jadebenn »

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9264
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10730
  • Likes Given: 12341
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #103 on: 11/17/2019 12:24 am »
The current Mobile Launch Platform (MLP) can only handle the Block 1 configuration, and the new MLP is being built to handle Block 1B and Block 2, so if there was a need to launch more than one SLS per year then it's likely they would only use the new MLP (it can handle multiple launches per year). The only opportunity to use both MLP would be at the transition from Block 1 to Block 1B/2, and I think that is too soon to allow a plan to do that.
Even with the current ML configuration it would be entirely possible to launch a Block 1 crewed SLS in conjunction with a Block 1B cargo SLS with very little turnaround if high bay 1 is set up for it.

When I was researching this topic it was implied that only the new MLP could handle the Orion configuration. But it wasn't stated.

However there is only one point in the future where flying a Block 1 and a Block 1B significantly less than 12 months apart can happen, and that is right around 2024. And we know that Boeing doesn't have ability, currently, to build more than one SLS per year - it would take an act of Congress to fund the ability to build more than one per year.

So while theoretically what you propose could happen, it's likely outside the realm of possibility at this late stage of the program.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline jadebenn

  • Professional Lurker
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
  • Orbiting the Mun
  • Liked: 1221
  • Likes Given: 3546
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #104 on: 11/17/2019 12:45 am »
When I was researching this topic it was implied that only the new MLP could handle the Orion configuration. But it wasn't stated.
Can you clarify what you mean by this?
However there is only one point in the future where flying a Block 1 and a Block 1B significantly less than 12 months apart can happen, and that is right around 2024. And we know that Boeing doesn't have ability, currently, to build more than one SLS per year - it would take an act of Congress to fund the ability to build more than one per year.
I'm quite certain that Boeing's lander proposal isn't going to gimp non-lander SLS production. That would go against the terms laid down for using SLS in the HLS solicitation.

In other words, the only way they can make a proposal that complies with the HLS requirements is to push the production rate above 1 per year.

Offline ncb1397

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3497
  • Liked: 2310
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #105 on: 11/17/2019 12:47 am »
When I was researching this topic it was implied that only the new MLP could handle the Orion configuration. But it wasn't stated.
Can you clarify what you mean by this?
However there is only one point in the future where flying a Block 1 and a Block 1B significantly less than 12 months apart can happen, and that is right around 2024. And we know that Boeing doesn't have ability, currently, to build more than one SLS per year - it would take an act of Congress to fund the ability to build more than one per year.
I'm quite certain that Boeing's lander proposal isn't going to gimp non-lander SLS production. That would go against the terms laid down for using SLS in the HLS solicitation.

In other words, the only way they can make a proposal that complies with the HLS requirements is to push the production rate above 1 per year.

HLS program will pay for the additional cost of the launch vehicle(s) (whether that is New Glenn/Falcon Heavy/SLS/etc.). There is no requirement for an act of congress.
« Last Edit: 11/17/2019 12:48 am by ncb1397 »

Offline jadebenn

  • Professional Lurker
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
  • Orbiting the Mun
  • Liked: 1221
  • Likes Given: 3546
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #106 on: 11/17/2019 12:49 am »
HLS program will pay for the additional cost of the launch vehicle.
That is actually the opposite of what they'll do. They'll pay for it as part of a bid (in the same way they'd pay for a New Glenn launch as part of Blue's bid), but they've explicitly stated they're not giving Boeing's lander a free ride.
« Last Edit: 11/17/2019 12:49 am by jadebenn »

Offline jadebenn

  • Professional Lurker
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
  • Orbiting the Mun
  • Liked: 1221
  • Likes Given: 3546
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #107 on: 11/17/2019 03:45 am »
You know, according to this press release from 2014, it only cost about $100M to outfit VAB High Bay 3 for SLS. I see no reason that shouldn't hold with High Bay 1.

