-
#60
by
Oli
on 02 Dec, 2015 11:02
-
Not sure why some people think the SM was outsourced to ESA to protect Orion from cancellation. The contract is only for EM-1.
Orion won't be cancelled anyway, it's essential for going BEO.
-
#61
by
hektor
on 02 Dec, 2015 11:15
-
Orion won't be cancelled anyway, it's essential for going BEO.
See Wayne Hale's nightmare from his Von Braun Symposium speech. I am sure some would think you could do a very nice all-American BEO vehicle based on Dragon. Or CST-100.
-
#62
by
Oli
on 02 Dec, 2015 12:17
-
Orion won't be cancelled anyway, it's essential for going BEO.
I am sure some would think you could do a very nice all-American BEO vehicle based on Dragon. Or CST-100.
I only see evidence to the contrary. For example the fact that the Apollo CM/SM was a lot more expensive than Gemini, in fact almost as expensive as the Saturn V. Or the fact that NASA organized commercial crew for access to LEO instead of using Orion.
Sure NASA could organize a competition for a BEO capsule, but I'm sure Lockheed would win easily due to the headstart they have.
-
#63
by
ThereIWas3
on 02 Dec, 2015 13:23
-
"BEO" is not a mission. The Moon is a mission; Phobos is a mission; Mars is a mission. The requirements for crew transportation are quite different.
-
#64
by
yg1968
on 02 Dec, 2015 13:37
-
Not sure why some people think the SM was outsourced to ESA to protect Orion from cancellation. The contract is only for EM-1.
Orion won't be cancelled anyway, it's essential for going BEO.
Some parts will be used for EM-2. Most expect the arrangement to continue for other missions.
-
#65
by
clongton
on 02 Dec, 2015 22:11
-
The service module was outsourced to the ESA because NASA had priced itself out of the ability to build it themselves.
Bottom line: NASA couldn't build it but without it there would be no Orion. ESA was the only way out of the corner they had painted themselves into.
-
#66
by
clongton
on 02 Dec, 2015 22:17
-
Orion won't be cancelled anyway, it's essential for going BEO.
I am sure some would think you could do a very nice all-American BEO vehicle based on Dragon. Or CST-100.
... Or the fact that NASA organized commercial crew for access to LEO instead of using Orion.
Sure NASA could organize a competition for a BEO capsule, but I'm sure Lockheed would win easily due to the headstart they have.
Orion was not tasked for LEO transport because it was too big and too heavy. So NASA turned to the commercial world. *They had no choice* There was no American launch vehicle - that could be human rated - capable of lifting it. The hell of it is that Orion was originally designed just that way - so only the Ares could lift it, thus forcing Congress to pay for the Ares. That was Mike Griffin's doing.
And if Lockheed could easily win, then why did they decline to bid?
-
#67
by
Rocket Science
on 02 Dec, 2015 22:31
-
Thanks for the great article Cody, well done!
-
#68
by
Oli
on 03 Dec, 2015 01:04
-
Orion won't be cancelled anyway, it's essential for going BEO.
I am sure some would think you could do a very nice all-American BEO vehicle based on Dragon. Or CST-100.
... Or the fact that NASA organized commercial crew for access to LEO instead of using Orion.
Sure NASA could organize a competition for a BEO capsule, but I'm sure Lockheed would win easily due to the headstart they have.
Orion was not tasked for LEO transport because it was too big and too heavy. So NASA turned to the commercial world. *They had no choice* There was no American launch vehicle - that could be human rated - capable of lifting it. The hell of it is that Orion was originally designed just that way - so only the Ares could lift it, thus forcing Congress to pay for the Ares. That was Mike Griffin's doing.
And if Lockheed could easily win, then why did they decline to bid?
Orion is big and heavy because it goes to the Moon and back. A Dragon modified for that purpose would be equally big and heavy.
There was no competition for a BEO capsule, only for LEO. The fact that Lockheed did not even bid with a stripped-down Orion only confirms my suspicion that its difficult to make a BEO capsule into a competitive LEO capsule and vice versa.
