Author Topic: SLS General Discussion Thread 2  (Read 407743 times)

Offline mike robel

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • Merritt Island, FL
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1040 on: 07/19/2017 01:33 AM »
I dunno.  There was a fair bit of interest when we orbited Ceres and flew by Pluto.  Juno is also grabbing some views.

But maybe it is just me.  But I fear we are off topic insofar as SLS goes, so I will shut up now.
« Last Edit: 07/19/2017 01:34 AM by mike robel »

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4211
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 2869
  • Likes Given: 3712
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1041 on: 07/19/2017 02:00 AM »
No one has caught up with us, even though we haven't been to the moon in 50 years.  And no one does else does what we have done with Robotic exploration of the solar system.

Robotic exploration of the solar system rarely makes the headlines in the tabloids.

The great red spot of Jupiter as never seen before – in pictures | Science | The Guardian

The Juno pictures were all over the place 6 days ago, and don't you remember the excitement with the New Horizons flyby of Pluto? Just about every publication I frequent usually has NASA robotic mission updates.

Quote
The USA is the only country to land a man on the Moon. However following the crash of the Shuttle the general public think NASA is a busted flush. It needs to return to the fray.

The public doesn't have that long of a memory to remember the Columbia in 2003. During that time we've had a lot of activity on the ISS, as well as robotic missions to Mars and other planets, and the last Shuttle memories would have been a successful mission to the ISS.

Quote
Congress probably expects the Orion and SLS to be involved in NASA's return to greatness.

The term "return to greatness" is charged statement, since there are many (including myself) who think America and NASA as never fallen from "greatness'. Despite the pronouncements of our current President.

Plus, giant rockets don't make a country "great", since they are only the transportation for a mission, not the mission themselves. And so far Trump has not announced any missions for the Orion or SLS.

Quote
The Japanese have caught up with the USA on lunar landers.

Russia was always the leader on robotic landers for our Moon, but we are the clear leader for robotic landers for Mars. Guess which one is harder...
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 whitelancer64

Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1042 on: 07/22/2017 04:58 AM »
Is there a chart or a graph somewhere that shows how much funding the SLS was allocated vs. how much was requested?
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4244
  • California
  • Liked: 3659
  • Likes Given: 2256
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1043 on: 08/03/2017 05:26 PM »
From the update thread:

Space Launch System Solid Rocket Boosters ‘on Target’ for First Flight

https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/space-launch-system-solid-rocket-boosters-on-target-for-first-flight.html

Goodbye swooshes.


:( I liked them.

"In the final design, the photogrammetric checkerboards will replace the orange and gray stripes that had been previously considered."

But no recent launch vehicle has used those kinds of "photogrammetric checkerboards" on their first flights. Other data has sufficed. Wasn't the last new US launch vehicle to use this pattern... Saturn V? This seems like yet another Saturn era design element rather than a requirement.
« Last Edit: 08/03/2017 05:27 PM by Lars-J »

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1009
  • Long Beach, California
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 602
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1044 on: 08/03/2017 05:58 PM »
From the update thread:

Space Launch System Solid Rocket Boosters ‘on Target’ for First Flight

https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/space-launch-system-solid-rocket-boosters-on-target-for-first-flight.html

Goodbye swooshes.


:( I liked them.

"In the final design, the photogrammetric checkerboards will replace the orange and gray stripes that had been previously considered."

But no recent launch vehicle has used those kinds of "photogrammetric checkerboards" on their first flights. Other data has sufficed. Wasn't the last new US launch vehicle to use this pattern... Saturn V? This seems like yet another Saturn era design element rather than a requirement.

That is pure hyperbole on your part, you have no idea if its useful or not yet you've already determined your conclusion.

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4244
  • California
  • Liked: 3659
  • Likes Given: 2256
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1045 on: 08/03/2017 06:03 PM »
From the update thread:

Space Launch System Solid Rocket Boosters ‘on Target’ for First Flight

https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/space-launch-system-solid-rocket-boosters-on-target-for-first-flight.html

Goodbye swooshes.


:( I liked them.

"In the final design, the photogrammetric checkerboards will replace the orange and gray stripes that had been previously considered."

But no recent launch vehicle has used those kinds of "photogrammetric checkerboards" on their first flights. Other data has sufficed. Wasn't the last new US launch vehicle to use this pattern... Saturn V? This seems like yet another Saturn era design element rather than a requirement.

That is pure hyperbole on your part, you have no idea if its useful or not yet you've already determined your conclusion.

Whoa, hold on there. How about you provide some actual evidence to prove me wrong instead of claiming 'hyperbole'. Am I wrong that no US launch vehicle since Saturn V has used "photogrammetric checkerboards"? (I certainly could be...) Then just provide evidence.

As far as them just being design elements... Were they needed or used on SRBs for the first Shuttle flight? No. Is that hyperbole too?