So if it only costs ~$100M to enable dual launch of Block 1 and Block 1B, there's really nothing stopping NASA from doing so if such a capability is ever needed.
« Last Edit: 11/17/2019 03:50 am by jadebenn »

Offline TheRadicalModerate

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5131
  • Tampa, FL
  • Liked: 3755
  • Likes Given: 703
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #108 on: 11/17/2019 03:59 am »
The moment you launch a separate Block 1B SLS to handle the lander, you limit yourself to storables, because the second SLS will still be under construction when you launch the first one.
This is a bad assumption. There are two mobile launchers. If NASA wants, they are fully capable of outfitting high bay 1 and stacking a second SLS at the same time as the first.

Stacking isn't the long pole in the tent.  Based on behavior so far, manufacturing is.  And how much more money would you be planning on throwing at EGS to get two stacks running at the same time, with two sets of SRBs?  Good thing that there won't be any stray LOX domes lounging about.

I guess you could store a core in the VAB, then finish stacking just as the second one came out of Stennis.  But it's still likely to take a month or two to stack the second SLS--especially one with an Orion on it--after the first one has rolled out.  That's still too long for cryogenics without a bunch of low-TRL stuff being required by Artemis.

Offline TheRadicalModerate

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5131
  • Tampa, FL
  • Liked: 3755
  • Likes Given: 703
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #109 on: 11/17/2019 04:02 am »
You know, according to this press release from 2014, it only cost about $100M to outfit VAB High Bay 3 for SLS. I see no reason that shouldn't hold with High Bay 1.

So if it only costs ~$100M to enable dual launch of Block 1 and Block 1B, there's really nothing stopping NASA from doing so if such a capability is ever needed.

Just to be clear, if you're going to launch two SLSes nearly simultaneously for Artemis 3, you're not talking about some dim, distant eventuality.  You'd pretty much have to have the contracts in place by now.  Oh, yeah:  Don't forget that you won't be doing any High Bay expansion work that'll interfere with Artemis 1.

I think it's much more likely that they simply build an AE/DE that use storables.

Offline jadebenn

  • Professional Lurker
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
  • Orbiting the Mun
  • Liked: 1221
  • Likes Given: 3546
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #110 on: 11/17/2019 04:17 am »
Stacking isn't the long pole in the tent.  Based on behavior so far, manufacturing is.
True. But Boeing's going to have to do something about that either way if their proposal gets chosen.
And how much more money would you be planning on throwing at EGS to get two stacks running at the same time, with two sets of SRBs?  Good thing that there won't be any stray LOX domes lounging about.
Would the requirements really be all that much more than for stacking one SLS? I'm certain they'd need to hire some more people, but these things don't scale linearly.
I guess you could store a core in the VAB, then finish stacking just as the second one came out of Stennis.  But it's still likely to take a month or two to stack the second SLS--especially one with an Orion on it--after the first one has rolled out.  That's still too long for cryogenics without a bunch of low-TRL stuff being required by Artemis.
You don't need to ship out the first SLS until the second's ready with the two high bay plan.
Just to be clear, if you're going to launch two SLSes nearly simultaneously for Artemis 3, you're not talking about some dim, distant eventuality.  You'd pretty much have to have the contracts in place by now.  Oh, yeah:  Don't forget that you won't be doing any High Bay expansion work that'll interfere with Artemis 1.
Let's see. Artemis 3 is 2024. HB-3 modifications were contracted in 2014, and finished in 2017. 3 years.

Assuming that there's no speed improvements and that they want to finish VAB modifications before the end of 2023, that gives them until the end of next year to start working on it. So yeah, they'd have to act soon, but it's not yet been ruled out as an option.

Also, I don't see where there'd be much possibility for interference. High Bay 1 and High Bay 3 don't share any equipment insofar as stacking rockets goes. There'd be more possibility of conflicts with High Bay 2 (which will eventually start being equipped for OmegA) than conflicts with High Bay 3.
I think it's much more likely that they simply build an AE/DE that use storables.
Their partnership with Intuitive Machines (which makes methalox engines) wouldn't make much sense if an all-storable lander was their game-plan.
« Last Edit: 11/17/2019 04:33 am by jadebenn »

Offline TheRadicalModerate

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5131
  • Tampa, FL
  • Liked: 3755
  • Likes Given: 703
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #111 on: 11/17/2019 04:34 am »
Let's see. Artemis 3 is 2024. HB-3 modifications were contracted in 2014, and finished in 2017. 3 years.