The service module was outsourced to the ESA because NASA had priced itself out of the ability to build it themselves.
Bottom line: NASA couldn't build it but without it there would be no Orion. ESA was the only way out of the corner they had painted themselves into.
Source? I seriously doubt those ~$400m ESA pays for the SM would have killed Orion if NASA would have had to pay for it.
-
#69
by
woods170
on 03 Dec, 2015 12:42
-
Orion won't be cancelled anyway, it's essential for going BEO.
I am sure some would think you could do a very nice all-American BEO vehicle based on Dragon. Or CST-100.
... Or the fact that NASA organized commercial crew for access to LEO instead of using Orion.
Sure NASA could organize a competition for a BEO capsule, but I'm sure Lockheed would win easily due to the headstart they have.
Orion was not tasked for LEO transport because it was too big and too heavy. So NASA turned to the commercial world. *They had no choice* There was no American launch vehicle - that could be human rated - capable of lifting it. The hell of it is that Orion was originally designed just that way - so only the Ares could lift it, thus forcing Congress to pay for the Ares. That was Mike Griffin's doing.
And if Lockheed could easily win, then why did they decline to bid?
Orion is big and heavy because it goes to the Moon and back. A Dragon modified for that purpose would be equally big and heavy.
Emphasis mine.
Very bold assumption for someone who does not actually work for SpaceX.
-
#70
by
Oli
on 03 Dec, 2015 13:30
-
Orion won't be cancelled anyway, it's essential for going BEO.
I am sure some would think you could do a very nice all-American BEO vehicle based on Dragon. Or CST-100.
... Or the fact that NASA organized commercial crew for access to LEO instead of using Orion.
Sure NASA could organize a competition for a BEO capsule, but I'm sure Lockheed would win easily due to the headstart they have.
Orion was not tasked for LEO transport because it was too big and too heavy. So NASA turned to the commercial world. *They had no choice* There was no American launch vehicle - that could be human rated - capable of lifting it. The hell of it is that Orion was originally designed just that way - so only the Ares could lift it, thus forcing Congress to pay for the Ares. That was Mike Griffin's doing.
And if Lockheed could easily win, then why did they decline to bid?
Orion is big and heavy because it goes to the Moon and back. A Dragon modified for that purpose would be equally big and heavy.
Emphasis mine.
Very bold assumption for someone who does not actually work for SpaceX.
Why? Assuming equal requirements, is there something that would magically make Dragon less heavy?
-
#71
by
yg1968
on 03 Dec, 2015 13:38
-
Orion was built heavy on purpose but it wasn't actually necessary. NASA wanted a capsule that could be used in space for 3 weeks without a habitat. It's also larger than it needs to be which means that it can't be lifted by an Atlas V.
-
#72
by
Oli
on 03 Dec, 2015 14:14
-
Orion was built heavy on purpose but it wasn't actually necessary. NASA wanted a capsule that could be used in space for 3 weeks without a habitat. It's also larger than it needs to be which means that it can't be lifted by an Atlas V.
Who said 3 weeks aren't necessary? The transit from/to LDRO for example takes 10-12 days.
-
#73
by
Coastal Ron
on 03 Dec, 2015 14:39
-
Orion was built heavy on purpose but it wasn't actually necessary. NASA wanted a capsule that could be used in space for 3 weeks without a habitat. It's also larger than it needs to be which means that it can't be lifted by an Atlas V.
Let's not forget that NASA is not monolithic in thought, and that NASA was originally pursuing a completely different design for Orion when Lockheed Martin was awarded the contract for a delta-winged vehicle. Michael Griffin then took over as NASA Administrator and after he implemented the Exploration Systems Architecture Study Orion was changed to what we have now - which is a design that Griffin developed as part of a study for the Planetary Society.
So no, NASA did not originally want a capsule. And what we have today is what one person in NASA, Michael Griffin, really thought NASA should have. We'll never know which was the better choice, but we need to remember how we got to where we are today.
-
#74
by
Jim
on 03 Dec, 2015 14:52
-
Let's not forget that NASA is not monolithic in thought, and that NASA was originally pursuing a completely different design for Orion when Lockheed Martin was awarded the contract for a delta-winged vehicle.
LM was never on contract for delta-winged vehicle.
-
#75
by
hektor
on 03 Dec, 2015 16:26
-
-
#76
by
woods170
on 03 Dec, 2015 18:26
-
Orion won't be cancelled anyway, it's essential for going BEO.
I am sure some would think you could do a very nice all-American BEO vehicle based on Dragon. Or CST-100.
... Or the fact that NASA organized commercial crew for access to LEO instead of using Orion.
Sure NASA could organize a competition for a BEO capsule, but I'm sure Lockheed would win easily due to the headstart they have.
Orion was not tasked for LEO transport because it was too big and too heavy. So NASA turned to the commercial world. *They had no choice* There was no American launch vehicle - that could be human rated - capable of lifting it. The hell of it is that Orion was originally designed just that way - so only the Ares could lift it, thus forcing Congress to pay for the Ares. That was Mike Griffin's doing.
And if Lockheed could easily win, then why did they decline to bid?
Orion is big and heavy because it goes to the Moon and back. A Dragon modified for that purpose would be equally big and heavy.
Emphasis mine.
Very bold assumption for someone who does not actually work for SpaceX.
Why? Assuming equal requirements, is there something that would magically make Dragon less heavy?
You make the mistake of assuming that SpaceX would, under equal requirements, come up with the same behemoth vehicle that NASA forced onto LockMart. You completely ignore the fact that SpaceX has a tendency to do things a tad different from the rest of the aerospace industry.
-
#77
by
Oli
on 03 Dec, 2015 18:57
-
You make the mistake of assuming that SpaceX would, under equal requirements, come up with the same behemoth vehicle that NASA forced onto LockMart.
I don't get it. So you think NASA forced the "behemoth" on Lockheed but would not force it on SpaceX? What's your argument again?
The lunar Dragon from the Evolvable Lunar Architecture by the way is almost as heavy as Orion, all things included, and can only keep a crew of 4 alive for 14 days (not that I trust the study, but its the only one I know of).
-
#78
by
mike robel
on 03 Dec, 2015 19:28
-
LM winning proposal for CEV was based on a delta winged lifting body.
http://www.space.com/1088-florida-hopes-host-cev-construction.html
As I recall, that Delta Winged Body was an initial proposal from LMCO and not the one they actually sent in. In a similar fashion, NG/Boeing released a Soyuz Like vehicle as their product. (Note: At the time I worked for NG in an LMCO building on a battle simulation program.)
At the time, I asked the POC given on the NG blurb if there was any information available. I did it from my LMCO e-mail, which made him suspicious, so I told him what my situation was and switched to my NG address. essentially he said it was a deception plan.
When I watched the announcement, there was, again, no real difference to the casual eye between NG and LMCO, except the solar panels. NG were long and rectangular and LMCOs were Compact and circular/stop sign shaped. They both appeared to be the same size.
After the contract was awarded, NASA went to the incredible shrinking SM as they tried to make the program work.
Mind you, this is recollection on my part and I no longer have the various released drawings of the various iterations, so I may be completely wrong.
-
#79
by
woods170
on 04 Dec, 2015 08:06
-
You make the mistake of assuming that SpaceX would, under equal requirements, come up with the same behemoth vehicle that NASA forced onto LockMart.
I don't get it. So you think NASA forced the "behemoth" on Lockheed but would not force it on SpaceX? What's your argument again?
The lunar Dragon from the Evolvable Lunar Architecture by the way is almost as heavy as Orion, all things included, and can only keep a crew of 4 alive for 14 days (not that I trust the study, but its the only one I know of).
Two major flaws with your argument:
- Orion and Lunar Dragon cannot be compared as apples-to-apples: Orion does not carry it's LAS all the way to lunar orbit. That add's quite a bit of mass to Dragon.
- No actual input for the Evolvable Lunar Architecture actually came from SpaceX, so all mass figures for the Lunar Dragon, including those of the required modifications are to be taken with quite a bit of salt.