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8510
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 5019
  • Likes Given: 1596
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1046 on: 08/03/2017 07:14 PM »
From the update thread:

Space Launch System Solid Rocket Boosters ‘on Target’ for First Flight

https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/space-launch-system-solid-rocket-boosters-on-target-for-first-flight.html

Goodbye swooshes.


:( I liked them.

"In the final design, the photogrammetric checkerboards will replace the orange and gray stripes that had been previously considered."

But no recent launch vehicle has used those kinds of "photogrammetric checkerboards" on their first flights. Other data has sufficed. Wasn't the last new US launch vehicle to use this pattern... Saturn V? This seems like yet another Saturn era design element rather than a requirement.

That is pure hyperbole on your part, you have no idea if its useful or not yet you've already determined your conclusion.

Whoa, hold on there. How about you provide some actual evidence to prove me wrong instead of claiming 'hyperbole'. Am I wrong that no US launch vehicle since Saturn V has used "photogrammetric checkerboards"? (I certainly could be...) Then just provide evidence.

As far as them just being design elements... Were they needed or used on SRBs for the first Shuttle flight? No. Is that hyperbole too?
STS flew with photometric checkerboards on the SRB's on the first several missions.

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4244
  • California
  • Liked: 3659
  • Likes Given: 2256
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1047 on: 08/03/2017 07:17 PM »
As far as them just being design elements... Were they needed or used on SRBs for the first Shuttle flight? No. Is that hyperbole too?
STS flew with photometric checkerboards on the SRB's on the first several missions.

I stand corrected... I had not noticed them until now. Two small squares per booster, that seems to have been it.
« Last Edit: 08/03/2017 07:20 PM by Lars-J »

Offline whitelancer64

Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1048 on: 08/03/2017 07:26 PM »
From the update thread:

Space Launch System Solid Rocket Boosters ‘on Target’ for First Flight

https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/space-launch-system-solid-rocket-boosters-on-target-for-first-flight.html

Goodbye swooshes.


:( I liked them.

"In the final design, the photogrammetric checkerboards will replace the orange and gray stripes that had been previously considered."

But no recent launch vehicle has used those kinds of "photogrammetric checkerboards" on their first flights. Other data has sufficed. Wasn't the last new US launch vehicle to use this pattern... Saturn V? This seems like yet another Saturn era design element rather than a requirement.

That is pure hyperbole on your part, you have no idea if its useful or not yet you've already determined your conclusion.

Whoa, hold on there. How about you provide some actual evidence to prove me wrong instead of claiming 'hyperbole'. Am I wrong that no US launch vehicle since Saturn V has used "photogrammetric checkerboards"? (I certainly could be...) Then just provide evidence.

As far as them just being design elements... Were they needed or used on SRBs for the first Shuttle flight? No. Is that hyperbole too?

The SRBs on STS-1 had black markings on the sides for photogrammetry. These markings were used through STS-51-C, the 15th flight of the Shuttle.

Later flights had stripes on the SRB's nose cones, starting with STS-41-D, the 12th Shuttle flight, and these remained in use until STS-58 in 1993.
« Last Edit: 08/04/2017 04:32 PM by whitelancer64 »
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline okan170

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1086
  • Los Angeles
  • Liked: 6428
  • Likes Given: 1299
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1049 on: 08/03/2017 10:13 PM »
For what its worth, using the checkerboards means that doing digital photogrammetry after launch will allow them to get a very accurate 3D image of the location, motion and orientation of things like booster separation.  The way its often done, at least in VFX is to have as many trackable points as possible to help cancel errors.  Combined with the onboard video, they should be able to do some pretty good analysis of what is happening.

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4244
  • California
  • Liked: 3659
  • Likes Given: 2256
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1050 on: 08/03/2017 10:43 PM »
For what its worth, using the checkerboards means that doing digital photogrammetry after launch will allow them to get a very accurate 3D image of the location, motion and orientation of things like booster separation.  The way its often done, at least in VFX is to have as many trackable points as possible to help cancel errors.  Combined with the onboard video, they should be able to do some pretty good analysis of what is happening.

Oh I understand very well how it works, and that some useful data could be there. But the point remains... why do other domestic launch providers not see the value of it?

Offline whitelancer64

Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1051 on: 08/03/2017 10:54 PM »
For what its worth, using the checkerboards means that doing digital photogrammetry after launch will allow them to get a very accurate 3D image of the location, motion and orientation of things like booster separation.  The way its often done, at least in VFX is to have as many trackable points as possible to help cancel errors.  Combined with the onboard video, they should be able to do some pretty good analysis of what is happening.

Oh I understand very well how it works, and that some useful data could be there. But the point remains... why do other domestic launch providers not see the value of it?