Assuming that there's no speed improvements and that they want to finish VAB modifications before the end of 2023, that gives them until the end of next year to start working on it. So yeah, they'd have to act soon, but it's not yet been ruled out as an option.

Also, I don't see where there'd be much possibility for interference. High Bay 1 and High Bay 3 don't share any equipment insofar as stacking rockets goes. There'd be more possibility of conflicts with High Bay 2 (which will eventually start being equipped for OmegA) than conflicts with High Bay 3.

They're not going to let somebody even breathe on the VAB configuration with an SLS in there.  And you've got Artemis 2 in there somewhere.  How long does stacking take?  Four months?  So you're going to do all the work between (optimistically) mid 2021 and mid-2022? Or (more realistically) late 2023?

Offline jadebenn

  • Professional Lurker
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
  • Orbiting the Mun
  • Liked: 1221
  • Likes Given: 3546
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #112 on: 11/17/2019 04:47 am »
They're not going to let somebody even breathe on the VAB configuration with an SLS in there.  And you've got Artemis 2 in there somewhere.  How long does stacking take?  Four months?  So you're going to do all the work between (optimistically) mid 2021 and mid-2022? Or (more realistically) late 2023?
I think you're overstating their caution. As far as I'm aware, NGIS has not conducted any modifications to High Bay 2 for OmegA yet. They'll need to eventually. If NASA was going to be as strict as you claim about work going on in other High Bays while SLS is being stacked, you'd think that NGIS would be hustling to get that done right about now.
« Last Edit: 11/17/2019 04:49 am by jadebenn »

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9264
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10730
  • Likes Given: 12341
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #113 on: 11/17/2019 06:05 am »
When I was researching this topic it was implied that only the new MLP could handle the Orion configuration. But it wasn't stated.
Can you clarify what you mean by this?

From what I read it seemed that the Orion would only be able to launch from either a modified version of the current MLP, or the new MLP that will be needed for the Block 1B and Block 2. That needs to be verified though.

Quote
However there is only one point in the future where flying a Block 1 and a Block 1B significantly less than 12 months apart can happen, and that is right around 2024. And we know that Boeing doesn't have ability, currently, to build more than one SLS per year - it would take an act of Congress to fund the ability to build more than one per year.
I'm quite certain that Boeing's lander proposal isn't going to gimp non-lander SLS production. That would go against the terms laid down for using SLS in the HLS solicitation.

Just because Boeing bid it doesn't mean they are likely to do it. I think they would need quite a bit of money to do a non-NASA launch of the SLS.

Quote
In other words, the only way they can make a proposal that complies with the HLS requirements is to push the production rate above 1 per year.

That seems to be the case. Which is possible, but only if NASA pours more money and personnel into the SLS facility.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline jadebenn

  • Professional Lurker
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
  • Orbiting the Mun
  • Liked: 1221
  • Likes Given: 3546
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #114 on: 11/17/2019 06:17 am »
From what I read it seemed that the Orion would only be able to launch from either a modified version of the current MLP, or the new MLP that will be needed for the Block 1B and Block 2. That needs to be verified though.
That can't be right. The current plan has Artemis 2 on Block 1, which means they're using the existing ML to launch crew.
Just because Boeing bid it doesn't mean they are likely to do it. I think they would need quite a bit of money to do a non-NASA launch of the SLS.
I mean, it would be a NASA launch in all-but contracting relationship. Customer is NASA, launch is in service of NASA's goals and programs, etc. Basically like CCrew or COTS.
Quote
In other words, the only way they can make a proposal that complies with the HLS requirements is to push the production rate above 1 per year.
That seems to be the case. Which is possible, but only if NASA pours more money and personnel into the SLS facility.
I just posted this on a comment of yours in another thread, but I think it's relevant here too. Bridenstine's previous comments suggest the impetus to invest is on Boeing.

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1184473771798880257

This was actually one of the remarks that convinced me Boeing was going for an SLS-launched lander before that was officially confirmed.
« Last Edit: 11/17/2019 06:21 am by jadebenn »

Offline ncb1397

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3497
  • Liked: 2310
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #115 on: 11/17/2019 12:01 pm »
Their partnership with Intuitive Machines (which makes methalox engines) wouldn't make much sense if an all-storable lander was their game-plan.

That is what their game plan is. They are exploring other technology though.

Quote
“Our typical propulsion partner tends to be Aerojet Rocketdyne,” he said. “We are looking at alternate sources, too, depending on their maturity, but there are some off-the shelf engines that we’re looking at from Aerojet Rocketdyne, that are flying on commercial crew, so existing engines.”

Boeing is looking at storable hypergolic propellant systems for the engines on the 2024 lunar landing mission, McGrath said.
https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/11/09/boeing-proposes-sls-launched-lunar-lander/
« Last Edit: 11/17/2019 12:02 pm by ncb1397 »

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2094
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #116 on: 11/17/2019 12:21 pm »
Both vehicles can be opreated independent of a gateway station...which if there is a Boeing plan, cannot be built..
Baseless speculation.

not if production flight rate stays at 1 per year.  if it moves up to two per year that would be the two Boeing would need for their program

the sticking point is the 24 deadline.  they will be lucky very lucky to have SLS and the Capsule flying by 22.  it is unlikely that by 23 which is when it would have to test they will have another upper stage for SLS...and it is even more unlikely they will have a lander...

its not only a money limitation but its just a simple build fly test cycle. 

all this seems to be an argument around a circle anyway as support for the 24 deadline is evaporating

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12418
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 19487
  • Likes Given: 13602
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #117 on: 11/17/2019 12:35 pm »
The moment you launch a separate Block 1B SLS to handle the lander, you limit yourself to storables, because the second SLS will still be under construction when you launch the first one.
This is a bad assumption. There are two mobile launchers. If NASA wants, they are fully capable of outfitting high bay 1 and stacking a second SLS at the same time as the first.

Minor nit: that second ML will not be ready to allow stacking of a second SLS for many years to come.

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9108
  • Likes Given: 885
Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #118 on: 02/11/2020 03:47 am »
So the 2021 NASA budget request throws some wrenches into Boeing's plan:
1. It defers SLS Block 1B indefinitely
2. It assigns Europa Clipper to commercial LV because otherwise it would reduce the SLS assigned to Artemis, which basically says NASA doesn't expect more than 3 SLS by 2024

Congress may restore SLS Block 1B, but NASA will be the one who pick the winner of HLS, it's pretty clear NASA has no confidence that Boeing can work on Block 1B in parallel or increase the production rate of SLS cores, it would be interesting to see how this non-confidence translates into their evaluation of Boeing's HLS proposal.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid
« Reply #119 on: 02/11/2020 04:02 am »
So the 2021 NASA budget request throws some wrenches into Boeing's plan:
1. It defers SLS Block 1B indefinitely
2. It assigns Europa Clipper to commercial LV because otherwise it would reduce the SLS assigned to Artemis, which basically says NASA doesn't expect more than 3 SLS by 2024

Congress may restore SLS Block 1B, but NASA will be the one who pick the winner of HLS, it's pretty clear NASA has no confidence that Boeing can work on Block 1B in parallel or increase the production rate of SLS cores, it would be interesting to see how this non-confidence translates into their evaluation of Boeing's HLS proposal.
Especially as Boeing bid relies solely on SLS 1B for lander. Most of competitors' offers can use commercial LVs for lander with crew on SLS/Orion which can be block 1A.

Tags: Boeing NASA SLS HLS lander 
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0