Less complex booster separation events?
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1033
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 480
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1052 on: 08/03/2017 11:23 PM »
For what its worth, using the checkerboards means that doing digital photogrammetry after launch will allow them to get a very accurate 3D image of the location, motion and orientation of things like booster separation.  The way its often done, at least in VFX is to have as many trackable points as possible to help cancel errors.  Combined with the onboard video, they should be able to do some pretty good analysis of what is happening.

Oh I understand very well how it works, and that some useful data could be there. But the point remains... why do other domestic launch providers not see the value of it?

A good argument against reuse.

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4244
  • California
  • Liked: 3659
  • Likes Given: 2256
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1053 on: 08/03/2017 11:37 PM »
For what its worth, using the checkerboards means that doing digital photogrammetry after launch will allow them to get a very accurate 3D image of the location, motion and orientation of things like booster separation.  The way its often done, at least in VFX is to have as many trackable points as possible to help cancel errors.  Combined with the onboard video, they should be able to do some pretty good analysis of what is happening.

Oh I understand very well how it works, and that some useful data could be there. But the point remains... why do other domestic launch providers not see the value of it?

A good argument against reuse.

What do you mean? I'm trying to parse what you wrote, but I'm not seeing it...

Offline mike robel

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • Merritt Island, FL
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1054 on: 08/04/2017 01:09 AM »
For what its worth, using the checkerboards means that doing digital photogrammetry after launch will allow them to get a very accurate 3D image of the location, motion and orientation of things like booster separation.  The way its often done, at least in VFX is to have as many trackable points as possible to help cancel errors.  Combined with the onboard video, they should be able to do some pretty good analysis of what is happening.

Oh I understand very well how it works, and that some useful data could be there. But the point remains... why do other domestic launch providers not see the value of it?

The Shuttle SRBs did not have all these visual points, whereas the Saturn V had its black roll patterns.  Unless the geometry of the shuttle meant they didn't need the roll patterns, I fail to see why they are needed on SLS.

Online calapine

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 212
  • Linz, Austria
  • Liked: 175
  • Likes Given: 125
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1055 on: 08/04/2017 07:55 AM »
Semi serious:

If NASA wants to go with the times they should come up a checkerboard pattern that doubles as QR code... ;)
« Last Edit: 08/04/2017 07:56 AM by calapine »

Offline chrisking0997

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 288
  • NASA Langley
  • Liked: 98
  • Likes Given: 225
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1056 on: 08/04/2017 04:07 PM »
For what its worth, using the checkerboards means that doing digital photogrammetry after launch will allow them to get a very accurate 3D image of the location, motion and orientation of things like booster separation.  The way its often done, at least in VFX is to have as many trackable points as possible to help cancel errors.  Combined with the onboard video, they should be able to do some pretty good analysis of what is happening.

Oh I understand very well how it works, and that some useful data could be there. But the point remains... why do other domestic launch providers not see the value of it?

The Shuttle SRBs did not have all these visual points, whereas the Saturn V had its black roll patterns.  Unless the geometry of the shuttle meant they didn't need the roll patterns, I fail to see why they are needed on SLS.

one possible use would be to help provide a dataset for further research, something private companies tend to not be interested in.  So, are they needed?  probably not.  Could they provide a basis for research/investigation at some later point or for some department not directly involved with the operation of the vehicle?  maybe
Tried to tell you, we did.  Listen, you did not.  Now, screwed we all are.

Offline whitelancer64

Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1057 on: 08/04/2017 04:21 PM »
For what its worth, using the checkerboards means that doing digital photogrammetry after launch will allow them to get a very accurate 3D image of the location, motion and orientation of things like booster separation.  The way its often done, at least in VFX is to have as many trackable points as possible to help cancel errors.  Combined with the onboard video, they should be able to do some pretty good analysis of what is happening.

Oh I understand very well how it works, and that some useful data could be there. But the point remains... why do other domestic launch providers not see the value of it?

The Shuttle SRBs did not have all these visual points, whereas the Saturn V had its black roll patterns.  Unless the geometry of the shuttle meant they didn't need the roll patterns, I fail to see why they are needed on SLS.

The Shuttle SRBs did have photogrammetric markings.

See post: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38021.msg1709683#msg1709683
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline mike robel

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • Merritt Island, FL
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1058 on: 08/04/2017 05:23 PM »
True, but it is practically naked when compared to the SLS or Saturn V.

Offline okan170

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1086
  • Los Angeles
  • Liked: 6428
  • Likes Given: 1299
Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1059 on: 08/04/2017 06:26 PM »
one possible use would be to help provide a dataset for further research, something private companies tend to not be interested in.  So, are they needed?  probably not.  Could they provide a basis for research/investigation at some later point or for some department not directly involved with the operation of the vehicle?  maybe

The article mentions that they want to use the data to validate their models that they've been using for SRB separation and other events.  It also may be that these checkerboards provide better more accurate targets for modern techniques than the larger black and white patterns.

Tags: